[Clerk]: To order, Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. Councilor Caraviello.
[Richard Caraviello]: Present.
[Clerk]: Councilor Falco. Councilor Knight. Vice President Lungo-Koehn. Present. Councilor Marks. Councilor Scarpelli. President Del Russo.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Present. With three absent and four present, please rise and join me in the salute to the flag. I believe we have some of the council members tied up in a committee meeting. I'm sure they'll be here forthwith. We'll begin. 16-096 offered by Vice President Lungo-Koehn. Why don't we do this one first while we started reading? Suspension of the rules, Councilor. A request for suspension of the rules offered by Councilor Marks. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion carries.
[Michael Marks]: Councilor, state your reason for suspension.
[Fred Dello Russo]: 16-295. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion carries. Communications from the Mayor to the Honorable President, to members of the Medford City Council, City Hall, Medford, Massachusetts. Dear Mr. President and councilors, I respectfully request and recommend that your honorable body approve the following amendments to revised ordinances entitled compensation plan and leave ordinances chapter 66 personnel. City Medford amended in revised ordinances, compensation plan and leave ordinances chapter 66 personnel be it ordained by the Medford city council that chapter 66 entitled personnel article two entitled classification and compensation plans. Section 66.40 entitled public safety personnel is hereby amended as follows. Section one and subsection 66.40 effective January 1st, 2014 at 2% of the present amount of each step within the grade shown below to set a present amount of each step and adjust the sum of thus obtained to the nearest and highest figure for the following grade. public safety one, firefighter, public safety two, fire lieutenant, public safety three, fire captain, public safety four, fire deputy, public safety five, chief, section two and subsection 66.40, effective January 1st, 2015, add 2% of the present amount of each step within the grade shown below to the said present amount of each step and adjust the sum thus obtained to the nearest and highest figure of the following grade, public safety, one firefighter, public safety, two fire lieutenant, public safety, three fire captain, public safety, four fire deputy chief, public safety, five chief section three subsection 66.4 effective January 1st, 2016 at 2% of the present amount of each step within the grade shown below to the set present amount of each step and adjust the sum thus obtained to the nearest and highest figure for the following grade, public safety one, firefighter, public safety two, fire lieutenant, public safety three, fire captain, public safety four, deputy chief, public safety five, chief. Section four, subsection 66.40, effective July 1st, 2016, add 1% of the present amount of each step within the grade shown below to the set present amount of each step and adjust the sum thus obtained to the nearest and highest figure for the following grade, public safety one, firefighter, public safety two, Fire Lieutenant, Public Safety 3, Fire Captain, Public Safety 4, Fire Deputy Chief, Public Safety 5, Chief. Section 5 in subsection 66.40, effective January 1st, 2014, add one and one-half percent of the following amount of each step within the grade shown below to the set present amount of each step and adjust the sum thus obtained to the nearest and highest figure for the following grade. Public Safety 1, Firefighter, Public Safety 2, Fire Lieutenant, Public Safety 3, Fire Captain, Public Safety 4, Fire Deputy Chief, Public Safety 5, Chief. This agreement is requested due to recently negotiated agreement with Local 1032 IAFF, the Firefighters Union. I have attached a proposed classification plan for your review. It is estimated that the contract will cost approximately $1 million through June 30th, 2015, which includes retroactive payments beginning January 1st, 2014, and includes payments to retirees who retired after January 1st, 2014. Retroactive payments prior to fiscal year 2016 were made once ordained by your honorable body. Separate transfer paper from negotiated salary count and free cash is on the agenda for your consideration. Very truly yours, Stephanie M. Burke, Mayor. We have attached to this an outline that gives the steps detailed amounts for each year, for each percent, for all of these matters. And we have here to report before us Louise Miller, our Honorable Director of Budgeting and Purchasing, and who was instrumental in the negotiation process and formation of this very good contract. Ms. Miller, if you would.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: So the ordinance before you reflects the agreement that was reached with the firefighters union and representatives of the firefighters union are here. Um, the contract is now negotiated. It is a one year and three year contract. So the first year is the first year of the contract, which was fiscal year 2014 and the last, um, the end of the contract will be through June 30th, 2017. Very good.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Mr. Clerk, would you mark present Councilors Falco, Knight, and Scampelli. Thank you. Councilors, any questions? Madam Vice President.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Dello Russo. Ms. Miller, you said it's good through June 30, 2017?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Yes. It's actually a total of four years. So the contract had stood unresolved. since 2013.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: So is the one million, that's going to cover us through June 30th, 2016, but then obviously we're going to have it in the new budget for 2000, um, fiscal year, 2017. That is correct. Okay. Thank you for now. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knife. Mr. President, thank you very much, and through you to Ms. Miller. Ms. Miller, it's my understanding that this matter was in negotiations for quite a bit of time and was approaching the stages of arbitration?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Yes, it was.
[Adam Knight]: And the parties were able to sit down and negotiate this agreement, and both sides are comfortable with it?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: I believe so.
[Adam Knight]: And has the membership of Local 1032 ratified this contract at this point in time?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: They have, and they are here if they would like to speak to it.
[Adam Knight]: I'd move for approval of the matter, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion for approval by Councilor Knight, do members of the Firefighters Union, IAFF, Local 1032, wish to address us?
[Bill O'Brien]: Yes, just good evening, Councilors. Bill O'Brien, Local President of 1032 Firefighters, offices at 340 Senior Street. After two and a half years, we did negotiate what we believe is a fair contract, and we just asked the Councilors to move for approval.
[Fred Dello Russo]: We have a motion for approval by Councilor Knight, seconded by Councilor Caraviello. Councilor Scarpelli. Mr. President, very good. Councilor Knight. We'll wait for the vote. On the motion for approval for a first reading, Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. Where we have a representative from the administration, and also members of the firefighters union, there are a couple of outstanding issues that I am very concerned about. One being the promised turnout gear, second pair of turnout gear that was promised and budgeted back, I believe it was a year and a half, two years ago now. And I'm not sure if the firefighters can speak to that, but I'd like someone from the administration to speak to the fact that this turnout gear that was promised and much needed has not been received by the firefighters as of yet. Can you speak to that?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: I am not aware of an appropriation for a second set of turnout gear.
[Michael Marks]: Can you?
[Bill O'Brien]: I don't believe Ms. Miller was on the job, so to say, when this went to approval. I believe this was done at a budget hearing when the firefighters made a presentation. about the concerns that we have of cancer-causing agents that get attached to our bunker gear even after they're washed. We transport them from station to station. People move around all the time before shifts, and they're not at the same station. So they have to put in their vehicles and so on and so forth. So we do have a wash and dry machine down at headquarters. I mean, it would be optimal to have wash and dry machines at every station. But the other case is that we have a second set of turnout gear. Because what happens in the last fire we had at Sagamore Ave, it was contaminated. And it goes out to a special cleaner, and it comes back, and the recommendation is you gotta take this turnout gear out of service. So it's beneficial to us and our families that we have a second set of turnout here.
[Michael Marks]: And that was approved by the Medford City Council. And maybe you could follow up on that to see where that stands. It's been, I believe, a year and a half, two years now. I certainly will. And my other question was regarding the work that was done over the past year to many of the stations throughout the community. there was some concern about shoddy workmanship in some of the stations regarding the floor, regarding heating and air conditioning and ventilation. Has any of those issues been resolved or has the city neglected to move forward on any of those issues?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Again, I have not been provided with any issues at the fire stations. I recently, um, actually had someone go to all the fire stations in order to put together a maintenance contract for the HVAC where the pH of the water has to be adjusted every year. And I, it once again, wasn't made aware of any issues. I don't know if anyone else.
[Michael Marks]: This is specifically around the work that took place, um, back, I believe it was a year, year and a half ago, uh, regarding, uh, the floor, at one of the stations regarding the HVAC system at one of the stations. And I know the city said they were looking into it, but I have yet to hear anything about that. Can that be another issue that you check on?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: I certainly will follow up with that.
[Bill O'Brien]: I believe with the council referring to the floor down at engine four that was kind of pitched the wrong way. We brought the concerns to the administration at the time and it falls on the chief and the administration to monitor that equipment and if there's any workmanship issues. that we brought it to their attention. It's up to them to investigate it. And, uh, I don't know what the warranty is on, on some of this stuff, as far as heating systems and, and, uh, the floor. And that's up to that. The administration holds all that paperwork. We don't, we don't hold that paperwork. If we have issues or we think that the building is insufficient or the heat doesn't work, we send a communication to the chief and that's his job to fix it. And some of the stuff, is fixed, they have replaced HVA systems at engine four, engine five. They don't run optimal. Do they work? Yes. Do they break down? Yes, they do. Ms. Miller did actually sign a Yeah, she brought in a maintenance person, which has helped, but it gets too hot, it gets too cold, stuff like that. It should be fixed. It should be running at an optimal level.
[Michael Marks]: Well, that's the reason why I bring this up. There was a punch list that was circulated back some time ago. I think it was by Jack Buckley at the time. I can't recall, but it was a punch list that before the city was going to sign off on the contract, that there was a list of items that had to be uh, addressed. And I have yet to hear back from the administration regarding these items. And I'm hoping because that was brought up in a timely fashion where it would be still under warranty. I'm hoping that, uh, at least these items will fall through. It doesn't sound like the floor was followed through.
[Bill O'Brien]: Um, so my, my, uh, if you have any questions about that stuff, I would probably target them to the chief.
[Michael Marks]: Right. And just my, my last issue was that, uh, and this is an issue that council longer was brought up on many occasions. uh, regarding email and communication, uh, with all departments, but in particular with, uh, the fire department, has there been any discussion between the, the fire department and the administration regarding setting up email accounts? No, there has not. Is there a reason? Is there a reason why?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Unless it's brought to us by the fire department, we weren't aware that we needed to initiate anything regarding emails, but there was a council resolution.
[Michael Marks]: Uh, by this council, I believe it was unanimously supported at least on two occasions that I can remember requesting that, uh, email, uh, be looked into, uh, to, for the fire department. And it just seems archaic that, uh, the response we received is that they go based on a notice that's put on, uh, you know, of things happening within the department. So it's a paper notice that's posted similar to what the clerk does downstairs about notifying, about public meetings and so forth. So again, once again, and I don't want to, I know this is something Council Longo has been working on for some time. I would ask that the administration go back and check out why email is not part of, not just for the fire department across the city. It seems like a very simple way of communicating a mass email. You can read, you can reach every city employee through, through one email and everyone be on the same page. So it just doesn't make any sense why we're still, not moving forward with that.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Okay, I certainly will bring that back to the mayor's office.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. On the motion for approval by Councilor Knight, seconded by Councilor Caraviello for the first reading. Mr. Clark, please call the roll. Councilor Caraviello. Motion to waive the three readings. Motion to waive the three readings. by Councilor Caraviello. On the motion to waive the three readings by Councilor Caraviello. Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Based on my vote that I took several weeks back when the administration came forward with the creation of new positions, I would ask that it be recorded in opposition to the waiving of the three readings, just because I feel strongly that it does away with public participation.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. On the motion of Councilor Caraviello, Mr. Clerk, please call the roll of the waiving of the three readings.
[Clerk]: Councilor Caraviello? Yes. Councilor Falco? Yes. Councilor Knight? Yes. Vice President Lennon-Curran? No. Councilor Marks?
[Michael Marks]: Record me in opposition.
[Clerk]: Voting no.
[Michael Marks]: Right.
[Clerk]: Councilor Scarpelli?
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Fred Dello Russo]: President Dello Russo? No. With the vote of four in the affirmative, three in the negative, the motion passes. On the main motion, for all three readings, you have to have to vote in the affirmative. So for the first reading, this will be for the first reading. because there was not a, uh, unanimous consent to waive all three readings. Uh, we will, uh, follow the standard procedure with any ordinance, and this will be subjected to three readings. Therefore, we will have the first reading vote now on the motion of approval by Councilor Knight as seconded by Councilor Caraviello.
[Michael Marks]: Mr. Clerk, just before you call the, um, I had a discussion with the clerk today. And knowing that, um, the last time, uh, the motion came up to suspend the three readings, uh, the mayor's papers appeared back on the calendar within, I believe it was three weeks. Um, so the process went rather quickly. So I just want the firefighters that are here tonight to know that, um, you know, we want to push this forward. We want to make sure there's transparency and open public dialogue. Uh, and it's, it's about a three week process. So I anticipate to have the paper back like any sign within three weeks.
[Bill O'Brien]: Yes. Mr. President, can I speak please? Go ahead. Um, our members, we've negotiated in good faith for two and a half years. We've had many meetings. We were on the brink of jail MC. We have spent countless hours of attorneys, manpower accountants. These members, men and women of my membership have waited two and a half years for a race. We can't strike. We go to work every day. We do the job. This city has the best men and women in the commonwealth, in the commonwealth. We deserve that raise. And I would ask the council to reconsider your vote to get these men and women their money as soon as possible. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: For the first reading, Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Caraviello? Yes. Councilor Falco?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Knight?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Vice President Lungo-Koehn? Yes. Councilor Marks?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Scarpelli?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes.
[Clerk]: President Dello Russo?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes. We vote seven in the affirmative, none in the negative. The matter passes its first reading. Congratulations. While we're under suspension, Madam Vice President.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Just if we could take a formal roll call vote with regards to the interdepartmental email system. That's something we've been talking about for two or three years, I believe. And Mayor Burke, at the time, when we discussed it in committee of the whole meetings for budget hearings, was the budget director at the time. So I know she must be aware of the situation and the need for it. And posting something on a bulletin board obviously is not good enough. So hopefully he, she's very busy, but if we could move, move on that and she can discuss it with the chief of fire and get that done. Um, I'd like to take a roll call vote on that request.
