[Morell]: 35th regular meeting of the Medford City Council, December 6, 2022 is called to order. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Hurtubise]: Vice President Bears. Present. Councilor Caraviello. Present. Councilor Collins.
[Morell]: Present.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Knight. Present. Councilor Strafelli. Present. Councilor Tseng. Present. President Morell.
[Morell]: Present. Summer President's, you're absent. The meeting is called to order. Please rise and salute the flags.
[Hurtubise]: I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.
[Morell]: Announcements, accolades, remembrances, reports, and records. 22-585 offered by Councilor Scarpelli. Be it so resolved that the Medford City Council invite the Medford High School head football coach and players to the next city council meeting in recognition of their outstanding community outreach. Councilor Scarpelli.
[Scarpelli]: Thank you, Madam President. I know that it was a resolution that I put forth that I appreciated all of the you know, talk and discussions around the Thanksgiving Day football game and being Fenway Park and how important that was and how we could, you know, the recognition of a football game. But I think what's more important that had to be addressed. And I think that our young people have to see that committees like this council and more recognize what these young men and women do and coaches do for the community. I would love that we could ask the Medford High School football team and coaching staff to appear to the city council and we make a motion that if we can have citations made and just to recognize what they've done. And what I'm trying to say is you have a program just a few short years ago that almost didn't have enough kids for one team. And now they're close to 60 to 70 kids that are playing on the team. That being so important because you're seeing kids. And from what I gather, it's a lot of kids that are Not the don't have the support that that most kids have in their families so leaning on each other. I think it's something that's so important. It's such a great tool to have a team like the high school football team. But what you realize is what they're doing in our community. and giving back to the community. We forget about wins and losses, forget about all that, throw that all away. But when you have a leader like John Curley, the football coach, who's going out with his team and help organizing and running National Night Out, the whole football team showing up and working with the police department to organize a National Night Out event or in September where they helped the senior citizens clean out their basements or in October, when they helped with this in support of the unified basketball program, where they're, they're, they're boys and girls dressed up and mascots and supported in support of the team in November, again helping with the unified football Thanksgiving Day game, and then What I thought really struck me was a neighbor called and says, well, the football team is coming out to rake our leaves. And I said, yeah, right. No, but that's what they were doing. They went out to neighbors that couldn't rake their leaves and were stuck in the house and the football team came out and rake their leaves. And I know that they're actually going to be they're doing a gift certificate drive to support the Medford family connection. So it's important that people hear this and why? Because you hear so many negative things now, especially what's going on in the last couple of months at Medford High School and everything you hear in TV and how negative things are. But we're lucky because we do have a lot of very good kids at Medford High School. And looking at the football team and the leadership from the coach, John Curley, and what they've done, I don't mind that you're not winning the Super Bowl. It's okay for me. I love the idea that we can read these stories and talk to neighbors and talk to senior citizens, how the football team has come out and helped this community and given back. And it was funny last night, I talked to a teacher and they said, Hey, you, you have something on the agenda for the football team. And the coach said, yeah, I just wanted to thank him. And he said to me, um, I had an issue with one of the players and I just wasn't getting to him. So I contacted coach Curly and Coach Curley, during his lunchtime, went to Medford High School, and when this young man sat down in a seat, his football coach sat behind him. And it was funny because I said, well, that's a scare tactic as a joke. And he said it was total opposite. What that young man felt, because their football coach cared enough that he would take his lunch and sit behind him, and at the end of the class, have a dialogue to make sure that both the teacher and the football coach is in this working together to make sure they achieve their highest capability possible. And to me, I think that speaks volumes. So I really want Coach Curley and the football team to be here and to be recognized and given a citation so they can understand that We see this people see this, and this can be just as contagious as the bad things, the negative talk you hear, but when you see teams like this and you see coaches like this lead lead lead our young people, you know, in the positive light. This is what our community is built on. This is what makes Medford, Medford. And this is what Mustang Pride is all about. If anybody thinks that Mustang Pride is about putting on a football helmet and running through a tornado, that means nothing. To be a Mustang, to have Mustang Pride, this is what it's about. Giving back to the community, understanding that there's something bigger than you. And I want to just make sure that we commend our coaching staff, especially Coach Curley. I know that the football association under Chris Murphy is his leadership. I think that that whole association should be recognized and I would make that a formal motion to invite them next week to the meeting. Thank you, Madam President.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. Councilor Caraviello.
[Caraviello]: Thank you, Madam President. Again, I want to thank Councilor Scarpelli for putting this forward. He's right. Mustang Pride means pride in your community. And there's five of us here that are graduates from this school there, and we all know what Mustang Pride is. It's not about wins and losses. It's about camaraderie, about team spirit, and it's about being a part of your community and making your school proud. And that's how we all grew up with. with the sports for our sports and education all go hand in hand. And I just wanna thank the coach for doing a great job with the kids, getting them out there in the community and helping them develop community pride and school pride.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. Any further discussion from the council? I do see Chris Murphy with his hand up.
[Unidentified]: Hi.
[Morell]: Name and address for the record, please.
[SPEAKER_18]: Can you hear me? All right, Chris Murphy 51 shirt now. I'm the president of the team, the Football Associates Booster Club.
[Unidentified]: You're coming through a little warble, Chris.
[SPEAKER_18]: Can you hear me now? Yes.
[Morell]: Yeah, if you want to turn off your video, that sometimes helps as far as connection issues.
[Chris Murphy]: Hold on one second. Is that better?
[Morell]: Yes, that's better.
[Chris Murphy]: That better? Yep, that's better. I just want to thank Councilor Scarpelli for putting this on and for giving these kids the recognition for doing this. One of the things that John Curley, you know, said to me when he first took this job is trying to make these kids, you know, they're going to be good students. They're going to be good athletes, but they're going to be better citizens. And over the last four years, the amount of stuff that these kids have done and have gotten to, you know, into the community is, is been outstanding. Um, I wish I could take credit for some of it, but I can't, um, this has been 100% coach curly. Um, You know, I get texts all the time from him saying, you know, I had this idea. Can we do this? Can we do that? Can we do that? You know, right now we're doing a gift card drive for the Metric Family Network for the high school and middle school students. We have drop-off boxes at the rink and the high school athletic office. I just wanted to plug that real quick, but I can't thank you guys enough for giving these kids and Coach Curley the recognition for this. And, you know, I know our wins and losses have been great, but one thing, you know, Mustang Nation can take pride in is that these kids are becoming great citizens and great parts of this community. So I thank you guys again.
[Morell]: Thank you, Mr. Murphy. So on the motion of Councilor Scarpelli, seconded by Councilor Knight. All those in favor? I'm sorry, as amended. As amended by Councilor Scarpelli. Seconded by Councilor Knight. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. Records, the records of the meeting of November 29th, 2022 were passed to Councilor Svang. Councilor Svang, how did you find the records?
[Tseng]: I find them in order and move for approval.
[Morell]: On the motion, Councilor Svang, seconded by Councilor Knight. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. hearings. 22-573 legal notice, notice of a public hearing city of Medford. The Medford City Council will hold a continued public hearing in the Howard F. Alderman Memorial Chambers and via Zoom Tuesday, December 6, 2022 at 7 p.m. A link to this hearing will be posted no later than Friday, December 2, 2022. This hearing was originally scheduled for November 22nd, 2022, but rescheduled to November 29th, 2022, when the November 22nd meeting was postponed and rescheduled in its entirety. The hearing is continued from November 29th. The purpose of this hearing is to hear from the Board of Assessors on the following items with the purpose of application on the FY23 property tax to determine the residential factor to be used for FY2023, select an open space discount and select an residential exemption and select a small commercial exemption. Call 781-393-2501 for any aid slash accommodations TBD 781-393-2516. The city of Medford is an EOAA 504 employer. For additional information, contact the office of the city clerk 781-393-2425 by order of the Medford City Council. Sign Adam her to be a city clerk. So we did receive a presentation from Interim Chief Assessor Ellen Bordeaux on the vote before us and the information regarding the FY 23 tax vote. I do have the slides in front of me. So we have to vote on four items, and I don't know if there are any Councilors who would like to speak at this point. And we also wanted to continue this public hearing so that any members of public who wish to speak in person or on Zoom had a chance to in regards to voting on the tax, setting the tax, different elements of the tax. Great. Councilor Knight.
[Knight]: I motion to adopt the lowest residential tax amendment present.
[Morell]: So I just want to read. Director Dickinson, do you have anything you'd like to add? I was playing up these slides.
[Hurtubise]: No, I'm just here to answer questions, should they come up if I can.
[Morell]: I can share my screen too, if that's helpful. This is the last slide from... Great. This is the last slide. So we have a vote for us for selection, minimum residential factor, vote on whether to adopt a residential exemption, and vote on whether to adopt a small commercial exemption. So we have a motion from Councilor Knight to adopt the- Lowest residential factor. Lowest residential factor. Mayor Snider.
[Knight]: Just for clarity, seek to amend it to adopt a minimum residential factor of 91.43.
[Morell]: So the motion is to adopt a residential factor of 91.43, correct Councilor Knight?
[Hurtubise]: That's what the lowest residential factor may be. That's what it may be.
[Unidentified]: That's what it's delivered to us.
[Morell]: Okay, so there's a motion from Councilor Knight. I also have a motion from Councilor Knight to adopt the lowest residential factor, so a factor of 91.43. Yep, yeah. Okay. So on the motion, Councilor Knight, seconded by Councilor Caraviello. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Hurtubise]: To adopt the residential factor, 91.43. Vice President Bears? Yes. Councilor Caraviello? Yes. Councilor Collins? Yes. Councilor Knight? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng? Yes, sorry. Vice President Morell?
[Morell]: Yes. So I mean, the affirmative is here and the negative, the motion passes. So we have a vote on whether or not to adopt a residential exemption.
[Knight]: The motion is not to adopt a residential exemption.
[Morell]: On a motion of, would you like to speak, Mr. Castagnetti?
[Castagnetti]: This is the time before we actually vote.
[Morell]: Before we actually vote.
[Hurtubise]: A residential exemption. Thank you.
[Castagnetti]: I'm Andrew Castagnetti, Cushman Street, East Medford. Today's December 6th, 2022. Greetings to the city councilors and Mayor Brianna. I'm here again, and I'm still disappointed that you and the mayor never adopted the owner-occupied real estate tax exemption named Mass General Law, Chapter 59, Section 5C. here in Medford. As was done in Boston, Cambridge, Chelsea, Malden, and our neighbor next to you in Somerville, which is saving the owner-occupied homeowner an average of $3,000 a year each off their real estate tax bill. So in closing, I simply ask, and you all, why not give us this Massachusetts static perk here in 02155?
[Knight]: nine times that I've taken this vote. Ultimately, when we adopt a residential tax exemption, all we're doing is we're still taxing the same amount of money. All we're doing is shifting who are asking to give us that money. And based upon the analysis of our city assessor, the city assessor has shown that the break-even point would make more people actually pay more in taxes than those that would receive a break. So it didn't make sense mathematically for us to do this. there'd be more people in the community that were seeing their tax bills actually increase, not decrease, based upon the assessment that was performed by our assessor.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Knight. Vice-President Bears.
[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. Mr. Castagnetti, I personally think that this should be an option that we consider when we look at the tax structure in the city. I don't agree with Councilor Knight in the sense that the numbers that were presented by Assessor Bordeaux where that yes, there are a number of people, a number of households. If you could shut off your microphone just for a moment, there's an echo.
[Morell]: Or maybe Shane can.
[Bears]: There certainly are a number of people who would pay more if we were to implement a residential exemption, but that number was lower than the number of people who would benefit. The conversation of course, is that there are people who would benefit and people who would pay. And that's an important conversation to have obviously, and a difficult decision to make. It's my personal belief that asking owners of high value homes to pay more and owners of lower value homes to pay less may well be a good policy decision for the city to make. It's the one way that we can adjust our currently flat property tax rate to potentially add some fairness. However, the main concern that the assessor brought up was that we would need a lot of time to implement this. And we hadn't had the discussions in time to implement it. So I certainly think it should be a piece of the puzzle going forward. Thank you.
[Tseng]: I was just going to mention, I think last week the interim chief inspector also mentioned that this would not be the right time to adopt it because of the logistics associated with it, but that if we do choose to adopt it, we should have a conversation early next year about it.
[Morell]: Exactly. The council did meet in August to discuss this with interim chief inspector Bordeaux. I would hope that we have a resolution to have that discussion.
[Unidentified]: Now, one second. Shane, can you help out here? Sorry.
[Hurtubise]: I got text saying that when you share, when we're sharing on Zoom, that it's not showing anyone.
[Morell]: All right, I can't.
[Unidentified]: Can you remove this person? I can't, they keep on moving. Okay, Ronald Miller. Let's check that person, sorry. All right, I got it.
[Morell]: Sorry, the square kept moving. All right. Sorry about that. Okay. So yes, we did meet. I would hope, I would entertain, I would hope a council would submit a resolution to once again, have that meeting either in the spring or the summer to see where we stand with the ability to adopt this. I, like bison and bears, I do see this as a powerful potential option for our community. Just want to make sure we're doing it right. And I think there is also something to be said that I very much appreciate the work of interim assessor, Bordeaux, but also I think just the title alone suggests we might not have the bandwidth to do something that is quite a large overhaul at this point. So you're heard. Absolutely. And I appreciate it.
[Hurtubise]: I can't. Anything else?
[Scarpelli]: No, I think if I can. I know that Council night. That's exactly what I heard from our assessor and the understanding that in theory, it sounds great. Uh, where if you want your home, you'll get you'll get tax exempt. That's not the way the way that it's been been, uh, uh, told to us that something that this council, especially some members of the council push for the understanding of keeping people in Medford when you're going to see how higher priced homes, which is a lot of times our three family homes, we want to keep people in Medford. And what I was told that as you're looking at those people that most landlords aren't going to say, you know what? We'll take the hit. My taxes are going to go up, but I'm going to take that hit. That's not going to happen. We want people to still afford to live in Metro. What's going to happen is, again, the landlord's gonna put it back on the renter, and affordable housing even gets deeper and deeper. So these are the reasons why that I'm gonna support the vote that I've taken since we've been here, and what our acting assessor has told us. It's not as simple as the wording of, you're on your home, you're, you're going to be exempt from the taxes. That's not true. So I think that you still have to understand where that money's coming from and who's going to take that. And I think it's just it just hurts our community if we approve that in totality. But thank you.
[Morell]: Thank you. Any further discussion?
[Knight]: Just one thing I'd like to point out, Madam President. In looking at the presentation that Ms. Bordeaux put on back in August of this year, she did note that at a 20% owner-occupied exemption, the break-even point would be any home valued at $707,000 would be the break-even. And the only value over that would be receiving an incremental tax increase. It looks like for every 90,000 dollars, it goes up about 200 bucks. Then the next 90,000, it goes up about 400 bucks. The next 90,000, it goes up about 800 bucks. The next 90,000, it goes up about 1600 bucks. The next 90,000. It goes up up there to 200 bucks. So if you look at a property let's say like 23 pushing street down here in the city of Medfield which is assessed at $803,000 right now that home actually wouldn't even meet the requirements for the break even point that home would actually pay more in taxes than we pay without the exemption.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Knight.
[Bears]: I appreciate Mr. Castanets selfless advocacy. So what appreciate your selfless advocacy I mean, The median average median home value in the city is below $707,000. More people would benefit than would pay.
[Castagnetti]: the 85% of the home occupied would receive savings instead of the usual 4% increases, which happens by clockwork instead of prop two and a half. It's more like four or 5%, especially with my two family. And yes, I would see an increase. So I'm not here to save money for me, it would cost me. But 85% of the people are gonna save. instead of the usual 4% tax. Also, if it's such a bad program, why is all these communities, especially some of them with a maximum of 35% shift exemption, why are they still in the program? They can drop out anytime. So could we, if we got in. And also, I don't wanna see anyone's bills go up personally. I think the tax man gets more than their fair share. It just never ends. If you wanna help, the renters, I suggest you all talk to your president in Washington DC to get them to reverse the energy situation. Because I've never seen this inflation since when Jimmy Carter was there in the 70s. And we had gas lines to buy gasoline for our vehicles. And if it's so complicated, it can't be rocket science if all these communities are doing it. Boston, I missed Everett, Chelsea, Cambridge. It started in Nantucket originally. And the formula is defective, I'll agree. It should not be a cutoff point of $700,000 or whatever. It should be rewritten at the state house that take the exemption amount of that tax swing at 35%, for example, it should be even dollars for every owner occupied one set amount. It can't be that hard to do the mathematics. Instead of someone saving 2,000, which is not right, which will happen in the Heights more than downtown. It should be one set figure, probably $700 it might come out to for every single owner occupied. I rest my case.
[Morell]: Thank you, Mr. Castagnetti. So on the motion of vice president Bears to vote against the residential exemption. Do not adopt. Seconded by Councilor Knight. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Hurtubise]: Yes. Correct. affirmative vote means to not adopt. Vice President Bears. Yes. Councilor Caraviello?
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Collins?
[Collins]: Yes.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Knight? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng? Yes. President Morell?
[Morell]: Yes. Signing affirmative, zero in the negative, the motion passes. And then the last vote we have is to whether or not to select a small commercial exemption, which historically the council has not adopted. Two more votes. Motion to- Oh, we have the open space. Sorry.
[Knight]: It's just going to move to not adopt a small commercial exemption.
[Morell]: So on the motion of vice president bears not adopt the small commercial exemption seconded by Councilor Knight. Councilor Collins, do you want to speak? Mr. Clerk, please call the roll when you're ready.
[Unidentified]: Is there a second on that? Yes, Councilor Knight. Okay.
[Hurtubise]: Vice President Bears. Yes. Councilor Caraviello. Councilor Collins. Yes. Councilor Knight. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli. Yes. Councilor Tseng. Yes. President Morell.
[Morell]: Yes. So the informant is there and then I get the motion passes. And then we just have to vote whether or not to select or yeah, adopt an open space discount.
[Knight]: Motion to not adopt.
[Morell]: On the motion of Councilor Knight to not adopt an open space discount. Seconded by Councilor Scarpelli.
[Unidentified]: Mr. Clerk, please call the roll when you're ready. Vice President Paris. Yes.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Caraviello. Councilor Collins?
[Morell]: Yes.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Knight? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli?
[Morell]: Yes.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Tseng? Yes. President Morell?
[Morell]: Yes. The affirmative is there and the negative motion passes. Motions, orders and resolutions 22-578 offered by Councilor Caraviello. Be it so resolved the Medford City Council have our DPW director and city engineer appear before the council and discuss the substandard paving on Winthrop Street by Eversource. Councilor Caraviello?
