[Paul Camuso]: The 34th regular meeting of the Medford City Council will be called to order. The clerk will call the roll.
[Clerk]: Vice President Caraviello. Present. Councilor Dello Russo. Present. Councilor Knight. Present. Councilor Long and Kern. Present. Councilor Marks. Present. Councilor Penta. Present. President Camuso.
[Paul Camuso]: Present. Seven members present, please rise to salute our flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Item 14-753, offered by Councilor Penta. Be it resolved that in the interest of public and residential disclosure, the $25,000 earmarked for public street bicycle roadway use be publicly presented in order that the community has an opportunity to review it for any issues that it may concern. Councilor Penta.
[Robert Penta]: Mr. President, members who might be watching, and I understand I see out there there are members of the Bicycle Commission here, and I'm glad that they're here tonight. I received quite a few emails from interested people, I believe members of your commission as well, as it relates to this particular issue. Last week when this was presented to us as part of the million dollar plus wish list of the mayor of Medford, and this issue had been brought up, I believe your chairperson, Mr. Kulik, was here. And there was some remarks made as it related to where we would be going with this $25,000 money that's going to be earmarked for that. Um, I'm also glad I see the chief of police in the audience too, because there's a request to you to attend to one of their meetings as it relates to bicycle safety. And I see you nodding your head. So we're just going to work on the date. The bottom line to all of this is basically the following. Um, I received phone calls subsequent to last Tuesday's meeting as it relates to Where exactly are these bike lanes going to go? In front of what homes in the residential areas? There was a concern in some of your emails that you folks sent back and forth yesterday and today, over the weekend too, I suppose. You talked about Salem Street. Some people wanted, some people didn't want Salem Street. Streets that had a high visibility of traffic and use of traffic, which might either interfere with the public safety or impede public safety as it relates to bicycles. So this is actually wanting to get a clear definition of what exact streets these bicycle lanes are going to be proposed for. And by numerical number, business or residential, where would they be located? And I believe an explanation coming forward as it relates to if in fact a bicycle lane is going to be in front of either a business or a residential home, Does that precede anyone having the ability to park there, as they presently do, or not to park there, or whatever it might be? We all know that bicycles are here to stay. It's the advent of the future. Somerville has done a great job in moving this issue forward, so has the city of Boston. Medford's a little bit behind the times, but finally they're catching up. And we have to recognize the fact that bikes are here, and bike lanes are here, and they are needed. But I just think it's having a program that's identified, specified, location-wise. And the other part of the concern was when a bicycle lane comes to an end and it finds itself either back out into the main thoroughfare or what have you, what's an explanation just are and what is the right-of-way privileges that a biker would have as compared to a motorist driving in the same lane? So with that being said, I don't know who really can answer it other than I believe whoever is going to make this determination, where the locations are going to be, where the business locations are going to be and the other questions. I know the bicycle commission, you folks, you know, you're new at it and it's, I guess you're trying to identify all of these things, but I don't know who's going to make this determination in the city as to how it's going to be implemented. for the Sharos, the $25,000, its locations, and bicycle safety, because that would be the major concern that I would have, that the bicyclists with your roadways or on your roadways, you know, are protected via public safety, but at the same time, if they're going to be at specific locations, just how are they going to be managed and who is going to manage them? So that is the resolution, Mr. President, and I would like to forward that back to the city administration with those questions to be answered.
[Paul Camuso]: On the motion of Councilor Penta, all those in favor?
[Robert Penta]: Roll call vote, Mr. President.
[Paul Camuso]: Roll call has been requested. Before the roll is called, name and address for the record.
[Jeanne Martin]: Jean Martin, 10 Cumming Street. And I just want to say, I read it on the email system, I don't know if it was the Medford Mass Group or something, that they were thinking about putting a bike path on Salem Street. and I think that Salem Street is an unreasonable request. It is a highly dense populated area. You have a lot of shift workers. I don't know if you know what it feels like to work 11 to 7 or 3 to 11 and then get stuck on the night shift and you're driving home at 7 o'clock in the morning. You have people driving on medications. You have people putting makeup on. You have people drinking coffee, I'm guilty of that. You have people eating while they're driving. You have a lot of distracted drivers. Salem Street is a highly, highly trafficked area. It's very populated and I think it would be very dangerous to have a bike path on that road. Winthrop Street is a different thing, or some of the other roads, that's fine. This is a very dangerous area to have a bike path. You have the buses. I don't know if you've ever traveled, but the other thing is that the biker might not get hurt. I can see myself actually trying to dodge a biker and hitting another car, because you see the biker. So you have to be prepared. The biker may not get hurt, but you might bump into another car, trying to swerve to avoid the biker. because the roads are so tight. So I just want to make everybody fully aware how dangerous that would be to have bike paths on the Salem Street, unless you have more control or you change the whole thing, you make it a one way. I don't know what you got to do to make the bikes safe, but I just think it's a too dense of an area to put bikes. Thank you.
[SPEAKER_05]: Thank you. Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. In looking at the packet that we have this morning, I have noticed that the Bicycle Commission and members thereof who are here present this evening have provided us with some information relative to where it is they would like to see these bike paths. And we also have a correspondence from the Mayor's Office, and this correspondence would indicate that the Traffic and Parking Commission will have the actual oversight authority over the bicycle lanes. I think one of the important components of this funding that we released last week, Mr. President, is the fact that it's also going to be used to provide educational information and educational materials to the residents in the city of Medford so that they understand that these cyclists do have rights. And part of those rights involve sharing the road, Mr. President. Again, I think this is a great initiative. I think this is a step in the right direction. I think it's forward thinking on behalf of the administration, on behalf of this council, to vote to release this money, Mr. President. I stand in support of bicycle lanes here in the city of Medford. I'd like to thank the members of the bicycle commission who took time out of their busy schedule during this holiday season to come out here this evening. Thank you very much.
[Paul Camuso]: Thank you. Councilor Penta.
[Robert Penta]: Um, I just noticed that on my desk, Mr. President, um, an amendment to this, um, resolution that's being offered here by the, uh, bicycle advisory commission. And, um, I appreciate the fact that you folks, I'm just getting it right now. I just, seeing it on my desk. So if other people go out earlier than that, I don't know. I'm just seeing it now. But, um, part of the, um, part of the issue that's being presented, um, does indicate certain locations, but it doesn't give street addresses. And I think that's important to know if we could put street addresses on here that identify where on the particular roadways, for example, when you say place that road from Winthrop street to West Bedford square, bike lanes, the sharrows, depending upon measured road width. Um, I, I'm also getting the idea that, um, This $25,000, it's inclusive for what you want to do with the bicycles. This is a proposal, is that what you're saying? And if this has to be approved by the Traffic Commission, as Councilor Knight has alluded to, I don't know. I really don't know if the Traffic Commission has other ideas where the bike lanes want to go. I mean, is it your call? I mean, explain this to us. Maybe you can come up here and explain this because this is all new to me and I just want to make sure. what gets presented before the traffic commission is as accurate as can be for them to vote on.
[Bruce Kulik]: Bruce Kulik, Grove Street. I would like to say thank you to the council for considering this matter. I think it is very important and that I'm here primarily tonight to listen to hear what any objections there might be or what other ideas people might have. I believe, as has been pointed out by Councilor Knight, you have the information about where the proposals were. And from that, that should be, I believe, sufficient for most people to understand whether or not their area is affected. And you had a primary question, actually, that you would ask.
[Robert Penta]: What was the question you asked? The question on number one, I just got this tonight. I found it on my desk. So I did not have this over the weekend or this morning to review it. So this is last minute. being presented here.
[Bruce Kulik]: I can't be responsible for that. I don't know when the mayor dispatched them.
[Robert Penta]: Well, I'm just telling you. Okay. Um, that's number one. Number two, um, you, you, you're making proposals here, like you say, from Winthrop street, uh, from Winchester lane line to approximately Wildwood road bike lanes on each side, um, by taking bike roads, for example, on either side of Winthrop street, that's going to shrink the side of the street. That's going to shrink the width of the street for vehicular traffic. And I'm just wondering, once again, something like that, when the traffic commission sees that, is that going to be something that's going to be acceptable to them? Because to some degree, having bike lanes on one side of the street is not the same as having it on two sides of the street. For example, if you are leaving Ball Square and going to Powder House Square, their bike lane is on the right-hand side of the street, not on the left-hand side of the street. But that's not the issue. The issue is simply this. You've given five indications here, where you would like to put it. Um, I think it would be more appropriate or better for you folks when you submit this, uh, for the request to the traffic commission that you identify the street addresses, uh, beginning and ending. And second of all, um, where these bike lanes and, and they converge back up to the main street. Um, I'd like to know how that's going to take place, how it's going to get done. I just, I guess I can't see it in my mind. You're in a bike lane and all of a sudden the bike lane ends. Where does the bike go back up to the street?
