[Paul Camuso]: I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you, Mr. President. Move suspension of Rule 33 to take 15-311 and 15-312.
[Fred Dello Russo]: at the 335 Main Street exit. It is, sir, that the Massachusetts State Law Commission's penal order to insist on the motion of the court is displayed at the end of the delegation. As the Councilors are all aware, Keynote to Go is installed by right and needs to be objected to in writing if there are any objections. So the petition is... Motion to not object.
[Paul Camuso]: So on the motion of Councilor Camuso for non-objection,
[Fred Dello Russo]: If the petitioner wants to come forward to address the council. Where is that? Councilor Caraviello has that on the main paper.
[Richard Caraviello]: Was that endorsed by... Mr. President, I just have one question. Usually Keynote to Go doesn't involve a monitor. Is that correct?
[Fred Dello Russo]: That's correct, Councilor, according to the clerk.
[Richard Caraviello]: What is that monitor? If you have a monitor, that means people will be staying there. Excuse me, sir. I was informed that when you have keynote to go, there's usually not a monitor on the site.
[SPEAKER_15]: We don't have a monitor right now.
[Richard Caraviello]: But will you be putting a monitor or will there be no monitor?
[SPEAKER_15]: That we want a monitor, yeah. I'm sorry, you said there will be a monitor? Yeah, we need it. We don't have right now.
[Richard Caraviello]: Mr. Clerk. I'm a little confused with the information.
[Clerk]: Well, if you want to read Paul Mulkey's letter on his decision, okay, that's a zoning matter, you know.
[Richard Caraviello]: It says the only purpose, the purpose of it would be to purchase a ticket to go. But according to the commonwealth, they don't, they're saying that you plan to install a monitor.
[SPEAKER_15]: Yes.
[Richard Caraviello]: I mean, I don't object to the monitor, but I don't know if that's the purpose of keynote to go. I mean, I don't really care one way or the other. I don't have any objection, but as I say, keynote to go is just to get a keynote ticket and leave.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So we have no objection from Councilor Cavillo. Councilor Knight?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, Mr. President, please forgive my ignorance, but... The only purpose of the money would be to purchase... By right, it's allowed to have the operation of Keno2Go, correct? Correct. However, by right, it's not an effective operation of the Keno2Go Act that would allow them to also have a TV screen to display the winning numbers that are coming out at that point in time? Is that all I'm understanding?
[Richard Caraviello]: That's correct. That's what I understood.
[Clerk]: Keno2Go was originally designed like the Megabucks or whatever. Mega bucks, whatever, you grab the ticket and you go. And that's how it was designed. Now Keno in the city, according to our zoning, is allowed in certain areas. And Keno means pretty much you can stand around, watch the monitor, whatever. In this particular area, according to Paul Mulkey's letter, and I don't have, he just wrote a decision.
[Richard Caraviello]: The operation of a kino game at 355 Main Street is not allowed use in this zoning district. However, a monitor installed to be used for the purpose of kino to go will not constitute a kino game being operated on site, provided no participants, that no one participates in any type of kino game. I'd like to be.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Do we have to vote?
[SPEAKER_04]: Yes.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yeah. So Mr. Clerk, will you please call the roll? A yes. Just explain the vote. A yes vote constitutes non-opposition. So we are, by voting yes, we are not opposed to this operation.
[Clerk]: Councilor Camuso?
[SPEAKER_11]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Caraviello?
[SPEAKER_11]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Knight? No. Vice President Lowenkern?
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Marks?
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Penta? Yes. President De La Ruza?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes. With the vote of six in the affirmative, none negative, the council is not opposed. One negative. Six to one. What did I say? One negative? I'm sorry. 15-312, petition by William J. Jean of UnityCab, The 2003 Ford Crown Vittoria, bin number 205AFP71W63X104361 to a 2004 Chevy Impala, vehicle identification number 2G1WF55E749410308. Councilor? Paraphrase? On the motion of Councilor Caraviello for approval. Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: I'd ask that the matter be tabled, Mr. President. This evening we had a license committee meeting. UnityCab was invited to attend the meeting because we have a number of items that we want to go over relative to our ordinance, and UnityCab failed to attend this evening. Now they're here before this council requesting a transfer of a license. I think that at the very least we should have our opportunity to discuss with UnityCab what our issues and concerns are prior to us actually authorizing this transfer.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Motion to table is undebatable. Motion to table by Councilor Knight. All those in favour? All those opposed? Matter's tabled. On the motion of Councilor Camuso to revert back to the regular order of business. All those in favour? All those opposed? 15-0. Sir, because you were invited to attend a subcommittee meeting on licensing this evening to discuss your taxicab operation, and weren't present in the council office at 5.30, the councillor thought it would be prudent not to allow for this transfer of license from one camp to another until the subcommittee on licensing has had the opportunity to share with you in discussion some questions that they have. So when the subcommittee meets again, reconvenes, I'm sure you were notified of this meeting by the clerk's office a week or two ago, It would be advisable for you to be present at that meeting for there to be discussion before we can take up this matter. As you're aware, there have been a longstanding number of concerns regarding practices of some of those who are licensed as hackney carriages in the city of Medford. And there's also an ordinance review underway as it regards the taxi cabs. So therefore, it would be appropriate for you to be present at that next subcommittee meeting, which Councilor Caraviello will call in the near future. But until that time, it's been decided that this matter lay on the table. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you for your patience. Mr. President, if I may, I certainly have no objection to the transfer of the license after the gentleman does appear before the subcommittee and addresses the questions that we have for him.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Councilor, and so noted. Uh, 15-089, uh, hearings, uh, public hearing will be held by the Medford City Council and the Howard F. Alden Memorial Auditorium, 85 George P. Hassett Drive, Medford, on Tuesday evening, March 24th, 2015, at 7 p.m., on a petition from Wendy's Restaurant for a special permit to amend its hours of operation to operate its drive-thru at 330 Mystic Avenue, Medford, on said site, being located in an industrial zoning district as follows, Monday to Sunday drive-thru, 11 p.m. to 3 a.m., in accordance with the provisions of Section 9401 of 45B of Chapter 94 of the revised ordinances of the City of Medford. Petition and plan may be seen in the office of the Medford City Clerk, City Hall, Medford Mass. Call 781-393-2425 for any accommodations, aids, or further information. By order of the Medford City Council, Edward P. Finn, City Clerk, advertising the Medford Mercury, March 6th and March 16th, 2015. At this time we open the public hearing to all those in favor. Would all those in favor of the drive-thru for Wendy's please step forward and identify yourself and state your intention.
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: Hi, my name is Anthony Donato with Bowler Engineer and I'm representing Wendy's. Chad Adams, who's the local construction manager, couldn't make it tonight. He apologizes. He's from Pennsylvania. But basically, Wendy's operates only a lunch and a dinner. They don't have a breakfast.
[Fred Dello Russo]: And right now, they're- This is a public hearing just to open up. So we just, at this point, allow you to state that you're in favor of this. Yes?
[Adam Knight]: Oh, okay. Yes, I am. Yes.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Anybody else in favor of the drive-through at Wendy's? Hearing and seeing- Do you wish to state that at the podium, sir? Hearing and seeing none, that portion of the meeting is closed. All those opposed to a drive-through at Wendy's, please present yourself before the rail. Those opposed. Hearing and seeing none, the chair calls that portion of the meeting closed. The chair awaits a motion for approval by this. Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President De La Ruzo. City Clerk Finn, is Kelly's Roast Beef 2 a.m. or 3 a.m.? No, it's Kelly's Roast Beef. That's 3 a.m.? ?
[Clerk]: Yeah. Thank you. As is Burger King.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I knew there were two or three.
[Clerk]: I just couldn't recall. Burger King, yeah.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I just wanted to make sure. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Chair awaits a motion. On the motion of approval by Councilor Knight. Does this require a roll? Well, it is. Seconded by Councilor Camuso. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion carries for the extended hours of operation of a drive-thru.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: If I may, from the chair on that?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I'm just going to make sure that the property is well lit, you know, for the parking lot and, you know, obviously traversing the drive-thru just for safety purposes.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. Your other petition will be taken up later. A question on the approved item by Councilor Penta.
[Robert Penta]: On the back portion, Mr. Wendy. Mr. Wendy.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Mr. Wendy?
[Robert Penta]: Big Dave, whatever your name is. Behind Wendy's, isn't there an apartment complex being scheduled to be built there?
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: I understand there is, yes.
[Robert Penta]: And how many units? Do you have any idea how many units?
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: No, I don't.
[Robert Penta]: I think one of the concerns before, just one council member just resurrected this in my head, on the lighting. And they wanted to make sure it was not going to be intrusive to the apartment buildings to the immediate left of them. I just don't know how the lighting is going to affect the apartments that are going to be behind you. And can we get some kind of a lighting scheme as to what's going to go in there? Because if it's going to be intrusive to the new development in the back, I think we're going to have to address that.
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: Certainly. I don't believe there's any changes proposed for the lighting. It's what there is now. But if you want more information on the existing lighting, certainly provide it. Okay. Directly to Mr. Finn's office? Sure. Okay, great. Thank you. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: On that point, Mr. President, I do believe that the folks from Wendy's were before this council a couple of months ago requesting some sign variances. And the discussion of lights came up at that point in time as well. And I don't believe the council has received any type of response from the developer. So I think that that would be certainly a nice good faith effort on their behalf, Mr. President. I believe when you were here for the variance on the signage and we made the same exact recommendations and requests and we haven't gotten a response.
[Fred Dello Russo]: that, by order of the Medford City Council, a public hearing will be given at the Howard F. Alden Memorial Chambers, 85 George P. Hassett Drive, City Hall, Medford, Massachusetts, at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, March 24, 2015, on a petition by National Grid of North Andover, Massachusetts, for permission to locate poles, wires, and fixtures, including the necessary sustaining and protecting fixtures, along and across the following public way. Valley Place, National Grid to install one SO 1 south of Valley Place, beginning at a point approximately 58 feet south of the centerline of the intersection of the Fellsway. National Grid to install 35 foot class 3 SO pole, number two, 50 feet plus or minus from the pole at number one Valley Place towards Fellsway to service 727 Fellsway. Wherefore, it prays that after due notice and hearings as provided by law, it be permitted to excavate the public highways and to run and maintain underground electrical conduits together with such sustaining and protecting fixtures as it may find necessary for the transmission of electricity. Said underground conduits to be located substantially in accordance with the plan filed herewith, marked National Grid, Valley Place, Medford, Massachusetts, number 17430506, December 17th, 2014, approved by the chief engineer, based on the review of the work of installation, the new pole and overhead wires only, i.e. no underground conduits can proceed forthwith, provided the following requirements are met. No city-owned or private utilities or other structures are adversely impacted. National Grid shall ensure that all sewer, water and drain lines are marked prior to any excavation. Any disturbed concrete sidewalk panels shall be replaced in kind. Before beginning work, the contractor shall notify DIGSAFE and shall obtain applicable permits from the Engineering Division. National Grid contractor shall utilize City of Medford regulations and standards, as well as for removing all debris related to its work. Approved by the Superintendent of Wires. Call 781-393-2425 for accommodations, aids, et cetera. The public hearing is opened to all those in favor. All those in favor, please present yourself, sir.
[XA7wYJ4TI4w_SPEAKER_13]: Good evening. My name is John Jankowski. I'm representing National Grid. My address is 170 Medford Street in Malden, Mass. Proposed petition is to install a wooden pole approximately 50 feet from pole one on Valley Street to provide service to 272 Fellsway in Medford. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: All those in favor? Anybody else in favor? Hearing and seeing none, we declare that portion of the meeting closed. All those opposed, anybody opposed, please present yourself. The chair hearing and seeing none, declares that portion of the meeting closed and opens up the floor to questioning or a motion. Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I certainly have no problem supporting this paper. However, several months back we had requested from the city engineer that she forwarded forward to us her policy relative to the city of Medford's regulations and standards for the street restoration and debris removal. To date, I don't believe we've received that, Mr. President. So I'd like to amend the paper by requesting that the city engineer once again send this materials to the Medford City Council for review. Thank you, Councilor.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President, and I have no problem supporting this paper here tonight. I did receive several calls from concerned residents of Bradbury Street. There appears to be an electrical wire that's hanging from 64 Bradbury, about 12 feet from the sidewalk, and extends down Bradbury to the corner of 3rd Street. And I know neighbors have made several calls to The electrical company and have not received any feedback at all, Mr. President. So if we can make that as part of the committee report, it's 64 Bradbury. It goes down Bradbury to the corner of Bradbury and 3rd St. And it appears to be hanging from one of your glass insulators at the top.
[XA7wYJ4TI4w_SPEAKER_13]: It's probably going to be just a wire from the. It's just a wire coming off, that's all. We'll take care of it.
[Michael Marks]: If you could take a look at that immediately, because residents are concerned. I would motion for approval, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion of approval for this item as amended by Councilors Knight and Marks, Councilor, Vice President Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Dello Russo. About how long will the work take?
[XA7wYJ4TI4w_SPEAKER_13]: We have to call in a digsafe. Hopefully most of the snow has gone. So I would think probably within three weeks. The 272s, they do have low voltage, so we want to kind of expedite the job too.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: So about two to three weeks? I would think so, yes. And you'll start right after you call a digsafe?
[XA7wYJ4TI4w_SPEAKER_13]: Yeah, I would think probably two to three weeks, because obviously, you know, next week jobs are all lined up.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: OK, thank you. And on a side note, I also got a couple of concerned residents. National Grid did some work on Parris Street and was supposed to repave.
[XA7wYJ4TI4w_SPEAKER_13]: Can you just find out for the council if that project is— Well, it's probably this time of the year, there's probably going to be a patch on it, but once the asphalt plants start opening up, obviously we'll start repairing it.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Is there any way you could send the clerk just a written response on that, Parris Street repaving? Residents were also told there was one side of the street, I forget if it was even or odd, was supposed to be filled in with cement like the other side, so if we could just get a response on that.
[XA7wYJ4TI4w_SPEAKER_13]: Is it electric or gas, do you know?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I believe it was gas. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. So on the motion of approval by Councilor Marks, amended by Councilors Marks and Knight. All those in favour? All those opposed?