[Caraviello]: I mean, this is, Eversource has been in the city, what, five years, six years? Been here so long on their project, tearing the streets up and down, and this is our one chance to get one of the biggest streets in our city paved on someone else's dime. And I would think at the least, we can get it done correctly. If you're driven by there, you can see there's different levels, the sewer covers are sinking, the lines are everywhere. Drive down the street to Winchester. You don't see the seams breaking. You don't see a different company doing it down in Winchester versus McCourt, who's doing it in our city. There's patchwork. It's just not what should be expected for whatever sort of step this community, for the last five years, for a community that got no benefit out of that project. I know we have the city engineer tonight, and if you'd like to address those issues, but if the city signs off on that paving, then shame on us.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. We also do have Todd Lamb from Eversource on the call, who I believe has a presentation. If any Councilors would like to speak first, or if you'd like to hear from Councilors.
[Unidentified]: Todd, you should be able to. I'm sorry, go ahead.
[Knight]: I'm tired of hearing from Eversource. I want this done. I just want it to be over. Literally, Eversource came in this community my first term in office. This is my fifth term. It's nine years. It just needs to be over. It just needs to be over. These people need relief in this neighborhood.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Knight. Todd Lanham from Eversource. Are you there? There we go.
[SPEAKER_19]: Yes, there are several folks here from Eversource. Bob Coates and Tim Reveille, I believe, are here as well.
[Morell]: Do you have a presentation or are you just available to answer questions?
[SPEAKER_19]: I think we're going to be here to answer any questions that may come from the discussion tonight.
[Morell]: Okay.
[Caraviello]: Madam President, can I ask where the person who was paid by Eversource to oversee this project is and who it is?
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello.
[Caraviello]: I don't know, because I recall when they came in, they were gonna pay for a person to oversee the project for the city of Medford. Who is this person, and where is he, or he, or she, or whoever's there? I haven't seen anybody, and I say, any person that's maybe a clerk of the works, or whatever you wanna call it, that thinks that's a good job there, then I say, I wouldn't pay for that on my driveway. And also, Eversource was supposed to pay $50,000 to a sidewalk. I see there is some sidewalk there. I don't know if that was the whole scope of the $50,000 worth of work for the sidewalk on Lorain Road in that area. But I wanna know where the person is that was paid by Eversource for this project.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviellol. Todd, is that something you can answer?
[SPEAKER_19]: Can I ask that Mr. Bobcoats be unmuted? He will be glad to provide some comments this evening. We could get Bob coach. I think he was last name only.
[Morell]: Is it coders?
[SPEAKER_19]: Yeah, I think that's a typo, but yes. We get Bob to come off video as well. I think we might be able to hang on a second. I gotta thank you. My apologies.
[Unidentified]: You should be able to start video now. Thank you.
[SPEAKER_02]: Good evening. I'm Bob Coates, vice president of major projects and capital construction for Eversource. Thank you to the council to be present tonight. I presented back in the spring and said we would come back in the fall. To answer the question specifically, we do have people assigned to the project full time. There's a person that is assigned and a project manager assigned. And we've been continuing to work collaboratively with the city departments. to affect positive change in this project, which we have demonstrated in the last six months. We are actually ahead of schedule. We're actually ahead of schedule and continuing to make great progress. With respect to the paving on Winthrop Street, it does meet the mass DOT specs. The seams were a little different. based upon the traffic patterns that had to be maintained while we were paving, and we will stand behind, obviously, that paving. There were some castings that needed to be addressed with the sister utility that couldn't address those, and we will be making those corrections as well. So we continue to make great progress. I understand and empathize with the frustrations of the city. It's been a long project, but we've implemented many strategies. I want to personally thank the city engineer, Mr. Wartella, for his leadership over the last six months, we've been able to make some great progress. I realize that it doesn't resolve the last several years, but it's a commitment I made to this council when I spoke to you in the spring that this is what we do and this is what we have done.
[Unidentified]: Thank you.
[Caraviello]: Well, Madam President, I'm glad you're making great progress, but you're not making great progress with quality work. Sorry, I wouldn't accept that for my own driveway at my house. Go by there and look at the road, and you'll see it's at different heights. The seams are coming apart. There's patchwork on different parts. This is not what this community has had 10 years of disruption for, for you guys to do a lousy job. Drive down the street a half a mile into Winchester and look at the difference. What's the difference between Winchester and Medford? I want the same quality that they did over there, not in our city. If a court can't do the job, you bring middle sex in here and let them pay the same way they paid down there. This is not fair. This is a major thoroughfare. It's not even going to last a year before it starts coming up. That's not acceptable to me. It shouldn't be acceptable to anybody in this community.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. Councilor, would you like to speak?
[Scarpelli]: If I can, to address a question to Mr. Coates, is this the final paving?
[SPEAKER_02]: The paving that's done on Winthrop Street will be the final paving. The striping's not the final striping. That's done as a temporary striping. There's inlaid epoxy paint striping that will have to be done in the spring due to weather freezing considerations.
[Scarpelli]: Okay, so, and yeah, In your professional opinion, what we're seeing on the method side with the patchwork, with the manholes that are sunk in, is that acceptable?
[SPEAKER_02]: The manholes, as I said, will be addressed that we've discussed, and the paving meets the DOT standards and spec. I realize that there's some seams that were applied that we've discussed with Mr. Witella, and they will be Um, verified to be safe and sound for the time period for that time period.
[Scarpelli]: So we appreciate you being the person that we're addressing this to. But I think you have to understand the horror that these neighbors have gone through and just the idea when they see the work that's not up to par and the idea that maybe in the next six months, that they could have machinery again, going up and down that corridor, fixing a mistake that we'll be talking about tonight. I hope you understand that. I think my last question really is, what's acceptable for standards? but the difference between what we see in Winchester and the difference that we see as soon as you cross the line in Medford, do you recognize that?
[SPEAKER_02]: We apply the paving to the standards that we are ordered to by the city and the state. I do recognize that the Paving and the optics look different in the two areas. The cities operate with different rules and procedures to execute those activities.
[Scarpelli]: So this is our fault, so our standards are lower?
[SPEAKER_02]: Didn't say that, sir, at all.
[Scarpelli]: Oh, you did say that. What you said was that the standards in that community are different than ours. That's exactly what you said. So my question is, being the professional, the standards that's allowed in Winchester wouldn't be allowed what we have in Medford in that act.
[SPEAKER_02]: So let me clarify my statement. I'm not saying that the standards are different. I'm saying the means and methods are different. We can pave at night in different communities. We're not able, weren't able to do that with the traffic concerns. We can pave by shutting down roads. So we operated in Medford in accordance with the directions provided us by the city departments. And we do have people on site to monitor the quality of that construction.
[Scarpelli]: So if I can ask our engineer while you're on the phone, while you're here in this presentation, if we can. So from what I'm hearing, the reason why we have patchy work and that we feel that it's subpar, it's because, not you per se, but we Medford told Eversource to pave it that way, piecemeal like that, because that's what I'm hearing.
[Wartella]: Thank you. Hi. Owen Wirtala, City Engineer. I believe what's trying to be conveyed here is the fact that in Winchester, they shut down the whole road, so they were able to get a nice, warm scene. And what happened in Medford was because we had to keep both two lanes of travel, the scene was a little colder, so it doesn't mesh as well. It's just cosmetic only. There was a rubber sealant applied to it. witnessed it. It was put down at the right temperature. It was compacted at the right temperature. There was tack coat down. If any of the seams fail, we're going to know by April. So we'll monitor it.
[Scarpelli]: Just so you know, and just the conversation I had with paving companies that do highways and so on, they did tell us The longevity or the length of that reliability for that roadway, because there are seams, are drastically different.
[Wartella]: Drastically. It's not like a seam. There's no gap. It's lifted above.
[Scarpelli]: So what they came out with, I went out there with them. They looked at it. They said, what I'm saying is seam is what we see. So what we see, no matter what it is, they've told me- I've also been doing this for 20 years.
[Wartella]: I've seen this before. It usually wears off in the winter time. If it doesn't and a seam forms, we're going to know.
[Scarpelli]: And then they'll be able to... So what safeguards do we have in the next season?
[Wartella]: There's a few punch list items that we have. A few of the castings are a little depressed. We need those addressed. The bike lane temporary pavements are temporary markings still need to go into place. They're gonna be going in next week. There's a speed table down at Victory Park that's also going to be placed on Thursday. And so that'll get us through the winter. And then next year, they should be doing all the rest of the restoration on the rest of Winthrop Street, the handicap ramps, and then Mystic Ave, Main Street.
[Scarpelli]: Okay, so just for entertainment's sake, If you had your choice, would you have rather done what Winchester did? And having no seams?
[Wartella]: That's for you guys to debate.
[Scarpelli]: I'm saying as a professional that we pay for the city of Medford, who is you, would you recommend that or would you recommend the piece?
[Wartella]: as ever so says it needs mask.
[Scarpelli]: Oh, that's not good right now, my friend. I'm asking you as a as a city. So this is what we don't need on. This is the problem we have. I know that we're going after our smaller businesses and saying we're going to pay curb to curb. And that that fee goes up to our residents. Now. We're asking for one of the richest companies in the Commonwealth to make sure they pave a road the way the standards that those neighbors deserve, right, my friend? So this is what I'm asking. If you don't really see that, this is what we need, because we've been crying for years that we should have a clerk of the works, that we find a way that we have a clerk of the works for these jobs. Because what Councilor Caraviello is saying is the person that ever saw us has promised us that's going to work with us. Maybe they've worked with you, but or department at City Hall, the mayor's office or whatnot, but we haven't been getting any information on what's been going on. And this is what's sad, this is why I have a resolution later about communication with the city. This is the stuff, and I'm sorry, you're just the person that, and I know we've been called bullies, by the way, because I'm not trying to, I'm looking for a professional that's in our community that's gonna say, no, George, This isn't right. The best thing is that, because the professionals that I'm friends with that said, yeah, let's go for a ride. And we went for a ride and they said they do highways, big jobs across the country. They said, no, honestly, the truth of the matter is the best way to do it is no seams. Okay, that's what they've told me. So I know you have 20 years of experience, but- I agree with your assessment. Okay, thank you.
[Morell]: Can I ask that question in a different way? So, thank you. What is the reason why Winchester can shut down all traffic? Is there a specific reason why they can shut down all traffic?
[Wartella]: You'd have to take that up with the traffic sergeants.
[Morell]: Okay.
[Wartella]: Yeah, they were limited in time between nine and two.
[Morell]: Okay. Okay. Thank you. Um, and that's the traffic supervisor on our side.
[Scarpelli]: Yeah.
[Scarpelli]: But again, thank you. Thank you for being here. I appreciate it. And I again, I think the frustration is those neighbors that I, you know, your frustrations every day. Yeah.
[Wartella]: I'm here just to answer questions.
[Scarpelli]: I, you know, this is, it's tough though. I, you know, whenever source, when they came in, they said there's no benefit to our residents, but they're going to at least leave it better than the way they saw it. I tend to disagree. I would call Ebersole some shame, because if that's what you're leaving and that's what we're going to do and you're blaming, whatever, I'm not going to go there. But thank you very much.
[Morell]: Thank you. Question bears on Councilor Caraviello.
[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. Yeah, I mean, I tend to agree that we should be doing this the best way possible. I just have two clarifying questions. It sounds like what you're saying, Owen, is that this is the situation for the winter. The idea is that what the current visible, what looks like a visible seam will wear away in the winter and become a flat.
[Wartella]: It should, it's cosmetic only.
[Bears]: And if it doesn't, that we will likely not accept it in a condition if it does not.
[Wartella]: If it doesn't, I don't, I mean, there's an edge, it's in the travel lane, it shouldn't cause an issue, it's cosmetic only.
[Bears]: Right, but let's say that there, if it doesn't hold, you said if it doesn't hold, we'll know by April.
[Wartella]: If it doesn't hold, we'll know by April.
[Bears]: And if it doesn't hold, then you have to redo it. Then they have to redo it. All right. Well, I think that's important to clarify and put out there. So we have not accepted it. We're going to go through the winter. If it doesn't hold, then it will be redone.
[Unidentified]: Correct.
[Bears]: All right. And the second thing is I want to just clarify and put out there is essentially the conditions that we're putting on the construction companies, you're saying that's coming from the traffic sergeants at the police department?
[Wartella]: The conditions of when they can operate comes from the traffic sergeant.
[Bears]: All right. And is that a mutual discussion between your office and the traffic sergeant?
[Wartella]: I let the police department. handle that. All right.
[Bears]: Well, it just sounds to me like, you know, we're trying to balance interests here. And I completely respect the interest of safety and understand there's a high school there.
[Wartella]: As far as the engineering division is concerned, or the DPW, we won't get in the way unless it's a safety issue. But their safety concerns mostly outweigh ours. So safety concerns are basically temperature driven. Theirs is like traffic.
[Bears]: Right. And I'm just saying it sounds like in terms of the balancing of interests in the situation, that we are making a decision to potentially do work in a way that would not be the preferred way to do the work, or there may be a way to do the work differently.
[Wartella]: That's means and methods, and that's kind of like contractual stuff. There's a leeway.
[Bears]: I think what we're dancing around here is that we could have a discussion in the city to have authorized this work to occur in a different way at a different time, and it may have had a different result. Right, and I think it's important that we have that discussion and not just defer 100% entirely to say, you know, I'm sure that the minds in the city and the people that we pay salaries, professional salaries to in the city and the police department, engineering division and anywhere else, plus the people from Eversource and the contractor could have sat down and said, here's a way that we can make a plan where we do close the street for a certain period of time and do this this way. It doesn't sound like out of the bounds of what we could be able to accomplish here, and I'm not trying to put you on the spot, but those are the kinds of discussions and collaborative approaches I think we need.
[Wartella]: Closing down that street has a lot of competing interests.
[Bears]: Right, and I agree with that. And I think that's the other thing, right? If we're going to have the conversation and discuss the competing interests, Before the project comes, we say, we're doing it this way. This is the result we're expecting. The competing interests worked out this way, and this is why the decision was made. And then we're not coming here after the fact and saying, we don't like the quality of the work, or we don't understand the quality of the work, or we're concerned that it's gonna break down, which is what I'm hearing from experts that Councilor Scarpelli went out with and Councilor Caraviello, quite frankly. I've driven down the road and I didn't find it sufficient. I've driven down a lot of repaved roads and it didn't seem like the best version of that that I've ever driven down. We had the issue on Mystic Avenue, which is the same project and the same contractor. So, you know, again, you are one part of a puzzle that makes this decision and I understand that. But as we discuss it, you know, having all those minds meet and say, maybe the competing interests, because this is a once in a generation opportunity to repave a major thoroughfare without cost to the city, maybe it's worth the interest of shutting down that road at a certain time or doing some work at night or doing something differently than we would for a smaller project with less impact. So that's all I'm really trying to say. And I think that that kind of approach is what we should take. So I'm not trying to put blame on the traffic sergeants or blame on you or blame anybody other than to say, I think that if we had come together and had the minds meet on this and said it's the priority that we do it this way instead of this way, this wouldn't be a conversation that we're having. Thank you.
[Unidentified]: May I make a comment?
[Morell]: Please.
[SPEAKER_02]: This is Bob Coates from Eversource again. I just want to be clear that the police department, the traffic sergeants have been very collaborative in working with us and giving us extended work hours wherever possible. and you know, it's obviously their decision on public safety and concerns. In this case, we had to pave it during the hours that Mr. Witella highlighted, and I understand the impacts, but I don't want you to have the perception that the police department and the traffic sergeants have not been working collaboratively with us and have found creative ways as we got through Winthrop Circle and allowed us to accelerate some of the activities to get things done faster. So thank you.
[Hurtubise]: Thank you.
[Bears]: Yeah, and just to be clear, that wasn't my implication. I'm saying that all parties involved could have come together and made a different solution, right? I understand. Thank you.
[Morell]: Councilor Caraviello.
[Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. I think if you went to the residents in that area and you asked them if maybe one night of disruption or two nights of disruption, where, as they say, you could have easily shut that road down and they could have went down, placed that road and right around that. If they did it at night, it wasn't that, we're not talking no major overhaul here or anything. And I think the neighbors would have, after what they've gone through for the five, six, seven years that this project, I think they would rather have a quality job than what we're seeing now. So no one answered my question. Who is the person that's being paid by Eversource to oversee this job for the city of Medford? I want a name of a person.
[Wartella]: that there was, there was, well, there were a few. I mean, depending on the contractor and what they were doing. I mean, Eversource will be able to answer this question.
[Caraviello]: Can the gentleman of Eversource give us the name of the person who was paid by them to oversee this project for the city of Medford? And if I recall, there was some company out of Connecticut that was hired.
[Morell]: Todd, are you able to answer that?
[SPEAKER_02]: I defer to Mr. Coates. I don't have the name in front of me, sir. I don't want to give you the wrong name, so I'm happy to provide that. But I don't have it in front of me, the specific name.
[Caraviello]: Going forward, you talked about speed tables. So I noticed there's one up right in Winter Street, or right where the road splits.
[Wartella]: Yeah.
[Caraviello]: Where is the next one planned for?
[Wartella]: Victory Park.
[Caraviello]: Why not closer to the school?
[Wartella]: It's right after school.
[Caraviello]: Victory Park is after the school.
[Wartella]: Well, going the other way, yeah.
[Caraviello]: So the sidewalks that are torn up at the park, are those gonna be replaced with concrete, not asphalt?
[Wartella]: No, it's definitely concrete, yes. That was the plan to have those done prior to the paving.
[Caraviello]: So going forward, seeing that we know we screwed up that part, going forward, when they come back in the spring, I think the discussion will be had, maybe you can give the neighbors, we do 911 calls for everything and every party and every little thing that goes on in the city, but the neighbors know that they may have maybe a night or two of disruption to get a quality job. I'm telling you, I'm not gonna accept from where you did it, we've still gotta go all the way down Winter Street, you gotta get on South Street, you gotta go Mystic Avenue, I'm telling you. We better see a quality job, because what they've done in that half a mile strip is horrible. And the residents of the city deserve a lot more than what they got there. Why is there a square patch in front of the high school driveway? I say, I did the same thing Councilor Scott Tolley did. I brought someone down that does highway work. And they laughed at me and said, they don't even think this is gonna last the winter. So what happens, do we have a warranty, a five-year warranty or a 10-year warranty? Yeah, we haven't accepted the roadway. But even after we accept it, how long is the... So they do it next year and you accept it and it starts coming up. Do we have some five years, or do we have a five year plan? I don't think warranties work like that.
[Wartella]: We monitor it to make sure that it's placed in spec. And if it usually is placed in spec, it'll usually be the lifespan of a normal road.
[Caraviello]: It's my suggestion, before any more paving's done, that the neighbors be called and give them the option of, I say, I don't think they'd mind, and neither do, of a little bit of disruption. You can say it's not that big of a job.
[Wartella]: We offered that suggestion as well. And it was, who did you offer it to? We offered it to the whole team and the police department didn't want to be there.
[Caraviello]: I think maybe the police department should be, I think we should get them up here.