[Bruce Kulik]: I recommend that you might visit Arlington or Somerville, maybe Cambridge, and you can see how it's applied at those places, which are done basically to DOT and AASHTO standards, which are both adopted by the state.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Point of information, Councilor Lungo-Koehn. Thank you, President Camuso. It is just also a suggestion. In Medford, they just put a bike lane right near my home on Highland Ave. Very nicely done. It goes probably two or three blocks and then stops the way it's... I believe that's a DCR road. It's a DCR road, but it is Medford and I mean, I think that's exactly what, close to what we want to do in Medford. And I think these streets probably are some of our widest streets, Playstead Road, Boston Ave, Winthrop Street, College Ave, I think they're some of our widest streets. I think they're good recommendations. by the Bicycle Commission.
[Bruce Kulik]: Good start. I expect full vetting of the Traffic Commission as well.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Absolutely.
[Bruce Kulik]: For that information.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. Kulik, if you don't mind. I think it's important to point out that cyclists do have a right to ride in the street, correct? Yes, that's correct. And maybe you could share with us a little bit about your experience and knowledge of the law relative to You know, cyclist rights on the street and a roadway, similar to what you discussed with me last week.
[Bruce Kulik]: Cyclists are basically just like any other traffic. They have the exact same rights as all motor vehicles, except for being on interstate highways. That means that you're responsible for merging with bicycle traffic just as you would any other slower traffic that might be there. to address Councilor Penta's point. Any two lanes come together, whoever is in front at that point in time has the right of way and the person behind has to yield or overtake safely. Thank you.
[Robert Penta]: Councilor Penta. Bruce, whoop. I was gonna put you back on the seat. As we discussed at the last meeting that you had, bicyclists are also supposed to observe the rules of the road as well. Handed notifications, clothing, lighting,
[Bruce Kulik]: and all of that, so. There's no regulation about clothing at this point, other than your possibility of adding something to the state, which you brought up a couple of weeks ago. However, there is no currently anything that requires clothing. There are reflection standards that need to be met, lighting standards, and of course, you're right, part of the responsibility of being on the road is to follow the same rules of the road that all other traffic does as well.
[Robert Penta]: Now you also, Bruce, at the very last page, I just noticed you say final recommendations will be made after we had a chance to review the actual site conditions. So am I understanding that your commission hasn't reviewed all of this yet by site?
[Bruce Kulik]: That's correct.
[Robert Penta]: So these are nothing...
[Bruce Kulik]: We've reviewed them through Google images and other photographs that we have. Um, there are some places where we'd be interested in finding actual road widths, um, before we would make any recommendation to the traffic commission or to the city about.
[Robert Penta]: So it's possible that some of these locations can change.
[Bruce Kulik]: Certainly.
[Robert Penta]: Well, if the, um, I don't know if the news media is here or not, but I would suggest that before, um, these five locations that you've identified, are put out there. These are subject to change. They could be added to or subtracted. And I think that's what the concern is. You know, where are they going to go, and do they follow the issues that I presented you before? So, Mr. Clark, Mr. Clark, on this particular paper, I'd like to have it referred to Mr. Kulik and his commission, but more importantly, I guess, to the Traffic Commission, that if, in fact, no matter what they recommend, whether it's these five locations or anything more added or subtracted, that they give the actual addresses inclusive of where they begin, where they end. So as anybody in these particular locations are perfectly aware of where the bike lanes go, number one. And number two, does a bike lane supersede someone's availability to park on the street? I don't know. I can't answer that. I don't know.
[Michael Marks]: On the motion of councilor Penta, councilor Marks. Thank you, Mr. President. I just had a side question. Bruce, I hate to get you up there again, especially with no direct route.
[Bruce Kulik]: I will say this is one of the strangest city council meetings I've been to. Nice and festive.
[Michael Marks]: Bruce, as the commission looked at the number of bicycle racks currently in the community, do we have bicycle racks in most of the downtown?
[Bruce Kulik]: No, in fact, that's another area that we are considering a recommendation to the city, which would be at some point the purchase of additional bicycle parking facilities. Many of the recent private developments that have gone in have put in very good modern racks, and we really appreciate that. But within the squares, for example, that does become a question because nothing is discouraging like going to find a place to park your bike and not really having a place when you want to go to a merchant that you want to buy something. So I think it is important that there be sufficient bicycle parking in the squares as well as automobile parking.
[Michael Marks]: So that will be part of a future recommendation?
[Bruce Kulik]: At some point once we've, you know, there's a lot of work to do. And, uh, as it's been pointed out, we're all volunteers and you know, we get, get done what we can get done. But that is one of the ideas we have for future recommendations.
[Michael Marks]: Sure. And just my other question was, uh, I work in Boston and, uh, with their bike racks, uh, I noticed that, uh, some bicycle repair kits that are somehow affixed to the racks. Correct. And they have basic wrenches and other small pumps and just some tools that I guess bicyclists could find helpful to have along their trails. Is that something also that the commission would consider? having maybe a few of these sprinkled throughout the city?
[Bruce Kulik]: That would be if it passes muster with all the people that have financial control. I mean, obviously it's an extra, an extra item, but it certainly would be useful. Right.
[Michael Marks]: Uh, you know, bike racks, uh, I don't think of that costly. So I think that should be something that we, as a city of 56,000 people can, uh, can afford to do. We're building a million dollar peace garden in the square here. I'm sure we can add some bicycle racks. And I would like to see that as a recommendation from the commission. And, uh, you know, if you need support of the council, I think as you hear the council is very supportive of these initiatives. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks for all your efforts. Thank you. Councilor Knight. Thank you, Bruce. Not so fast.
[Bruce Kulik]: I'm going to bring my bike in here and sit on it more quickly.
[Adam Knight]: We've seen other cities, Cambridge, Somerville, Boston, you've seen articles in the newspaper, you've seen reports online about police actually enforcing the rules of the road and writing tickets to cyclists and stuff like that. I think it's safe to say that Medford in terms of its commitment to the cycling community is a little bit behind some of our neighboring communities. And I guess my question to you is, what steps can the council take proactively to be in a position to have a successful rollout of bicycle lanes and also successful enforcement of the rules of the road? And what changes would you like to see take place here in the city that will address some of the concerns that have come up during your commission meetings? Because from what I can tell you of a rather large commission that meets rather frequently, you have quite a active and involved group of people that are participating on this. So I'm sure there are a number of great ideas that have been brought up, a number of great ideas that have been hashed out. And I was wondering maybe if you could provide some direction to this council as to what you'd like to see happen, what might make for a smooth transition, and what might ensure that this idea comes to fruition. And when it does, that we're in the best possible place to succeed.
[Bruce Kulik]: Well, as part of the educational piece that we're putting forward, as you pointed out, honoring the rules of the road, both by bicyclists and by motorists, is a very important facet. And to encourage the police department to watch for and enforce both for bicyclists and for motor vehicles, I think would be an important item. As well as any sort of detailed reporting of any incidents that might occur that involve a bicycle. That's something which across the state, a lot of times it's varied and there's not as much information as you'd like to see. as far as what might have happened that caused the collision, whether it's something that bicyclists did, something motorists did, that's always, I know it's not always easy to figure out what happened after an incident, but that would be useful. Okay, great.
[Robert Penta]: Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
[Paul Camuso]: Councilor Penta.
[Robert Penta]: Bruce, don't go. We talked about Bice Racks. I think it was two or three years ago. It could be even longer. The city got some kind of a grant for bike racks. And one of the bike racks they put up there is in the 1th Street parking lot, which is half owned by the city. And I forget what the second one was. So you may want to check in with, it could have come out of OCD. It could come out of one of those state grants.
[Bruce Kulik]: I think that was Ben Everbrook at the time. And Saving Lives, I think, was the group. And there were several, I think about a half dozen, put throughout the city in some areas.
[Robert Penta]: So maybe you can go back and look into that type of a grant if the city's never reapplied for it or whatever it might be. OK. That's it. Thank you.
[Paul Camuso]: On the motion of Councilor Penta, roll call has been requested. motion is to, uh, send this to the mayor to no, no, I think the original was to send it to the mayor, right? And then the traffic commission and the bicycle commission.
[Robert Penta]: Right. But these are just proposals. These five, whether they're going to add or subtract because as Bruce indicated, uh, these are just recommendations at the present time. So that would be number one as to what they do recommend the, uh, the exact street address by location. And second of all, um, I just don't know if they're in a legitimate spot where somebody can park in front of their business or their home and a parking lane is going to go there. There's a, who has chief you're here. Can you answer that?