[Fred Dello Russo]: No vice president. I'll go current that the mayor established an email system for the fire department. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll point of information. Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: I think the, the men and women of the Medford fight apartment in local 10 32, uh, more concerned about getting their cost of living adjustment than they are about getting an email account right now, Mr. President. I think the matter that's before this council is whether or not we feel as though they do their raise, and we can waive these three readings.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Mr. Councilor, we just voted in approval of the erasers.
[Adam Knight]: All right. The email issue, though, Ms. Miller said she was going to bring it back to the administration. So I don't know what more we need to do. I mean, why do we need to take a roll call vote on an issue that we've already sent them three times and we have the word from the budget? It's been over 90 days.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: It's been over 90 days. I think it just sent in a message that it's important to the council as the erasers are.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Caraviello? Yes. Yes. Yes. Councilor Falco?
[Michael Ruggiero]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Knight? No. Vice President Lionel Curran?
[Michael Ruggiero]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Marksley? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes.
[Clerk]: President Dello Russo?
[Fred Dello Russo]: No. Vote 5 in the affirmative, 2 in the negative. Motion carries. While we're on to suspension. 16-296, to the Honorable President and members of the Medford City Council, Medford City Hall, Medford Mass, 02155, dear Mr. President and Councilors. In regards to the paper before you this evening regarding the proposed increases to the Fighters Union, amendment to chapter 66, article 2, section 66.40, please transfer $554,000 from negotiated salary account to account 010-220-5110, and please transfer $446,000 from certified free cash to account 1010-220-5110. This will provide funding for the recently negotiated contract with local 1032 International Association of Firefighters, which is effective until June 30, 2017. Before us to explain this paper is the Director of Budget, Ms. Miller.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: So before you is a paper to actually fund the firefighters contract. And this would be retroactive to January 1, 2014, and would provide for all the raises through the end of this fiscal year. There was a certain amount of funds that was set aside both this year and in prior years for the negotiation of bargaining contracts, bargaining unit contracts. We would use the entire balance in order to fund this contract as well as propose that $446,000 of certified free cash be used to fund the difference. Balance in the certified free cash account is $9,623,000. Chair awaits a motion. Move.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion for approval by Councilor Knight, seconded by Councilor Caraviello. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Caraviello? Yes. Councilor Falco? Yes. Councilor Knight?
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Vice President Long and Kern?
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. President Del Russo. Yes.
[Fred Dello Russo]: With the vote of seven, the affirmative, none in the negative. The motion carries. While we're under suspension, 16 to 97 to the honorable president, members of the metric city council, city hall method, Nassau to one five five. Dear Mr. President and city councilors, I respectfully request and recommend that your honorable honorable body approve the appropriation of certified free cash in the amount of $190,000. for design development, final design and construction documents, and construction administration for repairs and improvements to the city hall roof, parapet and cornices, cupola repairs, repairs to the council chamber ceiling, and associated molding repairs and main entrance repairs and improvements. Louise Miller, Director of Budget and Chief Procurement Officer, will be in attendance to answer any questions you have. Ms. Miller.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: So, um, this particular paper follows on the work that was done recently to evaluate the roof, the parapet, the council chamber ceiling, as well as the front entrance of city hall. Um, this would allow for the architect fees to go forward with basically everything on the roof, the parapet and the cupola. The entire ceiling in this building with some work on the wood veneer in the walls where they were damaged by some water coming down. And then the front entrance to this building.
[Fred Dello Russo]: We had a lengthy explanation on this matter to us from the mayor herself at a recent Committee of the Whole meeting with her. So chair recommends a motion. Chair awaits a motion. Madam Vice President.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Ms. Miller, do you have any breakdown of the $190,000?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Unfortunately, I did not bring it with me today. I didn't bring it with me today. I apologize. I can provide you with that information.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: So could you further explain? So the $190,000 will just go to the architectural fees for those six projects?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Yes, it is the full design of all the projects, putting together the construction documents, the bidding documents. It is also for all the construction supervision that would be required as part of the design work. It also includes any asbestos and other environmental work that might need to be done and landscape architect for the front entrance of the city hall. So where did we come up with the 190,000? Is that something that was bid on? Yes, we had a request for qualifications from an architect, and the architect developed for us a cost estimate of what it would cost to do the design, bidding documents, and construction estimate. This actually is quite a reasonable cost estimate based upon the amount of work that's going to be required, and a lot of that is structural work, not just design-type work. In request for qualifications, did we only get an answer from one architect? Oh, no. We received many architects' statements of qualifications. So five. Do you know how many? No, I don't recall exactly how many. This particular firm that we selected, Russo Bar, actually specializes in exterior envelope work, which is why we selected them. And they've done historical work as well. So they have the combination of both the exterior work and the historical work.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Okay, if we could get a breakdown of the 190,000, Mr. Finn, and then if we could also get the results, a copy of the results, whether on disk or hard copy of the architectural design work. I'm sorry, once Russo bar is complete with their, you know, when their studies complete, can we get a copy of what they've come up with?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Oh, absolutely. Yes. And we will have to come back to council because once the design is complete, we're going to come back to council for the funding of the actual work that needs to be done. And did, I think we asked in the committee of the whole meeting and estimate on that, that work that is going to be need to need to be done, but we didn't have an answer to that. It's going to be in the $1.5 million to $2 million range. But until the design is complete, all I can give you is that kind of a ballpark figure. And based upon the preliminary work that was done on the parapet, almost all of it will have to be removed structurally.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: And can you explain a little bit more about the roof problems that we have? What type of leaks do we have now currently?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: So the leaks, we didn't have any leaks right now. We did some repair work and there were some leaks around the HV, the chiller HVAC units that are up at the top. I'm probably saying it wrong, but there are some HVAC units up there and there were some leaks around that. There also were some leaks along the flashing where the parapet actually touches the roof membrane. It's a flat roof and that flashing has needed some repair. We did some repair work to that as well. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor, move approval, Mr. President. On the motion approved by Councilor Knight, seconded by Councilor Falco. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll, if you would.
[Clerk]: Councilor Caraviello? Councilor Falco? Yes. Councilor Knight? Yes. Vice President Lemon-Kern? Yes. Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. President Del Russo?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes. With a vote of six in the present, and one absent. Motion carries. Congratulations. While we're on to suspension, do you want to do one more here? 16293 while we're on to suspension. Petition for common vigilance license by Colvin management incorporated doing business as Hotel by Marriott, station landing, 95, station landing, Medford, Mass., Leo Bazaras, CEO and Chairman, on file, business certificate number 291, building department, police, fire traffic impact, police traffic impact, health department treasurer, letter of compliance, tax identification, workman's compensation, and petition. All seem to be before us. And I believe the chairman for licensing is Councilor Caraviello. Thank you, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: Good evening, gentlemen.
[SPEAKER_15]: Good evening.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Please state your name and address for the record. Welcome.
[SPEAKER_15]: Eben Tormey, XSS Hotels. John Mitchell, general manager of the AC Hotel in Medford. I'm here representing Leo Exeris, chairman of Column 1 Hotels.
[Richard Caraviello]: If you gentlemen could just give a brief overview of of what's happening there to the council so that we'd be up to speed to appreciate it.
[SPEAKER_15]: Yes, it's a new 152 room AC hotel by Marriott just opened last week. 152 rooms. We have a beautiful modern new facility. We think the city of Medford will be very proud of what we've built for you here. I think it's going to be a great lodging facility for the city for many years to come. Is there a restaurant on the premises? Yes, we serve a breakfast seven days a week, as well as dinner, and there is a bar. It's very small. And what about a functional facility? Yes, we do have a meeting room divisible by two, as well as two small breakout spaces. Meeting room serves about 120 comfortably. We do have a patio terrace area off of the meeting room, as well as the breakfast dining area.
[Richard Caraviello]: When do you anticipate opening?
[SPEAKER_15]: We are open for business. Yes, we are renting rooms for a week now. We've had a wonderful response.
[Richard Caraviello]: Mr. President, the papers appear to be in order and I recommend approval. On the motion approved by Councilor Caraviello.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Seconded by Councilor Knight. All those in favor. All those opposed. Congratulations. Thank you very much. Motion passes, license granted. While we're on to suspension, we have one more paper from the Mayor to the Honorable 16-298, Mr. Clark, to the Honorable President, to members of the Medford City Council, City Hall, Medford, Massachusetts, 155. Excuse me, dear Mr. President and city councilors, I respectfully request and recommend that your honorable body approve the appropriation of certified free cash in the amount of $18,000 for investigating of the low slope roof at the Medford Public Library, including an existing conditions report and a structural analysis to determine, excuse me, whether an expansion of the second floor of the library over the area is possible. Louise Miller, Director of Budget and Chief Procurement Officer, will be in attendance to answer any questions you may have, very truly yours, Stephanie M Burke mayor signature filed with paper. Okay.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: So this paper actually follows on an issue that arose this year at the library with leaks in the library roof. Our building department went and investigated. There were some maintenance work that was done to the gutters and following that we weren't able to identify the actual source of the leaks. This would allow us to, have an existing condition study done of that flat part of the roof that is leaking. The structural analysis is to determine whether the second floor can be expanded. There are some plans for trying to make the library more usable and more of the space more usable, and Barbara Kerr is here, the acting director of the library, and so this simply as a structural analysis to see whether it is possible. It doesn't mean that's what will happen. It's just to see if it is even possible to do.
[Fred Dello Russo]: And again, we had a detailed explanation of this process and several others that are underway at a recent meeting with the mayor. The acting director of the library is here. Maybe she'd like to address us on the matter.
[Barbara Kerr]: I'm Barbara Kerr. I'm the acting director of the library. I like directress, actually. It's very 19th century. We're very excited about this. We've been wanting to expand to the second floor for years. So it's a very exciting prospect. I hope it can happen. And we're very pleased that the new administration is so quickly responding to support for the library. And we would very much like to put children and young adults upstairs. Brian wanted to put them up there to get them out of his face, but we want them to be, we want a new, we would like a space that's tailored to that age group where they can, enjoy their library experience instead of having to cohabitate with older people who might not be happy. So we would love this to happen if it can.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Awesome. Thank you. Motion for approval, Mr. President? Motion for approval by Councilor Caraviello, seconded by Councilor Falco. Is anybody wishing to speak? Did anybody press their cues? Why isn't mine lighting up here? I'm sorry. Did I press the wrong buttons? Wow, now we're back in business. Councilor Myers.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. And it was mentioned we had a meeting just recently with Diane McLeod, our ADA compliance officer, that there's an issue with access to the second floor. I appreciate the fact that the administration is moving forward on this structural analysis. I think every member of this council has been promoting not only a rehab of the library, but also an expansion, a possible expansion on the second floor with community space and potentially maybe even a place where you can have a scone and a coffee and so forth. What is the current status of the ADA issue with the elevator up to the second floor?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: The plan is to use CDBG funding to make the second floor of the library fully accessible, so we would look at the elevator space right now, enlarge it, make it into a full elevator so that the second floor is fully accessible.
[Michael Marks]: So is that a request that's going to be in this year's community block grant money or is that?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Yes, it is going to be in this year's community block grant money, the CDBG. Yes.
[Michael Marks]: And that'll be a request coming from the administration or from, how has that happened?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: I am actually not sure whether it comes from the director, the community development director, or from the administration. I'll have to find out for you. But I know that that is what the proposed funding is and how we're going to be moving forward with that particular project.
[Michael Marks]: And the funding would be for a design study or would it be for the actual?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: For the entire project. For design so that we can come up with good costs. find out where it is feasible for an elevator to be. It may be in exactly the spot that it's in and then the actual construction of the elevator.
[Michael Marks]: So is there been a design study commissioned already?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: There has not. We were just talking about it.
[Michael Marks]: So how will we know how much money to request in the community block grant money then?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: I first have to do a request for qualifications for a designer to do that design. And once we receive the proposals back, we will know how much that is.
[Michael Marks]: And that that'll be based on what the recommendation that how I don't understand how this works. I guess you're going to, you're going to do a request for qualifications.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Yes.
[Michael Marks]: Someone will put out their qualifications. You will also request at that time, a design study with a complete cost analysis.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Yes, so what happens is we get proposals from different architects. We interview them and then work out a fee schedule for the first stage of the design. Once we have that fee schedule worked out, then we proceed with the first phase of the design and then find out whether or not it's a project that can or cannot be done and what the actual cost of the project would be.