[Wartella]: Again, there's also like, you know, competing interests. I mean, one, you can say that like one resident will allow it, another resident will not.
[Caraviello]: We're the ones who get the calls.
[Wartella]: I get the calls.
[Caraviello]: I do too. Everyone in this room is getting the calls. And they want to know why we're paying, why we're getting what we're getting. And because they drive, they drive right through and they go to Winchester and then they say, that would, like I said, like you said, our standards, any different than Winchester standards? It should be, it's exactly the same. Should be the same. That road should look the same going all the way through. And they got a couple more miles of paving the door. And I'll tell you, I'm gonna be screaming to the higher top, if it's not done correctly, and I'm not gonna accept any more paving that looks like the crap that they did up there now.
[Collins]: Okay. Councilor Collins. Thanks, Owen, for being here. My question is also about sidewalks. If the sidewalk mitigation is rolled into the same project by Eversource or their contractor, I was just curious if you had a quick status update on your fingertips. If not, that's fine. I was hearing from constituents who were dealing with sidewalks.
[Wartella]: Yes, some of the money was used to redo some sidewalk, widening the sidewalk from four feet to five feet at Victory Park. The rest of it was shifted to the Lorraine to Smith Road that hold the missing chunks that are doing and that's coming through a separate city contract that will start at this point.
[Collins]: So that'll start in the spring?
[Wartella]: Yeah. Okay. And then basically they'll saw cut along the lines. We'll hide it with the pavement markings so there shouldn't be any seam or anything. It'll look clean.
[Collins]: Okay, great. Are there any interim measures for folks on wheelchairs, strollers, with those missing chunks in the meantime?
[Hurtubise]: I don't think there's interim measures at this point for the winter. The orange line slowed us down and it
[Collins]: Sure, totally. I understand that added up a bunch of full-time jobs to the DPW's roster. I'm just curious, are there added crosswalks just to maintain ADA compliance while all that's been worked out?
[Wartella]: We're trying to have all the ramps along that corridor are supposed to be upgraded to be ADA compliant. So we're adding some crosswalks, eat tables, bike lanes. It'll be a complete street.
[Collins]: But that'll happen in the spring.
[Wartella]: Yes. Well, you'll see most of it probably. You're going to see the roadway portion of it probably this winter. except it's gonna be temporary pavement markings instead of permanent pavement markings.
[Collins]: So it'll look the same, but it's just temporary. Okay, gotcha. Essentially what I'm trying to get at is for folks who can't hop over an uneven sidewalk through the winter, do they have recourse right now or is it avoid that sidewalk and toll? I don't, yeah. Where in particular are you talking? I'd have to reference my inbox. Okay.
[Morell]: There historically was never, there wasn't a sidewalk there to begin with. Not that that makes it any better, but there was never a sidewalk there.
[Wartella]: I've heard from folks- If there's no sidewalk, don't walk there, I guess. All right, so it's coming.
[Morell]: All right, thanks. Councilor Tseng.
[Tseng]: So there's been a lot of discussion about means and methods and comparing our community to other communities. I think it might be helpful for us all to sit down sometime next year, maybe in a committee of the whole, invite you and invite some other people involved in the decision making to really make it more transparent and see what are the things that we could change. both at the city level but also at the ordinance kind of city council level to make your work easier and to make projects like this more of a success, so it's less of a question more of a, I think this is something that our council could do next year.
[Morell]: Thank you.
[Caraviello]: Thank you. One more question. So I saw where on the rain road and Smith they put that new sidewalk there.
[Morell]: are we continuing there's another little strip of bill we're finishing up we're going to finish all the way down the place that road yep that's the intent thank you yeah i just have two very specific questions because i do live right there so i see it very closely every day um i did see the speed table go in which i'm very happy about um i noticed and i'm sure there's a reason it doesn't extend curb to curb correct so i've already seen cars go around it.
[Wartella]: Well, that's, it's coming.
[Morell]: Just continue to extend.
[Wartella]: Well, what's, what's gonna happen is we're gonna have the, the white, there'll be paint lines. So you're, you know, 20 foot wide lane for driving is gonna get narrowed down to about 11 feet, right? And then there's going to be a bike lane marked as well. So people will tend to be driving in like hugging that Yeah, double yellow center line. Yeah, that'll basically slow everyone back.
[Morell]: So it should do to be fair. And I know you know, this paint is not infrastructure. So people can drive over paint. And I just have concern because it's a space where we're trying to slow people down and be safer for pedestrians. And if some folks are going to swerve around now they're swerving closer to the sidewalk, we I think it's a foot and a half that is not in that area.
[Wartella]: And that's due to keep the drainage pattern. If you didn't extend it the whole way, you have to put in catch basins and structures, and that's just crazy.
[Morell]: Thank you. And I did notice that there was, there's just a fair amount of asphalt debris on the street. Is there a reason for that?
[Wartella]: Is that past Victory Park?
[Morell]: It's in between, it's right, like in between the high school and Placetet, I see a fair amount along the curbs, just debris.
[Wartella]: I'll mention it to McCourt to get him swept.
[Morell]: Okay, thank you.
[Caraviello]: I see we have a little strip of bike lane over by front of the high school, like just a little strip. Is that strip going to go the whole length of Winchester at some point? All the way in? Both ways. All the way into Winchester? Up to Winchester.
[Morell]: And to see I've gotten, I feel like I asked top for these plans like every six months but to see those full plans is that something you can share the council just so we can get a refresher on where you know that, again, this is just temporary pavement markings.
[Wartella]: any issues that we foresee, well, you can make adjustments before the permanent pavement markings go down in the spring. So we're, you know, we're, there's already one little tiny area that we're gonna adjust. So it's, you know, we're welcome to comments.
[Morell]: Yeah. Thank you. I do see two members of the public on Zoom, Councilor Knight.
[Knight]: Thank you very much. So just to recap, currently, The project that the work is not complete by the contractor right the city has not accepted the roadway correct. Okay. The applicant ever source is required to have. a field engineer, a city field engineer. Can we get that information published on the Eversource pipeline website that we have here at the city, the page?
[Wartella]: We don't, no. The website's been updated quite some time.
[Knight]: I know, but can we get that information on there? So instead of people calling us, we can say, call the field engineer. He'll tell you exactly what's going on tomorrow. You don't want those calls either and you don't need it. Everyone, you're working on other stuff. We got a field engineer they're paying for. Why are you going to take the calls? That's what he's here for.
[Hurtubise]: Okay.
[Knight]: All right. Lastly, when is it exactly with the drop dead project completion date?
[SPEAKER_02]: You want me to take that? Yeah, I do. Thanks, Rob. Yeah, so right now we're targeting the end of the third quarter of 2023.
[Unidentified]: So end of September for completion of the project. We continue to work.
[SPEAKER_02]: We continue to work. I'm sorry.
[Knight]: I'm sorry.
[Wartella]: I don't think they'll commit to that, but I think it's very good.
[Knight]: I mean, I'm going through my files here. I have April 30th, 2015, 19th, 2015, October 20th, 2015. It's 2023. It will be relatively soon, relatively soon it will be, you know, so this is something that needs to come to an end. And it needs to be done before school opens again because every year. all summer long, it's nice and quiet. And then come the second, the third week in August, we decided we want to rip up every street in the city. I mean, this year we did it at the Brooke school, right? Literally the first day of school, let's start a construction project around four streets that surround the school. All right. We need to plan better. All right. So we, we, we can't put this neighborhood through any more undue strain and stress. Now I know there's a ton of benefits that come with this through the MOU. Um, I've exercised as much patience as I possibly can on this. Um, and I appreciate, um, all that you're going to try to do to get out of our city so that you can move on to the next eight miles of, uh, pipeline that you have to do somewhere else. I'm sure. Um, but with that being said, um, I'd like to see that, um, contact information published on the city website. And, um, I'd like to get a commitment from Eversource. This is going to be done before the opening of school.
[Morell]: You like that in the form of motion.
[SPEAKER_02]: I'm sorry I can't hear the Councilor.
[Knight]: If I'd like to see a commitment that this is going to be completed before school reopens in September. And if we can't get that commitment that I'd like to see monthly written updates, relative to the progress of the construction. I'm here in my hand I have a card from a gentleman from Watkins strategies his name was Sean so tell him he was the senior public affairs specialist for Watkins strategy. Back when this job, he probably retired by now, it's been so long, but back when this job started, Sean would send us weekly updates and monthly updates saying, this is what to expect, this is what's going on. We also got updates like that with the Craddock Bridge project. And they'd say, the project is 73% complete. We've done this, this, and this, this week, next week we're doing this, this, and this. So then we don't have to call, we don't have to do this, right?
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Knight. I do see two members of the public with their hands up going to Matt Sirigu. I will unmute you.
[SPEAKER_06]: Hi, Matt Sergi with 386 Lawrence Road. I just wanted, I wanted to ask about the stretch from Winthrop Circle to Lawrence Road. There was, I assume this is, and I'm almost certain this isn't the final product, but it was like they just rolled some pavement out there and it's all pretty much ripped up already. And it's, it's, the patchwork was pretty bad to begin with, but it's, it's honestly probably worse than if they had done nothing, it seems. So will that be fixed before, like the plows are gonna rip up what's left of it, I assume, and it's got all that asphalt must be going down the drainage. I just wanted to ask if there was a plan to correct that.
[Hurtubise]: I'm not aware of any plan to correct that. I think it's gonna be monitored through.
[Morell]: So currently it's the final product between Windrup Circle and, it's the final product with Windrup Circle.
[Wartella]: It's not the final product. Okay. That section will be paved next spring.
[Morell]: Okay. but it will be that way.
[Wartella]: It was meant to even out the trenching because it was all wonky.
[Morell]: Okay. Thank you. Does that address your question, Mr. Sergo?
[Unidentified]: Sure.
[Morell]: Thank you. Going to Mike S, name and address for the record, please.
[SPEAKER_01]: I am Mike, I live on Hancock Street. I just heard them talking about the pavement that it was only cosmetic. and that it wasn't a big deal because it was in the middle of the lane. I ride a motorcycle down Winter Street all the time and that's a huge hazard because it's right where I wanna be in the middle of the lane, heading from Medford towards Winchester. And now I gotta either hug where the cars are or I gotta hug the broken up sidewalk. So I don't think it's just a cosmetic thing. I think it is a hazard if you're on a motorcycle, that's all.
[Morell]: Thank you, Mike. Can I just get your name once more for the record?
[SPEAKER_01]: Mike Seekman.
[Morell]: Thank you. Any other members of the public wish to speak? Any further discussion from the council at this time? Councilor Caraviello.
[Caraviello]: Madam President, I'd like to adopt Councilor Knight's motion that we get a weekly or a monthly update on what's going on there, similar to what we got with other projects. and the name of the field engineer.
[Morell]: So we have a motion from Councilor Knight to get the name of the field engineer onto the Eversource project website and to ask for a commitment from Eversource that this project be completed by the next school year. If that cannot be committed to, weekly updates, correct? Monthly updates. So on the motion of Councilor Knight, seconded by Councilor Caraviello. Sorry, as amended by Councilor Caraviello. I think, yeah, whatever. Whatever you have down, what do you have down?
[Caraviello]: I would put in, I don't really say yeah. Either one of us will know.
[Morell]: Great, we'll go with that, we'll go. Motion of Councilor Caraviello as amended by Councilor Knight, seconded by Councilor Knight. Please call the roll when you're ready. I'm sorry. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Nay. Motion passes. Old habits die hard. All right, where are we? Thank you, Owen. And thank you, Todd and Bob.
[Morell]: Thank you. 22-586, offered by Councilor Scarpelli. Be it so resolved that the city council be presented the process in which the administration designed the plan to allow unleashed dogs in our community parks. Councilor Scarpelli.
[Scarpelli]: Thank you, Madam President. First, let me start off by addressing some concerns that my daughter has been reading on social media. We love dogs. We love our dogs. I've had dogs my whole life. I love my dog. But the question that I put this out is to really discuss the survey that is being put out there by the city administration to talk about specific hours in specific areas that we have unleashed dogs. First of all, there is a city ordinance that we as a city council have in our laws here in Medford that you're not supposed to have, you can't have unleashed dogs. That's it. Why we're doing a survey without presenting this to the council or the understanding of what this means or what the repercussions mean, because right now you're having people, especially the kids, different sports organizations saying, hold on one second. We've had issues in the past where my daughter was on the field and a dog was unleashed and oh, but it's okay. It's a good dog. It's a good dog. Until that one time that good dog becomes violent or something scary happens. And for the city administration to put anything out there right now is really disingenuine to this council and understanding our policies and laws here in the city. There was a concern a few months back about Tufts Park and what we said was, well, let's look into fencing the old pool area, because it's still a big area, and they could still have dogs roam in that area, but we put a fence up. And the response was, no, because the people that wanted this movement said, that's still keeping their dogs within an area, and they're not free to roam. Well, I've read what the city has put out, and the process of having a survey, and the survey coming back, and they're gonna pick places in the city, maybe even fence them off, or cordon them off, and we're gonna set times for when people can go. We can't even get information for the most vital issues in our community out. But we're gonna let Nana be, who's gonna walk her three-year-old daughter through a certain park, and she didn't see the postings, and she doesn't understand the hours that there can be unleashed dogs in that area. I don't understand the process and having a survey to go out to talk about a law, an ordinance that we already have in our community, that we have not only in the park side, but also in the city side that says we do not, have unleashed dogs in our community for safety reasons. And there's a reason for the ordinance. It says an animal. It's an animal. I love my dog like a human too, but it's still an animal. There are no guarantees with that animal, especially around children.
[Unidentified]: So to put this survey out, no matter what it does, what it says,
[Scarpelli]: The end result is that people want to have certain hours, from what I've read, in our community in certain areas, but maybe not ballparks, it's said, but certain areas to leave unleashed dogs. I think it's a dangerous, dangerous game to play. There's a reason why Councilor Marks work so hard to implement the dog park. There are reasons why there are areas in the state side where the fells that they can run your unleashed dog. That's why there are areas, but to designate city property and then put hours to it and think that we're going to have the bandwidth in that office to make sure it's communicated to every resident with their child and say, that as long as we post it, we're safe. I said, I think that's very, very dangerous. And I think it's unsafe and it's just, it's a shame that it's put out there to appease people during political times saying that we'll just do a survey. So when that survey says, absolutely, let's do 10 o'clock in the morning to two o'clock in the afternoon at Tufts Park, during the weeks that the kids are in school and to say, hey, that's great, we're gonna post it. But we're gonna have that one day that Nana's gonna walk their child that doesn't have the post and the dog's gonna attack. That's a very slippery slope. That's very dangerous in that sense. And believe me, and I'll say it again, George Scarpelli, what camera are we on, loves dogs. I love dogs. But I also love and respect the people that traverse our community and wanna feel safe. So thank you, Madam President. I think that my reason for putting this forward is really just to vent and then just to spread some of the concerns that residents did have that's saying that, well, if it happens, this survey happens, they open one spot, what's gonna stop it from moving on? And I think that this is, you wanna focus on building a dog park for bigger dogs, you wanna think, well, let's figure that, let's work that out. Let's look at Tufts Park and maybe closing off that area, fencing off a safe area where dogs can run in a bigger area. Maybe that's the solution. But to put it the way that it reads to me is that possibly having hours around the community for unleashed dogs, I think that's wrong. And more importantly, in the form of a motion, is I'd like the city administration to help this councilor understand how we can ask for a motion for a city ordinance that's in place. Are we changing it? Has anybody had talked about changing an ordinance about unleashed dogs? Cause I've never heard anything of that. So thank you.
[Collins]: Thank you, President Morella. Fellow dog lover here, for the record. I find myself agreeing with a lot of what Councilor Scarpelli has to offer. I also took note of the survey when it was released. My first thought was just similar to the ARPA Community Survey in general. In the community, when we see a survey go out, I'm very curious to know What's the plan for the survey? What is the goal for how many people to be surveyed? What is the process for making sure that we get a representative cross section of the community actually weighing in? Will that be reported? How will that feedback be translated into policy with this issue in particular because it involves an ordinance? I would love advanced notice from the administration on if we are to try to craft or change policy based on the feedback from this ordinance, how will that go? Especially since that is a multi-jurisdictional event because of the ordinance involved. there was one more thing that I had to say. But it's left my mind. Um, you know, in general, I think that I think that Councilor Scarpelli's point about the bandwidth of our animal control specialists as well as our communications bandwidth is really a point well taken that applies to most things in the city. And I think that when we do put out a survey, especially knowing that it's an issue that constituents are looking to hear about, I think that we need to be proactive about managing expectations, both for the timetable on which things are proposed to maybe change and also the scope that it's possible to change things within. And again, especially that's relevant here because it would involve city council action as well as administrative action. But I think that in many cases, that's really lacking when this sort of, we're just putting feelers out there type of action gets done. I think it's really, we owe it to the community to let them know, we wanna hear your feedback and also this is the universe of possibility. Thank you.
[Tseng]: Thank you. Um, I think it's noble and valiant that this city administration's using surveys so much. I worked in survey research for four years. I certainly believe in its role in maintaining trust in the citizenry and getting feedback for ideas and policies. I think from that experience, I've also learned a few things. The first of which is you gotta have a plan. The survey has to slot into a bigger plan in general, and I think it would have been more prudent, especially given that the city council has jurisdiction of ordinances, that the administration should have come to us and asked us about what ideas we were open to, what we were hearing from our residents talking to us, and what possibilities that we were open to. And I think that could have informed the survey creation itself. I think I have another concern from the public opinion survey research perspective, which is that I'm afraid that our city surveys aren't representative of our population. It's one thing to conduct a survey. It's another thing to post a Google link on Facebook and ask people to fill it out. We saw with the ARPA survey that that survey was skewed very much towards homeowners, very much towards certain demographics, towards certain neighborhoods. That's something I, you know, if we're putting the energy into creating surveys, I want to make sure that that survey is representative. I want to make sure that we're actually listening to a whole range of people and having a survey sample that represents our city as a whole. I don't know if we will see the results of this survey, but given our city's record with previous surveys, I think that, you know, it remains as a concern of mine. And I think it's concerning when we use faulty data to inform our decisions as well. And so I think, you know, this is an issue I'm sure all the councillors have heard a lot of things pro and con. I'll put on the record too, I love dogs, but I think, This is just symptomatic of our city's planning process. And I think this is a symptom of the need to plan better, to think more far in advance, how we approach policy changes and how we approach soliciting public opinion. And I think Councilor Scarpelli's resolution gets at that point, the process point.
[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President, and I'll be quick because I don't want to be duplicative because I have a feeling Tom's going to say pretty much what I'm about to say. But I did put a resolution on this agenda earlier this year, after conversations with our ACO Pat Hogan about the fact that we don't have enough resources right now on animal control issues and on unleashed dogs at the Brooks Estate, which I'm guessing that's what we're going to hear there. I'm a member of the Brooks Estate board. You know, so just want to put that out there it is something that we put on the agenda and said, you know, maybe we could consider something like this an ordinance change if we're also talking about resources going towards it but a survey and no resources just going to leave our staff who are already overstretched and even worse position. Thank you.