[Leo Sacco]: So the best of my understanding, and I believe it's true, if there is a parking lane there, there will not be parking for the motor vehicle on the street. because of the white line, they can't go over the white line. So if it's right there along the curb line for the bike lane, motor vehicles cannot park there. You just couldn't block the bike lane because a person pedaling down and counts as a car, then they have to go out into the free flow of traffic. I'm totally convinced. I have to say that this is a very, as has been stated here earlier, this is a very organized group. They've come to our community meetings. They've already been to a traffic commission meeting and gave us an overview. This was before any of the discussion about the available funding to go forward and having traveled through several surrounding communities. If it works in Somerville, if it works in Arlington, if it's working in Cambridge, it'll work here. There'll be nothing new that we'll encounter that we won't be able to deal with. The biggest issue, as Mr. Kulik had mentioned, is getting the education campaign out there. And as far as the enforcement piece, We'll certainly be applying to the state, the governor's highway safety Bureau, uh, for funding to help us with the enforcement and education. So I don't really anticipate.
[Robert Penta]: The question chief is if, if you are putting a bike lane in front of my house, so my business that I have, I have a right to park there, legitimate right to park there. Are you telling me now, if a bike lane goes there, I cannot park there anymore.
[Leo Sacco]: I guess that's what I'm telling you. Yes. In a business district, if you look in these other communities, they have the parking lane, they have the bicycle lane, and then they have the travel lane. If you have a situation where the road is only so wide and you now have the bicycle lane that extends from the curb line to the width of the next white line for the bicycle lane, parking would not be permitted. But if parking is permitted there today, there's a good chance that the bicycle lane will not be allowed. And you'll just have the markings on the, on the main roadway.
[Robert Penta]: And that's, that's the key to, that's the key to my issue here. I don't know where these five recommendations are right now. And I don't know if any of these find themselves in front of anyone's home. Let's just say, and if that'd be the case, if people have been allowed in the past up until now to park in front of the house without any violation and a bike lane goes in there, I mean, I don't want to get into a contest over this, you know, you know, that the bike lane should supersede the residential owner, because that's going to be the issue that we're going to be hearing from residents. You're putting a bike lane in front of my house, but I can park there and I parked there. I've been able to park there for years.
[Leo Sacco]: I know one of the main streets that's being discussed is Winthrop street from the Winchester line, uh, coming into Medford. And right now, I don't think you see anyone parking in front of those homes. The street is certainly wide enough to accommodate the bicycle lane. It may even possibly be putting a parking lane if necessary. But no one parks there today, so I really don't anticipate a problem. If we're talking Winthrop Street and the hillside, that's a whole different issue. And no one parks there. They're not supposed to. And we get the complaints regularly. And I know that Councilor Lungo-Koehn has forwarded them to me on people that are parking up on the sidewalk that are obstructing the way. that street, I would anticipate the markings would be in the major part of the main part of the roadway that would allow them to travel with automobiles.
[Robert Penta]: You, for example, one of the recommendations here says placed at road from Winthrop street to West Medford square. It doesn't say right or left. It just says placed at road. So right now in place that road folks can park in front of their house. So If a bike lane goes there, are you telling the residents in that area that they can't park in front of the house?
[Leo Sacco]: We would never take away something without giving them an opportunity to be heard. So obviously, if this comes before the traffic commission, the people who are but that way will be notified to come and make their complaint be heard. I don't anticipate anything like that on place that road. I mean, I think along the the cemetery side and the park side, we probably could accommodate a bicycle lane. On the other side where it's strictly residential, the markings may be in the middle of the roadway, but I'm not the expert. I'm waiting on the outcome of this study to tell us what can be done and what should be done.
[Robert Penta]: And this is the concerns that I've received from folks. Some people don't even have these five locations and they just want to know, is the city going to have bike lanes all over the place? And these are some of the issues and that's just, That's, you know, we've got to discuss it before it becomes a finale.
[Leo Sacco]: It will be, it will be totally vetted. And again, I just repeat that they're a very organized group and they've been very good for us to work with. Uh, they certainly do their homework and they come prepared.
[Michael Marks]: Councilor max chief. I'm not, I'm not sure if this is an appropriate question, but we are on the traffic commission. Uh, one of the things we struggle with as a council every year is the striping of crosswalks. And my concern is once these bike lanes are put down within a matter of, depending on what they use, historically the city uses paint. I've been pushing for thermoplastic because it lasts longer, it's highly reflective, and it's a little more costly, but it lasts longer. Who will be responsible for making sure these particular lanes get painted year after year in a timely fashion, unlike the crosswalks?
[Leo Sacco]: Well, I think we fall into the same problem that we have with the crosswalks. I mean, someone has to push the button to make that happen, to make sure that the crosswalks and the bicycle lanes are painted. I'm not an expert, again, with the bicycle lanes. I'm sure that they know what type of marking should be on the pavement that isn't going to be slippery when it's wet, you know, for the bicyclists. I think that's more of a problem than it is for automobiles with crosswalks. You know, the thermoplastic would work well on crosswalks. I'm not sure if they'd work as well on bicycle lanes, but again, that's what we're looking to have an expert tell us.
[Michael Marks]: Maybe someone from the commission. Has there been any consideration regarding the maintenance of these particular Bike lanes. Thank you, Chief.
[Bruce Kulik]: The bike lanes would be put in with whatever paint presumably is used for the rest of the street markings and would have the same maintenance schedule.
[Michael Marks]: And what schedule is that, Bruce?
[Bruce Kulik]: I couldn't tell you what that is.
[Michael Marks]: That's the problem.
[Bruce Kulik]: Well, can you tell me how often the lines are redone? Not often. I couldn't tell you that. I just know that you become part of the street and um, unless they're being removed, they would be repainted on whatever schedule the streets are being refreshed.
[Michael Marks]: So maybe as a commission, the commission members can assist us as a community to make sure that the city stays on top of these public safety issues from bike lanes to crosswalks. It's very important. Um, and they've been neglected over the years. So I would hate to see them put down one year. And next year, Bruce, your lane's on physical.
[Bruce Kulik]: Thermoplastic would certainly be longer wearing, as we've seen on all markings. There are some paints that are less slippery than others. And generally, that's not an issue, except where the lane is painted with green paint that you may have seen. If that's done with thermoplastic, that's not a good idea. Other than that, it's more expensive and longer lasting. Thank you. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Mayne. Thank you very much, Mr. President. Again, I'm certainly supportive of the bike lanes and looking at it and seeing the bigger picture and thinking down the line. I mean, we know these bicycle lanes are coming. We know that this is probably only going to be the beginning of these bicycle lanes. And I was just wondering if maybe the ultimate vision that the commission has is to try to tie these lanes into the paths in Somerville and the path in Arlington. So that we can have a safe route for people to traverse from Medford to the Somerville bike path, from Medford to the Arlington bike path, or down the Arlington bike path to Somerville, back from Somerville and through Medford, and right back to where it started. So again, Mr. President, I'm very supportive of this endeavor. I think that in looking at the work that they've done in such a short period of time, it's amazing, you know what I mean? They're really showing that although government's designed to move slowly, it doesn't necessarily have to. Thank you.
[Paul Camuso]: Name and address for the record, sir.
[SPEAKER_08]: Dave Adams, 21 Blaze Delaware. I'm also on the bike commission. As you might see from some of the initial recommendations we had that we are already designing, trying to pick places that will connect to the infrastructure and the networks that are already in existence. We've had a sort of a preliminary planning session with regional planners where we've try to sort of get the initial idea of what the main places people want to go to in Medford are and how we could connect between them. It's still in the early stages, but it's definitely part of the plan to try to create connectivity throughout from any place you want to be to the rest of the city and to the surrounding communities.
[Adam Knight]: have you sought any guidance from maybe the Massachusetts Area Planning Council or any other state agencies that have some control over the way that transportation funding is released and that infrastructure improvements are released, or is that still a little bit found on the line for you guys? I mean, we went from having nothing to having bicycle lanes. Next thing you know, now we're talking about tying it into the Greenway and into the parks and stuff like that, so I can see a big vision and a big picture. And I was wondering how far along in the process you guys actually are.
[SPEAKER_08]: We did have a session with I honestly don't know which exact organization it was, but it was related to MABC. I'm sure that someone on our infrastructure committee can speak to that more closely. Awesome. Thank you. Thank you.
[Paul Camuso]: Thank you very much. And on the motion of Councilor Penta, we're going to have a roll call vote. And I want to thank you all for your diligent work on this. And this is going to be a great project that's going to tie in with the transportation infrastructure improvements that are going on that we're all excited about, whether it's the Green Line or some of the other plans in Medford. So thank you very much. And the clerk will call the roll. Mr. President, could the clerk read the amendments back before we call the roll? The amendments refer to the Traffic Commission and the Bicycle Committee to get the exact addresses and locations of the proposals before they are instituted, and also to send it to the city administration to make sure that they're doing the same. Is that correct?