[Michael Marks]: And that will be included in the Yes. Community block grant money this year. Yes. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Councilor Marks. The chair recognizes Vice President Juan Gocart.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Now that our machine is working properly.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Ms. Miller, my question has to do with the evaluation of the existing, um, I know that 18,000 is going to, uh, evaluate what I'm, I guess my, what my question is, will it evaluate the entire roof as a whole? I know there was leaking in the children's section, then I got a couple calls that it was also leaking in other sections. So will this evaluation cover the entire span of the roof?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: So yes, of the flat roof, the building department went and looked at where the leaks were. They had an opinion that they were on the flat part of the roof, but they just simply weren't able to identify precisely what the cause of the leak or the actual location of the leak. So this will, someone will come through, an architect, and actually give us a existing condition of every part of the flat roof. So if there are some other areas that are about to start leaking, they will let us know and we can do the repair work there as well. And we may decide to replace the whole roof. I don't know until we have that.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: So there is a sloped roof and a flat roof. It consists of two different types of roofing, I'm assuming?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Yes. This is for the flat part where there used to be skylights, and the skylights were covered up. So if you go up to the second floor of the library, you can see it out through the windows, that area. That's where the leaks are coming from. But water travels, so it's really hard to identify the exact location of the source of the leak.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: And I know this first came about in December, and then $5,000 was put into the roof. And I think, obviously, patches were put in place. As of maybe three weeks ago, the last time I was in there, the roof was still leaking. Did we do any more patching to at least get us through this process?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: At this point in time, we cannot identify any other locations that need to be patched. The leaks at this point is that there really are just a couple of drips when it rains. I mean, there was some major water coming in when we were initially notified of the leaks in the roof. But at this point, I understand that it's certainly not at that level.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yeah, Director Kerr, could we maybe get the director up just to answer that question? I'm just, my concern comes from, if it's been leaking since A little bit after the $5,000 patchwork, are we dealing with mold issues or any type of rot is a question that's out there. And I think we need to do a little bit more patching and spend this $18,000. So is the roof still leaking? And if so, how many spots are we talking?
[Barbara Kerr]: It's much, much better. When they came after the initial storm, Mr. Moki sent down a couple of crews. They cleaned all the water off. And they drained the roof, and then they came back and they did maintenance on the drains that are on the roof. And since then, it has been much, much better. There's one leak that always leaks in children's. There's, along the front windows, there's one place. And then there's a couple others. It depends, the children's ones always leaks when it rains or snows. The other ones depend on the wind direction and the kind of, you know, whether the sun is out or not. But it is much, much better. It is improved, but yes.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: So I guess I have a two-prong question. Are we going to do any patching in the meantime? Or how long is this study going to take? Because, I mean, we can't let it go on for a month or two months where it's still leaking in certain sections. Are we going to do any more patching as well?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: I am not aware of any more patching that we are going to be doing in the meantime. The study is going to be completed in a matter of weeks, four weeks.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: In four weeks.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Yeah. once we have the funding in place. And then as far as mold, to the extent there would be any, mold remediation is not generally done until after the leaks are patched because there is really no point in doing them until then. We're not aware of any air quality issue right now. Dust. It's a library.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: So with regards to doing the mold testing, is there a plan to do mold testing after this is fixed? Yes, we will. Oh, just make that a recommendation. Make sure it's in writing that the city council is requesting mold testing. And obviously an engineer will review any rot, so obviously just within the RFQ if we could get, make sure we have an architect that can review and evaluate any type of rotting situation. And then my third recommendation would be that we do have, whether it's clean the drains again or do some patchwork, that we do some patchwork within the near future, you know, because this is, we say this is going to take four weeks, maybe, you know, a little bit more as things always run over time, and to have like dripping in buckets and buckets all over the place and, you know, a leak near a window and near the children's section. I just feel like if this was a house, we'd have somebody, you know, you'd have somebody patching immediately and I think that's what we need to do here. I've spoken about it before and I think that needs to be done for the quality of the people who work in the library as well as anybody who's going in to visit or do any work in there or take their kids in there to have buckets where it was, when I was in there, it was leaking over the bucket and the rug seemed wet. So I just don't think that's acceptable to allow for. Obviously it's been happening since January if it was fixed in December and it was still happening as of three weeks ago when I was in a library and it sounds like we still have some leaks today. So we're going on three months now with really no resolve. Um, I think that's, We can't take another four weeks, and I don't think the library deserves another four weeks of leaking.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion for approval by Councilor Caraviello, as seconded by Vice President Lungo-Koehn, and thrice amended by the same Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and through you to Ms. Miller. Ms. Miller, this paper that's before us this evening was one of a couple of different options that the administration looked at, is that correct? In terms of, I think at the Committee of the Whole, there were a couple of different options that were presented to us, whether or not we wanted to see if we could build up on the second floor, and whether or not we wanted to just look at repairing the roof and that was it. And this seems like this was, based on my conversations with the administration and the Committee of the Whole, this seemed like the way to go. But Councilor Lungo does bring up a good point. So you're saying that it would take four weeks from the date that we approved this money to get someone out there and get the report
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: For everything to be finalized, a report to be finalized, yes.
[Adam Knight]: And then, say, we get a report back that says it's going to cost $50,000 to fix the roof of the library. How long in your experience would that take to be taken care of, put out to bid, qualified bidder selected, and have construction staff?
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: So, well, it takes two weeks at least to put out a bid and advertise it. And then it needs to be evaluated and the roofer has to be able to come in. Um, so it's a pretty small job. I'd say eight weeks from the time the report is done until all work is completed.
[Adam Knight]: So with the approval of this funding tonight, we can expect to see, um, completion of the, I should say, start of the construction work at the library within the next three months.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: Yes. However, depending upon what the report shows, it could be, you know, substantial sum of money. We just don't know yet.
[Adam Knight]: And, um, perhaps at the report, as it's safe to say that we're not going to know what the situation is at the library until we get this done.
[X_nYXZZ4ChY_SPEAKER_04]: That's correct. I mean, we've done some patching. We spent a few thousand dollars doing some patching, but we really need an expert to come in and look at it at this point.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, I think I'd have to agree with Ms. Miller that I would just throw in good money after bad over here. And until we do an assessment to figure out what's going on with the roof, um, I think this is, $18,000 that's wisely spent. I'd a second the motion for approval.
[John Falco]: Very good on that motion. Councilor Falco. Thank you, Mr. President. Um, I support this a hundred percent. I think it's long overdue. It needs to be done. And I love the idea of possibly having a second floor in the library. Uh, just a couple of quick questions with regard to the current leaking. So in the areas where the leaking has stopped, are they still missing sailing tiles and the buckets on the ground and,
[Barbara Kerr]: Yes and yes. But there's some places where we just leave the buckets, because I don't know if it's damp out in weeks. We've left the ceiling tiles off, because what's the point of putting them on if they're going to fall on the floor if they get wet? So yes, there are.
[John Falco]: So at the point where it's been patched, but we're not confident that it's?
[Barbara Kerr]: Well, rather than spend the money on the ceiling tiles, which are kind of pricey, we decided to just wait until the dry season and see what happens.
[John Falco]: Yeah. I mean, I just, um, well, I think that we're hoping that this investigation of the, uh, or evaluation of the roof is, uh, hopefully in a month's time we'll actually give us a good plan as to what we're going to do. And then, um, I'd like to see the ceiling tiles at some point go up soon. I think if you, especially if the, if the roof has been repaired, you know, I, I mean, I'd like to see the ceiling tiles go up just because, I mean, I think if you walk in, I mean, it sends a message. I mean, it really sends a message when people come in, especially from out of town, and this is their first, you know, view of Medford. I mean, it really kind of doesn't send a good signal. So, I mean, if the roof's been fixed in certain spots, I'd like to see the tiles go up. But as far as the maintenance of the library, if we could get a report back from maybe the building department as far as what is the maintenance plan? Is there any preventive maintenance being done in the building? For instance, I mean the drip, the drains on the roof were a definite issue that caused the leaking. Is someone going up on the roof on a yearly basis, looking at the drains, making sure they're cleaned out? So if we can get some sort of a report back from the building department, uh, just letting us know what they do on a yearly basis or what they do on a monthly basis with regard to maintenance for the building, preventive maintenance. Uh, I think, uh, that would be, um, a good start as to, uh, if we're going to be possibly putting on a new roof, we need to take a look at how we can maintain that building on a regular basis and conduct preventive maintenance as well.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Very good. So on the motion of approved by council Caraviello, uh, seconded by vice-president Lungo-Koehn, thrice amended by council Lungo-Koehn and once by councilor Falco. All those in favor. No, we need a roll call. Mr. Clerk, madam vice-president.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: The last, the last amendment, if we could just read that back.
[Fred Dello Russo]: The last amendment was Councilor Falco.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Sorry, my last, my last.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Your last amendment was that the patchwork be done immediately to mitigate any extant leaks in there to prevent the continued problem.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes, thank you. I just think that's important. I wanted to make sure that was in there because when we did get the information from the mayor's office, to replace the roof would cost looks like if it's the low roof in this estimate, 110 to 130,000. So I think patching it up within the next week or so is definitely a thousand or two is definitely worth it. Um, when you talk about three to four months, it might, it might take to repair or replace, get it replaced.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. Hopefully, uh, you know, in the next two weeks, the commonwealth of the mass library building commission will be coming to our city. and meeting with the library director and the mayor. And hopefully they'll look favorably upon us. They'll maybe generate, either give us a new library or at least money to repair that one and update it. So I look forward to that happening.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Yes. With the vote of seven, the affirmative, none in the negative, the motion carried. While we're on suspension, Mr. Councilor Knight, I'd like to take paper 16294 out of order.
[Fred Dello Russo]: 16294, my thoughts exactly. Petition by Virkamur Patel for NK Convenience, 562 High Street, Medford, Mass, for Keno To Go Monitor to be installed. May I just say that in 52 minutes, the council spent $1,208,000. Thank you all. Councilor Caraviello, Chairman of Licensing. Thank you, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: I reviewed the gentleman's papers here and they appear to be in order. Our motion for acceptance is under the condition that we get the signed off by the building department, make sure it's correctly zoned. Very good.
[Fred Dello Russo]: And we have a, on these matters, we have to just state that we're not in opposition.
[Adam Knight]: President, I'd like to be recorded in opposition to the paper.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor Knight is to be recorded in opposition. Does the, uh, does the vitriol wish to speak and address the council at all?
[L5Dn-1_BzKM_SPEAKER_11]: Sure.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Please state your name and address.
[L5Dn-1_BzKM_SPEAKER_11]: My name is, uh, real Kumar Patel and, uh, I've been doing business there for 2006 and, uh, uh, we are, uh, very proud to serve the community as a convenience stores. And, uh, we have really good people coming there and we do our great job to base, to serve them.
[Richard Caraviello]: Very nice. I agree, Mr. President. I frequent that store myself, and their store is always clean and well maintained. And they've been there for many years, and they are a good neighbor to the community.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Do we have to take a roll call on this? All those in non-opposition, say aye. All those in opposition. Aye. The non-opposition has it. Thank you, Mr. President.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, are we on the suspension?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes, Councilor.
[Michael Marks]: back from Attorney Mark Rummer, the city solicitor, regarding the resolution that was offered for the city solicitor to create a home rule petition regarding the election of a charter commission in this community. The city solicitor was very diligent and followed the instructions of the council last week on our votes to remove the restrictions on the number of amendments that would be allowed under the home rule petition. Also the increase of commission members from seven to nine and the removal of the periodic review so that the elected commission can decide if and when for future reference. when the charter will be reviewed, Mr. President. So I would ask that we vote a motion for approval of this home rule petition that was submitted dated March 3rd from the city solicitor, and ask that it be sent to the mayor for her approval, Mr. President. And I believe it also requires the signatures of the council. We all received a copy, and on the back page, it requires signatures of the council. So I would offer that, Mr. President, that we move approval on this and send the paper to the mayor for Mayor Burke's approval.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On that motion. Seconded by Councilor Falco. Councilor Nettle.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if the solicitor is available, I just have a couple of questions for him.
[Fred Dello Russo]: We welcome before us the author of this draft, the Right Honorable Mark E. Rumley, solicitor.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and through you to Mr. Rumley, thank you for being here this evening. In reviewing this piece of proposed legislation, Mr. President, it's my understanding that by the council approving this matter, we would be bypassing the requirements to collect signatures to put this matter on the ballot, and we would also be erasing the question of asking the voters as to whether or not they felt the charter review was appropriate. Is that correct?
[Michael Marks]: Yes, that's correct on both counts.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I don't feel comfortable bypassing the electorate. in this process whatsoever, and I'd ask to be recorded in opposition when this paper comes up for a vote. I think when we look at historically what the council has done, Mr. President, it's when initiative petition matters have come before the council and there's been a request to ask that it be placed on the ballot. Absent the signatures, the council was consistent in their application of requiring signatures, and I, for one, feel as though that's the best practice, Mr. President. I certainly feel as though chatter review is a noble cause. However, it's the process for which I am opposed and not the principal. So with that being said, I rest, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Councilman. The citizen before us wishes to speak. Please state your name and address for the record. Welcome.
[Michael Ruggiero]: My name is Michael Ruggiero. I live on 18 Pembroke Street. When a teacher asks to review her syllabus, no one wonders why. When a captain surveys his ship at night, no one asks him to what end. Yet as our group works to review the city's charter, the constitution for our city, some members of this council seem confused as to why we should go through the effort. Some call our efforts at home on petition undemocratic or imply that this process is somehow seditious. Our group has collected, as of right now, over 1,800 signatures for one simple reason. We want to review Medford's charter. There's nothing demonic or undemocratic about what we hope to do. Our goal is to simply involve you, the city council, Medford's finest, into this initiative. A regular review, as almost everyone agrees, is healthy. But why do we ask for this review now? Why not, as Councilor Knight says, just keep collecting the signatures? Well, the mayor campaigned for a charter review. It is in your power to ask for a charter review. It's not undemocratic at all. Most of the members of this council have been recorded on record as championing this process. Beyond this, a lot has happened in the last 30 years since our last review. Our city has changed, and a new blueprint is needed for us to adapt. But I've heard these words float about City Hall, I'm for charter review, but I want them to get the signatures, I want them to go through this process. These words sound very politic to me. How it is very easy to pretend to be for charter review, and then do nothing to actually help the process along.