[Morell]: Thank you.
[Knight]: Thank you very much. I think there's something else that we have to consider here. There are many pros and cons that come with living in a neighborhood that has a pocket or living in a home that abuts a park. One of the largest cons is that a small, minor change at that particular location can have major quality of life issues for the people who live in those homes. Look at, for example, place that park on a Saturday morning in the summer. Try finding a parking spot. Good luck, good luck. Driveways blocked every hour on the hour, can't get out of your driveway ever. So when you think about the mechanism that this administration loves to use to gather data, it usually consists of sitting behind a computer in an ivory tower, right? If you're gonna make a change, get out of city hall, get into the neighborhoods and talk to some people. All right, enough's enough. Because ultimately, if I get a survey about off-leash hours about a dog in the park, you know what I'm gonna do? I don't care about dogs. I'm gonna take it and I'm gonna throw it in the trash and I'm not gonna respond, because I don't care about dogs. The only people that are gonna respond are the people that do. So you're gonna get a skewed data set right from the start. Right from the start. Here's a voluntary survey that we're posting on social media. Okay, so you have to have social media. You have to follow the city administration. for you to even have access to participate in this data collection tool. Well, that's not going to give us fair representation of the actual thoughts of the people in this community. The data set's flawed right from the start. All this is, is a way to say, I have some support to do something that I want to do because someone asked me to do it. All right, it's not a good way to create public policy. Get out of the office, go talk to some people. Have a community meeting, have a neighborhood meeting. What park are you gonna do it at? If you're gonna do it at this park, I'm sure you must have a neighborhood meeting. I'm sure you must have called all the abutters. I mean, I remember when I sat here and the mayor sat there and we had to change all the notifications on any time anybody filed for a variance, just filed for a variance for 500 feet from the location in a circumference. But the mayor is going to change what goes on in these parks, which she, by the way, has zero authority to do, pursue it to two city ordinances and the parks and private policy. But that goes down a whole other path because, you know, if you don't know how government works, how are we going to get things done? Right. Right. So with that being said, I appreciate Councilor Scarpelli for bringing this issue up, but ultimately these surveys don't work. They're not representative of our community. And I've just outlined the reasons why. So how about we stop with the surveys and stop with, you know, these half-assed approaches that operate in the government. I mean, cause that's really what it is. That's really what it is. And pardon my French, but you know, I rest my case.
[Morell]: We'll go to Mr. Lincoln and then we have two folks on zoom.
[SPEAKER_28]: Tom Lincoln, this thing off sorry 27 Gleason Street. I find this very interesting for a couple of reasons, among other people are participated in the zoom call earlier this year, where there was a long laundry list of ideas for city parks through Alicia Hunt's office, et cetera. This was one of the ideas raised. At that time, I said a couple things, which I have not heard here tonight either. One is the issue of commercial dog walkers, which is a very, very big business. I understand that dogs need to be walked. I think that's great. but the idea of commercial dog walkers running free on public property with a private business to their gain just doesn't sit well with me and I think with a lot of other people and I suspect not with the council. I also echo the views that we don't have the, what's the word here, bandwidth to enforce this. We don't have the bandwidth to enforce commercial dog walkers or any other unleashed dog issues in Medford. The gentleman, the animal control officer does a great job, but he's one person. And I think he's probably running from pillar to post 24 hours a day. Well, it doesn't work 24 days, but during his entire workday. And he's not just dealing with dogs, he's dealing with wildlife, coordinating with environmental police and all these sorts of things. I'm a little annoyed, I dare say, about the survey. I share some of the skepticism. The surveys tend to be, from what I've seen, biased or certainly loaded. They tend to be not well distributed. And I think it's interesting, I never heard about the survey and I was at that meeting. You'd think that they at least send the survey to people that registered for that meeting. I suspect there are reasons I didn't get the survey, but that's a different question. So I think the idea that there's a proposal to have an end run or a vitiation, if that's the right word, of a longstanding ordinance for public safety public health, water supply quality issues, all these sorts of things. I share everybody's concern about children. A small child is no match for an 80-pound dog, I don't believe. I haven't seen it, but I've certainly heard about it. And, you know, this is, like many of these things, an ill-considered thin edge of the wedge to really you know, a proposal to change longstanding practice with really no thought about the consequences other than to, I'm not sure what the motivation is, but I think it's a very bad idea, despite all the assurances that it's going to be a test, it's going to be this, it's going to be that, it's going to be posted, I'm very skeptical. And, you know, we've had different, sort of place. Of course, the Brooks Estate is conservation land, a protected open space. It's a wonderful place to walk dogs, but dogs are supposed to be on leashes. We've had not a lot of issues, but we've had some issues and I'm not there 24 hours a day like anybody else. And, you know, I can just hear people saying, well, you know, it's allowed now. You know, the ordinance doesn't mean anything because the Parks Department or the Office of Community Development or whatever it is, said that, you know, we can run around with unleashed dogs. And I think that's a very, very bad idea at this point.
[Morell]: Thank you. Going to Jennifer Sullivan on Zoom. Your address for the record, please.
[Jen Sullivan]: Hello, I'm Jen Sullivan, Marsden Street, right along Barry Park. I don't even want to debate the actual What the survey was presenting it was more that so i have a sibling who is a firefighter in a neighboring suburb and the amount of phone calls a field. From people about you know why is this dog here this dog isn't from this particular city or you know what what's the amount of. manpower bandwidth sorry that it takes to actually run this so when i saw the survey i was kind of reassured because i figured well this this will never happen but also i was really annoyed by the last question which said are you willing to volunteer to helic basically enforce this and someone is a very active. participant and longtime resident, I'm sort of sick of being asked to volunteer for things that are quite clearly paid positions. So I just wanted to air that out, is that this is something that needs a lot of structure to happen. And it's not necessarily a bad thing, but there's a lot more that needs to be done and stop asking for volunteers to enforce it, especially when there's animals involved. You need to be skilled and accountable.
[Morell]: Thank you. Thank you. Going to Zoom user Salnier, name and address for the record, please.
[SPEAKER_12]: Hi, Charlene Salnier, 14 Tontine Street. So I, excuse me, have been working with Felsdog and MassDog for years now. And I was very happy to participate in the Zoom call earlier this year where people got to, acknowledge the fact that not only do we have a lot of dogs in Medford, but we have a lot more in the pandemic. And that keeping our heads in the sand and not looking at it and not making some appropriate changes isn't going to make the problems that exist with dogs right now any better in the city. There are other cities, Arlington, Brooklyn, I don't know about the survey. I had nothing to do with this survey. other than I contributed what FelsDog had contributed to DCR through the years about what we felt was appropriate reining in and regulation of activity in the Fels, such as dog walkers don't get to walk around for free. They have to pay an annual fee. Infractions have to be doled out for people who don't follow the regulations. There has to be a limit of how many dogs you can have off. And not only that, but the Green Dogs Program in Brookline, what they do there is they actually have to, in order for the dog to be able to be off leash, it has to have a green tag, and they have to demonstrate that they are good on recall. And that requires money. So obviously, what we recommended to Fell's Dog when they asked us was that there be a fee involved so that it can be covered, so that there is more help and there are more people and more signage and more education. From that survey, what I just heard preliminarily, I'm not responsible for it, but I just heard, 35 people in Medford said, I would love to help. I would love to be part of the solution. And if a program went forward, I would be willing to help with putting that program into place. I mean, I don't know. I don't know how many other programs in the city have 35 volunteers that would like very much to be part of this activity. I acknowledge that my children are a hell of a lot more important to me than my dogs. So anything that injures a child or anything that injures an elderly person or a disabled person is a really bad idea. And instead of allowing dogs free reign to whatever park and whatever field they're in now, which is how it is now in the city, with dog poop everywhere, this would be a regulated program. It would be something that pulls the reins in on some of that activity. And I think that has the potential to be a good program. And I can't really speak to the systematic rolling out of how it happened because like I said, it wasn't that involved in it other than them asking us what our recommendations were. So yeah, that's my thoughts.
[Morell]: Thank you, Ms. Salier. Any further discussion from the council?
[Scarpelli]: Madam President, just real quick. I appreciate the caller calling in, but again, I think Councilor Collins brings up the best point. When you identify, this is great that 35 people responded, but guess who those people that did the survey, guess where they're from? They're the dog lovers that walk their dogs off a leash. So of course they're gonna get that information. This is the problem with the process. That was the main question I had with the process. And regardless of that personally, I know I've been contacted by a few people from your committee or your program. I don't care what other communities do in the city that I live in, that we have audiences from the city, public safety is number one. So to allow it is dangerous. So thank you.
[Morell]: Councilor Caraviello and then we have Patricia on Zoom.
[Caraviello]: Thank you, Madam President. For the record, dog owner for the past 30 plus years. Currently, what other dog at this particular time, but I love dogs. And I, again, like the woman said, my children are more important than my dogs, even though I love my dog. You know, Mr. Lincoln came up and made the point about all these companies coming around, walking dogs all over the city, and we got Pat Hogan. Pat's very good. I've called Pat on multiple occasions. He's very responsive. He's one person. How much do we want this guy to do? You know what I saw him doing today? He was down there with the police chasing down coyotes on Placeton Road this afternoon around 11 o'clock by himself with the police department. It's not what he should be doing. He needs more resources to control all these dog walkers and nevermind the people just letting the dog run free. But the other issue that people, if we're gonna go with the dogs is, is dog boarding. I know he's got multiple calls of people boarding 10 and 15 dogs at their houses now. So that's gonna be another up and coming issue for this dog officer. When I spoke to him not too long ago, in regards to a neighbor's concern about dogs, he said, Rick, he says, I got five, six, seven other houses that I'm trying to get under control with that have got 10 dogs in them. So that's an issue, too, that we're going to have to face going down the line. But to have dogs just running free and say, you know, I'm a dog person, it just isn't the way to do things, especially in parks with children. It's not right. Someone's going to get hurt, and who's going to get sued? City of Medford. Where are we getting at least, I don't know why KP Law must have gave the city some device to let them think that this was a good idea to move forward on this when we're actually just violating our own law.
[Morell]: Thank you. Councilor Collins.
[Collins]: Thank you, President Rao. I appreciate all of the resident comments on this issue. At the end of the day, I'm not even overly concerned about a quick change to our dog free range policy precipitating here in Medford because honestly, I think Mr. Lincoln said, and if you didn't, I apologize for putting words in your mouth, why put out a survey at all based on the resident impact, that input that we've received so far. We know why they're putting out a survey. It's a way of not having to say in response to resident input, Actually, we don't have the operating budget to sustain what you are asking for, and that's why we're not doing it. It's a way of avoiding making that statement. And that is the conversation that we really need to be having on this and every other important issue facing the community. With that, I would motion for approval.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Collins. Going to Patricia on Zoom. Patricia, name and address for the record, please.
[Unidentified]: My name is Patricia Flynn, and my address is 139 Grant Ave.
[Hurtubise]: Please proceed.
[SPEAKER_10]: Thank you. I just wanted to take an opportunity to, I didn't have anything to do with the survey, but I did answer it. And it was my understanding that there were approximately 600 and maybe 600 answers or responses so far. And there were about 211 non dog owners. So, just a respective, I just wanted to respectfully. just, I'm sorry. Mr. Councilman Knight had said that the only responses that we would receive would be from dog owners. I just wanted to make it clear that I don't agree with that statement. And I don't think it's being reflective of the the responses that we, that the city has received so far. I was one of the founding members on the dog park committee and sure.
[Knight]: It's upon the data that you just mentioned to us. It sounds like 66% of the respondents, the dog owners, which is, and you said none would respond, sir.
[Morell]: Sorry, okay, Patricia, please, this isn't a debate, please continue.
[SPEAKER_10]: Yes, thank you. So I just wanted to put forth, when we first started thinking about the dog park, we sent out surveys, we visited locations, we spent a lot of time looking at the different circumstances. If things change, people on the school committee were against it because it was near children, near the school. I'm not saying all the members were, but there was certainly some opposition. As far as The mayor at the time, when we first approached him, there was nothing in the budget. We were able to secure funds to see this come to fruition. Please don't dismiss somebody because they did a survey. I don't think in my opinion, it should be up to seven people on the city council to be able to decide what the residents can receive and can't receive. I mean, we're all in this together and I think, and you know, laws can change. And I think the reason for this to be put out was just to see where people would stand in the community. I'm sorry, I'm a little nervous. So I think I digress now. Thank you for listening.
[Morell]: Thank you, Patricia. On the motion of Councilor Collins, to, sorry. You okay. So on the motion of Councilor Scarpelli, seconded by Councilor Collins. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. 22-587. Offered by Councilor Scarpelli, be it so resolved that the City Administration and the City Council hold a day of beautification for Medford City Hall.
[Scarpelli]: Thank you, Madam President. When I put this forward, I think the frustration came out that as we walked in one day to City Hall, the chambers were used as a storage facility. Probably the most hollowed ground in this building was being used as a closet. Out front, the floors looked dirty. There was They were crates, empty crates in the front. They were floor washers. And I think that, you know, as part of this beautification committee that the mayor has in place, I think that as well with the city council, I'd like to work together. I wouldn't mind getting my hands dirty, but when you come in here, which is supposed to be the most respected room in the community and the way it's being treated. And as I'm writing this, a real happy post went out and residents texted me and said, did you just see this post? And I said, what does it say? During the farmer's market here, we had llamas in the foyer of City Hall, llamas. I'm working about dogs and we have llamas in the foyer. So what I'm asking for is really to work with, ask the beautification committee, I know the mayor has a beautification committee. in place already that we work together with the council to try to find a way to come in. I know that I'm not tooting my own horn, but I have a connection with a very important company, the Furniture Trust Company. They came in and donated so much furniture, new furniture for our office staff here to save our community money. And I thank them for that. No one in the city has thanked them yet. City administration still hasn't thanked them. So I will put a resolution through later to thank the Furniture Trust Company that's been giving furniture and donating furniture throughout this building. But they were, that's what all that furniture was here. That's why this looks like a big closet. But I think that we really need to start taking pride right from the beginning, and that's when you walk through those doors. So I'm willing to work for it. I'd like to get a group of people together and maybe come through the building and help move some things if they need, if we don't have staff enough to do that, but that would be my request. Thank you, Madam President. Can we dress up in costumes on that day?
[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. And again, you know, not looking for any sort of special credit here. But oftentimes, especially over the past year, you know, I've been coming in here early and putting the chairs back in order and making sure that there's room for people to sit and Larry's been helping me out the clerks can help me out. And you know it looks great in here without every voting machine in the city in the room, and every chair and table in the city in the room, but I wish that that level of respect and consideration was given for when we or the school committee or any board and commission does the business of the city in this room, week in and week out and not just when the mayor wants to throw a party. That's, you know, it just is, I'm glad that there's been some improvements made, but, you know, this is, I agree with Councilor Scarpelli, this is not a closet. And I think this also goes back to some of the issues where, you know, storage rooms in this city hall have not been kept in the condition that they need to be kept in to store things. And, you know, that wasn't addressed promptly either. So I just hope this room doesn't fill up again with stuff.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng.
[Tseng]: In the same vein of things, I've talked with city staff for the last few months and with residents who'd like to see us, you know, update some of the decorations that we have in terms of, you know, who we're, you know, featuring in the city hall. You know, they're great historical figures that we pay respect to, but I think a lot of residents would like to see their neighbors on there as well and to see us have, you know, portraits decorations that are more representative of the diversity of our community.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng. Councilor Knight.
[Knight]: And on that note, Councilor Tseng, I mean, you have me about one inch away from filing an amendment for this paper to bring back Frosty. So thanks for bringing that up.
[Morell]: Any further discussion? So on the motion of Councilor Scarpelli, seconded by Councilor Caraviello, all those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. 22-588 offered by Councilor Scarpelli. Be it so resolved that the Medford City Council stop all requests for any work performed by KP Law until we receive a budget breakdown on what KP Law services have cost our community. Councilor Scarpelli.
[Scarpelli]: Thank you, Madam President. And I know that to beat a dead horse here, but I understand that we have to do a business, but until we take a hard line and understanding the finances of our community and especially what's going out to KP Law and especially the fact that there really is no urgency to hire a city solicitor or city assistant city solicitor until we truly understand the financial implications of the mayor's legal consultants, which is KP Law. I was reminded by a former Councilor for this resolution, just to remind us, when we voted on KP Law, if we can all remember, do all remember on the monthly costs that we were giving them? Who remembers that? It was $5,000. I know for sure it's definitely gone past that $5,000. And I know that there's been talk that this is the frustrating part of being a city councilor. We're now moving in, excuse me, other communities where I work in the municipality, we are already in the middle of our budget talks for May and June. We're all in it. The directors already met with financial director a few times. We're ready to go. We've already given our predictions, what our staff wants to, what they're looking for as a wishlist. We're already all in. What we're seeing right now is we still haven't seen one financial paper. And I don't know if there's a reason for it because one of the common denominators is that we've asked for the understanding or the amount of money that has been paid out to KP Law. So what I'm requesting from my fellow Councilors to follow my lead in asking you to please refrain from asking for resolutions that ask for legal opinion from KP Law or legal opinion because the legal opinion that asks for KP Law, at least that You know, I appreciate Councilor Knight that followed up on his resolution that he responded with asking for the city solicitor to give us an answer, knowing we don't have a city solicitor. And I will be public and transparent that I've reached out to a few former city solicitors that I've worked with, and I've asked them, if they would apply. And please help us. And and I said, I know we know we've been told by administration that it's difficult because it's a fight throughout the Commonwealth. And the answer I got from city solicitors that I worked with the now in different communities. It's a George has nothing to do with the shortage right now, it's the fear of what they're hearing of what's happening to department heads in this community. So I think that we should start looking at things straight on and figuring things out because things are getting, things have gotten away from us in this community. We're in crisis. We're in crisis. So I think the more that we support The mayor's initiatives, especially with KP Law, the more we're giving evidence, the more we're showing, and I know it's tough. I know that we're trying to do our business, but the truth of the matter is, are they really answering us? Even when we ask, are they really getting back to us? Are they really giving the answers that we need to help us succeed? I say no. I haven't seen, you know, we've done a lot of work, and Council President, I credit you with a lot of meetings. We're doing a lot. but we seem to not to get anything done because where does it fall? It falls for when it gets to legal opinion. So, um, again, everybody has their opinion, but I asked my fellow colleagues to share with my motion.
[Bears]: Thank you.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Pele. Vice Mayor Bears.
