[Fred Dello Russo]: Meeting of the Medford City Council will come to order. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Camuso? Present. Councilor Caraviello? Present. Councilor Knight? Present. Vice President Lungo-Koehn? Present. Councilor Marks? Councilor Penta? Present. President Dello Russo? Present.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Seven members present, none absent. Please stand to salute the flag. 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. We're going to begin the meeting with a council commendation offered by Councilor Knight, I believe. Councilor, do you want to come on up and speak? And if the recipient perhaps will ready herself to come forward. This is for Aggie Tudin, our tree warden. Go ahead, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: Just a few short weeks ago, our tree warden, Aggie Tudin, was recognized by being selected the Seth H. Swift Tree Warden of the Year, presented by the Massachusetts Tree Wardens and Forestry Association. So I think it's very appropriate that we recognize Aggie for all her hard work and dedication that she does on behalf of the city of Medford. It's quite an honor and a privilege to have the tree warden of the year working here right out of Medford City Hall. So congratulations, Aggie. Please step up. The Medford City Council takes pleasure in awarding this council commendation to Agnes Aggie Tootin, Tree Wooden, City of Medford, in recognition of being selected as the Seth H. Swift Tree Wooden of the Year, presented by the Massachusetts Tree Woodens and Forestry Association. Signed, Medford City Council President Frederick N. Dello Russo, Adam Knight, City Council.
[SPEAKER_27]: Thank you, Council President Dello Russo. Thank you, Councilor Knight. And thank you to all the council members. I've had the privilege and pleasure of working with all of you on various tree related issues around town and hope we continue to do so. Um, I will say that it's, it was quite shocking and surprising to have received the award. Um, I've had great support from all people in the city, from the mayor who entrusted me with a position, uh, to the various departments in city hall, especially DPW, and this council. The residents as well deserve a lot of credit because we share stewardship of our trees and this award wouldn't be possible without all of us working together. So I humbly accept and hope we continue to have great successful things with our trees.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thanks so much. Thank you. Councilor Carfiolo.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. Four years ago, I didn't even know we had a tree warden in the city. I'm not going to lie to you. Since then, I've worked very closely with Ag in a lot of things. Her and I have developed a business program for the trees, for the buy a tree, get a tree program that we implemented last year. And I just want to commend her for her work that she does and the call that she gets back to you within hours.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Mr. President, I think we're waiting on Councilor Camuso next. No? Yes? Councilor Penta, go ahead.
[Robert Penta]: I'm shocked that you didn't know four years ago. She's following in the good footsteps of Jesse Jessalonis, who won that for the city. And so we have an excellent tree history here in the city of Medford, you know? So, Aggie, continue on, and good luck.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Councilor Penta.
[Michael Marks]: Go ahead, Councilor Marks. Thank you, Mr. President. I've known Aggie Tudin for a number of years, and you couldn't meet a kinder, gentler person. She takes her job very, very seriously. She is the biggest advocate in this city to maintain and save our shade trees throughout the community, and has done yeoman's work to improve the quality of life in this community. And I would personally like to thank her. Uh, I, uh, have had a number of dealings, uh, as council is both mentioned, uh, Aggie gets right back to you. She gets you an answer. She gets right out to the site. Um, and she has done exemplary work on behalf of the residents of this community. And I personally want to thank you, Aggie and keep up the good work. Thank you. Councilor Marksley.
[Stephanie Muccini Burke]: Mr. President, Stephanie Borick, 5, Hedlund Way, Medford. I'd be remiss if I didn't get up and say a few words on Aggie's behalf. I had the privilege of attending the luncheon in her name, and it was quite evident that she's well-respected in her industry, as well as in the city of Medford. She has forged such partnerships with different organizations, not only the National Grids and Electric Company, but also some of the outreach from UMass Amherst and Harvard. She's just formed an amazing amount of contacts and business cooperations that we've seen in the city. We are lucky, lucky people to have her in our community, and she cares so deeply for our trees and for our citizens and for all of us. So congratulations, Aggie, and we're very proud of her.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Stephanie. Thank you. Item number 15-010, notice of a public hearing. A public hearing will be held by the Medford City Council and the Howard F. Alden Memorial Auditorium, City Hall, 85 George B. Hazlett Drive, Medford, Massachusetts, on Tuesday evening, January 20th, 2015, at 7 p.m., on petitions from Medford Adult Day Healthcare Center, LLC, for a special permit to amend the zoning ordinance in accordance with Medford Zoning Ordinance Chapter 94, City of Medford Zoning Ordinances, uh, sections 94 to one 48 D table of use regulations. You seven to operate other institution at the location. One Oh one mystic Avenue, Medford mass on set site being located in a C2 commercial to zoning district petitions and plans may be seen in the office of the city clerk, Medford city hall, Medford mass call seven, eight, one three, nine, three, two, four, two, five for any accommodations, et cetera. Um, by order of the method, city council, Edward P Finn, city clerk. Um, we're opening the, uh, the, uh, uh, public hearing to those in favor, all those in favor, please present yourselves.
[Kathleen Desmond]: Good evening. Um, council members present over. So I'm Kathleen Desmond with the law firm of bruising and Barclay. I'm here on behalf of the petitioner, uh, Medford adult health daycare. Gennady Itzkin and Pearl McGofsky are with me. This is a petition for a special permit to operate an adult daycare center on a portion of the property located at 101 Mystic Ave in Medford.
[Fred Dello Russo]: We will just allow you at this point to allow the present here in favor. Anybody else here in favor? Hearing and seeing none. We're in the middle of a public hearing. We're opening up to those in opposition. Any in opposition? Hearing and seeing none, the President opens this up to debate. Councilor Caraviello, Chairman of the Zoning and Licensing for recommendation.
[Richard Caraviello]: Mr. President, if you could just explain the type of business you're going to be operating this, so people know.
[Kathleen Desmond]: Sure. It's an adult daycare center. It will take care of clients from 8 a.m. There will be an activity room, a quiet room, a dining room. There will be three meals. I had presented to the council, it should have been in your package, a letter which describes it, but in essence, they will be transported to and from the site by vans. There will be activities scheduled for the clients. There will be three meals served. Any of their health needs will be taken care of. There will be nurses on site. They will also take them to medical appointments if they're off-site from the daycare centre, and they do provide some grocery services. They'll take them to buy groceries and then they can bring them home. It allows them to stay within the community in their home rather than in a residential.
[Richard Caraviello]: Is there a cost for the service? Does their insurance pay for it?
[Kathleen Desmond]: It is paid by insurance primarily, yes.
[Paul Camuso]: Mr. President. Thank you, Councilor Cavill. Councilor Camuso. Thank you, Mr. President. You make a motion for approval? I'd like to make a motion for approval on this, Mr. President. This is a long overdue thing in our community. We're proud to have many nursing facilities. But one thing that I like to see as an elected official is give people the opportunity to participate in programs and still maintain ownership and residence in their own homes. And this is going to be another particular case for Medford residents to be able to do that, similar to the Buddy Coholan Center that we have for people with Alzheimer's and dementia. as well as some other smaller establishments in our community. But I think this will be a great addition to the South Medford neighbourhood. And this will also spur some economic development. If you have, say, 30 clients and you have to feed 30 people, they're going to be doing grocery shopping in the area or utilising local businesses, whether it may be for prescriptions or first aid stuff or things of that nature. So I see this as a win-win to keep a building from being vacant in our community. And I'd like to move approval, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion of approval by Councilor, Councilor Camuso, Vice President Lungo-Koehn, and I just need to correct myself. It's Councilor Knight who is chairman of said committee. My apologies.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Dello Russo. In your letter it mentions that Medford Adult Day Healthcare Center has opened in other locations.
[Kathleen Desmond]: That's correct. They have. establishments in Natick, Revere, and Lynn. They've been operating, not this particular LLC, they each have their own separate LLC, but Mr. Ritzkin and Ms. Brodsky are the managers of those LLCs. So they, under different entities, they have been operating adult daycare centers in Lynn, Revere, and I believe Needham.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Oh, Needham. And those are existing businesses currently?
[Kathleen Desmond]: That's correct.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: And what licenses do you, you hold? That's what I just want to make sure you had licensing and as far as employees, they're all back, you know background checks quarried Okay, thank you and they also belong to professional associations that's in my letter as well Thank you, thank you Councilor Penta Under the after the words you seven to operate quote of the institution.
[Robert Penta]: What are we talking about?
[Kathleen Desmond]: Well, the situation is that the bylaws are rather outdated in terms of existing businesses that now exist now as opposed to earlier. So in my letter, I was indicating that in the C2 zone, you do have community adult recreation centers, but there is no specific adult daycare center use in the regulations. So when I went to building for a permit, they classified it as other institution. Um, but in the C2 district, you'll see in my letter, there are a number of uses which are similar to this particular use.
[Robert Penta]: My question I think would become curious to the point that since it's not included specifically, if this would need a public advertisement to change the zoning to include it rather than come under the guys quote unquote of other institution in your other institution of what you're saying is an adult daycare center, which is not found under, an exact terminology as another institution.
[Kathleen Desmond]: Building indicated that in other institutions, that's where it would fall. I mean, other institutions is other institutions at this point. I'm sure there are other uses that fall under that other institutions provision, which.
[Robert Penta]: Well, that's what my concern would be, to give something out that wasn't properly vetted, so to speak, through rezoning. I've got no problem going forward with it, but I'd like to get a report back. as to whether this terminology, what are you calling an adult daycare center, since it's not found under the terminology of other institution can be included under the term other institution for the purposes of this particular vote.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So on the motion of approval, Councilor, uh, had to request amends this to request a determination, legal determination as it relates to,
[Robert Penta]: whether the zoning for an adult daycare center is legal terminology for other institutions, or does, in fact, a public hearing have to take place to make this become inclusive of other institutions?
[Kathleen Desmond]: If I can go to the definitions.
[Clerk]: If the clerk can answer that, please. The zoning administrator determines what the zoning is on anything. And the zoning administrator is the building commissioner. And he's the one to determine that, This falls under other institutions right now. So I mean, on future, if you wanted to create a category for adult, you would have to have your own public hearing to create a category for it. But I mean, as far as going for this particular paper, that's how we classify it right now, is other institutions. So the public hearing is actually correct. But if you want to carve out it, that becomes a zoning
[Robert Penta]: ordinance in itself, but all fairness to the council and anyone who watching and the petition is here. I don't have a letter that says that. So if the building commissioner is the, um, I won't use the terminology zoning authority to make this inclusive of other institution. I think we should have had a letter that said that because it's obvious that we're operating other institution by including the terminology adult daycare center, um, LLC to be, to be included here. I'm just protecting our interests, but more importantly, I want to make sure that the zoning is appropriate for this. And so nothing comes back and says, wait a minute, you know, it's not included. It's not the way it's supposed to be. I've got no problem going forward with it, but I want that letter that says that this adult daycare center can be constituted as a legal entity under other institution on the unit than the use of it.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. So if we could get that explanation on the matter brought forth by councilor Penta from the, uh, uh, housing, uh, the building inspector, uh, Mr. Moki, uh, as amended by councilor Penta. Thank you. Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. I have a few questions. Um, how, uh, is your clientele referred?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Could you step closer to the microphone please?
[SPEAKER_26]: Because it's a community-based service, it could be the client can be self-referred, it could be referred by the doctor, by the social worker, or by any elderly services, or by the ASAP, which is the aging service provider, Mystic Valley. So it can be from either the case managers there or from the healthcare providers.
[Michael Marks]: How many clients can you accommodate on a daily average?
[SPEAKER_26]: We're looking for about 100.
[Michael Marks]: 100. And what is your staff to client ratio?
[SPEAKER_26]: Staff to client ratio now is 1 to 6 according to the regulations.
[Michael Marks]: 1 to 6 is state regulations?
[SPEAKER_26]: It's state regulations and it's including the medical personnel, which is the nurses, which is 1 to 12.
[SPEAKER_20]: 1 to 12 for the program aides.
[SPEAKER_26]: And the program aides.
[SPEAKER_20]: Social workers and case managers.
[Michael Marks]: Do you have any nurses on site? Do you have any nurse practitioners?
[SPEAKER_26]: We don't need any nurse practitioners because they remain in the community. People can stay with their own primary care physician who is signing up on the care plan, which is developed by the Adult Day Healthcare nurses and sent to them on a quarterly basis.
[Michael Marks]: So you dispense medication on site?
[SPEAKER_26]: If that's a doctor's order.
[Michael Marks]: Is medication kept on site?
[SPEAKER_26]: Medications are kept on the site. We usually work with the pharmacies who provide the day pack specific to that patient.
[Michael Marks]: So is medication kept overnight?
[SPEAKER_26]: It could be, but usually it's delivered daily.
[Michael Marks]: So if it's kept overnight, is there... It's a medical cart.
[SPEAKER_26]: It's a special medical cart which exists, which is locked.
[Michael Marks]: This is locked and...
[SPEAKER_26]: It's a double lock because usually the nursing station needs to be locked, and then there is a medication card that needs to be locked.
[Michael Marks]: Are there any regulations that govern the security of medications?
[SPEAKER_26]: There is a regulation that governs that.
[Michael Marks]: And you'll be adhering to all those regulations? Yes. Locally, does the Board of Health oversee your area?
[SPEAKER_26]: The Board of Health is giving us the clear permit, which is if people with insulin need to inject themselves and they need to help. So they really oversee how do we dispense the insulin. And they also, because we're serving food, they also oversee that. Right.
[Michael Marks]: And have you had a walkthrough yet at the site?
[SPEAKER_26]: Not yet.
[Michael Marks]: So that hasn't taken place yet? No.
[SPEAKER_26]: This is usually the last step. Once everything is in there, that's usually the last step.
[Michael Marks]: Well, I'd like to see how process is the last step. all the papers ahead of time.
[Kathleen Desmond]: Well, I'm sure they do a walkthrough without our permit. Their walkthrough is not contingent on whether... Well, they were certainly noticed as part of the special permit process.
[SPEAKER_20]: Right, right. I mean, it's going to be a lot of build-out by the codes on certain numbers of toilets and offices that are dedicated for the clients, for the employees, etc., etc. It usually takes about a couple of months, two, three months to do the proper build-out. Okay.
[Michael Marks]: You also mentioned that you provide three meals. Yes. What other activities are done with the... people that are staying there for the day.
[SPEAKER_26]: What are the activities?
[Michael Marks]: Other than eating, what else do they do?
[SPEAKER_26]: Oh, we have a recreational therapist on staff for 40 hours a week, so that's a full-time position that needs to be created locally. This person needs to be usually either certified or have a bachelor degree and experience working at least two years with the elderly and with the geriatric population. There is an activity that provides memory training, that provides the verbal expressions, that they build a range of motions. And a lot of this is developed in conjunction with a social worker, individually developed in conjunction with a social worker and the nurses, because we have special meetings twice a week. It's an interdisciplinary team that develops plan of care, which is then signed off by the primary care physician. So there are group activities and individual activities for each participant.
[Michael Marks]: So is the actual setup inclusive? Is everyone together or are they in separate rooms or separate areas? It depends.
[SPEAKER_26]: There is a room for them to be separate. There is a room for the person to take a rest. There is a quiet room which is required to have. We require to have a certain number of recliners, for example, for each participant. And there are classrooms. We provide English classes, book club classes where people can express themselves. We usually employ a part-time music therapist who comes two to three times a week to provide some sort of activity which involves music.
[Michael Marks]: And just my last question, do you do any outreach at all?
[SPEAKER_26]: Right now?
[Michael Marks]: Well, once you get started, if someone is a client.
[SPEAKER_26]: Of course, we will work with the local health care centers, we will work with the doctors, and definitely with the Mystic Valley.
[Michael Marks]: Mystic Valley?
[SPEAKER_26]: Yes.
[Kathleen Desmond]: And Mr. Marks, there is a schematic in your package which shows the breakdown of where the rooms and what types of rooms you will be in addition to that.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Mr. Are you all set? Thank you for those insightful questions. Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. Just a couple of questions. Um, you say this is a community based service. What communities do you service Medford? Is there a region, several cities in town? How many full-time and part-time jobs is this business going to bring to the city?
[SPEAKER_20]: Usually, we should have a license of about 100 clients. It's altogether full-time and part-time, and it's between 25 to 30 people.
[Adam Knight]: 25 to 30? And what's the breakdown in terms of part-time and full-time?
[SPEAKER_20]: I would say 70-30, 70-30% is full-time, 70-30% is part-time.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. And do you have a specific number of slots of your hundred reserved for metric residents?
[SPEAKER_20]: Are there any type of quarter requirements that you might be?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Excellent. Okay. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Knight on the motion of Oh, console. Thank you. One more question. I'm familiar with the building. What floor are you going to be on in there?
[SPEAKER_26]: First, we are in the first, you got to take over. You got to take over the whole first floor of the ground level.
[Richard Caraviello]: Yeah. Okay. And one more thing. I know you said you take insurance. What about people who don't have insurance? There is a possibility of the private pay, but we usually don't— I mean, people that don't have the ability to pay. Will people get turned away?
[SPEAKER_26]: Historically, we, in each of our centers, have a certain number of pro bono cases, but this is just that we give back to the community. Sometimes Mystic Valley provide the—or similar organizations find the resources. However, we do provide, in each of the centers, we do have several people.
[Richard Caraviello]: Because I know not all senior health insurances can go to your place and go to places that are similar to yours.
[SPEAKER_26]: Well, MassHealth covers this, which is a big insurance.
[Richard Caraviello]: But not everybody's on MassHealth either.
[SPEAKER_26]: Long-term care insurance covers this. Blue Cross covers this, actually, even as a secondary. And then the private insurances, some of them covers this.
