[Fred Dello Russo]: The third regular meeting of the Medford City Council will come to order. Mr. Clerk, if you would please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Caraviello? Present. Councilor Falco? Present. Councilor Knight? Vice President Leonard Kern? Present. Councilor Marks?
[Mark Rumley]: Present.
[Clerk]: Councilor Scarpelli?
[Mark Rumley]: Present.
[Clerk]: President Dello Russo? Present.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Seven present, none absent. Please rise to salute the flag.
[Richard Caraviello]: 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.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Y'all notice that the eagle has been returned to the top of the flagpole. 16-033, offered by Councilor Caraviello. Be it resolved that the Medford City Council reinforces the ordinance requiring door-to-door solicitors uh, to sign in with the clerk's office and we're identification. There has been several break-ins in different neighborhoods and abundance of door to door salesmen selling everything from magazines, windows, roofing, and solar panels. Councilor Cavill.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, I would just like to ask the city reinforce the audiences that we have in place already, uh, regarding these door to door salesmen that are coming around right now. And I think I've been hearing stories from many different neighborhoods, and there's people roaming the neighborhoods, and there's been a lot of neighborhood break-ins. And even when they come to my own house, I ask them for identification, and they look at me like there's something wrong with me. I would ask that the police, and if they get called, to ask these people to leave the neighborhoods, and let's see. Any companies coming into the city to sell things, that they please register with the clerk's office and get the proper identification and follow whatever rules that we have in place already. Very good.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So on the motion of approval by Councilor and Councilor Caraviello. Chair recognizes Councilor Martins.
[Michael Marks]: Just if I could, Mr. President, if someone happens to come to your home and they're doing door-to-door solicitation, my recommendation would be if they don't have a badge or a proper ID, that the person find out where this person is from that's knocking on the door, contact the city clerk's office, and let the city clerk's office know where this person was from, and then the city clerk's office can reach out and let them know that we have a city audience that requires door-to-door solicitors to have proper identification, Mr. President. So, that would be my recommendation.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Very good. So, the motion is approved by Councilor Caraviello and seconded by Councilor Marks. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion carries. On the motion for suspension of the rules by Councilor Knight. All those in favor? All those opposed? Councilor, you wish to suspend the rules for what purpose? For the motion to take papers. 16, 020, 021, 022, and 023. Off the table for discussion. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Several weeks, just a couple weeks ago, the administration put a paper forward for an ordinance change relative to a reorganization of the executive office. This council had some questions that needed to be answered. We had in our packets this week response to the questions that we had asked. I'd ask the current budget director to maybe come up and go over the response that the administration sent forward to us, and maybe we can get these papers off of the list of unfinished business this evening, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. Good evening. Please state your name and address for the record.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Louise Miller, currently Chief Procurement Officer. Did you need my address?
[Fred Dello Russo]: I'm sorry?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Do you need my address? No.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Okay. 100 George P. Hassett Drive. Thank you. Madam Vice President.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Dello Russo. Mayor Burke sent us answers to our questions on Friday. Almost everything is answered, except in the chart, it just doesn't have any names. I don't think you were here, Louise, last week. you know, A through F, and then along with the current versus the proposed personnel, we asked for, you know, who is who. I don't know. Did she, I don't know if anybody else got one with names. I just want to, it's, I'm sure it's easy to do. There's only about six or seven positions. Is that something maybe you could outline for us? Sure.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Maybe if you could give us the names of the people in these positions.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Yeah. And I'm not sure if I know everyone's last name. Okay. Good. All right. Secretary to the mayor is Linda Coletti. Chief of staff is Teresa Walsh. Assistant to the chief of staff is Janine Camuso. Executive assistant constituent services Is Lauren Felch? That's correct. Executive Assistant Cultural and Business Liaison is Amy Scroi? Amy Scroi? It's pronounced Scroi. It's pronounced Scroi.
[Fred Dello Russo]: S-G-R-O-I. That's the Executive Assistant of Cultural and Business Liaison. That is correct. This position right here in the chart.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: It is the step one position. Annie Scroi, Annie Scroi, S-G-R-O-I. Annie or Amy? Annie. Annie.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: And then you're the? I'm not on the chart. You're on the second part of the chart. Proposed Chief Procurement Officer and Budget Director? Yes. Okay. You weren't here last week when we met in Committee of the Whole either, I mean, because that's probably when I would have asked the question. So if you could answer us as best you can, I'm sure I'm going to know the answer you're going to give, but you really feel that you could handle both positions?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Budget and procurement, yes.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Okay. And so you're able to be responsive to, you know, you're able to handle all the emails, phone calls, and those two jobs together? Yes. I know you probably can handle it. I just feel like we've always had in the past, up until this past year, somebody just full-time in procurement. And then I feel like maybe budget isn't a full-time job year-round, but I'm sure you're doing things year-round. And I know, you know, May, June is probably very overwhelming. So I just want to make sure you truly feel that you can handle both.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: So the answer is yes. And it's actually a nice synergy between budget and procurement since procurement isn't responsible for all the contracts and for all the purchase order purchase order purchases for the city as well as the school department. It really lends itself very nicely to the budget function because half the budget is being procured by the procurement officer.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: And what do you have for help? Do you have a secretary?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: I have one staff person. He's a clerk, a full-time clerk.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Is that almost like secretarial or a little less?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Yeah, it's equivalent.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: And then with regards to the chief of staff, I was just doing some research with regards to just the salary, because that's going to be $106,420. Where do we come up with that? Because Malden, I feel like, is comparable to the city of Medford. And Malden's chief of staff for 2015 is in the budget for $82,964. So that's more than $20,000 more than, say, Malden's chief of staff. I know Boston and Somerville have They're larger communities, especially Boston. They have the largest salary in and around the $100,000 range. But when you compare Chief of Staff in Malden to Chief of Staff in Medford, I just question that with regards to the $104,000 difference between Malden and Medford.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: I do not know what the responsibilities are for the Chief of Staff in Malden. In Medford, it would be the personnel function as well as policy. for the mayor?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: That would be my only concern with the whole thing. I think the mayor has the absolute, you know, right to put in the people she believes are going to help administer the city. I feel, you know, I don't necessarily know all her picks, but I wish them well and I hope they lead to great things. concern is that $106,000 for chief of staff. I feel like that's high. You have Ms. Miller doing two jobs for almost the same amount. They range, from what I looked up on the budgets, from $45,000 to I think Somerville's $98,000 or Malden's $82,000, Taunton's $42,000, Fall River's $78,000. So that seems a little high. That would be my only concern with the number of papers that are before us, the four different papers. Just wanted to voice that concern.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Madam Vice President.
[George Scarpelli]: The Chair recognizes Councilor Scarpelli. If I can, thank you very much. I appreciate the Mayor getting back to us with all this information. As you can see, I'm taking this very serious. My wife wants to know if I'm going for my doctorate degree. I've compiled a bunch of different data from different communities, Malden, Revere, Somerville, Cambridge, Chelsea, and talked to a few chief of staffs myself today. What Revere is doing is very similar to ours, which is the chief of staff slash personnel, and he's in the roughly $108,000. If you look at Somerville and their chief of staff, is one position, and then if you look at their purchasing director, I mean their personnel director, you're talking about a position where he's bringing in close to personnel's $109,000. So where it's $2,000, two positions, double the salary. I don't see it being a problem in my eyes as the mayor's starting her own program and her own child. What I'm more concerned of and looking at the budget constraints this year where there's none. What Councilor Falco mentioned last week, maybe giving us a heads up and understanding in the future how that's going to look. I think that's important that we see this year what we have in place. And I know you're saying you could do two jobs, but when you're talking about a business of Medford and what's entailed here, I just think it's just, I look at Mr. Rumley's position, for instance. Neighborhood community has city solicitor, paralegal, ISD paralegal, legal secretary, and four assistant solicitors. So I just don't, and these are communities that are very similar to ours. So I commend her with going this way and looking to save money and going forward. If we really talk about the changes that everybody wanted going through this election year, I think it needs to be a team approach and going after it where people aren't going to be spread so thin and people are focused on one major job. And I think that's important. And granted, I'm not going to be popular when you talk about funding, but when you talk about what neighbor communities do and how they thrive. Our chief of staff and a neighbor community could be focused more on building partnerships with outside businesses to create more revenue in our community with the tax base and bringing more jobs to Medford, where our chief of staff is focused on personnel matters on a day to day basis, which some issues as small as, coming into the office thinking we'll take 10 minutes, we'll take six hours and there's the whole day. So I, you know, I appreciate the answers. The answers are right on. That's what everything we've asked for. I appreciate that. But I think if we can like to make a motion that going forward that, um, we hope that the, um, look for the mayor, the mayor's office look more into more in depth in the, the positions and running a community, running a city like Medford. and what's really needed. Speaking for myself and working with the school department for the last six years, we saw the issues with having the principal doing the assistant principal's job to save money, and we needed it at the time. But we saw where it hurt us. And this is where, in the last few years, the budget was focusing, making sure that we had identified positions, focused on that position. it's making a huge difference in the day to day activities in the schools. And I can only imagine what happens in the city side. So again, I, I appreciate all of her, all the mayor's answers and, um, and, um, that's it. Thank you. Sorry. Thank you. Councilor.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Do we have a motion? President motion to move for approval. Paper one six dash zero two zero on the motion of Councilor Knight for approval. uh, paper one six dash zero two zero as amended by councilor Scarpelli. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Caraviello. Yes. Councilor Falco. Yes. Councilor Knight. Yes. Vice-president Kern. Yes. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli. Yes. President Dello Russo.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes. Vote of seven in the affirmative, none in the negative. Mr. President, it's first reading. Most of the night motion to waive the additional readings of paper one, six dash zero to zero. Mr. President on the motion to waive the additional readings on the set paper. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll council of marks before that's called Mr. President.