[Clerk]: And you want to also have the bike lanes supersede the residential vehicle parking.
[SPEAKER_05]: And you get that Councilor? What's the final, the question as to whether or not they do it? Whether or not it supersedes.
[Clerk]: Okay. Clerk, call the roll. Vice President Caraviello. Yes. Councilor Dello Russo. Councilor Knight. Yes. Councilor Lockern. Yes. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Penta. Yes. President Camuso.
[Paul Camuso]: Yes, by a vote of seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative. The motion passes and have a great Thanksgiving. 14-754 offered by Councilor Marks. Be it resolved the most recent meeting regarding the reuse of the Malden hospital be discussed, whereas this will have a negative impact on the surrounding Medford neighborhood. Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. Um, on November 19th, the city of Malden held a public forum, uh, held by, uh, mayor Christensen and several of the city councilors. in Malden, I believe it was at the Beebe School. At that particular meeting, they discussed the development proposal to convert the Malden Hospital, which has been closed since 1999, into 398 living units. And the developer that was present and made a presentation was Felsmere Housing Group. And they spoke at the meeting, Mr. President, about the site itself. They spoke about the 398 living units of which 80 were assisted living apartments. 275 were market rate apartment units. There were 26 condo units and 17 single family cottages that were being built in the style of Nantucket housing. Also, they spoke about the barrier that's currently in between the Malden Hospital and many of the Method residents, which has been referred to as a wooden buffer that actually has a brook running through it. And that buffer and wooded area would stay as is under this particular proposal. Also, At the meeting, Mr. President, there were a number of Method residents that were not formally notified, but found out through the grapevine that there was a meeting being held in Malden. As we all are aware, many Method residents live closer to this particular site than Malden residents. And the impact of the surrounding area Lund, Grover, Fry, Murray Hill would be just as much if not more than an impact on Malden residents. And the resolution I want to offer tonight is the first resolution is to make sure that any meeting held regarding the Malden Hospital and the potential reuse and development of the Malden Hospital that the city administration notify the direct abutters in the area. That's my first motion, Mr. President. Also at the meeting, there was a conceptual drawing that was showed at the meeting. And the access road is Hospital Road. If you go up the hill, you'll know. If you come on up the hill, Hospital Road is on your right. That leads you into the back of the Malden Hospital. And then if you go a little further up, There is Lund Road, and the plan itself calls for the creation of a new street from this particular project, linking it to Lund Road. And all of us that have been around for some time and the neighbors who have lived there realize that when that area was opened into the Malden Hospital, it was a nightmare for area residents. There was a concern with traffic issues, there was a concern with public safety. At one point, a four-way stop had to be put at that particular area to alleviate some of the concerns of area residents. I had a discussion with Chief Sacco, and he agreed that the opening of that particular area, which leads into Lund, would have a devastating impact on area residents. And my second resolution, Mr. President, my second motion, actually, would be to call for an immediate erection of a barrier on the Method side, because right now there's a barrier that was put up by Hallmark Health some years ago, and it's closed. But under these plans, if this proposal goes through, Their barrier will be removed, and they're going to expect having access in and out from their particular development into our Medford neighborhood. And from the residents I spoke with, many homeowners who contacted me just recently regarding this issue, they have grave concerns with reopening that particular area. Also, Mr. President, I find it a little ironic that I realized this is a Malden project. It's Malden hospital, but part of the surrounding property at Malden hospital is method land and their proposal calls for building 17 single family cottages, as I mentioned. Um, and nine of the 17 cottages are located on method property. So those homes would be built that pay taxes to method. There would be method property for all official reasons and not one resident in the area, and no one from the city administration. Well, not one resident from the area was notified. As far as I know, the city administration was notified of the meeting, but there was no one there representing our city and safeguarding our neighborhoods, Mr. President. So, on behalf of the neighborhood, I know there's maybe a resident or two that took the time to come up tonight that would like to speak. But on behalf of the residents, Mr. President, I think it's only appropriate that we take a vote to immediately have a barrier erected there. And I know years ago, there was a concern about having fire access and so forth. And that could be accommodated, like many of the other barriers that exist in this community right now, where the fire department has access to get through a barrier and so forth. So I would ask that those two motions be put, Mr. President. And if anyone from the particular area would like to speak here tonight.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. When you say a barrier, Councilor Marks, what I envision is like coming down Fulton Street on Ridgeway Road, like a couple of Jersey barriers that are up with a sign that says resident accidents only. What exactly do you mean when you're saying a barrier in terms of, you know, what you'd like to see put up?
[Michael Marks]: A gate, a metal gate. I mean, it could be any type of structure, but a gate that could be easily accessed by the fire department. I know if anyone's interested, uh, on, uh, I think it's eighth or ninth street. There's, there's a gate back there that was put up some years ago that the fight department, I think have a lecture electronic gadget when they're heading to gain access in spring road as well, right? There's several of them in the city actually. So I understand it's been accomplished before. And, um, like I said, uh, this, uh, according to the chief, uh, and he's been around for some time that when this area was open back some years ago, it really posed a public safety concern in the neighborhood. And I don't believe that our neighborhoods should be turned into a cut through, uh, for traffic. Uh, it's a great way of omitting, uh, getting out and try to go on to, uh, the Fellsway from Salem street. You can cut through the neighborhoods and end up onto the Fellsway if you want to go 93 or so forth. And, uh, it really impacts a large, uh, area around our neighborhood. And I don't think it should be used as a cut through. Thank you, Councilor.
[SPEAKER_00]: Thank you, Councilors. I'm Jean Bowen, 17 Lund Road. I was at the meeting at BB junior high last weekend. My biggest concern is going to be the traffic because you're going to have probably two to 4,000 people living up there. Um, it's a huge complex that they want to build and you know, the traffic that's up there now, especially in the morning, from other people coming from the Fellsway that cut through. The traffic is terrible. And there was a four-way stop sign there. I think one of them is actually down. And when Hallmark put that gate up, our fire department can't even go through there anyways. They have to come down Lund Road and go down Grover Road and come up Hospital Road because the nursing home is in Medford. And, you know, A lot of the neighbours have concerns about the traffic and stuff like that because it will be a nightmare. Thank you.
[Paul Camuso]: Thank you. On the motion of Councilor Marks with two amendments, the first amendment and first resolution. First resolution, not amendment, I'm sorry. That the administration notify the direct of butters of any meeting that the City of Malden is going to have regarding this development and or Medford having a meeting regarding this development. And number two, the immediate erection of a barrier on the Medford side to protect the integrity of the neighborhood, as was stated by the councilors and the neighbor. All those in favor, roll call. Yeah. Breakaway gate. The fire department can drive right through if there's a fire. That's what they're made for.
[Robert Penta]: Councilor Penta. If I understood council Marks correctly, the city of Medford was informed about this.
[Michael Marks]: You know if that really is even the case and if the mayor didn't want to go we do have an office community development We do have other department heads that do attend meetings
[Robert Penta]: when the mayor chooses not to attend or he can't attend. But you indicated that there are 17 single family cottages, nine of which are in the city of Medford. How can a proposed development take pieces of property in Medford and use it as part of their development and another city and have our city in return and not be there to even discuss and protect it or even have an awareness of this. And I just think this is a something went wrong in the communication issue here, Mr. President. And you know, I remember the neighbors many, many years back had this issue when the hospital was operating, if I remember correctly, and the cut-through was going through there. And then I think, Chief, you were there, and they had to put a stop to it. And how they put a stop to it was only allowing, by a case of emergency, for a fire truck to go through. That was it. And then for some reason, the hospital closed down in 1999, and everything ended. And now, with this type of a development, which is 399 units, or 399 potential units, nine of the 17 of these units are going to be in the city of Medford and we weren't even aware of it. We as a council weren't even notified of it. Even if we wanted to attend, we didn't have that opportunity. And if the city, in fact, um, Mr. President, if the city in fact was notified and they sent nobody there, a shame on them because that's, that's embarrassing. I think to the residents who live in that neighborhood should be represented by city administration. Um, I, I would like to just bump up one more part of your resolution. I think the offscreen development, needs to report back to the city of Medford, to the council, just exactly what is the city's position on this development? Since in fact, Medford pieces of property are part of it. We're not a party. We're not a partner to this development. It just, these pieces of property are part of the development. If I understand you correctly, correct? And that's what you were told that night at the hearing, at the public meeting. Okay. So maybe we should all get a copy of what was being proposed. cat's out of the bag of the bond right now. So, uh, you know, nobody from the city was there to even get information. So I think it's time that we do get this information before this project begins to go forward. Now, the other part of the problem seems to be, could possibly be political in nature because if in fact, uh, if the Malden mayor and the Councilor from that particular district was there and they're all on board in this, and now all of a sudden, uh, our questions are going to present a block to maybe the proposal. Um, does this become a political, um, uh, Does this become a political issue on who's going to have more power and who's going to have more might? I'm from the city of Malden. If 99% of the property is on, is in my territory, who are you from the city of Medford to tell me what you can and can't do in my piece of property? I think the linchpin here is the nine units of the 17 that are in Medford. And that to me is the issue that I would make a presentation on. Number one, you chief, from what I understand the way the law goes, you could close that road down tomorrow morning if you want. that cut through tomorrow morning. If you want you could go there, just close it down in the interest of public safety.