[XA7wYJ4TI4w_SPEAKER_13]: Thank you. Dig safe.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Chair recognizes Councilor Caraviello. Motion to suspend the rules to take two papers out of order. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion granted. Items number under petitions, presentations, and similar matters, 15-309, petition for outdoor dining license by Wendy's Restaurant, 330 Mystic Avenue, Medford, on file recommendations from building commissioner, Board of Health, traffic impact report, ADA coordinator petition. And this comes before the, does this before license? So it comes before the licensing committee, so we allow the petitioner to address us, and then open the floor to Councilor Caraviello for recommendation.
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: Thank you, Mr. President. Chair of the licensing committee. Sir. Hi, good evening. Tony Donato with Buller Engineering, representing Wendy's. And as shown on the rendering here, we'd like to include a patio outside. Obviously, the products would be purchased outside. to be self-serve and first-come, first-served for the seating outside. There will be 12 seats, one of which will be accessible as per ADA requirements, and I believe this has been through your ADA coordinator in town, and she has, we've provided her additional information on the access aisles and widths, and it's been addressed adequately. And again, these are just, it's going to be only during daylight hours and the seasonal, you know, summer hours and while it's light outside. There's not going to be any exterior lighting for this seating area.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Chair recognizes Councilor Caraviello, Chair of the Licensing Commission. Thank you, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: I reviewed the papers and I see the picture there. Is that where the outdoor dining is going to be?
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: Yes, it is.
[Richard Caraviello]: And what were the hours of operation, you said, for the outdoor?
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: During the store hours, during daylight.
[Richard Caraviello]: Only during daylight hours?
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: Well, yeah, there's not going to be any exterior other lighting during the store hours, I guess you would say, between, I think they're open until 11 right now, but I don't, they're not going to add any lighting to that. And what that rendering does not show is that there was a request by the fire department or the building inspector to include some decorative bollards just for pedestrian safety, which would be installed.
[Richard Caraviello]: Mr. President, I reviewed the papers and I find everything in order. And a motion for approval.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion of approval by Councilor Caraviello. Councilor Marks, please.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. You know, I like the concept. The one concern I have is the fact that that Wendy's closes at 11 o'clock. So you can't go in and order after 11. You can use the drive-thru, correct? And after that time... Now till 3 o'clock. Well, after that time, even though that particular section, as the gentleman just alluded to, won't be lit, it will be lit from Middlesex Ave, with the lighting that's currently on Middlesex Ave. And my concern is that at 1, 2, 3 in the morning, if people want to get out on a nice summer night, That could turn into an area that people sit down and eat and so forth, which would pose a real concern for the area and also area residents. So I have a little concern, Mr. President, unless they're going to take the furniture in after dark every night. Is that gated off?
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: Well, I believe it's bolted, but I mean, we could add signage to then have them police it if that would address your concerns. So your staff's going to go out there if someone's having a hamburger out there and talking, they're going to kick them out? Well, I guess we could ask them to include a gate across there or a chain. That would help.
[Michael Marks]: I just don't want it to turn into a hangout.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Exactly.
[Michael Marks]: After hours, especially where it's not going to be lit. And I can see that particular area at 12, 1, 2 in the morning becoming a hangout. And I have real concerns, Mr. President, with that. So unless the furniture is going to be removed every night at dusk, I couldn't support that, Mr. President, in its current form.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So are you saying that would you be supportive to it on the condition that we amend the motion of approval that there be a condition added that the area be locked off by use of a gate at the end of its its use period?
[Michael Marks]: I may be amendable to that. The gate, the fence itself only looks maybe three feet high. It doesn't look like much of a fence. But, you know, noise travels, especially on a warm summer night. And there are residents, you may not think so, there are residents in that close proximity that I would hate to have concerns down the line. of people calling up saying they can hear, you know, people out at 2 in the morning, 3 in the morning. I just have a real concern with this. And I'm not sure if that's the direction we should be going in that particular area. We allowed the 3 o'clock extension. Maybe if we put a 6-month review on this, I would be amenable maybe to a 6-month review. But somehow that furniture has to be removed, Mr. President. Because I'm not sure what a gate would do, to be quite honest with you. And I'm not sure if their employees are going to want to go out and start kicking people off the property.
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: Unless they put like a no-loitering sign after store hours, and then maybe it'd have to be police if something came along. I mean, the six-month review, that would be great if we could just take a look at it for six months and see how it works out.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yeah, that takes us into September.
[Michael Marks]: Well, our police have better things to do than kick people out of your property with all due respect.
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: Well, I think they would first come out there and tell when it was closed. I mean, we could post signs there that it's only open during store hours or from daylight hours. And then we could probably add a chain across it or something or do something so that prohibit people from sitting there during the day. But I think that I'm pretty sure that the furniture is bolted down to the patio. It's not movable. And I think that's part of trying to get the ADA space requirements. additional information here on the patio furniture if you want to look at it. I don't know if that helps address your concerns, but.
[Michael Marks]: The furniture is not my concern. My concern is the fact that there'll be people loitering out there after hours and that that's my concern. You know, maybe if Wendy's wanted to open their restaurant and allow people that maybe one o'clock in the morning we're going to sit down inside your establishment and have something to eat. Maybe that may be what could be done.
[Fred Dello Russo]: I think this is more of a... Point of clarification, Councilor, Vice-President Lugokurin. I'm sorry, I have to press your button too, I'm sorry.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Will all the furniture be, you know, sometimes a stackable chair is locked up, anything like that?
[Fred Dello Russo]: In the packets that we received, it shows a diagram of the furniture, and it's the Infinity Series patio series, which is ADA compliant and meets all state, local, and federal regulations.
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: There's a little sketch that's going around that shows, and I think there's certain requirements with regards to, in particular with a wheelchair, the space that they're allowed to turn and clear. So I think that's why they're proposing with the bolt down. I mean, if there's anything, if they could chain up the furniture maybe so that they couldn't sit there after hours. But I don't think physically moving the furniture every night would be something. And the intent is that they're remodeling a bunch of their stores in New England. They've done this in the South and they're coming up here and they're remodeling their stores. I think it's more for like family's daylight hours. It's not really something like after hours drive-thru. But I do see your point. You wouldn't want anybody hanging out there, orders in the drive-thru and then sitting down there.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Point of information, Councilor Penta. Is this area going to be lit? No.
[Robert Penta]: It will not be lit?
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: We're not proposing any more lighting, no.
[Robert Penta]: So this outside seating area will have no lights at all at any time during the day or night?
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: Well, there might be some lights above. There's a walkway here that's going to be in front of the building, but the patio itself will not be lit.
[Robert Penta]: So maybe, Councilor Mack, you can make a request that there be no lighting there after 11 o'clock at night? No, he said there is some along the side. Nothing near the patio at all.
[Fred Dello Russo]: I think Councilor Caraviello was waiting to be recognized first. I'm sorry, we're having a microphone problem tonight, as you can see.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. I agree with Councilor Marks that maybe if you gated that area off, I mean, I see the space here, but if you put a gate out there and maybe took the umbrellas in with the sign saying, you know, no seating after dark. I know the only lights you'll be seeing are whatever comes off the store.
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: I would imagine they would take the umbrellas in.
[Richard Caraviello]: Yeah, but if you could gate that. Certainly. It looks like you haven't gated most of the way. Gate it with a sign saying no seating after dark.
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: Yes, that would definitely be amenable to that.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. As I look through the packet, I see a letter dated January 6, 2015, from Diane McLeod to the city clerk. And the letter reads, reviewing the outdoor seating specifications provided for Wendy's, I note that they do have three tables, one of which is accessible. Other than that, they provide no information on accessible seating. What is provided is not accessible. No path of travel with distance or access aisles with height or knee depth, as well as no seating policy. More detailed information is needed. That letter was followed up by a letter which looks like it's dated January 8th. And it says, in response to the memo dated January 6th, 2015 from Ms. Diane McLeod, ADA coordinator, Bowler Engineering is submitting the following supplemental information on behalf of Wendy's. Patio table cut sheet by Recycle Design depicting compliance with ADA, patio accessibility sketch, and Wendy's restaurants accessible seating policy. After that, Mr. Clerk, there's no correspondence from the Office of Disability to your office. Have you had any discussions with Ms. McLeod to determine whether or not, in fact, the seating policy is in compliance? MR. MCLEOD.
[Clerk]: Mr. Chairman, a lot of my staff have had problems today, these days. But after Mr. Donato forwarded the updated part to Diane on these ADA requirements. And from there, she said she had no problem after that, as long as that's what it is, those plans that he submitted. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Clerk.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Anything further, Councilor Knight?
[Adam Knight]: No, that's it. I just wanted to be sure that... Thank you, Councilor Knight. Councilor Camuso.
[Paul Camuso]: Thank you, Mr. President. I think that Wendy's has to make a determination, and if they want to proceed with this, I agree with Councilor Marks 100%. If they want to proceed with this, I think we have to move reconsideration on the 3 a.m. license, or at least put six-month review on the 3 a.m. license, because we could eventually have a real albatross around our neck in the residential neighbourhood, as Councilor Marks stated. They have their 3 o'clock license and they get this. And we all know that Malden still has bar rooms that are open till 2 a.m. And traditionally, people get out of there and they'd always head to Wendy's, Kelly's and Burger King. So I definitely agree with Councilor Marks. This is a major concern. Could you speak on behalf of Wendy's and what's more important to the operation right now? Is it the seating or is it the 3 a.m. drive-thru license? Because I can't see I can't see doing both of them at this point, to be quite honest with you. Because we all know that that may be fenced off or a chain or something, but you're still going to have people, I mean, we have other establishments that their furniture gets stolen at 2, 3 in the morning from in front of their restaurants in this community. So I just don't feel comfortable, to be quite honest, doing both of these at the same time. I don't know how the rest of my council colleagues feel about it. I think if we're gonna do this, we should put a six-month review on the license that we just gave a few minutes ago. Would you, can you speak on behalf of?
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: Well, I think the six-month review would be certainly a good alternative, acceptable.
[Paul Camuso]: On both?
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: On both, sure. I mean, we can certainly police that. I mean, I think, does the Kellys have tables out there too? Is there an issue?
[Paul Camuso]: No. Yeah, they do, but they're on the Revere Beach Parkway side. There's a couple metal tables.
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: Yeah. Yeah. But, you know, certainly, I mean, we can certainly add the fence and blocking off and signage. And we can certainly, I mean, they're ready to do a building permit, get this building under construction. They're going to be pulling the building permit. We received approval. So they would be open in the summer and it would be perfect time to evaluate it at the end of the summer. And if it's not working for the city and if you guys want to call us back in here and if, you know, discuss the alternatives, either change the hours or
[Paul Camuso]: The other thing I would... I agree with Councilor Marks if there's an aesthetically pleasing way where you can do higher wrought iron with a gate that they can actually lock. I mean, if you drive up Route 28, up near Kitty's and stuff, you have some of the smaller restaurants. McDonald's, for instance, has a nice wrought iron fence. It's black, but it prevents people from jumping over it and getting in there when they're not supposed to. But the current setup, I just think... I think you're actually asking for problems. Um, and I agree with Councilor Marks. It's a very, uh, condensed residential neighbourhood right on the other side of BJ's. And, uh, as you know, you get your air conditioner on on a, uh, nice summer night. I mean, uh, your window's open with the air conditioner off, you can hear things travel. So, um, I'd like to, if Councilor Marks is okay with it, I would, uh, I would like to see the six-month review, as the Councilor said. But also, right after this vote's taken, I'm gonna move reconsideration on the initial vote to put a six-month review on that as well.
[Fred Dello Russo]: There's a motion for approval as amended before us. Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Mr. President, I don't mind the six-month review, but I don't see what the hardship is to take in, you said there's seating for 12, take in 12 chairs and three tables. You know, outdoor.
[Fred Dello Russo]: If you saw the diagrams, Councilor, it would be akin to moving this whole bench that you're sitting at inside.
[Michael Marks]: They may have to rearrange what they were going to order, Mr. President, based on our approval. I realize that's what they're calling for, but, um, you know, we have a program that allows businesses to put tables and chairs out in the sidewalk, Mr. President, and we don't allow them to leave the tables and chairs at the end of the night. Those tables and chairs have to be taken in and so forth. And I don't see any difference. I, you know, I don't mind the six month review, but, um, I don't see why Wendy's can't take in this furniture every night. If this is something you want to offer seasonal for three months, This is something that you're going to have to take in the furniture, or you're not going to get my vote. I don't know where anyone else stands, but I just, you know, speaking on behalf of the residents in that area, and there are many, I couldn't possibly support something that may attract people at three in the morning to sit out there and not only have a burger, but maybe a couple of beers, too. Don't forget, so.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Chair recognizes Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, that's an interesting position that Councilor Marks has taken, and I think it makes sense. You know, we have Wendy's here, and I don't see any harm in maybe Wendy's putting out some temporary seating and us approving maybe a 30-day or a 60-day or a 90-day license for them to use temporary seating and see how it goes. Then they can come back to the council if, in fact, things have worked out and we can approve the design of the the standard equipment that's going to go in. But I think if we let them have an opportunity to give it a dry run or a trial run and see what the effect is, maybe that'll be a good compromise for all of us here. I think that we have some concerns about the permanency of the seating that's going to be out there. We also have some concerns about whether or not there are going to be transients there late at night. It's on Wendy's, obviously, to monitor their property, and I certainly don't want to turn this into you know, private detail for the police department to have to come down and keep monitoring Wendy's and what's going on, and I certainly don't want to see the quality of life of the residents in the area be hurt. However, I think that there's room for compromise here, Mr. President, and I think there's some room for some outside-of-the-box thinking, and if maybe we allow Wendy's to do a three-month trial period with seating that's not permanently fixed, and then they can come back to the council after that period of time, and we can take a look at the complaints that were registered by the police department, we can take a look at the the calls that have been made to our first responders, maybe we'll have a better understanding as to what exactly is going on down there after hours.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Councilor. Councilor Caraviello.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. If those aren't too heavy, I don't see why you couldn't stand them up at the end of the night. Excuse me? I think they're bolted into the attic. Are they going to be bolted? Why do they have to be bolted in? Do they have to be bolted in?
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: Well, again, I think, yeah, I think for, like, that, that someone had said, and then, um, just, again, these, these are, like, designed to meet ADA requirements, so they have to be spaced a certain distance away, and I think, you know, one of the concerns is that if they stack... I mean, could they be covered in the evening?