[Michael Marks]: And, um, I would like to speak on the fact that, The waving of readings has not really been a common practice of this council over the years, and it's been used in the past for negotiations, for city employees, and with the hope of expediting whatever contractual agreements were made between the union and the city. And I would caution, especially when we have a few new members of the council that, and we've all spoke about transparency, is that anytime you waive the remaining readings, you're canceling transparency, you're canceling public debate, you're canceling the opportunity for people to appear before the council that may have a concern. So the first reading, as I'm not sure if my colleagues may or may not be aware, the first reading is when it first appears on the council agenda. That's the first reading. So that's the first time it's up for debate and discussion. The second reading is when it's passed on to go for publication in the paper. And that is notification to the general public that may have not saw it on the council agenda the first time or wasn't aware. So it goes out in the paper and it's duly advertised. People read it and say, you know what? I'm interested in this issue. I'm going to go up to the council meeting when this appears for the third reading, And I'd like to speak on it. However, if we waive the reading, we're doing away with all the processes that are set up for a good government, in my opinion. And I would ask, Mr. President, respectfully ask, because I don't think my colleague's intent is to do away with the public process or do away with public meetings. But, you know, the three-reading process is state statute, and it's there for a reason. And I know in the past it's been used, and not often, but it's been used to expedite the process. But in my opinion, any time there's a change in city ordinance, we don't want to expedite the process. We want to make sure everyone has the equal opportunity and ample opportunity to be heard before this council. So I would respectfully ask my council colleague to withdraw the request to waive the readings, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I certainly can understand where Councilor Marksley is coming from. I don't think we're talking about reorganizing the wheel here. We're just moving a couple positions around in the mayor's office. But if he feels as though it's going to be an impediment to open and transparent government, Mr. President, I'm not going to stand in the way of that and I'll be happy to withdraw my motion.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So the first reading stands. And that item was on the change in terms for the city solicitor. 16-021 is before us now. And this is the piece dealing with the creation of the chief of staff and policy position. Mr. President, it appears that the Budget Director and Procurement Officer has given us a brief update as to what's going on with the position. Questions have been answered. I'd move for approval. On the motion for approval, Chair recognizes Vice President Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Dello Russo. I would just go on record and request that the Mayor relook at the salary of this position and just do some research with regards to surrounding communities. Like I said, Malden is $24,000 less than what the Chief of Staff will be making in Medford. I just want to request that she look into that before the second reading.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Let the record show that the Vice President kindly requests Her Honor the Mayor to reassess the salary level of this position. At this time, we have a citizen at the podium. Please state your name and address for the record.
[Robert Penta]: Welcome. My name is Robert Penter. I live at Zero Summit Road, Medford, Mass. Last week we had a conversation regarding these, this position and the issue as it relates to, um, since we're talking about the chief of staff position right now, um, the concern that a chief of staff would have, especially as it relates to the working operation, not only of the mayor's office, but the interaction of all department heads and employees here in the city of Medford and outside concerns. What bothers me on this particular matter right now is that this position, which became effective on January 4th of this year, Um, since it's a title to position and it's a compensated position in a, in a CAF, um, category, um, you're approving it now tonight, but it's been operative, uh, since January 4th of this year. Uh, last week, um, I brought up the issue and I don't see any, unless you guys and ladies have a paper on your agenda here. Uh, the relative to the fact that our city auditor has been asked to also, um, entertain doing the duties of the treasurer collector. And from last week to this week, I've consulted with the division of local services and the department of revenue. And it's absolutely, you cannot do it. The city auditor cannot do it. It's a, it's a prerogative and it's a concern of chief.
[Fred Dello Russo]: I know it's the chief of staff.
[Robert Penta]: It's an issue that a chief of staff would look into. With due respect to the chair. With due respect, Mr. President, the chief of staff is an advisor, is an advisor to the mayor of this community. And the advice to the mayor of the community over and beyond legal advice would be whether this is an allowable or whether it's allowable or not. There's no case law and there is no state statute that allows whether it be temporary or what have you. And as a result of that, I think it's something that needs to be addressed because the chief of staff who's been operating since January 4th of this year, it's obvious that that information either has been given to the incumbent mayor. or the president administration just refuses to, um, abide by it. The law is also quite succinct in its, um, in its review that under chapter 41, section 52, all accounts are rendered to be kept in the departments of any city shall be subject to the inspection of the city auditor or officer having similar duties. So we know now on the chapter 41, section 52, that that's the auditor's position as it relates to not being allowed to do any other position in the department, I mean, in the city. And chapter 41, section 55 clearly delineates the fact that the town accountant shall be sworn to the faithful performance of his duties, shall hold no other town office involving the receipt or disbursement of monies. If you've already had a chief of staff since January 5th of this year, that is a known fact that should not be allowed to take place, temporary or otherwise. There is nothing in state law. There is no state statute. and there is no case law that allows this to happen. The only exemption to the rule is- We have before us- Pardon me? We have before us, sir- We're talking about the chief of staff. The chief of staff position.
[Fred Dello Russo]: We have before us the issue of chief of staff.
[Robert Penta]: It's one of the duties that a chief of staff does, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. I'd feel much more comfortable getting legal advice from the city solicitor, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilor.
[Robert Penta]: I believe the city solicitor was here last week, and in our conversation he did acknowledge the fact that there is no case law, number one, and there is no state statute that allows it for temporary or otherwise. He's here tonight. He can stand on his own two feet to say it, but I think the OR is quite succinct. But more importantly, it's the position of the chief of staff, and they should know this. And this new administration should not be going into a territory knowing that it's in violation of state statute. Now, the unfortunate part about this whole issue right now is that you have a city solicitor that represents the mayor, that represents the city council, that represents the board of appeals. And if there's a difference of opinion as to who should prevail. It's quite obvious if the council needs to have a question answered, you still haven't gotten that answered. And I think you are entitled to have that answer legally, right, wrong, or indifferent. I stand here, and I'll be willing to be corrected. But for my information that I've been able to ascertain, and now speaking with the Division of Local Services at the Department of Revenue, you cannot do it. And the law is quite succinct on that. That is a prerogative, and that's a detailed description that a chief of staff does. They are the advisor. They are the advisor. And if their advice to the present administration was not consulted with the city's law department, well, that's a mistake there. But if the law department is basically saying this— Point of information, Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Until this paper makes its way through three readings, we have no position that's the chief of staff. So until we create the position, we have no position. So I'm a little confused as to the circular logic. We have a chief of staff that's in the job, but we don't have the position that's created. But if the person was in the position, then the person in the position should be looking at the auditor. I'm a little confused as to where this is going, Mr. President. The matter that's before us is whether or not we want to allow the administration the opportunity to change the audits and create a chief of staff's position. And looking at the matter that's before us, it's a reform that the administration is putting forward, a reform that they think that they need to be successful in order to accomplish their goals and objectives. I see no reason to stand in the way of it, Mr. President. And I think it's time that we move forward, and I move for approval on the paper. The President.