[Leo Sacco]: It's been a while since I've been up there, uh, Councilor, but I believe the fence is still in place that doesn't allow the cut through. And in my conversations with Councilor Marks, I would rather see that fence stay in place, put the fire gate there that to allow emergency vehicles through if need be. Uh, I do not want to see that road opened as it was before. Um, because it wasn't just the Malden hospital staff that were causing the travel problems with all the cut through. It was an easy commute through that property in the morning to get to route 93 and it was the same in the return trip in the afternoon. And I'm sure you guys get the, all the complaints that we get about the traffic on Fulton spring Fulton street. It's bad enough. Now we don't want to add to that problem. But in fairness, I did speak with chief Morris of the cane of the Malden police. And what he had told me about this project was that this was very, this was at its very initial stages. They had only had a few meetings with the city of Malden itself and the developer wanted to meet with the residents. I believe there was quite a bit of feedback in Malden about this project and that's why they had that meeting at that point in time. And the developer was ready to walk away if, if, uh, if it wasn't going to work for the community, if it wasn't going to work for the neighborhood, Medford just needs to be added to that audience. That's for sure. But I don't, I don't want to see that opened again. It was bad enough. I mean, when you think about Lund road and Grover road, two streets that really probably shouldn't have a stop sign. And now they ended up with a four way stop that tells you the amount of traffic that was there during that time. We don't want to see a repeat of that. And as I said, Murray Hill road, Fulton spring tells have Fulton street, Fern road, We get numerous complaints about the amount of traffic and the speed with which traffic travels on those roads today. So, we don't want to add to that.
[Paul Camuso]: On the three amendments, the Chair recognizes Councilor Lungo-Koehn. And just a brief announcement, we've been notified by Dr. Sheehan that the video feed is not going out on Comcast. We are aware of it and our video technicians in the back are working on it. I can only tell you what we're reporting. Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Caruso. Council Penta mentioned what I wanted to bring up. If we could get a report back from our OCTD department, I too believe they should have been at this meeting. Whether there's nine or a hundred units in Medford, this is a huge development that abuts our community. It abuts a number of neighborhoods in that area. So just wanted to know from Director DiLorenzo, you know, how involved is the city of Medford and what is the mayor and OCD doing to protect our portion of this property and our neighborhoods? I agree with everything else that has been said. Traffic in the area, I live in the area, I drive down Highland, get onto Salem Street to take my kids to school, and you see people taking the right, cutting through the neighborhood as it is, creating a lot of traffic. Salem Street is already backed up, so development of this size in that neighborhood is gonna create a large amount of traffic. Let's keep it off Medford streets. As the chief said, it's already, there's already issues. So I just really believe that the city of Medford should be on top of this. We need to be at these meetings. I'd also ask that the mayor, if he is notified of any future meetings, if he could let the council know of those meetings, whether it's one or two or three of us that can attend, it's at least an extra set of airs that can come back and we can discuss it more on the council and make sure that the city of Medford is doing what we need to do to protect our neighborhoods.
[Paul Camuso]: All right. On the main motion and the three amendments, the administration notifies the direct abutters of any meeting in Medford or Malden, immediate erection of the barrier on the Medford side and that OCD and I'm jointing these two. Resolutions together from Council Lungo-Koehn in Council of Penta because they sound pretty much alike. We got in the OCD office Is that okay? Yep that the OCD office have gives us the city's position on the project and also notify the council of any upcoming meetings That's all night consulate.
[Adam Knight]: I'm constant president commercial I'd like to further amend the paper to have the city councilor invited the developer to a committee of the whole meeting to present his plans to the council and so that we can ask some questions face to face with the individuals who are putting this plan forward.
[Paul Camuso]: Further amended. Great idea. All those in favor. All those opposed. The roll call has been requested by Councilor Marks. The clerk will call the roll.
[Clerk]: Vice President Caraviello. Councilor Tolaruso. Councilor Knight. Yes. Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Marks.
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Penta. Yes. President Camuso.
[Paul Camuso]: Yes. By vote of seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative. The paper passes as amended. Thank you for coming out this evening. Uh, item 14 dash seven, five, five offered by Councilor mocks to be resolved. The lack of a cross of a traffic crossing God on Riverside Ave at the entrance to the McGlynn Andrews school be discussed in the interest of public safety. Councilor mocks.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. As we're all aware, uh, the entrance to the McGlynn Andrews school on Riverside Ave is, a well-traveled area in the morning and the afternoon. And for the past week and a half, two weeks, there has been no crossing guard there. There has been a Medford police officer sporadically there covering the area, but there are a lot of kids that cross Riverside Ave to get to school. And I'm not quite sure why we can't have a dedicated person there. And if they're in the process of hiring someone, Why don't we have reserves that we can call upon if need be? And the chief is here, so maybe we can get an answer right away, Mr. President. Maybe we could have talked about this when we talked about Grover Road.
[Leo Sacco]: I don't want to inundate you, Chief. That's all right. We've had some difficulty filling some of the assignments. The Traffic Supervisors Association, the union that represents the traffic supervisors, on October 30th picked new assignments. Lapham Street and Riverside Ave at Freedom Way was left open. We're short one traffic supervisor. We have 24. We need the 25th. We're in the process. We've had several traffic supervisors out long-term medical leave. One is returning on December 1st. Another may be returning probably by January 1st. That post has been covered every day by a police officer. They may not be there at the start time, but they're there before 7.30 in the morning, or at 7.30. I hear them calling off on the assignment. I'm not there to watch it, but I do hear them calling off on the assignment. I know they're dispatched there, and they're back there in the afternoon. As soon as we can fill that post with a permanent traffic supervisor, we will. But that's the one post that's open right now. And that was due to the reassignment of traffic supervisors when they picked according to their seniority. And I think where the lady who had that post did a very good job at that post. But I think if you speak with her and you speak with those that worked that post before her, that's probably one of the more difficult posts in the city. When those schools were being built and when they were being discussed to be built, I recommended traffic lights, not that there were traffic lights alone. We'd also have a traffic supervisor, but definitely there's a need for pedestrian crossing lights there. I know that that's not going to happen because once the buildings are constructed, it's too late, but that's what should have happened back then. And it was recommended at that time and it didn't make it, didn't make the cut. So we will fill it. The short answer version is it will be filled. hopefully quite soon, hopefully by the end of next week. This week is a short week. We need to train someone to put them in that post.
[Michael Marks]: Are there plans chief to build up the reserve?
[Leo Sacco]: Yes. Yes. And that's underway now? That's underway now. Letters went out recently. Uh, we sent out 12 letters. I've got three responses. Uh, so I'll send out the remainder of the list and see what we get. But if those three pass the background check, they'll be put on as reserves. Thank you, Chief.
[Adam Knight]: Absolutely. Thank you, Mr. President. Chief, now you said that you're working on building up the reserves. How does the reserve system work? Is there a substitute list? Is there a per diem rate? How does it work?
[Leo Sacco]: They get paid by the day that they work. They do get a per diem. In order to be eligible, they number one have to go to the personnel office to fill out an application. And then the main component, the most important component, is their application date. They're then put on a list of applicants, and we start going down the list according to their application date. And then we send a letter to them to see if they're interested, get a waiver form that they have to sign so that we can do a criminal background check on them, do employer checks and neighborhood checks if need be. And then if we need to send them for medical or physical, so we get the okay for all of that. It's a little bit of a process, but we've learned from past experiences certain things can't be overlooked even for the post that may be one hour in the morning and one hour in the afternoon. We have to make sure we cover all the paces.
[Adam Knight]: I think, um, you know, regardless of the amount of time that they're out there, it's a very important job, a very vital job. I certainly have no problem with putting them through a, you know, intense vetting process. Um, a suggestion chief, one of the things that I've seen work at in other communities, um, when I, when I was representing city workers, was a per diem list that they used, and they'd call in retirees who had served in the position before, who had already gone through the vetting process, who had already served in the position before, been trained at it, had passed a CORI check, and brought them in on a per diem basis, almost like an O3 contract employee that the state uses. So just a suggestion, Chief, in looking at maybe a short-term solution would be maybe contacting some of the retirees so you don't need to go through the process of training and the process of vetting as intensely as you would somebody that's new. But people retire for a reason, I know.