[Richard Caraviello]: Would you cover them with a cover?
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: I guess we could cover them. Maybe that would be a compromise.
[Richard Caraviello]: I mean, I know they, I know they have covers. You, you know, they, you can get a cover that can cover the tables.
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: I think that'd be a great idea, Councilor, if we could cover them, and if they could lock them with a cover, and then... A tarp with a cable and a lock? Yeah. That'd be great.
[Paul Camuso]: Well, Mr. President?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor Camuso?
[Paul Camuso]: That leads up to something right along the lines, and I think it would be something that Councilor Marks, and I'm not speaking for him, but maybe that would be satisfying to him and myself, because obviously there's some neighborhood concerns. What about one of those tops that you shut down the whole patio at night? It just, you roll it out from the wall, and it comes with the vinyl, so you actually can't walk in there. It goes around the four corners.
[SPEAKER_11]: They have them, I mean. I've seen them, I'm not sure. I would think that the manufacturer would have something that would just cover the whole table as it is.
[Paul Camuso]: Yeah, but the table being covered is still gonna not prevent people from going in the patio at three in the morning. So you said cover the tarp? You know what I'm talking about, right? Like, pool yards and things like that would actually go, It's very aesthetically pleasing, and it comes out, and it just attaches to the four corners for lack of the scientific.
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: Of the fence, yeah. I would support that.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So if the chair could have something in motion form.
[Paul Camuso]: Make a motion to have it Covered up by virtue of connecting a vinyl something or something aesthetically pleasing to all four corners, so that at 11 o'clock at night, anything within the regular operating hours.
[Michael Marks]: After it gets dark, according to... At dusk.
[Richard Caraviello]: Cover the furniture and chain it down. No, not the furniture, cover the whole patio. Either cover the furniture or cover the patio. No, the patio.
[Fred Dello Russo]: so that the patio be covered, so this license is granted on the condition that the outdoor dining license is granted with a six-month review, if I understood the amendments, and that a vinyl or similar material tarp be employed to cover the entire seating area from post to post, of the fence to prevent the entrance of individuals in there to be seated. After the sun goes down and or the termination of the agreed upon dining hours, which is sunset, am I correct?
[Paul Camuso]: That's what you stated.
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: Yeah, it's not, it's not lighting. So I guess it would be dining hours, but there's not gonna be any additional lighting. So, I mean, I guess we could just say the store while the store is open, but that's acceptable.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Is that a little broad? The store is open till 3, or is the store closed at 11?
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: I mean, while the store is open, but not the drive-thru.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So the restaurant itself closes at 11? So at 11 o'clock, this shop will be employed, or before then?
[Paul Camuso]: 11 o'clock, it closed. Unless someone else has better... I don't know. We're all on the same page. I guess it's my question. To protect the integrity of the neighbourhood.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight? My question, Mr. President, is are we granting the license on these contingencies, or are we...
[Fred Dello Russo]: The chair's understanding is that we're agreeing to the license with these contingencies. We're not asking for a redo of the design and a design alternative. The design alternative has been approved by all the necessary persons, so we're just making amendments to it for the purpose of granting the license.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: compliance with in-store hours, and that's something we do review in six months. And if we have to, we pull it back till 8 p.m. or whenever the sun goes down.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Very good.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: And we should probably, if I may, through the Chair, get a report from the Chief of Police with regards to any calls that maybe are made at Kelly's. And I don't even think Kelly's has a permit for outdoor seating, although they do have a few tables up in the Hill area there. So maybe we could look into that.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So with all those amendments, Mr. Clerk, you have them all? Six-month review at the termination of restaurant hours in store dining hours.
[Clerk]: Correct. Is that right?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes. Mr. President. Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: You know, why would we want to invite residents at 10 o'clock to an area that's not going to be lit? And forget about Wendy's, because they're not looking out for residents of this community.
[Fred Dello Russo]: No.
[Michael Marks]: Why would we want, if the gentleman said it's not going to be lit, and we're going to allow people, our residents, to go and use this area that's not lit, to me would pose a great danger. I'm not sure why we would allow that. It doesn't make any sense to me, Mr. President. It may work for the store to have it open until 11, but if it's not lit, then why are we, you know,
[Fred Dello Russo]: If you could clarify that for us, sir.
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: Would we call that ambient lighting?
[Michael Marks]: It doesn't light up your area, you said. It doesn't light up the area.
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: It's gonna be close enough to it.
[Michael Marks]: It's gonna be close enough to give enough light. So originally then you were allowing lights out there without any restrictions at all. You just wanted to have a little potty area out there. I'm sorry. You made it sound originally like once it turns dark, there's no one's gonna go by there because Once the sun goes down, you're not going to go out there. Now you're saying, well, there's enough lighting there. You could stay until 10, 11 o'clock, if need be.
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: When the store closes, they shut the lights off on the exterior of the building, but they leave the drive-thru windows open.
[Michael Marks]: Yeah, but that's not how it was presented to us originally. I apologize. You made it sound like there was no lighting out there. And now all of a sudden there's lighting because you want it to be open until 11. Mr. President, I can't support 11 o'clock. I can't support 11 o'clock. That's not the purpose of those lights out there to light up that particular area. And to me, you know, when you're trying to put a baby to bed at 8 o'clock is late to hear noise of someone that may be out there 8, 9, 10, 11 o'clock at night. You know, so I can't support that if we want to do it. Dusk hours. Or even 8 o'clock, 9 o'clock, but not 11. I think that's far too late, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: We have a motion of approval with those conditions stated. So on the motion of approval by Councilor Caruso.
[Michael Marks]: What hour, 11 o'clock?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yeah, in-store dining hours, so that would be 11.
[Michael Marks]: I would ask that that be amended to 8 o'clock, Mr. President. I withdraw the 11 and amendable to 8. It's a six-month review, so we can revisit this in a six-month period.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So we've made that amendment to 8 o'clock, that that area has to be covered up. So on that motion, all those in favor with the six-month review.
[Michael Marks]: Roll call vote, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Roll call vote has been requested by Councilor Marks. On the motion for approval, as amended with all those conditions, Mr. Clerk.
[Paul Camuso]: Quick question.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Quick question, Councilor Camuso. I just have a quick question.
[Paul Camuso]: Does anyone know what time Brewers Patio closes? Because that's directly across the street, and that's... In Malden. Correct. That's a good point. 2 o'clock. It's right on the line. It is 2 o'clock. The patio too? I've been out there. The question is, we haven't had any complaints about that, but I think the 8 o'clock is definitely a good start.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think it's also important to point out that nothing precludes Wendy's from coming back and petitioning the council to lift the restrictions at a later date, provided that there are no problems.
[Unidentified]: Correct.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So on that motion, Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. Councilor Camuso. Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Caraviello. Yes. Councilor Knight. Yes. Vice-President Lana-Kern. Yes. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Penta. Yes. President Dello Russo.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes. 7 in the affirmative, none negative. The motion passes for Wendy's on Middlesex Avenue. Thank you.
[Paul Camuso]: Mr. President? Mr. Councilor? While we're under suspension, I'd like to move reconsideration on 15-089.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion for reconsideration on 15-089, petition for 3 a.m. drive-thru at Wendy's. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion for reconsideration is before us.
[Paul Camuso]: I'd like to put a six-month review on this, at least present it to the council with a six-month review.
[Fred Dello Russo]: We have to go through the public hearing again now that we're reconsidering.
[Adam Knight]: So, the public hearing, having previously been... Mr. President, I move that the public hearing notice be waived based on the issue that you've already read at once and to the record.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Very good. On that motion, all those in favour? All those opposed? The reading is waived. All those in favour of Point of information, Councilor Penta.
[Robert Penta]: I do not believe you can waive a public hearing, Mr. Clark. Can you or can you not? Do it quick. It's for the public.
[Adam Knight]: That's what it is. Just waive the reading, not the actual public hearing.
[Robert Penta]: No, it's a public hearing because you're asking to waive one of the ingredients of the hearing. Can't the Council... The Chair will... The Chair will... Wait a minute. If the Council votes for this right now and then for next week have a motion of reconsideration on the time sequence on that, can we do that? On the license. You would have to reconsider. Tomorrow, but we wouldn't have to go to the whole public hearing process and advertising or anything like that, correct?
[Adam Knight]: Can't we just do it right now?
[Paul Camuso]: It'll take us two minutes to do it.
[Adam Knight]: All those in favor? All those opposed? The public hearing's already been held. We voted on a paper. We're moving for reconsideration on the paper, not on the public hearing. The public hearing's already been held. This legislative body's making a reconsideration on a piece of legislation that it had passed. It's not
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: on how we voted on the public hearing. Can you do this, Eddie, can you do this or not? Just do it over. Just read it. Just read it.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Let's just read it and I'll be happy. Wait a minute, let the clerk answer, please.
[Clerk]: You granted the special zoning. Zoning is a public hearing. Move for reconsideration. When you move reconsideration, it brings it back to its original state and you do all your stuff all over again.
[Paul Camuso]: And it's not a different day, so it doesn't have to be re-advertised. It's past the notification time, which was 7 p.m., so we're all set just if we read it.
[Robert Penta]: No, he just said no. You have to have the hand. You have to go through the whole thing. He has to read the paper.
[Paul Camuso]: It's advertised for the same night that we're doing the recall. If I did it tomorrow, maybe it would be a different ball game.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So we're going to read the paper now. 15-089. City of Medford, notice of a public hearing. A public hearing will be held by the Medford City Council and the Howard F. Alden Memorial Auditorium, 85 George Piazza Drive, Medford, Massachusetts, on Tuesday evening, March 24, 2015, at 7 p.m., on a petition from Wendy's Restaurant for a special permit to amend its hours of operation to operate its drive-thru at 330 Middlesex Avenue, Medford, on said site being located in an Industrial 1 zoning district as follows. Monday to Sunday drive-thru, 11 p.m. to 3 a.m. In accordance with the provisions of Section 94-145B of Chapter 94 of the Revised Ordinances of the City of Medford, Petition and plan may be seen in the office of the City Clerk, Medford City Hall, Medford, Mass. Call 781-393-2425 for any accommodations, aids, and further information. TDT 781-393-2516. The City of Medford is an EEO AA504 employer. By order of the City Council, Edward P. Finn, City Clerk, advertising Medford Mercury, March 6th and March 16th, 2015. The chair declares this public hearing open and opens the floor to those all in favor to make themselves known before us. All those in favor, please present yourself before the chair and state you're in favor.
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: Hi, Tony Donato, Boiler Engineer, in favor.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Very good. Anybody else in favor of this drive-through?
[Robert Cappucci]: Robert Capucci, 71 Evans Street. Thank you, Mr. President. I am in favor of this. If I could please just add, at a time when Medford is seeing businesses fly out of here, with eight open storefronts down here in Medford Square, the amount of hoops I've seen this council put on this man and this business, is amazing to me, calling for them to add expenditures of an awning, and this, that, and the other thing. I hope Wendy's doesn't just move across the street.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Mr. Capucci.
[Robert Cappucci]: Thank you, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. Anybody else in favor? Hearing and seeing none, the chair declares this portion of the meeting closed. Anybody opposed? All those opposed, please present yourself. Hearing and seeing none, the chair declares this portion of the meeting closed. Opens up the floor to consideration. Councilor Camuso.
[Paul Camuso]: I'd like to move approval with the approval of the Chairman of the Zoning Committee.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Zoning Committee Chairman Penta.
[Paul Camuso]: And I'd like to just put a six-month review. I apologize. I wish we did this a little earlier, but I do think it's needed. This is still a residential neighborhood and well-intentioned and well-needed, I think.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Motion for approval with the six-month review. Mr. President. Councilor Penta, please.
[Robert Penta]: I forgot your name. What is it? Tony. Tony?
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Okay.
[Robert Penta]: Why do you want three o'clock? Have you done some kind of analysis that says you're going to make a lot of money up to three o'clock?
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: Well, the store closes at one right now, and they do have customers that still pull in the driveway, and they just want to service the customers. They don't have a breakfast like a McDonald's or Burger King, so their revenue is totally generated for lunch and dinner. So, I mean, if the business isn't there, they're not going to be open at 3 a.m. Let's put it that way. I mean, if they see the customers come in, they'll stay open. But, you know, they'll definitely reevaluate it. And if not, they're not going to stay at 3 a.m. if there's no demand for it.
[Robert Penta]: One of my concerns, I want to go back to Councilor Marks, and you talked about the neighborhood. And it's true, in a hot summer's night, air conditioning's in a whole bunch of nine yards. Are you comfortable, John Edwards, are you comfortable with 3 o'clock as compared to 2?
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: I'm just having a hard time with 3 o'clock because... I think the... I mean, there's also other fast food restaurants. I think the Dunkin' Donuts is open 24 hours right across the street. So, I mean, they're just trying to... Is that in Medford or Malden? Medford.
[Robert Penta]: That's open 24 hours? The Dunkin' Donuts on the mall?
[Clerk]: I just don't know the exact... I made this 13 of them, I came up with them. But Burger King, again, Burger King's, I think the one was 24 Hours Burger King, if I'm correct. Wendy's is up to three, but they do have a 24-hour license based on the old Krispy Kreme, because they inherited that. So they wanted to exercise that, they could. I think it's the fast food environment that changed. We have a three-month review on it.
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: It may likely be just a weekend thing, too, in the end.
[Robert Penta]: The three o'clock is not going to be every night?
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: Well, it's every night, but as a demand there, like I said, they're going to re-evaluate it, too, if the demand's not there. But right now, they think the demand's there.
[Robert Penta]: So when we review this thing in six months, it's possible that you may not even be open until three, you may only be open until two or whatever it might be. Correct.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Now, we have motion approval by Councilor Camuso.
[Paul Camuso]: And this goes with the business, not with the land.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Right. And this goes with the business, not with the land. Amended. All those in favor?
[Michael Marks]: Roll call vote, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Roll call vote has been requested for the 3 a.m. drive-thru, which is tied solely to the Wendy's, and with a six-month review. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. Councilor Camuso.
[Clerk]: Councilor Caraviello? Yes. Councilor Knight? Yes. Vice-President Lowell-Kern? Yes. Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Penta? Yes. President Dello Russo?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, none negative. Motion passes. Congratulations. Thank you. Thank you for your patience.