[Richard Caraviello]: I would like to see some kind of provision made for people don't have the means to pay. Okay.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. Uh, Councilor Caraviello, the motion of approval by a Councilor Camuso as amended by Councilor, uh, Penter and seconded by Councilor Knight, Councilor Penter.
[Robert Penta]: Two quick questions. Um, for people who might be watching, can you tell them where one-on-one Mr. Gav, what's that one-on-one Mr. Gav right now?
[SPEAKER_20]: I live right across from, I believe, the BMW. Literally right across.
[Robert Penta]: OK. And you indicated you could serve as 100 clients. Is that on the spot, or that during the course of the? How many can you actually have on that location at one time? About 100. You could have 100 people. So your 25 to 30 people could handle 100 people at any one time? No matter what their problems might be. So if anyone has probably a somewhat of a psychiatric type of a problem, you can handle that?
[SPEAKER_26]: Yes, but we do provide service for people with behavioral problems and with mental health problems. However, we are not a psychiatric facility.
[Robert Penta]: But how are you supposed to know that if somebody wants to apply?
[SPEAKER_26]: And this is all regulated by state, by state regulation as to the number of, you know,
[Robert Penta]: But this is for the purposes of anyone who might be watching so they have a better understanding.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So there are limitations then, if I could clarify. Limitations or admission criteria for people to come in.
[SPEAKER_26]: For insurance purposes. Insurance would cover it, not for us. In order for insurance to cover it, there has to be a need with the help of the aids of daily living. But if we have a physician order and it's up to the person's physician to say this person would benefit, a lot of times We take people who otherwise would be prone to isolation.
[Clerk]: Very good.
[SPEAKER_20]: But on a regular basis, we receive the physician's summary from the doctor. Based on that, we evaluate our nursing staff, evaluate the patient, and then create a so-called care plan. Based on the care plan, all disciplines in the office act on our behalf.
[SPEAKER_26]: There are three medical professionals who sees that patient, and it's a nurse from the Mystic Valley, There is a primary care physician and there is a nurse from the adult day health center.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Very good. Thank you. Councilor Penter. Is that helpful? Then on the motion for approval by Councilor Penta amended by counts on the motion of approval by council Camuso amended by Councilor Penta seconded by Councilor Knight. A role for roll call has been requested by council Camuso. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Camuso. Yes. Councilor Caraviello. Yes. Councilor Knight. Vice-president Long and Kern. Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Penta? President Dello Russo?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes. On the vote, seven in favor, none in the negative. The petition passes.
[SPEAKER_26]: Thank you very much.
[SPEAKER_20]: Thank you. It was a pleasure serving this town. Thank you.
[SPEAKER_26]: Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Motions, orders, and resolutions offered by Councilor Penta. Be it resolved that Medford Dentist, Dr. Lorenzo Lepore, be congratulated for having his most important health and educational piece of legislation passed by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts regarding the sterilization and use of musical instruments within our educational school system by students for use. Councilor Penta.
[Robert Penta]: Mr. President, we all know that Dr. Lepore has an extreme interest in musical instruments because he plays one himself. But he started on this adventure a few years ago up at the State House when he had a bill introduced by Representative Paul Donato as it relates to the sterilization of musical instruments in schools. The bill, as reported out and signed by the governor on his last day in office, number 4384, states the following. Upon the issuance of a musical wind instrument to a borrowing student attending grades pre-kindergarten through 12 and any public or commonwealth charter school, the issuing school shall inform the parent or guardian of the student that while the musical wind instrument was sanitized, it may also be sterilized in order to ensure that all microbiome life has been eradicated within the instrument. Now, we all know that there was a tremendous amount of concern as it relates to using pieces of instruments that children use in the public schools or charter schools or public school administration. Through Tufts University, its medical school, and a whole host of medical individuals, the Federal Food and Drug Administration became very supportive once they recognized the fact that this has a legitimate concern, where they wrote, quote, we recognize that with respect to cross-contamination risks and the associated microbiological implications, musical wind instruments are not unlike other contaminated medical dental devices. It states that a valid public health issue consistent with the universal precautions adhere to in the medical dental settings relative to instruments contaminated with bodily fluids. And as such, this agency, which is the FDA, believes that the classification of sterilized musical wind instruments falls under the jurisdiction of the Environmental Protection Agency and is simply concurring with the conventional medical wisdom that sterilizing items contaminated with body fluids between uses is inappropriate. Now, we all know that if you went to a restaurant, it would be absolutely inappropriate to use somebody else's fork, spoon, or drink from their glass because there are strict sterilization issues. It's the same thing you tell your kids not to use somebody else's toothbrush other than their own. And you can go and you can start making all these analogies as it relates to the misuse or the abuse that somebody might find themselves in. because of the fact that something either wasn't sterilized or it wasn't brought to the parental attention for the purposes of letting them know that their children, to be safe, needs to have this stuff sterilized. Restaurants and hospitals follow strict public health rules and regulations and standards. And this was a long journey because it was sort of like virgin in the territories of people who just didn't understand this. Some 25 years ago, you would never think of going to a dentist. so to speak, and he or she would put their fingers in your mouth without gloves. And ever since the fact that they now wear gloves, you would come to your attention immediately if you went to a dentist, male or female, and they decided to stick their finger in your mouth without a sterilized, whatever the color might be of the glove that they have to wear. This is a real big issue. This isn't a requirement. This is a voluntarily encounter that a parent will have now with their child who decides to want to use this instrument, or whatever the wind instrument might be. I think it was some two to three summers ago, there was a story in the Boston Globe that identified some 30,000 pieces of wind instruments being stored in the Boston public schools. And as a result of that, having not been used for years, and as a result of that, and having the microbiological factor come into play, showing that the danger that these kids would have by blowing these instruments is something that basically, again, accelerated not only Dr. Lepore's interest in this, but also the state legislature. And I have to say publicly, if it wasn't for Representative Donato leading the charge in this on Beacon Hill, fighting this and introducing it each and every year for the last, I believe, four years up at the Statehouse for the purposes of educating his fellow lawmakers, and having the governor not only accept it when he first came on, he authorized a, strike that, he entertained a commission for the purpose of not only reviewing it, but they wrote a report in 100% support of it. So, what I'd like to do, Mr. President, I'd like to invite Dr. Lepore to come here, and I think it would be a great acknowledgement to, again, one of our own, you know, kind of like Fortunate, we have it in the medical field, We have it in the legal field. Most recently, we have Victor Garrow, who received a nationwide award for his position of taking on a case for 30 years and defending somebody, proving that the gentleman was innocent and not guilty. And here we have another situation here where we have a renowned dentist here in our community who also happens to be a gentleman who plays a wind instrument, who saw the need for this to happen. He saw the need for parents to be advised and become prepared. And he also saw the fact that an infectious disease, which is at the core of this whole thing, this is a prevention of infectious diseases, could be taking place and be corrected. I think that's a good thing for not only the city of Met, but for the entire Commonwealth of Massachusetts and anyone who wants to believe in the fact that, you know, this is a good, it's a good bill. So with that being said, I move, Mr. President, that Dr. Lepore be invited to come at a future date and he be duly recognized for the having the bill passed. And you know something, I might even want to invite Representative Donato here, too, because this wasn't one of those easy bills that you can just get through. A lot of people sometimes couldn't understand it, don't understand the medical part of it, and you have a lot of new reps coming and going. So it took some time for the purposes of having this happen. And you had some opposition. Yeah, there was. I found it. But he worked himself through it, and the legislature finally, and the governor. The governor was on board right from the beginning, but the legislature finally saw through it, and it finally got itself passed.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, that's a beautiful resolution. On the motion for approval by Councilor Penta, seconded by Councilor Musil. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. 15-022, offered by Councilor Penta. Be it resolved that the Mayor's ongoing new parking revenue enhancement program be further discussed regarding inequity and location positions on paid-to-park kiosks, as well as corollary issues associated with this program. Councilor Penta.
[Robert Penta]: Mr. President, last week we had a, once again for the second week in a row, this is now running ourselves into the third week as it relates to this parking program that the mayor has initiated. But I think it's time we get a few issues straight right from the beginning because I don't want any misrepresentation to go out there before we get into our discussion as it relates to just what the council's position is on this. Councilor Camuso, you made some comments relative or earlier, that the council, on other occasions prior to this, voted, I believe you said, for a revenue, for a program. What the council voted for... Can I, councillor? Can I finish my position, please?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Point of information, Mr. President. We have the councillor asking for a point of information. Go ahead. And if I just might kindly recommend for the uh, efficacy of our deliberations tonight that, uh, perhaps we allow a more neutral party to, um, clarify that matter as far as the votes and, uh, maybe then we'll be more satisfied rather than, uh, uh, two sides trying to argue contravening points.
[Robert Penta]: I don't think it's a matter of point of information.
[Paul Camuso]: Councilor Camuso. I think it, um, The gentleman said it a little bit differently than I stated it earlier. All the votes in motions that were put before this Medford City Council, that were put before this Medford City Council, were unanimous votes. Now I understand what the council is talking about, the final vote that we asked for to come back to this council, but the mayor, under his authority, didn't need to do that. But we are unanimous. We were unanimous on the two votes that were taken. And the two that this council took were one given the mayor the authority, which was a seven to zero vote. And then the other vote was the night of the RFP or RFQ. I forget exactly what it was, but we went over the language of the contract for a couple hours over here back, and I believe it was March of 2014. And it was a seven zero vote to report it out of committee.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. And you've made your point of information and I'd kindly request that we keep our points of information to a sentence that's rather direct.
[Robert Penta]: Mr. President, continuing on those votes at the council took all the council was for a traffic enforcement, not a revenue enhancement program. And I think the records will verify that, but let's get right to the crux of the matter. On May 20th on May 20th of this past year, we received a letter from the to the president of the council from the mayor, but basically said that the parking management program, the authority intend to an agreement exceeding three years. Dear Mr. President, members of the council, the city of Medford has received proposals from various vendors in response to our request for proposals for a parking management program. It is the intention of the city to enter a 10 year agreement with the successful proposal pursuant to the site and section of the law approved for the contract that exceeds three years. Now, following that step further, the mayor indicated that I respectfully request and recommend that your honorable body, pursuant to the provisions of Massachusetts General Law Chapter 30, Section B12, approve and authorize the city of Medford to enter into an agreement with the successful proposal for a term signed by the mayor. And at that council meeting on the 20th, those that spoke were Mr. Rumley, Mr. Stirella, and Mr. D'Antonio. That resolution was amended by myself at the very end. It states, amended by Councilor Penta, that the mayor and the preferred vendor meeting with the council to explain the program in depth prior to the final decision. But upon further review of the tape of that particular meeting, that was not the amendment. The amendment was as follows. It was to amend the motion that the council meet before the signing so that we have a complete understanding. So as amended, that having the mayor, whoever the vendor might be, present themselves before the council before the finalization of the contract, before the finalization of the contract. So why would the mayor want to, why would somebody want to come here before it was finalized? If in fact the mayor was going to sign it. Now we met on September 10th at a committee of the whole meeting. And at that point in time, there was business folks that and Councilors that pushed back from the contract that was being presented to us at that time from the people who were there. And at that point in time, The mayor decided to listen to all the things, left the room, and said he would come back with further. And when he came back further was with no vote by the council to discuss what took place by way of an amendment or by way of extras or what have you. As a result of that, there's been some, I guess, misinformation being scuttled out there as it relates to just does where this Medford City Council stand. This Medford City Council had two proposals that took place on that May 20th. On that May 20th, we had A, we'd bring in one of the three vendors, for which it happened to be Republic, and B, we would get a report back if the city was to do it on its own with the financial breakdown. We never had an opportunity to vote on that one way or the other. The council's position, other than the fact, saying that the mayor has the authority to sign it, he does have the authority to sign it, but we never had the finalization of what was being presented to us. So what I'm offering here right now is the following. It's a resolution that the Medford City Council take their official position as to whether they support Mayor McGlynn's pay-to-park kiosk revenue enhancement program with the Republic Company from Tennessee. Very simple. Either you're for it or you're against it so people have a clear understanding of where we all are. You can't one week turn around and say you're for it and another week you're against it. And I don't want to hear from Councilor Caraviello calling me up and telling me that the people are saying that I'm saying something about him. vice versa. It doesn't go that way. My comments have been pretty consistent and I'll say that in front of anyone that wants to challenge me to what I say. That's the resolution. There it is, Mr. Clerk. I'd like to have the council vote on it and then we can continue on talking about it.
[Paul Camuso]: Point of information, Councilor Camuso. So I just have one question for the councilor. So the request for proposal that originally went out that you voted on, you didn't know what was in that contract when you took that vote.
[Robert Penta]: Just for the clarification... Took what vote, Mr. Paul? We didn't have no vote.
[Paul Camuso]: We had a vote back in March, I think it was March, when we sat at the committee of the whole and went over the request for proposal before Louise Miller put it out. Before she put it out. The records... Mr. Dello Russo, I'm council president. Yes, sir. I think you made a very good solution before. The city clerk is the official record keeper of the community. Please give us the votes, Mr. Clerk, on the meeting for the request for proposal that originally went out, and then for giving the mayor the 10 years authority.
[Robert Penta]: Point of clarification. what the council voted for, seven to nothing, and I will agree to that, because that's what I voted on. That's what I, to allow him to go forward and to negotiate with Republicans. That's what I wanted to do, and report back to the council before it was finalized for us to review it.
[Paul Camuso]: That never, ever took place. There's two different meetings that took place. The council is trying to make it look, because he wants to make it look like he took one vote this way, that way, whatever. No he didn't, I'm not taking it. There was a seven to nothing vote, to send out the request for proposal to the vendors. Yeah, I'm not arguing with that. But if you now want to change the whole program, I'm not saying that.
[Robert Penta]: I'm talking about the meeting that took place on May 20th. To get those three vendors to come back, to get those three vendors to come back, you had to send the request out.
[Paul Camuso]: Councilman, you knew it was in the contract. You know something? I didn't know it was in the contract. Neither did you.
[Robert Penta]: You didn't even know about it until September 10th, when you got it for the first time.
[Paul Camuso]: No. Yes, you did. The request for proposal went out back in March. So like I said, you know something, Councilman? That's a request for proposal. That's not the contract. With all due respect. With all due respect, I've been watching this for longer than before I was on the council. You fought something, then you're against it. You just like to make steam. You never let the truth get in the way of a good story. Wait a minute, wait a minute. The only one making steam right now is you.
[Robert Penta]: Mr. President, Mr. President. I move the question, Mr. President, please. Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: This resolution that's presented to you, Councilman.
[Robert Penta]: I'm asking for the clerk.
[Fred Dello Russo]: We're on O22. Right, and that's coming out of that resolution. That's coming out of their resolution. So if you could present that as a resolution for the next agenda through the City Messenger.
[Robert Penta]: Let's do this one first. And then we have 022 before us. I am taking out of my resolution. I'm filing this motion out of my resolution.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So that's an amendment to your resolution. Yes. If you want to call it amendment. So then, so we're going to vote. So then we're going to dispose of old 22 as amended. And it is amended that the Medford city council take an official position as to whether they support mayor McGlynn's paid to park kiosk revenue enhancement program with the Republic company from Tennessee. That's an amendment to item number 15022. Councilor Camuso, did you want to amend?
[Paul Camuso]: I'd like to get the, I'd like for the clerk for once and for all, because I know for a fact Councilor Penta has given misinformation out there.
[nXRer8wKd5o_SPEAKER_14]: That's absolutely not true.
[Paul Camuso]: I would like to allow the clerk to give clarification on the two votes that the Medford city council took. I would like to do that right now, and then we can put this to sleep, and you won't have to deal with counsel.
[Robert Penta]: Point of clarification. Wait a minute. I'm not arguing that we didn't. We took the vote. We all took the vote to go out for an RFP, and we all took the vote for the mayor to go forward. We never took a final vote, as you voted for.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor Penta, Councilor Camuso, the clerk will need time to resolve this by way of research. So that will be an amendment to the motion before us.
[Paul Camuso]: I don't want to use the word duped. The contract called that we put our vote behind. But at this point to say that we were totally against it and this and that up until the final plan that the mayor would... Who's saying that? Nobody's saying that, Paul.
[Robert Penta]: Mr. President... The resolution's very simple.
[Paul Camuso]: Either you're for it or against it. I'm not talking about your resolution. For or against it. Councilor, it's so convoluted, what you're trying to do... And your mind is convoluted. What you're trying to do here is... And your mind is convoluted. Councilor... I go by fact. Mr. President, I go by fact. I'd just like to see the records of the original votes and... where it took us to this point. Because there is, Councilor Caraviello, in conversations with him, has been approached by what, four or five people? At least through this community. I know someone that was sitting next to the councilor when he's saying that you can blame certain councilors for this. Let's, let's- Well, bring that person forward. Councilor, they don't like you. They don't even want to talk to you.
[Robert Penta]: That's the reason- So like I said, Mr. President- Well, ask Councilor Caraviello the question. You even said you thought you were coming back to take a vote. Did you not say that? Councilor- Thank you very much. There he is right there. He just-
[Fred Dello Russo]: He doesn't. Thank you. Councilors. Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. Um, you know, I, I don't think anyone behind this real disputes. The fact that this council has been pushing for years and I is one member for parking enforcement in this community. I don't think anyone disputes that how we arrived at that and where we are today is due to a plan that the mayor signed. And I don't dispute that either. This is the mayor's plan. He's the one that signed it. Yes, the council did take several votes, but not on the language. And we've heard members of the council already state, like Councilor Knight mentioned today, he's not happy with the $0.35 surcharge. Now, at the time, was that an issue that was brought up, that we discussed, that we talked about, that we voted on? Absolutely not. Councilor Camuso said last week that he's against kiosks and prefers parking meters. Now, was that an issue that we took a vote on? Absolutely not. So it was the length... It's in the records.
