[Fred Dello Russo]: The 34th regular meeting of the Medford City Council will come to order. Please rise and salute. Madam Clerk, please call the roll.
[hFAk--zIv7g_SPEAKER_20]: Councilor Camuso. Councilor Caraviello. Present. Councilor Knight. Present. Vice President Lococourne. Present. Councilor Marks. Present. Councilor Panza. Present.
[Fred Dello Russo]: President Dello Russo. Present. Six present, one absent. Please rise to salute the flag now.
[SPEAKER_03]: I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor Caraviello.
[Richard Caraviello]: May I ask that we have a moment of silence? It's not the meeting of the victims of the terrorist attacks.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Please join the Medford City Council and all rise for a moment of silence in memory of the victims of the terrorist attacks. in Paris this past weekend. Thank you, Councilor CAVIOLLO. The Committee of the Whole, if I can just report on the Committee of the Whole meeting held this evening. at six o'clock in the council office, uh, to address the issues, uh, regarding the Shepard Brooks estate, an update on, uh, the goings on on the property and a, um, uh, consideration of, uh, some of the issues surrounding the request for the loan order. Uh, the, uh, committee has asked that the paper remain in paper and in committee. However, they have asked for three things. One, a report from the budget director's office for expenditures from the city of Medford on the Shepard Brooks estate for the past five years. Two, that the fire chief report to the city council in writing on an outline of the parameters and requirements he has for upgrades of the road to the Sheppard Brooks Estate, and also a cost estimate from the city engineer on that road. And then three, that the director of public health, Karen Rose, report to the council on what restrictions or requirements might be to mitigate the present uh, sewage system up on the property and also to report back to us on, uh, requirements and restrictions, uh, on, uh, the property, uh, because of the presence of lead paint. Did I get that all councils? Thank you. Uh, madam vice president.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, president Delaware. So if we could have a paper waiting for, our new mayor, just to ask the intentions of the Brooks Estates moving forward, some sort of master plan, obviously, in the scheme of the rest of the capital improvements we need to make, just so we know what to invest in, how to invest in it, and how we're going to move forward.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Very good. I should have had that on the notes. I apologize. Thank you. Thank you. So, motions, orders, and resolutions, 15-749. Motion for suspension of the rules, Councilor Knight. All those in favor? All those opposed?
[Adam Knight]: The reason I asked to suspend the rules, Mr. President, is to take the tabled papers from last week.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion of Councilor Knight to take the tabled papers from last week. All those in favor? All those opposed?
[Robert Penta]: Whoa, whoa, whoa. What papers?
[Adam Knight]: The papers that you- Can we take them one at a time, please? Absolutely. I'd like to move first, Mr. President, with the DPW loan order. Very good.
[Unidentified]: Mr. President, may I, on that motion?
[Robert Penta]: On that motion, Councilor Penta. Last week, the motion was laid on the table because we did not receive anything as it related to what we were spending $300,000 on. I believe the council's request was to have a paper in our hands as we view it. We did not receive anything this past week till today. So I'm going to move that that paper lay on the table until we get a written explanation of what the $300,000 is needed for, for the department of public works.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Before we entertain that motion, we're going to entertain the motion to take the papers off the table for consideration.
[Robert Penta]: I'm going to take them one at a time and move to separate papers, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion of Council and Knight to take loan order 15-737 for the DPW facility project off the table. On that motion, all those in favor?
[Robert Penta]: I move the motion that the paper lay on the table until we get what the council asked for last week.
[Fred Dello Russo]: We're going to take it off the table. The chair is in doubt whether to take the matter off the table. Ms. Madam Clerk, please call the roll to take the matter off the table.
[Robert Penta]: Mr. President, to be perfectly clear, it's kind of clear. The council voted last week to lay it on the table pursuant to council rules until we get an explanation. We have not received anything in writing as we asked for.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So I think I think on the roll on whether to take it off the table or not. Madam Clerk, please call the roll.
[hFAk--zIv7g_SPEAKER_20]: Councilor Camuso, Councilor Cabrera. Yes. Councilor Knight. Yes. Vice-President Monk-O'Connor. Yes. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Pantano. No. President Dello Russo.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes. With a vote of five in the affirmative, one in the negative, one absent, the paper is before us. The paper was already tabled for the purpose of information. We had the vehicle of information before us. So now the paper is before us on that motion, Mr. President, on that motion.
[Robert Penta]: Councilor Penta. I mean, how do you explain to anyone who's watching or sitting out here when you ask for information, you lay it on the table for specific purpose and you still haven't got your purpose resolved. How can you even entertain it going further?
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Mr. President, point of information. Councilor Knight, a review of the minutes from last week's meeting would not indicate that the council requested anything other than enacting rule number 20 to motion to table it.
[Robert Penta]: I believe, Mr. President, to be quite candid, if you go back and review the tape, the council is quite clear, and nobody objected to getting the information to be forthcoming. And besides, that's not the point. It's a $300,000 item. It's a $300,000 item that you're asking this council. It's quite obvious if this council is going to continue to go on, starting in January, nothing's going to change around here. You people are going to have no information. You're just going to take someone who comes to the podium and makes a presentation without any discussion.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Point of information, Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: If I'm not mistaken, Mr. President, Ann Baker was before the council representing the administration. And this body asked, where is the paperwork behind each and every one of the three loan audits? And she had nothing to provide us. And that was what I remember why the issue was tabled until we got some information back to the council on why do we want to borrow money that the taxpayers are going to have to spend? I think that's a logical request. to ask. So I have yet to receive anything. I don't know if my other colleagues have.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Point of information, Madam Vice President.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I, too, agree with Councilor Penta. I agree with Councilor Marks. But at the same time, we have somebody here who could educate us on the two loan orders that are before us. If we need to table it further to request more information, I will be happy to put that forward. But while she's here, I'd like to hear what has to be said.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Quite reasonable. So the paper is before us.
[Adam Knight]: The paper is before us. Why don't we invite Ms. Miller up to explain to us this loan order. Ms.
[Robert Penta]: Miller. Well, further information then. What's the difference between Ms. Miller and our city auditor? I mean.
[Adam Knight]: That's a question for the solicitor, Mr. President.
[Robert Penta]: No, no, it isn't. Please, don't try to twist the words. We have two separate people making a presentation on the same paper. And again, with all due respect to Ms. Miller, you know, Where's the information that the council asked for? You have three members of the council. I can't answer for anyone else. Three members have spoken up waiting for information. So I just think this is the tempo is being set for what's going to happen here in January. Nothing is going to change. Nothing.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Ms. Miller, please state your name and address for the record.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Louise Miller. I live in Needham, Massachusetts.
[Fred Dello Russo]: We have before us the matter for the City Yard, 15-734, loan order for the DPW facility. Could you present to us what this is about and why it's before us today?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Yes.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Oh, my apologies. Point of information, Councilor.
[Robert Penta]: Were you forwarded the request that information be forwarded to this council ahead of time?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: I did not receive that request.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Unbelievable. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Penta. Ms. Miller, if you would continue.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Yes. So there were two phases to the DPW construction. The first phase was the remediation of the site. There had been contaminated soil on the site. And the second phase was the building of the project. When we had put the budget together for the two phases of the project, we had budgeted $500,000 for the remediation and redevelopment of the site, and we had budgeted $12,394,000 for the building of the new DPW building. The remediation and redevelopment actually cost $975,000. which was $475,000 over what we had budgeted. When the bids came in for the DPW building, they were favorable, and including all change orders, the total cost of the building was $12,214,000, which leaves us with a deficit of approximately $300,000. That's where the $300,000 came from.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Point of information, Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: I was just wondering if I can ask, has all the furniture arrived within the DPW that was audited?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: I believe all the furniture that was ordered has arrived. We're still ordering a few shelves here and there, but I believe everything else has arrived.
[Michael Marks]: So everything that was on audit has been received?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: That is correct.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Councilor Marks. Chair recognizes Vice President Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Dello Russo. Can you tell us where the $300,000 is owed to? Is it a certain contractor? Is it multiple contractors?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: No, it's just a single contractor, GNR Construction Company, and we're in the process of closing out the project. We're finishing up certain warranty issues, and this would be, you know, close out all payments.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: And through the chair, We have millions of dollars in free cash. Has that been thought of to use free cash rather than go out to bond on something that we've already bonded quite enough on?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: That's actually the mayor's decision. And the mayor has chosen to go out to bond for the $300,000. Chair recognizes Councilor Penta.
[Fred Dello Russo]: You all set, Madam Vice President? For now. Thanks. Thank you.
[Robert Penta]: This concerns on that yard right now that there's leaks in the roof and the air conditioning and the heating system is not consistently working correct. Where is the city's position on that and the contractor?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Um, actually we're still working with the contractor and all the subcontractors to get the final issues resolved. So the contractor has come back out and looked at the roof. I don't understand exactly what the construction is, but apparently it's not unusual. during the first few months for this to occur. So they've come back out and they're fixing leaks in the roof. And the controls are being adjusted for the heat and the air conditioning.
[Robert Penta]: This building isn't even a year old. That's correct. And it already has leaks in the roof. It's wonderful. More importantly, most importantly, if there's problems that still exist, why would you want to be paying this company off until their problems are fixed?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: We haven't paid them off yet. We're withholding money at this point, but we're going to, at some point, need to pay the contractor.
[Robert Penta]: How much are you holding back?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: We're holding back approximately $300,000. How much? Well, that's just $300,000. Yes, that is correct.
[Robert Penta]: So what do you need the money for now, then? Why don't you wait until they do what they're supposed to do?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: We do anticipate that everything will be taken care of in the next couple of weeks.