[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. And I completely support the spirit of this. And it's more for me, how do we make it actionable? Because I think we share all the frustration with KP law and not having a solicitor, not having an assistant solicitor. And, you know, some of us went to some pretty extreme lengths in June to get that back. I think as we all remember being here at one in the morning when it was finally resolved. And it was, you know, that's what it takes right now in Medford to get an answer is to be sitting here at one in the morning discussing something that nobody wants to do. However, you know, we have a December meeting scheduled plan we do have the ongoing BJ's lawsuit and I'm just trying to understand the scope here right like, you know, I know that. The President Morell has been working closely with with the administration and quite frankly with KP law specific lawyer from KP law around BJ's and that's coming up in January. And I don't want to see us sitting without a representative there. So, you know, my suggestion would be to twofold because again, I completely agree that this is an unacceptable situation. And we've seen what's happened in previous situations where legal representation wasn't here. at that time because we only had one solicitor and she was deeply overworked and wasn't able to attend our meetings because of all the legal issues that were coming from the administration. What happens sometimes when we get into that situation? Could we amend this that we request that finance director Dickinson appear at our December 20th meeting with the, and basically present three things. One, the report the quarter report that we had requested and we're told we were going to get in mid-November. Two, that the warrant articles finally be placed on our agenda as we requested and that Director Dickinson said that he could make that possible. And three, and this is new so I'll try to say it slowly so the clerk can get it down, the third piece would be that we get a amount expended on legal services in fiscal year 22, and the amount expended on legal services so far in fiscal 23. Because I know for a fact in fiscal 23, that number is going to be basically all KP law. And then we'll know how much we're actually spending on KP law. And after that point, if we don't get that presentation and those answers at that meeting, I would support something to the effect of stop all requests except essential urgent legal work. That would be my other amendment that we... I would support that.
[Scarpelli]: I understand that we do need some protection when you talk about BJs, but again, I'd love to support that with bringing in Mr. Dickinson and see where we are. So thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. And again, appreciate it.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Collins and Councilor Caraviello.
[Collins]: Thank you, President Roehl, and I appreciate the dialogue so far. I appreciate Councilor Scarpelli for bringing this forward. Like Vice President Bears, I I'm glad about the spirit of this resolution. I had similar reservations about doing it by the text offered in the main paper, which the amendment offered, I think I'd be much more comfortable with. I think that everybody behind this rail, this really feels that frustration of asking for this information over and over and not getting it. And also the frustration of trying to work with KP Law, a lawyer that is not beholden to us or working exclusively with us and getting extremely variable responses to our requests for legal counsel, which I will not enumerate, but I will if anybody asks me specifically. I was going to mention well, in the spirit of the amendment that's been offered, I think that, you know, the buck has to stop somewhere. I think this is an appropriate next step to make. I think we can, I think we have demonstrated, I think we'll continue to demonstrate to the administration that we are extremely serious about getting a city solicitor, assistant city solicitor that will be accountable to us for the council to stop all work that requires legal review right here and now before another escalating step. You know, not to sound overly cynical, but I could see that being a real gift for the administration in the way that goes against what we're trying to do here. Prior to June of this year, you know, we heard multiple times an alleged rationale for why we didn't really need an independent council. The summer we started hearing that. Um. Commentary about the fact that we would try to produce two whole ordinances per year. I want us to keep making the case that this city council is. By law, a legislative body. We will legislate to create the policies that this community deserves. I want us to keep doing that through December. If we don't get you know the reasonable accommodations that we're asking for, you know, then I
[Morell]: Thank you, Mr. Collins. Councilor Caraviello.
[Caraviello]: Thank you, Madam President. If Councilor Bears wouldn't mind amending it to add years 20 and 21 which we've asked for. I don't even, I don't even know how many times we've asked for that so if Councilor Bears, if you could ask for 20 and 20 and 21 also, I mean we, we have no idea. I mean, I think we're all hearing rumors of numbers of what KP Law is and their bill is, but like Councilor Collins said, we're getting inconsistent advice. We're getting a different person every time. And every time we have a meeting, our subcommittee meetings, I mean, all we're doing is driving the bill up also. We're just as bad as anyone else because they're coming on here on a Wednesday night or Tuesday night, whatever night we're having. And I'm sure they're not working for $100 an hour on these meetings. There must be some kind of man. But like I say, if Councilor Bears wouldn't mind adding on 20 and 21, which we probably asked for maybe 10, at least 10 more times.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. So on the motion of Councilor Scarpelli as amended by Vice President Bears, amended by Councilor Caraviello. So Mr. Clerk, could you please read back the motion?
[Hurtubise]: There's an amendment from vice president bears requesting. requesting that the finance director be present at the December 20th meeting to present the quarterly reports and also to present the warrant articles that should be placed on the agenda. And there's a third request to get the amount spent on legal services in FY22 and so far in FY23. And then there's an amendment from Councilor Caraviello requesting also the amount spent on legal expenses in FY20 and FY21.
[Morell]: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Do I have a second on that? So on the motion of Councilor Scarpelli, amended by Vice Mayor Bears and Councilor Caraviello, as seconded by Councilor Caraviello. All those in favor? All those opposed? The motion passes. 22-589 offered by Councilor Scarpelli, be it resolved that the chief of staff appear at our next meeting to guide us on how we can have a better form of communication with our city partners. Councilor Scarpelli.
[Scarpelli]: Thank you, Madam President. Very simple. This was when I wrote this, it was a few weeks back, and this was in conjunction with the horrifying situation for that young lady that endured the beating at Bedford High School and the lack of communication we got from the school department. I know that, you know, when I was in the school committee, one thing that we made sure that the superintendent reached out to all the stakeholders. And I know that when I was a school committee, we made sure that our city councils knew when something very important happened in the school department, that we would be getting phone calls, especially something that dire. And, um, we, we didn't get anything. I think we got a, uh, something that was added to a, um, go Mustang page and then something in it. It wasn't, It wasn't anything that we were alerted to because it's something that at that level. Now, don't get me wrong. We have a student that has an accident in the gym class. As a school committee member, I got a phone call saying, George, just so that you know, the ambulance just left from the Glynn School. We had a young person break their wrist in phys ed at basketball. Thank you. I understand it's on the school committee side, just on the city side. we should be informed with issues that, especially dealing with the horrific issue that was brought to that situation, and newspapers and news trucks, and we're getting phone calls from news outlets, and we're getting phone calls from parents, but I don't know what you're talking about. And they said, how do you not know what we're talking about? So again, It's something that I find very disheartening, so I think that's why that was put in. So thank you for hearing my cry, Madam President.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. Any further discussion from the Council? On the motion of Councilor Scarpelli, seconded by Councilor Caraviello. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. 22-590 offered by vice president bears be it so resolved by the Metro City Council that the elections manager and Elections Commission provide the council with an after action report on November 22 general election, be it for the result of this report include any complaints challenges or issues that occurred throughout the entire election process. impacts of the new staff and leadership structure and how the elections department plans to improve the process and conduct more voter outreach and engagement going forward. Vice President Bears.
[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. Something that we've done since the beginning of this term and towards the end of last term was working as a council to improve the governance of our elections. And one way that we did that was by adopting modern provision of mass general law to move us to an elections commission model. And that new commission was appointed and then confirmed by this council in the spring of this year. I will add that then the mayor later decided after the September primary to make a staffing change and change who was in charge of the elections department So essentially, I just want to point that out because the department has gone through an entire change of both governance and lead staffing within one year. The September primary, which, as we know, had some very close election results, went off seemingly without a hitch. However, there in the November election, you know, there were a number of issues that were reported to me, and that I saw directly around some incomplete information being released on election night, you know, where the early votes and the mail votes were not released on election night. So there was some confusion as to what the what the results are. Luckily, there were no close local elections. But I'm sure if there had been that there would have been a significant outcry regarding the fact that the results that were unofficial, yes, but released on election night anyway, were not entirely complete. I know that at my polling location and at a number of other polling locations that poll workers who I spoke to had some concerns about understaffing and difficulty getting poll workers. And I also know for a fact after the election, I've heard from a number of poll workers that they've not been paid completely for the hours that they've been worked. And that's still true, at least as of later at the end of last week. So, you know, those are some significant issues. You know, I have no doubt in the confidence of the actual results of the election, but I think procedurally and engagement wise, we need to hear from our elections manager and our new elections commission. How are they planning to improve the process around the election going forward? We're going into a municipal election cycle where we're not gonna have support from the secretary of state's office that we have in an even year election that's a state election and a number of other things, you know, I do believe that there's a shared commitment, certainly within this council, to make improvements. That's what we've been focusing on. How can we make sure that this department has the resources and the governance structure it needs to succeed? And I think providing us with a report and having a discussion with us about how are we gonna make sure that all of the different pieces, big and small, of the election process go off smoothly, and that the elections department can do that outreach to make sure that we are increasing voter turnout as much as we can is incredibly important. So that's the intent of this resolution, and I ask my colleagues for their support.
[Morell]: Thank you, Vice President Bears. Any further discussion from the council on the motion of Vice President Bears, seconded by Councilor Knight. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. 22-591 offered by Councilor Knight. Whereas there's no advice and consent procedures relative. On the motion, paper withdrawn. Paper 22-591 has been withdrawn by Councilor Knight. 22-592 offered by Councilor Knight. Be it so resolved that the Director of Veteran Services establish a hotline to address questions related to the much publicized Camp Lejeune water contamination lawsuit in the interest of consumer protection. Councilor Knight.
[Knight]: Madam President, one of the benefits of working remotely is that I have the opportunity to see the Camp Lejeune water contamination lawsuit commercial 600 times a day. And that would lead me to believe, if I'm seeing it that much, many of our veterans who are elderly in nature are seeing it as well. And as we are all aware, whenever something like this comes up, The scam calls usually come along with them. So I was hoping that a veteran service director could set up a hotline for individuals to access that may be looking for information relative to the Camp Lejeune water contamination lawsuit, in an interest to protect them from scamming, phishing, spamming, phishing, and the like. I mean, ultimately, It's something we see out there every day. You know, the social attacks are more and more common. And I think it's important for us to take the steps necessary to provide our residents with the protections and safeguards that we can't, especially when something like this is being brought up. Ultimately, it's a lawsuit that addresses Parkinson's disease, cancer, and various other diseases that come along with the exposure to various contaminants, which would also lead one to believe that some of these individuals may not be in the best of health, which would make them even more vulnerable. So I'd ask that this correspondence be forwarded to the veteran service director with the support of my colleagues.
[Morell]: Thank you, councilor. I do see, so we did get a response from the veteran services director. I do see you probably didn't get it because it went to the council member list, but I do not believe you. Yeah, sometimes he did say that folks calling that his office number, he can absolutely speak to this. The City of Medford Veteran Services number is 781-393-2505. He can address the questions relating to the PACT Act of 2022 with the provision known as the Camp Lejeune Justice Act of 2022. Whenever an interested party gives a number of call, he responds to voicemails and emails. Folks can also email him at jjohns at medford-ma.gov.
[Knight]: I'd just like to amend the paper matter present to ask that that be published on the Vetted Services website.
[Morell]: Absolutely. So on them, any further discussion from the council? So on the motion of Councilor Knight, as amended by Councilor Knight, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. 22-593, offered by Councilor Knight and Councilor Caraviello, be it so resolved that the Medford Police Department reinstate their monthly traveling information sessions. Councilor Knight.
[Caraviello]: I would certainly defer to the senior member.
[Morell]: Councilor Caraviello.
[Caraviello]: Thank you, Madam President. It's a program started by former Councilor Falco some years ago, and it was a pretty successful program. We'd have quarterly meetings at different schools in different neighborhoods with the police chief and the police officers, and yielded some good results, and it got some neighbors into the community to ask questions about what was going on in the community, and the chief Chief Sacco was great with it. There was always going to be a contingent of officers there to give the residents a chance to air their concerns and also for the police to let the residents know what was going on in their community. So I would like to see this brought back. I have no problem. helping out with it and going to them if need be. It was a good program done by Councilor Falco, and I would like to see it brought back.
[Morell]: So on the motion of Councilor Knight, seconded by Councilor Caraviello, all those in favour? All those opposed? Motion passes. 22-594 offered by Councilor Knight, Councilor Caraviello and Councilor Scarpelli. Be it so resolved that the Metro parking department implement monthly traveling information sessions based upon the framework previously utilized by the police department. Councilor Caraviello, Councilor Knight.
[Caraviello]: Once again, I'm the first senior member.
[Morell]: Councilor Caraviello.
[Caraviello]: Thank you, Madam President. Similar to the other resolution, Where the parking department is moving ahead in leaps and bounds, especially now where they're implementing parking programs and resident parking in different neighborhoods around the train stations. I would think that this is a very good idea and they should be going into the neighborhoods where they've drawn their circle around the parking permit areas. So I would support this whole heartedly. And I would say this should start now as again, as they're going around figuring out which streets are going to do resident parking, because I received calls from the residents that they think they're way too far away from the station, and about their parking situation. So I support this a lot.
[Morell]: Thank you. Councilor Knight.
[Knight]: Madam President, ultimately, our parking department is destined to fail if we keep operating the way we are currently operating. We need to do something a little bit different. Outreach, we're all outraged about the outreach from Eversource, but our parking department goes and throws up meters all over the place without talking to anybody in the neighborhood. It doesn't make sense to me, right? What's good for the goose is good for the gander. We should be holding our own employees to the same standards that we're holding those private contracts that are coming into the city to do business as well. I just had the opportunity to have a correspondence with the foreman. of the parking department and I asked him to meet with an individual who's working right across the street. As a matter of fact, at 99 Riverside Ave, they're doing some construction work to the affordable housing units there. And I asked the foreman to meet with the superintendent of the construction job for the simple purpose of understanding what the parking rules and regulations are in the region and where he could park his trucks. I sent that email to the foreman. The foreman never responded. I got an email from the director, CC'd with the mayor, with Nina, with the DPW director and the city engineer. All right, this department's never gonna work. It's never gonna work if the foreman can't pick up the phone and talk to somebody on the street. All right, that's what those offices are for, the foot patrol offices, right? They're down there, the parking enforcement offices. They're supposed to communicate with the individuals that are in this community. So ultimately, I think that there is a very significant lack of communication coming out of that office. There's a significant lack of understanding among many of the residents in the neighborhood, what's expected of them. And there's a haphazard application of the enforcement policy that keeps people a little bit concerned about the way things are going. So with that being said, I support the resolution wholeheartedly and thank my colleagues for joining me in supporting it.
[Morell]: Thank you.
[Scarpelli]: Thank you, Madam President. Thanks for my colleagues. I think that I'm looking at this in a different way that we can look at it and showing showing our community how this can work. by going out in the community. I know that, you know, like I'll say it again, I hate to say it, but when you're working in a community, in a municipality, when you want something to change, you want something to happen, you go through the community, you set up round table events where people come out and share what their concerns are, and then the rebuttal or the communication back and forth to make sure this works. Now, traffic and parking fees and fines in our neighbor community, people were outraged after they went through roundtable discussions to each neighborhood. And they came back and they said, okay, so you're saying these fees and fines are going to go directly to our school system, that our roads will be swept on a daily basis and our playgrounds will be safe and clean. Well, let's see. And that's what happened. So the big conundrum, the big issue and concerns, the negativity was put to rest once people really understand where the benefits are and where that can go. Unfortunately, what we're hearing over and over again is the lack of communication to who? The citizens of this community and That's where I agree with Councilor Knight that this cannot work and this won't work unless we have a way that we can turn to each other and say, this is how, why this is happening. Now, granted, when you're sitting in front of someone to tell them you're gonna raise fees and fines, they're gonna look you in the eye and tell you they're wrong. But ultimately, you made the decision to explain it and you move forward. We have yet to do that. in many things. My phone's been blowing up about how people were part of this dog commission, and this is something that, and Brookline, how things change and shame on you, and this is wrong. Fine, fine. I've talked to 30 of my neighbors that asked about this dog situation. They don't live in Brookline, they don't walk their dog off a leash, and there's a huge lack of communication in this community. The last two resolutions speak volumes. I think we saw a huge, huge difference with the relationship with the police and neighborhood policing when council Falco made this motion to move it to neighborhoods. And we actually joked about it because council Falco every week would give a summary and say, don't forget community policing will be held this night in this location. And you want, you want to know the truth? The police loved it, and the neighborhood loved it because that always filled the room. And they sat there, and like Chief used to say, they used to take it. And then when they were left, they were shaking hands saying, oh, now I understand. And boy, does that help. So communication is key for success in anything we do in life. And what we're lacking right now in this city is a true lack of communication. So I think these resolutions help. So thank you to my colleagues to support if they will.
[Morell]: Thank you. Vice President Bears.
[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. And I think this and many other issues go right back to what we were talking about with Eversource and Mr. Wartella, which is, you know, what has the parking department been tasked to do and who is leading the implementation of a plan and making sure that there is communication going on and constituent service work going on so that the outreach is happening and that there's capacity to do that. And I think what's clear here is that the parking department was, you know, we haven't even gotten to raising fees and fines yet that's not even on the table. We're just talking about, you know, some adjustments to permitting some, some adjustments to increase enforcement some changes to the infrastructural system. We haven't really gotten to fundamentally deep changes on a city wide basis around parking enforcement right now I think the parking department has been given, in many ways, not the guidance and planning and resources that they've needed to be successful. And I don't think they've been told, here are the communications outlets. It's been start from scratch. It's start from scratch every time. You have a planning department with its own email list, a rec department with its own email list, a health department with its own email list, a mayor with their own email list, and none of it is communicating with each other. You don't have an integrated communications infrastructure to support our departments, to support the idea of reaching out to folks in different communities around a whole host of issues. You know, I think that's really where this needs to come in with a collaborative approach to bring all hands together and say, who in this city is, you know, working in constituent services and what support do they need on a citywide basis and what citywide infrastructure are we doing to make sure that they can do outreach. Same goes for communications. And I think also goes for decision making and planning around projects like the meter project or decision about how we're gonna, you know, what is our city policy around the Eversource paving? All of these issues are interconnected. And I think that, you know, these are good resolutions. I certainly support these policies, but even information sessions, one off from the police department or one off from the parking department, I think they'll make some impact on those specific areas, but they will not get to the systemic issue that we don't have the proper infrastructure around communications and constituent services, and that the leadership approach around collaboration is not there to bring the different parts of city government together to bring to bear the best results for our residents. So thank you to my colleagues for putting this forward, and I really hope that we see a bigger and broader and systemic approach from the city administration. Otherwise, we're gonna keep coming back here time after time again on issue after issue. Thank you.