[Paul Camuso]: But not in the final plan. I see what you're saying.
[Michael Marks]: We did not take a vote. And Mr. President, if you could indulge me for a moment.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Please, you have the floor, Councilor Mikes.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you. Because it's important that we get this information out and that the people at home and the people in the audience are aware, Mr. President. And I'm not going to speak for anyone else. I, as one member of the council, never voted to outsource this particular program. If anything, It was myself, Councilor Wong-Tam and Councilor Penta that pushed at the beginning to take this program in house. We thought we could accomplish this in house by our own staff. A unanimous vote by this Council, Councilor. Kiosk versus meter. I never took a vote on kiosk versus meter. When I sat on the committee back some five years ago, our mission was to look at other communities. And our recommendation back to the mayor was, Mr. Mayor, we looked at other communities. Boston uses a combination of kiosk and meters and other surrounding communities. and their parking lots use kiosks and meters on the streets. We didn't make our declarative recommendation on which way to go. That was the mayor's choice. Then we heard recently about raising business and commuter permit fees for permit parking from 100 to 400. Did anyone behind this reeling vote to raise business or commuter fees commuter permit parking from $100 to $400? Absolutely not. Absolutely not. 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on the paid-for parking. Who voted behind the reeling to have it for 12 hours? I don't know. I didn't vote for it. Did anyone else vote to have it for 12 hours? And now we're hearing the concerns that people would like to see it less to help business out. The $3 surcharge on resident permit parking. Did we vote for that? And then it was just the company just took it back now, knowing that on a $10 permit parking, resident permit parking, $3 is excessive, and they took it back on their own. We didn't vote for that. The $0.35 surcharge to use the Park Mobile for your pay phone, we didn't vote for that. The enforcement versus pay to park, we didn't vote for that, Mr. President. able to support 30-minute free parking. Did we get a vote on that? We all support that. We've heard it mentioned, whether it's 15 or 30 minutes. Every council said, I'd like to see that. Well, if every council likes to see that, and we're saying that we supported the mayor's proposal, why is it in there? I want to know why it's in there. Because we didn't vote on the language. We did not vote on the language. And I can't say it enough, Mr. President. The validation program, that was recently created a couple of weeks ago, and the mayor nixed it shortly after that. The kiosk, where the kiosk are located. Who voted on that behind this reeling? We sat down and said, where the kiosk could be located? That was under the mayor's plan, not under our vote, Mr. President. Also, keeping the appeal process. The one thing that we didn't outsource was the appeal process. And everyone told us, and I know Gwen Blackburn's in the audience, and every city that we went to said, keep the appeal process out of City Hall, keep it away from City Hall. The one thing that may have kept in City Hall was the appeal process. Did members of the council vote for that to keep it here? Absolutely not, Mr. President. Also, to post signs on trees. Was that a vote of this council? I personally know that it's against the city policy to do so. That wasn't a vote of the Medford City Council. So, Mr. President, I think what we have to be careful here is, you know, the mayor's a big boy. This is the mayor's plan, and he should be able to come forward and say, this is what I thought was best for this community. But to run and hide at a time when the residents of this community need direction, Mr. President, is incomprehensible. It really is, Mr. President, whether he's on vacation or not. Thank you, Councilor. Well, just let me finish, Mr. President. Whether he's on vacation or not, Mr. President, he's had ample opportunity to appear before the residents of this community. Whether it's a reverse 911 call, whether it's on local access stations, whether it's not having a press conference, which he knows how to do very readily in his office, he has failed to appear before this council and the community and explain his pay-for-parking program. Now, if he's in favor of it, he should get out there and push for it, Mr. President. But I'm not going to be tagged, Mr. President, because every inch of the way, I had questions on this. And questions are still coming up, Mr. President. And for my vote from five years ago, back in 2009, along with the committee the mayor appointed, was to provide consistent parking enforcement in this community. and not to go to a pay-for-parking program right away. And that was my vote from day one, Mr. President. And this has taken on, as a speaker said earlier, we went from a plan of small nature, just trying to improve enforcement and moving cars along, to a plan now where we're aggressively seeking out people and we're aggressively hurting local business in this community, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: As my neighbor so aptly said, we asked for a glass of water and got a tsunami.
[Michael Marks]: So I just want that to be, yes, the council did take several votes, Mr. President, but we had no meaningful dialogue or input to any of the language that was always under the mayor's purview. And as we can see, the program being tweaked now is because of the lack of involvement in this community. and we're paying the repercussions now on trying to figure out a program while we already signed a contract, and that's unfortunate.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Councilor Marks. Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I will yield to Mr. Stirella.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Councilor.
[Sorrell]: Dr. Stirella, if you could please kindly state your name and address for the record. I'll do that. John Stirella, 20 Metcalfe Street, Medford. If I may, Mr. President, I have here a short review of the process, which has been taking place, by the way, over one year. It started, contrary to what Councilor Camuso says, it started in January of 2014. That's one year ago. That's when this began. At that time, the request for proposals, the RFP was put out. Now that was available to all of these councils, and I assume you all read that. That RFP is included in the final contract. So when you saw the RFP, you knew one year ago what was going to be in a contract. None of you can deny that. Then in February, the proposals were due. Then in March, the interviews of the three selected firms was carried out. But on May 20th, this council gave up its right of control over the mayor by allowing him to go ahead with a 10 year contract. You all voted for that. I was here for that. I advised against it. I said, you're giving up your right to the final contract. So actually this is not solely the mayor's plan. This is also, I hope you all forgive me for saying this, This is also the whole council's plan. The mayor and the council are both responsible for this. The people did not want this. The people wanted, uh, the, uh, uh, they, they wanted, uh, control of the parking, but they did not want to pay for it. The people never wanted a paid plan. Actually, normally, the police, if you inquire about this, you'll find out that in the majority of cities throughout the whole nation, the police do all the enforcement. You don't farm it out to another company. And then, on September 10th, when — on May 20th was when the council allowed the mayor to sign a 10-year contract. So — and then on — that was not known to the people.
[Michael Marks]: Point of information, Councilor Marks. Just if I could, because Dr. Strella brings up a lot of great points. And I would just like to ask the doctor a question. Yes, that's a proper use of a point of information. Because he's a very astute person and very active with his body, but. I agree with that. And I'm glad you do.
[Sorrell]: I'm joking.
[Michael Marks]: As you know, by state law, the mayor cannot enter into a contract over a term of three years. That's correct. As I understand it. Right. So when the three requests for proposals came back, they were all for a term greater than three years. So what you're saying to me as a member of the council at that point, we turned to the mayor and say, you know what, Mr. Mayor, if you can't negotiate a contract within three years, go back, go back to the drawing table. That's what you're saying. That's right. That's true. Knowing that there's a startup cost cause he outsourced everything. And in this case, it was close to a million dollar startup cost. There were no companies, John, that would come into the city, the way the mayor wanted to do it, would come into the city for three years. So under your thought was just to go back to the mayor and say, you know what, we're not moving forward. We're not moving forward with this. My thought was at the time, allow the mayor to negotiate, and then we can have say in what the language will be, John. That was my thought.
[Sorrell]: Well, you may say no, but you don't have that right. You gave him the right to negotiate for 10 years. That's all you get.
[Michael Marks]: But as part of that right, as part of that, that, that vote we took, we also put a stipulation that the mayor will bring the proposal back to us for a final vote. That was council appendix resolution and it was voted on unanimously by the council. The fact that the mayor never came back to us to allow us to make changes and to to view the language is not, maybe it's a legal issue. Maybe it's a legal issue. But that is an amendment that we put on the resolution that allowed him to enter into a multi-year agreement. That is the amendment, John. And I don't know any way of slicing it up. You're right.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Councilor Matz.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you.
[Sorrell]: That was a long point if I'm fair. It is a legal issue. And the mayor acted legally. You gave him the right to do that. He accepted it. He took the risk of going ahead with a 10-year contract, not knowing in advance how this council was going to vote. And yet, something like six months later, the council voted to allow the mayor to go to a 10-year contract, which he did. That contract is final, and you cannot amend it legally.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Dr. Stirella. Councilor Caraviello. Thank you, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: You want to speak first? I'll yield the floor to you.
[nXRer8wKd5o_SPEAKER_14]: Thank you. This is going to be very brief. Everything that Councilor Mark says, oh, my name is Gwendolyn Blackburn, 233 Arlington Street. Everything that Councilor Mark says, I second because I was on the committee with him, so he knows what all that we did. I do want to tell you, though, that I'm around town a lot, and everybody says, what did the city council do to us? They all believe that the city council is responsible for the kiosk. They do believe it. And I say, city council didn't do it. The mayor did it. So they do believe that all of you You're being held responsible for it. The reason I actually came, because as far as I can tell, we're kind of whistling Dixie here, we're going to lose our businesses in town over these kiosks. And it's really sad that our small businesses cannot afford to stay in business here with people not going into their stores or their shops, whatever it is. But this is something different and probably that other people have already brought it before you or you already know it. But I got an email from a senior citizen who, I'm going to read what she said, and she was in Boston at the theater. Afterward, she came out to Carol's for dinner. It was her first experience with using Medford's pay to park. I parked on Salem Street near the Alamo sandwich shop across the street from Modern Bakery. Well, was I in for a surprise. The street lamps in Medford Square shed very little light. I could not read the directions to see the face of the keyboard on the front of the kiosk. It was dark. My friend happened to have a flashlight in her purse. We had to use the flashlight to see the keyboard. As we were walking away from the kiosk, a man was walking up to the one we were leaving. He called us back to ask if he could use the flashlight. Check out the street lights in West Medford Square, she's telling me. In the square, Is the square well lit? I hope it is better than Medford Square. I don't understand why someone did not pick up the poor lighting in Medford Square. And I just wanted to share that because senior citizens can't see it. I don't plan to use the kiosk. I'll probably get tickets or I'll go to Arlington or someplace where they don't have them to do my business, their post office over there. You don't have to use kiosks. You use them in the parking lot. So, I'll go do business where I can, elsewhere, and I hate to do that, but I feel that Medford has really been sold a bill of goods. We're in a situation where we're going to lose some of our small businesses, and it's not going to get better. The mayor is going to do what he has already done. and not pay attention because he doesn't come out to any meetings, so he can't hear you. But I just wanted to share that. I suppose other people have already brought it up about the poor lighting. I don't know anything about it. Somebody, you did? Yeah.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor Lungo-Koehn, and Councilor Penta both motion to have all the lighting replaced, if I remember.
[nXRer8wKd5o_SPEAKER_14]: They put those, I guess, LED or whatever they call them, lights all in the square and you can't see. But I haven't even been by one of those kiosks, so I wouldn't know. Thank you. That's all I wanted to say tonight.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you very much, Professor. Councilor Camuso.
[Paul Camuso]: No, I just, um, I wanted to concur with, I think Dr. Stirella had a fair assessment of the entire process. If for any, At any point during this, if we felt we didn't like what was in that request for proposal, four members of the city council could have voted not to give the mayor the authority. At that point, the process would have stopped, like Councilor Mark said, until he'd come back with something that was palatable that would then give him the authority to go out for the 10 years. So. Thank you.
[Robert Penta]: Councilor Caraviello, point of information, Councilor Panto. What Councilor Camuso is saying is only 50% true because the RFP that went out also included the RFP on questions that came back from the three vendors. We as a council had no way of knowing what those questions and how they were going to be answered. Councilor Knight rightfully brought up the fact of the private vendor making the signs when that's a contract issue here with people who work for the city. But the dual part of the story is that we asked for the city to make its presentation if the city, in fact, was going to be the person that was going to put the kiosk or whatever it might be. And that's the reason why this Medford City Council voted seven to nothing. And I'm quite sure the clerk in his minutes that took place in the executive session will attest to that. Councilor Caraviello?
[Paul Camuso]: Yes, Councilor Camuso. Thank you. My apologies. And as I was stating, and Councilor Marks was 100% correct, this whole All the internal language of the final document was the mayor and the mayor only. We had several recommendations getting us up to that point. I, for one, wanted regular meters. You put a quarter in and that was it. This council supported that unanimously way back when at one of the early on meetings. So Councilor Marks is correct when he says that. But my point is, I just want everyone to know that, and I'm trying to say this the right way so that Councilor Marks because I understand what you're saying. People are getting confused. And as the young lady from West Medford stated, Ms. Blackburn, I don't know if she left, but as she stated, everyone is saying it's the Medford City Council. And then when certain members of the council are just trying to throw this off on other people and this and that, all the votes that were taken by this council, all the votes that were actually taken by the call of the yeas and nays regarding parking has been unanimous. Now, once the final,
[Robert Penta]: Point of information, Councilor Penta. Those votes that were taken were for traffic enforcement, not revenue enhancement. Read all the resolutions.
[Paul Camuso]: Like I said, Mr. President, Councilor Penta can say whatever he wants. He can backpedal. But the bottom line is, we saw the request for proposal early in 2014, as Dr. Stirella stated. We gave the mayor the authority, knowing what was in that written proposal. So you know what, if we feel like maybe we made a mistake doing it, then let's say that we made a mistake and it's something different than we thought. But to throw the red herring out that three members of this council, or four members, or five members, or six members of this council voted one way and other members didn't, it was unanimous, all the votes. And the city clerk's gonna give it to us next week because I asked for that in the form of a resolution. So once it's apples to apples, I may take out a full page ad in the Medford transcript so that the people can see that Councilor Penta is not being forthcoming and truthful 100% on this.
[Robert Penta]: point of personal privilege. Since you mentioned my name, let's get it straight. I don't think the clerk has got to go down. You've already identified the fact that an RFP went out. We have no argument with that. You also identified the fact that the mayor asked to go forward with one of the three vendors. So those are your two votes right there. Those are the only two votes that this council took on that. But the amendment, the amendment to the vote to go forward was predicated on bringing in A, the city's cost of what it would be, and B, a finalization before the council, before a contract was signed.
[Paul Camuso]: And was there?
[Robert Penta]: Listen, you don't have to. Mr. President. All you have to do is watch the tape, ladies and gentlemen. It's as clear as the bell.
[Paul Camuso]: He can say it any way he wants. And as I stated, Mr. President, when the councillor wants to do coffee talk banter and blame certain members of this council, the vote. You're running around the town telling.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Point of clarification, Councilor Longo-Curran.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I feel like we're being repetitive. I'm objecting to this conversation. If we could try to answer some questions, solve some problems.
[Paul Camuso]: Thank you, councillor. So moved. Let the people speak. If I could just finish. I'm going to wrap up. Councilor Camuso is going to wrap up. I'm going to wrap it up. But when I have people that are telling me, when Councilor Caraviello is having people tell him directly, four or five people, and other councillors are hearing the same stuff, All these different groups are not making it up that this is what's being said out there. So I just want the truth. The truth will set everybody free. The truth will set us free. So the clerk next week will come back with the documents, and then we'll see in the local newspaper, come election time, if Councilor Penta's words come back to bite him.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Councilor Camuso. Councilor Caraviello.
[Robert Penta]: Just mention my name again. If he has a vendetta, if he has a vendetta out for me, why don't you just tell the public that, okay? You're a lame duck councillor, so your words, you can say anything you want about me. It means absolutely nothing, okay? Well, you can do it all you want in election time, okay? And I'll do all I want during this period. And I know what I'm saying because this does not lie. And if you watch a councillor, that doesn't lie. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Caraviello has the floor. Thank you, Mr. President. You know, Dr. Stroll made a good point here. You know, the blame pie is pretty big here, and we all need to take a piece of it. I think if you ask any member of this group here, do we support this plan in the form that it is, I'd be shocked if anyone said yes. I don't know why Councilor Penta needs another vote tonight. I think we're all in agreement that we're not happy with this plan that we have. I mean, it's been worked on. It's changing and changing and changing.
[Robert Penta]: I didn't mention my name. You certainly did. You just said Councilor Pantus. I said Councilor Pantus. It's my resolution. So could you tell him to please be quiet and let somebody speak? Rick, not for anything. If everybody was so opposed to it, then according to Councilor Camuso, we should have never ever voted for it. So, you can't have it both ways.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Penta, if you just hear what I said, I said we all need to take a piece of this blame pie. Why? Because we did vote to accept this.
[Robert Penta]: No, we didn't.
[Richard Caraviello]: We did. You maybe did, I didn't. We did. We may have gotten duped in what we thought we were going to get.
[Robert Penta]: We kind of get duped into something that never came to for a final vote.
[Richard Caraviello]: Tell me that. I agree with you 100%. We thought the plan was going to come back to us, so we would know further. We didn't get that.
[Robert Penta]: And there's the answer right there.
[Richard Caraviello]: And there's no one around this room that's going to disagree with anything you say there. OK? So again, that's the truth of the matter. My friend can believe whatever he wants. Are you still going or? I'm still going. Again, I would doubt that the mayor was going to say, let's just pull the plan and throw it away and write a check for a million dollars to the parking company. Because that's not happening. And again, another vote tonight on this. Again, I respect where you're coming from, Councilor Pandella. There's no one around this rail that's happy with this parking plan. And if there is a person here, then I'm shocked about it. Okay? So another vote of disapproval, I don't think it's necessary, Councilor Penta. It is my opinion. Again, I think it's a redundant vote to do. And one last thing. Certain media groups have challenged my ability to vote. for this issue because I'm a member of the Chamber of Commerce. Today, I sought an opinion to the State Ethics Committee, whether I am allowed to, because I am a board director. State Ethics Committee has no problem with me voting on this here. They asked that I do not sign anything as far as the chamber, but anything with this product or any other issue that the chamber has, they have no problem with me voting on it. So I just wanted to make that clear because there's been a certain media group out there saying that I'm in conflict of interest. So there is.