[Adam Knight]: I don't understand how individuals going to collect signatures to put an item on the ballot, which would be one of the purest forms of the democratic process, would be too much to ask. That's all I'm saying, Mr. President. I feel as though there's a process in place. Why are we going to tinker with one of the oldest constitutions in the country? Why are we going to tinker with the Constitution of the United States of America that was based upon Massachusetts' Constitution to collect these signatures, to bypass them? This process, Mr. President, I just have a real problem with this process, Mr. President. It sounds like it's agenda-driven. And I have a real problem with it, Mr. President. That's why I'm voting in opposition. I rest at that, Mr. President. That's why I'm in opposition. It's a process argument. It's a process argument. I don't like the process. I feel as though we're bypassing the process. And I think that the people should have the right to participate, and there should be full participation, Mr. President, full participation. And that's where I'm coming from. I don't want words to be put in my mouth.
[Michael Ruggiero]: I just want to respond to that question about the process. Many cities, most cities actually in Massachusetts, have regular charter reviews in their process. It's built in the process. I can assure you, Councilor Knight, that we're going to keep collecting signatures. We will reach our 6,000 signatures. There's no question about it. We're not asking for the City of Medford to automatically accept these changes. This would be an elected body, and any changes that they make would have to be approved by the City of Medford. trying to hold a gun to the city of Medford's head and ask for a ransom of some ridiculous amount. We will get these 6,000 signatures. Councilor Marks presents this Home Rule petition to make the process of charter review as inclusive as possible. He wants to involve every level of our government to move this charter review forward. Our group could do it alone. We can keep gathering signatures. We could force City Hall to accept a review. But wouldn't it be healthier if everyone in our city was involved in this change, from city council to the mayor's office to all the people in our city? A vote against this petition tonight is a vote against this type of reclusiveness. All I ask is for everyone not to pretend. If you're against charter review, that's fine. That's your right as a citizen of Medford, and I respect that view. But just state your position honestly. It's one thing to say I'm for something and then not do anything to help the process along.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So thank you. Good evening. Welcome. Please state your name and address for the record, Jean.
[Jeanne Martin]: Jean Martin, 10 Cumming Street. And you'll be amused to know that I was called pushy this week, so I kind of wear that as a badge now. I was referred to as pushy. But anyway, this is a representative democracy. We don't have a pure democracy. Pure democracy would be 50 plus 1 on any given item. We elect you to represent us in many, many ways. And so it's not a simple democracy. The reason why we have to do 30 years, let's get real, for 30 years the city has not had a charter review. A review, again, does not mean that we have any change to the charter, it just means that an elected body of the people, and I believe none of these folks behind the reel, can be a member of that charter review. So it is up to the people, and it is up to the people to get involved once that body is elected. But what happened over the 30 years is a complete breakdown of citizen participation in government. They were involved in sports, and they were involved in the schools, and the people were involved in different aspects in the business community. But the one area that has not been a place where the people, the citizenry, have been involved is in the actual local government, how it works, input into it in a major way, unless they were directly affected by local government. Those folks, they've been active in it. But for the vast majority of people, they're afraid. They don't know. They're in a very passive position. And this process will stimulate their ability to start to get involved. And it has to be led by you guys, because they've been sheep for 30 years. I know that sounds terrible. It sounds like an insult. And I guess I earned my pushy word today. But they've been sheep. They've been passive. participants in local government. And we want them to be active, and we want to teach the kids to be active in their local government, and that's true. So while I respect the petitioning process, this is not illegal to do it this way. And we elected you to represent us. I don't always agree with the way you guys vote, but you vote for the mass majority of the people. Sometimes I don't agree with you. Sometimes I do. But I have to accept that. You guys vote for me. You represent me. And this is a legal avenue to do a charter review. So don't be afraid of it. Just don't be afraid of it. The people don't know. It's new to them for 30 years. I can't stress that enough. What's it going to take for this city to just look at its own constitution, the way we run ourselves? Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Jean. Good evening. Please state your name and address for the record.
[Robert Cappucci]: Thank you, Mr. President. I'm Robert Capucci of 71 Evans Street. I want to fully concur with the last speaker, Jean Martin. This is not a democracy. We live in a representative republic. To be clear, and I definitely want to congratulate and acknowledge the point that Councilor Knight is making about the voters having a say on this by petition. I hope he'll feel the same way on an upcoming agenda, but that's another item. But to be sure, this proposal, if I can ask a question, this is not a charter review we're talking about here for this particular agenda item. What we're talking about is reviewing just plan a or making amendments to it or keeping it. Is that not correct? We're looking at If I can so we're looking at just either amending the plan a we have or keeping the plan a that we have Is that correct under this agenda item? so then Under plan a so if one of the amendments is to go to a plan C. That's not an option That's correct. So then what we're doing is we're not doing charter review. We're doing one particular
[Adam Knight]: I think this is the problem. This is the problem. This is where I'm coming from. People don't know what we're doing. What are we doing? What are we doing? He doesn't know. He's been to every single meeting. He ran charter review. He ran, he ran a caucus for charter review here, Mr. President. He doesn't even know what the paper that's coming out and he's just speaking in favor of it. This is why we need to collect the signatures and we need to go through the process. This is why. So people can get their questions answered so they can be full participation.
[Robert Cappucci]: And Mr. Mr. President, if I could, please, it's, It's that I do know what's happening here, that I wanted it to make clear through a question for the people in the audience and the people watching at home. It's not that I don't know.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So we call that a rhetorical question then?
[Robert Cappucci]: It's a question to bring clarity so that everybody in this audience and everybody sitting at home watching knows full well that this is not a full charter review with the option of going to another charter. It's either accepting Plan A or amending it, and that's it. Thank you, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Mr. Capucci. Good evening. Please state your name and address for the record. Welcome.
[Joe Viglione]: Thank you, Council President. Joseph Villione, 59 Garfield Ave, Medford, Mass. I want to thank Gene Martin and Robert Capucci for eloquent speaking on this matter. It's been 30 years. You know, if a home rule petition gets people a pay raise, Why can't we have a home rule petition to expedite charter review, charter change? This is a very important thing. And I want the viewers out there to just look at the records of the councilors who vote on certain issues and see the ones screaming the loudest who do the least amount of work. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Good evening. Welcome. Please state your name and address for the record.
[Joyce Paul]: Joyce Paul, A Mason Street, Medford, Mass. And I support this getting more information, I think it's a good idea. And just look at it. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Good evening citizen. Please state your name and address for the record.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: Greetings. Councilor, Councilors. Um, Andrew Castagnetti, Cushman street in Beth. I simply have a mathematical point of information, the mathematics only. And I believe the CPA, the community preservation act, When they started that process, I believe they acquired less signatures than what is presently acquired here at 1800 or so. And as one of the Councilors had brought up, through the process, through the signature process, you would need, well, I believe it's 20% of the registered voters. And that's probably over 4,000, 5,000, almost 6,000. and they have to be certified and make sure that they are totally legitimate. So it's almost, it's not impossible, mathematically speaking. However, it's nearly impossible in the real world, and I'm not sure if it's ever been done in this community, to gather that many signatures to do such a thing. Simply the math, if there's a shortcut on a Home Rule petition, And if it goes forward to the ballot, the people will be able to decide regardless. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Mr. Castagnetti. Good evening. Welcome. Please state your name and address for the record.
[Sqp6S0Yyr0A_SPEAKER_04]: Hello. I'm Rachel Tannenhaus, 26 Pearl Street. Nobody has called me pushy yet this week, but it is only Tuesday, so the night is still young. I have some questions, actually. I'm a little confused, Councilor Knight, because I, hold up, that is a bunch of feedback. I don't know where it came from. I think, am I remembering totally wrong that a few weeks ago at a council meeting? Oh, I have to address through you, don't I? Sorry. So, hypothetically, a few weeks ago, Councilor Knight, I vaguely recall saying that collecting signatures wasn't working. And now I think I heard him say that we should go with collecting the signatures. I don't know if there's been a significant change in the information that's come forward since then, but I feel like both processes can go on at the same time. It's my understanding that one of them doesn't necessarily cancel out the other one, and that, in fact, if anything, the signatures do, the proposal of the signatures does, it has more more flexibility in terms of what you can look at, but actually both processes can go on parallel and they're not necessarily at this time a threat to one another. So it is possible that people could continue collecting signatures and still be okay with exploring this particular avenue. And that wouldn't be unconstitutional at all. Actually, I don't know of anything in the U.S. Constitution that addresses this, but it's my understanding that, in fact, it's perfectly legal to have both things going on at the same time, and that ultimately, if it comes down to it, the one done with signatures, which are totally doable, I think it actually won't be a problem getting the signatures. People are really putting an effort into that, and there have been people who have expressed a desire to help with that, and that there's been some effort around that. So I don't think that one process is a danger to the other, and it's my understanding that the one where we gather signatures actually could preclude what you're voting on here today if people decided that that was a thing. But it's only March, so there's still plenty of room for an exchange of ideas on both options. And I don't think that's necessarily confusing to folks if people are really clear about both options. It would be really helpful to have a frequently asked questions or a plain language document out there on both the options, I think that that would be really useful because, of course, not everybody who's voting or who's looking at these things is a scholar of governmental processes. But if the people who are behind each of these efforts would be willing to do that, I think that that would, it would be perfectly fine for both processes to go on at the same time, and that would give people more options, not fewer. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Good evening. Please state your name and address for the record.
[Judy Beatrice]: Judith Beatrice, 49 Wyman Street in Medford, lifelong resident of the city. I have two things. Number one, as I said, the first time I spoke that the matter of having a trust charter review is a matter of trust. It's a matter of trustworthiness. First of those of all, he will going to put it through. You can't trust anybody if you don't trust yourselves. Number two, it's a matter of trust on the part of our citizens that we trust that those who we're going to elect and those of you who hear that we're all working for the betterment of the city of Medford and for the council and for the whole city. No review in 30 years has really been detrimental from my perspective of not representing the new population and people that we have coming to the city. So from my perspective, it's needed. However, a point of interest. I believe the last time the council voted, it was a four to three. So even if the home rule petition goes on a four to three, my understanding is that from here, it has to go to the legislature and the legislature has to approve it. Quite frankly, gentlemen, I had, sorry, gentlemen and ladies, I have some very concerns that in reality this may not pass in a democratic legislature, that we may get stuck in committee with a home rule petition and we may never see the light of day. So I would encourage those of you who are also looking to go both ways in terms of continue to collect the signatures. It is absolutely imperative that both processes continue at the same time. I think your goodwill and your trust in us, the citizens of Medford, not me personally, would give you an opportunity to say that even though we may get downed at the legislature level, there is a real ferment on the part of the city for us to do a honest charter review for no specific purpose than just to review it. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: The motion, the resolution of 16-072 is before us on the floor. And there's a motion for approval by Councilor Marks. Did you want to speak? Thank you, Councilor Marks. Please do.
[Michael Marks]: I just want to make sure that people viewing this realize the intent of this is truly to create a citizen-driven decision-making process. So this is not a process in which an elected body goes behind closed doors and decides what the chart is going to be. This is going to be an elected body of the people, elected by the people, that will eventually put any recommendations, if there are any, on the ballot for a vote of the people. I can't see any more of a democratic process than that, Mr. President. And I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that I thank all my colleagues for the spirited dialogue and debate on this. Dialogue and debate is very healthy on any issue. And I'm hoping that, through all the discussion we had, this is the fourth time This has been on the council agenda or before the council. And, uh, I think over that period of time, uh, we actually came out with a document through recommendations of this body and through citizens that I believe is a much better document. And I am a little more optimistic that this will go through the state legislature. I had a conversation with representative Donato recently, and he said there are currently five or six home rule petitions currently right now making its way through the state legislature for the creation of a charter commission. So we're not the only ones trying to do this. and help expedite the process. We may be the only community that waited 30 years, but by no stretch are we the only community that is trying to work on behalf of the citizens. If I can make this an easier process, rather than having people go out and try to obtain 5,000 signatures, that's my job to listen to the public. And I've listened to them over the last several years. And I hear the outcry. This is not a very sexy issue to talk about, but it's needed in our community. And maybe there isn't an outcry that you hear walking down the street, but in my opinion, uh, you know, anytime that, uh, we can act on behalf of the citizens, I think we're doing everyone, um, uh, a good thing in this community. And I just want to say, uh, from the start, the city solicitor, uh, spent a lot of time and effort, uh, helping craft, the language, helping put forth language that would be acceptable to the state legislature, reaching out to the legal counsel in the state legislature to find out how it has to be worded and so forth. So I really would like, you know, a lot of times he goes unnoticed, but I'd like to thank City Solicitor Rumley for his efforts on putting together a document. It was only last week that we asked him to craft this home rule petition. And I know he has a lot of other things on his plate. And to come out with such a document really is a tribute to this city and to the work that Mr. Rumley does as city solicitor. And again, I want to thank my colleagues and the general public that have come up and voiced their opinion on this. And I'm hoping, Mr. President, within the next several months that we're going to get approval from the state legislature and start working on the second half. I agree with some of the speakers. We need to put together a document that shows the process for running. How does one run? How many signatures do you need? And I think this will take place, but we have to take one step at a time. And I think that notification through Reverse 911, through literature, through using public access, the PEG stations, we can get that message out to the public. and anyone that is interested in serving on the Charter Commission. So again, I want to thank my colleagues. This is not a very easy issue to vote for, but I think it's the right thing to do, Mr. President. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: If you wish to address us, good evening and welcome. Please state your name and address for the record.