[Collins]: Thank you, President Morell. I think this was a great idea. I'll be happy to support it tonight. Just to echo what Vice President Bears was just speaking to, you know, I think that as we try to improve the status quo with parking in our community, among other issues, you know, I keep coming back to What were they set up to do? Were they set up to succeed? Were they set up to fail? I think that these traveling information sessions is a great idea. Actually, just earlier this week, I was talking to a constituent who actually didn't hear about the big sweep, which is something that even I hear about. And I feel like I'm the last person I know about everything in the community, notwithstanding being a council member. To me, that speaks to the fact that we can do as much as we're doing right now. We can try to reach as many people as possible with our current communications infrastructure and staffing levels. We are, it's reality, we're missing a lot of people. This is going to help. but it's not a systemic approach. I really want to see the city administration supporting the parking department and rolling out these traveling information sessions. No department crafts its own policies. These are directives that are coming down from the administration. If the administration wants this department to succeed, they need to help them succeed. I think this is a great tactic to advance that, but it needs resources and it needs support just like the rest of their agenda. Thank you.
[Tseng]: I think I've long said that we shouldn't expect people to come to government. We should expect government to go to people. And there's a lot of work that even we can do better in this regard. I thank my fellow Councilors for putting this on the agenda because I think it matches that spirit entirely. I just would want to offer a quick, a short amendment to add the Traffic Commission in there as well, because I know they're working on a lot of the policy changes that Councilor Caraviello brought up. And I know the director of the parking department has said that she doesn't involve herself in those discussions. And so it's important that we have the decision makers also traveling into the neighborhoods.
[Morell]: Is sponsors okay with that amendment? Sure. Great. So on the motion of Councilor Caraviello as amended by Councilor Tsengs. Great, so on the motion of Councilor Caraviello, as amended by Councilor Tseng, seconded by Councilor Naik. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes. to do dash 595 offered by Council night, see if the result of the NHS SRO provide the council with a report within 30 days outlining any and all filings complaints investigation incidents and reports relative to student upon student violence in our public high school over the past 24 months, Councilor Knight, Madam President, this is a rather self explanatory resolution.
[Knight]: Ultimately, what I'm asking for is information relative to violence. high school. There have been a number of reports, a number of concerns. I've been contacted by a number of parents relative to this very issue. And I'd like to get a look at what data we're collecting up there to see if there are any trends or any type of circumstances going on that we need to know about. Ultimately, just like most other things in this community, we're left in the dark until brave parents and brave voices come up and fill us in on what's going on. And I think that it's time that we take a look at this long and hard. So I've asked for the last two years. I understand that this data is going to be very interesting because the last two years have been very interesting relative to the population and the public schools. But I'd like to see what we have there and I ask my council colleagues to support this measure. Second.
[Morell]: Thank you. Any further discussion from the council on the motion of Councilor Knight, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes. 22-596 has been withdrawn by Councilor Knight. 22-597 offered by Councilor Knight, BSO resolved that the Metro City Council request a draft ordinance within 21 days mandating the following criteria. Any employee receiving wage replacement benefits under MGL 152 shall have the right to elect to utilize earned leave time to be made whole. Councilor Knight.
[Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. It's been a longstanding practice that an employee for the city of Medford who's injured in the line of work and receiving workers' compensation benefits would be entitled to utilize sick vacation time or other earned leave time to make themselves whole. An employee injured in the line of work would be compensated by the city, the self-insurer, at a rate of 60% of their pay. So if an employee gets hurt at work and they're receiving comp benefits at 60% of their pay, they're not receiving 40% of their pay. And most times that 40% goes to pay for small things that aren't important to families, like health insurance and stuff like that. But recently the city administration implemented a policy after some, I believe, 70 years on the books of allowing workers in this community to utilize their sick leave when on workers' compensation. The city administration said, no, you can't anymore. And I'm not sure why they would make such policy of why they would take such steps to hurt families and put families in a bad financial situation on top of what's going on already with the injury that a worker suffers. So when looking at this, I've also seen that this allowance of the utilization of sick time for injured workers, collecting workers' compensation benefits is not applied even handedly. It's applied haphazardly. If this person, maybe you get it. If you're that person, maybe you don't. Yeah, we're not doing that anymore. No, tomorrow we are, today we're not. So quite frankly, if there were three people in the same department that got hurt, they might all get three different answers. And I don't think that that really works in the interest of humanitarianism, equality. or within the purpose of the Workers' Compensation Statute, or within the purpose of the utilization of John Sickly. So with that being said, I'm asking for an ordinance to be drafted. This is something that's happening, it's real, it's happening right now to workers here in the city. And it needs to be addressed in short order. And if KP Law doesn't write it, I won't. But it needs to be done, and it needs to be done soon, because we need to protect these people.
[Morell]: Thank you.
[Knight]: All right. Sick time is earned time. It's their time. They earn it. It's to be utilized when they're suffering an injury or an illness. And the administration is using their discretion to say, well, you're collecting workers' compensation benefits for an injury that you suffered in the line of business. We're not going to let you be made whole. We're not going to let you utilize your earned time so that you can pay for your health benefits, for your wife and your children. It's sick, it's sick. And from what I understand, whatever your union affiliation is, has a little bit of what to do with who's going to be the one that gets approved and who doesn't. All right? And quite frankly, that's opening the city up. That's opening the city up to a number of liabilities. A number of liabilities. It's workers' compensation retaliation. It's discrimination against a disabled individual.
[Unidentified]: I know a human resource director should know this stuff.
[Knight]: That's my council college to support the resolution.
[Morell]: Okay.
[Scarpelli]: So to the chair, to council night. So just, just to be clear, I'm on the negotiating team. I work in a municipality. So you're telling me that at first I've heard of it and it's appalling. So if someone's accrued 20 years of service in their community and accrued and earned their sick time, um, Because I do that myself. We have a process with when you're talking about before, you know, looking at FMLA, looking at different processes to make sure you're saying that in the city right now we have, there's an avenue now that employees that have earned that sick time can't use that time accrued. That's what brought to my understanding, yes. That bothers me in so many ways, because when you look at accrued sick time, these are the reasons why you use that time. Why you save it. That's why you save it. That's why you want people to work when they can. And the financial implications of that, if that's what's happening, in the long run, I know that it must be pretty similar in this municipality, like our municipality, When you leave and you have certain vacation days, accrued sick time, you can actually buy those days back. And if you have a member in his 20th year that wants to use that time, deservedly so, that comes out of, financially, you're looking at that one way. But then if you look at the end result, the 30 years, what you're going to be paying out for that employee for those years that you withheld those days, There's so many negative ramifications with that process, I think it's appalling. I know you brought up the piece which I think is the most important piece, the heart, the humanitarian piece, that you've accrued that time. You need to find a way that if you were on workman's comp, there's a reason why that you got hurt on the job, in the city, working for our community. You've accrued those days, you've earned those days, And now you can't use those days. I just want to make sure I'm clear that I'm really hearing that.
[Knight]: And Councilor Scarpelli, an explanation, right? So you get 60% of your wages replaced through the workers' compensation system. Then they utilize their accrued sick time to make up the other 40%. We all do. So that they're made whole. But what happens in this circumstance is because they're not allowed to utilize that other 40%, they have to take that 40% from the 60%. So, because that's the only income they have, right? So now you're seeing a worker who's injured in the line of duty, who's not able to utilize their sick or vacation life, who's being compensated at 60% of their pay, but has a 40% liability that they have to pay back the city to keep the health insurance going. So in essence, if I got hurt on the job, I'd be getting paid 20% when I have accrued sick time in the bank that I could use to keep me whole and to keep my bills paid and to keep my family protected with health insurance.
[Scarpelli]: Thank you for the clarification. I think that's a disgusting, disgusting policy. And I stand with you, and I would second that resolve. That's horrible.
[Knight]: And I know it's not, you know, it's complicated. It's not the sexiest thing in the world, but I just happen to understand workers' comp, because that's what they do for a living.
[Morell]: Thank you. Thank you. Any further discussion from the council? On the motion of Councilor Knight, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. 22-598 offered by Councilor Knight and Councilor Scarpelli. Be it so resolved that the Medford City Council establish a new ordinance by adopting the following. Chapter 26, section three, public schools accountability. Purpose, the purpose of this ordinance is to improve communication with our stakeholders and establish a vehicle to increase their participation in the development of policies and procedures governing our public schools. Policy of the city, it is the policy of the city that the following measures be required by ordinance. One, the Medford School Committee shall be required to conduct monthly listening sessions for the purpose of receiving feedback and gathering information related to the operation of our public schools. Two, these sessions shall be televised in the same format as all other public meetings and chaired by the mayor. Three, the superintendent of schools and all members of the school committee shall be required to attend unless excused by a supermajority vote of the city council. Four, a superintendent designee shall be prohibited. Five, these sessions shall be conducted on the first Tuesday of each month in person in accord with the following schedule, August through June, for a total of 11 annual sessions. Six, if the session date falls on a holiday, it shall be heard the following week. Seven, there shall be no requirement to register or apply to participate. These sessions shall be an open forum limited to no more than three hours. Eight, attendance at these sessions for the school committee and superintendent is mandatory. Nine, to conduct such sessions shall result in the forfeiture of compensation for the remaining pay periods of the fiscal year. Councilor Knight.
[Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Everybody watched the news. Metro made the news again last night, huh? Metro was on TV again. And once again, it was not to celebrate our community success. Once again, it was not to celebrate our community success. Let's think about it, the school renaming, the Diane Guarino disaster, violence at our public schools, but now a vote of no confidence by our teachers against the city administration and the school committee that passed overwhelmingly at a rate greater than 90%. After listening to all the drama, community outrage, the fear, and the concerns. One underlying theme that I keep hearing over and over again, no matter what the crisis is, is that people have no forum to voice their concerns, to voice their opinions, and to voice their criticisms of the school committee and the school administration. This council has made multiple requests for this to be addressed voluntarily, and nothing has happened, nothing has changed. Individuals go up to meetings that wanna speak and they're boxed out.
[Unidentified]: Crisis after crisis, it's business as usual. Last week, we listened to Mrs. Braley. stand before this entire city, the city she grew up in, with concerns about the public schools and the safety of her daughter.
[Knight]: These are the same public schools that she attended.
[Unidentified]: These are the same public schools where she worked for a number of years. And it broke my heart to listen to her tell us that she has no place to turn.
[Knight]: and that she has to go through these lengths to publicize the situation to the extent that she has to get justice for her daughter. I said it last week, and I'll say it again. I think it's shameful the way that this situation is being handled. And I think it's shameful the way that those other situations that I mentioned are being handled. And I think it's time that we do something about it. When those people come up to this podium and they talk to us and they ask us for the opportunity to voice their concerns and their criticisms, we all tell them we're gonna stand with them. We all tell them we're gonna do more.
[Unidentified]: And then we wait till the next crisis and the next one and the next one. Nicole did something last week that I thought was very smart.
[Knight]: She told us that we all have a role in this. And she's absolutely right. And this paper tonight is my first attempt at hoping to make this right, to address some of the inaction that this body and that the lower house, we'll call it, that the lower house has had as well. Being the city council, we have the opportunity to make ordinances. We have the opportunity to make ordinances that provide directives. And I think that underneath and based upon the circumstances that are surrounding us over the past several months, it's incumbent upon us to act.
[Unidentified]: So I'm asking my colleagues to act with action, not with acting. This paper is something that I think we can work on.
[Knight]: I know it's not in a perfect form. I know it's not in a final form. I know it's something that's going to need to be addressed and need to be discussed. But it's something that has teeth. It's something that has teeth. It's something that has requirements.
[Unidentified]: And it's something that shows that we care. It's something that shows that we're not going to tolerate it anymore. So Madam President, through you,
[Knight]: to Nicole, to Rob, to Mrs. Guarino, to those that felt they didn't have an opportunity to speak during the school renaming, to the 400 teachers that stormed City Hall yesterday that feel as though no one's listening. Someone's listening. Someone's listening. We want to help. I want to help. I want to make it right. I said that last week, and I'll say it again. So with that being said, Madam President, I rest my case.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli.
[Scarpelli]: Thank you, Councilor Knight for bringing that forward. That speaks volumes. But again, I had the privilege of speaking with Mrs. Branley privately, and what punched me in the face was the reason why I ran for City School Committee back in 2008 when I left the city of Medford. Something that's uncomfortable, But I didn't say anything then, but my son was bullied to horrific, horrific levels where we talked to him every day about it today. And he's a well-rounded young man that I'm proud of every single day. And I made that decision to run for school committee because I wanted to make a change. And the key piece of that was I left the politics behind. When I joined the school committee, I left politics aside. And it's disgusting that this comes back around. And when Mrs. Bramley talks about it, it just brings me back to the reason why I ran originally. I wasn't a true politician. I was a phys ed teacher and the kids loved me. And that's why I was, that's why I topped the ticket because everybody loved Mr. S. And then I realized my role and how important it could be and the changes we can make. And then I said, you know what? I'm going to do more because I realized with that administration, I could do more on the city council. And then I joined the city council and you saw some great things happening.
[Unidentified]: But then now it's converted the other way.
[Scarpelli]: Everybody that I've talked to that read this and called me said, thank you. This is amazing because we don't have an avenue to talk to our schools, school department or school administration or school committee. And at least this gives us an opportunity that it's uncomfortable for them. I know what's uncomfortable. I was a school kid member making some huge changes. I'm a city council that has to make huge decisions. But to sit there and look the person in the eye, it's honorable. It's what we do. It's what we should all do. And all I keep hearing over and over again is that we're not being heard. So why did it get to this extreme? Because I waited 24 hours and I called Mrs. Branley. And I couldn't wait for her to say, George, they called me right away. I got the information that I needed. My daughter feels safe. Our kids, everything's moving in the right direction.
[Unidentified]: But no, she said, no one has reached out. So in conversation with the councilor Knight, we said, how, where do we want to go here?
[Scarpelli]: Cause it's not popular. What we were asking for right now isn't popular. And if the people that support my school community members were good people, but it's gonna hurt me politically, I don't care.
[Unidentified]: This needs to be taken care of.
[Scarpelli]: And this ordinance, this ordinance speaks volumes to the people that work for our community, care about our community, every single day, the most important people, our teachers and our students. And yesterday sat in that crowd, we stood in that crowd, Councilor Caraviello and I. And I was proud, I was proud that I was supporting our teachers in this battle. And it's funny, what keeps coming back is the lack of communication, dialogue, because what was said publicly in front of everybody through the Teachers Association, and then what was said in a closed meeting, an open meeting at school committee, and what was said that there was, there's a contract already, there's a ratified contract. No, there isn't. I was part of a negotiating team. No, there isn't. The negotiating team met with the city school administration, city administration. They came to a plan that they can now send to the body and they vote on that. Then the body decides. That's what we do in this country. And from what I hear, because we weren't given, the negotiating team didn't let this information out, but last night a school administrator said that the votes were close. I taught for 15 years, we ratified a contract, at the end of the vote, it was always 80, 90% in favor. Not by 27 votes, that's still failure. Even if it won by a vote, it's still failure. It's still telling you something. Even tonight, what do we talk about? What do we all say tonight? What a disgrace of a lack of communication. And we have the second strongest governing body in our community, a third. Well, I don't know where we are now, but they're a forum where people need to let the information that they know or they feel has to be brought out to the public, understood. And it's not to put anybody out. It's not to make you feel uncomfortable. It's to share the information that's vital.
[Unidentified]: But the process set up in that forum, it stymies that.
[Scarpelli]: It stymies the process of open forum. It stymies the process of sharing information that's important. And I'll tell you, when I left that meeting yesterday, And teachers came up to me, great teachers, teachers we know and love. And I know Councilor Bears wrote an impassionate, and they wanted me to share that they appreciated that, and they know that we're supporting the teachers.
[Unidentified]: But what they told me, this resolution will speak louder than any vote of a budget or a contract, because this gives them a forum.
[Scarpelli]: that teachers and parents and kids can come to a podium, to a body that they elected and say, we need help, or we need justice, or we need support. Or do you know what? I know Councilor Knight hates it, or just to come up and speak because it's their forum, right?
[Unidentified]: So I'm gonna leave it at this.
[Scarpelli]: I'm gonna, again, I say this because you have to hear this to the Branley family. Sometimes in horrible situations, great things come out of it. And I think this is something that if it's supported by this council, that's gonna be resounding for a long time to come because we're gonna have a voice and someone's gonna have to listen. And for a personal level, thank you for showing me why I took this job and why I do what I do. Okay? Again, councilor, I ask my council colleagues that I know it's not comfortable. I know it's very uncomfortable because a lot of those people are our friends, but sometimes you have to make a decision that's bigger than yourself and bigger than a political line. So I ask everybody to support this ordinance. I think it's important.
[Caraviello]: Thank you, Madam President. You know, I told, last week I told a couple hundred people about our meeting last week and how in 11 years being on this council was probably the worst night of my life. Sit here as a father who had children that went to that school, as a grandfather who has children at that school, sit here and watch our parents beg for help, and I couldn't help. Like Councilor Scott probably said, this is the reason I ran for this job, to help people. That's the job of governments, to help people. And I just felt so insignificant last week. I went home, I was really beside myself. And I say, I just didn't know what to do. And I'm glad we're finally stepping forward and doing something to help people. This is our job, to help people. This is their voices, this room. This is where their voices get out. We said earlier that people come up here and say a lot of stuff we don't like to hear, but this is their forum to be heard, and we're the group that's supposed to be able to help them. And when we don't help them, we're not doing our job either. So I would hope this would have some teeth and get help out to the people who need help.
[Unidentified]: Thank you. Thank you, Madam President.