[Robert Penta]: Question.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor Carafiello has the floor. Yes, I'm sorry.
[Robert Penta]: Then the question is this, as a member of the chamber, did you vote for this or not when the board of directors voted, yes or no?
[Richard Caraviello]: I supported a parking plan. You supported the plan that was presented. I supported the same plan that
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: to allow them to negotiate.
[Richard Caraviello]: We supported a parking plan. We didn't have an actual plan in front of us. All we did was support parking. A parking plan, okay? That's what we supported. Again, I'll take my share of the pie on this, and I think everyone else around this room needs to take their share of the pie. We got duped into a plan we didn't like, and I know there's not one person around this room that's happy with this plan. So, again, I understand where you want to go with this, but I think we're all pretty unanimous on how we feel about this.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you very much, Councilor Caraviello, for that presentation. Councilor Langley-Kern?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I'll yield. I don't like people to stand.
[Fred Dello Russo]: OK. Councilor, Mr. Citizen, please state your name and address for the record.
[jCO6jvvXtn0_SPEAKER_03]: My name is Nick Tomazook. I live at 29 Garfield Ave. I don't know if you guys ever heard the expression, a happy worker's a dangerous worker. You guys are fighting amongst each other. You should be fighting the guy across the hall. Together, not separate. Whatever happened in the past, you should just sweep it under the carpet, forget it, and start new. But you guys got to get together to fight that guy. And to alleviate the problem with the kiosks, I hear a lot of senior citizens asking me questions. And I said, well, how the hell can I answer them? I said, there's been such a lack of information and misinformation about these kiosks, the Times, and the East, and everything else. What they should do is just program those kiosks when they're not enforceable to have it on the screen. Parking does not, it's not in effect, or the kiosk is not, the parking enforcement is not enforced at this time. after 7 o'clock, because you're confusing a lot of those senior citizens out there.
[Fred Dello Russo]: They're feeding a stupid thing after 7 o'clock on Sunday.
[Richard Caraviello]: I brought this with the gentleman that there's no hours of operation on those kiosks. So people don't know when they're in effect and not in effect, and he says that he can put them on there. They put it right into the program, just like that whole thing, just put it right on. So people don't have to walk up to it. They can see on the side of the kiosk Hours of operation, days of operation. And I asked the gentleman. I'll tell you the whole story. Do not feed it. Right. But it's a, at least if it's on the side of the machine and large lettering, you'll know rather than having to walk up and push a button. The gentleman from the parking company said that's something they can do is to put it on both sides. So when you pull up and it's on reflective, even if it's dark, at least it'll show up.
[jCO6jvvXtn0_SPEAKER_03]: Right. And another point is somebody brought up the lighting in the square. I brought that up last year. I said, clean those lenses and put high-intensity bulbs in there. You don't have to change the light post or anything. Just put a transformer in there to take care of the high-intensity lights, and you'll have that square lit up like Fenway Park. Instead of spending a whole bunch of money, you change the head of it. The power's already there and everything.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Point of information, Councilor.
[Richard Caraviello]: This morning, I was in Denham Center. And all their lights have the light shift, the nice bright white lights that you're talking about, whole square was all lit up. They don't have the yellow or the orange light. 100% right. I mean, I don't know what the cost of changing those lenses.
[jCO6jvvXtn0_SPEAKER_03]: The lenses were all changed this year.
[Richard Caraviello]: If I'm not mistaken, I think the lenses were all changed this year. But again, but they're orange lights and they just don't throw.
[jCO6jvvXtn0_SPEAKER_03]: I was at another town today, bright white lights, they look fabulous. But we have to do something about those kiosks because people are feeding those things when they don't need to. And they're making more money.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Point of clarification on that.
[jCO6jvvXtn0_SPEAKER_03]: Point of clarification, Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: From the representative from Republic, are people able to feed the meter or will the machine reject any payment after 7 p.m. or before 7 a.m.? It doesn't reject.
[jCO6jvvXtn0_SPEAKER_03]: Well, then it should be rejected. Exactly. That's why I said, put something on the screen or something that, you know, hours of operation or whatnot, and it shouldn't accept money after seven o'clock.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yeah. It shouldn't accept money. I agree.
[jCO6jvvXtn0_SPEAKER_03]: I think it's people are afraid of getting people off because for the lousy dollar that you put in there, they're going to give you a 15 or $20 ticket. So we've got to help them out guys. Like I said before, The only, you are really beating a dead horse because you already signed that contract and we're stuck with it for 10 years. The only thing is, is you guys can make it easier. Thank you. Take the weight off the people's shoulders. And I don't know if you remember the, uh, sober paved road to the carriage house, sir. Thank you, sir.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Council longer current has the floor next.
[Robert Penta]: Yeah. I want to, I want to get to your question. You just said,
[Fred Dello Russo]: Do you want a point of information?
[Robert Penta]: Point of information? Yeah, point of information. Point of information, Councilor Penta. There are two opt-out positions in this. After 90 days, if this is not working out for either party, there's opt-out provisions, and there's an opt-out provision at the end of the first year. So I just thought I'd let you know we don't have to live with this for 10 years.
[jCO6jvvXtn0_SPEAKER_03]: OK.
[Robert Penta]: And I'm quite sure there's going to be a whole host of legal questions that are going to arise that maybe Republicans are not going to want to entertain, because maybe they're just going to say this isn't worth it.
[jCO6jvvXtn0_SPEAKER_03]: Well, everybody's thinking that they're yearning for 10 years. That's the thing. Because there was no information on it. I still haven't got any information about it at all. I just don't come to the square anymore.
[Fred Dello Russo]: All right. Thank you very much. Thank you. Councilor Lungo, Vice President Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: A few questions, I guess, for our public then. Is there a way to shut the meters off? at 7 p.m. and not turn them back on until 7 a.m.?
[SPEAKER_13]: I don't believe so, but I will confirm for sure. I know we have a program so that you can't buy more time than the meter or the time, the posted time allows. I do know that the signage that's posted for the meters does give the times from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., and that is reflective. We're going to add some more signage to the side. I'll confirm and report back if they can physically program shut off at a specific time.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: If we could have that question answered through the chair, if Republic can shut off the machines from 7 p.m.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Point of information, Councilor Caraviello.
[Richard Caraviello]: In some of them, their meters shut off, they will not accept money after the, whatever particular hour they, they are. Cause I've been there and I've tried to put money in and I didn't realize that the hour and it would not accept it after eight o'clock or whatever time they had.
[SPEAKER_13]: Um, I just don't, I don't want to answer definitely yes without being sure.
[Richard Caraviello]: But I know it is, you know, other kiosks do stop with it. Well, it will not take any money after, after the hour or whatever hour is up.
[SPEAKER_13]: Right. I mean, I know these kiosks are in similar cities and they don't shut off. So I just, I'm not a hundred percent sure. So I'm sure the capability exists to do that. Sure. We can figure it out.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: And then, um, I, a few issues were brought to my attention today through a phone call and I guess it relates to the entire program, but you know, there's certain spots where there's no signage, there's certain spots where there's no kiosks. Is there an internal audit being done of where we need more signage, where we need more kiosks?
[SPEAKER_13]: Yeah, like I stated earlier, we were put on hold putting any signage out because of a DPW issue and whether we could do it. I finally got clarification literally this morning that we could do it, and we're now going to go back and do it. The DPW said that they don't have the capacity to do it right now. We'd get it done quicker than they would, and as long as we do it between the hours of 7 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, and we're not taking away from overtime opportunities that the union was on board with that. So I do have a list of about 62 signs that have to go up.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: And then it's like, there's no kiosk in front of, from what I understand, in front of Citizens Bank, there's four spots, there's no kiosk, so do people have to pay or do they not have to pay?
[SPEAKER_13]: In Medford Square?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Medford Square, in front of Citizens Bank, there's that inlet, four spots, there's no kiosk. Do they have to go into the the other side of the parking lot, or do they have to cross the street?
[SPEAKER_13]: If I'm correct, the first couple are signed as 30-minute pay meter. You'd have to pay the kiosk that is in close proximity. The rest are just limited time enforcement. They don't say pay meter, so you wouldn't actually have to pay a meter. If the signs say pay meter, then you pay the meter for that spot. If they don't say pay meter, then you don't pay the meter.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Well, I was in the parking lot. behind CVS right near Citizens Bank. And I mean, signage was inadequate, I think. It's my opinion. I agree.
[SPEAKER_13]: And like I said, we got told to stop doing the signage. So I couldn't do anything about it until I was told literally this morning at quarter of 8 that I could go and do it. And when will the new signs go out? We're getting back on the horse starting tomorrow to get the signs out there.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I also have questions with the public. With regards to the resolution, I I agree with Councilor Caraviello in a way. Voting for or against it, I agree that every single councilor has issues and could almost arguably be against the project for certain reasons, but I think things need to be seriously tweaked and concerns need to be hashed out and changes need to be made. I think what we set out to do a year and a half ago when we kept pushing for parking enforcement, it was to get our police department to initiate more parking enforcement for more turnover. What it turned into is what, you know, obviously what the mayor wanted, the kiosks. And I remember Councilor Mucks specifically, even I think Councilor Camuso mentioned too, why not meters? I mean, we tried to ask questions. They just really fell on deaf ears. But we need to offer some sort of free parking. And if, you know, we need to give the mayor however long it is appropriate, whether that's weeks or months, to make the changes. We need to give some relief to the businesses. We need 15, 30, maybe even an hour worth of free parking, or we need to lower the rate. Different things need to be thrown around, and the mayor needs to listen loud and clear, realize what's happening in West Medford Square, realize the issues that are in every, I'm sure there's issues in every district. in every one of our squares. And I know some things are being hashed out, some concerns are being taken under advisement and really being worked on. You know the chief's been active, Republic has been working with the chief. Changes are being made, but a big change that needs to be made, and like I said at the Committee of the Whole meeting, is some sort of free parking. And if the city has to take the hit on the amount of income that we were supposed to bring in, then I think every councilor behind this rail would vote for the city to reduce that amount of income that we're supposed to generate. This wasn't to, I as one councilor did not necessarily want to make money on the backs of the consumer and the businesses. The city needs to make some serious changes so that we can see our businesses survive rather than what's going on right now.
[Paul Camuso]: Thank you. Thank you to the chief. Hey, chief Sacco. I think, uh, I think one thing that I think we could look at, um, doing pretty quick and it's similar to what councilor Marks and councilor Lungo said, I'm not so sure the contract, if there's even room for negotiation for total 15 minutes or 30 minutes free, I would love to see it, but realistically, I'm not so sure the contract, that's something we'd be able to achieve through negotiations. I think we might be able to achieve something, though, where from the time of your expiration, you don't actually get a written ticket. You give a 10-minute leeway at the end of it before you get that violation. So similar to a speeding ticket, when you're out tagging and it's 25 miles an hour, I'm not going to say it out loud, but there's a traditional formula they use. If you go above certain thing over, you know what I'm saying. With that being said, I think that's something that could give some instant relief and help out, even if we do it for six months, just a 10 minute at the end of the, when it's about to expire. So if your thing expires 125, Republic doesn't write a ticket until 136. So you get a 10 minute leeway at the end of it. We're still going to be turning over the parking. I think that would have a good intent as far as turning over parking. not hammering people with tickets, but holding them accountable if they're over the limit by 11, uh, 10 minutes. And then once they hit that, um, next one, is that something that Republic, I mean, and not talking about contractual, but I think that's something that would make more sense. And listen, I have to preface it by, I think all of us here would love to see the first 15 minutes of the 30 minutes free, but there's really going to be no way to police that because it's actually, when you're putting the money in the kiosk, that's, what's actually initiating with all the data and the information technology that you got there at 1 o'clock. So they're not going to know when the 15 minutes started, when it didn't start. You know what I'm saying? I understand that. That's just the way information technology works. But on the other end, that's something fairly easy. That's just a training piece. I'd like to make a motion that we look for a 10-minute grace period at the end of each thing before a violation is given, at least for a few months. to get people knowledgeable and even, well actually, I was gonna say give those fake ones out like they were given out, not a fake one, but a zero dollar one. But I just think that achieves our goal of turning over spots, but it's also holding people accountable with a little breathing room. So I'd like to make that a motion, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So amended by Councilor Camuso that there be a 10 minute grace period. At the end. At the end? At the end. Thank you. And you make the proper point. To initiate anything, to get yourself on record, whether you're going to get charged or not, your plate's got to get in the system.
[Paul Camuso]: Exactly. And to Republic, to follow up on that, has any cities and towns done something like that that you're aware of, where you guys would just instruct your people not to write the violation for the 10 minutes? Oh, that's not on.
[SPEAKER_13]: Mr. President. Go ahead. I'm sorry. Um, yeah, typically it's a five minute grace period. A lot of cities, that's basically what our staff has been instructed to do already. So, and as a matter of operation, uh, identifying someone that hasn't paid and writing the citation is going to take you a matter of time. So in reality, most people are going to get that grace period. Our staff has also been instructed if they're in the course of writing a parking citation and someone comes up and approaches them, that the owner of the vehicle, that we cancel out a citation and they walk away. So during the course of writing a citation, up until the moment they hit print on the button, which will take our staff approximately 90 seconds to a minute, two minutes to do. If someone walks up and says, that's my car, that's my car, then we walk away and we don't write the citation.
[Paul Camuso]: So I'd like to make the motion for the 10 minutes. And I know now we can initiate, well, we want it 15 minutes, 20 minutes, 30 minutes. 10 minutes, I think is reasonable when you when you're running in real quick, just to get the ball rolling, the conversation started between the mayor and the company.
[Robert Penta]: Point of information, Councilor Penta. Mr. Nash, question. Tony, I'm sorry, this is... I'm following this conversation as it relates, I believe he's alluding to using a kiosk, but if I drive down the street and I see a sign that says two-hour parking, and there's no kiosk, there's nothing, How are you going to know who got there at what time and when? You're not going to. That's the whole point.
[SPEAKER_13]: The license plate recognition cameras, so the license plate LPR camera for short, takes a picture of the car, takes a picture of the license plates, takes the exact GPS coordinate of the vehicle. We've got it set up. We've got a program for two hours and 15 minutes. So even though the sign says two hours, you actually have two hours and 15 minutes in an overtime situation. That's where any sign, is that what you're saying? Not a kiosk, a sign. I understand. There's 15-minute zones, there's 30-minute zones, there's one-hour zones, and there's two-hour zones. There's now three-hour zones in the lots.
[Robert Penta]: So they all work the same way. No matter what it is. If I drive down the street and I see a half-hour parking area, and there's no kiosk, there's nothing, just the signs, there's a half-hour. How are you going to know what time I got there? Because you're driving around the city doing all this other enforcement.
[SPEAKER_13]: I won't know what time you got there. I'll know what time we chalked your car when we did get there. So you can get there, and we won't get there for another 10 minutes. And the time starts from the time that we identify that your car is there. So, yes, I'm not going to know the second that you pull into the spot, but when we drive by your car, that's when the clock starts ticking.
[Robert Penta]: But, Dan, I mean, I could be sitting there for an hour or two before you eventually get there. Of course you can.
[SPEAKER_13]: Absolutely. It's a gamble. There's only one meter in the world that would be able to do what you're asking to do. No city in the country actually operates that meter right now because no city will put it in because that is 100% enforcement of every single car. So there is no parking program in this country that is going to be able to do what you just said is when I park my car, my two hour clock starts ticking right now. It's just, it's impossible. So, and that's not a very customer friendly approach to the program. I mean, you pull in when we identify the car, that's when the clock starts. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So to counsel, come on.
[Paul Camuso]: So I just, I'll wrap up on this point. Um, I'd like to make it so that there's a 10 minute grace period at the end of each expired, um, session.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. Thank you. Councilor Knight. I yield the floor to Mr. D'Antonio. Councilor Knight yields the floor to Mr. D'Antonio. Please state your name and address for the record.