[Robert Penta]: On the motion for approval by Councilor Knight. Mr. President, no one is standing here to interrupt the appointment. The fact of the matter is that that person has been in the position since January 4th of this year. So all you're doing is finalizing something that was initiated on January 4th. The person is in there. The papers have already gone out. The individual is signing off as chief of staff. So it's already a done deal, so to speak. And this council deserves to have, within its own bailiwick of information, the fact whether this is right or wrong. Because if this council is just going to sit there, it would ignore the fact that a city auditor is also assuming the position as a treasurer collector, when you know that there was a young lady, Judy Johnson, who's worked very hard, very capable to be that person, to do it. Why is that not happening? No. The ball's in your court. You folks can do what you want. But this isn't a good message sending out to the people of this community, that you have a present administration that's potentially working with the conflict of interest and in violation of the law by having one person, the city auditor, assume two positions, that and that of the treasurer-collector, when you have a qualified person downstairs in that office that could do the job. Thank you very much. Well, I'd like to ask you, Mr. President, is the city council going to request a legal opinion on that because I think it's important. As a citizen, I'd like to ask one of my colleagues to make that request to the city administration, whether Mrs. Baker on the chapter 41, chapter 41, section 55 is entitled to be the city and the town treasurer at the same time.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information. I think the appropriate time to bring that matter up would be in the public participation portion of our agenda and not right now. We're dealing with the paper that's before us. Thank you, Councilor.
[Robert Penta]: Mr. President, with all due respect to my colleague, he knows.
[Fred Dello Russo]: He knows that anyone at any time can ask him. I am asking a question, Mr. President. Sir, you're no longer a colleague. Pardon me? You're no longer a colleague, sir. Oh, you don't have to address me like that, Mr. President. Point of information, Vice President Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I thought we had asked that question last week, so I would like to put that question forward. The question is? Is there any conflict of interest for the auditor to also be running the Treasurer-Collector's office? Is there a conflict? I mean, it stated there was a conflict last week. We'd like a legal opinion on that. I agree. I thought we asked it last week, so.
[Clerk]: You tabled all the papers.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: If we could ask it this week.
[Robert Penta]: I don't know. You can take a roll call vote. I mean, you can take a vote on it or what? Yeah, we'll take a vote on it.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. We have a citizen who wishes to speak. It's been added as an amendment to the motion of approval by Councilor Knight.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: 41 section 55.
[Richard Caraviello]: Point of clarification Councilor Caraviello. Is 16-032 is only for the chief of staff correct? That is correct. Not the that's a the budget director I mean the budget I mean the The auditor and the... That was never before us. That's not before us, right. So... Nor was it ever. Our only question tonight is Chief of Staff. Correct. Thank you. Thank you, Consul.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, citizen. Good evening. Please state your name and address for the record. Welcome.
[Jeanne Martin]: Thank you. Jean Martington, Cumming Street. And I actually don't have a comment. I have a question. I know that's news for you guys. I always have a comment. But anyway, is the Chief of Staff going to be the liaison between the Mayor's office and this body? or is that going to be somebody else?
[Fred Dello Russo]: And if so, who was, uh, I think it's going to be some, somebody else.
[Jeanne Martin]: Okay. That's all I wanted to know. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you very much, ma'am. So on the motion of approval by Councilor Knight, Mr. Clerk, please call the roll council caveo.
[Clerk]: Yes. Council Falco. Yes. Councilor Knight. Yes. Price for the long term.
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Council marks. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli?
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Clerk]: President Dello Russo? Yes.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Vote of seven in the affirmative, none in the negative. First reading passes. 16-022. This is the piece before us for the amendment of ordinances for the procurement officer. and the creation of the Chief Procurement Officer Appointment Term. Do we have a motion? On the motion of Councilor Knight for approval for the first reading. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Caraviello? Yes. Councilor Falco? Yes. Councilor Knight? Yes. Vice President Long and Kern? Yes. Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Scott-Bell? Yes. President De La Rosa?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes. With a vote of seven in the affirmative, none in the negative, the matter passes of 16-022, passes the first reading. 16-023. This was classifications and compensation plan for officers and employees non-union. Move approval. A motion for approval by Councilor Knight. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Caraviello? Yes. Councilor Falco?
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Knight? Yes. Vice President Lowell-Kern?
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Marksley?
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. President Del Russo?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes. With a vote of seven in the affirmative, none in the negative, the first reading passes. 16-024. This is the amendment of the revised ordinances of the city method for personnel policies and vacation. That passed already. That passed already, Mr. Clerk. Motion to revert back to ordinate with three readings last week. Motion to revert back to ordinary business, Mr. Clerk. On the motion of Councilor Knight to revert back to the regular order of business. All those in favor? All those opposed? 16-034 offered by Councilor Falco. Be it resolved. that the Council President establish an ad hoc subcommittee to study the reuse of the Malden Hospital development and the potential impacts on the surrounding North Medford neighborhoods. Councilor Falco, let me find you first. Here you are. Thank you.
[John Falco]: Thank you, Mr. President. Over the past few weeks, actually the past month or so, I've received a number of phone calls, and I think a number of us may have as well, from residents in the North Medford neighborhoods about the proposed development of the old Malden Hospital site. There are a number of situations, I guess, where it could be used as a dense housing development. And there's also an idea out there that it might be used as parkland if the city of Malden decides to purchase that. And although most of the development is in Malden, and we have a limited say as to what can actually go there, the resolution tonight is a proactive attempt to help minimize some of the potential impacts. Safety is the number one issue in that neighborhood. Right now, many of the streets in the North Manfred area are being used as a cut-through to get to Route 93 or to get to the other side of the Fells Way. And, you know, anyone, if a dense housing development does go in there, anyone that wants to head west towards Route 93 in the morning is going to be inundating the streets of Murray Hill Road, Fells Ave, Fulton Spring Road, Vista Ave, Fulton Street, And things are pretty tight now in those neighborhoods with regard to traffic. Um, so, you know, and also with, you have, uh, there are many kids in the morning that are, uh, walking, uh, down the street to get to the bus. Uh, people are walking to the T. So it's really a major concern, um, that, uh, there's, there's just a major potential impacts there, uh, with regard to traffic and safety that I think really need to be looked at. The resolution tonight is a, um, proactive attempt to safeguard the North Medford neighborhoods. So I ask you tonight, if you could please assign an ad hoc committee to, uh, to, to work on this, um, and move approval.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. Thank you on the motion of approval by council Falco. Uh, once we take a vote, I'll be delighted. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Chair recognizes councilor Caraviello. Thank you, Mr. President. Upon seeing this on the agenda last week, Mr. President, um, I reached out to a couple of colleagues over in Malden, to find out what was happening on their end, and I also reached out to Alan McDonald from Hallmark Health for their thing. According to my colleague in Malden, they had a meeting a couple weeks ago with the Pine Hills people again, and I guess they've scaled back the project again a little bit, but there's no plan as of now going forward with this. And when I spoke to Mr. McDonald this morning, he reiterated the same thing, There was, you know, other than, you know, some minor talks going on, there was nothing in the pipeline to get this off the ground. So, and when I talked to them, all the people said they'd be more than happy to come down here, you know, if they did have any further information. But as of now, there is nothing happening in there. Other than Pine Hills has an agreement to purchase the property from Hallmark in the event they're able to reach an agreement with Medford, Malden, and obtain the necessary permits.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Councilor. Chair recognizes Councilor Scott Powell.