[Bears]: First thing I want to say is, and I've exchanged some private conversation is that I apologize for not speaking up last week. could give a million excuse. I did have the flu and we're on zoom and whatever, but I should have said something because I can't imagine how you both feel and what you've been going through. Councilor Scott probably talks about his son. I was at Medford high school 11 years ago. My sister was there six years ago. We've dealt with some issues, not what you've dealt with lesser than that. And I know how much it affected our family. So I just want to say that to you directly that I wish I'd said something last week. And that's why I'm saying something this week. And I hope that we can have more conversations. so that I can do what I can to help. Something that really stuck with me from what you said is that being reactive puts people at risk. Being proactive means that we can get ahead of things and stop things from happening before they ever become a problem. Um, something that I think, uh, you know, as part of this conversation, um, around our schools and when, you know, hear from parents, hear from you, hear from others about, uh, There's a lot of behavioral issues. People are, there's a flood of issues. People can't manage it. It's, it's, it's so much that the resources aren't there to manage it. Something that we had a conversation about, um, one conversation about, I don't know, hundreds of hours of conversations about in June was the budget of our school system and the fact that two days into June, the mayor cut $2.8 million in school funding this year that the schools were expecting, that they wanted for mental health, student behavior, support, and I would guess in some elements of that, safety in the schools, right? And the resources that we need for that. That was one of my biggest concerns when I made the budget presentation, when we advocated and fought for funding to be restored to the schools so that schools have the resources that they need to succeed. We restored some funding, I think a few hundred thousand, but not 2.8 million. We didn't restore the resources and support that our schools asked for and that they expected to be able to, I think, hopefully deal with some of these issues. Now, I also wanna say that I certainly think there's I'm not saying it's all just a question of resources. I think better decisions and better processes and better communication need to be a part of this, too. Um, now I'm going to say something that I don't think everyone's going to agree with here. Which is that this proposal specifically we've had a lot of conversations about. What is in the school committees purview? What is in the city council's purview? We've had a lot of conversations about the city charter. and Massachusetts General Law. And we could pass this thing word for word right now, and I guarantee you that whether it's the school lawyer or the school committee itself or somebody else, they're going to come and say, this is unenforceable. We're not going to follow any of this. We're not going to do any of this. That's what they're going to say. If you look at Mass General Law, the authority over the schools, over school governance, it falls to the school committee. If you look at the city charter, the city council can't pass an ordinance on this. Some of this I think falls into passing rules for the school committee. I mean, and I can only imagine how this body would react if the school committee passed a resolution saying the city council must do this and must meet this way and must do that. Well, I think we'd have to discuss the specifics of that, but I'm pretty sure this council didn't agree to it and didn't implement it. And I think that's the response that we're gonna expect here. So, again, on the on the larger concerns about this issue and getting resources to where they need to be. I propose a B paper tonight, which would be be it resolved by the Medford City Council that Mayor Lungo-Koehn city staff, public schools administration, and the school committee work to send the city council a supplemental appropriation as soon as possible to restore as much of the $2.8 million in funding that was cut from the fiscal 23 budget. with a specific focus on surging resources to safety and student supports to address ongoing issues regarding student behavior, mental and physical health, and the safety of everyone in our public schools. And I think that that is something that is clearly within our authority, within our budgetary scope, and something that would put resources to bear immediately around the issues that we've been discussing, and not something that I think will end up getting us bogged down in a whether we want to say it or not, political and legal morass that won't actually bring results and proactive action on this issue. So again, I'm open to more discussion around this. I agree with where this stems from and wanting to address problems. But I think we know what kind of Pandora's box we're opening going down this road. And I don't think it's going to give us the results that we all want to see here. Thank you.
[Collins]: Thank you for being here tonight. I also want to open by apologizing for not speaking up last week. when you came before us and briefly shared your story. This case is very deeply troubling. And honestly, I felt at a loss for what I could offer that in that moment would possibly help given how limited this body is and what it can do to directly impact this or any other situation in public schools. I was distracted by a sense of regret that this issue even had to come so far as to be brought up in a public meeting and risk further pain and exposure for everybody involved. I apologize, this is state of my mind. I've had the opportunity to speak with you privately and thank you for giving me your time and your perspective. In reflecting, I've remembered that even in the absence of a new good idea to lend to a problem or some idea for an instant fix, which there isn't here, simply expressing sympathy can be a good start. I'm sorry that I didn't offer that last week. So for all the families who listen to these meetings, for your family, for all the families who invest in our public schools, I am sorry for my silence. COVID was no excuse. If I wasn't well enough to respond to a resident in need, I should have already been logged off. That's just something for me to take forward. Like I've said, I'm deeply troubled by what your family and these students have been through. I'm sad that we have to go so far in giving each student what they need to have a safe and stable experience at school. Every student needs to be able to count on that. We owe that to our public school students and their families. Councilor Knight and Councilor Scarpelli, I appreciate the sincere attempt to create a solve for this issue. It's a policy that will improve conditions in our schools. Talk is cheap, we all know this. Roles change hands, policy is an expression of values. That being said, I want to support policies that will help to effectuate direct impact that this body can enforce. I don't love to share this, but I'm not comfortable supporting the main papers tonight as written. I do want to share why. I believe this proposed ordinance, I share similar concerns. I believe it would conflict with national law. I believe it would be unenforceable. I believe that we need to pay Deep attention to resources. Hold our administration accountable to following through on resources. A public forum is deeply important. I don't know that we can enforce that. I know that we owe our students and our teachers and our school staff more resources to create the environment that our students deserve. In the interest of avoiding a conflict with mass general law, I feel unable to support this paper as written. I believe that we can hold school leadership accountable to our shared goals while also maintaining checks and balances in our city government. That's not to say that I don't support changes to school policy that would arm our school administration and school staff with better systems and tools to prevent school violence and create the best possible experience for our students and our public schools families. I just don't believe that this is something that we can do. I know that our teachers, our school staff, our school committee want what is best for our students. I know that we need, and I think that most of them would agree, that policy changes and resource changes to improve the condition and the environment of our schools, ensuring the best possible environment for kids to learn and thrive in safely. We have to effectuate that. I think that the B paper offered by Councilor, Vice President Bears is one piece of an overall puzzle of aligning resources with our values. I'd be happy to support that tonight and continue the discussion about the main paper. Thank you.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng.
[Tseng]: Thank you, President Morell. Um, I think I, I also you an apology. Um, I, I listening to especially I think to Councilor Scarpelli's remarks and Councilor Collins remarks I think reminds me of a few things I think the first, the most important thing is of the ideals that we held when we chose to run for office. And when I made the decision to jump into all of this, I really wanted to give a voice to people like me, who I didn't feel like were being properly represented in our community. And I fell short of that ideal. I think that's safe to say. I, I was also sick and that's just, I mean that's not, that's not a good enough reason. And, but I think Councilor Collins is right I should have been, you know, if that's, you know, if I was already lying in bed for a few days then you know that should have been it. I will be transparent in saying that when I first heard about this, which was too late, we should have received news earlier on. I did contact a few school committee members, teachers, school leaders who I thought might have a better picture of the incident and the details there. And I was pretty much universally advised that I should choose my words super carefully in the interests of the children at stake. I think that paranoia, was, I think, you know, was affected by judgment in terms of what I should have said, and I really should have just said, expressed my sympathies, because I think Councilor Collins is right, that even that itself, I think, would have been more than saying nothing. What I should have said last week, I think, but what I will say this week is, first and foremost, I think, what happened to your daughter and the incidents that have occurred since are never acceptable, never, never, ever acceptable in our city, not anywhere. We should recognize that there is an epidemic of school violence and that this has become a very persistent problem in the aftermath of COVID and and especially with... Point of information? Is the gentleman referring to in the Medford public school system or in general? Well, I'll get to that. So, I mean, it's been a persistent problem in the aftermath of COVID lockdowns and a general downturn in youth mental health, which this council has talked about. And, you know, this isn't only happening in Medford, but we in Medford should be proactive about solving and tackling these challenges head on. Um, this is a personal problem to me, because I still have a lot of siblings of my friends who attend the school system, and I just graduated not too long ago from Medford High. This again, this isn't unique to Medford, but I think it's important in talking to students and teachers and school leaders about how we can prevent something like this happening. I think we need to, you know, recognize that we need to stop the systemic failures that led to this in the first place, especially with the administrative problems. I think we need to recognize that we need to treat this problem holistically and developmentally and focus just as much on physical well-being as well as on mental health and making sure that the problem is rooted out permanently and that we don't have students that get to that point at all. But such a hard approach I think such a strong approach I think means that we'll have to take a really hard look at the systemic underfunding of our schools I think it will require us to build more accountability, build more trust. I do really respect the spirit of the resolution itself. I think I share my colleagues' worry that this wouldn't be actionable and that this wouldn't solve the administrative problems that we saw in your, unfortunately saw in your case, and that it would also be illegal and overstepping our authority vis-a-vis the governance of our public school system. But I hope that my listening to the paper, I do hope that that's, again, one piece of the solution that's more actionable. And that really focuses on building trust, trust and collaboration. MHS is a safe place for most, if not many, but until it is a safe place for everyone, we have a lot of work to do. And it's clear to me that school leaders, that parents, teachers, students, and members of our school committee are ready to work together to try to find something that prevents the administrative problems that happened here and prevents the mental health problems and prevents the physical violence problems. And my hope is that something like the deep paper will help us move forward in that direction.
[Knight]: Madam President, I must just say, if I can just interject, please.
[Morell]: I'm sorry?
[Knight]: If I can just interject for just a moment, please. The issue isn't violence. in the schools. That's just one component of many of the crises that have occurred over the last two and a half, three years. All right. The issue is the body's total lack of an open forum or a vehicle to it for any individual in this community to address their elected school body or the superintendent of schools. All right. The point I want to point to the purpose of the proposal. The purpose of the proposal is to improve communication with our stakeholders and establish a vehicle to increase their participation in the development of policies and procedures governing our schools. That's what the purpose of this is. So when my colleague puts a B paper forward, I don't feel as though that really falls within the spirit of the paper. And the reason I say that is because just a couple of minutes ago, the gentleman made an amendment to Councilor Scarpelli's paper for KP law. And he asked that our finance director, Bob Dickinson, supply us with copies of the Warren articles. Now these copies of the Warren articles are something that we've been asking for now for, can anybody tell me? Probably the better part of three years that we still don't receive them, three years, Warren articles are where we spend our money. We don't get that. We've been asking for it by way of ordinance, by way of council action multiple times and we don't get it. So right now we don't even know what the financial picture of this community is. This council's debated papers and entertained papers concerning a moratorium on spending until such time as the administration provides us with an accurate financial picture of what's going on in this community. The administration has not done that. So it will be irresponsible for this body for us to say, hey, spend more money, even though we don't know if we even have any.
[Unidentified]: The issue isn't about this one specific event.
[Knight]: I know you guys don't want to do me a cuppa because you were silent on the call the other night. And I appreciate that you get for doing that, for having the courage to come up and speak on a call like this. I really do. I appreciate it. I really do. I think you guys, it's great that you have the courage to do it now. But here's the thing, all right? The paper isn't about this one issue, all right? The paper's about the way the body handles the public and the way the body handles the public when issues of crisis or catastrophe occur in this community. All right, now, last I checked, there was no lawyer in city hall. We got a lot of legal opinions flying around this room right now, but there's no lawyer in city hall last I checked. We talked about that a little while ago too. So maybe the paper won't pass this muster, maybe it will. Why don't we send it to them and say, do something. Tell us why you won't comply. Why don't you wanna do this? Why don't you wanna listen to the people that put you here? Why don't you wanna earn your paycheck? Or you can challenge it, or you can just comply. If you can challenge it, you can comply. Why don't you just adopt a policy that says, all we're asking for here is three hours a month, three hours a month to earn your paycheck. That's not too much, I don't think, to ask. I don't think that's too much to ask. Send it to them. Let them say, no, we're not going to do it. Then they can tell us why they don't want to hear from the people. Let them say to us, Oh, well, you know, yeah, whatever. I don't really care that's not that important to me, I don't really want to listen to what you have to say or they could they could just clearly say, because we don't have to. But then we'll know where we stand. Then we'll know where was, then we'll know where we stand. I read for people, not for prestige, not for any other reason.
[Scarpelli]: Thank you, Madam President. And again, I understand Councilor Villes and bringing that B paper up, but again, I've said in the past, I can't support anything when it comes to financial, this revert back had nothing to do with this issue. I will not support any initiative that goes to the mayor to ask about spending more money when we don't know what the money looks like. So I wouldn't support that. I think the other piece is very important that as a former school committee member, Yeah, this is a difficult decision to make, and this is a hard line to cross. But over and over again, when you speak to the educators that you all love and respect, and they tell you that there is no forum that they can reach and talk to on the school committee, when you talk to the kids that we all talk about how we want to support, that they don't have an avenue that the parents can go to that forum and speak on an issue. Or, um, You know, again, the parents in situations like this, I know this situation's driving, drove this issue, but we're talking about asking a school committee that, by the way, voted to eliminate security guards, who voted to implement a suspension process because it affected an uneven balance and not looking at what's in front of you. We're seeing what's happening right now. I'm sure the Bramleys, or the kids that are being bullied, or the parents that can't speak, or the parents that don't have a voice, truly don't care about any systemic issue right now. They wanna know to make sure that their child is safe. And if this is the extreme that we need to move on, I think this is where this body can, if it against mass general law, like Councilor Knight said it, let it come out. Are some of these things that we can work on to change as an ordinance? Yeah, maybe. But the bottom line is, teachers last evening, teachers that you support, children that you support, parents that support you, came to me there. and reiterated the fact that this is an unbelievable stock. This is something that we are now finally having an opportunity to hold the school committee accountable for what the citizens see as a severe concern and issue. And this is just an avenue that they can just go to a forum and speak because they don't have that process. And to say that they do, no, they don't. There's a system in place that you can petition it, then you can come up and you can speak, and then that's it. No dialogue.
[Unidentified]: And what we're having right now, we've gone to this point where they used it last night.
[Scarpelli]: And it's a serious motion last night. They voted zero confidence. the people we trust, my former colleagues, our teachers, our children's teachers, you know them. If they voted for that purpose, it should hold some weight enough that this council should move this forward to show the school committee that this process needs to be adjusted on their end. So I, again, I understand that it's not comfortable and I understand as a former school committee member, I'd be appalled, but as a former school committee member, I would never have let my body get in this way and do this. I want us all to understand, all we're asking for is a forum where people can come up and talk to our elected officials. They're telling us they can't. That's that simple. So a vote tonight, symbolic or not, a vote tonight is to show the school committee that we need to move this forward to the next step. And if the next step says, Massachusetts General Law says we can't do it, okay. This council put the most important piece forward first, and that's the teachers and the students and the line of communication. Thank you, Madam President.
[Morell]: President Bears.
[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. You know, again, I think we've had a lot of conversations and when we wanna talk about violence and resources and administrative work and making sure that our schools are safe, that's a conversation that we can have and that in our authority, that our budget authority speaks to that. When we start bringing in things that happened two years ago, and a whole slew of issues, and there has been an election between some of them and now, where this school committee was elected, then we're making a political point. We're making a political argument. We're not talking about what is within our authority that we can be proactive to address the issues of violence and safety in our schools. This council has an open forum. We're about to have an open forum. We put it in our rules to have an open forum. That's our values. That's what we decided because that's within our scope and our authority. So we offer that. Teachers didn't vote no confidence in us. And I know for a fact that that's because of what we've done and what we've said and what we've tried to do. Now, if we pass an ordinance, we have the authority to negotiate the teacher's contract. You know, we don't, we couldn't put that ordinance forward, we couldn't pass it and it wouldn't be enforceable. And it would be leading us down a road to say, we have a solution that's gonna end up crumbling before us. Now, I understand that we wanna take action and do something, but I don't wanna put forward the solutions that aren't gonna get the result. That's my whole thing here. That's what I think this is gonna do. At the end of the day, I read this and I say, it's just not gonna, it's gonna crumble before us. So we can put it forward and get into a giant argument and have the school committee sending back resolutions telling us to shut up and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And then in three months, where are we gonna be? We're gonna have it all crumble before us. We're not gonna have more accountability. We're not gonna have a change. And we're not gonna have had the proactive discussions on the things within our authority to try to advance concrete solutions. around this issue of safety and violence, which I think we all take very seriously. So that's where I'm coming from on this. Now, if we want to have more discussions in committee about things that we can do and take action on that are within our authority that we think can encourage this, I'm open to that. But at the end of the day, we aren't the school committee. We don't set the rules of the school committee. We don't set the meetings of the school committee. We don't govern the public schools of the city. We pay them. Well, the whole city pays them. It's a system in our charter of checks and balances and a system of mass general law that has very specifically said, there's a city council that is a legislative body when it comes to city matters under our charter we approve the budget. We look at ordinances, and we look at zoning, and that under master while the school committee has complete and total governance over the Metro public schools. That's what it says. And leading people down that road otherwise on a solution that's going to crumble in front of us just isn't the approach that I want to take on it. I think we all agree on some of these specific issues around administrative competence and safety and violence and resources, and that's where I want to focus. You know, again, we're about to get in what I can remember Councilor Mark saying it and us having meetings in the last session, talking about the school committee talking about the City Council, us getting furious about the school committee saying something to Council now that I'm remembering I think Councilor Knight brought up. You don't go into the into there you don't you don't cross that line into there because all you're going to get is trouble. And that's, that's what's going to happen here.
[Knight]: Point of information. With the same hold true between other legislative bodies and various levels of government.
[Bears]: Hey, if this was an advisory, Councilor Knight, we asked you to hold public forums. That's a different conversation. This is an ordinance mandating it and taking away people's pay if they don't do it, and basically baiting them into having an argument with us about it. That's my how I read it. I'm sorry, but that's how I read it. If it was, it was saying we believe in the principle of a public forum and we ask wholeheartedly that the school committee hold a public forum on this issue, you know, and again, if something is on the agenda, people can speak to it. That's also just kind of how individual members of a body work. That'd be an entirely different story, but it's not. Thank you.
[Hurtubise]: And I appreciate Councilor Villes point, but I just have a question to my, my colleague.
[Unidentified]: Do you feel the school committee is listening to our people? That's to who?
[Scarpelli]: Do you feel what you've seen and what we've gone through for the last few months, do you feel that the school committee is given an avenue for our constituents to go and speak on concerns and issues that we think is vital to our community.
[Bears]: Anne Avenue, yes. The preferred avenue, maybe not.
[Scarpelli]: But Anne Avenue, yes. So with that, I would say, I'm not asking the school committee to change any policy or procedure dealing with how to run the school. I'm asking them, I'm asking us to support an ordinance that brings the school committee, bring the constituents, our constituents, our parents, our teachers, a forum that they can go to and speak on concerns and issues. That's all. It has nothing to do with the policies that they have.
[Morell]: President Bears, you had the floor.
[Bears]: Yeah, I mean, I think we've had the conversation. We've decided how we want to run a public body. We have an open forum. We have a place for people to come have a conversation. Obviously, sometimes we have to say, please stick to your five minutes or stick to 90 seconds because we have a big line, but people come here and we have a public forum. And that's what we as a group have decided is how the city council should run. Now, the school committee has decided a different approach. you put something on the agenda, it takes time. It's maybe not, you know, my preferred approach necessarily, but it's what they've decided to do. And I think us going and saying, we want you to do this and we're going to enforce financial penalties on you to do what we say doesn't align with any understanding of the city charter and mass general law that I have. And I'd like to focus on different actionable solutions to try to reach the results that we're trying to achieve. Thank you.
[Morell]: Thank you. So any further discussion from the council? Councilor Knight?
[Knight]: Move rule.
[Morell]: Before we get to that, I know we have members of the public who wish to speak. Pretty much everything has been said at this point. I also am of the mind that I do not believe we have the power to enforce this. I don't want to make rules for a separate body. They're a separate body. They don't make rules for us. We make rules for them. They're a separate body the school committee does not report to the city council department of the city. Regardless, I don't, similar to what Vice President Bears has been saying, I don't want to present the illusion of a solution, knowing that this is unenforceable, knowing that this isn't going to happen. I understand what you're saying, Councilor Knight, as far as sending it out to what other legal authorities, Steve, in the past semester. I'm voted, I'm voted, I'm voted, I'm voted, I'm also the chair. I'm voted, I was voted into office to make decisions. I can't support this paper tonight. I'm not going to punt to see what some other body says to, again, extend this and give the illusion of a solution. I understand the motivation. That's where I'm coming from. And that's where my vote is. Vice President Bears.