[Robert Penta]: A good business approach would be to make sure that the job is done correctly. Why would you want to pay them before the job is finished?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: We're not paying them before the job is finished, but under the law, once they give us their final invoice and we accept the building finally, we only have 14 days to pay them, the contractor.
[Robert Penta]: But how can you say within 14 days if you still have the leak and you have air conditioning and heating system problems?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: We're not going to pay them until we're satisfied, but we do need the funds in place so that we are able to pay them?
[Robert Penta]: Well, I'm going to concur with my colleague, Councilor Langel-Curran. I would not bond another thing in this city and put the city into any further debt when you're sitting on $6.5 million in free cash. You spent almost, not you, the city has spent almost $14.5 million to build that building. It isn't even a year old and it's already leaking. It doesn't make any sense. You try to tell us that to the common person on the street and they're going to tell you there's something wrong with how the city. Look at that ceiling over there. It's going over two years. Two years you got holes in the ceiling. And you came in here and I believe you indicated it's going to cost the city in excess of a million dollars to do the roof and that. Where's that money going to come from? Hope you're not going to bond for that too. You know, the problem around here is that this administration has gotten away with it for way too long with not bringing the council in on issues such as this that have an extreme effect upon this community. An extreme effect. More importantly, it's the lack of communication. You just sat there and rattled off numbers that I couldn't keep up with. You had the numbers there. We didn't even get a piece of paper. I'm going to move to the paper. Lay on the table, Mr. President, until further notice, until we get further information.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Motion to table is undebatable. Hold up. Okay, good. If you want to ask a question. Motion has been withdrawn. Chair recognizes Vice President Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you. Sorry. Thank you. President Dello Russo. Ms. Miller, this just led to another subject. Sorry about the communication, but who's responsible for reviewing the construction? I'm sorry. To make sure that everything was constructed correctly before you hand out the remaining $300,000 owed. Our architect, as well as the DPW
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: director or commissioner. He is supposed to be reporting issues that are reported to him by the men and women who are in the building. I'm sorry. Go ahead. Is there a designated person?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: DPW commission is just going to go off of what's reported to him. I think my concern stems from the warranty that had to do with the fire station repairs and the lack of foresight and ability to go after the warranty with the city. So with regards to, is there a designated person that's going to go through that building inch by inch to make sure that everything was done correctly? So in a half year, year, two years, we know. that it was done properly and we're not going to have to expend any more money than what we have expended already.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: So that was what the architect did do. They came up with a punch list, which I understand to be complete. And then after that, it's a matter of the people who are in the building to report if there are any further issues.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: So through the chair, if I could ask that each individual sub-department head within the DPW go through their section of that building to report to Commissioner Geer and the architect with their findings. My concern is that you know, nobody's actually reviewing the building. They're just, Oh, we have a leak. Let me report it. Do you know what I mean?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: I understand what, I understand what you're saying. So we've been trying to work on that meeting with, um, the DPW weekly. Actually I have, and I've walked through the building a couple of times. The last time I walked through was last week, um, with what I understand are the last issues. So there were two roof leaks that were reported. There was an issue with the, controls and controlling the temperature within the building as well as it's like a heating vent unit that seems to be leaking. So, and it's really not unusual to have issues with new construction, especially on a building this size and of this scale. And I called the president of the company who did the building myself, And they were going to report back to us this week or early next week.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: And with regards to the punch list, how many things are on the punch list to go through?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: At this point, it really is just adjusting the controls. There are some small issues still with those very large doors. Again, it's a control electrical type of issue. And the roof leaks as they're appearing.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I would suggest that not only do we have department heads go through that building, but we also have somebody from the building department to go through it in depth to create their own list to make sure that what we paid for was done correctly, so that, you know, this $300,000 is the last that we spend for a very long time. Obviously, my frustration is coming out. We have the issue with the fire department, you know, spent over a million dollars, and there was problems that, you know, we weren't going after through the warranty. I don't want to be here two years from now with more requests for a leaky roof when it should have been fixed before this $300,000 is given to the contractor. That's my concern.
[Fred Dello Russo]: This amendment will die when this paper is tabled.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: If we can make that a B paper. If I can make that a separate motion after the separate paper.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes. Chair recognizes Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. The question I had was, you broke it down by the cost of the building and also the cost of the remediation that was done. And it seems, regarding the cost of the building, we came under budget, which is great news. But how did we and what company did we use? How did we come almost 100 percent off of the remediation? To me, that's, you know, I could see 10, 20 percent on a building project. When you're talking 100%, where was the mess up in this? And what needed to take place that they didn't account for to double the remediation?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: So the remediation was actually removing the contaminated soil. And borings that had been done indicated a certain depth of contaminated soil, which turned out to be deeper and more widespread than we had originally anticipated.
[Michael Marks]: Now, who did we pay to do that work?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: The engineering firm. Right. Brown and Caldwell was the engineering firm that did that part of the work for us and designed the cleanup.
[Michael Marks]: So what recourse do we have as a city to go back to someone we paid, we hired them to do a detailed study, and then the study is inaccurate and cost us double the money? What recourse do we have as a community? Are we exploring what options we have?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: With this particular project, because it was an environmental cleanup, I am not sure. We can certainly look into it. But environmental contamination, as I understand it, is extremely difficult. It's difficult to predict exactly where all the contaminants are. And here we were trying to remove all of it so that the site is being closed right now. There are no contaminants.
[Michael Marks]: Right. I understand that. That's why we pay a company that's a professional company that does that for a living. And if that was my home and I had to pay double what I paid an expert to tell me what the cost was going to be, you know, there'd be some concern there. So I just hope the city doesn't, you know, let this go by the wayside. And I would ask, Mr. President, that we get a response back from the city solicitor, because, in my opinion, you know, that's why we bring in these outside consultants. That's why we pay them hefty bills to make sure that We're safeguarded as a community, because we don't know. What if that mushroomed into a $3 million remediation? Who would foot the bill then? We would still foot the bill? So, at some point, I think, you know, we have to turn around and say, I don't know what legal recourse we have, but I know in other building projects, and I can't remember who we got that information from, but the typical margin is, I think, 10 or 20 percent. And to have 100 percent, Is this far exceeds any standard, uh, that I'm aware of.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So the city solicitor is going to, uh, investigate.
[Michael Marks]: I don't, I don't see how we can approve this right now asking for additional money when, uh, you know, we hide, I'm sorry, that company Brown and Caldwell, uh, they're a nationally known company. to come in and give us an estimate, tell us how deep the contaminants are, the width, and I'm sure that's all involved in the reporting, and they were off considerably. I mean, you know, I don't, you know, I think, I agree with my Councilor. I think, Councilor Petra, I think we should lay this on the table for another week, get some more answers on this, even ask the mayor to consider taking this out of free cash, because there's millions of dollars in free cash. He may have told you personally that He wasn't going to do that, but maybe it should come from the council saying, hey, we'd like you to use free cash on this. But I really believe that this could be a legal matter, Mr. President. Maybe all it takes is the city solicitor writing him a letter and saying, are they aware that the cost overruns? Yes, they were. And what was their response?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: I'm sorry, I actually don't recall exactly what they responded, but there were issues that came up during the removal of the soil. We'll have to go back and look at the file and I can come back.
[Michael Marks]: What do they say? If I was a contractor, someone came to me and said, hey, this is an overrun of a double what we anticipated. I'd have to give some type of response. It wouldn't be tough luck. I mean, I mean, so I think we have to look at this, Mr. President. And I would agree with my council colleague, Councilor Penta.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. Counsel Max chair recognizes council care of yellow.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Mr. President, please. Um, on what council Max brought up, do we have a contract with a brown cover?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Yes, we did.
[Richard Caraviello]: What did their contracts say for the scope of work they were going to do for that?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Um, at, they were designing the remediation and the closeout of the site. They also supervise the removal of the soil. And then there was a cost associated. I don't have the contract in front of me, but that was basically what the contract was for the DPW building.
[Richard Caraviello]: But they specified that the contamination was within a certain area. And once they started to work, they found that the contamination.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Yeah, they just gave us a cost estimate of what the soil remediation would be. And we developed budgets. And yeah, that's just where we are. The estimate was under what we actually ended up expending.
[Richard Caraviello]: You mentioned about the warranty of the building. Does the warranty of the building start when we actually take possession of the building or are we already under the warranty now?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Um, I believe we're under the warranty. There was substantial completion and the building was accepted. I thought you said we don't have a final certificate of occupancy.
[Richard Caraviello]: I thought you said we, we don't pay until we accept the building.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Right. We don't have a final certificate of occupancy, so we have not paid the contractor, but the warranties are going to run. from substantial completion date on the particular property. So the different warranties are running from different periods of time, depending upon what they are.
[Richard Caraviello]: When does the warranty expire?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: One year from whatever the date is in the document.
[Richard Caraviello]: So we're almost out of warranty, correct?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Oh no, we are not. I can get you the exact date.
[Richard Caraviello]: We open the building like May? Yes, but they were still working on the building.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: We didn't move into the building at that point in time. So I'd have to go back. I'll have to get you the date.
[Richard Caraviello]: I mean, I would feel comfortable if the warranty started on the day we actually took possession, which would be when we make our last final payments, rather than have the warranty start if it's a building we haven't accepted yet.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. Chair recognizes Councilor Panetta.
[Robert Penta]: Some interesting points here. Number one, the contract to build a building, was that an estimate by the contractor?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: No, that was an estimate by the architect. They were two different firms.