[Cheryl Rodriguez]: I'm Cheryl Rodriguez, 281 Park Street. I think Councilor Marks probably just said what I was going to say, that I think the most important thing, either way we go, signatures or home rule petition, is to make sure that we get this out, that people know what this is, because I can't tell you how many people thought I was collecting signatures to open a charter school. They have no idea what a charter is. They don't know what's in it. They don't know why they would want to change it. And I think it's the responsibility of the city to help get that information out. It's nice that small groups are having little meetings, but it has to come from the city to educate and let people know what's really happening.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you very much. So on the motion for approval by councillor marks it to that this be forwarded to the mayor for approval and then onto the legislature. So on that motion, As seconded by Vice President Lago-Kern, roll call has been requested. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Cavill? No. Councilor Falco? Yes. Councilor Knight? No. Vice President Lago-Kern?
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Monk? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli?
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Clerk]: President Dello Russo?
[Fred Dello Russo]: No. With the vote of four in the affirmative, three in the negative, the motion carries. Did we get everybody? We got one more piece. We're going to invite a applicant for a taxicab driver's license. President, is Mr. Hickam Hamdi present from Revere? 148 on the motion of Councilor Caraviello to take the motion matter off the table. All those in favor? All those opposed? The applicant is before us. Welcome, Mr. Councilor. You are the chairman of the committee.
[Richard Caraviello]: of taxis.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion approved by Councilor Caraviello, all those in favour? All those opposed? Congratulations, you are a licensed cab driver in the city of Medford, sir. Thank you, sir. Congratulations. You have a good name. Thank you. Now, back to the regular order of business. On that motion by Vice-President Klunko-Kern, all those in favour? All those opposed? Motion carries 16-096. offered by Vice President Lago-Curran, be it resolved that the Medford City Council Committee of the Whole meetings be televised. Madam Vice President, please, if you would.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Dello Russo. I'll be brief on this one. We had a committee of the whole meeting two to three weeks ago with regards to the, actually regards to the charter review. It was in this council chambers. I believe it started at 530 or six o'clock and it was televised. Since that time, I've gotten a lot of people stating how happy they were to be able to watch a Committee of the Whole meeting at home instead of having someone take notes or somebody having to read minutes or us having to explain what we discussed in room 207. I think it would make for a much more transparent process if we could have all of our Committee of the Whole meetings televised, whether we have to do it in this room or some way we can figure out how to do it in room 207, where I know it's little bit more of a relaxed atmosphere, but I think it's worth paying videographers to do that. I think it's definitely more transparent. It's a way for people that can't make it here on any given night or at all to be able to see what we're discussing on a weekly basis. We usually have committee of the whole meetings, sometimes every week. I know there was one at 6 o'clock. There's a committee meeting tomorrow, subcommittee meeting. But I think it's just a great way to go, and I think it's going to go along with what the mayor is doing with regards to getting more stuff up on our website. I think that it's definitely a step in the right direction, and I hope that we can make that happen with regards to, especially committee of the whole meetings, but also any type of subcommittee meetings to make it transparent and open to the public as much as possible.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Madam Vice President. Mr. President, I think this is a great resolve, a great resolution. The Subcommittee on Rules will be meeting tomorrow evening. I'd ask that the paper be referred to the Subcommittee on Rules for deliberation.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion that this paper be sent to the Subcommittee on Rules by Councilor Knight. Madam Vice President.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I'd like to make the recommendation to the Subcommittee on Rules, but I'd also like a roll call vote on the actual paper.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Councilor Cavillo. Thank you, Mr. President. I agree with my vice presidents. I would hope that the mayor has the foresight to put this in the budget for next year so we could either pay for some cameras in the other room or pay for staff to do it in this room. Because currently, I don't think that's in our budget for staffing for this year. Or maybe find some money to pay people to come in now and do it. But I say I would hope the mayor. puts it in the budget for next year's budget for next year.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Very good. So on the motion of Vice President Lungo-Koehn for approval and that it be sent to the subcommittee on rules as seconded by Councilor Knight or as moved by Councilor Knight as well. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Canvio? Yes. Councilor Falco? Yes. Councilor Knight? Yes. Vice President Lundell-Curran? Yes. Councilor Martins? Yes. Councilor Scott-Pelley? Yes. President Dela Cruz?
[Fred Dello Russo]: No. The vote is six in the affirmative, one in the negative. The motion carries. Congratulations. 16-098 offered by Vice President Lundell-Curran be it resolved that the Medford Police Department along with the City of Medford come up with a plan on how to better address notification and warning to residents with regards to break-ins and other crimes, especially in those neighborhoods that have had multiple incidents as of recent. Madam Vice President.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Dello Russo. I think this kind of goes along with my last discussion with regards to just televised meetings. I know the chief of police and a number of officers, detectives, I've actually been to a community meeting where there were probably six or seven officers and detectives present at the Medford Police Department. Now those happen, I believe, once a month and they evening meetings, I think we need to do something. We need to make recommendations to not only the administration within City Hall, but also our police department and our chief of police, because people have serious questions with regards to what's going on. Within the last few weeks, month or so, there's been some break-ins, and it's happening in a few different areas in Medford. people more are starting to complain about notification and lack of notification to surrounding homes and neighborhoods. Obviously, if there's a break-in, letting people know on the street and the surrounding streets what's going on, what has been brought forward, what do the police know, what can the police divulge, obviously, and how do they protect their homes and make them safe, and what should people be worried about. It's something that we lack in the city, and I think that we need to really work on better notification. The complaints obviously were with break-ins, which is why I put that on, but we've also got emails within the last couple days with regards to drug activity in certain neighborhoods. I believe one email came from the Salem Street neighborhood. I know that when we discussed the new Chinese restaurant that went in on Salem Street. There were a number of residents who were concerned and had questions and wanted them answered. At that time, we did bring up the public safety summit, which I know Council Member Axe is going to discuss later on in the meeting. And that is another thing that is very important. But I think that the meetings within the police department have to maybe be televised, or they have to just discuss or let people know that they're going to be discussing certain issues such as break-ins in the West Medford area, which I know was a complaint, or drug activity in the Salem Street area, which I know was another complaint. We need to let the public know what's going on and how we can improve it, whether we do, you know, safety committees within the city or watch groups. We need to do something, and we need to notify the public better. And we need to make sure that people are able to keep their homes safe and know what's going on in the area. I would like to know always what's going on in my neighborhood, as we all would like to, to be able to keep our homes safe, our families safe, and our cars safe. Because that was another one, car break-ins. So if we could ask the chief of police to work with the mayor and figure out a way that we can notify the public better. And I think one avenue is that. meeting that the chief of police has with the, you know, whatever residents are willing to, you know, and able to make it to the meetings. I think that is one way to start.
[Fred Dello Russo]: The community meeting that the police chief has every couple of weeks. It was just approached by Councilor Marks that we merge his item, which is 16-100 and with yours since they're similar matters. So if you have no problem with that.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I have no problem. And actually when I, respond to these emails or posts or however people are discussing with me. I think I was approached twice within the last few weeks with regards to this type of issue. I bring that up. I bring up, um, I know that Councilor Marks and the rest of the council has voted, I think twice, maybe three times to have a public safety summit. So definitely I think it's relative and, um, completely related to this topic. Um, and it's just something we need to do better. We need more transparency with, you know, crime going on in our community.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you very much, madam vice president. Chair recognizes councilor Scott Peller.
[George Scarpelli]: I thank my colleague for bringing that up, this topic up. It also reinforces what we've talked about when I've been talking to constituents with the safety summit, talking about getting the people out and listening to more community policing and possible substations around the community. There is an outcry to support the chief and the police department in making sure that we give them the tools that they need to make sure that this all falls into fruition with notification and more feet on the ground and looking at different locations where those hotspots are. One of the conversations talking about the T, mechanic building on the end of, uh, on Salem street, looking at being, being a great idea for a, for a substation. And the word from that neighborhood is looking at the, um, crime rate in that area and looking to use that to subdue, subdue the, the, the, um, the, the fair and that area. So thank you.
[John Falco]: Thank you, Mr. Councilor. Councilor Falco. Thank you, Mr. President. Um, I support this, uh, resolution a hundred percent. I think it's a great idea. And I think that, you know, communication is always the key in communicating with the various neighborhoods, especially with regards to crime. And you know, the more people in a specific neighborhood that know about an issue, you know, everybody can keep an eye out for each other. And I think one of the, uh, you know, I did a little bit of research when I saw the resolution because the, you know, the different things that different communities do. And I noticed one, one community does, um, I think there's an email application, I think it's called Next Door. And so it's set up by a neighborhood. And basically, I belong to the North Medford neighborhood. And so what the police department could do is send an email blast to that group and say, OK, there's issues in North Medford, or whatever part of Medford you want it to be, and say there's been break-ins, car break-ins, house break-ins. But at least they could notify. The public, it's a low cost option, I think, and I think it would be quite useful and everybody would at least be on the same page and get official word from the police department. So I think this is, it's a really good resolution. I think communication is the key. I think that's one option that we could go with. I think updating the, I'm not sure if we have the, you know, the, the, you know, enough officers to do this, but actually, um, updating the website on a regular basis with regard to issues that are going on in the community. Um, I looked at another town that actually had maps of the city and literally had, you know, uh, you know, like pins where there were various issues throughout the community. Um, so that's another way of looking at it. So there were options that I think that can, that, uh, that the city could use. I think there are low cost options and I think this is something that needs to be looked at and needs to be addressed. And I supported this. So thank you. Thank you very much. Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. And I want to thank Councilor Longo for bringing up this issue. And she's right. The councilors over the last two or three years has voted at least three occasions unanimously to set up a public safety summit in this community. And it's based on issues throughout the community, throughout all the neighborhoods on public safety and ways we can improve public safety in our community. Councilor Scarpelli hit the nail on the head, and I believe it was discussed last week about community policing. Because of a lack of grants and so forth, this community has moved away from community policing, and I think that it's detrimental. I believe having an officer on beat, whether it's on a bicycle, on foot, whatever it may be, in a neighborhood, in a business district, I think serves this community well, and I'd like to see community policing come back again. in our community. I'd also like to see the police department do some crime data reporting. I mean, it's like pulling teeth trying to figure out the number of robberies in this city, armed robberies, house break-ins, car vandalism. It's very difficult to get this data. And to me, we should be able to go on the police site or city hall website and be able to bring up the police department and see the number of break-ins. and then see a comparison over the years and maybe be able to see where the hotspots are and be able to tell residents that, you know, we noticed that there's a lot of car break-ins in your particular area. This is what you should do. You should leave your light on at your house, your front porch light. You should make it look like there's activity in the area. You know, just helpful hints. And I never hear any of that within this community on how to protect yourself, your family, and your property. And you very seldom hear that within our city, but I think it's needed. You know, we're not a dangerous community by any stretch of the imagination, but like any city, we have our fear of concerns and trouble. And brushing it under the rug or pretending it doesn't exist just doesn't work. And, you know, I think we're finding that out the hard way. Additionally, Mr. President, if there's a rash of robberies or break-ins in West Medford area, I live in Wellington. But I think I should receive a call, too, saying, you know what? There's been a rash in West Medford. Guess what, Mr. President? These people that are robbing, they're going to get wise to it, because they're crooks. And they're going to say, you know what? We already hit up West Medford enough. Let's head over to North Medford. Well, let's head over to South Medford. We should be allowing residents to make that decision and know what's going on. Because if I didn't see Channel 7, the news, or I didn't read in the local paper, I wouldn't know there's the rash of robberies, home break-ins. in this community. And therefore, I wouldn't be vigilant and I wouldn't be looking out for it. My second point, Mr. President, years ago, I remember when I first ran for office, there used to be a neighborhood crime watch group in almost every section of this community. And they got together, and what best to have a thousand set of eyes in a neighborhood looking out? You know how you have the nosy neighbor that lives across the street? Guess what? That nosy neighbor can help prevent your home from being broken into, your car vandalized. And these are the type of things that we want to encourage in the community. We want people to talk amongst themselves and also have dialogue with the different neighborhoods and say, what do you experience in North Medford? Are we seeing the same in Haines Square? Are we seeing the same up at the hillside? You know, these are the discussions that I was hoping to summit three times, Mr. President. I didn't get any feedback at all other than the paper going to the administration. And it's not just the recent administration. It went to the old administration, saying that they forwarded the paper to the chief of police. And then we never heard back again. We never heard back again. I think it would be very helpful to have a public safety summit where we invite everyone to discuss the issues, Mr. President, things that they're seeing. And we're not going to let out any secret recipe on how we're combating this, but we're going to get together and have a discussion and dialogue on What ways can we communicate better? What ways can we do to prevent? You know, what can residents do to help assist the police in trying to get the message out there in this community? So I'm hoping, and you just mentioned to me, Mr. President, and I appreciate your work on this, that you're trying to gather all the different chiefs and department heads for this public safety summit. And I'm hoping that helps us at least move forward on the issue. And let residents know, because the emails I'm receiving is people are concerned that they're not getting any communication. And I think that's the concern. And maybe if we said, you know what, next Tuesday, we're going to have a Committee of the Whole meeting where the chief is going to be up here and every other interested party to discuss this important issue, people know that the city is being proactive. And right now, you don't see any of that. So I want to thank Councilor Longo for putting this on, and my colleagues for bringing up their concerns, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you very much, Councilor.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Caraviello. Thank you, Mr. President. Being the victim of a daytime home break-in, I understand where this is coming from. My house got broken into about a year and a half ago, 1130 in the morning. So I understand when you come home and you see your back door broken down and your house ransacked, I know what it feels like. Part of the problem is with a police facility that's outdated and understaffed, There's no way for these policemen to get the message out. I don't know if the station has a media officer. If the station even has a webpage to get the messages out to people. Again, they're busting out the seams over there. The chief does his best. I've been to a lot of the Wednesday meetings. You know, there's 20, 30 people there, but again, you know, they're jammed in that little room. There's no multimedia accessibility to anything. And let's say nowadays, you know, everybody's tied into their cell phone or their computer, and that's how the message has to get out, along with, you know, you see something, say something. So again, you know, it's a, I, you know, I wish I had an answer for the people, but, you know, I would think, getting our police station up and going and maybe hiring a media officer to address these issues would be a good start. Very good. Councilor Falco.