[Bears]: And if I may, if there was a motion by a sponsor or a supporter of the resolution ascended to a committee to have discussions about different approaches that we could take on this that could pass legal muster, that would be a different story.
[Knight]: Who's going to give us the legal opinion? The mayor's private attorney?
[Bears]: Well, that's going to come on anyway. No, that's going to come on anyway.
[Knight]: I mean, all she wants to do is prevent this from coming out.
[Bears]: As you noted, you would write a resolution. You'd write an ordinance. We've all written ordinances to fill in the gap that they've called on. And if we want to bring in someone else, that would be fine with me.
[Morell]: Any further discussion from the council? Name and address for the record, please.
[Branley]: How do I turn this on?
[Morell]: It's on.
[Branley]: Oh, so Nicole Branley. I need to omit my address for safety concerns. I don't actually have any specific words written for tonight. 51 days ago was my daughter's attack.
[Unidentified]: It's not any easier 51 days later.
[Branley]: It's still horrifying. On November 7th, I spoke at the school committee meeting. We spoke about that earlier on the phone. I'm wondering if you went and actually looked at the meeting. not since our conversation, okay. On November 29th, I believe it was brought up at the City Council meeting by you and by Member Knight and Member Caraviello about what happened to our daughter. I spoke December 2nd at the City Council meeting, and here I am again today. I think the city has a lot of work to do.
[Unidentified]: And I think it's opened my eyes in many of our citizens that there is a huge failure here.
[Branley]: And as I said before, I believe there's 14 elected officials. Everybody has to do their part. Every parent, every elected official, Every person, what happened to my daughter was inhumane. It was inhumane. And it hasn't gotten better. Some of the words that we've talked about here tonight that I've heard many of you say is communication, teachers, uncomfortable. This is uncomfortable for me.
[Unidentified]: Just because I'm doing it is not easy.
[Branley]: Uncomfortable is watching your daughter walk into school every day and know that she she's sad because she got hurt and she's scared Uncomfortable is how she must have felt that day on the floor This doesn't get easier 51 days later this is something that I I said to someone earlier I will never get over that over this and all the days of the rest of my life because this is my child This is my child So this is uncomfortable. It might be uncomfortable for you to vote on this or make your peace, but this is uncomfortable and it's not getting any easier. I need everybody's help. I need everybody's support. Someone also said to me, you have hundreds, if not thousands of people standing behind you, but what elected official is going to take the lead and stand in front of you? Wow, I thought, wow, you're right. I can lead everybody behind me, but who's gonna step up? I need everybody to step up for the safety of our kids, not just for mine, not just for mine, for every child, for every child. So there has been one consistent, I mean, there's been many consistent people who have supported us and one has been the teachers. her teachers have been amazing, amazing, and they have validated every single one of our concerns. They've listened to me, they've communicated tirelessly to make sure that she's okay and that I know she's okay every single day, that we're getting through it all together. So I guess my question is after 51 days, why, yesterday was the first time that I heard from you. Why was today... I just mean, today it was 3.30 we were on the phone. This meeting was at seven o'clock. And I asked you one thing. I said, could you just look at that video of what I said at the school committee meeting? Because I'm not sure you know what happened. And I hung up with you and three seconds later, I got a voicemail from you. I haven't heard one thing from any of you. And I'm not trying to point you out and say you were wrong or whatnot, but it's not right. And what I need everybody to do right now is the right thing for my family, for our city, for our school. We only get one shot here with our kids. I only have one shot right now. This is my one shot. And people keep saying how strong I am or how brave I am. This is really uncomfortable. I've had to put myself out everywhere to protect my child.
[Unidentified]: She's never entered the cafeteria in 51 days since this has happened.
[Branley]: Going to parent-teacher conference the other night, we walked through the overpass that we walked through 30 years ago. And I said, wow, it's still just as cold here. in this overpass.
[Unidentified]: And we opened the doors, and there was a nurse's office. And I couldn't breathe, because that's where everything happened.
[Branley]: That video of my daughter being attacked was sent to me before I even started my car to get to Medford High School.
[Unidentified]: Because instead of stepping in, People turned on their recordings. I couldn't look. I knew what it was. I couldn't look. I've watched it once. So we need to step up.
[Branley]: We need to do better, not just for me, not just for me. I can lead everybody. I can say a million great things. That's great. But if nothing changes, then what does this show? What does this show the kids who have the unexpected behavior? What does it show them? And my God, what does it show the kids that are doing the right thing and having this done to them?
[Unidentified]: What does it show them? Come on.
[Branley]: If you don't like this policy, then what's your proposal? What's your proposal? What's your proposal? You can say no to this all day, but then what's your proposal? Can you write a proposal? Can the three of you get together and maybe make a plan? Because these three got together and made a plan. They wrote something. It says right here, Councilor Knight, Councilor Scarpell, thank you.
[Unidentified]: Councilor Knight. What's your proposal? I'm present.
[Knight]: As I noted in my presentation with the paper, I did say the paper needs work. I did make a motion to move approval with the understanding that the paper probably doesn't have the support and it's going to die. I would be willing to withdraw my motion to move approval and have the paper referred to committee of the whole. For us to meet within the next 30 days to discuss some real legitimate. Options and opportunities for us to pursue certainly, you know. The councils have recent issues and concerns and a lot of them surround. legal basis and whether or not we're able to take such action. I certainly feel that we're in a position to do certain aspects of what we asked for. Maybe forfeiting their pay isn't something that we can do, but maybe wiping it out of the budget the next year is something we can do. So there's different things that we can put in place and different protocols we can put in place. So I'd be happy to sit down and further discuss language or put together a small working group of members of council to do that. in the interest of time, because ultimately, you know, Ms. Branley is right. What's the proposal? Where are we going with this? You know, if we're going to vote on it, it's going to die, and then we can't bring anything back for 90 days. It's a simple matter. We're better off keeping it in the committee and trying to work on something and getting it out there instead of with a paper vote that's going to fail and then be parliamentarily precluded from being brought back for 90 days.
[Scarpelli]: Madam President, if I can, I, again, the reason why it was brought forward, The reason why we're here is, you know, the reason why this was something that was important is because we have that opportunity for you to talk to that microphone. And I know that you would rather be doing it to the people that have to make the decisions, because like we said, we can't make a decision, but when they're not being heard, When you're not being heard, like I said, two days later when we talked, no one's reached out to you yet, trying to figure out a resolution, or at least bring your daughter's mind at ease, or your family's mind at ease, you have to come to this forum. So I think it's something that I don't want to see die, and I think that, like, Council and I said to let it rest. I would support that would go to the committee of the whole if our colleagues will indulge us and then maybe we could sit down and see what legally we can and can't do. And then see if there's an option that maybe the school committee sits back and sees this and says, well, maybe we need to readjust and what our policies are. And maybe we need to have our forum open. So because it's got to this point, everyone, it's not, this isn't, This is uncomfortable. I know it is, but it's gone to this point. And I know that uncomfortably, it's your position and it's your family that's paid the price, but it also opened a lot of people's eyes. And like I said, personally, I'll never, I readjusted who I am as a person because of it. So, and I know it's not easy. I know it's not easy, but thank you, Madam President.
[Branley]: And I think just to add, and I said it to you, We can't be reactive anymore. Even about the paving. Now we're gonna ask questions. Why? Why are we always so reactive? Why can't we be proactive? Put something in place that's proactive. Don't let this happen to another family. Because what if the family isn't as strong as ours? What happens to them? What if a child can't go home and talk to their parents? I am so blessed that we have the relationship that we do with our daughter, that she was open with us. I wish you that for your baby. I really do. I really, I wish that for every child. I wish that for every parent that they had that open conversation, but I'm really worried about the people that don't know how this is supposed to work. I've done a lot of research. I've worked in the school system. I'm versed in the lingo that's in the school system versus the lingo out of the school system. I'm blessed in that way, but not everybody is. We can't help what happened to my daughter. I'm not sure something else is going to happen either. So I need to be proactive. I need you all to be proactive. So if it needs to go to the committee of the whole, if there's something that I can do to help, I'll do it. I'll support all of you. If you support my family, the teachers, and I don't mean just contract, I mean like teachers that are on the ground that have their opinion that can't go up and speak just, hi, I'm a teacher that I wanted to say that this is, you know, a problem in our school, I had to apply, you know, I felt like I needed to apply to speak at the school committee meeting. I needed to send to the school committee and to the superintendent who I've been in meetings with, who I didn't feel like I had the full support of, the superintendent, read my words before anybody could say to me, sure, yeah, you can come in. It's, that was a horrible feeling. It was a horrible feeling that I felt like it had to be studied first and okayed. I poured my heart out into that. Like I poured out my heart every single time that I've spoken. I'm not saying, you know, I feel like what I'm asking should not be a lot. I need people to be proactive to protect our children. to protect the safety of all at school every single day. It should be just common sense at this point. So listen to the teachers, find out what they need on the ground there. Because there's a lot of things happening at the school that I'm hearing about that you, everybody in the city should know about as elected officials. It shouldn't be dangerous to send your child to high school. and certainly should not land them in the emergency room. So I thank you for your time. Like I've said, I am willing to help in any single way. I was on the subcommittee meeting for the school committee earlier about bullying prevention. I'll do whatever it takes. Ask me. I think by now the city knows I'm persistent. So I will continue to be persistent. I'm not going anywhere. I'm going to stand up for every child, my child, every single time. Thank you.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Carballo.
[Caraviello]: Thank you, Madam President. Schools should be the ultimate safe space for children, and our schools are not. I have a 16-year-old that goes to that high school, and I fear for her the same way Nicole fears for her daughter. I'm afraid for her every day. And tonight we've offered some solution, but the solution we gave is what we do, what we're offering tonight is what government does best. We throw money at it. Instead of addressing the problem, let's throw some money at it. We've got plenty of talented people at that school We should be able to address this problem, not throwing more money at it. The school committee talked about $50,000 for a consultant to do what? To tell them what they should be doing? Those teachers up there, those administrators know what they should be doing. We don't have to bring a consultant in to tell us what they need to do. This is the safe space for these children. Parents send their kids to school, they don't want to get a phone call saying, hearing what Mrs. Braley had to hear. That's a horrific thing. Let the administrators at that school do what they're trained to do. They know how to handle this. Not bringing consultants. Let's not throw some more money at it, because that's what government does. We just throw money and hope the problem goes away. I'll support anything we want to do today to get this moving forward, but we have to start addressing the problems up there. We have talented people, let them do their jobs up there.
[Morell]: Thank you.
[Unidentified]: The school department said we need $71 million this year, and the mayor sent them 68.
[Bears]: So it's not throwing money at a problem throwing good money after bad. They expected millions of dollars that they didn't get. because the mayor decided to cut it out of the budget for whatever reasons that she had, even though she initially had a plan to fund the whole thing. So, let me just go for this.
[Morell]: So in any case, is it a point of information you're debating, it's a point of information, information.
[Caraviello]: So if we gave it a second, would this problem been avoided?
[Bears]: I don't know. But what I'm hearing in the conversation that I had with Mrs. Branley is that people who are tasked with dealing with this are overwhelmed and they can't handle the issue and they need resources. And I think a proactive approach, and I'm not saying it's the only one, but I'm saying I had a conversation and I tried to think of something that could help, is to send resources specifically around behavior, physical safety, and violence, because that's what I'm hearing that people are overwhelmed with. We're hearing stories in the schools that they don't have the resources they need. So I said, hey, let's put A and B together. There was money that wasn't supposed to be there. We have a growing problem, and I'm hearing that the staff we're tasked with dealing with it are overwhelmed. If you believe that they have what they need and they just need to do it, that's fine. I'm hearing from parents and from the parent who spoke to me tonight, there's people who are overwhelmed, who are tasked with dealing with this and that maybe some more resources would help. That budgetary piece, that resource piece is within our authority. And I think we should ask for it. That's all I'm saying. I'm trying to think on multiple streams in the many ways that we can address this issue. And it sounds to me like getting money to our assistant principals and guidance Councilors and adjustment Councilors and people who are dealing with mental health and physical health and making sure that there's enough staff to properly monitor the bathrooms and the million other things that we've heard might help. and may stop the next one. I can't say whether if something in the past would have stopped something that happened in the past. I don't think anyone can say that, but I think we can say that resources to make sure that staff is there to address these specific issues probably would help. So that's what when I had a conversation with Someone who asked to be proactive, that was a proactive approach that I thought we could look at.
[Scarpelli]: I'm going to be calm. If I can't just say, because I agree, Council Bears. These are initiatives that we need to focus on. I think that funding these initiatives are great. But what we're asking for is free. We're asking us to have a forum that our constituents can meet with our school committee. That's all. That's the point where this word is brought up. That's what the issue is. I agree with you a thousand percent. I won't vote on it. I won't support it because of financial, my background with financial issues until we see our numbers. But we also have a school committee that voted in policies that hinder the situation from being resolved. So again, we wouldn't know that because the parents can't speak to that point. So thank you.
[Morell]: Any further discussion from the council at this time? Councilor Knight, let's rise to the original motion.
[Unidentified]: Mr. Castagnetti. Yes.
[Morell]: Oh yeah, sorry, participation on, you're speaking to this paper specifically? Okay, please name and address for the record.
[Castagnetti]: Castagnetti, Cushing Street. I don't have any dog in this fight, but this is like worse than, this is worse than bad. I mean, imagine if it was one of you people that were lying on the floor bleeding. or you're a kid if you ever have a kid. This is more than unacceptable. I don't like bullies. I guess you got to talk soft and carry a big stick. In the old days, Lincoln Junior High School's Mr. Buckwell, the sheet metal worker. Mr. Scott probably must remember the story. And walking through front of his classroom during intermission in between classes or cigarettes, he would have a steel yardstick. And we would catch it on the rear. They would call a cheap lawyer today. They would own the city. As a president once said, talk soft and carry a big stick. You can throw all the money you want, as Calvillo says. But you know, if you don't take care of business, and this society wouldn't be gone.
[Unidentified]: Maybe somebody should fall on a sword for this.
[Castagnetti]: I'm not talking about a peon, especially if, if, if the injured party were not respected properly, maybe set an example and teach it some good lessons. Um, I could go on and on. But to make it brief, if you're not getting a response, well, maybe it's true. Maybe I've heard this years ago. I never believed it. So maybe it's true that the tail of the school committee is wagging the city's dog. I don't know. I never went to a school committee meeting. I have no interest in it. They are full houses. I don't know if they're allowed to speak. As a matter of fact, at what time? quarter to 11, there's over 60 people on the Zoom meeting. And it seems like most of them are school committee members. If you're not getting responses, maybe they could tune in and plug in right now, hit the button. This is not acceptable. This is real bad. What if it was you? Get your stones together, cast a stone, rewrite it if you have to. Night is bright.
[Bears]: Council Member Drew's motion, I would move to approve the B paper and send the main paper to committee of the whole.
[Morell]: Okay, so on the motion of Vice President Bears to approve the B paper, well, so we'll take the B paper separately, it's a B paper, so.
[Hurtubise]: Sure.
[Morell]: I want you to approve the B paper from Vice President Bears, seconded by, second on the B paper, Councilor Collins. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Unidentified]: Vice President Bears. Yes. Councilor Caraviello. No. Councilor Collins. Yes.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Knight. No. Councilor Scarpelli. No. Councilor Tseng. Yes.
[Morell]: President Morocco. Yes. Four in the affirmative, three in the negative. The motion passes. On the motion from Vice President Bears to refer the main paper to Committee of the Whole, seconded by Mr. Collins.
[Unidentified]: All those, do you want to roll call on this? Roll call, Mr. Clerk. Vice President Ferris. Yes. Councilor Caraviello. Yes.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Collins.
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Knight. Yes. Councilor Strapelli. Yes. Councilor Tseng.
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Morell]: Councilor Morocco. No. 16 affirmative, one in the negative. The motion passes. I'm going to hand the chair over to Vice President Ferris. I need to step out. My son needs me.
[Bears]: 22-599, petition for common victor license by Claire Shaleen. Licensing operations manager, 2902 Corporate Place, Chanhassen, Minnesota. 5517 for LTF Club Operations Company, Inc. DBA Life Cafe at 70 Station Landing, Medford, Massachusetts, 02155. I know this was in the packet. Please stop. Please stop. Please do not harass Councilors in the chamber. You may leave if you'd like. This is a convinctual, please, please. Move approval on the ham and cheese. On the convictual license by Claire Chalene, Councilor Scarpelli.
[Scarpelli]: Thank you, Council President. I know that I talked to conversations, uh, clerk. I know there was some outstanding paperwork that we're waiting on that has now been approved. Everything is in order and in place. Um, I know that is that is the petitioner online? Yes. Okay. I know that that's basic questions. I know that other councils Alaska know that how many employees will be working, uh, for the for this company. Are they free to speak?
[Bears]: If we could recognize the petitioner, Claire Shaleen, is she unmuted? If you could just give us your name and address for the record and answer the question by Councilor Scarpelli.
[SPEAKER_24]: Yep, my name's Claire Shaleen. I live in Minnesota, actually. Specific number of employees, I don't know. Off the top of my head, we are going to have some full time, some part time, but I could get that information to you tomorrow.
[Scarpelli]: for the approval, I think that we need to, do you have all the paperwork in order? Are they all workman's comp paperwork in order?
[SPEAKER_24]: Yep, we have workman's comp. That information was submitted on the original application.
[Scarpelli]: The hours of operation, I know that. Yep, 7 a.m.
[SPEAKER_24]: to 8 p.m.
[Scarpelli]: perfect that falls and it needs to be changed, you know, that has to, um, if it goes past the ordinance hours, it needs to be, um, that needs to be addressed. But, um, I see everything else in order, Madam President, uh, Mr. President, so I would move approval.
[Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. And just for added edification, I can confirm with the clerk that all of the necessary paperwork has been submitted.
[Scarpelli]: Okay, thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you. On Councilor Scarpelli's motion to approve, any further questions from the Council? Seconded by Councilor Caraviello. All those in favour? Aye. Opposed? Motion passes. Public participation. To participate remotely outside of Zoom, please email ahertabese at medford-ma.gov. Do we have any additional public participation from members of the space, in the room, or anyone raising their hand online? any further public participation. Seeing none, is there any other business to be handled tonight? Motion of Councilor Knight to adjourn, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion passes and the meeting is adjourned.
|
total time: 20.92 minutes total words: 3629  |
total time: 48.44 minutes total words: 7952  |
total time: 16.13 minutes total words: 2782  |
total time: 10.26 minutes total words: 1616  |
|
total time: 25.65 minutes total words: 4709  |
total time: 29.62 minutes total words: 5745  |
total time: 10.93 minutes total words: 1996  |
total time: 9.24 minutes total words: 1419  |