[Leo Sacco]: The unfortunate part with that is a lot of the retirees and the traffic supervisors union have left the state. A lot of them have retired and moved to Florida or down south where it's a little bit warmer and they're not dealing with the winters, but it's a good idea. I don't know how many are still in the area. We'll look into it. Awesome. Thank you. I appreciate it.
[Paul Camuso]: On the motion of Councilor Marks to receive in place on file. All those in favor. All those opposed. Thank you chief very much. Thank you. Item 14-757 has been withdrawn from the petitioner. Motion to receive in place on file. All those in favor. All those opposed. Chair recognizes Councilor Dello Russo.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Mr. President, motion to invoke rule number 33 to take papers in the hand of the president.
[Paul Camuso]: All those in favor? All those opposed? The ayes have it. Item under suspension. Offered by President Camus. So be it resolved the city council appointment to M belt that has expired. Be discussed. If I may, from the chair, Councilor Penta has doing it, been doing a great job with this. And from the chair, if I may like to make the motion to reappoint him to that position, if there's a second.
[Richard Caraviello]: I'll second.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Um, Mr. President and a city clerk Finn will be able to attest to this. Um, over the past several weeks he and I have been going back and forth and uh, it was my intention to file a resolution. And this resolution would be that the city clerk provide us with a list of all the positions that fall into the purview of the council for appointment. And the purpose that he would provide us with this list is for us to determine what the actual job description of these positions would be. And also establish a performance evaluation tool to determine whether or not the employees that are actually in these positions are meeting the objectives and the goals that we set forth, Mr. President. So while I do appreciate your resolution this morning and your recommendation, I think that it might be a good idea for us to take a look at the actual role and function of our representative on the MBELT board. Maybe take a look at what exactly it is that we'd expect of them to report back to us. And maybe if there's a meeting schedule, stuff like that. Certain requirements and protocols that we'd like to see take place so that we're sure that we're being informed. Furthermore, I also I'm not aware whether or not it's a requirement that a member of this council has to be the appointee. And that might be something else that we would like to discuss, Mr. President. Maybe someone that this council as a body can agree on to serve on the in-built board, because we're torn in a lot of different directions at this point in time. Appointing one of us to that board may not necessarily meet the goals and objectives that we set forth for the position, just based upon time and attention and the ability to really focus on it, Mr. President. So with that being said, at this point in time, I'm going to be filing a contrary resolution, Mr. President, in the coming weeks to bring this stuff up. So I'd ask that the matter be tabled.
[Paul Camuso]: There's a motion to table, which is undebatable. All those in favor of the table?
[Adam Knight]: Aye. Roll call has been requested. And this is nothing against the job of Councilor Penn for the job that he's done in the role. I just think that, you know, it's very important for us to take a look at what exactly it is expected of these people that are coming under our purview time and time and time again. We reappoint people to positions, but there's really no measuring stick. There's no best practice that's in place here for us to determine whether or not we're getting what we need to get in terms of information.
[Paul Camuso]: Thank you. Councilor motion to table. Although there's a motion to table, there's a motion to table. We're going to take a vote on the motion, a table, and then if it doesn't get table, we're going to have plenty of emotion. We draw the motion. Councilor Penter and then Councilor max.
[Robert Penta]: First of all, um, for the purposes of identifying my colleague, my newest colleague on there, this council does have a representative. It's part of the legislation that was passed back in the late nineties, late nineties. That's number one. We have a definite role by being on that board. The board meets approximately once a month, if not, maybe once every six weeks. And the purpose of the board is to enhance the viability of the Sheppard Brooks estates, um, which serves an educational and a, um, historical purpose here for the city of Medford. Second of all, um, you were given a book, I believe when you first got elected that showed you the whole intent and of what the, background was of the Brooks estates. Um, it had an in depth detail of where it came from, um, how it got itself started and the endeavor that it's going on. And we all know that it's, um, it's, it's, it's a long, hard endeavor, which includes a road in a building upgrade of approximately three and a half million dollars to get itself back on the road. Um, the purpose of the legislative person, be it myself, who has sat on that board is to enhance, um, not only the viability of the Shepard Brooks Estates, by supporting and not supporting, depending on what takes place at our monthly meetings, for which are publicly noticed out in the clerk's office, for which minutes of the meetings are readily available if anyone so chose to go look at them and to see what is being discussed. I feel quite confident that my role and my position on the board has not only satisfied the responsibility of a Councilor sitting on that board, but at the same time, It's part of the legislative obligation, which is part of the law that was passed and duly recorded at the Middlesex Registry Deeds for this particular position. But if Councilor Knight has an issue with that, I- Point of information, Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: It's no reflection on the job that you're doing, Councilor Penter. As a matter of fact, I don't think that you're doing a bad job at all. My question was, let's determine what exactly it is we're looking for out of the individual that's in this place. Now, we have some legislative enabling language that's in there that's going to speak to that, and that's okay. But we also have other positions that fall under the purview of this council, and it's not just necessarily the end belt appointment. And if we're going to do it, we should do it at one time, and we should do it for all. I don't think we should do. the clerk, the messenger, the home-health stadium appointee, the in-belt appointee at separate times, I think it would make more sense for us to sit down and to establish a best practice for this council and a best practice for the way that we're gonna continue to do business in terms of these appointments that fall under Rapperview. Really, that's the intent of the resolution that I am intending to file. It hasn't been filed yet, so at this point in time, the only matter that's before us is Councilor Camuso's resolution that he filed. He has a recommendation on the floor and I've removed my objection or my motion to table. I certainly think that the matter should be tabled. I'm going to vote against the resolution this evening because I feel as though it should be tabled and for the reasons that I set forth. However, please don't take this as an attack. Councilor, I don't think you're doing a bad job, but I think you're doing a great job. Certainly, I think that it falls under the purview and the responsibility of this council for someone to be serving on that body. I just think that I'd like to have a little bit more information going forward. I certainly have taken a look at the master plan that the Shepard Brooks M-Belt group has put together. It's a great plan, you know what I mean? It looks like it's something that they put a lot of time and effort into. It's something that I couldn't support in terms of bonding. But that's a whole different story. My question really is the representation, the best practices that are in place, the job description, and how we actually evaluate performance and measure performance of the people that we're actually recommending to go into these jobs. That's all. No more than that.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Councilor. Councilor Meis. Thank you, Mr. President. And Councilor Knight brings up a lot of good points about best practices, about the vetting process, about evaluating particular people, and I would be in whole heart, uh, support, uh, if we included, and I haven't seen your proposal yet, but, uh, it would not limit it to, uh, the president of the council, the vice president of the council. I mean, uh, you've already voted yourself on the president and the vice president of the council. Um, I'm not sure what vetting process you took into consideration during that process, but, uh, there are a number of positions, the, uh, all, all the different, uh, committees that, uh, people are appointed to, uh, all our council committees. So I think if we're going to look at a process, I would agree with you. And I think we should start from, uh, the appointment of the president, which is probably our most, uh, important, uh, appointment as a council and work our way down. So if your proposal includes that, uh, which I hope it does, because tonight there was a meeting to discuss organizational for next year. And I didn't hear anything about a vetting process. I didn't hear about anything about someone's ability to lead this council. Uh, so I, I, if it includes all that, that's, that's go for it. But I don't think we should just pick and choose, uh, what positions we'd like to take a look at and provide these best practices to. It should be everyone across the board. I mean the,
[Adam Knight]: The positions that I was looking at, and the reason why I haven't brought the resolution forward is because we're still working on determining what other positions, based on past practice and past legislative action, actually falls under our scope, you know? And that's really why I haven't brought the measure forward. I mean, you can ask the clerk. I think, Edwin, that I bring this up maybe June, July, even before that. So this is something that we've been working on and going back and forth on. But again, you know, it's a resolution when I bring it, if I, when I, when in fact I do bring the matter forward, it can be amended. Um, you know, I was looking at the positions of the whole mail commission. I was looking at the position of the M belt. I was looking at the position of the city messenger, the city clerk. Those were the four that were glaring to me in terms of appointments that are under the purview of the council people that are actually appointed to serve. Um, so, you know, Councilor, I'm all for that debate. Um, you know, I will bring this matter forward. Um, I'll bring it forward sooner rather than later. However, I don't want that to hold up the resolution that's before us right now. So, you know, with that being said, I think I've talked ad nauseum on this as to where I'm coming from. I certainly appreciate and can, you know, understand where you're coming from. I mean, if there are going to be criteria in place, there should be criteria in place, and I have no problem with that.