[Robert Penta]: Listen, the building cost over $14 million. The cost to remove that soil was in there. It wasn't an estimate. It was a cost that Brown and Caldwell gave to the city of Medford and signed a contract. Now, this is really interesting for you guys and girls that are coming in next year. Brown and Caldwell also happens to be the same people that are going to do the spot in West Medford. and the city's own parking lot over there. So if this is an example of their estimation of what needs to be done, the city really needs to take a hard look as to whether they're figures and whether they're really as good as they're supposed to be as good. Now, if there's a time sequence and there is a damage clause in there that basically says that they're going to do this for the city at a particular cost, is there anything in the contract that says if they find something that was unanticipated or unexpected, then there would be a cost overrun to that? Those are the words you need to look at to see if they're in the contract. And if it's not in there, and if they're just giving you a document that says this is the cost overrun, well, the city shouldn't have to pay for it. It's like you go to the store. You see something on sale. Whatever the sale is, that's it. If they mismarked it, shame on the store. They mismarked it. I mean, this is crazy. Think about this, Louise. This is, you know, this does not make any sense.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: What happens is Brown and Caldwell designs and plans for the contamination, then gives us an estimate of the cost of the remediation.
[Robert Penta]: Did they do a sample survey?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Yes, they did.
[Robert Penta]: And if they did the sample survey, they must have dug down into the ground to see how deep and how far they had to go to get that dirt out. OK? So why should the city of Medford now have to be paying for that for which they couldn't anticipate on? Think about it, OK?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: No, I understand what you're saying.
[Robert Penta]: And that's totally unfair to the taxpayers of this community who have to pay for it. I'm going to stick to my original thing, that the paper lay on the table until these questions, these legal questions, get answered.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Is that a motion?
[Robert Penta]: Yes, it is.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion that this paper be tabled, undebatable. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? The paper's tabled. We're going to take that up with the papers in the hand of the clerk. Is that all right? So we can do it as? Yes. I have it written down for myself and the Madame Clerk. Is that satisfactory, Madame Vice President? Thank you. We are taking. We've got these two more. 15735, loan order on the Carriage House, Brooks Estate, $200,000. That's going to stay in committee. Uh, that was still on the table though. It was never sent into committee on the motion to take a 15, 7 35, uh, from the table, uh, to off the table and then to the committee of the whole, all those in favor, all those opposed. 15-736, loan order on Winthrop Street draining project. Before us to report on this matter is Louise Miller, Director of Procurement, Budget, Finance. Ms. Miller.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: All right. So this is for $350,000. So this project was the Winthrop Street rotary and drainage project. which was a complex project with multiple funding sources, and there was an estimate for each funding source, and they did not divide up as we anticipated. So our Chapter 90 reimbursable expenses ended up being under budget, left us short with our sewer, INI, and capital funding budget, and leaving us with a net deficit of $350,000. In addition, in this instance, the engineering firm didn't do what they were supposed to under the contract in terms of the borings so that the contractor found ledge. After they started doing the work, it slowed down the project and cost the city. Some pipes that had to be moved, some of the work had to be done by hand, additional police details. And the total cost, there were conflicts with some unmarked duck bank and the ledge, which added quantities to rock that had to be removed and additional police details. So in this instance, we have already spoken with the city solicitor. We are pursuing the engineer for breach of contract. We anticipate recovering a certain amount. And because we anticipate this is going to litigation, I don't want to get too much into the details of where we are, what position we're in.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Point of information, Councilor Penta.
[Robert Penta]: Doesn't a company such as this have to put up a bond? Don't they have to put up a bond? The people that are doing business with the city?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: The construction company does, but there was nothing about their work that was not done according to construction standards. The engineering firm, on the other hand, does not need to put up a bond. Instead, they have insurance.
[Robert Penta]: Was the engineering company a subcontractor to the contractor?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: No, they're separate. The engineering firm and the contractors are always separate. We have two different contracts with the firms. The contractor goes out to bid after the engineering firm designs the project.
[Robert Penta]: So who are we paying the $350,000 to?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Well, this is for the additional costs as a result of the issues that came up during the construction. So the cost would go to the contractor, but we're trying to recover some of it from the engineering firm.
[Robert Penta]: But you also indicated that Chapter 90 funds were underfunded.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Well, no. There, we just misestimated.
[Robert Penta]: Who misestimated them? We did? We did.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: The city did.
[Robert Penta]: We did?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Yes, we did.
[Robert Penta]: And who was supposed to take that? Who misestimated?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Just our staff.
[Robert Penta]: But who? We misestimated. What department? I'd like to know.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Well, because it goes through a number of different eyes.
[Robert Penta]: Somebody had to submit the number. Who submitted the number, Louise?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: I'm going to take responsibility as a budget director for whatever numbers needed to be done for the city.
[Robert Penta]: No, no, no. Louise, it's not your job. It had to be a department that was responsible for this.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Yeah, purchasing. It's me.
[Robert Penta]: What's purchasing? City engineer's office? Somebody had to put these numbers together, Chapter 90.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Yep, we did. We put the numbers together.
[Robert Penta]: So who is this conclave of people? I mean, listen, understand something here, you know. You're being too honest by not being honest enough, okay? You have a job and I have a job to do here. My job right now until the end of this year is to make sure how these monies are spent. And if somebody mis-estimated in their job, misappropriated or whatever it might, misfunded, This council needs to know what's going on here. That's the problem around here. Nobody wants, everybody hides everything. Everything is hush-hush. If it was misappropriated or mis-underfunded, what department did it? Maybe they need help in estimating, you know? Maybe we need someone to go out to these departments when jobs like this take place. Now, we all know this was a complex job because I saw it every day when you went to, and I saw a lot of the ledge and everything that was going on over there. But the Chapter 90 funds, that comes from the state. They give you a dollar amount, and that's it.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Yes, it does. And I actually was part of conference calls with Chapter 90 regarding what portion of the drainage they would pay for versus paving. And because of the way the drainage was, they agreed to pay a certain amount, which we thought was more than what we actually expended on the drainage, as opposed to what really is water and sewage.
[Robert Penta]: How much money came from Chapter 90 in this?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: I'll have to, um, I have to look that up. I'm not sure. This was almost a $3 million project. I want to say it was close to a million dollars.
[Robert Penta]: Okay. And that's the city of Medford sending in that estimate, correct?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Yes. With our estimated quantities and chapter 90, what they do is they just review it and tell us whether these are eligible costs or not.
[Robert Penta]: And so somebody from the city had to send that in.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: That is correct.
[Robert Penta]: I would just hope next year things are really done different around here. This is really unfair. You do a project, and what's underestimated, and what's underestimated, what's overestimated, what's coming in, what's going in? And then we're sitting on $6.5 million in free cash, $7 million in an enterprise fund. We haven't seen anything. Why isn't the money even coming out of the enterprise fund for this? It's a water and soil project. Why are we even bonding for this? Again, it's the administration's decision. Again, I would hope the Council takes a hard look at this and just saying, hey, you know, the water rates are almost off by $2 million this year. And I hope that's corrected in some shape, manner, or form, and that the taxpayer doesn't have to pay for it because you're sitting on $7.5 million of a surplus account. Here's another $350,000. And God knows, if the engineers has any brains, we'll probably file bankruptcy, and you'll never see a dime from this. This is just a shame, Mr. President, because This is what you get for having a lack of communication, a complete lack of communication. We're finding out at the end of the tunnel, not in the beginning or during the middle of it while it's being worked upon, at the end of the fund. Now, when did you get this bill for $350,000?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: We did become aware of cost overruns during, obviously, while the project was taking place.
[Robert Penta]: Like when? July, August? Last summer. Last summer. Here we are, November 17.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: So one thing I will say at the time, we did think we were going to try to reappropriate excess funds that we have in our MSBA projects, but those have not closed out yet. So we were going to come to council and ask for the loan or to be transferred from the loan, be transferred from one project to another. Unfortunately, we're still working on closing out the paperwork for those projects and those came in under budget.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Dello Russo. I'm going to move eventually to table this paper as well. I truly feel that we need a written explanation, not only a cost breakdown of the $3 million, but at the very least, a cost breakdown of the overages of the $350,000. I appreciate Ms. Miller being here before us, but I feel like just throwing out police details, ledge, rock, removed, borings is not a good enough explanation. I would not be able to explain to the taxpayer why we're taking either $350,000 from free cash or going out to bond for $350,000. I don't think it's fair. I don't think it's fair to the council. And I thankfully got a quick call from the mayor today, but it's at the last hour. It's not a detailed explanation. It's just not enough. It's not enough. How much in police detail? How much additional ledge had to be removed? What pipe, what piping needed, how much piping needed to be relocated? When we, I get a call today and we, and they knew about the override, you know, the overages, I believe summer of 2014 or 2015. I mean, I didn't know, I don't even know. Whenever the project was under construction. Well, it started in 14. So we've known, you know, this is the, as of last week, it's the first time I've known of any $350,000. additional expense for the project. It's a lot of money, so that's $650,000 in overages for projects, two projects that were done within the last year and a half in this city. I really hope that there's more oversight to projects that are done in the future, and I hope that we can start getting written explanations to things. For us to be scrambling — you know, I wanted to hear what Ms. Miller had to say. I want to — I want the information. But for me to be scrambling, trying to find paper to take notes on so that I can explain to somebody who reaches out to me tomorrow, what did you vote on? And I say, some details, some ledge, some borings, pipes. It's just not enough. We — we are elected by the taxpayer.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Mr. President, if I may, just for the record today, I understand you're going to be requesting for — further information, but I did have some detail. It was $155,000 for the conflict with an unmarked duck bank and a water main relocation. There were $80,000 in additional police details and $97,000 in additional quantities of material. I didn't work out all the, down to the final tens of thousands, but those were the three big items.
[Robert Penta]: Point of further information.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Point of further information. Counsel Penta.
[Robert Penta]: Louise, she said something very, very important. Did you hear what she said? She said she got a phone call. Let me ask everyone around this room. Did you all get phone calls? You know, this is how this building has been operating. It picks and chooses whatever it wants, when it wants. It is so terribly wrong. And I would just hope the new administration doesn't do this. Pick you off one at a time, get your full votes and see you later. And goodbye. That's the most despicable way to run a government.