[pkk5OxKuY6w_SPEAKER_04]: Mr. President, do you mind if I ask in the six-month review, is it something that you internally, or you just contact Wendy's in general? Is it a hearing? The clerk will contact you and put it on the pen.
[Clerk]: For the zoning and the hours, a decision goes out. 15-310 Petition for Outdoor Dining License by Bertucci's.
[Fred Dello Russo]: 4054, Mystic Valley Parkway, Medford, Mass. We hope you've taken notes. On file, building commissioner's report, board of health, traffic impact report, ADA coordinator petition. This is before licensing committee. We'll allow our friends from Bertucci's to address the council, and then turn the floor over to Councilor Caraviello. Mr. Bertucci, state your name and address for the record, please.
[SPEAKER_19]: Good evening, my name is Gary Sadler. I'm an architect with Upland Architects representing Pertucci's on their proposed outdoor patio at their location at 4054 Mystic Valley Parkway. Just to give you a brief overview, the proposed project is a roughly 68 by 18 foot wood framed with a composite deck patio. rails, handicap ramp to accommodate 32 seats on the patio. The patio will be located inside or over an existing landscape bed adjacent to the sidewalk. The project has been through the various committees. We did spend a little time with some back and forth with Ms. McLeod. on the ADA accessibility items and made some revisions to the plan to accommodate those requirements and requests. There are plans to open up the existing side wall to accommodate wider door openings. The patio will be staffed full time by a wait staff. Tonight I have John Sullivan of Bertucci's, who can address any operational issues that, or questions that you might have.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. Councilor Caraviello.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. I reviewed the papers and find them in order. I just have one question. What are your hours of the outdoor dining going to be? My only concern would be if you'd stop the outdoor seating 30 minutes prior to closing. That would be my only concern, so we wouldn't have people lingering out there all night.
[SPEAKER_19]: Sounds like we could do that.
[Richard Caraviello]: All set?
[Robert Penta]: All set, Mr. President. Quick question.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Chairman Penta, please.
[Robert Penta]: You have a note here from Diane as it relates to everything looking good, One of your entrances having two feet, three inches, has that been corrected?
[SPEAKER_19]: Yes, yeah, if there was, yeah, we've right now, that has been corrected. It has to be three feet. Exactly. We're actually showing four feet. Okay. For, which is compliant with the access standards of Massachusetts. In the two doors, the two new doors that will open up to the patio are actually 10 foot wide each, 10 foot plus. They're a folding door system. So anything that we may have originally presented, that got resolved in the back and forth with the ADA coordinator.
[Robert Penta]: She makes something here, which I've never seen before. It says, do you have people who will seat them, or will they seat themselves? And do you have an accessible seating policy? Is that something new?
[SPEAKER_19]: I've never heard of it. That's new to me, a seating policy. I can tell you that Bertucci's has a hostess, a full-time hostess that does seat their guests.
[Robert Penta]: But will the person seat these people in this area?
[SPEAKER_19]: Oh, absolutely. Yes, yes. Yes, they will.
[Robert Penta]: I've just never seen that before.
[SPEAKER_19]: I haven't heard of a seating policy, but It may be in situations where it's a seat yourself type of establishment, where a patron in a wheelchair may not know where the accessible seating is. That would be my guess. Okay.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Move approval, Mr. President. On the motion for approval by Councilor Penta, Councilor, Vice President Lango-Curran.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I think Councilor Knight has a good question. I don't know if he got it answered, but I was under the impression that just the 4, 8, 12, 16, 24 seats was what we were discussing, and the section to the right was an indoor section. Can you explain? So is there a bar outside and high top tables?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Sir, would you please state your name and address for the record and address the councillors from the podium, please?
[SPEAKER_09]: John Sullivan, I'm the general manager of the location. So that, what you're looking at is the whole deck. The L shape that you're looking at is pretty much like a couch with two seats there and a table. And then going towards your left would be the other seating. The long stretch in front of the four diamonds that you see is a handicap ramp that'll go down. It's over 30 feet in length. And if you look at, what you're looking at, Let's say in between the two diamonds to your right, you'll see a three, that's a host stand. And to the left and right of that are two sliding glass doors that are five feet by five feet.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: And if you're looking at Bertucci's from Mystic Valley Parkway, will this deck be on the right side?
[SPEAKER_09]: If you're looking at the front of the building?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yep.
[SPEAKER_09]: It's the left-hand side where the courthouse is, the parking lot.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Oh, where the parking lot is, where your parking lot is. Right, exactly.
[SPEAKER_09]: Correct. So there'll be two handicap entrances, one for the deck and also there's one going in the main building.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: This is going to have 32 seats?
[SPEAKER_09]: Yes.
[Richard Caraviello]: 30 minutes prior to closing. Can you explain the type of seating that would be, like with Wendy's we had stationary
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: ...that were going to be bolted down. What type of tables and chairs are going to be used?
[SPEAKER_19]: Nothing will be bolted down. It's movable furniture. So the tables to the left of the plan are what they call flex seating. So those are movable. If Bertucci's needed to accommodate a party of eight, they could slide the tables together. So those are flexible in terms of their layout. The diamonds that have the number two in it, those are what are considered high top that really adjust for guest to come in and stand at those tables, maybe if they're waiting for a seat inside for dining. The seating over on the right, as John mentioned, is more lounge-type seating, cushion-type seating, or outdoor couch with a little table to set your drink or food at.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: And then at the end of the night, what will happen to all the seating? Remain there, is it gonna be fenced in? You said it's a wooden fence?
[SPEAKER_19]: It is surrounded with rail. It's not segregated, it's not closed off. In other words, there's no gate at the end of the ramp to segregate the rest of the area. But the intent is, maybe with the exception of umbrellas, if there are umbrellas, the seating stays on the deck.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Last question, any video cameras? Are you gonna have any type of props? Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Madam Vice President. Councilor Marks is waiting next, then Councilor Camuso.
[Michael Marks]: The parking that currently exists, will that still exist in front of the building? Yes. So we're not replacing any handicapped spots or anything else that's in front of the building? Correct. No changes are proposed or required to the parking. So the width of this patio that you're talking, It appears to be at least, what, 11, 12 feet?
[SPEAKER_19]: It's about 18 feet. 18 feet? Wide, yes. That's from the building to the edge of the ramp. And that falls within the landscape bed that's there existing. And just outside of that is the sidewalk, the public sidewalk. So there is, at the end of that ramp, we're proposing to connect or pour a concrete pad at the end of that ramp and connect it with the sidewalk.
[Michael Marks]: Okay, and are you going to focus people that don't want to use the outside area to a particular entrance?
[SPEAKER_19]: The way operationally it would work is patrons come into the restaurant through the main entrance, set up with the hostess, and then the hostess would bring them to the outdoor dining.
[Michael Marks]: But currently you have two accesses now to get into your main entrance, right? Right, that's true. So are we doing away with one of the accesses and you're only going to have So you are going to have multiple accesses then?
[SPEAKER_09]: You're going to have the main two entrances that you're talking about now with my foyer.
[XA7wYJ4TI4w_SPEAKER_13]: Right.
[SPEAKER_09]: So they're going to come in that way, meet the hostess. We just opened up a new bar lounge in August. So to get out to the deck, they're going to have to go through the bar lounge to go through the two doors, sliding glass doors that we're doing there. So there's not going to be any access for them to walk up the ramp to get to the... Thank you. All set, councillor? Yes. Councilor Camuso.
[Paul Camuso]: Thank you. I certainly see this as a whole different animal than the previous petitioner that was up here. This is a restaurant that you actually have to wait in line, get a seat. You have to show proper identification if you're going to have an alcoholic beverage. So I am totally in support of this. We already have establishments like Margarita's and many others throughout the community that have similar seating arrangements. Pizza Regina among Joe's American Bar and Grill. So not your average Joe's, not Joe's American Bar. But with that being said, Mr. President, I do support this. I just want to make sure that you realize my understanding is you have to go get an extension of your liquor license now if you're going to serve alcoholic beverages on the outside extension. Other restaurants in our community have had to do that when they set up patios and things like that. So you want to make sure that everything's in order for insurance purposes, as well as liability with the city and everything else. So I'm not 150% sure on that, but I know another restaurant had to do it, I'm being told by one of my council colleagues. So I think we have to be very cognizant of that. So I second the approval, if it hasn't been done yet. And then one question to the clerk. I know there's been some confusion based upon outdoor seating ordinance that this city council worked diligently upon that was put into effect maybe two or three fiscal years ago. We really didn't delineate in that ordinance whether it was public property or private property. So in the past, restaurants like Petucci's wouldn't even necessarily have to come in front of the council for outdoor seating because it was their own property and they owned it. I have pizza Regina and some of the others that I just mentioned. So I think we have to go back and revisit the ordinance because I was under the impression at the time it was strictly to protect the city's interests as far as slip and falls on sidewalks when people had the small little chairs out there in front of restaurants like Bocelli's restaurants like muffin shop and several others up on the hillside the Danish pastry house. I think the ordinance was more geared towards that, making sure there was a bond in place and that the city is protected. But this is a whole different animal. So I think we should send this maybe to a licensing subcommittee to look at with the city solicitor if we want to update the ordinance where it comes to private property. Because like I said, quite honestly, these are the first two vendors we've seen, as long as I can remember, looking for outdoor seating on property that they currently own. And the other thing is too, we want to make sure we have a mechanism in place that we don't get challenged. They're here under their own will this evening saying, we're here to apply for this because the building commissioner turned around and said, you need it, or the code enforcement officer said you need it. But that's his interpretation of the law. There's really nothing in the law that states that they need to be here this evening. There's an ordinance. The ordinance is for, this doesn't delineate, excuse me, it doesn't decipher whether it's public property or private property. So this is where, this is the first time, like I said, that you look at the other restaurants that have this currently within our community. They never had to come before the city council for outdoor seating. So there could be a challenge. And like I said, they're just doing what the building department has told them to come forward because it was denied. But quite honestly, if you get a vendor that's right in the middle of a neighborhood, that knows they're not gonna get the support of the council because it's in the middle of a neighborhood, they may say, hey, we're gonna take it to Superior Court And we're going to challenge it. There's nothing in writing that says private property, you can't have outdoor seating. So if we could at least send the question to the city solicitor on the alcohol and the extension of the license, as well as private property and outdoor seating. Because if you look at that ordinance, it was drafted for, there were certain little restaurants on Main Street, High Street, Riverside Ave that were looking for that.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Right. If I remember, Dr. Rose had some concerns regarding public health in that ordinance too.
[Paul Camuso]: Exactly. So if we could just get a thing, but I support this wholeheartedly, but I just don't want to be challenged at some point if a restaurant opens up, you know, directly abutting a neighborhood. Directly abutting a neighborhood and then next thing you know, we're in superior court with our city solicitor because there's really no legal mechanism to to fall back on.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. So on the motion of approval by Councilor Penta, seconded by Councilor Camuso, and amended, Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: I was wondering if the petitioners could tell me if they plan on having any music, televisions, entertainment, or anything like that out on the deck.
[SPEAKER_04]: Not currently. Okay.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Okay, great. Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Move for approval, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion. All those in favor?
[Paul Camuso]: Did that include the questions to the solicitor?
[Fred Dello Russo]: That includes the amended questions.
[Paul Camuso]: In general, not just to them, but the answer for all the businesses. We want to make sure there's consistency.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Private and public application.
[Paul Camuso]: Thank you for your guidance on this.
[Fred Dello Russo]: All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Congratulations. Motion carries.
[SPEAKER_19]: Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you.
[SPEAKER_09]: Good luck.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Two little items to report out of committees. 14704, Subcommittee on Rules Meeting Report, March 18, 2015, Council Meeting DVD, etc. Maybe Councilor Knight will want to share with us the report out, Chairman of the Rules Committee.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Wednesday the 18th we had a Rules Committee meeting at 4.30 p.m. in Room 207. to discuss papers in committee. One of the papers that was in committee was for the council to review the cost of a copy of a meeting of the Medford City Council. Presently, there was a policy put in place where the cost of a copy of a tape was $20, and that $20 was based upon the time when it took somebody however long the meeting was to sit there in front of a VCR and actually copy it on VHS, Mr. President. Under the deliberations in the subcommittee meeting, we reported out favorably a recommendation that the council meetings from zero to six months be $5 for a copy, and council meetings for anything over six months be $10 for a copy. We've also discussed, Mr. President, the council's ongoing position of support in putting the council meetings on the city's website. So those are the two items that were submitted, discussed in committee, that were reported out favorably, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So on the motion of Councilor Knight to report this out favorably, Councilor Panta.
[Robert Penta]: Real quick, I'd like to just insert one question, where you have five dollars, it should be for a citizen copy. Okay, so that way you're there because governmental agencies would be entitled to it anyway.
[Adam Knight]: Right. Yeah, we're not creating a new policy council. What we're doing is just changing the fee schedule for the existing.
[Fred Dello Russo]: And just put the word citizen in front of the word copy. No, I got no problem with that. So as amended by recommendation of Councilor Penta. So all those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? So carries the motion. Secondly, we have a report out 15294, Committee of the Whole meeting report from March 18, 2015 on substance abuse. We had a very fruitful and helpful Committee of the Whole meeting last Wednesday evening here in the chambers. Attendees included all the members of the city council, as well as Karen Rose, Director of Public Health, Fire Chief Giliberti, Police Chief Sacco, leaders of Team Medford, Penny and Brooke, representatives of the health departments of Medford school systems, as well as many others, including Cheryl D'Alefano and Aaron DiBenedetto. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the problem of opiate addiction in the community and as well as an ordinance for a substance abuse coordinator. So the recommendations that came out of the committee were the resolution originally proposed by Councilor Camuso was ratified. So be it resolved that the city solicitor draft an ordinance for the City of Medford to hire a part-time substance abuse prevention coordinator working a minimum of 24 hours per week. The substance abuse coordinator shall report to the Board of Health Director and be responsible for developing and administering a unified substance abuse prevention program in Medford. The focus shall be on prevention, intervention services, health policy development, community outreach and other functions to meet the needs of the community. The coordinator shall also work with the local health care providers to gather and disseminate information on available substance abuse treatment services and resources in the local area. The coordinator shall have a master's degree and be a certified addiction Councilor with three to five years' experience in counseling services. Two, the Medford City Council goes on record in support of the implementation of NARCAM within the Fire and Police Department. Three, the city utilize the reverse 911 system to inform the citizens of the substance abuse problems and the resources that are available to them, and four, that Team Medford investigate other communities on what they are doing to address the substance abuse problems. Upon a motion of Councilor Knight, that the meeting report be referred out of committee. It passed that evening. Councilor Longo-Curran.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Dello Russo. Madam Vice President. If we could just also add to this, I know that I had asked the Health Department, Karen Rose, and Team Medford to draft correspondence to the City Council with regards to what they think is needed from a substance abuse coordinator. I know they have a number of grants coming in and out of the work they do, and I know they are working on a number of things. So what in addition to what they're already working on do we need to expand on with regards to that position?