[Paul Camuso]: If I may, just from the chair, very briefly, I did not know that that's what you were thinking. I think it's a very, very good piece, but at this point, I, as one member of the council, have vetted Councilor Penta on this particular matter, and the motion is before us for approval, but I do totally support your motion when it comes forward, sooner than later. I guess my question is, has the term expired? The term has been expired for several years now. And he's been a carryover, so especially with a lot of the stuff going on up there, that was my intent, to have an actual appointment of the council rather than a carryover with everything going on. Point of information, Councilor Dello Russo.
[Fred Dello Russo]: If I cut through the chair to the clerk, could the clerk tell us how long this appointment is for?
[Clerk]: I can only go back, you know, to when I started, you know, and I believe it's the six year appointments. And the first time that I was involved with it before the count was 1998. And that appointment was proposed by, uh, I think the president at the end belt at the time, Jay Griffin. And then again, uh, in 2004 was the last time we had a council that voted on, uh, which was the reappointment again by, uh, uh, Jay Griffin. So if that was a six year appointment, I'm only thinking at six, then you have, you know, in 2010.
[Robert Penta]: It was a council president who made the appointment, which was Bob Mayorka. Jay Griffin proposed.
[Paul Camuso]: So there is a motion for approval. The motion to table was withdrawn. So there's a motion for approval and I would request someone to call a roll call vote where this is an appointment.
[Robert Penta]: I believe before the role is called that this discussion has come up before with the city clerk, uh, straight to the city solicitor. regarding my position and it's duly recorded in your office, Mr. Clerk and the city solicitor's vendors opinion that it's acceptable for me to serve in this position.
[Paul Camuso]: And you still want it. I assume I'm putting it forward. I'm talking to you. You want it, right? Okay. After all this discussion, you might not have wanted it.
[Robert Penta]: Yeah.
[Paul Camuso]: So there is a motion before us for this reappointment.
[Clerk]: I just have one clarification for you. Is this to, say it was expired 2010, is this to go to 2016? It goes back to the date of expiration? Or is this to go another 60 years starting today? No, it's from the date of, it was retroactive. So this is 2016 expiration.
[Paul Camuso]: Please note that, I'd like to propose it that way. The clerk will call the roll and please, yes vote is for Councilor Penta and a no vote is not against Councilor Penter and no vote is just like to do the vetting process with all of them. I assume, I'm not speaking for any council, I'm just, I think it's only fair that I say that to my colleague here, because we heard Councilor Knight loud and clear with direction you're going.
[Clerk]: Okay. Vice President Caraviello. Yes. Councilor Dello Russo. Yes. Councilor Knight.
[Paul Camuso]: I'd like to be recorded in the negative.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Clerk, for the reasons that I stated forthwith, I'd like to see a performance evaluation measure and a job description for positions underneath the city council purview.
[Paul Camuso]: Duly noted. Can the clerk please put that in the minutes to reflect that?
[Clerk]: Yes.
[Paul Camuso]: Yes, by a vote of six in the affirmative, one in the negative because of the reasons that were stated by Councilor Knight. Councilor Penta, you are reaffirmed retroactively to the six year position as of the date of expiration. Congratulations. Would you like to say a few words or are you all set? I'm all set. All right. while we're under suspension. Offered by Vice President Caraviello. Be it resolved that the Medford City Council congratulate Father Toomey of St. Rayfield's Parish, who just celebrated 36 years in the priesthood last Tuesday.
[Richard Caraviello]: Vice President. Thank you, Mr. President. I just want to congratulate Father Toomey. He's a good man, good community guy. On his 36 years, not at all at St. Rayfield's, but just in the priesthood.
[Paul Camuso]: Very, very big part of our community, to say the least. All those in favor. Aye. All those opposed. The ayes have it. Congratulations. Father to me. Item 14 dash seven 58 offered by council of Penta. We get resolved with the recent street sweeping in some parts of the West Medford area. Be discussed. Councilor Penta. Is the chief still here? Chief is gone.
[Robert Penta]: I was hoping he was going to stay. Um, over this past weekend, I received a telephone calls and six emails from folks from Mammoth street, Blakely Road, and other locations, where they received robocalls as it related their streets were going to be swept on the 17th and the 18th, respectively. And streets were never swept, tagged, ticketed, and towed. My comment on that particular issue, Mr. President, is very simple. If you were tagged, ticketed, or towed, and any one of the robocalls that went out or any way your houses were identified that your streets were going to be swept, I think you should come to City Hall, go to the mayor's office, and demand your money back. This is absolutely wrong. It's unfair. You don't turn around and tell the people and the streets as of this day has still not been swept. You don't have people get all excited to move their cars. And if they're going to get a ticket or toad, if they don't do it, and then when they do get ticket and toad and the street never gets itself swept, that even adds to the, to the anxiety. And as we speak right now, it continues to add to the anxiety. So I just think it's wrong. I think the procedure is wrong. If there's a reason why the streets weren't swept, so be it. Those people should be notified. If you got a ticket, you got tagged and you got towed, bring it to city hall and it should be, and it should be reflected. If I remember correctly, at some point in time last year, a situation like this happened and I believe the mayor made an announcement that he would take and bring whoever got him during the specific period for whatever the issue was, bring them to city hall and they would be abated. So that would be my suggestion. I was hoping the chief was going to stay for this because it was on the agenda and I know he was CC'd on some of these requests that, um, I don't have an answer because nobody can tell us why the streets weren't swept. I don't know, but they weren't. But all I know is this, that people did get tagged, ticketed, and towed. And as a result of that, they should be entitled to get their money back. And that's it. I just, I don't understand it.
[Paul Camuso]: Councilor Knight and Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. In similar substance, I recently got a call from some residents who are residing on Placetet Road and they expressed concern over the big sweep and the amount of leaves that have built up in and outside Oak Grove Cemetery, Mr. President. So I'd like to amend the resolution also to ask that the leaves on both sides of the fence at Oak Grove Cemetery abutting Placetet Road be removed prior to the conclusion of the big sweep.
[Paul Camuso]: On the motion as amended, Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. As Councilor Penta mentioned, um, you know, I find it very interesting that we have permanent signs posted for resident permit parking throughout the city. For years, the city did never, no enforcement at all. We have a street sweeping program with no permanent signage and they tow and tag cars. I can't figure this city out, Mr. President. It doesn't operate correctly. You have permanent signage, you don't enforce permit parking. You don't have signage for street sweeping, you tag and tow. And this is not the first time we've heard this problem, as many councils will be. Last year we faced the same thing, when they tagged and towed a number of cars, and the city had to reflect upon it, and said they tagged and told an error. This happens year after year. And as a council, I think we've been on board, at least I know myself a dozen times asking the administration to look into permanent street sweeping signage. And we have yet to get an answer because we still currently don't have a full fledged street sweeping program in this community. It's no reflection upon DPW. It's a reflection upon the administration who refuses to put in place a street-sweeping program that makes sense, that actually sweeps our streets, and does it more frequently than twice a year. It's inadequate, Mr. President. And the fact that we're still using notification methods of an electronic billboard shows you how far behind the times we are in this community. Thank you, Mr. President.
[Paul Camuso]: All right, thank you. On the motion as amended.
[Robert Penta]: Councilor Pentland. Just to re-up this because, you know, this is going to present itself with another issue forthcoming this winter as it relates to snow emergencies and how they're going to take place. You know, not everybody goes to their computer every day to go on the city's webpage to see what's going on. People have other more important things to do like their job, their family, their kids, and making sure they stay alive with their job and making sure payments are being done. So to turn around and say you should have gone to the city's website, bingo. And if you didn't watch the city's website, well, what was the other alternative? Now we're going to do robocalls. So the robocalls go out. And when the robocalls go out, and the people do get them, and they do follow them, and they do subscribe to them, and nothing takes place, and then you penalize the taxpayer, I mean, where does that put us? We were told when we had this discussion last year after, I believe it was the snow emergency, and I think it was at your behest, Councilor Langel-Curran, when we were talking about off of, uh, off of, uh, by Magoon Park, those streets there where the neighbors came down and they wanted to have an opportunity to park on their street until the, until the, uh, I can't think of the name of the street and the residents. And we have the chief of police down here and we have the people from the department of public works down here to allow the people to park on the street rather than in the wintertime, you only can park on one side of the street. Do you remember? And we had that discussion and we were, we were informed that we were going to discuss that in the same way we were going to discuss the issue that we have here in front of us right now. And it's right back in our face all over again. So I don't know what it takes. I don't know how it's run. The police don't go down the street anymore with the bullhorn telling the people, you know, to get your cars off the street. It's being told the department of public works won't do it because all they do is get to go down the street with a lead man and the sweet stripper goes down there. So who's going to hear that particular person? and when in fact that takes place. So we do definitely have a problem here as it relates to not only snow removal, which is going to be forthcoming, but also with these issues of getting these robocalls and the city not doing that for which they're telling residents to do and the residents get ticket tagged and towed. So once again, anyone who was ticket tagged and towed, if you got a robocall and they never came and swept your street and it still isn't swept, I would suggest that you go to city hall, go to the mayor's office and demand that you want your money back and that you do not want that attached to your driver's license or your registration to your car. Because it's just unfair. One of the memos that I got, a lady came home and her car was gone. Her car was gone. And there was no reason why the car should be gone, because the street wasn't there. She had to pick up her son. She had no money, and she had no car. And she had to do something on the alternative to do that, because she did what she was supposed to do. So with that being said, Mr. President, that's my resolution. Anyone that got it, please go to the, uh, and I would suggest still keep sending your emails to the chief of police, the mayor's office. If this is continuing to go on, to go on in other parts of the city, then that's what you need to do because there's no form there. You talk about having a system to vet out councils and positions. Well, maybe we should have a system to vet out our administrators as to what they're supposed to do when they say they're going to do something.