[Anthony D'Antonio]: Anthony D'Antonio, 12 Yale street in Medford. Um, a couple of points I want to make. And I try not to be redundant on any of them. But I was on the way home this evening, passing the South Medford Square, and I noticed a decrease in the amount of vehicles out in front of the stores, from Alexander Avenue to Yale Street. A really big decrease. And usually when I drive by there, they're loaded, they're crowded. Even on my street, there's people there parked. I don't know if they would, Tuesday night is always a busy night down there with the Oasis and with Pacelli's, but I got home and I received a phone call, a reverse 911 call from Captain Clemente indicating that we will have three public and police, we're going to have the three meetings discussing the parking situation. at the Academy, if I'm not mistaken. I think it's going to be at the Academy, I believe. I was in a rush to get out and I was listening to Clemente leave the message there. My point is that a good effort on the part of the Medford police in trying to do this, but I still say wholeheartedly that the meeting should be taken here and that the mayor should be here to answer the questions. Nothing gets done. The point doesn't get across unless he is here taking the heat on this. I mean, when, where's the surprise when, who didn't think this was going to happen after he went mute on the parking proposals put by your committee that you had, nothing was done. Nothing was done. Then all of a sudden it comes in with a guillotine and we got this parking program. Now you want to raise revenue. You want to put parking meters there. You don't want, this is not a kiosk city unless you put them in the, in the parking lots and then you have, You don't need to put your license plate in. They can run a piece of paper. And they have a software that says, OK, you're a young person. The thing that I have a question of is, when this was being negotiated, didn't anybody from the finance department, budget director, or the purchasing department get an idea that this was going up towards a million dollars on behalf of the city to put forward this program? I mean, if it's a million dollars, it normally is going to take a three year contract. And I think it's time for the city to say, okay, thanks for the time you put into this, but this is not for us. We have to find a different solution. There are other solutions out there. And unfortunately it requires a lot of personnel on the ground. And it also requires a mayor who can get the money from one and put into a budget where we need public safety officers, we need DPW people. I mean, there's a lot of things that can be done, but this just doesn't, and there's nothing against the Republic Parking System. I mean, they're all good people. They have a bottom line they have to meet, but this is always the way the city runs. The mayor doesn't like what some people do, and he comes up with his own plan, and then he, you know, he hits Mrs. Murphy's car on the rear wrench, opens the pond door, and you guys are all chasing the car down the street as well as the citizens. And it's the wrong way to run a city. And that's because this charter has not been reviewed for 30 years in the city of Medford. There's absolute power in there. And to expect anything else, like Charlie Brown always thought that Lucy was going to hold the football when he goes to kick it, but she always moves it. That's what we have with this mayor. You don't get what we're paying for here. We have to change that. And people have to be made aware of that. We've got to stop all this. Well, never mind. Anyway. I hope that the people understand that there are a lot of pros and cons with these things. And I've seen a lot of people having difficulty, a lot of difficulty with the kiosks. It's a hell of a lot easier to put a quarter and a card, a credit card in those things. And one thing I think I heard one of the representatives from Republic say that the information is secure when you put your license plate number in there. And I strongly disagree with that. There is no information that's secure once it goes into the cloud, or it goes into the airways, or it goes into the software, because there are companies out there that do this particularly. I could take Mr. Nash up to a place in New Hampshire and show him his own company in a particular data aggregator, and they won't even know that they're being looked at. And I have a feeling that it's not their fault. It's just the way the society is today. But anyway, I really hope that— Point of information? No, no, no, no, no. To give you an example, Groupon sells coupons for golf memberships and causes special discounts. Well, you can go up there and they can go right into their system and see who's signing the coupons. So what happens is you manufacture golf clubs, you come to me, I sell you a list, the people that are buying the memberships to the golf course.
[Paul Camuso]: Yes, it's in our contract though. I believe Councilor Penta, I don't know if he stated it, that they cannot use this information.
[Anthony D'Antonio]: They can't sell it.
[Paul Camuso]: They can't.
[Anthony D'Antonio]: They won't.
[Paul Camuso]: They won't use it. Because no, you just said Mr. Nash, his company in Republic in New Hampshire. You said someone has their data.
[Anthony D'Antonio]: I said I could take you to a company in New Hampshire that does this, and they could go into the site.
[Paul Camuso]: All right, because I misunderstood it. I thought you knew something, and I was going to tell you to call the FBI if that was the case, with all the stuff going on in today's day and age.
[Anthony D'Antonio]: I just think a little more consideration on behalf of the mayor should have been taken for the people in the city of Medford.
[Paul Camuso]: I'm sorry, Anthony.
[Anthony D'Antonio]: I thought you said that I misinterpreted what you said. No, it's out there. I mean, these are companies. They pay big money for people to come in and do this, to do the software. I mean, they have computers that will fill this room, and that's all they do. That's how they make their money. You've probably seen emails that should come to your email address that you have no idea how they got there. That's how it happened. They sell the list. Well, thank you, and good luck. Thank you. Thank you. Councilor Knight?
[John Costas]: Again, I yield the floor to any citizen who'd like to speak, Mr. President. Good evening. How you doing? John Kostas, Medford Electronics, 25 Salem Street in Medford. Of course, I'm also a past president of the Chamber of Commerce, but I'm not here for the Chamber of Commerce. I represent some of the people in our block of stores, and yeah, there's—I can watch people use the kiosk, and yes, there is issues, especially, you know, older people do have a hard time running the cart and so forth. It has really been, and I wasn't thrilled about the kiosks. I would rather see parking enforcement in the square versus kiosks or meters. But we didn't get that. Either way, it's wonderful. Right now, my customers can pull in, and some of them take a chance. They won't put a quarter in the meter. They'll run in, run out, and they'll take a chance if they get a ticket or not. But in Medford Square, sometimes it looks like a ghost town. because there's so many places to park, you can fly in and fly out. So I know at some of the meetings I've been to where I'll be public, they're making all kinds of changes to this program. I don't think there's any one program that everybody in the entire city is going to want. I guarantee you, if they weren't kiosks or meters and it was enforced parking, you'd have a whole bunch of people saying, why aren't you doing it the right way and doing it with, you know, The other way, you know, either meet them eight or the kiosks. So I don't know how much you can go after this over and over again, because it just keeps going on and on. And nobody's going to be happy at all with this program whatsoever. But it's working for me in Medford Square. If they extend it, there's a few things I'd like to see changed, and they're changing them. But I would like to thank, though, the Chamber of Commerce, because I'm I'm just a chamber member. I pay my dues like 300 other people do. Um, but they've been keeping me informed by emails and stuff of what's going on, how's it going on and what's happening. So I'd like to thank the chamber for taking that step forward to help me implement a program that not everybody, um, not everybody likes, but I think it's here to stay and I think we're stuck with it. So thank you. Thank you, sir. Councilor Marks.
[Fred Dello Russo]: I'll yield, Mr. President. Good evening.
[Joe Viglione]: Please state your name and address for the record. Good evening. Joe Villione, 59 Garfield Ave, Medford, Mass. I was over at Haines Square a couple of times, two different storefronts, and I talked to both of these store owners, and people are outraged. Sunday, there was a fellow trying to put money in the meter, so I parked my car over near the iSight place. And, uh, Nancy salon, I was over there and I went over and I talked to the fellow and I said, you don't have to put your money. And I showed him, you know, Monday through Saturday. And he goes, oh, and he was just outraged. He said, you can't read it. I don't want to put my personal information in. I go into the stores, they're all flustered. So John Costas, you're a great guy. You're really great guy. You do a great job with the Chevalier, but I strongly disagree with you, man. The people I'm talking to 100%, except for Mr. White and Mr. Costas, both with the chamber of commerce. 100% of the people out there in the community are just really, really outraged, and people want more meetings here. They want to come out and speak. I got some texts. I invited some people. They were here tonight. People want the discussion. So, John, it's going to go on and on because we have to pay that 800 grand and get them out of here. It's a ghost town out there. It's not a vibrant community. The streets are fractured, and there's litter everywhere. Why would people want to pay to come to this community?
[Fred Dello Russo]: I yield to the woman who would like to speak.
[Q7cD9OP2TNA_SPEAKER_21]: My name is Victoria Hunt. And I would just like to add to the fact that it is a ghost town out there. And people are not going to pay to park to go to the small businesses. They're going to keep right on trucking and go right around the little roadie to Arlington. Hunt, H-U-N-T. And that's where they're going to go, because there's no meters there. And the business there is booming. And business in Medford is, shh.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion?
[Paul Camuso]: Motion to leave this open. Mr. President?
[Fred Dello Russo]: We have it so with several amendments. Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think based upon what we're hearing today, we can all agree that the plan is not perfect. This is not a perfect plan and we all know that. And I think the reason that there's so much frustration is because the lack of transparency in the process in establishing this plan, Mr. President. And because the process wasn't open and transparent, now we're in the situation we're in where there are a lot of questions, and it seems like there's a lot of reaction and reactivity versus being proactive and proactivity. Chief Sacco's done an excellent job, Mr. President, I feel, in addressing the concerns of the general public. He's been out there, and he's been working very hard on this. As Councilman Locke said, he right now is the face of this program, and there's no question about it. He's been working far too many hours, in my opinion, on establishing a parking management program and a little less on making sure that the other essential functions of our police department are up and running. I think that this is almost becoming a distraction at this point in time, Mr. President. But I guess the question is, where do we go from here? And what are our options from here? And in looking at the situation, we can go forward as the plan's presented. It is what it is. We can work towards trying to get the contract bought out and eliminate the contract, but I don't think that that's going to happen. I don't think that's a reality of the situation. I don't think that that's something we're going to be able to be successful with. However, I think that over the past three weeks, we have been very successful at moving this project and this plan towards something that everybody can live with. And, you know, I think that if we're going to make a commitment to parking enforcement or the parking management plan that's in place, we've seen people from Republic that have been willing to work with us, we've seen the Traffic Commission that's taking our concerns very seriously, Mr. President. So I think that in looking at what our best option is, our best option is to continue the discussion, to continue the dialogue, to keep this issue here at the table, to keep the Committee of the Whole open so that we can continue to make changes to the existing plan so that we can have a successful downtown. And when I look at the plan, I think that there are some other areas that we need to look at, Mr. President. And if we want to make this work, we need to take a look at the comprehensive zoning that we have in our downtown business areas to ensure that we're attracting sustainable businesses based upon the zoning regulations and ordinances that we have in place right now. I also think it's important that, because this is a parking management plan, it might be very suitable for us to take a look at what we can do to take cars off the road and to improve pedestrian-oriented transit and multimodal transportation down in our business district, Mr. President. So I think the proper course of action for us to move forward at this point in time would be to continue this discussion to talk about what changes that we can continue to make. We've been very successful over the past three weeks in addressing the concerns that have been brought to us. Thankfully, the people from our public and the chief have been willing to work with us and have been very, very patient in addressing our concerns. And I think that we've been patient because of the frustrations and the lack of open, transparent process that's been in place. We need to ask the residents to be patient because we're getting responses. We're moving in the right direction, Mr. President. So I think, you know, based upon the options that we have here before us, it's in our best interest to keep the paper before the council to keep it open and to continue the dialogue and continue the conversation.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you on that motion. Councilor, if I can, from the chair state that we have within this motion, which is before us, I have a number 15 22. Uh, we have a resolution that calls for ongoing discussion. you've called for ongoing discussion yet within it, we have an amended to, uh, which will require action, um, a referendum on the plan that really, uh, quite frankly, as I see it, uh, as the chairman to be highly ontologically challenged. Um, I think that, uh, we also have a amendment by council Camuso for a, um, uh, ruling. on the content of the votes by the city clerk, um, which was also at my recommendation for the clerk's impartiality on the matter. Uh, Mr. Clerk, if you could also share with us what else you have in hand.
[Clerk]: Uh, we have an amendment, uh, from council current. Let me see, uh, on if the machines can be shut down, uh, or the kiosk machines be shut down at the, uh, uh, closing period. Very good. Yeah.
[Fred Dello Russo]: so that they don't accept anything. And on Sunday, so they don't accept money on those times. And also councilor Camuso had a before us the matter of, um, that there'd be a 10 minute grace period at the end of the paid for, uh, period in the kiosk that at the termination. So if somebody paid for a half hour of parking that an additional 10 minutes be granted to them at the termination of that half hour before free before they get it. No, before they get a ticket, before they get a ticket. So with all those, uh, amendments, there was 30 minute free parking came from hope. My apologies, Councilor Marks off at 30 minutes free parking. So, um, so we have these five amendments that require action. while we're asking for the main motion to stay fluid. So I'm wondering if a councilor would like to separate, make a motion to separate all these issues so we can. Motion to sever. Sever. Councilor Penta.
[Robert Penta]: Why would you want to sever it? Why don't you just include it? Because when you have the discussion next week, you'll have your answers.
[Fred Dello Russo]: You're one asked to keep the thing opened and the others all require action to be acted upon. So you can't keep something open and ongoing while at the same time asking for action.
[Robert Penta]: Well, all you're keeping open is the conversations you're going to be able to have. That's what the resolution would say. So I would be willing to. That doesn't make sense to me, Councilor. Oh, why doesn't it? I have some amendments that I'd like to put forward. Well, then this will be tremendously amended then. Well, whether it's amended or not, what difference does it make? It's part of the ongoing discussion, Fred. It's all there is. Yes.
[Fred Dello Russo]: What I'm saying is that these amendments can't continue within an ongoing discussion. They need to be acted upon as separate motions. Each one of them is going to be a separate motion? Should they not be, Councilor Long-Term, Madam Vice-President?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: All together, but it's counterproductive to Councilor Pente's resolved vote for or against the program. I think that needs to be voted on at a later time. maybe none of these changes are getting implemented.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Very good. That's a great point.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Hopefully the mayor hears this loud and clear, and we won't have to vote on that.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So the motion that you've brought to us for a referendum on this program, uh, councillor, uh, would you kindly withdraw that motion?
[Robert Penta]: No, just table it until you get the answer.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion to table the amendment? Until it's, until, no. Mr. President. Mr. President.
[Paul Camuso]: Councilor Camuso. Councilor Knight brought this up in the past too. If something's going to be under suspension, every member of this council should have the courtesy of at least seeing it and signing off on it. This wasn't under suspension, Paul. No, the other paper that you just handed to him.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: It was an amendment. That's an amendment. We do this all the time.
[Paul Camuso]: I understand the amendment. Did he give you, I thought it was an original, he said it was 15-032.
[Fred Dello Russo]: He presented to me as a motion separate from this. Him giving its own number. Hence my point. Not the clerk giving it a number. That's my point, Mr. President. My point is that I'm asking that that amendment be withdrawn.
[Paul Camuso]: Okay. And that was my point, Mr. President, because when anything goes under suspension for many members of these council, any member of the council, we all see it, we initial it and then give it in. It wasn't a suspension. When it was given a number earlier, one would assume that it was under suspension and that we didn't sign off on it.
[Fred Dello Russo]: It couldn't be accepted as a, uh, you see my, you see what I was saying? We've had many, we've had many resolutions to give many resolutions.
[Paul Camuso]: We've had many resolutions. Like I said, just moving forward. Anything under suspension, I think we should all see.
[Robert Penta]: We've had many resolutions that are amended on the floor.
[Paul Camuso]: Amended on the floor, but not given to the city clerk with a number. I said, he read my resolution.
[Robert Penta]: With a number on it. And then I said, as amended. As amended, and I handed it to him.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So we've accepted it as an amendment. Originally, though, my question is, yeah, right, yes, yeah, right. But can we leave that table, or do we have to withdraw it when we're acting on the rest of the budget?
[Robert Penta]: Let's withdraw it and see how the answer is. Before we go any further, before we get to that, I want to go back to the amendments that we're discussing here right now. I want to go to indicate that on, is Mr. Nash, you're still here? Dan. Are the cars, the two cars that you have right now, are they lettered yet properly? Are they done? Pardon me? Nope. Okay. And have they been used? recently for the purposes of issuing tickets? Nope. Okay. And when we met, I believe it was on this past Friday, you indicated that the cars would not be used for that particular purpose. They would just be driving your drivers around and they would be getting out and doing what they're doing.
[SPEAKER_13]: Correct. The cameras are disengaged and the computers are off. Okay.
[Robert Penta]: I move that the dates of January 15th and January 16th, any tickets and issued You amend the amended further with another amendment, further amended by Councilor Penta that the tickets issued on the January 15th and especially January 15th where the cars were unlicensed, unregistered and unserved checked and unleaded, uh, not be, uh, be waived. And same thing for the 16th. Um, and also number two, there was no clarity into what you just said. Councilor. Yes. You can't understand it. And the 16th, the same for the 15th and the 16th. Any tickets that they issued be invalid, because they were used in a car that wasn't properly marked, insured, registered, and inspected.
[SPEAKER_13]: That's the third time he said that the cars were not insured or registered. They weren't insured. When were they insured? They were insured. I can get you the documentation if you want.
[Robert Penta]: What day were they insured, Dan? I don't have that documentation. You don't have it.
[SPEAKER_13]: But it wasn't insured on the 15th. Basically, what you're saying is that we drove around the city with uninsured vehicles, which is just not true.
[Robert Penta]: You had a cardboard plate that said Tennessee on the back of a white car that did not have a Massachusetts registration. It wasn't inspected. And it wasn't leaded and identified. That's what the contract says you were supposed to do.
[SPEAKER_13]: You had 90 days to do it. The contract said that we had to mark the vehicles.
[Robert Penta]: Therefore, with that being said, tickets given on those two days, and they're still unalerted vehicles, but I understand what he's doing. They're just driving the people around. So the tickets that were given on those two days be waived. That's all.
[SPEAKER_13]: To clarify, every single citation that is issued, every single citation, every single citation, no matter when, whether it was January 15th or next January 15th, every single ticket, whether it was this January 15th or next January 15th, is issued by an officer on foot. The vehicles do not issue citations. They identify people that are in violation. The officers get out of the vehicle. The officers then do a double check through the handheld unit, and every single ticket is issued on foot.
[Robert Penta]: But you had to use that vehicle, Dan, to get to where you were going. If the chief of police drove down the street and saw my car that was uninspected, unregistered, and didn't have a Massachusetts plate on it for the purposes of an unleaded, he would stop me and give me a ticket. He didn't have it.
[SPEAKER_13]: You didn't have those. I'm just clarifying, because you're making it seem that the vehicles themselves issue citations, and they don't.
[Robert Penta]: Well, you would have not been able to get the information, Dan, from the orange things on top of those vehicles from the guys driving down the street. Correct?
[SPEAKER_13]: I don't need the cameras to get the same information.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So what you're saying is that the technology that your firm employs to affect the parking enforcement plan is not advanced enough that the machines themselves issue citations. So it still requires the use of a human being in doing that.
[Clerk]: No.
[Fred Dello Russo]: No.