[John Falco]: Thank you, Mr. President. Councilor Marks had mentioned a good point a couple of minutes ago with regard to statistics and crime data. And I've only been on the council now for a short time, but can we like to request a report from the chief of police actually with regard to 2015 crime data just to It would be interesting to see what we're dealing with. But I'm not sure if the council has received reporting in the past, but I think it's something that we should get. It's something we should be aware of, and we should get on a regular basis. But if we could start off with looking at 2015 data, I think that we'd be heading in the right direction by looking at that.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So item number 016-098 and 100, which we've moved the two of them together. Motion approval on that as amended by Councilor Falco to have a 2015 crime statistics report presented by the Chief to the City Council. Chair recognizes Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And piggybacking on Councilor Falco's amendment, Mr. President, I'd ask that Also, any data related to overdoses, opiate overdoses be provided with the crime data. The community has access to a GIS mapping system, and I think it might make sense for us to begin to mapping, to begin to start mapping where our crimes are occurring and where our high concentration of drug overdoses are to see if there's a trend, Mr. President. So I might ask that that information be included. Very good.
[George Scarpelli]: It's further amended by Councilor Knight.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor Scott-Peller.
[George Scarpelli]: If I can't follow up with this, I think it's very important research-driven policymaking. I think what other communities are doing are using interns and One thing that's been pretty consistent with our committee is a lot of it is looking to support efforts, whether it be DPW, police, fire, drug addiction issues, looking into the mayor possibly putting together a data team that would work for the city and that will collect data to support what we're trying to do throughout our community, not just with with the police department, but this, this brings, brings it to light. I know that just today, um, at my summer stat meeting, I sat in front of, um, the mayor and, and he, we went through, um, about a 12, um, 12 page, uh, report about my department that, that supported or didn't support our numbers in recreation. And that helps us understand where we need to fix some deficiencies and then carry on with our positive issues. So I think that if we can maybe reach out to the mayor and see if she can look into possibly researching what other communities are doing and collecting data, not just for one department, for all departments to support the needs of our community. So thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. So on the motion for approval, as amended by Councilors Falco, Scarpelli, and Knight. Mr. Citizen, welcome. Please state your name and address for the record.
[Robert Cappucci]: Thank you, Mr. President. Robert Capucci, 71 Evans Street. I want to thank Councilors Lungo-Koehn, and Marks for bringing up these topics. I'm of the humble opinion that government's first duty is protection of the citizens. Councilor Caraviello, I think hit it right on the head. I do attend the first Wednesday of the month police chief town hall meetings where there are sergeants and detectives. It's every first Wednesday of the month at 7 o'clock. We need to fully staff our police force and we need to get them a better station. On March 18th, four officers will be graduating from the academy. given us a total of 105 offices in Medford, putting us about 25 offices short for a city of our size. Now, these informational meetings, I would encourage people to go that might be watching and listening to me right now. They have refreshments there. You can ask any questions. The things you find out are very pertinent. Like what I found out at the last meeting was, with just an additional 10 officers, they could be able to be doing so much more for the citizens of Medford. They just got a Twitter account. I'm pretty sure it's at medfordpolice.com. But I would either Bing or Google search that to make sure. But one of the reactions of having this Twitter account now is that the media will be asking them questions about different things that they're working on. And this takes a lot of time away from the officers to be able to do their duty. They're making about one arrest a week on drug charges. There's somebody else going around the city now targeting Hondas, stealing the tire right off the car using a silent drill. There's a lot going on, and there's a lot that can be learned at this informational meeting. But as Councilor Riccabiello pointed out, they need the offices to be able to have good communication with the people, to be able to be in every neighborhood of our city to be enforcing the law and having a much stronger and sounder public safety. But they need the officers. Just 10 more officers would do a world of good for Medford. And as far as communication goes, This city is sitting on almost a half a million dollars in collected fees from the Verizon and Comcast accounts. It's long past due that we open up our TV3 station. We could be talking about this. We could be talking about the charter review and explaining it to people. As Councilor Knight points out, people don't know. Well, let's really open up the doors of communication. The chief could have his own show on TV3. We could be doing a lot more for communication in this city and a lot more for public safety. You're sitting on the funds to do it. I would respectfully ask you to please get the ball rolling in that area. And I thank you again for bringing this up, and I thank the councillors for their input. And again, Councilor Caraviello hit it right on the head. Thank you, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you very much, Mr. Kibushi. Good evening, ma'am. Please state your name and address for the record, Jean.
[Jeanne Martin]: Jean Martin, 10 Cumming Street. Just one thing, I'm all for the statistics program. that we need to have that out in the open. What I don't want to see is a link between the numbers of officers we hire and crime statistics, and I'll tell you why. If you're doing a good job and you determine crime because you have a lot of police officers on the street, they're friendly, they're getting out there, they know what's going on, the neighborhood crime goes down. Well, if you deplete them because the crime level goes down, your crime level is going to go back up. So I just wanted to make, do you understand what I'm saying? No, I guess not. I see some questions in there, in the faces. If the police officers, if we increase it by 10, and we have people walking the streets, police officers are walking the streets, crime is actually going to go down. And if it goes down, and we link crime statistics to the amount of officers, then what you don't want to do is delete the officers because crime is down, because the reason why it's up why crime is doing well, I mean not doing well, is because there's presence out there. So we want to increase them by 10, which I'm all for, you know that. But I don't want to link the data of crime statistics to the numbers of officers we need. We need to base it on presence. And if they get out there, they're friendly, they're getting to know everybody, they know what areas are, you know, I want to see them walking the beat, I really do. I think that's the best thing, to deter crime. Officers walking the beat in large numbers. so that they feel supported. But I don't want to link the two, because what happens is, as we know, well, we're doing great. Crime is down. Let's change out these officers for police, for fire, or DPW workers, or something else. And then your police officers will, the crime will go up again. So thank you. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Good evening. Please state your name and address for the record.
[Sqp6S0Yyr0A_SPEAKER_04]: Hi there. Still Rachel Tannenhaus, still live at 26 Pearl Street. So, two things. One, just to build on what Gene said, I don't know if an analogy would be useful, but I, in the public health world, we sometimes have a problem with programs working so well that they put themselves out of business, and then the problem gets bad again. This has happened in particular, work with me here, this has happened in particular with programs to prevent HIV and AIDS, where in areas that were well-funded for that, they did a really great job, and then the rate of HIV went down, and they were no longer a crisis area, and the programs no longer got funded, and then as soon as they got defunded, because the money went to crisis areas, and then as soon as they got defunded, the numbers went back up again. So it's a similar sort of thing where, you know, I can see what you're saying with If you're basing the number of officers you've got on what the crime statistics are right then, it may wind up being a cycle that continues feeding itself. But the other thing is that if you're having this public safety summit, I think it's really important to make sure that you do outreach to every possible community and take a look at who's not at the table and make sure that You're making note of that and making sure that they can come to the table. I say this because while in a lot of cases neighborhood watches do help with safety, sometimes what they help with is keeping areas, keeping homogeneity in an area. Every now and then, things go wrong with the Neighborhood Watch program, and it turns into, help, I just saw someone who's browner than I am. And we do not want that to happen. We want these things to be, and it's not even necessarily on purpose. The person may not be thinking about that consciously. But we don't want it to be like that. We want it to be something that actually deals with safety and doesn't deal with, hey, I don't feel like that person belongs here because they're different from me. So please make sure that all impacted communities, including those who sometimes have had, lately there are people with disabilities, for example, sometimes have not always the greatest relationship with law enforcement because sometimes there's misunderstandings about what the needs of particular populations are. Um, so you want to make sure that's an example. You want to make sure that communities of color are represented. You want to, I mean, you want to make sure that folks from all different socioeconomic, uh, groups are at the table at this, um, summit. So just please make sure you take a look around and say, who's not at the table yet. Let's make sure we can get them here. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. You know, um, council Scarpelli and, um, and Councilor Falco mentioned about data collection. and facts and figures for the police. I was doing a little work a couple of weeks ago, and I was looking at some of the cities and towns. Our capability of collecting data over here is minimal. I mean, a small town down the Cape, which is probably 20% the size of us, has an IT department. They have five people on their IT department gathering things. We have one person in the city, for our IT department to gather things. That's a real concern where we, you know, don't know how to get these things. I mean, we have computer equipment that's antiquated. Councilor Falco just handed me a list over something that Cambridge has. They have nice facts and figure sheets for a month, for a one-month period that they hand out that's on their web sheet. I would say he doesn't have the capabilities of doing these. I mean, it's time we step up into the new generation and get more people that do more jobs that are more computer driven versus paper people. So again, I think every week we sit here, we ask for things, we ask for things, but we don't have any people to do anything, to do the jobs that are needed. I mean, I'm around the city. I go to the police department. I see the computers they have in there. They're antiquated. They don't even have a phone system in the police department. If you want to call the chief on the main number, you have to hang up and they have to use another phone to call the chief. So, I mean, I think the whole police station, and again, it goes back to the fact that we don't have a modern police station with modern equipment. And that's where it all stems from, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: on the motion for approval as amended. All those in favor? Huh?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Dello Russo. I just want to wrap it up and agree with my colleagues. We need, and obviously the public that has spoken, we've discussed it many, many times before, we need a new police station. We need more officers. It's always been discussed, we need revolving new, police cars out on the roads. I think that's all, we all agree with that. But in the time being, since that's not gonna happen overnight, and I think communication needs to happen immediately, I ask that the chief of police and the mayor get together and brainstorm some ideas on how to get communication out. And it can be as simple as the police department starting a Facebook page or Twitter, which I guess they've done, and letting the people know that at the next community policing meeting, They're going to discuss A, B, and C. I mean, a way to get the agenda out and a way to get people to understand and know what's going to be discussed and for the discussion to be had, not only how can things be prevented, but what are the target areas, what areas do we need to look at, and how can we make it, obviously, safer. So I just wanted to wrap it up and agree with my colleagues, but something needs to be done with regards to communication immediately. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On that motion as amended, all those in favor? On the motion for council remarks for suspension of the rules, all those in favor? All those opposed? Suspension of the rules is granted.