[Fred Dello Russo]: It's terrible. Thank you, Counsel, for your point of information. Chair recognizes Counsel Caraviello. Thank you, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: Louise, are we seeking full restitution from the engineering firm?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Yes, we are. But I estimated what we would actually recover.
[Richard Caraviello]: And I can— I'm sorry, could you repeat that? I'm sorry, could you repeat that, Louise?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Under that's a litigation, yeah.
[Richard Caraviello]: Louise, I'm sorry, could you repeat that?
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. If, in fact, the matter is something that's going to go into litigation, I think that we need to err on the side of caution and not disclose too much in terms of what our litigation position is, our litigation strategies at this point in time, Mr. President. I think we've raised enough questions here for us to understand that the paper's not going to go through tonight, it's not going to pass tonight. Ms. Millers gave us a breakdown of what looks like $155,000 for replacement, a main replacement, $80,000 for police details, $90,000 for materials. So we have some understanding, but we need to have more understanding. I'm just very concerned if, in fact, we owe the money. We're going to have to pay the money sometime to somebody. The question is whether or not we're going to be able to recuperate it and how much we're going to be able to recuperate back during the separation process. And I'd be very cautious in compromising our position in separation moving forward, Mr. President. I mean, ultimately, You know, the overruns are there. We need to find out what they're for, what they're from, and that's OK and fine. But we also need to protect our interests, and we need to protect our position in litigation. So with that being said, I rest, and I thank you, Councilor, for allowing me to make the point.
[Richard Caraviello]: I was just asking if we were seeking full restitution. Yes, we are. In the event that full restitution is not made to us, would the Water and Sewer Enterprise account, would this project fall under that?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: I think some portion of it could.
[Richard Caraviello]: So just say, for instance, we only recounted 150. We can maybe take it from there. Okay. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. Councilor Canfield. I think a citizen wants to speak behind you. Please state your name and address for the record. Welcome.
[Michael Ruggiero]: Hi, my name is Michael Wajiro. I live on 18 Pembroke street. Um, there's a couple of points I want to, that it's sort of floating in the air right now that's very frustrating. The first is just a general lack of transparency that's available to us as citizens. If six members of the people that we elect to actually review these documents aren't receiving the documents within a year and a half, we have to ask, how could the average citizen ever find this out? How could the average citizen ever find out that we have all of these overrides? That's the first point I wish to make. The second point I wish to make is about mistakes and how we handle mistakes. I think it is poisonous for us to make mistakes and then just say, oh, no problem. Let's just go out to bond. It is not how we handle our errors. When we do make mistakes, it's like free money. We just go fishing in bond. If we actually have to take the money out of our general fund, then we'll actually feel it versus some future date that's going to be thrown down the line. We have to ask ourselves, is this a general trend? Maybe it's a one-time mistake. Maybe it's $350,000. It happens. Projects do go over. Maybe this is just a one-time thing. But haven't we seen this reoccurring over and over and over again? I ask the council to respectfully avoid using the easy motion of just simply going out to bond when we make mistakes like this. We have to start paying for them, because then we'll actually start feeling them. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. Welcome. Please state your name and address for the record.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: Thank you. Andrew Castagnetti, Cushion Street, Bedford, Massachusetts. I have a question for the chair, for the budget director, Louise Miller. This talk about floating a bond to pay for some of these things. Knowing that the United States national debt is over $18 trillion, I'd like to ask her a question through the chair. And that is, what is the total 0 to 155 for method bond debt as we speak today in 2015, please?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: So the total interest balance as of July 1, 2015, is approximately $15 million. And the total principal balance as of July 1, 2015, is approximately $60,800,000. That's a total outstanding balance. But those are not what our payments are. Our payments are obviously much less than that. That's just a total outstanding debt. Is that the question?
[Fred Dello Russo]: If you could repeat that, Ms. Miller.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Yes. The total principal balance outstanding is approximately $60 million. $800,000, and the total interest balance, and I'm rounding as I add these up, is approximately $15,650,000. Sixteen. He asked for the total amount that was outstanding. The document that I have includes the three loan orders, so they have to be backed out of the total.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Ms. Miller. Chair awaits a motion. On the motion of council, appended to table the, uh, paper until we receive further information. Your questions will be added with the, uh, papers in the hand of the clerk.
[Michael Marks]: written responses. Yes.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So we'll, we'll have a chance to adjust that as we, as I read it. So on that motion to table, all those in favor, all those opposed make this table on motion of council night to revert back to the regular order of business. All those in favor, all those opposed 15-seven 49 motions, orders, and resolutions offered by Councilor Knight. Be it resolved the city council meet with the chief of police and city solicitor to craft an ordinance banning replica handguns in public places. Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And thank you for entertaining this resolution this evening. Recently, the city of Boston on November 9th had signed into law the banning of replica handguns in public places as an effort to provide our police officers with safer streets to work in, in an effort to provide our children with an understanding that the use of replica handguns are relatively dangerous in public places, and to protect the citizenry from the use of replica handguns in criminal activities, Mr. President. On November 9th, Mayor Walsh signed this local ordinance in the city of Boston into effect. On November 10th, in the city of Medford, a gentleman was arrested for brandishing a replica handgun in a road rage incident on Mystic Avenue, Mr. President. So I think it's safe to say that the city of Medford is not exempt from these type of actions and from the harm that can be caused by replica handguns in our community. In this packet that I put together and had the messenger distribute to my Council colleagues, I've put together a couple of different materials relative to other communities that have done this, not here in Massachusetts, but across the nation. And when I take a look from the back forward, you'll see Dallas, Texas has an ordinance that restricts and regulates the use of replica handguns in public places. You'll see that Beaverton, Oregon has similar laws in effect. You'll see that Minneapolis, Minnesota has similar laws that are in effect, Mr. President. New York City has actually gone a step further and has required that the sale of imitation guns in colors such as black, blue, silver, or aluminum is prohibited in New York City. And those stores are not able to carry those in New York City. So I think that this is an ability for us to sit down and to help make Medford a safer place for our police officers, for our children, and for the residents. So Mr. President, I'd ask that the consulate detain this motion to vote in the affirmative. to have a meeting with the chief of police and the city solicitor to craft an ordinance that will work best for Medford in keeping our residents and our police officers and our children safe.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Very good. So on the motion of Councilor Knight, all those in favor? Did you wish to speak on this item before us, sir, before we call the roll? Yes, Council President, I would like to.
[Joe Viglione]: Thank you very much. My name is Joe Villione, 59 Garfield Ave, Medford, Mass. Turn on your Saturday morning cartoons and you see guns. You see cartoon characters. brandishing guns, and you go into your toy store and you see guns. So, on one hand, we have kids using replica guns. On the other hand, we now want to ban them in public places. Last year, there was a box cutter on that windowsill for months. There was a dirty steak knife on a box outside for months. It was my magazine, my proactive work that got the knife and the box cutter removed. But we've had the police up here when two politicians were arguing outside just a month ago. I was talking about the, um, that bill that passed the question one and there were two politicians out there fighting and the police had to come. You come to a city council where police are a constant presence and there are knives out there. I would ask that this city councilor who puts this motion forward would better clean up his backyard first. before he comes up with these cockamamie ideas, start being proactive, not reactive. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion of Councilor Knight, all those in favour? Please state your name and address.
[Jeanne Martin]: Jean Martin, Tate Coming Street. I'm actually in favour of this. You know, what happened 20 years ago is not what goes on today. Unfortunately, kids can't play with guns the way I grew up playing with guns. Fake guns look real today, and if I was a police officer, you can't take that chance. Unfortunately, you can't take that chance. There's too many on the streets. And at one time, I had a BB gun, and I gave it up because it looked too real. And I wanted to pick off some squirrels, but I didn't. I called the appropriate authorities to have them come out of my attic, but I did. But I gave up my BB gun because it looked so real, and with my reputation. But I didn't want anybody thinking that I was dangerous. But it is not the times that we used to have. So I just want to say that I support this, because you can't take that chance. Unfortunately, and parents need to make their kids aware of it, that they look too real. And you have to err on the side of caution sometimes. And that might lead to a death when it's just a toy. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: On the motion of council, if I may, the data would reflect that this is not cockamamie at all. But otherwise, in the city of Boston, for example, Between January 2014 and April 2015, replica firearms were used in at least 113 incidents that included assault and battery, robbery, drug dealing, destruction of property, breaking and entering, and home invasion, Mr. President. That's according to police department data. And also, during the 2014 school year in the city of Boston, 15 replica guns were seized in the public schools, and this year, 13 have been seized. So, Mr. President, I definitely think there is a need for us to take a look at this, and I'd ask my council colleagues to support the resolution.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I just want to thank Councilor Knight for bringing this forward. I just would make one amendment to give the Councilors time to review the ordinance and review the packet that we got. Possibly change the language to meet with the Chief of Police and City Solicitor to begin discussion and possibly draft and craft an ordinance banning. Just to give us, you know, rather than say we're 100% for it or against it in the resolve, I'd like, you know, time to, you know, to discuss it. review the actual ordinance. I think it's about four or five pages long, which we just got tonight.
[Adam Knight]: So those materials, none of the materials included in the packet or a draft ordinance in terms of what I'm looking for the city to do. I think that this is going to be best done to sit down with our chief of police and to craft something that he feels would be right for Medford. Um, what I included in here was just an illustration of other communities that have done this going back to 2007 and I included a copy of Dallas, Texas's ordinance just because it was very surprising to me to see a state like Texas and a community like Dallas actually putting restrictions on anything that shoots anything. So, Mr. President, I thought that that was one of the reasons why this would be very helpful to show that it doesn't just happen in Massachusetts. It's a problem in Oregon, it's a problem in California, a problem in Texas. If it's a problem in other places across the nation. We're not going to be exempt from it either. So I think it's a proactive approach to addressing an issue that really hasn't cropped its head up in our city too much, but we have seen it within the last two weeks. Yes.