[George Scarpelli]: As we move on talking about this, I appreciate Councilor Falco bringing this up, but if we can, too, as we look into the development, can we get an update, too, on the New England Memorial site and Stoneham, just as we tie, I take both get more information, especially for myself. And I'd really like to look into that as well. So if we have any information on that, that'd be helpful. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Send that request up to the OCD director. Thank you. Yes. So as amended by council Scarpelli, that the, uh, uh, office of community development update the, uh, uh, council on the proceedings for the, uh, former new England sand site. Um, vice president logo.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you. Um, president Dello Russo. I, I do want to thank Councilor Falco for bringing this forward. We have discussed this a few different times in the council, and I think along with the city council playing an active role, I just really want to maybe amend to also ask the current mayor, our new mayor, to be involved with the process, to be involved with working with Malden, having a good relationship, obviously, and good communication with the mayor of Malden with regards to this site We may only have three acres, I believe, which is like 10%, 15% of the entire project, but we will bear probably 50 to 90% of the traffic burden. So it is just extremely important for our department heads and our administration to be in contact with the city of Malden. We can voice our opinions and do what we can, but I think that is extremely important. When I attended one of the first meetings at The BB school, I think it was, in Malden, there was probably 100 residents, and every elected official from Malden was there. I believe I might have been the only city councilor. And then there was department heads from Malden. I believe our OCD Lorenzo was our only department head there. So we do need to make our faces known, and we need our administration to get on board and get involved. I also wanted to just bring up, we definitely, this, our ad hoc committee and the council as a whole, we've supported, there is a community group out there that's working hard. They have a, they've done plans, they've had engineers work on low or density projects, which is, I believe would be our push. As low density as possible with green space. I mean, obviously we're not Malden. Malden may want their best bang for their buck. I'm not sure exactly where they're leaning, but we want to lean for lower density lower traffic, less amount of cars, so that it doesn't impact our neighborhoods. They're going to come down, like you said, Murray Hill Road and a number, you know, come right onto all of our roads up in the Heights are going to be congested, even more so than they are now. So I know that committee, I did have been conversing with them and they have, they're working on a traffic plan. So hopefully this ad hoc committee can get involved with them as well and work together. with the Traffic Commission to create a plan, whether it's certain directions, not being able to come on certain ways on our roads. We need to think ahead of the game, and I think that's something that this committee will help out with a great deal so that we can look at the big picture, a big map, and how it's going to affect traffic. Air pollution, there's a number of other concerns as well, but traffic is the number one concern that I keep hearing about. from our residents and from the community group. So I really hope we can get some work done on this. And I hope the administration gets on board to get involved for the sake of Medford in its entirety, but the Fulton Heights.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Very good. So as amended by Vice President Lungo-Koehn, chair recognizes Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. And I agree with Councilor Longo's comments that the city administration has to take a more active role on this particular project Although Medford only has a small footprint in the overall project itself, there should be ample public notification for residents, particular abutters that are impacted by this. We all know the traffic was going to be an issue. This council has gone on record for the past, I believe it's four or five years now, asking that the cut-through road in the back that leads up to Murray Hill Road be closed. And we had the chief of police here, I believe it was about a year, year and a half ago, And he said he will never let that particular road be opened. That would be a shortcut to 93 and be a terrible impact on the neighborhood, Grover and Murray Hill Road and Fry and that whole particular area up there, Mr. President. So I'm happy to see that we did take a step on assuring residents that that cut-through road will not be reopened again like it was years ago, and that the buffer between the project and the homes be maintained. because part of the project called for some of the shrubbery and wooded area, which acts as a buffer between the project and the neighborhood, be removed, Mr. President. And that's a large issue of contention with neighbors and the project itself. And I want to thank Councilor Falco for bringing this up. I think an ad hoc committee, any time we put together at least some oversight on behalf of this community is a good idea, so I would support this.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Very good. Thank you, Councilor Marks. So on the motion of approval by Councilor Falco, I second. A roll call vote has been requested on this motion that was amended by Councilors Scarpelli and Lungo-Koehn. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Caraviello? Yes. Councilor Falco? Yes. Councilor Knight? Yes. Vice-President Lowell-Kern. Yes. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli. Yes.
[Fred Dello Russo]: President Dello Russo. Yes. With a vote of seven in the affirmative, nine in the negative, the motion passes. Congratulations. 16-035 offered by Councilor Knight. Whereas the current ordinance entitled to chapter 90, vehicles for hire enables the city council with powers more appropriately vested in the executive branch, be it so ordered, The Medford City Council amend the Medford Mass Code of Ordinances entitled Chapter 9D, Vehicles for Hire, by striking the words City Council and replacing them with Traffic Commission in the following subsections. Section 9032, section 9033, 9034, 9037, 9039, 9040, 9045, 9048, 9051, 9-0-5-2, 9-0-6-7, and 9-0-6-8. Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This resolution is rather self-explanatory. I bring it forward relative to Article 2 in taxicabs. The City Council currently has the power and authority vested in it through the Code of Massachusetts Ordinances to license taxicabs, taxicab operators. What this resolution would do would transfer that authority to the Traffic Commission, Mr. President. As a member of the Subcommittee on Licensing, we met and we performed an audit of the operators in the community here in Medford, and a number of them were not in compliance. But as the legislative branch of government here, I think that it's a slippery slope for us to get so involved in regulatory affairs. I think that that's a function that's really more relegated and more appropriately vested within the executive, Mr. President. So I bring forward this paper to reform the way that we do business relative to the issuance of taxi cab licenses. In my two years on the council, we've had Councilor Marks abstain from voting relative to the fact that we have an ordinance that doesn't make much sense. We've had a number of people come before this council seeking an opportunity to drive taxi. But our ordinance is all over the place, Mr. President, so I think it would make sense for us to step away from the regulatory affairs and take a look really at the language and actually legislating an ordinance that makes sense, but allowing the Traffic Commission the opportunity and the power to oversee the issuance, revocation, suspension, so on and so forth of taxi licenses here in the community. As such, I'd ask my colleagues to join me in voting in the affirmative.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor, this is a change in ordinance, and whereas it is so, should it not be subjected to three votes and public vetting? I believe so. Very good. So this vote would constitute a first reading of such change. You have a motion for approval.
[Richard Caraviello]: Chair recognizes Councilor Caraviello. Thank you, Mr. President. I thank my fellow councilor for doing this. Most of the other cities, the police department is the issuing authority. for the taxi cab licenses, and I think it does belong with them. So I think this is something that's been long overdue. And I say I wholeheartedly support it.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Chair recognizes Councilor Knight. Councilor Marks, my apologies.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. I think this is a worthy suggestion, although I would ask my council colleague, maybe if we could send it to the licensing subcommittee and have it originate from the licensing subcommittee. I think it would hold a little more weight coming through that angle. First, I would also ask that, uh, although the request now says the traffic commission, council Kaviello just said he likes it with the police department. Those are two separate entities, traffic commission and the police department, the two separate entities. So if you like what the police department, you don't like this because this is sending it to the traffic commission. And right now I'm not aware of any licenses. The traffic commission is responsible for. They are responsible for signage, street markings and other important issues in the community. Uh, but, um, this would be a difference in what they are currently responsible for. I'm not saying I'm opposed to it, but I think maybe if it's before the subcommittee on licensing, uh, we can come up with a better option. And I would probably tend to agree that the police department would be probably the best option where we already have someone that's in what we refer to the hackney division. that's responsible to make sure these cars are properly registered, make sure these cars adhere to city ordinances and codes and so forth. So I would just respectfully ask my colleague if we could send it to the licensing subcommittee, maybe hash out some of these questions and then move it forward. I think it's a very worthy suggestion.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Caraviello?
[Adam Knight]: The paper was filed, Mr. President, to start a discussion, to start a discussion on making a reform that's going to work best for the city. So I certainly have no problem with that whatsoever.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So you withdraw your motion for approval and ask that it be sent to the committee on? Licensing. Licensing. So on the motion of Councilor Knight, as seconded by Councilor Marks, that this matter be sent to the Licensing Commission. And we invite the citizen to speak. Please state your name and address for the record. Welcome.
[Sqp6S0Yyr0A_SPEAKER_04]: Hi there. Rachel Tannenhaus, 26 Pearl Street. And so as somebody, I'm here wearing two hats. I'm here as a citizen and also as the chair of the Medford Disability Commission. It's really, it may not seem immediately relevant, but the licensing of Taxis is actually extremely important to folks who might experience ADA violations and civil rights violations. It's always really important for me, as a service dog handler, to know who licenses the taxis and be sure that they are aware of the ADA, the Americans with Disabilities Act, portions of the ADA that do apply to taxi service, because I have been kicked out of a lot of taxis, and it wasn't because I was drunk and rowdy. It was because I was using a service dog. My friends who use service dogs can report very similar situations. And unfortunately, it is no better with Uber or Lyft. But the thing about taxis, and the reason why I take them now, is because unlike Uber or Lyft, I can go to the folks who licensed them and say, my civil rights have been violated. What can you do? So wherever it is that this lands, I'd like to be sure that whomever may be licensing this is really clear on what the AD obligations are of licensed taxi drivers. Maybe looks also at looking at whether there can be some actual accessible cabs in this city, because there are none. would possibly be willing to work with the Disability Commission on such things. In my other life, well, I volunteer to provide training at the Cambridge Taxi School. Obviously, this is not Cambridge, and our system is very, very different. But as it happens, licensed taxi drivers in Cambridge, in order to receive that license, must go through training, a week of training, and pass a written exam. And one portion of that training involves serving customers with disabilities and older adults. And I provide part of the training on serving customers with disabilities, particularly the rights of people with service animals. So I'm happy to help out with anything I can do. uh, to make sure that when we are, I have no problem with, you know, moving it to an appropriate area, but I'd like to make sure that it's done thoughtfully and in a way that preserves, um, the civil rights of people who would be using taxis and maybe puts a little teeth into things because Right now, it's really hard to, right now, basically, if I have a problem with a cab, I call Diane, and she, I don't want to put more on her plate, but I call Diane, and she talks to the cops, and eventually, it gets around to, it would be great to have, okay, these are the folks who handle this. They are also in charge of the licenses. There are teeth in this. There are consequences if you violate the law. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, ma'am.
[Michael Marks]: Mr. President, can I just ask a question?
[Fred Dello Russo]: If you could, yes, Councilor.