[Fred Dello Russo]: The role of that position, yes.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: If we could add that.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Mr. Clerk has that. Anything else, ma'am?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: That's it, thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: I know that this committee of the whole meeting was the first of many discussions that we are going to have relative to the issue of opiate abuse here in the city of Medford. I think we've made great strides and this is certainly a good start. At the close of the Committee of the Whole meeting on the 18th, we also voted that we would meet again in a period not to exceed 30 days.
[Fred Dello Russo]: And I had wondered, Mr. President, if you could also indicate that the committee report ought to indicate that we will reconvene in Committee of the Whole to continue our discussion on this matter in a period of no more than 30 days from the conclusion of the last meeting. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Councilor Camuso.
[Paul Camuso]: If the entire council will be amenable to, we started the process of drafting an ordinance for the part-time position. The mayor recently said he was going to actually make it a full-time department head. If we could amend it from the floor this evening for the word part-time put full-time, and that's just because the mayor actually said that at a recent event, and asked the city solicitor to start drafting the ordinance that this city council put forward. Because right now, there's nothing, no mechanism in place to actually make that happen. So... So, to amend that to be a full-time position... Based on what the mayor said, a full-time position in the ordinance, and at this point, too, I mean, we can even strike out some of the language with the qualifications and all that, because that's going to be up to the personnel director, but at least get the ordinance going, because it was initiated here at the city council via a resolution recently.
[Joe Viglione]: So...
[Paul Camuso]: And as we know, the city council, our job is the budget, it's to create ordinances, is our two biggest functions. So if we could amend the word part-time to full-time, and that's based upon the mayor recently saying that he has the funds available somewhere to do this.
[Fred Dello Russo]: And to send this to the city solicitor.
[Paul Camuso]: To send it to the city solicitor though, to start the ordinance drafted. Because up until now, there's no mechanism in place to put this. So when the mayor comes up with the money, at least the city council got an ordinance in place to fall back on.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Very good, councillor.
[Paul Camuso]: And can we get a roll call vote on sending that as well?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes.
[Paul Camuso]: Because this city council has been very unanimous throughout this whole process. And it's glad to see that there's some working relationship with the mayor's office on this very important position. Doesn't matter where it was initiated, as long as it's coming to fruition, because it's much needed in our community. And you can tell that by the turnout the other evening.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, councillor. Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And Councilor Camuso, I think that that's a great act and a great approach to take in terms of shaping this ordinance to something that's going to work here for the city of Medford. In reviewing the language and looking at the language, it says, be it resolved that the city solicit a draft an ordinance for Medford to hire a part-time substance abuse prevention coordinator working a minimum of 24 hours a week. I think we don't even need to put in the part-time, full-time, or anything else. I think what we really need to do is take a look at saying a substance abuse prevention coordinator koordinator working no less than 40 hours a week. If in fact we wanted to be a full-time position, someone that's going to actually be here and there, it's going to be outlined. It's going to be framed right there in the ordinance that their hours of work or what's expected of them is that they put in 40 hours. Full-time, part-time, I think that those are items that would have to be defined early on in the ordinance as we start moving along. I think we can all agree that, you know, people work a 40-hour work week, so if we wanted a full-time position, we could just put in there they work no less than 40 hours, and that might be, you know, some cleaner language in terms of what it is we want to accomplish.
[Fred Dello Russo]: And, Mr. President, if I may just... So it's amended by Councilor Knight to be a 40-hour work week?
[Adam Knight]: Again, that's for discussion, Mr. President. I don't want to go amend the resolution. Councilor Camuso has put a number of hours and time and effort into this, so, you know, I don't want to do anything contrary to what his efforts are. However, that would be a suggestion that I would make at this point in time.
[Paul Camuso]: Mr. President, the original intent of the ordinance was to have remedial action taken sooner than later, and we started with the part-time, and like I said, it was unanimously supported by this council. The mayor came out at a later date saying he's willing to do full-time, but as of right now, Besides the press conference and besides this council going on record in support of it, there's no mechanism in place to put the person in a job with the proper personnel classification. So as Councilor Knight stated, we're still going to have to assign a classification to it as we see CAF1, ME02, ME03. So it's our job as city councilors to initiate and approve or deny ordinances. So this city council has taken the ball, and we're running with it. And I'm glad to see the mayor agrees with us that it is needed, and he went as far as to say a full-time position. So for that, I am thankful.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Councilor. Councilor Knight, you're all set? I am, thank you. Councilor Penta? No, I'm all set. Councilor Penta is all set. So, on the motion of approval, as amended, a roll call vote has been requested. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. Yes. Yes. Yes. He has an old roll paper in there. They still have President Emeritus Miyako on them. The clerk will start anew. Yes.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor Knight. Knight is yes. Yes, seven in the affirmative, none negative. The motion passes. On the motion of Vice President Lungo-Koehn to revert back to the regular order of business. All those in favor? All those opposed? We are back. 14, 15-303 offered by Vice President Lungo-Koehn. Be it resolved that the city of Medford take part in honoring those who have been affected by autism by taking part in light it up blue on April 2nd. Autism Speaks is asking people to wear the color blue and asking homeowners, et cetera, to put up a blue light. Be it further resolved that the city of Medford use a spotlight and shine it on City Hall the evening and night of April 2nd. Madam Vice President.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President De La Ruzo. I'm sure we've all got two to three emails, if not more, from people who are in favor of, you know, working hard for Autism Speaks, and they are lighting the city, the town, hopefully the nation up blue on April 2nd. It's something that they're asking residents, communities, cities, towns across the nation to take part and light it up blue, whether you wear the color blue or put a, you know, your spotlight outside of your house, put a blue bulb in, I was hoping that we, I'm sure that the city has a spotlight somewhere and that we could use that, purchase a blue bulb and shine it on City Hall on April 2nd. That's something that we could do with a number of different organizations if we do have a spotlight available. It's something maybe we could ask the vocational school to help us out with. They light up City Hall like a Christmas tree during Christmas time. I know childhood cancer has a day where they go gold. The Zaken Bridge is lit up in gold, so maybe we could take part in that. There's also, you know, Breast Cancer Awareness Month, Pancreatic Cancer Awareness. So I would hope that maybe that is something we can do to show our support for different organizations on different days. And the first one being autism, which affects many young children, I guess those of all ages, and something that should be recognized.
[Fred Dello Russo]: One in twenty children today?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I'm not sure of the statistics, but I know it's a great deal of children and this is something that would be great for the community.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. So on the motion of Vice President Lungo-Koehn for approval, all those in favor?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Roll call.
[Fred Dello Russo]: A roll call vote has been requested by the Vice President. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, none negative. The motion passes. 15-304 offered by Vice President Lungo-Koehn. Be it resolved that the City Council thank Maria Daniels for her hard work with the Medford Arts Council and congratulate her for receiving the Leadership Circle Award from the Massachusetts Cultural Council. Be it further resolved that an accommodation be drafted to present to Ms. Daniels on April 26 during the reception at the Royal House. Madam Vice President.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Dello Russo. Ms. Maria Daniels is getting recognized with the Leadership Circle Award from the Massachusetts Cultural Council, which I think is a huge honor. and the council has been invited along with the rest of the community to the Royal House on April 26th, and I would ask the city clerk to draft an accommodation from the council to hand deliver to Maria Daniels on that day in recognition of how thankful we are for all the work she does with the arts in this community. You've seen her before the council answering questions, You also see her at almost every event that has to do with cachet and the arts. So she does a lot of work for this community, and I want to thank her for that.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Madam Vice President. So on the motion of approval by Vice President Lungo-Koehn, all those in favor?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Aye.
[Fred Dello Russo]: All those opposed? The motion passes. 15-306 offered by Councilor Penta. Be it resolved that the Medford City Council go on record advising the Mayor on behalf of Comcast subscribers not to sign a new 10-year agreement with Comcast to be effective as of April 20th, since in fact, It serves no betterment for Comcast subscribers who are now being offered new competitive technologies by new methods at competitive rates by other state-of-the-art vendors. Councilor Penta.
[Robert Penta]: Mr. President, after I put this resolution on board, if anybody saw it, Apple, the Apple industry, Apple Computer Company, came out with their newest and latest of technologies for which they even allege it will be a challenge to Comcast customers. as it relates to not only their streaming, but also as it relates to the technology of being able to get that for which Comcast is offering its subscribers, as well as other internet providers. Also, Mr. President, unfortunately or fortunately, however you want to look at it, we got this letter dated December 18th that was delivered by UPS to this building over here. Unfortunately, it wasn't timestamped, so whoever had it and sat on it, and didn't relay it to the council as they should have, or to the city clerk's office as they should have, it just really presents a big issue because the 10 years is just about expiring, which is right around the corner. There's been no talk of having a public hearing, for which the mayor apparently is refusing to have because you're less than a month away, a little bit more than a month away to do this advertising. Also, there's an obligation, I believe under the contract, Even according to the folks from Xfinity, which is Mr. Kelly, and he writes in his letter of December 18th, that we didn't get until just last week, that the city has an obligation under the formal renewal process to either accept or deny Comcast's proposal within four months, or no later than April 18th. And this was hand-delivered by UPS on December 18th, and we received it last week. Taking that into consideration, and now seeing what's out there, We know what's happened with 10-year contracts here in the city. The first one is the rubbish contract for 10 years. The latest one is the outrageous kiosks that are operating here in the city of Medford, causing all kinds of problems, not only to our residents, but also to the small business people in this community. And now the mayor wants to saddle us again with another 10-year contract, and this time giving absolutely no public access for the purposes of information. The unfortunate part about all of this, Mr. President, The technologies are so far advanced out there that if you traverse yourself out to the states of California and in that particular territory, those folks that had even public access on the peg stations are now moving to get rid of them because they are basically alleging that they're serving no purpose other than making a huge cost and a dent in the cost of cable subscription. I believe Comcast and Verizon, as it relates to both of their service people, have merged in many of those cities and towns. as far as the service goes. And there is some movement that maybe Xfinity and Verizon might even merge in the future. But that's just another issue right now. Right now we're dealing with the 10-year issue that the city should not go forward and sign this contract. And anyone who has Comcast out there right now, send a letter, call the mayor's office, and just tell them not to sign this contract. What's Comcast going to do? Just pick up and walk out of the city? I don't think so. But the fact of the matter is the technology is so far advanced right now. It's out there. It's happening right in front of our faces, and Apple, Couldn't have proved it anymore, as they did last Thursday when they came out online. They did a seven and a half minute demo of showing how advanced, not only are they over cable television, but the new technologies that are out there, plus their merging and interaction with other subsidiaries that are into this particular type of a situation. We've seen also what's happened with the PEG access stations, when communities around us got themselves in trouble by misappropriating the funds, who went to jail for eight years, Who's being subject to an attorney general investigation? And it's just not fair. We have here in our own city of Medford an investigation that's going on. We were led to believe at some point in time that the public access channel was going to file dissolution. And they said they were, and they haven't. We have papers here tonight that come from the attorney general's office, especially the charitable affairs division, which are basically saying it is still under investigation. I don't know how much more investigation it can be when there's hundreds of thousands of dollars missing and unaccounted for. But when they're missing and unaccounted for, and the mayor of this community sits by and does absolutely nothing about it, and then he wants to even entertain possibly thinking of signing a new 10-year contract with a company that does nothing more than raise the rates each and every time they have a chance. And it's the same mayor in this community who happens to have a pretty good deal Concast, who recently gave him $5,000 for whatever he wanted to use within the community, and I believe there's a $30,000 or thereabout in account that he has used to do whatever he's wanted, unbeknownst to this council as it relates to whatever he feels a charitable event needs to take place here in this community. You know, Mr. Kelly, who's the Director of Governmental Affairs and Regulations, has never offered that to the City Council. He's never made that away to the taxpayers of this community. I'm not so sure the mayor would want to sign this because he has a particular perk that he gets out of this for himself to use whatever he wants to use. I'm not so sure, Mr. President, that public access here in the city of Medford, for which the city has in its coffers in excess of $300,000, if not more, that have been taken from subscribers to Comcast, who have had no public access for well over a year and a half or thereabouts, is the right way to go now in the future. The mayor wants to put this new public access channel up at the high school. It is not readily available, it's not easily accessible, it's not on a bus route that way you get off, it's an easily walking distance, and especially at nighttime, it presents itself with a handicap and a public safety issue. So with that being said, and recognizing that there was a three-member commission that the mayor empowered earlier this year, whether he agreed or disagreed with the folks that were on there, They did make recommendations that basically talked about keeping this thing centrally located, easily accessible, and something that could work. And to this day, the mayor still doesn't have it. He's quoted a saying back in 2014, excuse me, before the election, that public access would be made available and it would be in the city of Medford and it would be operational. Well, where is it? It doesn't exist. The mayor has taken personal advantage on the public access of Channel 15, the educational channel for his own, personal use for which he uses personnel from the high school for his own personal public affairs to have him televised anytime he wants on their dime while they should be teaching in school, not doing, they shouldn't be taking care of him. You know, we just heard tonight from the subcommittee of the council that was on relative to having our council meetings put on the government access. I mean, to be put on the city's website. That would be a great way to go. But I doubt it, if the mayor would allow that, because if there's anything that's controversial that doesn't speak well of the mayor, it's not gonna go. It's not gonna show. You know, Comcast, they may have been good at one point in time. I know Councilor Camuso, you had made comment, I think it was last week or two weeks ago, that maybe we should go back and just rescind the order that the council voted on, whatever it might be. We never got an answer back from the city clerk on that. So, pardon me?