[Robert Cappucci]: Hi, you wish to speak? Welcome. Please state your name and address for the record. Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, Robert Capucci, 71 Evans street, uh, through the chair. Uh, while it's important for the topic of safety, if we're looking at other cities and towns across the nation and what they do, The town of Kennesaw, Georgia, actually passed a law that required all households to have at least one firearm and ammunition on hand, and it dropped the crime rate in that town to practically nonexistent. Thank you, Mr. President. On the motion of Councilor Knight, all those in favor?
[Fred Dello Russo]: As amended. Roll call vote has been requested. Madam Clerk, please call the roll. Yes, it was as amended. Councilor Penta, you wish to speak on this before we call the roll?
[Robert Penta]: I don't know if the intent of the resolution is to ban any type of a handgun or a replica of a handgun.
[Adam Knight]: The intent of the resolution is to craft an ordinance that would work for the City of Medford that would be similar to what the City of Boston has done. If you look at the City of Boston's ordinance, Mr. President, a minor in a possession of a replica firearm in a public place, the replica firearm would be confiscated. It would be brought back to the police station. The minor would have to come back with their parent to receive the weapon. If it's confiscated from an adult, the adult has a 24-hour cooling off period. before they're allowed to receive the replica firearm back. There are certain controls and requirements like an orange tip and green tape or paint on it to make it stand out so that police officers can discern these toy guns from real guns. I mean, the last thing that we want to hear in this community is that a police officer is involved in a shots fired call with somebody that has a replica or a toy gun in their hand. Also, if you look at some of the statistics and the data, and I don't have them in front of me here, Mr. President, but based on my remembrance from the research I did, there's a thing that's called suicide by co-op. And in 48 percent of the instances of unarmed individuals, they considered them unarmed individuals because they had replica guns. They weren't real guns. But yet, the police executed them. Not executed them, but used deadly force to stop the threat, Mr. President. But in those situations, they determined that those people were unarmed because they had no real firearm, but rather a replica gun. So I think that the intent of the resolution is to sit down with the chief of police, to sit down with members of this council and our solicitor, to come up with a legally sound resolution. I mean, an ordinance that would absolutely and positively protect our community here in Medford.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Councilor. Councilor Penta, are you all set?
[Robert Penta]: No. Please. The difference between having a replica gun and the appearance of a replica gun are like night and day. The state of New York made it very imperative The colors are black, silver, I think dark blue, and there was four dark colors that they, aluminum, they would prohibit toy manufacturers from making guns like that. But you could still have a gun that looks like a gun, but it could be in a different color. And they believe there's a $300,000 fine that's attached to a gun manufacturer who makes a gun with those colors on it. I think what you really need to take a look at is you're not banning it. What you're doing is you're controlling whatever it might be. Now, Councilor Knight just alluded to the fact that a black gun, I believe a black gun, the way the standard was, had to be painted orange by the nozzle, by the barrel. And what some of these kids are doing is they're painting it black to match the gun. Now, that puts a policeman in a very, you know, compromising position. He doesn't know if that gun is going to be real, fake, or whatever it might be. And I think that's one of the concerns that have been brought about. But I think New York sort of like went about it the right way, because what they did in New York, as I said, they took a color and they made it iridescent, flashy, whatever it has to be. If a toy manufacturer wants to make a gun, the four colors that they took off the shelf that they could not put on, could not put on a gun, they could not sell it that way, so be it. Now, if a kid gets the gun and he decides to modify it, once again, you're talking another incident because what's he doing? It's either one of two things. It's going to have a strict appearance in the sale of the gun or the toy gun, or are you going to just eliminate them all together? You know, the question is, do you take the chance or you don't take the chance? And maybe the middle of the road is to go by way of having a strict appearance first and see where that goes. A fine this heavy, $300,000, is a pretty heavy fine to sell a gun that does not have a strict appearance to it.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So I would say— This is a beginning to a process.
[Robert Penta]: No, I understand that, but I would suggest that that type of information be forwarded to your subcommittee.
[Adam Knight]: I certainly agree, Councilor Pender. I think that New York, and this is a city law, it's not New York State's law, it's New York City's actual local ordinance that prohibits the sale of any toy gun unless it's completely brightly colored. And one of the things that Councilor Pender keeps referring to is the $300 in fines. Those were $300,000 in fines that were levied upon businesses like Amazon and eBay who were violating the local ordinance and actually selling In Wal-Mart stores, actually, was one of the big purveyors of these replica firearms to New York City in violation of the local ordinance. And that's where a lot of that recovery came from, Mr. President. But again, Councilor Penta, I couldn't agree with you more in terms of looking at it and saying, should these replica handguns in the city of Medford, if they're being sold there, be brightly colored? I don't think that that's a problem. I think that's something that should be a great discussion topic. And I also think that there really is no place for replica handguns in our parks, in our public parks, in our public schools, in our public buildings. So, you know, that's why I brought the resolution forward, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So, on the motion of Council Knight, as amended by Vice President Leclerc, Madam Clerk, please call the roll.
[hFAk--zIv7g_SPEAKER_20]: Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes. With a vote of six in the affirmative and one absent, the motion passes. 15-750 offered by Councilor Knight. Be it resolved that the City Council request the implementation of pedestrian crossing controls at the intersection of George and Main Street. Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think that this resolution speaks for itself. I got a call from a couple of constituents, one of whom is in the room this evening, whose birthday may be coming up, if I understand correctly. And this is an issue of importance to them. And I think it's an issue, it should be an issue of importance to us as well, Mr. President. The 101 bus, for example, travels up and down Main Street all day long, and it makes stops right at George Street in Maine. There are no pedestrian crossing controls at George Street in Maine, which is a heavily traveled thoroughfare, and buses along that route have pretty high ridership, Mr. President. So in the interest of public safety and keeping our pedestrians safe, I brought this resolution forward. I think it's a good idea. long in the waiting, but it's something that's necessary. And as the sun goes down a little bit earlier here, and people are getting home from work at 4, 5, and 6 o'clock at night when it's dark out, it highlights the problem even more, Mr. President. So I'd ask that my fellow colleagues support me in voting in the affirmative for the resolution.
[Fred Dello Russo]: I'd like to add that now, the result of an effort by our own councillor, Penta. Ma'am, you wish to address the council. Please state your name and address for the record.
[Sqp6S0Yyr0A_SPEAKER_04]: I would, sir. Thank you very much. Okay, thanks. Hi, I'm Rachel Tandenhouse, 26 Pearl Street, Medford. I would like to speak in support of this. I live around the corner from there, from Georgia, Maine. It is a major bus stop for me. The 96 goes there. The 101 goes there. Those are the buses that pass closest to my house. And that's how I get to work every day, is by the 101 or the 96. I'm also blind. And I think I get around pretty okay. And I do my best. And I have this awesome guide dog here that helps me out. But some intersections are certainly more challenging than others. And this is absolutely one of them. It's a really difficult one to navigate. Nobody, whether you can see or not, can really tell what's coming around a corner. And people come zooming through. And just some sort of, I mean, I would be very excited about a traffic light. But some sort of traffic calming measure would be pretty exciting. I think that that would do a lot for my safety and my independence. And frankly, the cars don't really care if they run over a blind person or a sighted one, so I bet it would do wonders for everybody else too. And I appreciate very much your bringing this up. love Medford very, very much. Um, it occasionally tries to kill me. And, um, well, I know it's not personal. Uh, you know, this is one of the intersections that would, uh, do wonders for my safety and, and that of my neighbors. And if you ever want to hear about any of the other ones, you know, let me know. Thanks.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. On the motion approved by council and I'd all those in favor. Oh, madam vice president. You want to speak on this? I apologize.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Quickly, thank you, President Dello Russo. I think it's a very good resolution. I also got a couple emails this week on it. It reminds me of Winthrop and George a couple years ago where we had a couple, I believe somebody was injured very badly at that intersection and we did traffic calming approaches. We installed a raised crosswalk very close by. So this is parallel to that and definitely a speedway that needs some attention.
[Fred Dello Russo]: You wish to speak on this matter?
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight? If we could also send this paper to the Pedestrian Committee to add to one of their list of intersections of concern, I'd appreciate it.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So that this be sent to the Pedestrian Committee?
[SPEAKER_07]: Yes. Ms. McGivern has been working with the Pedestrian Committee to implement some safety controls in our community to make Medford a safer place for those who choose to walk. Very good.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So on the motion of Councilor Knight, as amended by Councilor Knight, that this paper be sent to the pedestrian committee. Did the vice president have a amendment there too? No. Sir, please state your name and address for the record.
[acqgxK4yhEM_SPEAKER_16]: My name is Mario Martin from 198 Harvard. And I actually think this is a really good resolution. But I was wondering, because basically on Main Street, there are several stops. And I was actually wondering if, in addition to this, would there be some sort of possibility where we can, you know, offer sidewalks on pretty much all of the bus stops on Main Street and South Medford as well. More particularly, I think it's Wellesley Street, the corner of Wellesley Street and Main Street, where I know that there's an elderly couple that lives on Main Street that usually tries to cross the street. And as I forget who mentioned it, but at nighttime, it's incredibly difficult to cross the street. Well, I mean, it's incredibly dangerous. So there's people flying through. So I would also if possible, um, you know, seek to ask, see if it's, see if it's, uh, if, if, if, if you guys can, you know, add, uh, all of us stops on mainstream as well. Uh, thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion of council night as amended by council night, all those in favor, all those opposed motion passes. 15-751 offered by Councilor Penta. Be it resolved that the lack of timely action regarding Medford Square bus stops be discussed. Councilor Penta.