[Michael Marks]: Have you been denied access with your service dog with Medford cabs?
[Sqp6S0Yyr0A_SPEAKER_04]: I have to be honest and say I don't use a lot of Medford cabs because I've had some sketchy dealings. So there was one Medford cab that lied about how much he charged because he knew I couldn't see the meter. And I've had another situation where I took the cab from Medford to Cambridge and he charged me $50. So I haven't, I gotta be honest, I've been using green and yellow cab.
[Michael Marks]: And just one other question too. You mentioned that Cambridge requires testing of their cab drivers?
[Sqp6S0Yyr0A_SPEAKER_04]: Yes, they have a very different system there. There are no formal cab companies in Cambridge. They are all radio subscription services. And so, and also obviously they have a much bigger system and there's like actual, you know, money in their city and stuff like that. Yes, in order to be licensed as a cab driver, they provide, well, in general, for the past 20 years or so, they have provided training once a month for folks who are interested in getting the license to drive a cab. Of late, it has been less frequent. I mean, it's scheduled for every month, but a lot of them get canceled because, frankly, it's easier to drive for Uber or Lyft. You don't have to go through the whole process. so there aren't as many people signing up for the classes. But you cannot drive a taxi in Cambridge unless you have been through their system, through their training and passed their test.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you. Sure. Mr. President, if we just could, maybe where the licenses are issued by, they're approved by the council, but issued by the city clerk, that we can send out a letter or contact these drivers to let them know that they are required to take residents that have a service dog, and I assume that's state statute, Mr. Clerk, is that correct? Federal statute? Yes. Or it's the ADA? Yes. Okay. Can we send a letter, Mr. Clerk, to let these drivers know? It will be made as such. Right. I love the idea of testing. I think that's a great concept that Cambridge uses.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On our application, there's a test. It's been the same question for two years, and it's how do you get from CVS and Medford Square, not specifying which one, to the Medford Police Station. That's the test? That's the test.
[Michael Marks]: That's the written exam, yes. Very interesting. Well, this is why Councilor Knight wants to look into the issue.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. And most of them get it wrong, Councilor.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Caraviello. Mr. President, I do agree with the young lady. There is a need for more handicap accessible vehicles in the city of Medford. I don't even know if we have any handicapped vehicles in Medford. I would encourage, I mean, the vehicle is more costly than the regular cars, but there is a need from the city and I would encourage, I would hope that the taxi company would be encouraged maybe to buy one or two vehicles. And Mr. President, If we could, uh, if you could, uh, call a, uh, subcommittee meeting next Tuesday, uh, so we can be the chair of the subcommittee, which would be myself. If we could have that next Tuesday, we'd be prior to our meeting. So we can deal with this matter.
[Fred Dello Russo]: You're at will as chair to a convener committee at your, uh, very good.
[Michael Marks]: Yes. Councilor Marks. What council Caraviello just mentioned was one of the reasons why we asked the licensing subcommittee to reconvene. and come out with an ordinance that addresses some of the concerns that we're, you know, hearing tonight. And one of them was that we bantered around was that if you had a cab company in the city that had more than, I believe it was three or four cabs, that they were required under city ordinance to provide at least one handicap cab. And those were the things that we wanted to build into the ordinance. But the licensing subcommittee, for some reason, never met on this, Mr. President, and never addressed some of the concerns. But maybe now we can eventually move this on and maybe give it to someone more equipped to looking into these issues and presenting these issues, Mr. President. Very good. So on the motion approved by Councilor Knight as amended.
[Fred Dello Russo]: All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion to send it to Subcommittee on Licensing Cases. 16-036 offered by Vice President Lockwood-Kern. be resolved that the schools and public relations department set up a voicemail, as I have received complaints that no one is answering the phone. There is not an option to leave a message for a return call. Madam Vice President.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Dello Russo. I put this on the agenda after a third complaint last week, end of last week, with regards to people trying to get in contact with our new schools public relations position. At first, there was no phone number. Then there was a phone number. To date, I don't believe, as of two days ago, there was still no voicemail set up. Now we're almost mid to end of January. That's two to three weeks going on with no way to get in touch with, besides possibly a new email that's been set up with our public relations professional. And I'm surprised, and I'm a little you know, obviously not happy about it because this is a position that is creating so much controversy within our city. The morale at the schools, it's not helped morale. So you would expect that, and it's not even necessarily this person's fault. I believe this rests with the higher ups. I mean, there should be an office, there should be a voicemail set up. It was, you know, kind of, push through at the last hour before January 4th for the change in the administration. And I just feel like there should be a phone, there should be a voicemail, and there should be responsiveness. So I would ask the superintendent of schools, when will a voicemail be set up? And also, again, we asked questions a few weeks back with regards to job description, salary, what this position is going to entail, what the person in the position is going to do on a day-to-day basis. And I think that's very important, because the fourth complaint I got was with regards to somebody from the PTO asking for a little bit of help on something, and then being shoved, you know, you have to ask the principal first. Well, you know, and I have discussed this with somebody from another PTO, too, and they're asking me questions about what the public relations is going to help them with, and I really don't have the answers. So, you know, I hope that is part of the job. the public relations professional is going to help. You know, all the volunteers, I hope, with regards to the PTO, help with the publications and things that definitely can enhance all of our elementary schools and our high school. But obviously, we haven't got any responses. So I again ask for responses on a job description with regards to this position so that we can better answer our constituents' questions and be able to direct the right people to the right place. And hopefully, this is going to This job should, at I believe $85,000, $90,000, should be helping our schools tremendously. And I don't see how that can be happening when there's no voicemail and no ability to respond. One woman said she's called a number of times and is very frustrated. She can't even leave a message in a voicemail. So the complaints are real. And I felt that it needed to be put on again, especially since We haven't got any answers to our questions. And I think our superintendent took the hit for this in the paper. And I believe he's the one that should be, you know, responsive to us.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. Chair recognizes Councilor Felken.
[John Falco]: Thank you, Mr. President. Um, I actually did, uh, when I saw this resolution, I, I wanted to get more information. So I actually did reach out to the superintendent and he did tell me that the phone will be, the voicemail will be active by the end of the week. I taught, it seems like, I guess when they move, The previous person out and they moved the new person in. I'm not sure if something happened with the phone jack, but it sounded like there was maybe some sort of technical issue. But they should have a voicemail by the end of the week.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Councilor. Please state your name and address for the record. Welcome.
[SPEAKER_09]: Hi. My name is Alex Good. I'm the owner of the School of Lumiondo Martial Arts on 412 Salem Street. So I'm just basically here to back that. We've been trying to set up an after school program with the Roberts Elementary. I've been in close contact with Cheryl Rodriguez of the PTO. She directed me to Lisa Evangelista, who, as you said, I called four or five times, no voicemail. I emailed her, no response. I contacted her on LinkedIn, no response. Then I finally called Paulette Van der Kloot, school committee member. I haven't heard back from her yet either. Point of information, uh, councilor Scarpelli. I appreciate, um, well, has anybody directed you to the principal of the school? Um, Mr. Johnson, he's on board. He's, uh, we were all ready to go with it. I made a fire out. Um, we had dates set on it and then we went to get it approved and it's just been at standstill. Um, I called at the end of last week, Mr. Johnson. Mr. Johnson direct you to Mr. Vietorista? No, I haven't talked to Mr. Johnson since probably December.
[George Scarpelli]: All right. So that's a problem. So the protocol should be, Ms. Rodriguez should know this, that the PTG, it goes through the principal that they work with because there are a lot of, there are different, different issues that have to go through before you move, move on that availability for us and see what programs. And I'll be glad to meet with you after this and just grab your number and information. and make sure that that goes through because again, this also reverts back to a bigger issue and that's recreation. Have you gone to the subcommittee meetings on recreation and arts and recreation? Because I think this is important that these are the avenues that community schools and recreation, it's important that we can do that too, just to piggyback that. But I'd like to talk to you at the end if I can, and maybe I can help you with moving that forward. Sure. I know that in our standing as former school committee members, anything that goes from the PTG or outside agencies has to go through the principal first. And then any other information that goes through has to go to the superintendent's office.