[Paul Camuso]: Point of information, Councilor Camuso. Just for the Councils, that was a homeroom petition, and the only way to get rid of it would be through another homeroom petition.
[Robert Penta]: Okay, so with that being said, be it a homeroom petition or what have you, I don't think it's fair, especially to the ratepayers, who keep paying each and every month, each and every month, each and every month, and getting nothing forward, you know, and that's the problem with society today. People become so inundated with all these nuances, they just let it go by, and while they let it go by, the city keeps generating money, In an account that serves no purpose for the rate payers, and at the same time, the mayor has an extreme advantage of taking those monies to be used that he has going with Comcast. And one final comment, Mr. President, you know.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Point of information, Councilor Kimuso.
[Paul Camuso]: Were you referring to the franchise fee question, or the whole, when I just answered Home Rule petition, I wasn't sure if you were talking about. Franchise fee. All right, that, all right. So we're talking apples to apples, okay.
[Robert Penta]: Okay.
[Paul Camuso]: I didn't know if you were talking about the, Signing of the 10-year contract again, which we're still waiting for the administration to respond if it's a renewal. The question we asked, but I just wanted to make sure.
[Robert Penta]: The issue of the 5% is the franchise fee. That was a home rule which is broken down to 3, 1, and 1. Okay. With that being said, Mr. President, I just don't think it's fair. I don't think the city should go forward. I think the mayor should be getting, the council should direct them not to sign this contract. especially not having a public hearing. And more importantly, what are we getting? If we lock ourselves into another 10-year deal, God knows what's going to happen. The rates, Councilor Caraviello, you just said it, what are we getting? All we're getting is the rates just keep going up and up and up, and you're getting nothing forward in return. And it's just not fair. And with that being said, I'll open it up to anybody, other questions, Mr. President.
[Paul Camuso]: Councilor Camuso. Thank you, and thank you, Councilor Penta, for bringing this up this evening again. So after last week's meeting, we asked several questions that were waiting for answers. One of them in particular was the franchise fee. And I think at this point, we're talking about all new technology. If no one bids on the public access station, and there's not the interest out there from non-profits to do it, I'd like to ask the city solicitor if he can do some research through the FEC or whoever it is, if we could use the franchise fee for other cable related rather than the public access station, like citywide Wi-Fi. A lot of communities now have citywide Wi-Fi. And since this discussion took place last week, there are some people that approached me, I'm sure, talked to other members of this council, that they feel that public access is good, but there is maybe a better need for the money in today's day and age, where everyone has devices that can hook up to Wi-Fi. So if we could at least just ask the question, because as of right now, The deadline for the bid has been extended and based upon what you hear out there, there's really not that much interest other than maybe Winchester. some other communities. But other than that, if legally it can be used for citywide Wi-Fi or updating technology into the new schools even more than we already have, somewhere where it will have a better impact on our community and maybe the youth, the seniors, or whatever. If we could just ask the question, I'd like to, I support your paper, but I'd like to make a B paper that we ask the solicitor to do research on where else it can be spent.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Can we do that as an amendment?
[Paul Camuso]: Amendment or be paid for?
[Robert Penta]: Well, a point of, just a point of further clarification.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Point of further clarification, Council Penta.
[Robert Penta]: The peg access is very specific by law. It has to be used for public access, educational, government channel. And the other thing that nobody has talked about, why does it have to be for a non-profit? Why can't it not be for a for-profit? And if it was a for-profit, you might have a different attitude of people coming in here and saying, hey, not only can we do it and raise money for the community, you don't have to worry about public access because the for-profit will take care of the whole situation. And you know, and that's something that the mayor is not even entertained. He doesn't even, he doesn't have the ability to figure this thing out. We were paying a guy named Peter Epstein, something like $325 an hour. And that was the gentleman who did the last hearing 10 years ago. Okay. And he has yet to be contacted the last time I spoke to him, which is probably within the past three weeks to a month. And so if the mayor has no intention of having this public hearing, and he intends to have a 10-year contract signed, Mr. President. That's absolutely unfair to every single ratepayer, subscriber in this community, to know what's going on, and at the same time, it doesn't serve the taxpayer any benefit at all. They're getting nothing out of this 10-year contract, except the mayor is the one that becomes the beneficiary.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor Camuso will finish his comments now, as amended.
[Paul Camuso]: And I definitely hear what you're saying, but I think we need to know what exactly, and you said it eloquently, Councilor Penta, I can be used for public access educational as well as governmental. So this could be used potentially. And this is the question I want to ask this evening. If we could use this, if there's not not the drive to get the public access done, but to improve the infrastructure for the children of our community, maybe the senior citizen centers throughout the community. We can bring technology maybe into their buildings legally, and we might not be able to, but if we could at least ask the city solicitor to look at all these avenues, because when this topic came up last week, I've had several people, and I'm sure other people have heard similar, if not the same thing, but public access is great, but we talked about last week where technology's going, and that's why we're all gonna support, hopefully support this this evening, the 10 years, but with today's technology, There's probably places we could spend that money, if legally we can, that will have a better impact on the citizens of this community, be it the youth, the senior citizens. So if we could just ask the question, we're not saying we want to do this, but if we could just ask the question so we have a better understanding on where it can be spent. So can I do that as an amendment or a B paper? As a B paper with a roll call vote on both, please.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So as a B paper with a roll call vote.
[Richard Caraviello]: So on that motion, Councilor Caraviello. Thank you, Mr. President. You know, I was here Sunday with several of my other colleagues, and there had to be 300 people hanging out of the doors here. And something that the TV station should have been here, if not the high school station, many of those kids who died were high school students. And no one ever saw anything. That's one of the, I've never seen this room as packed as it was. They were hanging in the hallways, and nobody, other than the people in this room. That was something that should have been on TV for the high school students to see. It was people that spoke in the beginning about the drugs and the knocking and many other things, and the speeches of kids that are recovering from drug abuse. We have press conferences, we have other ridiculous things, but that was the biggest event that I've seen in years. and we had nothing for anyone to see about that to show one of the biggest problems that we have.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and I'd like to thank Councilor Penta for bringing this resolution forward. I certainly support the resolution in theory. I have some concerns about the language, Mr. President. In looking at the language of the resolution, I mean, I think that everybody here is in agreement that we don't want to see a 10-year contract with Comcast. and the mayor has the authority as our chief negotiator to enter into a contract. By law, we've all been advised, informed, you know, told by the city solicitor that the longest term of a contract should be three years unless special approval is given. In looking at the resolution, you know, I think that it might make sense for us to go on record advising the mayor on behalf of Comcast subscribers not to sign any agreement in excess of three years. And the reason I say that, Mr. President, is because, you know, even if Comcast was providing new methods and new technologies and competitive rates, I still don't think that we'd support a 10-year contract for the provision of Comcast cable services. You know, when looking at this resolution, again, I support it in theory. I think it's a good resolution. I just hopefully think that some suggestions to accomplish what we're trying to get to are necessary, Mr. President. And looking at it, be it resolved the Medford City Council will go on record advising the mayor on behalf of Comcast subscribers not to enter into any agreement in excess of a three-year term. Would be enough for us to get our point across his desk. And I'm open to obviously discussing amending the paper with the sponsor. Again, like I said, in essence, I'm in support of it. However, I think that some language changes might make it a little bit more strong.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. You know, why sign any contract until we have someone that wants to run the station? I mean, three years, one year, six months? Sign no contract until we have someone that's going to run the station, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So is that an amendment to the motion? Yes. So on the motion of Councilor Panta as amended, by Councilor Caraviello with a B paper called for by Councilor Camuso.
[Paul Camuso]: Councilor Camuso. If we could also ask the city solicitor the question, what happens, because I don't have a copy of the contract in front of me as I don't know any of us that do.
[Fred Dello Russo]: I don't.
[Paul Camuso]: What happens at the expiration date? We want to, I mean, we just want to make sure that they don't just turn the switch and now that everyone that subscribed to Comcast has a blackout and now You're waiting for Verizon to come into every house in the community that has Comcast that's going to take two years to get up and running. So, just want to find out what happens if it doesn't get signed.
[Fred Dello Russo]: And is that a amendment to the main paper?
[Paul Camuso]: If Councilor Penta doesn't mind.
[Fred Dello Russo]: As amended to the main paper by Councilor Camuso.
[Paul Camuso]: Is that okay, Councilor?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yeah. Councilor Caraviello's amendment was that it not be signed, not even for three years. Councilor Penter would like to summation. Mr. Citizen.
[Joe Viglione]: Mr. Council President, my name is Joe Villione. I live at 59 Garfield Avenue, Metro Mass. And I want to respectfully disagree with Councilors Penter and Camuso about peg access. Um, there are two stations very interested in running the, uh, access station. It's not Winchester either. Winchester is obsolete. And according to the RFP, they want someone that's interested in Medford. Now, in case this doesn't happen because the mayor hasn't advertised this properly, I have put in for community media Medford. So we will have a Medford Corporation runs it for Medford. And I've already reached out to people to be part of that. No, I didn't want to do that. I'd rather do access TV, but I'm going to do this for the city of Medford. I put in What, 12, 13 years fighting for this. We shouldn't be punished because the mayor made so many mistakes with AXS TV and didn't discipline the station after the Judge Jackson Thompson report. So why should you punish us? Now, as Councilor Caraviello had a great point, the vigil Sunday should have been taped. Now, if someone had called me, I would have brought my camera and I bought my own camera as well as my tablet and my cell phone because I don't want to be dependent on the six stations where I have memberships. because I have to borrow a camera and then run back and bring them back. And I'm a member of Mass Access now as well, so I am plugged in, but I have my own camera. I got it, and I could have come here and videotaped that, and we could have put it on Made in Medford. All you have to do, and I've said it before, just call me and I'm there. Access is very important to this community. It's very important to me, and I ask the council president some great latitude in this, because I have a prepared paper. I respect the opinions, but we should come to the middle on this. The mayor, as issuing authority, has not been efficient. Now, he's a good mayor in certain regards. Mayor McGlynn does some things that I really like. Okay, there might be a 10-year thing with waste management, but those green barrels are effective. So, you know, there are some things the mayor does. I just wish he would ask our input. So he's not all bad. He's a good guy outside of the council, and I've said that. I like Mayor McGlynn as a person. I really am appalled at some of the things he does as mayor. So don't separate, you know, you have to separate the two. He's not a bad guy outside of City Hall, but he's been in a long time. Now, a for-profit would be beneficial. So we jumpstart a for-profit, and I see it as a media center. We're cachet, and all these organizations in America come together, as they do in Somerville. Something they do in Malden, as they do in Newton. Newton, you can't get a show on there. Boston, there are access centers that are flourishing. Why deny Medford this? Because we don't have it. Now, we've lived without 5% of the franchise fee. Continue that 1%. Continue it. I beg the city council to think about this, this idea, this solution. The mayor has not been an efficient issuing authority. All due respect, Mayor McGlynn. You have, and I can prove it. Anywhere, anytime, meet me and I'll show you where you're deficient. There's nothing in the contract that says the mayor has to be the issuing authority, so why don't we have seven people, or six, because one doesn't want to hear what I have to say. Why don't we have seven people putting their heads together and being the issuing authority? In Winchester, the selectman of the issuing authority, not the town manager, met with Mr. Howard for a half hour at his request, and we discussed cable issues. He didn't even know Wincambe had been sued by employees and lost, settled out of court. Richard Howard didn't even know this until my public records request, so here I am enlightening every community to the deficiencies and the pluses. And there are a lot of good access stations out there, though there are more problems now. I'm going to get the lawsuit that was filed in Saugus. The town hall is going to give it to me. I have to pay 25 cents a page, but I will have that information for the city council. We need to move forward with public access TV just because the last crowd was so bad and did so many bad things. And, you know, there's a Councilor here that enjoyed being on a board member show, and now that Councilor wants to shut down access. Well, I don't get it. You got to use it, and I didn't. That's not fair. And, you know, believe me, I was an angel taping the mayor's Raising of the Christmas Tree. I did so many things for Medford Community Cablevision, and I got kicked in the teeth. They took speakers that one of my friends had a company. Everything I could do for MCC, picking up supplies at a discount, because my family had a discount at Hunt. I did for Medford Community Cablevision. I did a lot of stuff. It was all about them. It was an insider's club, as is Winchester, as is a couple of others. Now, Winchester was great three years ago. We had a great board. We had a good executive director. But it's changed. The good people left. The good board, the board people that were great, the school committee person, they're gone. And now you've got the entrenched cronies just as we had here in Medford. So Winchester coming in here, that ain't gonna happen. I'll put an injunction there before I let that happen, believe me. No, there's two good stations that want to come into Medford. The mayor has not advertised this properly. The deadline's the 26th. I'm out there talking to contractors. I'm out there talking to different TV stations. They didn't hear about this. They didn't get the message. Why? I'm not the mayor. Why am I doing this work? Because the mayor doesn't want it to happen. purposely not getting it out there because he wants to say, oh, Comcast, do you want Channel 3? I'll give you Channel 3 in exchange for whatever they're gonna barter, and we'll give you like, you know, Channel 700 for public access. That is in the wind. Look at the language in the portions of the contract I gave you last week. The language is there, they wanted to remove Channel 3 years ago, and the old crowd, you know, the old crowd did not want to let go of Channel 3 for good reason. Four, five, seven, three. We need a for-profit station. We need to move forward with the technology, not go back into the dark ages and shut off access. All due respect, councillors. You both have good points, and I appreciate what Councilor Knight has. I really appreciate what Councilor Knight brought to the table. I do your, you know, and Councilor Caraviello, excellent points. All seven, well, six of you people. And I'm hoping, I'm hoping Council President, you get with the program because you, you know, you're a good guy outside of the council as well. And it's time for you to cut ties with the mayor because he's afraid of you. You gotta get that through your head. You have the power over him. You got more money than God.
[Fred Dello Russo]: We're gonna focus on the issue at hand, which is the Comcast contract. I am.