[Robert Penta]: Mr. President, this is not a new subject matter, at least for me. And it's getting more and more disturbing the more we keep thinking about it. I first introduced this subject matter back on June 14, 2011. First time I introduced this idea of the bus stops in the square with an anticipation that there was going to be a lot of road work and bridge work and construction. And bringing forward, I have a whole folder here of not only resolutions, but I have a folder of information coming back and going forth, whatever it might be. No resolution to the matter still as of yet. And then on June 30th of this year, resolution 15525, once again offered by myself, as it related not only to the bus stops, but a meeting with the DOT people, the MBTA, letting the governor of the Commonwealth know of our disappointment and our frustration over the idea of this bridge and its impact it's going to have here and the city of Medford, still no response. I asked the city clerk for a copy of the letter, never got a copy of the letter. Then again, on June 23rd of this, June, September, excuse me, on September 22nd of this year, I offered another resolution.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Did they meet with us?
[Robert Penta]: No.
[Fred Dello Russo]: They met with us this spring.
[Robert Penta]: This was June. We're talking about now September. We have had no meetings since June 30th to September. As a result of that, as a result of that in the Craddock Bridge, and I had asked you, Mr. President, on September 22nd to go forward and for the purposes of setting up a meeting with the MassDOT, letting them know and letting us know that we would have a committee of the whole. I asked for a copy of the letter and apparently no letter was ever sent out. So now, with no letters going out, and we're just sitting here spinning our wheels and just talking about something that's having a major effect. Last weekend, the downtown Medford Square, we were around 8, 7.30, 8, 9 o'clock at night. Unbeknownst to any business merchant down there, all of a sudden, everything was closed down because they were putting the bridge in. They were putting the bridge in early in the night. And one particular business not only had it closed down and lost all his, probably, $3,000 to $4,000 worth of business. It just doesn't make any sense. Again, it's a lack of transparency, a lack of communication. What's the sense of us having these resolutions? You turned around and told us last week, we're going to get it resolved. We haven't gotten nothing resolved, Fred. Nothing's resolved. We got no letters going out. We have no meetings set up. And we have bus concerns issues in the square. And I believe it was last week, on one particular day, they even changed the buses. And people had to walk to Medford Square not knowing that the buses had been changed. All we're asking for is a little bit of common sense in this whole process of this Mystic, of this Kratik Bridge, you know, reconstruction, whatever it might be. And another reason, if anybody's out there watching this whole thing, the reason it's taking two and a half years is because they don't work there every day. They were supposed to be working there six days a week, double shifts. That was the deal. I don't even know what that contract says if they're not doing that. But once again, it's another typical City of Medford contract for 121 feet. 121 feet is going to take two and a half years. With the state of technology that's out there today, moving wires, telephone lines and gas lines, it just doesn't make any sense. But I'm more concerned over the fact, the abruptness that's going to take place once those buses have to be moved. And nobody has come to the city from the MassDOT, from the MBTA. No letters have gone out. Council resolutions have been ignored and not adhered to for the disposition of what takes place. I don't know what's going on, but I certainly hope that the next city council coming in has a better firm and a better grip on their own resolutions, because this is absolutely making no sense at all. We're making resolutions and there's no action taken. So why are we making these resolutions? Will you tell me? You can't answer it, because I can't answer it. And the fact of the matter is, this is what people elect us to do. If we're going to do the people's business and we're going to talk about it, at least do what our own business tells us to do. At least adhere to our own resolutions. If a letter went out to the MBTA and they ignored it, they didn't want to come back, or DOT, so be it. You're the chairperson of the council. The letter should have gone out. And the letter should have been addressed to the city clerk. It should have gone out. And if people are just getting lax around here and just letting resolutions come and go, well, then shame on everyone. That's not what we're elected to do. If you owned a business in Medford Square, and you had to figure out when you woke up in the morning, you had to turn that key. And from the moment you turn that key, you've got to pay for the electric. You've got to pay for the gas. You've got to pay for the insurance. You've got to pay for your stock. You've got to pay for your employees, workman's comp, every other thing that goes along with it. And then you come down and you have your business closed down or being given no information of when it's going to be closed down, no transparency, no communication. Not one person from this city building went down to Medford Square to tell those business merchants. And if the state was ignorant enough not to tell the business merchants or to tell the city hall, then the city should have been all over them. all over them and they weren't. But this city council is just as much to blame because they didn't call the meeting that was supposed to be called from June of this year till again on September 22nd. And this is now November 17. I'm going to ask you, Mr. President, since it's obvious that the city clerk, would you please call this meeting ASAP? You said you were the last time we had this conversation. It needs to be done before a business person goes out of business.
[SPEAKER_16]: On the motion of Councilor Penta. Roll call vote, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Transportation meeting is going to take place. And amended by Councilor Knight that we get an update when the subcommittee on transportation is going to meet. On that motion that roll call, Madam Clerk, please call the roll on the motion of Councilor Penta.
[Robert Penta]: The roll call vote, Mr. President, is going to be that the city, you, Mr. President, you call the meeting. You call the meeting. You get in touch with DOT. You get in call the MBTA. and just tell them they've either been lax or they can use the excuse that they never got it. We need to have a meeting ASAP because there is a concern relative to the businesses in Medford Square and to the people of this community not knowing when and how these bus stops are going to be moved and where they're going to be moved.
[Fred Dello Russo]: As amended by Councilor Knight to request when the next meeting.
[Robert Penta]: Separate, sever the motion, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Request to sever the motion. Mr. President, I have a question. Um, have you had any correspondence at all with anybody from dot to date relative to the issue? I have. And, uh, would you be so kind as to report back to the council as to how those conversations have gone?
[Fred Dello Russo]: I'd be delighted if given the chance council night, there'll be a meeting on Tuesday, uh, December 1st with representatives of the department of transportation, uh, in at Alia pertaining to the credit bridge project.
[Robert Penta]: No. What about the MBTA, which is the bus stops?
[Fred Dello Russo]: The bus stop people have not expressed a willingness to attend a meeting of the city council.
[Robert Penta]: Do you have that in writing? Do you have a letter that you sent to them or is it just phone calls? Phone calls. Phone calls. Well, could you please put it in writing so we could have a paper trail that allows us now to do what we need to do for leverage. Common sense would tell you this is a business proposition. This isn't a social phone call to say, would you please come? Listen, they work for us, the taxpayers. We don't work for them. They work for us. And the bus stops are very important. They're important to not only to the commuters who use them every day, but they're also important to the business people that are in that square. And if they have to be moved.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Maybe the construction people will explain in their presentation the scheduling for moving of the bus stop as it's part of the construction plan.
[Robert Penta]: I don't know. The Medford City Council is the only people that can move bus stops. DOT doesn't tell you they're going to move them. MBTA doesn't tell you they're going to move them. You need to have a discussion with them so they are aware of what we're going to do. This council has to agree amongst themselves where those bus stops are going to go, and they're going to have to adhere to it. We've been through this over and over again. Any move, Mr. President, that you include the MBTA at this meeting?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Please.
[Robert Penta]: Do you have the word MBTA in there, Madam Clerk? DOT and the MBTA?
[Adam Knight]: Motion to sever the two items, Mr. President.
[Robert Penta]: Could you, could you read the, could you read the motion please?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Motion is that the department of transportation be called to the report to the Metro city council regarding the credit bridge project. It was amended by you, councilor Penta. to have the request for the MBTA bus stop people to come to present themselves to the council regarding the bus stop.
[Robert Penta]: I'm going to amend it further that it be in writing immediately ASAP. This has been going on since June 15th, so I think we'd like to have this in writing both to the DOT and the MBTA. You're saying what, next Tuesday night? No. You just said December for, what is it, two weeks? Is that two weeks? Yeah. Thanksgiving's next week. Get it?
[hFAk--zIv7g_SPEAKER_20]: I can't hear a thing.
[Robert Penta]: Say it again.
[hFAk--zIv7g_SPEAKER_20]: I can't hear you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: That it also request that the MBTA be present.
[hFAk--zIv7g_SPEAKER_20]: I have that.
[Fred Dello Russo]: And that the requests and responses be made in writing. Be in writing. Excuse me. Excuse me. On that motion, please call the roll.
[hFAk--zIv7g_SPEAKER_20]: Councilor Camuso. Councilor Cabrera. Yes. Councilor Knight.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: Yes.
[hFAk--zIv7g_SPEAKER_20]: Vice president. Yes. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Penta. Yes.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes. The vote of six in the affirmative, non-negative motion passes on the B paper that report be given back to the city council as to when the subcommittee on transportation will meet on that motion. All those in favor. Roll call. Roll call vote has been requested.
[hFAk--zIv7g_SPEAKER_20]: Councilor Camuso, Councilor Caraviello, Councilor Knight. Yes. Councilor present among the current. Yes. Councilor Markswell. Yes. Councilor Penta. Yes. Councilor Talbot.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes. With a vote of six in the affirmative, none negative, one absent, the motion passes. On the motion of Council appended to take papers in the hand of the clerk. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? By Vice President Nungo Kern. That a written explanation be given to the City Council regarding the loan order for the Winthrop Street Rotary as to what are the overages in detail. On that motion. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes. Offered by Vice President Lungo-Koehn be resolved that all DPW department heads review and tabulate all needed repairs on the Pompeo DPW facility and that the building inspector review the construction concerns therein. Commended by Councilor Marks that the city solicitor review our recourse to inaccurate findings on soil contamination. On that motion, all those in favor? All those opposed? The motion carries. Offered by Councilor Caraviello, be it resolved that the Medford City Council requests that the Arts and Culture Subcommittee hold a committee meeting with the Chevalier Commission to discuss, in light of the dismissal of Boston EventWorks as its building manager and booking agent, which was working on a commission basis for the Chevalier Commission, Who will be accountable for operating the auditorium and booking future events, and will there be expenses involved for someone to handle these responsibilities?