[SPEAKER_09]: So again, we did do that. Um, so what happened was we, um, submitted it to the principal. He submitted the flyer to the superintendent and there was never a response. Then it was mentioned that it wasn't approved. And then he said it wasn't approved. The superintendent, Mr. Bellison said it wasn't approved because he hadn't talked to the principal. even though Cheryl talked to the principal first. And so it's just, I'm sure it's just a lot of misunderstanding and I just want to get it sorted out. Okay. I'd like to help you with that. All right. That was all I had. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. And I think this is one of the reasons why the school department felt they need a public relations person to not get back to a resident, a business owner. This gentleman's owned a business in the city for a number of years. He was here in the square for a lot of years. Now he's on Salem Street, he runs a reputable business, and that sends a lousy message in this community when people don't return phone calls or e-mails, Mr. President. And if they're not the right person he should be talking to, then it's a two-second call saying, you know what, you have to talk to this person. Or as Councilor Scarpelli said, circle the wagons and re-talk to the principal. But to not to get back to someone sends an awful message, Mr. President. And just let me speak as a parent tonight, if I could. And if the PR person wants to work on something with the superintendent, it's a nightmare, Mr. President, trying to get out of the Medford High School parking lot on a Friday afternoon, on an early release day on a Wednesday. It takes you a half hour to 45 minutes to get out of the Medford High School parking lot. It's unacceptable. And in the case of an emergency, Mr. President, God forbid someone had to get out of there in an emergency, I don't know what would happen, Mr. President. It's unacceptable. It's not the first time, it happens every Friday up there, every early release day, and it's unacceptable that it has to continue that way. Last Wednesday, I witnessed kids coming down the hill on the ice, we got a little rain and some ice there, and there wasn't any salt or anything put, and you had to see the kids try to traverse down the hill, which many kids do. It's unacceptable that the property's not kept after. We all remember years ago what happened in the city of Boston when they didn't shovel sidewalks and kids walked in the street and were struck by a vehicle, Mr. President. And it's unacceptable. I don't know what's going on with that high school. But let me tell you, they're putting positions up there, they're hiring administrators, and we can't get them to salt and sand for the kids, and we can't get them to move the parking lot cars out of the high school. You can't get them out. I would ask anyone of the council here to go up there at 2.15 on a Friday, park in the lot, and see how long it takes you to get out. See how long it takes you to get out. That's a major concern, and it shouldn't be happening this way. We have a police officer that's assigned up there. We have an officer that's a high school safety officer that's assigned up there. And he does his best. Mr. Mosaic has been up there a lot of years, and he does his best. But he's one person, and there's hundreds of cars trying to pick up students, buses, and so forth. And it really is — it's a shame that, as a city our size, that we can't get a handle on how to alleviate the trafficking issues that are going on at the high school. I really — I really have to say that, Mr. President. And I hope this gets to the superintendent of schools and the school committee, because it's unacceptable. And they should be well aware of this. This is nothing new. This has been happening for years up there, Mr. President. And the students walking down a slippery sidewalk is a concern of mine. It should be a concern of everyone behind this railing, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Councilor. Councilor Scarpelli. I'm sorry. You're all set? Is there a motion? Motion for approval. On the motion of Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Michael Marks]: As amended by Councilor Marks. All those in favor.
[Fred Dello Russo]: All those opposed? Mark me as opposed. Motion passes. 16-037, offered by Vice President Langel and Kern, be it resolved that the administration update the council with any changes that will be made regarding customer service between city departments and the public to ensure that there is always a positive interaction between the two. Madam Vice President.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Dello Russo. This actually, was on my radar with regards to customer service, treating people with respect. Due to some complaints, I had brought this up to Ms. Miller at our budget hearings in June. She did say she was going to make sure that was brought up with regards to the personnel and staff. And it also came up during the great debate. I was pleasantly surprised when our new mayor had this answer during the debate that things were going to change and, you know, people were going to be treated all the time with respect. I don't believe it. Believe me, I'm not saying that there's a problem everywhere, but when you do have a complaint here and there, you just want to make sure the public can come in to whether it's a police station or city hall or, you know, go to any department and get the answers they need, be treated respectfully and be on their way. So that was something that was on my radar in June. It has been in the past. And it was something that the mayor spoke very well with regards to how that's going to change. And I just would like to know, you know, if there's any going to be any specific changes that maybe we can go back to residents that complain or have complained in the past and say, yes, you know, I really feel that that's going to be one thing that she spoke about that she is going to do. And I would like to just know how, are we going to have any, you know, disciplinary action? Is there going to be any, um, I don't know if any such type classes that our personnel are going to go to. I just want to see what type of changes there will be just to make sure that that is going to happen. And I hope, you know, I hope it does. I believe this is almost, you know, you run a city almost like it is a business. It's $150 million budget that we have and we hire a lot of people. And I want to make sure that we do strive to do better and strive to treat people better, obviously. I really hope that that change is in the works and would like to know if she can give us any insight with regards to how that change may be coming to fruition.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. And the motion for approval by council along with current roll call, uh, chair recognizes council.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. Um, last week, uh, I had the opportunity to attend one of the, uh, the mayor's constituent services, uh, meetings in West Medford and that, um, the two common complaints throughout the whole meeting were City Hall able to communicate with people and getting to the right departments and customer service and public works. And hopefully when that committee makes their recommendations, it'll take the concerns of the citizens, because as I said, this was one of the major concerns of most of the citizens. And the meeting I went to, they probably spent about 35, 45 minutes just on this particular issue. So it is, Councilor Longo is correct, and a lot of citizens have recognized it, and hopefully their transition team will make the proper recommendations.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Councilor. Chair recognizes Councilor Marks. Thank you, Mr. President, and I want to thank Councilor Longo for putting this on. Regarding customer service, we're all aware that the City of Method will implement the 311 C-Click and Fix program. I believe it's going to be March or April, and that's long awaited. And I thank the administration for moving forward on this. However, Mr. President, I read online inside Method that the C-Click and Fix has been used for the past several years so Method residents can go on and put on a request that they may have for city service. So I went online. I put C-Click Fix Method, and indeed it brought up 240 postings since 2009 of Method residents going on the C-Click and Fix saying, I have a pothole in front of my house, or I'm concerned the stop sign fell down in front of my house, how do I get it repaired? And needless to say, these requests that residents believe are going to someone here at City Hall are going nowhere. And I looked through to see if there were response or if any of these issues were closed and I couldn't find one response. I couldn't find anything. So I sent an email back to the editor of inside method saying, um, you know, where did this all come about that people are reaching out to see click and fix when it's not implemented in the city yet. And they've been doing it since 2009 and she had no idea why people would have gone on that site. But this gets back to, the issue we've been talking about, customer service, and the fact that the city never had anything set up. So people in the community are reaching out to, in any format they can, they're reaching out to an application that the city doesn't even subscribe to, to try to get answers. The department heads on on. So I'm hoping with this new administration, and I think we're seeing some movement now, which makes me quite happy in that direction. And, you know, I'm looking forward to this implementation. Last week I mentioned that you can implement all the systems you want, but unless we have the boots on the street, unless we have the capability of responding back and actually fixing some of the concerns, this program will not be a success. So I think it has to be followed with additional personnel in DPW, additional personnel in some of the other departments, like we're seeing police, fire, across the board on the municipal side. Otherwise, you know, we're going to have a great system set up to capture requests from residents, but not be able to resolve any of the issues, Mr. President. So, I think that has to be the second part. I'm not sure if the administration has that as a second option.
[Fred Dello Russo]: but it needs to take place, Mr. President. So if I may, Councilor, is that an amendment that we get a response back from the administration regarding the status of Seek, Click, and Fix within our municipality?
[Michael Marks]: That could be a request, and Councilor Lungo and I offered a couple weeks ago that we receive a full training of the program itself, and we have yet to get a response back. Mr. Clerk, have we got a response back regarding training for members of this council? That just went out last week. But we even asked before that, we asked before that, that we be part of the process. In December or? I believe in December, but department heads have been trained on this system already. There's no reason why we as city officials who failed a lot of these calls should also be trained on this and be able to point people in the right direction when they reach out to us, phone call, email, and be able to explain this new particular program that's going to be implemented, the 3-1-1 system, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So be it further resolved that an additional request for a training of the City Council regarding the implementation of the 3-1-1 system. And what you said about staffing is fine. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor. Chair recognizes Councilor Schapelle.
[George Scarpelli]: Regarding the 3-1-1, it's a very slippery slope right now. The—understanding what the intent is, I think, has to be defined through the administration a little bit better. If it's implemented to collect data, then to look into hiring policies, because I agree with you, Counsel Marks, that I work in the system that within 48 hours of a 311 call to my office, I have to respond to that constituent. And then, if not, it's reverted to our summer stat. organization that the mayor sits on, and then that data is then pushed directly to us, and answers have to be given to why they weren't or were answered. So I think that an understanding of what the true definition of this program, when it is presented to the community, and how we handle it, because I firmly believe in what echo your thoughts and without the proper people on the streets doing the work. And a lot of times people answering that phone and moving it to department to department, um, is going to be essential making this work. If not, I think this could be, uh, an even more volatile issue than you even can think of because it, um, what we do is understanding that the, the three one system where it's implemented in some level, it's then, carried over. It's like having a 9-1-1 system without a police department. So it's, um, it's very important. So thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. Councilor. So on the motion for approval by council longer current as amended, uh, clerk, Mr. Clerk, please call. Oh, I'm sorry. I apologize. Uh, madam citizen.