[SPEAKER_13]: Yes and no. Thank you. Yeah. I mean, you can, I mean, in order to issue the citation from the vehicle, you'd have to mail the citation to the house and you can't do that. You have to put the citation on the windshield and a vehicle can't put a citation on windshield. We have two means to track every single citation. First, the camera identifies a potential citation and then the officer, the parking enforcement officer gets out of the vehicle and does a double check through the handheld to verify it. So there's two means to do the identification of any violation.
[Robert Penta]: But Dan, he would have never been able to do whatever those violations were on that, at least on the 15th, on the 15th, if he didn't have, if the car was properly, it was like it was supposed to be. Point of information, Mr. President. We could have.
[Michael Marks]: Point of information, Councilor Marks. Just if I could, I hear what Councilor Pente is stating, but from what we heard, the infractions dealt with parking in handicapped spot, parking in front of a hydrant. And I, as one member of the council, I don't care how they got the information. I want them to issue tickets. That's what they're there for, to issue tickets, and especially for infractions of parking in front of a hydrant, which is a danger, uh, in case of a fire or parking in a handicapped spot, Mr. President. So I hear what Councilor Prentice is stating, but I don't think we should be waiving any tickets for people that are in violation of parking in those particular spots, Councilor. Thank you, Councilor Martz.
[SPEAKER_13]: I will. avoid any citation on the 15th for overtime parking. For overtime parking? I think there was five citations issued that day, and I'll avoid those five citations out of the system for anyone that was overtime. But the bus stops, and the handicaps, and the crosswalks, we'll keep them.
[Robert Penta]: On that matter, how can you override something without coming to City Hall? You can do that where you're at? Well, with your permission, I'll do that. OK. I don't know which way you want me to do it, and you don't want me to do it. I hope the council agrees to give permission to avoid the tickets, OK? the council is not authorized to do so. Okay. But he can do it. Second thing on the tickets, is there any way instead of having a paper ticket, you can put a color ticket on that? Um, yes, that's already been brought up in work. But I just want to know, cause it's not part of the resolution. Yes. I like to make a part of the, there are a couple of solutions to that.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So is that part of the amendment?
[Robert Penta]: Yeah. I like to amend it that the, the, the violations be color coded. So, and not, and not in paper council and not on paper.
[Paul Camuso]: Um, this was already brought up earlier as a, Resolution as an amendment by myself. It was I said the ticket talking about it stop and shop in the second question following up people that actually get a violation. Now, these are the people we're getting up in mornings. Will they actually get an envelope to mail it in as well? Other communities get an envelope priests pre it's pre addressed.
[SPEAKER_13]: Um, that was not the original plan, but we could look into that. I think, I think you should because the communities are split. I mean, Hartford, Connecticut, Albany, New York, all these cities, they don't, They don't issue envelopes. They just issue your citation on a windshield.
[Paul Camuso]: Other communities do. Where are people going to be mailing them? To a lockbox out of state somewhere? Or right to Medford Main Street?
[SPEAKER_13]: They'd be mailing it to our office. OK. Or they could pay them online.
[Paul Camuso]: I just, I think it's a lot. I think they're.
[SPEAKER_13]: Well, one of the possible solutions to help with the question about the color is to use an envelope that is colored and marked up.
[Paul Camuso]: Yeah, that's true, too. Use an orange envelope with a white ticket.
[SPEAKER_13]: So that could be one potential solution that solves both problems.
[Robert Penta]: Last two points, to get it corrected, because this is the question that was asked. Once you give a ticket and somebody appeals the ticket, do they have to pay the ticket first or do they have the appeal and after the appeal it's taking place? No, they do not have to pay the ticket first. They do not have to pay the ticket in advance. And the last thing, Chief, did you realize on the ticket they have the word officer? Why are they using the word officer? Can that word be changed?
[Leo Sacco]: Well, I haven't looked at any of the tickets. I haven't seen the tickets.
[Robert Penta]: It says officer on it.
[Leo Sacco]: But the fact of the matter is they are referred to as parking control officers, parking enforcement officers, civilian parking control officers.
[Robert Penta]: Anyone see the words officer gives a representation of a police officer, and they're not. They're not supposed to give anything that represents the city of Medford Fire, Police, or any type of representation.
[Leo Sacco]: I'm sure that'll be modified. I'm sure that's a simple solution. But going back on the vehicle issue, Those vehicles were not unregistered, and they were not uninsured. Those vehicles were legally on the roadway. They had temporary Tennessee plates, which is recognized in the state of Massachusetts for that temporary period. They immediately went to the registry and registered those vehicles. They have orange lights on order to be installed on the roofs of the vehicles, and they are going to be leaded. I know that the urge here is to throw the program out, I think just going at the vehicle is being a bit much.
[Robert Penta]: No, I think the urge is to have, after 90 days, they should have been prepared for this. That's the urge.
[Leo Sacco]: Well, they didn't own the vehicles for 90 days.
[Robert Penta]: Well, they had them for 30 days.
[Leo Sacco]: They didn't have an office for 90 days.
[Robert Penta]: Chief, they had 90 days to get them. They said it in their contract, 90 days, Fred. 90 days. I amend the motion that the word officer be replaced on the tickets.
[Fred Dello Russo]: It's amended by Councilor Penta that the word officer be amended. Councilor, are you through with your amendments?
[Robert Penta]: And also that the ticket, if somebody gets a ticket, it's color coded. And would you say with the return address envelope?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Colored return address envelope.
[Paul Camuso]: Mr. President, if I may, just in wrapping this up, Chief Sackle, I would be remissed. And I think all of us, while we're not, we're not thoroughly happy the way things are been rolled out, But there's been one person that is a city employee that has been doing a great job with this, and that's the gentleman at the podium. I've met him on several occasions over the past two weeks. He actually got in his vehicle, come out, met this man right here, Mr. President. And I can appreciate when we say that we want him doing chief of police business, but for taking on the additional responsibility, Chief, We couldn't have had a better person in this city doing it. Your personality, your knowledge of the law, and just being responsive to people. For our police chief, and this came up earlier in the meeting, and I wasn't going to let him go home tonight without bringing this up. Last week, this man personally went down Did you pay the meter, though, when you went to every square?
[Leo Sacco]: You better.
[Paul Camuso]: Every square.
[Leo Sacco]: I have the receipts to show, too.
[Paul Camuso]: Every square. The chief went to every single square that have these kiosks, walked around all the businesses, answered questions. And he didn't need to do that. You know what?
[Fred Dello Russo]: And he took the lead on all the hard questions.
[Paul Camuso]: Absolutely. And you know what? I haven't finished the square, Medford Square, yet.
[Leo Sacco]: So there was some businesses.
[Paul Camuso]: There is some businesses. But like I said, I just. You know what, he's been the point person, and we couldn't have a better department head doing it. And thank you, Chief. And this will all quiet down. As far as the rollout, and it's way above your pay grade, it could have went a little bit more seamless. I think there could have been a lot of more information getting out there. But you're doing an outstanding job. And I'm speaking for all the councilors. Even Councilor Penter and I, I bet you're in agreement with this 180%. Right, Councilor? Hooray. He said he don't answer.
[Leo Sacco]: I appreciate it. Thank you very much. But you know, this, this does fall. I know someone said that, you know, this really isn't a chiefly work, but it all falls under the same umbrella. So the police department's responsible as well.
[Robert Penta]: So let's wrap it up. Wait a minute. You want to rush? Relax. This is too important of an issue. All right. Number one, after seven o'clock at night, Dan, you indicated that you're going to have a special team go out after seven o'clock at night. What does it say that in the contract?
[Leo Sacco]: Well, just so that you know, I mean, that was part of the discussion because obviously if we're not giving out stickers for resident parking, we, the police department is going to have a great deal of difficulty identifying those vehicles on those streets that are not resident parking, uh, don't have the permit. So until such time as we have the technology available to us, Republic Parking said that they would be glad to stagger hours. Maybe someone will work the early part of the evening. Maybe they'll work from 10 p.m. to 2 a.m. The goal is so that people don't have to call with the complaints that we try to get the compliance. They can do whatever they want with their personnel. It's outside of us. I don't think there's anything locked in the contract about when they're gonna work or how many. Whatever it takes to accomplish the goal, they're willing to work with us. We're going to be short staffed technology wise. We're lacking. They have it. They're registering everyone for those permanent parking streets. It's a natural fit. I wouldn't argue with the fact that I understand.
[Robert Penta]: I understand the seven to seven, but I don't understand how they can work after seven. I mean, and as far as their, financial windfall that comes out of all of that, number one. And number two, how are you going to read in the dock? How are they going to read number plates in the dock?
[Leo Sacco]: The license plate readers pick them up no matter what time of day it is. Dock, basically infrared.
[Robert Penta]: But when cars are parked close together, Chief, what are they going to get out of the car?
[Leo Sacco]: The license plate reader reads those plates. They can read them from angles. I've seen how those things work, and you'd be amazed. I mean, unless the bumpers are back to back, and you couldn't even see the plate, even if you got out and looked on your own. That may be the only reason why there'd be a difficulty there.
[Robert Penta]: I think it was mentioned at the Committee of the Whole meeting that it cost about $30,000. Is that what it is for those things to be on top of those cars? Is that what it is, Dan?
[Leo Sacco]: Theirs may be more expensive, but what we had, the unit that we presently have was $30,000 when we bought it.
[SPEAKER_13]: Retail cost on a unit is $60,000. $60,000 retail. With our discount. And is that installed? Yes, and that's just the unit. That's not the vehicle.
[Robert Penta]: Well, since we have approximately $7 million in free cash, I'm going to move that the city's police department be afforded an opportunity to investigate what the cost would be to install them in your cruises.
[Leo Sacco]: Just so you know, one of the earlier meetings, that was one of the things that the mayor and Mrs. Burke had brought up to make sure that we- Well, I'm glad you know that because we have to read it in the newspaper to find out what's going on. But no, I mean, it was brought up at a meeting and it was discussed and actually Louise Miller was asked to research it. It'll be coming, but it does take time for those things to happen. So in the interim, Republic's going to help us out and hopefully we satisfy the needs.
[Robert Penta]: In the effort to eliminate redundancy, why don't we withdraw that amendment? No, I'm going to put it on there as an amendment.
[Leo Sacco]: But, you know, I just want to say that, you know, and I appreciate the comments, but the fact of the matter is we're all in this together. I mean, we all love the city that we live in and we work in. This is going to take, this'll take a while. I mean, this is probably going to take a little while to iron out, but I think Based on some of the comments I heard, and I don't think they were just saying it because I was there, they realized it was coming at some point. It's just a shock to the system. It's a tough time of year, January. All the bills are coming in from Christmas. It's just, business is off anyway in January, and this isn't helping things, but it will improve, and most people have been pretty positive about it.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, my chief. Councilor Panter, are you satisfied with your amendments? Yes. Thank you. Ma'am, would you please state your name and address for the record?
[Jeanne Martin]: Yes, Jean Martin, 10 Cumming Street. And I'm going to say two nice things about this program, and then that'll set me off from going off. First of all, one of the good things about this program is that it saves our police from becoming, in other words, for other better words, meter maids, which is a waste of their time, which satisfies one of my requirements parking enforcement. So that's one good thing. I'm glad to see that. And the second thing is it got the commuters from other cities from stopping and parking in the city. So those are my two compliments to this program. Everything else is a complete, if we didn't have a 10-year contract with these folks, we would scrap this whole thing and start fresh. I mean, the amount of changes and everything else. And I have to say, with all due respect to the police chief, It is not his job to set policy, which he is manipulating and working with, not manipulating, that's a bad word, but he is working and tweaking policy that the mayor should be here on. That's what's getting my blood pressure up. The mayor should be here taking his own heat for his own program. He's making the chief of police take the heat, waste the chief's time when he should be doing other things in this city. That's what got my blood up today. You know, I have a whole bunch of things. But the other thing is about Mr. Marks, he was on that committee or commission or whatever it was for the parking enforcement. Total insult to all the time that they spent on that committee. And I know that the police chief is paid to be on it because he's paid as a city employee. But there were citizens that were on that committee that spent time on that parking enforcement program. Had that been recognized by the police chief, I mean by the mayor, we wouldn't be in this position. And I don't have anything against the outside vendor. But because we're in this contract now, we're signed into it. And it just, all of these issues need to be brought up next week when the mayor is in town and sitting here, taking the heat for his own program. Because it's his and it's yours, you know, for whatever. You can argue about how much responsibility is the council's. But it is also, it is primarily the signature is by the mayor. He has the only authority to tweak it, change it, put a stop sign here. He's the ultimate authority for where there's going to be a parking meter or whatever. And the kiosks, don't even get me started on the kiosks, because that has caused more problems than if you had just put meters in, quarter-fed meters. You know, whether you agree with it or not, and put in too well parking, and then have people watch it. Everybody understands a meter, a simple, simple, simple meter. Everybody understands it. And I just have to say that. So, I mean, I think we should have went by the recommendations of the parking commission. I think it should have been reconsidered. But again, the two things I'm going to, so that my blood pressure comes down. One, the police are not wasting their time, although the police chief is now wasting his time on this, when it should be the mayor that's taking the heat for his own program. He is the enforcement of policy. He is not the signature on the policy. He is not the guy that makes the policy. The mayor is the guy that makes the policy. And number two, it got the commuter traffic off of the streets, which was the second good thing about this policy. So with that, I'll shut up. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Jean. On the motion. Do we have any motions for separation? Oh, ma'am. My apologies. Your name and address for the record.
[F9Dj7AZRD7I_SPEAKER_34]: Mary Ann Ashcraft, 77 Fountain Street. I was here last week. I actually got a call from a businessman in Medford Square. What's happening? Are we in the business of putting people out of business? I understand We've got the kiosks. We may have to live with them. I'd like to see them opt out of them. What happens when the bridge starts construction? We have people going out of business now. We're going to have more people. Exactly. And, you know, I've been here my whole life, like I said. I know people. I don't expect to hear from people that own businesses. They call me and say, what's going on? And I said, call the mayor. Don't blame the city council. I myself haven't been in the square. I don't intend to be in the square. I've changed my prescriptions from CBS. I'm going somewhere else. I see people going out of business. I don't think it's going to work. Can the mayor opt out of this? We have three months. We have a year to opt out of it. Also, as I have said to some council members, Norton, this surrounding, the mayor had plans drawn up by an architectural firm in Cambridge that cost a lot of money, because I know the architect that drew up the plans. What happened? He said, we can't afford it. But we can afford this. I don't understand it. I'm not happy with it. Probably what I say doesn't mean it will make any difference. But I do have a friend that's a dentist. They're taking her bridge, her parking lot, To reconstruct the Craddock Bridge, patients complain now, because I've worked with Dr. Zietzer, and I've worked in the office for many years. Dr. Zietzer opened that practice in 1971, I believe. They have no parking now to come to their dental appointments. And certainly, when there's major construction, she's not going to be seeing those patients that come from quite a distance, that have been coming from that distance for 30, 40 years. I can't say any more about it. It's terrible, I think. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Mayor. On the motion, do we have motions to sever, motions to withdraw amendments? Thank you. Motion to sever all of the amendments from the main motion. just the one motion to sever the one for or against the project.
[SPEAKER_13]: He's withdrawing it for a week.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Put it on the agenda. Do you have that? Do you have another copy of that? You have the one that you numbered. Well, that's the... The clerk will assign it a number.