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Caraviello. Thank you, Mr. President. For those of you who don't know, Boston Events Works has vacated the building this week so that we no longer have a building manager there or a booking agent for the building. And I was notified that Uh, the Jafari commission has put out an hour of, uh, some type of position for a janitor or some type of person to maintain the building. But in the meantime, the DPW is going to be sending people over there on Sunday mornings to staff the building. So is there going to be a cost because the gentleman was the one before was doing it as part of the commission basis thing. And where is the building going as far as booking events for the future. Are they going to hire another booking agent? I'd like to know what direction they're going to go into now, as far as hiring another agent or where they're going. So if I could ask that that be sent to subcommittee for a meeting, and I would assume that the arts and culture would be the correct venue, unless, through your wisdom, you think of a better place it should go.
[Fred Dello Russo]: I think it's a wonderful space for it. The Cultural Arts and History Subcommittee is chaired by Vice President Breanna Lungo-Koehn and is membered by myself, Councilor Dello Russo. Thank you. And the Honorable Robert M. Penta.
[Richard Caraviello]: Like I said, there's nowhere wrong. I don't know if there's any direction for them to hire a new person to run the building. Are they going to start paying somebody? So I'd like to know where they're going. for the future.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Madam Vice President.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President De La Ruzo. I actually had coffee with one of the commissioners on Friday and I am going to set up a meeting in December. I'm hoping for mid-December because they've reviewed what the city of Lexington has done as far as a master plan for the five to ten years and she's meeting with the, I don't know if Susan Fairchild herself or the whole board is meeting with the city of Lynn Auditorium to see how they've, Lexington was the last five years and they want to see how Lynn's done it the last 10 and how they've become so successful. So one component to that is.
[Richard Caraviello]: Lynn has a booking agent that works there.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Right. So they're looking into the booking agents, but they are going to be hopefully ready to, you know, present to the council and start the dialogue and see how the city can help. And hopefully when the new mayor comes on in January, we get insight with regards to big capital, um,
[Richard Caraviello]: And I would hope that the new mayor would have some vision and maybe see the, the survivor auditorium also.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes. So I do plan on calling a meeting on that. Hopefully mid December, if not mid January, once we get the new mayor's insight as well.
[Joe Viglione]: So on that motion, you wish to speak on the matter, please state your name and address for the record. Thank you. Council President Joseph Villione, 59 Garfield ave, Medford mass. This is an excellent opportunity for something we've discussed for ages. We have over $300,000 sitting in an account for a TV station. If we got a van parked outside of the Chevalier and we had a station in the Chevalier at the old space occupied by Boston Event Works, which I've been in many times, so it's on two separate floors, we now have monies that can go to the Chevalier and to the TV station. We could open a radio station, which I talked to Stephanie Muccini-Burke about a while back And Mrs. Burke said that there's money from Homeland Security for something like this. Now, there are two members of the board of directors of Boston Free Radio from Somerville right in this auditorium tonight. So there's a synergy that we could have. There is activity that could bring in all sorts of fun stuff to the Chevalier. But this is the perfect opportunity. And also, I think Councilor Caraviello had the idea of the Medford Library. You can now have two satellite sites, which Arlington has. Your public access money now will work with the library and with the Chevalier. It's a win-win-win. I present it to you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Welcome. Please state your name and address for the record.
[Jeanne Martin]: Jean Martin, Tuck Cummings Street, and I actually agree with Joe. This is a great opportunity to bring everything together in Medford Square. Medford Square needs the business. They need the arts and the culture to come in. We need to have that banner, the what do you call it? Yeah, the thing. Yeah, yeah, the marquee. Thank you. We need to have the marquee put up there. We need to take this building seriously. Thank you. Yes, I need remedial help. So we need to really take that building seriously in the next coming year. And if we don't, the Medford Square area isn't going to build out as fast as it could. It's just that simple. Between the library, the community access channel, and you can put it down in the theater, you can put it on the second floor of the library for all I care. I don't care where you put it. If you build another floor in the library, I'm all for that and put the channel in there, I don't care. Put the channel in a small little retail spot, I don't care. But that would really, those three things mixed together would really help to boom Medford Square and get the businesses going down there. So I really am in support of that. You have to get the religions out of there. I'm totally, that sets me off. and because it's just totally against everything I believe in, but we have to take that building seriously and we have to take the library seriously. Either these are buildings that the city owns and we take them seriously or not. We had an earlier debate about the Brooks estates and we really need to think hard about putting more money into that because to me it's just, it's not going anywhere. They have multiple issues, but anyway, the money that we, that we need to do, we need to take those two buildings seriously, as well as the public safety building. Those three things need to be taken into consideration in the future year. Thank you so much for listening to me, and I really do want to see Medford Square take off, because then it needs to go up to Haines Square. We have empty buildings up there, too. Empty storefronts that could use the arts once they start in Medford Square. Thank you.
[Robert Cappucci]: You're right. Thank you. Please state your name and address for the record. Thank you, Council President. Bob Capucci, 71 Evans Street. might be a little redundant, but enough can't be said about the Chevalier Theatre. It is a treasure and a gem that's not real well known here north of Boston. I went there last Saturday night, saw the four a cappella singing groups, it was sensational. What I didn't see around Medford, what Lynn does, I have friends who live on the Lynn Shore Drive up in the Swampscott area, when they have a big show coming in, they put out these A-frame placards that, maybe Medford is doing this and I just missed it, so forgive me if I'm speaking out of turn, but maybe in our five business districts, we could put up an A-frame and let people know, like this Saturday night, they have a comedian and a singer named Sarah Blacker, I think. After the show Saturday night, I went to a local restaurant, Carol's, that everybody knows, and a lot of people showed up. I'm sure there was spillout for Salvatore's and other places, If people driving home on a Friday afternoon saw an A-frame that these acapella bands, who were sensational, that were at the Chevalier, I mean, this is how we revitalize our business networks. And I hope that the city of Medford will take action on this and help to advertise some of the great shows that are coming in at the Chevalier. And I want to thank the Chevalier Theatre for the awesome job that they're doing. Thank you, Mr. President.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. And just if I could, this weekend, the Methodist Council held the first annual Methodist summit here at City Hall. It was well attended. There was probably 100 residents from all different backgrounds and different groups in this community. We all got together and sat in separate tables and in groups of five or six. And we came up if we had a wish list of what we'd like to see done with the arts in our community. And that day, no one was allowed to say, we can't do, or we can't do it because of budget, or we can't, everything had to be positive. And I think there was a common theme throughout all the attendees that were there was the need for more collaboration throughout the community, definitely community outreach, And other communities, if you buy a home, they actually have what they call a welcome wagon. We'll come out and say, do you know that we have the Medford Family Network in this community? Do you know that the public library is open certain days of the week? Do you know that we have the Mustangs play at Hormel? And it's just a way of inviting people into the community, getting them to know what we have, and having some type of assemblance or central depository. Because right now, if you move into the community, the only thing you get is a listing of when your trash is picked up. That's all you get. The city hands you out, OK, here's your trash pickup, leaf pickup, see you later. And so there was discussion about outreach within the community. I think it's a great idea. And also having a website similar to the city website, but allowing, and I'm not sure how this would be done, but allowing these different organizations to have access and be able to compile information. So you could have the Medford Family Network. You could have the Arts Council. You could have the Hormel Commission. All these different entities that have access to one particular site and be able to use that as a central depository for people to do one-stop shopping. Because it's very difficult to get answers in this community. It's very difficult to find out what's going on. And I think that would be a great asset in this community and something that was reiterated over and over again that afternoon. They plan on having, the Method Arts Council plans on having many more events. They're gonna quantify all the different points that were brought up on Saturday. That was a three hour meeting. It was, let me tell you, it went by very quick. It was very fruitful and there was a cross section of a lot of different people in this community that attended. And really, I think we'll go a long way to incorporating arts throughout the community. Right now you see arts events. You have the West Method Open Studio. It was brought up. Why not have the Haines Square Open Studio, the Wellington Open, or the South Method Open Studio? Why not branch that out? You know, we have 23 parks in the city. What better way to do outreach when you actually have these parks that are used as a place where you can set up a stage or a performing arts type event, and have that in your own neighborhood. So you don't have to worry about, if you live in Wellington, saying, well, I'm going to go over to the West Medford Open Studios to take part in an event. And so there was a lot of good subjects brought up, Mr. President. And I think over the next several years, we're going to see an infusion in this community. I don't want to understate it, but the fact that the arts currently doesn't really have a home in this community. We were very close back some years ago to getting an art center with art studio and lofts and so forth, which fell short. But the need for a home in this community and a place where they can hang their hat and use it as a place that they can make calls from and organize from. I think would go a long way to improving the atmosphere and the vibrance of the art community. And we all know the arts is directly related to property value. And if anyone tells you otherwise, they're misinformed. Because any community that has a strong art association, similar to Somerville and Arlington and Lexington, they're all doing very well, not only with the arts, but in regards to property value in their community. So I just want to say it was a great event, Mr. President. and I look forward to subsequent events to push this issue forward.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Councilor Marks. And on the motion of Councilor Caraviello for approval, all those in favour? All those opposed? Motion passes. Thank you, Councilor. And finally, offered by Councilor Caraviello, Councilor wants to address the council. He attended the meeting that was held up at the Lawrence Memorial Hospital, uh, this evening. Uh, so, uh, be it resolved that the councilor Caraviello address the city council as to the happenings at Lawrence Memorial Hospital.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. Um, this, this evening, along with myself and councilor Penta, uh, we were invited to the physicians operations committee, uh, at the hospital. And, um, what it was is, um, they want to let us know and keep us abreast of what's happening up there. during the time of the merger or non-merger happening. But some of the things happening up there over the next couple of weeks is they're opening a brand new sleep center on December 7th, and that'll be the only one in this region other than Winchester Hospital has one. But that's not in this region. Well, it's in Boston, but in the suburbs, there's no other one here. They're opening also a brand new bariatric center on the third floor there. So there's two brand new departments. They spent $700,000 on nuclear medicine. And one of the big things happening there, starting on January 4th, they're going back to operating on five days a week there, which they had cut back to three days a week. Yes. Councilor Pente, you're shaking your head no. He said that was one of the things that I think we talked about that before you got there. But- This is your report, Councilor. Yes. But I say the hospital is doing their best to stay alive and remain viable during these difficult times. And they are spending money on renovations. Salt One and West One have just been completely done over. So hopefully they'll invite us to some other meetings just to keep us abreast of what's happening at the hospital so people don't think it's closing. It is viable, and they're working hard to keep it strong.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Did they comment at all as to where they are with merger plans at this point?