[SPEAKER_13]: Sir, please state your name and address for the record. Thank you, Councilor. My name is Ed Serino. I live at 49 Bradshaw Street in Medford, Mass. And for the exception of a few years, I've been a 50-year resident of Medford. I also have been with Anheuser-Busch for 31 years, one of the city's largest taxpayers, and I would say one of their best corporate neighbors. I am here for parking. I actually went to the traffic committee today. I tried to get a parking permit for the side street next to the corner where I live, which I've gotten for years, and visitor's passes. When I went up to Republic a few weeks ago, I was told by the people there that I couldn't get visitor's passes, even though I had them last year. And to get them, I had to go see the chief of police, which I thought the woman was joking. And I said to her, I would hope to God that the chief of police has something better to do than give me a visitor's pass. And I went down to the station, like I was told. Of course, the officers got to chuck a lot of it. He wasn't available. I talked to his secretary. I was told I had to get on an agenda for some traffic meeting, which I just said, no, I just went up. I went up today. And I had a long talk with Chief Sacco. And it's not about me getting the passes. Anybody can do what they have to do as a resident. And I'm not going to bore you with Republic. Everybody in the city knows what that is and what it has been. I mean, first of all, they, as a company, need to train their people in customer service. I get tagged three times last year for a permit that I paid for. So those are the three episodes I had to go up and argue, which I don't have the time or will or inclination to do. And the parking's getting worse in this city. Where I live, the streets on both sides of me are permanent, residential. I have no idea why. Spring Street, people come to my street to park. People from the projects come up to park. People from the condos in Riverside come up to park. And the neighborhood, there's a lot more renters. It's not years ago where a two-bedroom was rented out to a family of four. You might have five to six students living in there. They don't need to have a TV room. They have their iPads. I have an absentee landlord across the street from me, who's a nice guy. I've talked to him a lot. He's got about 15 kids in the building. I said, go up to the Traffic Commission and try to get parking right here. Get people up. And they should. I asked the chief today. He said, out of ignorance. Is there a law on the books where you have to park in a driveway? I have a one car driveway. I went up to the city five years ago and they were cutting curbs in my street to get my driveway extended towards my front porch, not towards my neighbor. The city denied me. I was trying to get a car off the street. And to me, it's, it's, listen, I fully expect that this city will go towards Somerville sooner than later. We're probably going to go to zone parking. You know, if they're going to do that, I'd like to see people look ahead. Maybe instead of charging 10, maybe you charge five. Maybe you put on people's taxes and force people using driveways. But I just think there is such a lack of common sense that it's mind-blowing. It's absolutely mind-blowing. And as I told the chief today, I'm getting older, I'm getting crankier. But I am proud to live in the city. I had opportunities to take my daughter out of the city for education. She goes knock on wood, she's a great student. She's a senior graduate from Medford High in the AP program. I'm involved. I mentioned Budweiser because I was always a political liaison for the company and the city, especially when Mayor McGlynn was here. There was stuff that we did for the neighbors behind us that, legally, we didn't have to do. We were there before it was our rights. We spent a lot of money on cutting down the intercom, all the stuff with people and landscaping. And I would go over to the neighborhoods, because I literally grew up in that neighborhood. And it meant a lot to me, and it means a lot to me, to work for a company that's a good partner, especially when it comes to transportation and parking. Those trucks run through the city left and right. I get calls a lot. When I talked to Councilor Marks last week, I had a few people on Park Street call me up. Because trucks, a lot of the drivers are new. They don't know. They go the wrong way. And obviously, seeing a big truck come down your street is scary. I had, two years ago, Carolina Street, street over from me, there's a nail salon on the bottom of Riverside Ave. It's very dangerous. People park. You can't get through. A tractor trailer had his GPS wrong and came up on a most rammed a lady. And I literally get out of my car to try to help. But I think that, you know, obviously, parking is very, very territorial, especially in a bad winter. Last winter was no fun, and I've had arguments with neighbors that I never argue with. And I try to be a good neighbor. We fixed our property. I've taken financial hits from my neighbors, cutting down trees, helping them out. But where we're going with parking, it can't be a reactionary thing. It can't be a stall thing. It should be, I don't know legally if the council can get involved. The way that the chief explained to me today, it's going to go to the parking commission. But I think there's got to be foresight way ahead of time. Where do we want to go? What do we want to do? What makes sense? Does it make sense to go zone? Does it make sense? Listen, nobody wants to pay any more money. Everybody alive. Nobody wants to do that. Nobody enjoys that. But I just think that it overall, and I was listening to a lot of people tonight on various topics and it seems to me a lot of it's communication. Maybe the city needs to hire a chief content officer that runs communication for everything. The city hall, this department's education, everybody, the world's changing. I mean, I have a teenage daughter. She thinks I'm nuts for reading the newspaper, for coming up and for doing, if it's not in her hand, she ain't, that's the world now. But I just, you know, wanted to just take the time. Listen, I went today, I got done what I had to get done. They voted to give me the passes that I've had for years, which didn't make any sense, you know, and I missed a couple hours for work to my boss's chagrin, but it is what it is. But I just, you know, after speaking to Chief Sacco today, I got a little bit heated for a minute, call myself after a while of talking to him, I would hope to God he's got better stuff to do. And I know that's his role as chief, but I just think it's not gonna get worse, excuse me, it's not gonna get better in the city. There's a lot of commercial development coming in, Wegmans is coming in, Total Wine's going to have it, I fully expect Mystic Ave will be a matter of when, not if, when that blows up commercially. It's not gonna, the parking's gonna get more and more and more, it's not gonna get less and less and less. And I'm sure all of you get phone calls and emails beyond belief over stuff, so. I'll shut up now.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. Going by what this gentleman said about the parking, I think about three or four weeks ago I asked for a meeting with Republic and our group in a subcommittee hearing so we can go over their policies and practices and training procedures and where the parking program is going in the future. And we haven't heard back from them. So, Mr. President, if we could ask that happen again, this will be the second request for this.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On that second request of Councilor Caraviello to Republican Party. Oh, please do, Councilor.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. I want to thank Mr. Serino for coming up tonight. Very active in our community and makes a lot of sense. And, you know, we had this discussion back, I think it was three years ago with the chief. It's clear to me. the resident permit parking process to get resident permit parking on your street is not working in this community. All it's doing is one street will get resident permit parking and they'll alleviate the issue they had with people parking there and jumping on the express bus or people parking there and walking to their favorite restaurant and they're pushing the problem over to the next street that doesn't have permit parking. The chief assured us back, this is three years and I realize he was busy implementing the mayor's pay-to-park program, but he said he was working on a citywide parking permit program that would address a lot of the concerns that you mentioned about being able to park. You happen to live on a corner, so you can't park, even though the frontage of your house is on one street, you can't park on the street that has the other frontage on the side of your house. Or visitors, which to me makes no sense at all. Not after the taxes you're paying. So I think we should, when we discuss the issue with the chief, Mr. President, this will be one of the issues that I bring up. And maybe it's about time we take this off the chief's plate and create a commission or an ad hoc committee like you've been doing, Mr. President, to look into some of these issues. And citywide permit parking is definitely not working right now the way it's done, the piecemeal approach. And I would ask that, uh, that the issue be taken up, but I appreciate Mr. Serino coming up tonight.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. We all do. Uh, Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Uh, Mr. President, thank you very much. And Mr. Serino, thank you for being here. Um, I can attest to the good work that Budweiser does with its neighbors and I can certainly attest to the good work that you do in the community. So thank you very much for being here. Um, this council passed a resolution one five dash seven, eight, nine. And in our packets this week was a response from the chief of police. and that resolution was requesting that they made revisions to the resident parking permit process and implemented zones or went citywide. And the response reads that we've been discussing revisions to the resident permit parking program. Before anything is implemented, we will hold public meetings in order to seek input. In the meantime, we're using a common sense approach so that residents of adjoining permit parking streets are allowed to park on other permit parking streets in the neighborhood. Some initial feedback to citywide permit parking has been negative. Not every neighborhood has the same parking issues, so formalizing the neighborhood approach may be the appropriate steps. I tend to agree with Councilor Marks that the process that we have in place right now, it served a purpose and it met a need, but that need has evolved. And I think it's time for us to step up into the 21st century and to, as Mr. Serino said, be proactive and be visionary and have the foresight to figure out what we see coming down the line. So with that being said, Mr. President, the Chief is looking to seek public input and maybe get some suggestions. So I'm wholeheartedly in support of Councilor Marks' idea to maybe begin to have some hearings or a committee or put something together for us to gather some information to share with the Traffic Commission to make this process a little bit quicker, more expedient, and also so that we can all participate in it, Mr. President. So with that being said, thank you very much Councilor Marksley for bringing it up. I think it's a great idea. And Mr. Serino, I'm sorry it was at your expense, but it looks like, you know, this is something that I certainly feel strongly about and I'd be supporting going forward.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion of Councilor Caraviello, as amended by Councilors Moxley and Knight. All those in favor? Opposed? Congratulations. Thank you, Mr. Serino for coming tonight. You're always welcome here. We forward back to the regular order of business offered by Councilor Scott Bally. All those in favour? All those opposed? Motion carries. 16-099 offered by Councilor Marx. Whereas Oakland Street is used as a cut-through during weekday mornings, posing a safety concern for area residents and children attending the Oakland Park Children's Centre, and whereas existing street signage was taken down during sidewalk replacement back in 1998 and never replaced then, be it resolved that the Traffic Commission post resident-only signage from 7 a.m. to 9.30 a.m. Monday through Friday in slow school zone and speed limit signage be replaced on the interest of public safety. Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. We also have an area resident here that would like to speak. You know, we all know where Oakland is. It's directly across next to the old Tony Lucci's. across here from City Hall, and it's fast becoming a major cut-through. If you come here in the morning, you'll notice coming down Salem Street, all the cars queue up at the set of lights across from City Hall.
[Fred Dello Russo]: If I may interrupt, Councilor, it's been reported that the patch up there in the ceiling seems to be giving way at this moment. We ask that all the citizens seated on that side of the chamber to move over to this side of the chamber in the interest of your life. Councilor, if you would continue.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. So Oakland Street is fast becoming a major cut through in the area, and it's causing a real public safety concern not only for the Oakland Park Children's Center, but area residents that are trying to get out in the morning, go to work, go to church, do whatever their daily activity is, they're having a tough time on the street because cars are trying to circumvent coming down Salem and bypassing the light. So they're coming down Water Street, taking a left off onto Oakland Street, and coming down Oakland to bypass the set of lights. And it really is causing a concern. There was, for a period of time, when the sidewalks were done in 1998, a slow school zone and speed limit sign on the street. But after they repaired the sidewalk, they never put back the signage. Now we're asking not only to replace the slow school zone and speed sign, but also to place a resident-only sign there, Mr. President, between the hours of 7 a.m. and 9.30 a.m., Monday through Friday. And that should help alleviate this cut-through traffic in the morning. And naturally, we need enforcement, because a sign doesn't cause or create enforcement. It just creates a sign. And we're hoping that most logical people would see the sign and say, I can't go down this road between this period of time and not go down and choose to use that as a cut-through, Mr. President. This is a long-standing issue for area residents. And, you know, it's great we have the new chicken and rice guys that just opened up around the corner from Oakland. I've went to the restaurant a few times. I wish them well. But that's also creating some additional need for parking. And guess where they're parking? Oakland Street. So we're seeing cars of employees that are parking on Oakland Street for five, six, seven, eight hours at a time. And I know Diane Musto that's here tonight is circulating a petition in the neighborhood for resident permit parking in that particular street, which will eventually go to the traffic commission. And I think that will go a long way to keeping some of the business district parking off your street and also some of the commuters that are grabbing the bus in the square off your street and bring it back to a neighborhood street, which it really should be. That's how it used to be. And that's your neighborhood. You pay the taxes there. And, really, the residents shouldn't be burdened with the overflow and cut-through traffic, Mr. President. So, at this time, I'd like to hear from Diane on her concerns, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: We will in due time. We're going to hear from Councilors Caraviello and Knight.
[Adam Knight]: I'll yield to the young lady. Councilor Knight. What she has to say is far more important than what I have to say, Mr. President. She's the one that has to live with it, so I'll be happy to
[SPEAKER_03]: My name's Diane Musto. I live at 18 Oakland Street. I've been there for 33 years. And it used to be a nice, quiet neighborhood back in the day. But as you can tell, the last few years have been tremendously, it's horrible. The traffic, as Councilman Marks said, is ridiculous. Trying to get off the street in the morning is impossible. My son walks my grandson to school because he gets there quicker walking than taking the car. My daughter last week was trying to get out of the spot. She makes her way down to the end of the street, and there was cars coming from both sides of Water Street. There was traffic behind her. She couldn't take the turn. A gentleman behind her was honking to the point where he got out, flipped the finger, started screaming at her. She was petrified. It's ridiculous. And any given day, hundreds, I'm talking between 300 to 500 cars come down that street in a matter of two hours. You can put someone out there and count them. It's crazy. My husband has gone out there to try to slow down the cars so that the kids can get out of their sports and head to work, almost getting run over. They have no respect. It's like a speedway. They fly down there because there's no speed signs that say slow down, school zone, or what the speed limit is. It's definitely a public safety issue. Someone's going to seriously hurt, if not killed, if something doesn't happen. There's no crosswalks. My grandson used to go to the Oakland Park School there last year. Walking him across the street was no easy job. I mean, you dodged cars. It's crazy. Something has to be done, whether you make it a one-way going up Oakland Street or you put a no through, you know, you can't cut through Oakland Street or something. Something has to be done because the amount of traffic that comes down there in the morning is, you know, I've never seen it. I've never seen it that bad in my life. The other concern we have right now is the parking situation on Oakland Street. We've got all these new businesses that are coming into Medford Square with the new kiosks in. No one wants to pay to park. They found their new home in front of 18 Oakland Street. You find four to five cars at a time that don't live there. They're not residents. They park from morning to sometimes 11 at night. And when we come home from work, where do we park? We don't have a driveway. So now we're like circling the block trying to find a spot to park. It's just ridiculous. People from out of the city come there to park that don't live there. They park all day. They take the bus. They go into Boston. They come home at nighttime, hop in their car, go. Something's got to be done. I did get a majority of the neighbors on Oakland Street and Garden Street to sign the petition. I think I have the majority of the signatures. And so now my next step is to get on next month's agenda with the traffic commission. So hopefully that goes through, but, um, yeah, something needs to be resolved. Cause it's definitely a public safety issue as far as all the cars coming down, no speed limit, you know, school zone, you know, so, and I want to thank you counsel Knox for bringing this to everyone's attention.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you very much. On the motion of Councilor Marks for approval, Councilor Knight. Um, yes, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Um, so through you to Councilor Marks, uh, the street has never been resident in the past, and this would be an effort to make it resident because what I've seen, um, work in other neighborhoods is resident access only signs between certain hours, as opposed to restricting the parking on the street between seven and nine. I don't know what's going to work best in this neighborhood, Mr. President. I don't. Just another option that's out there. But if you drive down, say, Winthrop Street, and you get to Rural Ave. Rural Ave. has a sign that says, no right turn between the hours of 4 p.m. and 6 p.m. Maybe that's another option that we can look at if there's no success with the petition in seeking. The request is to?
[Michael Marks]: There's only access.