[Joe Viglione]: I want you to be issuing it already. I'm saying nice things about you. I'm praising you for once. I mean, Freddie, take it. I'm here. I know public access. I started in 1979. I got more memberships than most people in the country. And I know this issue and I'm passionate about it. Do not take this away from the people who want it. Chris Donovan wanted to come here tonight and talk about Somerville Cable TV having 24 programs a day. And I know that because I'll have a radio show on Somerville TV starting in about three weeks. A radio show, they have a radio station along with their public access station. In conclusion, I said it before, I talked to Stephanie Burke, she said there's Homeland Security money for a station. Now I ran Two radio stations, AM 1670. There's an expanded band on AM. We could put transmitters around the city in conjunction with the internet streaming and the public access. I have this knowledge. I am committed to this. We can have an emergency channel where Captain Barry Clemente could be on all sorts of media platforms, including Connect CTY, Reverse 911. I'm here. Medford needs this. We're not going to let it go. I will not let public access be taken away from us any longer. Your Honor.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Mr. Viglione. Sir, if you would like to address the council, please state your name and address for the record.
[Michael Ruggiero]: My name is Michael Ruggiero. I'm from 811 18 Pembroke Street. I agree with the council. I think it's dangerous to sign another contract, 10-year contract with Comcast. I'm not sure if the council is aware, but the fastest internet speed in the country is in Tennessee, Chattanooga, Tennessee, and they run their own network. a possibility that this city could actually get involved in. Chattanooga is a local tech hub as a result, offering internet speeds of a gigabyte per second for $85 a month to its average citizen. There are lots of options available to this town, and signing another deal with Compass for 10 years will not only hamstring future negotiations, but will also limit Medford becoming a technology hub. Thanks.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Sir, please state your name and address for the record.
[Robert Cappucci]: Robert Cappucci, 71 Evans Street. Through the Chair, if I could ask, Councilor Penta threw out a figure. Comcast, or whoever the issuing authority is, or maybe it's a combination between several services, has given the city how much money that's not being used? Through the Chair to Councilor Penta?
[Robert Penta]: I believe through the years it's been approximately $30,000 that the Mayor's been able to use. For whatever he feels he wants to use it for.
[Robert Cappucci]: And how long have we not had access to television? Well, since December of 2013. So we're two and a half years almost, two years and a quarter, with that much money. What? A year and a half. A year and a half? Well, we're... This governing body acts as kind of like the Congress of Medford. You're the voice of the people. The mayor is the chief executive officer. You really need to ask about these monies, why we don't have an access television for the community for a myriad of reasons, and what the mayor is afraid of and why he's not advertising. I mean, Joe Viglione, who came up before me, gave an excellent dissertation, and it's It's really incumbent upon this body to get answers. I know under our city charter, all you can do is make requests of the mayor. But if it takes changing the city charter to finally get some things moving forward in the city, these are the options before you. And this is why we elect you good folks to be our voices when obviously there's just too much power. in one office in Medford City government. We need to know where this money has gone. I hope this investigation will find that out, and we need access to television in Medford. Thank you very much.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. So we're speaking on not signing a 10-year contract.
[Robert Penta]: Councilor Penta was waiting for the floor. I'd be willing to amend it that reads the following. Be it resolved that the Medford City Council go on record advising the mayor on behalf of Comcast subscribers not to enter into any contract agreement until a public hearing takes place with Comcast to be effective as of August 20th since, in fact, and I think that's what you were leading to. Why sign a contract at all? We haven't even had our public hearing.
[Richard Caraviello]: Well, I wanted to amend mine that we not sign a contract until we find a vendor for the public access station.
[Robert Penta]: Well, that's a separate issue, because right now the contract is—the public vendor's going to have nothing to do with the contract. Because the contract is— The contract's the contract. The contract is having a 10-year deal with Comcast. That's where he's going. Inclusive of the contract is going to be having public access in whatever it might be. The key here is, if you don't want him to sign a 10-year contract, and you want the public hearing to get input from the community, you do that, or you just tell him not to sign a 10-year contract.
[Richard Caraviello]: Okay, Mr. President, I'm willing to take my motion off the table.
[Fred Dello Russo]: That your amendment is off the table. Councilor Caraville withdraws his amendment. And Councilor Penta offers a revised motion. And if the Councilor could share that.
[Robert Penta]: I'll read it again.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Read it again so that the Clerk has it.
[Robert Penta]: Be it resolved that the Medford City Council go on record advising the Mayor on behalf of Comcast subscribers not to enter into any contract agreement Hold it. Slow, slow, slow. All he has to do after the word to, where it says not to, just insert the words enter into any contract agreement until a public hearing takes place with Comcast to be effective as of April 20th and then continue on. You get it?
[Fred Dello Russo]: He has to go slowly.
[Robert Penta]: After the word to, enter into any contract agreement until a public hearing takes place. because that is so important. People don't realize that that public hearing talks about exactly what's going on in this city and what Comcast is offering other than work. Would you be the rates just keep going up and up and up and nobody's got a chance to talk about this.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. Uh, council, uh, we all set. You have that Eddie clerk has that a Councilor Knight is waiting next.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, I'd like to thank the council for coming up with some new language. That's language that I can certainly support. I appreciate his efforts and it's a pleasure to work alongside him on this.
[Paul Camuso]: Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. And Councilor Camuso.
[Paul Camuso]: I'd like to get the answer because I did look into this because I was getting several people that were interested in putting in a bid if it was for profit. I'm not so sure you can have a public access channel that is for profit. Absolutely. I would call that channel 457. You have to give people equal time and things like that, but you do have their out there on the country.
[Robert Penta]: They have profit public.
[Paul Camuso]: We got to check the FCC regulations and see if, uh, if you can, because like I said, I know people that are interested in doing it, um, quite honestly for profit, but nonprofit is actually, which makes it a vibrant part of the community. And it's not for business, it's not to make money and everything else. So if we could ask that question as well.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Ask that question as part of your B paper.
[Paul Camuso]: And then the B paper is looking into where else the money can be spent in lieu of the public access, if the city needs it. Senior housing, internet accessibility citywide, Wi-Fi.
[Fred Dello Russo]: That the B-Paper can include overall spending money spent on Wi-Fi and senior citizen housing.
[Paul Camuso]: And our technology upgrades to the school system. And if it can be for-profit according to FCC regulations and all that. Because I'm not a lawyer, but I would think it has to be non-profit. I would think.
[Fred Dello Russo]: – Briefly on that question.
[Robert Penta]: – You can have for-profit that does not have to go through Comcast, because they're not going to come under those regulations. You will have a legitimate for-profit company come in here and run a cable company. Well, it'll be a public access, but they won't follow the same guidelines as if you're going to have it under Comcast. That's the difference. They have guidelines that they're going to have to follow, but it won't come under the Comcast contract.
[Fred Dello Russo]: In summation, sir, you wish to speak at the podium.
[Paul Camuso]: Comcast's website actually says on it that it has to be non-profit according to FCC regulations. For them. Comcast, I'm sure it's similar with Verizon, ICN.
[Fred Dello Russo]: We're going to get a clarification on that as requested as part of the resolution. Sir, can you name and address for the record again?
[Michael Ruggiero]: Michael Leggero, I live on 18 Pembroke Street. I have a question for the council. Is it possible that the council could summon a representative of Comcast here to talk about this contract and negotiation? Or is it possible to at least invite someone from Comcast here?
[Fred Dello Russo]: The council can invite anybody to report to it as they deem fit.
[Michael Ruggiero]: May I recommend that the council invite someone from Comcast to speak? Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: I believe inviting someone to Comcast to appear before the council to discuss the ongoing contract negotiations would be a little bit outside the scope of actual good faith contract negotiations. The mayor has his position, Comcast has their position, and they're in negotiations trying to hammer out an agreement for them to come to the council I think would probably set back negotiations. Having negotiated a number of contracts in the past, during my time with the union, most of the negotiating committees keep everything confidential until the parties enter into an agreement, then they report that information out, and that information gets reported out.
[Fred Dello Russo]: It would be akin to the city council trying to influence the negotiation of nuclear arms in Iran. Yes, Councilor Penta.
[Robert Penta]: I'll somewhat disagree with that, only for one reason. The idea of having the public hearing is to get information from the ratepayers that are going to tell you what they like, what they don't like, or what they would like to see. Then they take that information and go back and negotiate. If you don't have any public hearing and you don't have any public information, what are you negotiating?
[Adam Knight]: I'm certainly not. opposed to a public hearing on the issue to discuss the concerns that residents have about their Comcast cable subscription. However, even if you look at the open meeting law, the open meeting law says a perfect scenario for executive session would be when, in fact, it would be detrimental to contract negotiations. So I think that, you know, based on past practice. Right.
[Fred Dello Russo]: But we're going to now conclude our discussions and take a vote. Sir, you want to briefly address the council?
[Joe Viglione]: Just two quick points on these things. On a public hearing, yes, it's important that the public ascertain about the telephone, internet, cable TV, public access. And I agree with Councilor Knight and Councilor Penter on this. It should be the public hearing that the mayor has. And I believe he's required by rule, not by law, but by rule as in a requirement. And if our city clerk, our wonderful city clerk could just alert me when he gets that piece of paper, I'll try coming by the office every day to make sure that I see it on the wall because That's very important. Now, on one last topic, for-profit television. In Medford, when I was at TV3, I had Robert Hilliard on, a professor from Emerson who had a wonderful book called Low Power Television, LPTV. And a lot of ethnic groups are using low power television, and then if you connect to the cable, you have a larger power television. medier using what three fifths of the monies for the general fund and then the other one percent for the high school salaries. He certainly as issuing authority could say to Comcast look we're going to take these monies and we're going to use them to launch a for profit station and then you won't be obligated other than to carry it. There are ways he can work it. He's the issuing authority. That's what a negotiation is all about. Thank you very much.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. Sir, you've already spoken twice on this item.
[Michael Ruggiero]: If you want to. The point I have would like to make, obviously, a public hearing would absolutely be best. But if a public hearing is not able to be arranged, it seems that you could invite, if it's possible, the council to invite Comcast here just to speak on, to hear some of the public concerns. I don't see how that would necessarily detrimentally affect the contract. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. On the motion of Councilor Penta for approval, we're going to take the B paper first by Councilor Camuso. So on the B paper offered by Councilor Camuso for approval. All those in favor? Roll call vote has been requested on that paper. The B paper. Mr. Clerk, if you're able to.
[Clerk]: Yes. Councilor Knight. Yes. Vice Mayor Donald Kern. Yes. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Penta. Yes. President De La Ruza.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, none negative. The motion passes. On the main motion offered by Councilor Penta for approval, roll call vote has been requested. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Camuso. Yes. Councilor Cavillo. Yes. Councilor Knight. Yes.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes, 7 in the affirmative, none negative, the paper passes. 15-307. Offered by Councilor Penta, be it resolved that the intentional failure of the Mayor's Revenue Enhancement Parking Program, not monitoring why the reprogramming of the parking kiosks and their continued collection of revenues not entitled to revenue collection totals after operating hours be discussed. Councilor Penta.