[Richard Caraviello]: They did not. It's still in the hands of the Attorney General. And I asked that would it be helpful if we reached out to the Attorney General and maybe brought her in for a meeting, and they said that any help that we could be would be appreciated. And they're still in negotiations with the Mass General Group? Well, it seems to be more in the hands of uh, the attorney general. So, and he did say that they had other groups that are interested in partnering up with them, but partners, uh, mass general is the only one that's actually bringing something to the table other than just being a partner with them. So that's, that's the reason they're staying focused on the partners.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So on the motion of CAV council, Caraviello that this be, uh, received in place on file. On that motion, Councilor Penter.
[Robert Penta]: On that motion, Rick is partially right on the idea of expanding the operating room. But the idea of expanding the operating room was also to go from three days to five days a week to take the transfers that have been going to the Melrose Wakefield back to the Lawrence Memorial Hospital. About a year and a half ago, they sort of like lost that influx of patient care for the operating room. It's been approximately 1,000 patients per year. according to their records, which is holding their own. And by doing that, they talked about block time, for which doctors have the opportunity to block time in the operating room. I think it starts from 730 in the morning to 3 o'clock in the afternoon. And that block time will allow certain types of operations, or more operations, that for which they had to give up before, that went to the Melrose-Wakefield. They also talked about the idea of the surgical volume possibly right now looking at 2016, it's approximately going to be the same. The question that seems to be having a problem with the hospital and all the hospitals is that a lot of the patients coming in are not paying the patient's care, what do you call it, their co-payment. And some of these co-payments are kind of like high. And as a result of that, some of these patients are opting out not to have the operations now or waiting to a later date. So in essence, maybe the patient care volume is down, it's not because the patients don't want to do it, they just can't afford to do it or their co-payments are too high. Now we're into the insurance part of the whole program and that in and of itself presents another thing. Getting back to the idea of where this merger sits, one of the interesting components of the merger, hopefully the merger takes place, is the Lawrence Memorial Partners really wants the Lawrence Memorial Hospital. It's accessibility to 93, it's a perfect match and it's a perfect fit. And as a result of that, one of the two big stumbling blocks with the attorney general was this idea of licensure. And one of the things that held back the last merger was there was no definition of when this first five, six years of the merger taking place, when the licensure would become operative and effective. And hopefully, it becomes effective as soon as partners makes this merge go through if the training general allows it. With that being said, that'll just put the Lawrence Memorial right on the map all over again as a hospital completely affiliated with partners. The doctors, they were pretty interesting. The interesting part about it is that they had a lot of interesting questions. And some of the questions, they questioned about what was going on and as to why, because there's a lot of changes taking place. So they just didn't sit there like a lump on a log. which was very good. They were inquisitive, and they wanted to know some of the answers. And some of their questions couldn't be answered, which was even better. So people are going to have to get back to them. There's no question you see a new movement up there at the hospital. Hopefully, it's enough to keep it going. It may not be able to keep it going with all its services. But if the OR room can bring itself back, and this block time of operations can take place up there, as Rick alluded to with the other things going on, the hospital should do itself well. People should understand that the Lawrence Memorial Hospital was a very financially endowed hospital. And when that merger took place between Hallmark and the Lawrence Memorial Hospital and Melrose-Wakefield came into the picture, and unfortunately I think the Malden Hospital was part of it, and of course it's no longer there, that's when the finances of the Lawrence Memorial Hospital and their bankroll became depleted. I think at one point in time they had a $34 million asset profit margin. Now, I believe they're in the minus column. Getting better, but still not out of the woods yet. So, hopefully, as we keep moving forward. One of the best things the people of this community can do, if you are a patient or you know a doctor at the Lawrence Memorial Hospital, make the call. Find out what you can do to send that letter in, whether it be to the Attorney General or to the Mass General. Tell them that you want to keep the hospital, you like their services, and as Rick alluded to, with the new services coming on board, And again, their whole transportation needs, their 30-minute response period time for an ambulance, and putting everybody on call and on notice, it's going to be unacceptable if they don't meet the requirements that the hospital is asking for. They'll be out of a job. So, with that being said, Mr. President, hopefully this is the beginning of more transparency that the hospital has had. It hasn't had this in a long time. These doctors, men and women that were there, and the doctor in charge, seem to be wanting to do the right thing, and I want to thank them for inviting us.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Councilor.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Carfiello, on your motion. I got there a little earlier, and I was talking, but I did ask a question about Lawrence standing alone without Melrose, and they said that wouldn't happen because of the Hallmark branding. And I also asked, he says, you know, if everybody, if all these hospitals lose money, I says, how does anybody survive? He said, most hospitals do lose money, but, um, they make money on their private investments. And I guess that's, what's keeping all mock and Lawrence alive is there.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Uh, they, they do return on investment from their endowments.
[Richard Caraviello]: Yeah. They're making, they're doing quite well on their investments.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So he says that's been the saving grace. So on the motion of council Caraviello to receive in place on file, all those in favor, all those opposed motion passes. The records, the records of the meeting of November 10th, 2015 were passed to Vice President Lungo-Koehn. Madam Vice President, how did you find those records?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: In order.
[Fred Dello Russo]: And?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Move approval.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion of approval of the records by Councilor Lungo-Koehn. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes. Chair recognizes, before we adjourn, the Chair recognizes Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Mr. President, I believe it was last week we asked for a joint meeting with the school committee regarding school safety. Yes. If we received any type of response, I have not.
[Fred Dello Russo]: We're going to, uh, I actually, I did, I received a call back from the, um, uh, superintendent of schools. Uh, but we've been playing telephone tag for the past two days. Congratulations. So, uh, Councilor Caraviello has just informed us that the perpetrator of the break in. A 19 year old woman from Everett was arrested for that crime. Councilor, but no doubt we will continue to pursue that meeting. And we can be assured that the presence of two members of the school committee on this body in the next turn. will certainly benefit the wisdom of this body, just as the two previous members of the school committee who joined this council may possibly have done that. Council of Penta.
[Robert Penta]: Did you make inquiry to the school committee to have this joint meeting?
[Fred Dello Russo]: I'm sorry?
[Robert Penta]: Who did you make inquiry with to have the joint meeting? I didn't. Who did?
[Fred Dello Russo]: I think the clerk may have.
[Robert Penta]: I don't understand this. It's a council prerogative to make the inquiry. Number one. Number two, I believe the superintendent had some comments about it last night at the school committee meeting where he said that this wasn't done to keep it hush hush before the election. Well, I don't know what it was or why it wasn't, but it took place six days before the election, you know, and the teachers never responded and never called the police department. Police department wasn't called. And it's the same situation they had up to high school. when they had a bomb scare and nobody knew nothing about it. And they wouldn't allow the dogs to come into the building because they didn't want the adverse publicity. You know, this is the problem around here, Mr. President. You're asked to do something. That's a huge issue that took place in that school. Someone got into that school building, could have kidnapped a kid, could have caused harm, could have done something that we're seeing every single day, devastation taking place in public places. And they got to think about having a joint meeting to discuss the public safety of a building What are they afraid of, a hard question being asked? You know, I don't accept this, Mr. President, and I wouldn't hope that you would call tomorrow morning and just tell them, listen, this meeting is taking place next Tuesday night to be here. You know, we vote on their budget. We vote on their budget that they submit to us. And if they can't be responsible enough to want to meet with another legislative body who is ready, willing, and able to help out the situation, they have no security in the schools, One thing, Chris Murphy, when he was running for school committee, that's what he was advocating for. He's the only one running for school committee that advocated for security, or lack thereof, in the building. And we're still talking about it. Shame on every elected official, the superintendent, the mayor. Shame on you all for not wanting to sit down by now to have even a date set up. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Please state your name and address for the record, Mr. Castagnetti.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: Castagnetti, Andrew. 23 Cushing Street, Method, Marist. It's good. Brought up this evening. My wife was one of the teachers that was robbed and she's very, very upset and concerned about her safety. I love that meeting that trial that the perpetrators does not want to attend to today in Danvers. She's very, very concerned as should all the teachers and all citizens of the city. Thank you for listening, sir.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. On the motion for adjournment.
[Robert Penta]: We already voted on it. Thank you.
|
total time: 16.45 minutes total words: 1256  |
total time: 6.07 minutes total words: 563  |
total time: 7.38 minutes total words: 567  |
total time: 8.83 minutes total words: 937  |
|
total time: 24.72 minutes total words: 2100  |
total time: 9.1 minutes total words: 523  |
total time: 1.59 minutes total words: 177  |
total time: 2.19 minutes total words: 183  |