[Clerk]: That number's gone already.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Refile it as a resolution. So that is withdrawn. All those in favor. All those opposed. Uh, so we have before us withdrawn the motion to withdraw, uh, whichever it's withdrawn. So we have the main motion to continue this discussion as amended by Councilors, Camuso, Marks, Penta, and Lungo-Koehn. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion carries. Petitions, presentations and similar matters, 1520, position by Eugene Martin, 10 Cummings Street, Medford, to discuss Haines Square redevelopment. Ms. Martin,
[Jeanne Martin]: Thank you. Jean Martin, 10 Cummings Street. Thank you very much for letting me speak here tonight. Haines Square is a great square, and it has great potential to thrive, and yet left neglected, and without proper advocacy from the city as a whole. If you would just take a good look at the architecture, you would see what I see, the base for a wonderful meeting place for the citizens of Medford to commune, as well as purchase goods and services. To revitalize the square, we need to have joint meetings between the state officials because of Route 60, Route 28, and the MBTA bus barns. Local politicians, especially the mayor and small business community, all need to get together to have a good, wholesome plan for the whole unit. It has to be taken as a whole area and not just piecemeal. The best assets the square has are Dempsey's restaurant, without a doubt, the best combination of community with its breakfast menu. I watch people all have coffee, commune, talk, families, friends. It's a social place as well as a place to receive, you know, it's a food place. So it's absolutely the cornerstone in its proximity to the square, how it's central. It's one of the central eye catches of the square and it's absolutely one of the anchors of the square. But again, the sidewalk outside of it has potential. It has those seatings with the picnic tables or whatever, but they're not used. As it is, the man that owns it says he has to come out. It's a city property, the sidewalk city property. He's not supposed to be responsible to shovel the snow, but he often does. He takes care of that, and so do the other two businesses, the florist and the pizza parlor, because nobody else will. because the city doesn't have the services that it used to provide. But that space, that little triangle where Dempsey's is, is absolutely perfect to have umbrellas with people out there eating and communing from, especially Dempsey's. Or eating a sandwich from a local sub shop down Alfredo's Kitchen or something, get a sub, come down. It's on the same side of the block. You don't have to go out of your own way. Modern hardware is another huge staple, which has offered many people the convenience and personal touch for home improvement. The laundromats are a staple for the area because of the large rental apartments all throughout the neighborhood. What needs to be said is that Haines Square has a lot of two-family houses that are now used as rental properties. Both up and down are used as rental properties. People live outside of the city, own those houses. it's not no longer just owner occupied like it used to be back in the day and so you have a high population of people that use the buses and use you know, different mechanisms. And they also use the dry cleaners and the laundromat. The laundromat there is absolutely essential because a lot of people that live in those rental properties, a lot of owners don't let them use the basement for washer and dryers or sometimes have coin-operated machines in their basement or something, but a lot of renters use the laundromat in Haines Square. They can walk right down there and use it. So those laundromats need to stay there. The downside of the square is its central focus. As you drive up from Medford Square, which has a liquor store, which used to be the movie theater. Now, I realize that a liquor store is a legal business. It's a legitimate business. It brings in a lot of tax revenue, because the taxes on liquor are higher than other goods and services. I understand that. However, as you're coming up that square, where Spring Street comes into Route 60, the thing that catches your eye, which used to be a movie theater, is now a liquor store. I'm not against that personal person that owns it. But if anybody could arrange to have that liquor store move to a place along the side of a bunch of blocker stores and not be the central focus, that would make the whole thing different. And also, if you had an eatery inside that theater, if you had an eatery with Wi-Fi, that would be awesome. The whole feel of that liquor store area would change. If you had nice glass windows that were open and not filled with signs for Bud Light or whatever, then, wait a minute, I'm not done yet. Oh, oh, okay, all right. So, because if you look at it, you see Bud Light and whatever. Instead, if you saw people sitting in chairs, you know, using their devices, and I will agree now, I've come to change my mind, I'll even let you put a bike rack in front of that area so that if people are traveling by bicycle, they can go and hang there and have lunch, okay? But anyway, if you change that, you would change the whole feel of that whole region. And I'm not against the liquor store, if you want to put it to the side in another spot, more power to you. But it's a central focal point, and if you put an eatery in there, man, a lunch place, sandwich, soup, something like that, where people have, you know, a lunch thing, because you've got the breakfast thing right over there at Dempsey's. It would really be awesome. Let's see. The other big problem is the MBTA bus barns and the brick building that sits in front of it. The brick building was built in, like, 1922. I realize that there is an electrical infrastructure for the bus barns, and it is a problem, but guess what? It's the MBTA's problem. It's not my problem. It's not Haines Square's problem. It's not the city's problem. The MBTA buses sit there, and they look horrible. Imagine if that bus barn area was a green space. Hello. I guess I'm transforming. The city's going in my head or something. I'm thinking green. But if that place, if that area was green, I've been around you people too long. So if that area was green with some benches to sit, All right, you buy a sandwich, you go and you sit on a bench with some green space instead of the bus barns, it would be another place that would be open for the community to come and sit. I don't want other buildings put there. God knows we've got enough buildings in this city. We keep putting up developments every which way. You get a postage stamp, they put up a building. So if you could take that and turn it into green space, but that's going to take the effort of the state representatives, the state senators, you people, the mayor, the small business community, the Chamber of Commerce, everybody's going to have to get in on that. But visualize it. Have some imagination. Let's see. With the help of the state delegation, blah, blah, blah, I would like to see the green space, blah, blah, blah. Now, the MBTA is another problem, because we have buses and trucks that often go through there. So if you're going to introduce, God forbid, bike lanes, because I personally think it's an accident waiting to happen. But if you are, you're going to have to decide, are we going to take out parking spaces? in order to put a bus lane? I don't know. But whatever you do, you're going to have to involve the MBTA, because trucks, huge trucks, go down there to deliver, especially for modern hardware. I see trucks all day dropping off stuff for modern hardware. And they're not semi. They're just small. But they are trucks. They're commercial trucks traversing and buses that traverse all the time. So the MBTA is going to have to be involved if we move a bus stop. I don't know. Design it. I don't get paid to do this, but there are people that get paid to design these kind of squares, and if we had some imagination, we could transform that square. Let's see. That's it. Okay. What else? Okay. Let's see. As for general cleanliness, we used to have section men, or we could use women today, in the squares, whose sole job was to pick up the litter in the square. Now, I understand that it costs a lot of money, but whether the DPW hires more personnel to become square people, that sounds funny, but square cleaners, I don't know how to say it, but sweepers, part time, part of their sessions, or maybe Monday, Wednesday, Friday, or whatever, or hire senior citizens, I don't care how it gets done, but we need to have people to clean up the litter because there's a lot of litter blown around, and I don't have to tell you people, the lines for the parking spaces are not, they're not there. It's kind of a weird, the way the square is too, if somebody, you're kind of like when you come in from, Spring Street to Salem, it's kind of, I don't know, it's kind of, people do their own thing. So, you know, it could be one lane, but there's two or three cars stacked, like lined up, you know. So, whatever, the traffic people that organized could straighten that out and maybe make the island in the middle bigger make it so that there's only room for one car to go one way so that you don't see piles up or maybe the island could also become bigger for another use like when we have our festivals in the fall the fall festival they use that as the stage prop area for the festival for where the stage is so if you expand that little bit You could have the thing, you know, use it for some other space. But anyway, OK. So I don't care how you get it done, but we need to have section people to clean up and to paint and to do all of that stuff, to monitor flower pots, water them, whatever, you know, those barrels with the flowers in them, make it nice with the lights, with the hanging pots and all of that. I have a dream. Anyway. So anyway, the signage all looks trashy. There's too many things in the windows in the stores, and if you had the awnings or all of the signage uniform, it doesn't have to be exactly the same. You can have your own personality, but if there's some kind of consistency throughout the signage, that would improve the area. As for parking enforcement, The mayor assigned a committee to review the problem back in 2009. He had ignored the recommendations of that committee and it has led to chaos. We've talked about that, but I'm going to go over it real quick because I wrote it down. The decision has been made by the mayor to go with an outside private contractor and has been signed for seven years with three more added options. Many of the businesses in Haines Square are not in the Chamber of Commerce, and therefore have not had a voice in the matter. Not until now, and I understand the Chief has talked to some of those business owners, that's wonderful, but I know for a fact that a lot of those business owners don't belong to the Chamber of Commerce. No offense, but they don't. There are inconsistencies in the policy where Dabbs Lock is. And he's right. I'm a frequent customer of Artery Lock and will still call them for business, but they do have an advantage over the other businesses in West Medford. If you're going to do parking enforcement meters, which is my preference, over kiosks or whatever, you have to go all the way down Route 60 because it's really a commercial slash retail You've got the gas stations. You've got the Brazilian food place, which I'm a frequent customer of. You've got nappies. You've got artery lock. There's a whole bunch of businesses along there. They've got the bike shop. There's a bike shop on Route 60. They should be metered as well, because that is just as much a commercial-slash-retail place as any other place. And so it's, you know, when Dabbs Lock came up here, I was feeling his pain because Artery Lock doesn't have to pay that, doesn't have to have that. With all due respect, people who come from Malden have told me that they haven't stopped at the Dunkin' Donuts in Haines Square because they don't understand the kiosk system. It might be $5, but I want Malden's $5, you know. At the very least, regular coin-operated meters should be put in place for simplicity's sake, and that would be my recommendation, to get rid of the kiosks and go with meters. People see meters, and they understand them. Haines Square has a high rental population, blah, blah, blah. Now, this is a sensitive topic, but while I see immigrant groups from South American to Asian have small family-owned businesses in Haines Square, there are not a lot of black American-owned businesses that I know of. I would like to see a black-owned barbershop and one other black-owned business go into the square. The population of that area is changing, and it would go a long way to incorporate all the new people. There are a couple of open storefronts currently on the Alfredo's kitchen block. across from the stop and shop. And so that would be a great place to put in a barbershop. And so we could reach out to the Chamber of Commerce. You could reach out to Neil. You could reach out to other, you know, people in the business community. Go to places, the schools where they make barbers, where they train barbers, and get somebody and say, hey, can we help you open up a barbershop? And just open up a barbershop, because the area is changing, and we need to change with those times. I'm almost done. In closing, I believe that all the squares should be treated the same. It is no secret that West Bedford is on the wealthier side of the city. I know that. I just had to say it. And therefore receives more attention. I would say that if we have meters in Haines Square, we have to have meters in West Medford. I don't want to see kiosks in West Medford and meters in Haines Square. It might work for Boston, because in Chinatown, they have meters, and on Newbury Street, they have kiosks, but Medford isn't Boston. So I just wanted to throw that out there. I know it's controversial, but that's what I do. All right, well, thank you very much.
[Richard Caraviello]: Jean, don't go away.
[Jeanne Martin]: Thank you, Jean. Don't go away.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Maybe you could do Medford Square next week. Yeah, exactly. Thank you. Councilor Caraviello.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Madam President. Jean, don't go, come back. Yes, yes. Come back. You know, I agree with you a lot of stuff that's happened on there, but you know, we have signed ordinances that aren't followed in Haines Square that if some of those signs and stuff, windows got cleaned up, would make a huge difference down there. Now, Jim Silver formed a task force in South Medford. That could be your job, form a task force for Haines Square. Similarly, talk to Jim Silver, ask his advice in signing a task force. It's not a bad idea. You'd be the head of that task force.
[Jeanne Martin]: Yeah, I'd be good at that. That would be right up my alley.
[Richard Caraviello]: My suggestion to you.
[Jeanne Martin]: But in the meantime, I want the mayor to look at all of those ideas, too.
[Richard Caraviello]: If you form a task force and you've got enough people, the mayor will listen to you.
[Jeanne Martin]: That's right. That's right. That's how you make noise. All right. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Ms. Martin, you said something that really resonated with me, and it's something that I know our representative has been working on very hard for a number of years, and that is the closure of the Salem Street Car Barn. I think that's very necessary, and it's something that's long overdue. I think the closure of the Salem Street Car Barn would actually bring an effort and an opportunity for us to beautify the area, but more importantly, it'll improve the quality of life for the residents in the neighborhood. I know I've worked when I was in the legislature with Senator Shannon, with Representative Donato on a number of occasions in making an attempt to get the carbon out of there. But I'm pretty sure, if my memory serves me correctly, that the representative was able to secure some funding in order to perform a study and a plan to relocate the carbons to Wellington Circle. I don't know how far along we are in that process, but what I'll do is reach out to him and I'll let you know.
[Jeanne Martin]: Thank you. I appreciate that. Thank you very much. Thank you. Councilor Penta.
[Robert Penta]: Yeah, Jane, the thing that I appreciate the fact is you put a lot of effort and time and making a presentation of what you thought you believed in. You know something? But the city has a responsibility, too. So this is where I'm going to digress from Councilor Caraviello. I don't think you have to go out there and start and do anything. We have a community development office who's yet to even walk these streets here in the city of Medford to find out a knock on the business doors, like the mayor, failing to find out what's going on, what's the problem, what do you think would be a better situation here for the city? What would you like to see to be done? So with that being said, I think the city has a big obligation. It's bad enough they're taxing people to death with food tax, and sales tax, and excise tax, and water and sewer tax, and real estate tax. And now you have this new crazy kiosk tax. And now you want the business people to go ahead and create something that the city should be doing themselves. If they want development to take place, if they wanted to be proactive, they'd be out there, just like Summerville was proactive, just like Winchester's proactive. just like Arlington is proactive, just like Lexington is proactive. We don't have to be those communities, but we can be proactive between and amongst ourselves within our own communities. And a lot of people look at West Mefford, you happen to mention it, so I'll mention West Mefford. It's a close-knit group of people, they work together, they look out for each other, and it's a type of business where one feeds off of another. They're not Newbury Street, it's just a mom and pop type of community within our own city. But all four sections of the city are like that. Mefford Square is different. All four sections of the city are like that. And once the city wakes up and decides to figure out that they need to fix potholes, they need to understand that business people need to survive, and they can't keep taxing them to that, especially when you're sitting on almost $15 million of revenue surplus and a water and sewer account and free cash, and now you're trying to tax them again with this craziness of a kiosk tax. It's wrong. In my opinion, it's wrong. I think the city needs to wake up. And it's obvious that the mayor, listen, if the mayor had any respect for this council and for you, he would have sent somebody, he would have sent something to the president of this council and told them, unfortunately, I'm not going to be here. I'm on vacation. Could you please cancel the meeting for another week? But no, he didn't do that. He knew in advance, they knew in advance he wasn't going to be here. It was a wasted night, unfortunately, for all the people that showed up, but hopefully the chief got the message and got the idea that there were still concerns out there that need to be corrected. And I stand by my resolution. And when I introduce it next week, I do not support this. Because I do not think it's right for the city. It's not the right step to go in. And I think it should have started with the city taking on the responsibility first before we do anything by bringing in an outside company. Thank you.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: President Dello Russo.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Madam President. Gene, that was a wonderful presentation you made today. And while I thought tonight's meeting was fruitful on the discussions regarding parking, I lament the absence of one. But nonetheless, I think the discussions were helpful, productive, and all the discussions thus far have been so. And we've certainly seen this whole parking plan evolve into something really that isn't anybody's, but is now, because there's been so much input and so much change, in a sense, I think it belongs to everyone. That being said, with regards to your your ideas and your vision for Haines Square. I think it's very laudable and very a sign of hope within this community, and I appreciate you bringing that forward. You know, there are some people of a particular political bent that think government should do everything for us. I think experience has shown, it's been pointed out to the people behind these rails that they need to pay more attention to history. I think if history has shown us anything, that where we rely on government to do everything for us, we run into problems. Gene, a public-private partnership for the development of anything is what is the ingredients for a success story. Contrary to what some people think, my experience with the Office of Community Development, when you approach them to work on projects, that they end up being very successful because of the expertise and resources that the leadership of that office brings to any endeavor. And if you, in the cooperation with maybe merchants in the square, property owners, members of the Chamber of Commerce, and the people in the Office of Community Development, were to engage into some project, I think that would be a tremendous recipe for success. And I know you have the ability to lead and do that.
[Jeanne Martin]: Thank you very much. And I think the space for that should happen in Haines Square. I think that the politicians, the mayor and you guys, should all meet at Dempsey's. And I think that the local businesses should also meet at Dempsey's or the new lunch place that we're going to build where the liquor store is. And then you guys can meet, and I'll be there. I'll be happy to be there. And because until you guys come together because of zoning laws or whatever has to be changed, so that they can eat on that little tri-corner or whatever, because it's not being fully utilized. That little tri-corner outside of Dempsey's isn't being fully used. And it would be so awesome to see umbrellas and people hanging out there and relaxing on a June day. Thank you.
[Robert Penta]: Councilor Penta. Yeah, Jean, don't go away, because my opinion is going to be a little different than Councilor Dello Russo. I wish he mentioned me by name, because that's who I know he was referring to. But I think government does have a role. I think government has a responsibility. When they tax the people in this community, or in any community, to do something and to be part of the community, they have a responsibility to go out there and work within the community. And when you don't see them, and when you don't hear from them, and when you see businesses closing down one at a time, one at a time, and one at a time in Medford Square, and you still not see city government going out there trying to find out what the problem is, what the reason is, that's the problem. It's government not doing its job. You can do all the job you want to help out. It's commendable. But you still need government to help you out. And if you don't want government to help you out, then you shouldn't even be standing here tonight, because it won't work. It takes two to tango. But before it takes two to tango, we have to remember one thing. Jim Silver and Smartco and South Metro, it was because of those people being persistent, being persistent. Because if the city was doing its job, he wouldn't have had to been so persistent. And thankfully, the chief was there on a particular night And he walked the neighborhood with them to see what was going on. He is an exemplary person as a municipal employee. If all the department heads acted like him, we'd have no problem. You wouldn't even need a mayor because everybody would be doing their job. The guy goes over and beyond the call of duty. This is not his job, though. His job is to be the chief of police, to make sure our community is safe. He should not have to be the parking commissioner, so to speak, whatever it might be. But unfortunately, the mayor God bless you chief. Why are you doing it? I don't know. I don't think you deserve it. And I just think there's a perfect example of government not being responsible for what they're supposed to be doing. This is the mayor's program. This is the mayor's program, not the chief or the council. This is the mayor's program. And if he wants to go on vacation for which he's entitled to, then we should have been given the respect that he wasn't going to be here tonight by the people in his office who knew he wasn't going to be here because everybody that showed up early tonight expected him to be here. And that's the message that went out. And that was the vote of the city council last week. Seven, seven to nothing. Thank you.
[SPEAKER_05]: Councilor Marks, point of information. Councilor Camuso.
[Paul Camuso]: I'm sorry. Um, I can appreciate that. and I wish we did get notified, but I certainly understand from a homeowner's standpoint that the mayor probably would want to go on vacation and not have you running around the coffee shops yelling that he's out of town and so that someone can probably maybe go to his house and burglarize it because he's on vacation. I mean, it's just, like I said, I just find it quite amusing, Madam President. Councilor Marks. Like I said, I can understand, but... Is that a point of information? Yes. No, when you go to Florida with your friends, you don't tell people.
[SPEAKER_05]: Hey, hey. Hey. Order.
[Paul Camuso]: Nor should you.