[Jeanne Martin]: Hello, Jean Martin, 10 coming street. And I went to that same meeting that Mr. Caraviello went to on constituency, constituency services. Um, And you're absolutely right, Mr. Marks, if you do not have more people in the areas that were most discussed. And I kind of wonder, because now you've set up this expectation. These people came out, and they didn't just come out from West Medford. They came out from all over the areas of Medford, and they came to this meeting. And now there's a belief system that things are going to change. And I hope that things change, because now you've set up the expectation that things are going to change. And the only way that they're going to change is if you hire more DPW workers and more police. Because the two biggest issues that came up were, one, parking enforcement, street sweeping, plowing, especially plowing in the winter, and all of the car issues and all of that. And also the DPW potholes and you name it. So if we do not hire more DPW workers and more police or reutilize our police so that they're in enforcement mode, then the 311 system is going to be absolutely useless. It's going to set up the expectation that I'm going to be heard. And then if they're not heard, they're going to be even more frustrated. So I just want to point that out. So we're going to have to figure out something to do because there's not enough DPW workers to take care of the issues in this city. Clearly, like you said, at the high school, they can't even salt the hill. So thank you very much.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. Madam Vice President.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Just with that point, thank you, President Dello Russo. I agree with my colleagues. I agree with Ms. Martin. But I think implementing the 311 system is definitely necessary and a good start. I think it's going to show us, okay, we need more staff on the highway. We need to order more filler for our potholes because we have 300 complaints within a matter of six months. I think it's going to tell us we need to get on waste management because they missed picking up 70 barrels this week. I mean, it's going to tell us where the problems are, and obviously there's going to be, like Councilor Scarpelli said, there's going to be a transition period that may be very bumpy, because we're going to need to put some more personnel on, and I think that's going to be very important, and it's going to be a true tell to the residents and to the people of the city, we need to spend this money and hire five new DPW personnel, or else we're not going to get to half of these complaints and be able to improve on the things we need to improve on, but I think it's definitely going to work in benefit in the long run, and it's definitely going to be very transparent, and we're going to know if people complain that, you know, certain personnel aren't doing their job, well, we're going to have a record and say, you know, they are, they are. Look at what they've done within the last, you know, look at, for example, look at what our DPW department has done within the last two weeks alone. 67, you know, for example, complaints and resolves and action taken. So I think it's going to, in the long run, it's going to work. I think the administration is fiscally on top of it, and we are going to be able to put personnel where we need to put personnel, and I think we're going to have a much better work ethic on top of it if we don't have a stellar one already.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Very good. So on the motion for approval as amended, Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Caraviello? Yes. Councilor Falco? Yes. Councilor Knight? Yes. Vice President Lowell-Curran? Yes. Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. President De La Ruza?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes. With a vote of seven in the affirmative, none in the negative, the motion passes. 16-038, petition for common vitualist license by Noe Tejada, 96 Ferry Street, Everett, Massachusetts, president of Iris Family Restaurant, Incorporated. 432 Salem Street, Medford, Mass. On file, business certificate number 257, building, fire, police, health, treasurer, letter of compliance, tax ID, workman's comp, petition, all in order. Chair recognizes Councilor Caraviello, Chairman of the Licensing Committee, for his input.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. Turner, which business are you taking over?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Practically, I'm just getting off from LLC to incorporated.
[Richard Caraviello]: Okay. Mr. President, I reviewed the papers, and I assume the hours are going to stay the same, 7 to 11? That is correct. Mr. President, I reviewed the papers, find everything in order, and motion for approval. On the motion approved by Councilor Caraviello, Chairman.
[Fred Dello Russo]: All those in favor? All those opposed? Congratulations. Chair recognizes Vice President Angel Kern that we take papers in the hands of the clerk. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion carries. Offered by myself, President Dello Russo, it be resolved that the Medford City Council offered sincere condolences to the family of Nicholas Andrea Tola on his recent passing. If you would all rise to join me in a moment of silence. The records of the meeting of January 12, 2016, were passed to Councilor Falco. Councilor, how did you find those records?
[John Falco]: Thank you, Mr. President. I reviewed the records and found them to be in order, and I move approval.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion for approval of records of January 12, council meeting. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion carries. Chair recognizes Madam Vice President.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I just want to announce a fundraiser for juvenile diabetes being held for actually one of our gym teachers. physical education teachers, 6 p.m. on Friday night at the Elks. She's running, Ms. Richard is running the marathon in support of juvenile diabetes. So I know a number of people will be there. It's a great cause. They can have raffle prizes and food. So I invite everybody who would like to join to come down and show your support.
[Michael Marks]: Awesome. Thank you. Chair recognizes Councilor Marks. Thank you, Mr. President. Last week, the council brought up the issue with the Craddock Bridge and the business owners in that particular area. and the lack of addressing some of the concerns by DOT. Have we heard any response back regarding the barriers and access to some of the properties?
[Fred Dello Russo]: I've received nothing in an official capacity. I don't know if Councilor Caraviello can share with us anything as he was on the grounds with that.
[Richard Caraviello]: As of today, there's been no action taken on anything that we've asked for.
[Fred Dello Russo]: The requests went out, Mr. Clerk, to the Traffic Commission and to the City Engineer, I believe, as well. And those requests went out on Thursday. They went out to the Mayor's office on Thursday.
[Richard Caraviello]: So then they went out to the other offices. As of today, the barriers are still closed. We've asked for an opening in the barrier there to help the businesses out there, even to allow some parking in front of the restaurants. and businesses there in the evening to help out, and no responsibility there. I agree with Councilor Marksley, this group is being very unresponsive to the needs of the community.
[George Scarpelli]: Point of information, Councilor. Is this a recommendation that we order a work of stoppage to the,
[Michael Marks]: If we didn't receive a response, that's what we discussed last week. So it'll be up to the council. Chair recommends Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think that we have a couple of different avenues we could take to address the issue. I'd be happy to call a subcommittee meeting on intergovernmental affairs, see if we can get our representatives from the state house down here as well as representatives from the administration, from the business community. And from the project to sit down in the same room and see if we can work something out, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: It's getting ridiculous. To respect my Councilor Knight, we were down there last week with the representative, representative Donato. The DOT was there. They said, don't worry, we'll take care of everything. And that's where it's gone. Other than take away the barrier in front of the front door, none of the other requests I would ask for have been met.
[Adam Knight]: I think, Mr. President, I went down last Wednesday evening at the request of a business owner to a site visit down there, and there's a lot of signage that's very confusing. I certainly don't think that there's a accessible pathway to get from the parking facility behind Donuts with a difference to, say, REMAX or that side of the square, Mr. President. So I think that there's a number of issues going on that are something we can address. But the way we're going to get them done, I think, is by working together and sitting down in the same room and trying to iron them out. I think that we could have Diane McLeod and the Office of Disability take a look at the accessible pathway. I think there are a number of different approaches that we could take, and I just think it's about sitting down and coming up with a comprehensive strategy where we're all on the same page, working to effectuate the same positive goal. Mr. President, I think that DOT is standing in the way of us trying to get something done here. And unless we show a unified front, we're not going to be able to accomplish that. That's why I say it might be time that we bring our elected delegation, as well as the administration, into the same room and develop a strategy as to how we're going to approach them and address what's going on and why our requests are falling on deaf ears. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: I must say that I'm quite disappointed that we haven't received an official response. Chair recognizes Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: I don't know if the city solicitor is prepared to discuss this, but maybe if we can ask his legal opinion, what our next step is as the legislative body in this community, because I hear what Councilor Knight's saying about sitting down and coming up with comprehensive plans and so forth, but this has been an ongoing issue for a long period of time. And I don't think we can, in good faith, tell the business owners any longer that we're going to, you know, hold this up any further. A day lost is a dollar lost for these businesses. And I, as one member, think we're at the point right now. I want to work with people. But I think we're at the point right now where we have to send a stronger message, and that message may be a halt at work. And you better believe they'll sit down at the table immediately and address some of the concerns. But I'd like to pose that question to you, Mr. Solicitor.