[Paul Camuso]: Oh, the election Councilor.
[Robert Penta]: Yeah, I know that. I know that election every two years. So with that being said, uh, Mr. President, I move the issue on the motion of council.
[Paul Camuso]: Penter as amended.
[Robert Penta]: Roll call vote.
[Paul Camuso]: Roll call has been requested. Clerk will call the roll.
[Clerk]: Vice-president Caraviello. Councilor Dello Russo.
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Knight. Yes. Councilor McCurran. Yes. Councilor Markswell.
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Council Penta? Yes. President Camuso?
[Paul Camuso]: Yes. By a vote of seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative. A motion passes and revert back to the regular order of business. The records.
[Robert Penta]: Mr. President. Okay.
[Michael Marks]: Councilor Marks. Just if I could, Mr. President, we received two responses. If I could just read them from the administration. Um, it was, uh, the first one is a paper 14 dash four nine nine. And there was a response, uh, out to, um, waste management regarding, uh, them picking up trash on major thoroughfares during peak traffic hours in the community. And we did get a response from James Nocella. Uh, he is the area manager of waste management. And if I could just read it, cause this is an important issue, Mr. President says, we have reviewed the council's request for the mayor to alert waste management on picking up trash on main thoroughfares at peak travel times. The issue was previously brought to our attention, by the administration as a core to our mission to zero safety program. We continuously review our routing practices and make every effort to avoid high risk situations. We will continue to avoid peak travel collection wherever and whenever practical. Thank you for your concern. And also, Mr. President, paper 14-743. It was a council resolution asking for the lighting on Boston Ave. from True Value Hardware down, be looked at by the Superintendent Wise. And Mr. Hurley came back saying he did go down and inspect and found out there were several lights that were out and he contacted National Grid. So on behalf of the council, I'd like to thank Superintendent Wise, Joe Hurley for his quick action, Mr. President.
[Paul Camuso]: Thank you. Thank you for those two updates. On the motion, Councilor Penta.
[Robert Penta]: We also got tonight in our packet, I got both of those things you just talked about, I didn't get. I got them both. I didn't get them. Did you get them? We also received a notice of a public hearing scheduled for December 10th regarding the Peace Garden. And this is really confusing right now, because now what it's saying, the State Department of Transportation is stating the following, that a secure right of way is necessary for this project. Acquisitions in fee and permanent or temporary easements may be required. The city is responsible for acquiring all needed rights in private or public lands. MassDOT's policy concerning land acquisitions will be discussed at this hearing. This is something that's absolutely brand new. I believe, Mr. President, the city of Medford, in this particular issue, is the owner of the property. And being the owner of the property, it's a city owned piece of property. And I don't understand this right of way and this easement, permanent or temporary. We've never been advised of anything like this. And I think we need to have a report back as to why MassDOT is coming in as it relates to our public lands, whether it's the housing authority of the city of Medford, it's still the public lands of the city of Medford and they're not private. And with that being said, MassDOT, I just don't understand how they can, why are we getting this at this stage of the game? I don't know. We're talking about, uh, and we're still waiting for a budget director Burke to give us the financial background of how much has been raised so far for this peace garden. And now we have to deal with a public hearing regarding a right of way or an easement permanent or temporary that comes under the subject policy of mass dot. And they haven't a public hearing on this. So, I mean, Can we get a response back from the office of community development on this?
[Paul Camuso]: Mr. President on the motion of council, a penta to get a report back from office community development.
[Robert Penta]: And as to why, why we're having, I mean, what are we, what are we acquiring that we don't already own? That's what I want to know.
[Paul Camuso]: Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: I think that's the purpose of them. Maybe we should just go to the meeting and figure out, ask the question right there to the people that are the ones presenting.
[Robert Penta]: The meeting is December 10th. We've been told all along, none of this has ever come up under any of the discussion. Whether it's money that's been taken out of the linkage account, whether it's money that's been taken out of the community walk-around funds, whether it's money taken out of the city's coffers. There's been no, this has never come up before. Now all of a sudden, the Mass Department of Transportation, is sticking its two cents in, either the city didn't do something, or there's something that we're not aware of. And I think we should become aware of it. I don't want to go to a meeting on December 10th and go and ask questions. I want to know ahead of time. I've taken votes in this council for the purpose of putting money toward that Peace Garden. We've taken votes off this council from the linkage accounts. I'm not waiting until December 10th. This is too important an issue. It's well in excess of a million dollars. And being in excess of that kind of money, and it's being on our city property, why does the Mass. Department of Transportation have to have this public hearing. And I think it's a valid question.
[Adam Knight]: I think the valid question is whether or not it's on city property, right? Because if it was.
[Robert Penta]: Well, if it wasn't city property, you wouldn't be getting this notice. So there must be something that either we weren't apprised of or the city wasn't aware of. And I think we should become aware of it.
[Paul Camuso]: Or the city might be petitioning MassDOT for an easement on their property, because this is a public hearing for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
[Robert Penta]: It says in the second paragraph, Mr. President, it's in a question form. The city is responsible for acquiring all needed rights and private lands. Mass DOT's policy concerning land acquisitions will be discussed at this. What's the land acquisition? We were told from day one that's our property. We own it. Now, if we're buying property, that's another issue. I'd like to know what we're buying.
[Michael Marks]: Councilor Knight, are you all set? I am. Councilor Marks. You know, I don't want to speak out of turn, but I think one of the issues originally was the fact that there was going to be a walkway and some discussion needed to be had between housing and the city of method regarding the walkway. Cause it wasn't our area to, to connect. Um, and I, and I, that was one of the issues, but I'm not sure if that's what this is regarding. And I agree with Councilor Penta that, you know, you know, we've taken several votes on this already to move money and so forth. And, um, it's only appropriate that we get an answer on this immediately.
[Paul Camuso]: Also, for anyone out there, and including Councilor Penta, the email to ask any project inquiries are to dot.feedback.highwayatstate.ma.us. On the motion of Councilor Penta, all those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? The ayes have it. Roll call to send this to OCD. Roll call has been requested. Clerk, call the roll.
[Clerk]: Vice President Caraviello? Yes. Councilor Dello Russo? Yes. Councilor Knight? Councilor Kern.
[SPEAKER_05]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Marks.
[SPEAKER_05]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Penta. Yes. President Camuso.
[Paul Camuso]: No. Five in the affirmative, two in the negative. The motion passes. The records were passed to Councilor Marks. How do you find the records? Councilor Marks reviewed the records and find them to be in order on the motion for adjournment. And before we adjourn, um, I'm going to chair recognizes Councilor Lungo-Koehn. Oh, I just want to wish everybody happy Thanksgiving. Councilor Dello Russo. Happy Thanksgiving. Thank you. I think all the members would like to wish everyone a happy Thanksgiving. And last but not least, just an announcement for the community. This evening at 6.30, the Medford City Council met in a caucus to discuss the leadership roles for next calendar year, 2015. And the Council of Dello Russo was nominated. uh, voted in as the President-Elect of the Medford City Council for next year, and this was not an official vote, which will take place in January, and Councilor Lungo-Koehn was, uh, nominated and voted as the Vice-President of the Medford City Council for calendar year 2015, so congratulations to my colleagues. Thank you. Uh, on the motion of Vice-President Caraviello for adjournment. All those in favor? All those opposed? The ayes have it. Happy Thanksgiving.
|
total time: 9.87 minutes total words: 998  |
total time: 24.77 minutes total words: 2107  |
total time: 10.7 minutes total words: 1010  |
total time: 2.18 minutes total words: 213  |
|
total time: 17.14 minutes total words: 1105  |
total time: 0.23 minutes total words: 19  |
total time: 0.25 minutes total words: 23  |
|