[SPEAKER_05]: Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President, Madam President. And I appreciate Jean, and I appreciate your vision. And I think, you know, when it comes to the Office of Community Development, we as a community need to expect more from the Office of Community Development. That's the reason why we have an Office of Community Development. And, you know, they do yeoman's work when it comes to finding grants and rehabbing parks. or allocating community block grant money every year. They do a tremendous job. But all you need to do is look at the five business districts in this community and wonder why we haven't revitalized one of our business districts in the last 25 years. That's all you need to wonder. And, you know, it's clear to me that the Office of Community Development has fallen far short of the mark when it comes to redevelopment. This administration has been in charge for 28 years, And I would submit to anyone in this community, Medford Square is no better off now than it was 28 years ago. And I would submit to you that the square was better off 28 years ago than what we have down there currently now. The council voted several months back on Riverside Ave, the transportation little shuttle that we have across from the CVS on Riverside behind the burial ground. We voted to have it looked at for a possible repurpose. Right now, it's falling apart. The roof is leaking. It's in deplorable condition, and it's being utilized for next to nothing. And the response back we got from the administration was they'll take it under advisement. These are the type of things that, when issues are brought up, that there's no one at City Hall carrying the water. There's no one at City Hall looking into it. And that's the problem that we face. And, you know, until there's a new administration in this city, we're going to see our business districts the way they are, in deplorable condition, in need of updating, in need of new traffic studies, new pedestrian crossings, traffic calming approaches, new facades. The whole issue — and it's — we spoke about Haines Square, I think it was last week, about the fire that took place at the Lucky Dragon Chinese restaurant. That was over two years ago. And it's still boarded up with action signs in the window. That was two years ago. How does a community allow an establishment in a business district to stay boarded up like that? I just don't understand. And is there any involvement from the Community Development Office or the Building Commissioner's Office to do something about it? You're talking about the liquor store as a blighted look and area, what about a boarded up establishment that's been caught on fire two years ago. And this is, I think, what we're seeing across the community, not just Haynes Square, West Medford, the hillside, and our main anchor, which is Medford Square. And the mayor has commissioned three separate reports to revitalize Medford Square, has spent several hundred thousand dollars to come out with a plan to revitalize Medford Square and has done nothing. And that's over a 25 year process. So I guess when we talk about parking enforcement taking five years and the mayor's vision, that's pretty quick because the revitalization of Medford Square is still ongoing after 25 years in the police department after 50 something years chief, which we won't call you up to the podium in the library, 50 something years. So, I guess it's par for the course how we're working and, you know, I agree. I don't think it should be done by a citizen advisory board. It should be done by the people that we're paying their salary, hefty salaries. And, you know, that's what should take place in this community. And the mayor needs to put an emphasis on the Office of Community Development. And some of all their staff is probably seven times larger than our staff. We have one full-time person who's the director. one part-time person, and there may be someone else answering the phones in the office. That's our Office of Community Development. I don't know what you're gonna get out of it, other than what we're already getting, which is just the minimal day-to-day, keep the office going, but no improvements to our infrastructure or any thought of revitalization. But I appreciate your thoughts, Jeanne.
[SPEAKER_05]: Thank you. Councilor Caraviello.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Madam President. You know, Councilor Pence was right. Assistance pays off. You know, again, I know you won't take it, but that's sometimes the ground effort from the citizens that will get people motivated and going in this building. You know, you talked about the people, you know, the little square there. All that restaurant has to do is apply to the Board of Health for a permit, and they could put the tables and umbrellas out there. A year and a half ago, I brought in Harvard University into the city, And they come up with 20 low-cost ideas to enhance the city. And we didn't take them up on not one of them. See, that's the shame. They were over here. They were on display for a month. And as I said, the students spent three months here picking out places to clean with all things that were low-cost, because their project was they had to keep everyone on a budget. And we didn't take not one of the suggestions. And we had one of the number one landscape architects in the world in this building and we took no suggestions from them.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor Dello Russo. Madam President, a motion that this presentation be forwarded to the mayor for a response.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: What type of, that he review, that he review Haines Square redevelopment?
[Clerk]: Yes.
[Michael Marks]: Councilor Marks. Maybe if we can ask the mayor more of a poignant question, of what are his plans to revitalize our five business districts, because you can only be told so many times about a plan that was drafted 20 years ago. Right. You can only be told so many times about that outdated plan until people realize and unmask the masquerade that's going on that nothing is happening in this city.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Motion for approval. by Councilor Dello Russo. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. Offered by Councilor Caraviello. Please discuss the after hour and weekend truck problems on Auburn Street.
[Richard Caraviello]: Chief, if you can, that's what I asked yesterday, if you can talk about those for a second. Chief, over the last couple of months, the traffic on Auburn Street, especially on the weekends and after hours, with the 18 wheels going down there, has kind of increased an awful lot. Do we have any set hours when those trucks should be going down there. I mean, they're going down there Saturday and Sunday nights at 10, 11, 12 o'clock at night to make deliveries on Whole Foods.
[Leo Sacco]: That's somewhat an age-old problem. I have heard that it's increased over the past couple of months. One of the issues there is that that street probably should definitely be a no-heavy trucking street.
[Richard Caraviello]: Well, I know they can't get on. I mean, I don't know how far they can get on the parkway. But again, they're coming down there. Listen, it's bad enough they come down there during the week when there's school going. They come down there on a Saturday night and Sunday night at 11 o'clock.
[Leo Sacco]: It's just a question of where they're going to. My assumption is Whole Foods. They're going to Whole Foods. Because there's no place else they could go. We'll speak with the management at Whole Foods. I know that at one point in time, we did have it rerouted and trucks would have to go into West Medford Square or make a turn on Canal Street. But it was probably more likely that they'd have to go to Harvard Avenue and back onto Boston Avenue. But then they couldn't clear the bridge on the parkway, that bridge by U Hall. That was a problem, but I know that it has been a problem. Auburn Street's just a, I mean, it really should not be a truck.
[Richard Caraviello]: Is it possible to set some hours when they can't go down that way? I mean, it's not fair to those people. I mean, let's say bad enough they have to come down there during the week, but, you know, they shouldn't be coming down there on Saturday and Sunday nights.
[Leo Sacco]: Well, I think the first step would be to talk with the people at Whole Foods and find out why they may be getting deliveries or why trucks would be leaving their establishment at on those nights at those hours. I'm sure that they could arrange for the deliveries to go at a different time. And I've always been told by MDC before the DCR that trucks could travel as long as it's basically a block or two to the location they could travel on that parkway. But they really, as they come out of Auburn Street, they're not supposed to be making that turn onto, if they come out of Auburn Street by Whole Foods, and they get onto the parkway.
[Richard Caraviello]: going down Auburn Street to go. That's where they're coming from. They're not coming across, but I mean, they might be coming that way too, but if you could speak with the manager there and report back to us some type of solution, because I say those people, it's bad enough they come down during the week, but to come down on Saturday and Sunday nights, it's kind of pushing the envelope there. Okay, I'll check with them. Thank you, Chief.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you on the motion of Councilor, uh, caveat for approval and forwarding to the police chief. All those in favor, all those post motion passes, uh, papers in hand to the clerk offered by Councilor Marks. Be resolved that the community mitigation fund under the gaming act be discussed. Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Uh, thank you, Mr. President. It was brought to my attention recently by a method resident that The Gaming Act, which we're all aware of, which was the creating legislation to create casinos in this community. As part of that, there was a community mitigation fund that was established, and this was to offset costs related to gaming for communities and surrounding communities. There is a one-time, and this is why I wanted to bring it up tonight, there's a one-time 2015 reserve that's allocated to surrounding communities, of which we are named right within the one-time policy that was put out as being one of the surrounding communities. And it states, if I could read it, Mr. President, because there's a time frame that's associated with this. It says, in recognition that communities may not be able to demonstrate many significant impacts by February 2, 2015, and in recognition of the commission's emphasis on proper local planning, the commission has established a one-time local reserve for the 2015 Community Mitigation Fund Program. The commission has reserved $100,000 for each designated surrounding community, each community which entered into the nearby community agreement with a license and any community that petitioned to be a surrounding community to a gaming license, which we are one of them, Mr. President. This reserve can be used to cover impacts that may arise in 2015 or thereafter. It may also be used for planning, either to determine how to achieve further benefits from a facility or to avoid or minimize any adverse impacts. We've all spoken, Mr. President, about the need for infrastructure improvements in Wellington Circle. The deadline to apply for this is February 2nd. I want to send a response from this council to the administration to, first of all, to see if the administration has applied for this, where the deadline is approaching. If not, that they apply immediately, and that also this council go on record, you know, I believe the number one concern is the traffic impact from what I've heard from residents and also from living in the Wellington area and what can be done to improve some of the potential congestion in the Wellington area which we all know will be one of the main major thoroughfares to the Wynn Casino when it eventually comes.
[Fred Dello Russo]: If I may from the chair point out that There's been a longstanding flooding problem on Middlesex Avenue at the intersections of 1st and 2nd Street and beyond. I'm wondering if this money could be used to mitigate those drainage inefficiencies as well.
[Michael Marks]: That's a great suggestion. But I think we should go on record at least asking the administration if they've applied before the February 2nd deadline and also What are the thoughts of the use of the $100,000? And I would say transportation, flooding issues in the general area, I think, is a worthy suggestion. Also, recently, our own Councilor Rick Caraviello was named to the Community Mitigation Committee by the mayor, and he will sit on this committee as one person from this community and be fighting for mitigation money to improve infrastructure and other economic engines in our community to help with the potential loss that a casino may bring into the local economy. And, you know, Councilor Caraviello, with his background in the chamber and his background in the community, I think was the perfect fit for this particular position. But I would like to put that in the form of a resolution on the actual 2015 reserve money, $100,000 that is earmarked to surrounding communities in which we were named. Each.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Right. Correct. Each. Thank you. So, uh, on the motion of a council of marks, as he has explained to Mr. Clerk, council caraviello.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. Um, thank you. Council marks for that. Um, I have tried with the mere being away. I don't know if we've applied for that $100,000 rent that's out there. Once he gets back, I tried to get a hold of him, but once he gets back, I'll find out. But as it was explained to me, there's also going to be other pools of money that are going to be available for all the cities in town. Now, for people who don't understand, this is not just a wind casino. This is all the casinos in the whole state that are going to be coming out of this pool. So I'll hope to address the issues that this community faces going forward. And hopefully some funds will be coming this way, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, uh, councilor Caffiello and the community can trust in your, your abilities. Thank you. Uh, on the motion, uh, councilor Penta.
[Robert Penta]: Yeah, it's interesting because this Medford city council was in the forefront of wanting to be a surrounding community contender right from the beginning. And I think there is maybe five to six resolutions that were offered on there. Myself included along with council Longo current as it related to getting ourselves on there. And the interesting part about all of this, I think we sent resolutions to the Mass Gaming Commission, and I believe we also sent one to the Commonwealth of Mass. I think it was the Attorney General's Office that needed to go there. Bottom line to all of that is we had asked the mayor on numerous occasions to be part of the surrounding community application. Not only did he ignore us, but he also went forward and did whatever he did to subsequently reach, I think it was $250,000. and money thus far from the Wynn Casino group of people who made the application to the Mass Gaming Commission. Putting all of that aside, we now have a situation. We have, and I don't know if this is called mitigation money, I don't know what the proper terminology is, but if we have the ability to have $100,000 come to us, whether it be for use for the Wellington area, whether it's the First Street, whether it's for flooding. Once again, I'd like to amend the motion that the mayor consult with the council as it relates for the purposes of using this money. There's no sense in you being on the committee, Rick, that the mayor just appointed you to, if the money is going to wind up going for whatever he wants to do. All you are going to be doing is a conduit to bring the money into the city. And again, it's another example, if the mayor doesn't want to participate with the council in our request, then it's for naught. We're just giving him carte blanche to do whatever he wants whenever he gets this money.
[Richard Caraviello]: Point of information, Councilor Caraviello. The money that will be asked for will be for a specific It won't just be, here's a check and run with it.
[Robert Penta]: We'll make the specific thing for the Wellington neighborhood, whether it's for the rotary intersection or to decrease the water.
[Richard Caraviello]: There's multiple issues.
[Robert Penta]: Well, the multiple issues got to come from the council.
[Richard Caraviello]: Right. But there are multiple issues for mitigation money, not just Wellington.
[Robert Penta]: We're talking about this $100,000. Right. Okay. What do you want it to do? Councilman, you brought it up. What is your suggestion? Mike?
[Fred Dello Russo]: I'm sorry, Councilor. Well, Councilor, you have the chair. I'm asking him a question. So through the chair to Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: My suggestion, as I stated, is to look at infrastructure improvements, i.e. transportation improvements in the Wellington area, because I think that's going to be the biggest impact. And that's what I've heard from residents and business owners and so forth. And there will be some other impact to the local economy and businesses in that area. but I think this should be one of the first priorities.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So on the motion of Councilor Marks as amended by Councilor Penta, that the mayor consult the city council before making any expenditure of grant monies given as mitigation under the casino act.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Caraviello. I have not had the opportunity to attend the meeting yet. So, um, once I, I, I, I've gone to a meeting, I can inform this council on what, what lies ahead.
[Robert Penta]: February 2nd is right around the corner.
[Richard Caraviello]: Well, if the mayor's not here, I can't.
[Robert Penta]: Well, the council resolution go forward as amended.
[Richard Caraviello]: I will report back to the council on what lies ahead and what type of funds are available. Thank you, councillors.
[Fred Dello Russo]: And Councilor Knight wishes to speak on the matter.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. Councilor Marks brings up a good point about the impact that a gaming facility is going to have on our transportation infrastructure here in the city of Medford. And then we're sitting here talking about some grant funds that are available to us and what to do with them. And I think it might make sense for us to maybe look at hiring a full-time transportation planner, someone that can look at the issues that are affecting our city, can determine what's going on, what impact they're having, and what direction we need to go. But someone that's a professional, not someone that we're going to give $100,000 to do a study to give us the study back and then disappear, but someone that's going to be on staff, or someone maybe that we can work with regionally with our neighbors in Malden and Everett, who are also going to be impacted at Wellington Circle by the, well, maybe not so much Everett, because they're going to have PNC or money coming in from wind management, but Malden, to help us out and maybe approach this issue regionally so that we can pool our resources and that we can get more bang for our buck.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Councilor Knight.
[Robert Penta]: Councilor Penta. Point of information. Councilor Marks, I mean, Councilor Knight, brings up an interesting point, but the city some years ago did apply for that. And they put a request in the budget. I think it was for, I think it was almost $80,000, $90,000 at one time for the purposes of having a transportation, I won't use the word consultant, a transportation person upstairs. And I think we got the idea because of what Somerville was doing. And at that point in time, I believe Somerville had 14 people in their office of community development and how they were getting so efficient is they hired an outside professional person to be their transportation consultant. I think that's one of the people that made the takeoff of the piece of property over there. I've got no problem supporting them there, but these are all, I think, budgetary issues, because if you take that money from the $100,000, you've got to keep that position going each and every year. I like the idea of bringing it up again, but I think it's just, you know, I think it's just something that this whole budget has to be looked at as to where we're going. Each and every year we wind up in the last four years with a million dollar surplus. So we know that there is money there to hire additional people. The school committee just got an additional two and a half million dollars this year, and they've hired many more administrators, more than we've able to do on this side of the street. So something's got to make the turn. that gets to where you're talking about, Councilor Knight, what Councilor Marks was talking about, where this city should be moving forward. Everybody's moving forward around us, and all we're doing is just staying still and becoming stagnant, and that's wrong. It shouldn't be that way. We're not a poor city. We are financially endowed right now. We have good money, and we should be investing it in good projects, not just keep increasing, taxing the people, and just keeping the coffers, and just filling them up and filling them up. It just doesn't work that way. And our best example is our sister city. Just look at Somerville. Years ago, people... Years ago, I wouldn't want to move to Somerville. Now, you can't even get into Somerville. You can't even touch the real estate in Somerville.
[Fred Dello Russo]: That's it. Thank you, Councilor Penta. On the motion of Councilor Matz, amended by Councilor Penta and Councilor Knight. All those in favor? Roll call, Mr. President. Roll call has been requested. Mr. Clerk.
[Clerk]: Councilor Camuso. Councilor Caraviello. Yes. Councilor Knight. Yes. Vice President Lionel Kern. Yes. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Panetta.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes.
[Clerk]: President Dello Russo.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes. On the vote of six in the affirmative, one absent, the motion passes. The records of the tabled records of the December 16th, 2014 meeting were passed to Councilor Knight for review. Councilor, how did you find those records? I move for approval, Mr. President. Motion to approve by Councilor Knight. All those in favour? All those opposed? Records accepted. Records of January 13, 2015 passed to Councilor Fanta. Councilor, how did you find those records? Accepted. Motion to accept? Yes. All those in favour? All those opposed? Before we adjourn, Councilor Marks will briefly address the council.
[Michael Marks]: Just one brief thing, Mr. President. I had the opportunity to attend the Martin Luther King third annual event, which was held yesterday at the West Medford Community Center. There had to be close to a hundred people that attended. Part of the program dealt with Medford High students along with their teacher, whose name escapes me right now, students that shared very touching stories of intolerance. And there was roughly 13 students. And it was a real eye-opener, Mr. President, which really played in part of what took part in the whole civil rights process with Martin Luther King and so forth. And it was a great event. I know Councilor Caraviello was there, and John Falco from the school committee. And I look forward to next year's event. And I want to personally thank each and every student that came up there to share such a personal story, some of which you may want to keep secret. But these students were willing to get up there and show that uh, what their experience has been and, uh, how they, uh, improving and also how, uh, the city of method in many circumstances has united around, uh, these particular students, uh, to include them. And, uh, it was very touching. Um, and, um, again, I look forward to attending the event next year.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Again, Mr. President motion to receive comparison filed by Councilor Marks. All those in favor. All those opposed on the motion to adjourn by Council Penta. All those in favor. All those opposed. Meeting adjourned.
|
total time: 19.57 minutes total words: 1584  |
total time: 6.76 minutes total words: 374  |
total time: 10.14 minutes total words: 1142  |
total time: 32.96 minutes total words: 2403  |
|
total time: 22.95 minutes total words: 1374  |
total time: 0.75 minutes total words: 80  |
total time: 16.15 minutes total words: 1588  |
total time: 5.66 minutes total words: 347  |