[Mark Rumley]: Well, the first thing I'd say, Mark Rumley, City Solicitor, 50 Woodrow Avenue. The first thing I would say is that any type of action like that, when you talk about stoppage of work, it's not a matter of going down there and everybody just goes home. It would have to be some type of compulsion behind it. And that compulsion is always judicial, that is to tell people to stop. So what would have to precede any type of effort like that is a meeting where all of the data, all of the communications, all of the requests, that have been made and the reasonability of those requests. For example, the council may have asked that A be done. Well, there may be a valid reason why A hasn't been done, but perhaps you've asked that B should be done, and maybe it's valid that that should be done. What I'm saying is that when you lock and load for purposes of litigation, that should never be the initial response. Now, I'm not suggesting that that would be the first thing that this council's done because you've been diligent in asking questions and trying to get information on a regular basis. But what I am saying as your legal advisor is before you lock and load and say pull the trigger, let's make sure that we're standing on solid ground. and that all other avenues which could yield some benefit have been exhausted before that step is taken. That said, I think what's occurring right now is the frustration level is rising. I made a walk through the square with some other department heads with Mayor Burke just the week before last, and I saw that area where the activity was going on. And if that were to just stop, I mean, if it just like froze like you see in commercials, There would be some type of difficulty to that because there's already been alterations made and things of that nature have been done. So what I'm saying is that I understand your motivation. I'm not saying that it's imprudent or unreasonable, but I think that this type of activity has to be done with a deliberate discernment. We have to proceed in a proper fashion and I know that that's exactly what you'd want.
[Michael Marks]: So should we be bringing in the building commissioner and office of community development to work on or in concert with this council?
[Mark Rumley]: And the police department to talk about what they've had there. They've had some input there. This project, as everyone knows, is a massive project that's going on, I guess, for years. And where that's the case, we're going to have a lot of concerns. But the idea of stopping that until those concerns are met, that might be a little bit draconian. But nonetheless, it's in the cards as a possibility.
[Richard Caraviello]: In all due respects, I mean, how many times are we going to make requests? I mean, I stayed down until 10.30 one night to meet with the DOT. They came and made promises again. They were there the next day, made promises. I respect your opinion, but we should be locked and loaded. They're sort of just snubbing everything we say. I mean, if you can't do something, give us a reason why you can't do it. Don't just ignore us and walk away. That's what they're doing. I mean, the bus stop's going to get out of there. I mean, if you see when the bus pulls up, there's no room for it. That bus stop's going to go to another spot, which they've been promising to move. It hasn't happened.
[Mark Rumley]: I understand, Councilor. Essentially, you're preaching to the choir. But I would also say that in order to move forward, even though the frustration level that you have is reasonable, I get that. But in order to take certain legal moves to stop a state contract of this magnitude with all of the different moving parts that are in play, that has to be done by prudent heads, not reactionary. But I'm not suggesting for a second that any member of this council is being reactionary. I'm not suggesting that. But I'm saying that litigation has its ramifications. and must proceed properly. That's all. But I certainly share all that. I've tried to cross the street in that area.
[Richard Caraviello]: And it's a, I mean, if this is going to go on for the next two and a half years and we get some, uh, we've got some problems and we're only, we're only in the beginning stage.
[Mark Rumley]: Right. And I think that, um, the continued focus and the concern that's been brought by this council is commendable. And I'm hopeful, hopeful with state delegation and others that it can be as some results. And if it doesn't, Well, then let's prepare to cross that bridge. Which I didn't mean a pun.
[George Scarpelli]: Chair recognizes Councilor Scarpelli. If I can, we still, another issue that concerns me is that with any big job as a project manager, have we identified what department is actually in charge of this project? Because I've looked into other communities that are working with DOT and it's, it's very simple when you talk about this type of issue is the liaison from the city that's there is the one that's enforcing and dictating what's going on there. Right. So I, do we, do we have that?
[Fred Dello Russo]: There's a gentleman from Zoppo construction, if I could, a Councilor who addressed the council some twice in the past several months. And I believe that actually the point person on behalf of the city is the office of the engineer. So the engineers.
[George Scarpelli]: So it's not the DPW. Okay. So if I can, and being prudent and, and looking into all of those department heads coming ahead of us in front of us next week, if we can, and, and understanding our frustration and that we are making sure that our gun is loaded per se, that, that, that we need to, have them here to answer that. And, um, you know, even recommend a site visit. I know that we've also on the school side at times when there were issues with custodial services and cleaning services, we visited us, uh, our, and I think people need to know the frustrations with the business owners in that area that, that it's a voice that we asked for all those, the department heads of police, um, the engineering, DPW and the business owners with, of course, DOT, that we evaluate this issue and making sure that they understand at the podium that we're willing to do what needs to be done to make sure that our business owners and our constituents' issues are heard. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Mr. President. I think we have a motion, though, before us that this go to subcommittee. Mr. President? Chair recognizes Councilor Falco.
[John Falco]: Thank you, Mr. President. I think it's not a bad idea of sending it to subcommittee, but I actually like the idea of having a committee of the whole just on this one topic where we're all involved, because I just think this is huge. I mean, you're talking about people who own businesses. Their livelihoods are being affected. I think we've all been talking to business owners within the community. And I like Councilor Scarpelli's idea of bringing all the department heads in. I think that that is something that we need to do. I think we need to have the DOT here as well. But I think we need to all be in one meeting where this is the main focus of the meeting, and we all get on the same page. And I just think a community of the whole would be ideal for something like this.
[George Scarpelli]: I think that's a good idea, if we can all community of the whole in asking for engineering, DPW, police DOT, uh, next week.
[Unidentified]: Yeah.
[Fred Dello Russo]: If I may, if I'm counsel, please continue.
[John Falco]: And, uh, if I, if I may, I would say maybe not necessarily on a meeting a night where we have a council meeting, because I think that this is something, especially if you're having all kinds of department heads that are coming, you're talking about a lot of time. And I don't think it's something that we should be rushing through to get through get to our regular scheduled meeting. This is something I think that's going to take time and a lot of thought. And especially if we have department heads coming, the DOT coming, all of us, I think there's going to be a lot of people that are going to want to chime in on things. And I think it's going to take some time.
[Richard Caraviello]: Very good. Councilor? I agree with Councilor Falco. We should have this on a, maybe a Wednesday night or a Tuesday night, I'm not Wednesday or Thursday night. But like the mayor said, the, the point person on this is the city engineer and we've not seen the city engineer once. I've not seen a city engineer come to any meeting when the construction company was here. So again, I would say the first person to call is the engineer and get her on this. She seems to have dropped the ball. Thank you. Madam citizen.
[Jeanne Martin]: Just a real quick comment. Gene Martin, 10 coming street. I went to the pre meetings for this bridge work and Senator Jalen was there and Representative Donato was there as well to most of these meetings. So where are they in this problem solving? Okay. All right. Well, I'm just saying, I'm just asking, where are they? Can they?
[Unidentified]: be liaisons to these agencies for us.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. There'll be a meeting of the committee of the whole Wednesday at six o'clock in the city council office. Uh, the clerk is going to invite, uh, the city, uh, engineer, uh, the, uh, state delegation. and a representative Mr. Daly of department of transportation, as well as a representative of Zoppo construction to meet with the city council on this matter. We'll have present with us also, uh, the, uh, city solicitor Wednesday coming not tomorrow, the following Wednesday.
[Mark Rumley]: Mr. President, if I, if I could add just one thing, it's not really a legal advice. It's just, with all of the people and all of the effort and the focus that you want to bring to this type of a meeting, probably also be beneficial to set up some type of a central place electronically where people who can't attend the meeting can share their own experiences and thoughts in that area, not only as pedestrians, but also driving through there. So I think I can talk to the city clerk about that so we could have a repository of other comments and experiences of people who perhaps can't make that meeting. There's no need for us not to go forward with those comments, especially in this age.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Very good. What's next Wednesday's date? 27th. 27th. Thank you. Mr. Citizen. Thank you. We're going to adjourn. Mr. Castagnetti wishes to.
[Joe Viglione]: Good evening. Please state your name and address for the record. Good evening. Uh, Joseph Villione, 59 Garfield Avenue for mass. If we need a repository for comments and such, we should have a mobile public access TV and broadcast it on the government channel. We can accomplish that if the esteemed city solicitor would like. And he knows my phone number.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Mr. Castagnetti. Uh, thank you. I just thought you forgot something. Go Patriots! Motion for adjournment. On the motion of adjournment by Councilor Caraviello, seconded by Councilor Falco. All those in favor? All those opposed?
|
total time: 16.46 minutes total words: 1273  |
total time: 7.35 minutes total words: 677  |
total time: 16.84 minutes total words: 1075  |
total time: 4.85 minutes total words: 521  |
|
total time: 15.6 minutes total words: 979  |
total time: 9.77 minutes total words: 483  |
total time: 5.9 minutes total words: 604  |
total time: 3.72 minutes total words: 345  |