[Adam Knight]: I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I got tied up with the permitting because of the last conversation we had. I'm saying we just, they get, they're going through the process to get the permitting. Okay. I'm sorry. I missed that. I missed that. Um, move approval, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Motion for approval. Councilor Caraviello.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. You know, Councilor Marks brings up a good point here about the cutthroat. Our whole city has turned into a cutthroat. I mean, that's really what it is. I mean, um, I don't know if you ever tried to traverse the city at eight o'clock in the morning, seven days in the morning, It's next to impossible. I don't know where people think when they cut through, they're going to go. I mean, you see Forest Street gets backed up almost along this road most mornings, and I know why. They're coming down Forest Street, and they're cutting down water so they can get to 93, and they get back on the highway. And that's all backing up. That's where all the cars are going. You know, Route 38 on High Street, West Bedford, backs up almost to the school. I mean, I don't know what the answer is. But they say more and more cars are coming, and they're going here. They're parking on the streets. At the commuter lot in West Medford, the team just started charging to park there, and they went up on the parking rate. Nobody parks there anymore, because they went up $1.50. So now the cars that were parking there for less are now parking on the side streets. And the lot stays empty now for the mornings. Again, we could put up all the signs we want, but unless we have a policeman there, to enforce them. It's, it's, it's a hard thing to do. I mean, I live on a street and occasionally the state police will be there enforcing it, but you know, they're there maybe once a month. So again, I, I, I, you know, I support Councilor Marks as resolution there, but again, you know, it's just the whole city has turned into a cutthroat on the motion of council.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Marks is seconded by councilor night Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: So just for clarification, Mr. President, we're going to ask for approval of the traffic commission to erect slow school zone sign on Oakland and also speed limit sign, whatever the speed limit is on Oakland. And I believe at the corner of Brookside Parkway and Water Street, resident access only. So that way, if they're coming down from Brookside, is that is that where you want it? Because if you put on water,
[SPEAKER_03]: they take water, and then they come down Oakland. Or they come down forest, water, Oakland. So now if you've got cars coming from both angles, no one on Oakland Street, if they want to make the turn, they can't go nowhere. There's too much traffic coming at both ends, from both sides. So I don't know somehow whether you make Water Street one way all the way through, you know what I'm saying? Or Oakland Street one way going up, and then you'd have to take the turn. So no cars can come down Oakland Street.
[Michael Marks]: So where would be a suggestion for the resident-only access? Where would you like to place that sign? If you place it at the corner of Water and Oakland, by that time, they've already made the left if they're coming down Brookside. And they're going to end up going down there anyways, because they can't go any further. So I think if you put it on Brookside, at least you'll deter them from coming down.
[SPEAKER_03]: Right, true.
[Michael Marks]: And then maybe we can also request as a council that the traffic commission look into making it a one-way. I don't disagree with you.
[SPEAKER_03]: That would be really nice. I mean, if you made it a one-way going up, everyone always comes up the street to get to their houses. And if you have to get off Oakland, you go down water and you get to the rotary. Very rarely people that live on Oakland come through that way to come down.
[Michael Marks]: Come through which way, Brookside?
[SPEAKER_03]: Brookside, yeah, to Water and down. Very rarely they do that, because if they're coming off the highway, they go right to the set of lights right here and come up Oakland. And anyone letting the kids off at Oakland Park, the Children's Center, you're coming up Oakland. They park, let the kids off, then they go down Water and back and around. So it makes sense to go one way up the street.
[Michael Marks]: So, Mr. President, those two signs that we spoke about and also a sign at the corner of Brookside Parkway and Water Street resident access only between the hours of between the hours of seven and nine a.m. Monday through Friday. And then if the traffic commission wants to look at whatever recommendations on making Water Street a one-way. Let them go out and view the site.
[SPEAKER_03]: Yeah. I don't know why they didn't make it one-way all the way through. I mean, it doesn't make no sense. You make a one-way and stop it at Oakland, and then this end is a two-way. It just doesn't make sense, especially when there's parking. I mean, it's tough to get through. If all the cars are parked there, you either have to back up to let this car, and then you can't. It's ridiculous. It's difficult.
[Michael Marks]: So we'll make those recommendations to the Traffic Commission.
[SPEAKER_03]: All right. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, and again, I apologize for getting confused there, resident only. I was thinking resident parking only as opposed to resident access only. But one reason I think this is a great idea, Mr. President, is because if, in fact, there is enforcement there, it is a surchargeable offense. If you go down the road when those restrictions are in place, it's the same thing as driving down a do not enter street. So it's going to be a surchargeable offense, and people will get the picture relatively quickly when they get a $700 surcharge.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you very much, Councilor. Madam Citizen.
[Jeanne Martin]: Sorry, Gene Martin. I'll try to be quick. But I wanted to address something that someone said, which is there's two issues, parking enforcement and moving violations, which are two different issues. The Republic can be expanded to take in the whole city, as far as I'm concerned, because I think it's a waste of police personnel to do ticketing for parked cars. That's number one. But number two, moving violations should be under the direct responsibility of the police and only the police. And since there's no appetite in this city by the mayor in this coming cycle of two years, and I'm not putting her down, but she has no appetite to build out a new police station in the next two years. I didn't get that from the meeting. So if she's not going to build out a new police station, then maybe she can put 10 cops on the payroll for now, at least. so that we can do more moving violations. Because if they don't get a ticket, they don't get a surcharge. So if there's no enforcement, then they don't get a surcharge on their insurance. So, and I'm not putting down the mayor, but I got the sense that she doesn't have a plan to put in a new police department in the next two years. Maybe it's four, maybe it's seven, I don't know. But in lieu of that, the least she can do to be good to the police force, who is, you know, way behind on 100 different levels. Before we renovate the library, I'm all for the new roof on the library. I know I'm getting off topic. But before we renovate the library, we need to think about putting more cops on the street. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion as amended, all those in favor? All those opposed? Motion carries. On the motion of Councilor Caraviello to take the papers in the hand of the clerk. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion carries. 16-299 offered by councillor scarpelli be resolved at the metric City Council request an update From the mayor on the possible loss of the La Conte rink to a private organization Be it further resolved that the metric City Council requests support from our state delegation on the possible loss of the La Conte rink to a private Organization council scarpelli.
[George Scarpelli]: Thank you. Mr. President. I I think that some it's a I people don't realize that the DCR has just put on an RFP to take over the ranks that we saved for them over the past somewhat years. We now know how important recreational facilities are in our community and what it offers our constituents. And especially during the coldest months and having the opportunity to have the control of that facility. and keeping costs down for our youth organizations and their programming is very important. I think that what the new governor and his administration is doing by sending the new director of the DCR out and going from neighborhood to neighborhood and trying to take back their ranks for quote unquote to raise funding for that department now, which It's not going to happen, at least the way the format's set up now. My fear is that with an RFP, any private organization can come in to Medford, take over not just the La Conte rink, but the Flynn rink. do what they may with it and to support their own pocketbook. So I think we need to get on board with this before it's too late. People don't realize they're actively, there are private organizations walking the rinks now and ready to put bids on our rink. And the ramifications, I think, would be devastating to our recreational landscape and our youth organizations, both with learn to skate and learn to play for our youngest kids, our youth hockey organizations, our girls and boys high school hockey program, and our social skating, which is the open skate. So I think that we need to be apprised of what's going on, and we need to really push our state delegates to start knocking on the governor's door and saying, hey, the decision that's coming out, that came out this week, needs to be halted immediately. So thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. I commend Councilor Scarpelli for this. You know, I've been an advocate for the state to have a rink for over 30 years, being a past president of the Methodist Hockey Association. And, you know, these groups come and go. Every time the state thinks, you know, they don't want the rink, they want to pawn it off to the city. Now, all of a sudden, they see the rink is starting to do well. Now they want to take it back again. I mean, this has been going on for many, many years. And again, our city has had, you know, I was on demand many years ago to buy this for years, but from then to the MDC, and I'm glad we have it now. I would think for this city to lose control of that rink for the thousands of kids that go there would be devastating. And I agree that, Everybody should be calling our state delegation to have this stopped, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Councilor. Councilor?
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, thank you very much. I'd like to amend the paper to ask the administration to report back when the current operating contract ends. It's my understanding that the administration and the DCR entered into an operating contract that was a defined term of either three or five years. And I think that that's coming up on expiration, Mr. President. Also, I'd like to ask the administration whether or not they're going to be pursuing a response to the RFP, and whether or not this RFP would contain language that allows the city to retain a right of first refusal as to whether or not they want to be the operator.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion for approval as amended by Councilor Knight, all those in favour? All those opposed? Motion carries. Offered by Councilor Scott Peli, be it resolved that the mayor's office contact the Department of Transportation to assist the Medford City Council in scheduling an onsite meeting with the Department of Transportation for removing or relocating two bus stops.
[George Scarpelli]: Councilor Scott Peli. Thank you, Mr. President. Again, uh, subcommittee on transportation met a few weeks back. and had a very productive meeting with both the powers to be here at City Hall and constituents to talk about issues both on both ends of Main Street. And we've reached out, I know the city clerk has reached out numerous times to get in touch with the liaison from the T that can answer some very important questions so we can move forward and making a decision. And I've made two phone calls myself today and still haven't gotten any information. So we need to move on this because this is where people get frustrated, where we've done our due diligence, but where other organizations are dragging their feet and halting our business moving forward. So if we can reach out and find some other avenue to contact Department of Transportation. If that person can't do that job, then maybe we'd need to speak to a supervisor and get that done. So, thank you. On that motion, all those in favor?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: I just want to thank, this has been an ongoing issue with the bus stop in front of Carol's Restaurant in the square, and also the bus stop in front of the Oasis on Main Street in South Medford. And I want to personally thank Councilor Scarpelli, and Councilor Caraviello for the wise questions they asked her in the meeting and for moving this forward. This is truly a public safety concern and it was a very productive meeting. And again, I want to thank the chairman of the committee, Councilor Scarpelli for his insight.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion for approval, all those in favor. All those opposed. Motion carries. Offered by Councilor Knight be it resolved that the message board at the corner of Winthrop street and high street be removed. Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, as many of you are aware, I reside on the corner of Winthrop Street and High Street. And every time I go to get my mail, I've received a number of questions about this message board that's been sitting there for six, maybe eight months. At one point, it was flashing and said something, but that was so long ago, I can't remember what. So I would like to ask the administration to take the appropriate steps to have it removed in the interest of public safety, quality of life, and neighborhood beautification.
[Fred Dello Russo]: It was for the street sweeping, and so they just thought they'd leave it up so that every six months it would be relevant.
[Adam Knight]: Oh, on that note, Mr. President, I did receive a call from my highway superintendent, Mr. Tanaglia, who said that the DPW is open for business and are soliciting requests for pothole repairs. So if anybody has any, uh, I swear to God, he really did call and ask me to do this. Um, but I, Mr. Tanaglia did ask for anybody that has any concerns about, uh, potholes or any potholes that have been identified to either use C click fix. I'll give them a call. Very good.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor. Mr. President, while counsel and I brought that up about the circle there, there's a plate that's been there for some time now that seems to be sticking up on one end. It's sinking. Whose responsibility is that? Is that? There's a plate that's right over by where the message board, across from the message board, that's sticking up on one end. And whose responsibility is that? Is that the construction company? Is that a city plate? Can we have an answer? Why the plate is there?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Plate at Winthrop and High Street being examined.
[Richard Caraviello]: And you see it's sinking into the ground and sticking up on it.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So that it stopped sinking in one corner.
[Richard Caraviello]: And Mr. President, who's responsible for fixing that hole? Is that a city problem or is that left over from the construction? And who is responsible for the repair of that said sinkhole?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Point of clarification, Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: I was also informed that a port-a-party has been placed in the area in recent days, so there is the potential that construction might be beginning again there or some type of work might be going on, but there is a new Throne Depot box that's also on the corner there that has arrived within the last day or two.
[Fred Dello Russo]: As amended by Councilor Knight to indicate that there is a port-a-party at the area. On the motion for approval, all those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. Councilor?
[George Scarpelli]: If I can, I had my first faux pas as a city council member. Heavens. Heavens forbid. But I just wanted to make sure I clarified this. The John Howard event, first of all, went fabulously for John and It shows how great Medford is. He had over 500, 600 people coming through the doors at the Irish American celebrating what he's doing for his young student. The mistake I made was my daughter was very angry with me when I got home and said, Dad, it wasn't John who gave me the lead, one of the lead songs, but it was Aaron Keefe, one of my former students. And so I got yelled at, and if I didn't correct that tonight, I'd hear it tomorrow morning. So please forgive me, Aaron. And again, congratulations, John, again, for a wonderful evening. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Mr. Clerk, if you would, make sure the records indicate that correction. Thank you. And the records, speaking of records, of the meeting of the 23rd were passed to Councilor Falco. Councilor Falco, how did you find those records?
[John Falco]: Mr. President, there's one update. one edit that needs to be made. And that is, uh, on page 47, the, uh, and a 16-zero eight seven item B says it says amended by council and I, that community development in the traffic commission provide input to the council on the possibility of increasing the fines throughout the city on the violation of sidewalk parking. And after that, it should say, and restricting allowable delivery times.
[Fred Dello Russo]: I can allow the clerk and you can, uh, I can give him a hard copy of the edit and as amended. So you motion their approval as amended. Yes, as amended. And you'll make that correction with this. Excellent. All those in favor. All those opposed on the motion for dismissal.
[Michael Marks]: Just before we adjourn Councilor Marks, I just want to recognize a longtime member of the board of trustees, for the cemetery, who is resigning after 25 years of service on the Cemetery Board of Trustees. Susan D., who did a remarkable job serving the residents, and the reason why the cemetery looks the way it does, because of her due diligence on that board for so many years. So I want to wish her well, Mr. President. And on behalf of this entire community, I want to thank Susan D., And if we could send her a council citation for 25 years of service to the Board of, Cemetery Board of Trustees.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. On the motion for adjournment by Councilor Knight, all those in favor? All those opposed? Meeting adjourned.
|
total time: 8.98 minutes total words: 857  |
total time: 25.07 minutes total words: 1759  |
total time: 24.99 minutes total words: 1280  |
total time: 12.83 minutes total words: 958  |
|
total time: 10.56 minutes total words: 1347  |
total time: 2.84 minutes total words: 371  |
total time: 5.21 minutes total words: 511  |
total time: 5.33 minutes total words: 261  |
|
total time: 7.54 minutes total words: 514  |
|||