[Robert Penta]: Mr. President, once again, this week is another one of these weeks relative to the whole parking thing. Having discussions with the Chief of Police and small business people, people who are getting tickets, machines that just aren't working, I don't know. So let me start off with the first one right here. Here is a picture of a poll that says 30-minute parking Monday through Saturday, 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. On March 10th of this year, that law was changed to 8 to 6. These signs are still up and people are still getting tickets for which now the chief is getting phone calls as it relates to this. I have here a ticket that's issued on the 18th of March, where somebody put the money in the meter, and the meter stopped collecting it and collecting it, for which they shouldn't have collected the money. Now, Councilor Caraviello, you made a resolution back on December 23rd as it relates to having the city come forward and present to the council a 60-day evaluation take place by the mayor and Republican. The 60 days has come and gone. Then on January 2nd of this past year, you also had a resolution as it related to the kiosks on the face of the kiosk being legible so you could read it, and you still can't read it. Again this past week, we have the truck, once again, in downtown Medford, in other parts of the city, again in violation of the contract Nothing to be seen on the back saying that this truck makes frequent stops. The mayor has just intentionally allowed, allowed this company from Republic from Tennessee to go forward and continuously keep breaking and breaking the laws. Now, the other part of the contract basically says the following that, you know, we are supposed to be getting some kind of information forthcoming. I believe today, again, speaking to the chief outside, He had to go down and speak to some folks next to, I believe, Mystic Valley Pediatrics. Next to there, there's a beauty shop over there. The women over there are up in arms and they're all afraid because they think they're going to get tickets. Who's parked in the parking lot? The two kiosks are against the wall. The records reflect, as we just get, that in January of this past year before the city council, Republic was supposed to go over and meet with the senior citizens to explain to them the whole kiosk. And here we have here a letter dated March 19th, addressed to you, Council President Dello Russo, that on April 3rd, they're going to go over there and discuss how to use a kiosk. From January to April 3rd, okay? Huge. I mean, they're right on the ball with all of this. The fact of the matter is that the machines are still taking the money, and where does that extra money go to? Is it coming to the city of Medford? Is it going into Republic? We talk about the people getting tickets, full-scale observation. West Method, on Playstead Road, where Playstead Road and Winthrop Street meets, there were 15 to 17 cars on any one given day that used to be parked there, and they never got a ticket. Now you're lucky if you see one, if not two, cars at the very most. And you know where those cars are parking? Those cars are parking all on the side streets, and they're going into the neighborhoods, and the complaints are starting to come in. Go to the parking lots. Supposed to be three-hour parking. The sign's still up there for two hours. So how do you turn around and give somebody a ticket? Today, someone who was a business merchant in West Medford and a business merchant in Medford Square who paid their $100 for the pass got themselves tickets. They got themselves tickets today with the permit because they were parked in the municipal parking lot. On Boston Avenue, in front of this sign over here, where a legitimate delivery was being made, and the trunk was open and the merchandise was coming out, the guy in the truck goes up there and gives them a ticket. How do you give someone a ticket when you're in a legitimate spot? Tell me. Councilor Marks, you made a comment a little while ago when this thing was going on, that once this thing started to get going, you gotta be careful because they're gonna be taking aggressive action. They're doing more than taking aggressive action. Look at the tickets that they're giving out. You'd think they would at least put the courtesy, like every other city in town, from the back of the ticket that at least gives you the telephone number. You have to figure out where 557 Main Street is. A lot of people don't know that. A senior citizen, a senior citizen in Medford Square trying to figure out how to put money in the machine when they didn't have any change and they didn't have a credit card and trying to figure it out. It just doesn't work. Medford is not that type of a community. Why the mayor is doing this, I have absolutely no idea. But again, he's in complete violation The contract has been in complete violation, you know, since this thing operated. It's beginning. What about the credit cards that you're putting in? And they're reading the wrong numbers for the license plate. Last week we got a complete description. I have a complete description here from a nurse, a doctor, and the patients that just couldn't negotiate what's going on in Riverside Avenue in that big, huge parking lot. Imagine, we came here, had a big discussion with the people from Republic who stood at that podium that night and said, we are going to go over because the seniors were having a problem. We'll probably give them 25 pocket spaces. That was in January. And now they're going to go there on April 3rd, which isn't even here yet, April 3rd, to show and discuss with them how to put the money in the machine, which is almost 400 feet away from from where they park their cars. It makes absolutely no sense at all. Go outside and sit in front of City Hall over here. They have a stupid little meter on the corner of the road over there, so if you park all the way in the parking lot over here, you're gonna figure out I gotta walk all the way over here. It doesn't make any sense. Mr. President, page four of the contract. I am going to suggest tonight that the city exercises its right, as it states here, to fully terminate this contract with Republic before it gets any worse. We haven't even seen, we haven't even seen, as we've been told, the next phase of where these kiosks are going to go in. There are business districts and streets and locations that don't even have them yet. Once they have them, this is just going to accelerate and multiply. I'm going to make an offer here for the mayor tonight. He can go out of this thing being a hero, rather than having the council come after him. Mr. Mayor, this is what I'm saying to you. You came to the council a few years ago, and you asked us to take a million point two out of our water and sewer surplus account. Councilman Marks was the only one that voted against it, and looking back, he did the right thing. Probably the worst mistake I ever made, but I gave it to you at that point in time. Never a thank you in return, because that's what we needed to balance the budget. I'm asking you to take whatever it is You take the cost of what the contract says, of what it cost them to put this thing together, you amortize that over the minus the deductions of what we're being paid, and we'll pay the difference, seven, eight, nine hundred thousand dollars, let these people leave this community, let the people go back to their normal way of owning and operating their small little business, not being afraid of getting tagged and towed and ticketed wrongly, not being afraid to know that I'm going to lose a customer, because they didn't put the money in the meter, not to be afraid of a lady falling down and the snow that's going to be taken by an ambulance to the hospital because she was trying to put her money into the kiosk. Go out a hero and admit that we made a mistake and we're going to go back to the original idea of having traffic enforcement. We will do this in-house. We will get local people and we'll move ourselves forward. And I think everybody at that point in time would say thank you, Mr. Mayor, for understanding the impact that this is going to have. You know, Councilor Camuslo, you said something in one of the very first meetings a long time ago. You turned around and said that you were in favor of putting parking meters. And if parking meters were going to be the issue then, like it would be now, I don't think anybody would have, I think they would have understood it. But this has turned out to be a major, major disaster. With that being said, Mr. President, I get pictures, I get more and more stories, I get more and more people. giving me the authority to use their names. I think it's obvious. And you know the thing that's really funny about all this? Can you imagine the mayor having the audacity, and that's the word I would use, the audacity to say, he hasn't received one complaint. He hasn't received one complaint on this traffic program. Go walk the streets, Mr. Mayor. Go walk the streets. Look at these people. Ask them what they say. Unbelievable. That being said, Mr. President, I know it could be a tough vote. Maybe people will want to vote for it. Maybe they won't. But the message goes back to the mayor. You can do it one of two ways. You can voluntarily get out of it or the council is going to make a suggestion that you go out of it and terminate this contract with Republic. And I don't think there's anybody in this room and any businesses in this community that would turn around and say, OK, we can do that, you know, and if we have a problem, If we have a problem with enforcement, we will address it, but we will address it in-house, and we will start very slow. We don't have to have an out-of-town company called Republic from Tennessee, who takes almost 68% of the net profit before the city of Medford sees a dime. And now we're going to be dealing with this type of aggressive taxation on the people of this community. Plus, it's a 10-year contract. How many of these 10-year contracts does this mayor think the people in this community should stomach. It's wrong. There's no need for this. So, with that being said, Mr. President, I move that the city of Medford remove itself, terminate its contract with the Republic of Tennessee—I think that's the name—Republic Parking of Tennessee in the best interests of the taxpayers, the small business people, and the city of Medford as a whole.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Councilor Penta. Councilor Caraviello.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. You know, I, my opinions on this is as in-depth as Councilor Pentland's are, but, you know, this company's been in town for four to five months now, and they haven't managed to get their act together. I mean, listen, I appreciate they've made changes here and there, but, you know, we're to the point now where you should have had the majority of the bugs worked out. I mean, you know, the point of them still taking money on Sundays and after hours is Not acceptable at all. I mean, what happened to a certain percentage of the employees were going to be Method Residents? I only know one. I only know one Method Resident that was hired to work on this parking program. I haven't seen one person that's all day giving out tickets that's a Method Resident. Maybe I might be wrong, maybe I don't know them, but I don't see that. I mean, and the other thing is, you know, These people that are out there ticketing are arrogant. They're just out and out arrogant. People are saying, hey, look, I was just doing this. I don't care. Appeal the ticket. It's not the attitude to have. That wasn't what I signed up for here. I was in favor of the parking. But I wasn't in favor of a plan that's just gone wrong from day one. I mean, listen, we had a bad winter, and that accounts for part of it. It's because they're not getting the revenues that were anticipated. You can't go take it out on the backs of the people. And I say, I've heard it, I've seen it. And I say, I don't know if I would vote to rescind the whole, write a check for $800,000, $900,000 without some discussion. But I think this company has to come in before us. either either council the whole or are in front of this this this body but again you know they're they're just running run just run shadow over everybody in town so I'd like to say that we have them come into a council the whole meeting where we can discuss this for a reasonable time and I want to know the amount of method people that were hired to work here again I've only seen one I want to know we're supposed to be like 50 or 60 percent of the people that were hired Where are they? I want some names.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor, if I could just from the Chair clarify one thing. In the beginning of this, you had asked for a, I think, a three-month review of this. Two-month review? Where are we with that?
[Richard Caraviello]: We're well past that date, Mr. President. We're well past that date.
[Robert Penta]: Resolution is 14795, December 3rd, 60-day review.
[Fred Dello Russo]: 60-day review, and that was requested when, Councilor? December 23rd.
[Richard Caraviello]: But again, these people need to have... Councilor, repeat that, please. I'm sorry. Mr. Councilor, I'll repeat what you just... I said it's time that this group come in here and put these employees on notice that these are people in this community. They're not here to be treated like animals. And also, you know, put up a sign so the people can see where the meter is. The meters are at car level. City of Boston, City of Cambridge, there's a big tall sign, pay meter here. Yes. And that's part of the problem. People can't see where these meters are. And if you want to contain it, there's not enough of them. There's not enough of them in certain areas. You know, in front of the Citizens Bank, There's those four spots and all those, and on the side there, there's only one kiosk. I mean, people are walking all over the place. Mr. President, I'd like to make a motion that we either have Republic either come before this council or a meeting or a committee of the whole within the next 14 days.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Very good, Councilor. So moved. Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I believe last week we did vote by way of resolution to invite the Traffic Commission here as well. The traffic commission is the body that's responsible for the oversight, the implementation of the parking program, but more importantly, they're the policy makers. They're the ones that set the policy, set the ordinance and the tone. Republic's tasked with the job of enforcing our ordinance, and they're doing that. I think that it's incumbent upon us and the administration to sit down and point out where the failings are, and then take corrective action. Councilor Penta is absolutely correct. The contract is not being adhered to. There are violations in the contract. I think that, you know, Councilor Caraviello's idea is a good one to bring them here in the next 14 days or the next 30 days. I'd suggest that we say 30 days, Mr. President, for the simple fact that maybe we can meet as a council and come up with our laundry list or our punch list of things that are driving us crazy about this program. It's not working. The violations of the contract are not being adhered to. So on and so forth, get this list together and give them an opportunity to remediate the problems that they have. I mean, I don't think 30 days, we've already given them two months for a review. I think that the review that's coming back from this council and members of the general public are not glaring.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Point of information, Councilor Caraviello.
[Richard Caraviello]: No disrespect, Councilor, but we've asked for 60 days. We're going into 90 now. If you give them 30, it's gonna be 60. I'm sure that if this whole group, if you give us a week, we'll all have a list.
[Adam Knight]: And that's all well and good. I'm saying let's get the list together. Let's give it to them. Let's give them 30 days to fix it.
[Richard Caraviello]: If you give these guys 30, it's gonna go into 60.
[Adam Knight]: If they don't fix it within 30, they don't fix it within 30. Then we can take our vote on whether or not we want the contract eliminated. But I think that we've made a lot of progress. We've made a lot of progress and a lot of discussion.
[Richard Caraviello]: This city went the whole winter without a parking permit program. And they still haven't figured it out.
[Adam Knight]: It's a shame. And I don't disagree with you, Councilor, and quite frankly, I find it kind of asinine to be giving people parking tickets when there are no signs that are out there that say where you can park and where you can't park, and that the signs are inaccurate, so on and so forth. And I think that these are real-life issues, you know what I mean? So I think that, you know, at the end of the day, is the contract going to be eliminated by the administration? I don't know. I don't know. But if it isn't, if it isn't, Then what? We're still left with the same project and the same program, and we still need to have these changes take place in order for it to work appropriately.
[Robert Penta]: Mr. President, you know, a lot of the times when the Republic was here for a couple of meetings and the chief was here, we gave a whole bunch of concerns that we had, and, you know, we got some of our responses back. I think the main one was changing the hours from 7 to 7 to 8 to 6. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Also with single head meters. Now how do you justify putting up the signs and telling you, you have 30 minute parking, but tagging people? And then having the audacity, as Councilor Caraviello says, being arrogant, well if you don't like it, appeal it. Why should somebody have to appeal something if they're parked in a spot that's legitimately for 30 minutes, and take some time off from work, And we don't even have our hearing officer. Our hearing officer, unfortunately, she's not in right now. And now there's some concern that maybe, that Republic is doing some of these hearings. I don't know if that's true or false. Maybe we should make that as another paper. Because if they're doing that, that's, again, outside the scope of this. You know, you have parking meters taking money after 7 o'clock at night. Councilor Caraviello, it was your resolution that said No charge for the parking period after the fact. You can delay this thing all you want. The fact of the matter is they've had more than enough time. You can't be driving around since January not having the proper signage on the truck. It took these to get the signage on the side of the truck and they were still doing it. I spoke to the chief tonight, and the chief turned around and said, I told Dan Nash, you know, this is unacceptable. Well, that's not the point of being unacceptable. It's a contract. If you're in violation of the contract, then so be it. We put that guy tonight through the torches of hell, the poor guy at Wendy's over an outside thing, and here a multi-million dollar company comes in, and they can walk around and do anything they want. Take the money after six o'clock at night. Tag people improperly. I won't say illegally, improperly. Another guy was in the loading zone. Tag a guy who's legitimate in a loading zone. It's wrong. It's wrong, Mr. President. It's just plain wrong. You guys can do whatever you want, ladies, but all I know is, I'm moving on the question, strongly suggesting to the mayor to terminate the contract ASAP, and behalf of the taxpayers of this community, because of their failure to abide by the contract as amended, and that's it. You know, another thing, you know, and I think it was you, Adam, who came up with, and rightfully so, the suggestion about the signs, okay? It was a violation of the contract and the signs and this and that. And now because of that, you don't see any of these signs up. If you go and you talk to them and they say, well, it's the city's fault. The city's fault for what? That you've got the wrong signs up and you're not, and you've not been putting the proper signs up, and you haven't changed the two hours to three hours in certain parts of the city. And you have certain parts of residential neighborhoods that have kiosks in front of them that don't belong there. And don't buy it. With all due respect, Mr. President, I'm going to move the question. MR. PICARDY.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor Penton moves the question for termination of the contract with a roll call vote. Councilor Caraviello had several motions that he offered asking for review, and they were nuanced by Councilor Knight. Those seem to be contravening on the same motion. So the chair awaits a motion to make Councilor Caraviello's amendments a B paper. Councilor Caraviello.
[Richard Caraviello]: Can I ask Councilor Penta, is his motion that the city of Medford write a check for $900,000 to Republic to get out of this?
[Robert Penta]: Whatever the cost is, yes.
[Richard Caraviello]: In all due respect, I think before we make a vote to write a $900,000 check, I think we need to have some discussion on that. I mean, I'm not happy with the contract there, but I don't know if we should be writing a check for 900,000.
[Robert Penta]: Well, there are violations in the contract that have to have offsets to it.
[Richard Caraviello]: Before we make a decision to write a check there, we sit down with the city solicitor and figure out what violations are.
[Robert Penta]: I'd rather give him the direction rather than sitting down, but again, I've had enough direction, but before this group, as I say to you, I get I get these calls all day long.
[Richard Caraviello]: I go down there and meet these people and talk to them with you. I just don't. I don't. I'm not comfortable voting to write a check for $900,000 and until we until we know what violations... Well, I don't know if it's 900, that's just... Well, I mean, whatever it happens to be. Again, and say, where did these funds come from? So, Councilor, you had... I mean, where did these funds come from? Well, free cash.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Point... First of all, the Chair needs a clarification from Councilor Caraviello. Does he wish his motions to be made as a B paper so that the two motions are not contravening one another? Yes. Yes. If the clerk would, and then we'll have a point of clarification from the Madam Vice President.
[Clerk]: I would like a motion from Councilor Penta, the amendment by Councilor Penta on the termination of the contract. And I have Councilor Calviello's request for 14 days for review. I don't have the other one. The other one is
[Fred Dello Russo]: ...restated, restated on the... ...those are two separate things then, because we're asking on Consul Penta's main motion, which was a motion of discussion, which is a discussion, it had actually no motion, that was revised to make a motion that the city immediately back out of this, terminate the contract.
[Robert Penta]: For the contract, I think it's a 90-day clause, and then they have to work it out.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So to void the contract. And then Councilor Caraviello will now have as a B paper a request for the representatives of the Traffic Commission and... No, from Traffic Commission and. And.
[Richard Caraviello]: And Republic.
[Fred Dello Russo]: to present themselves before the City Council within the next two weeks to answer the grievances herewith. Point of clarification, Councilor Knight.
[Richard Caraviello]: Right here, this should be your answer. That's it. It's on your desk, that's your answer. It says, uh, 15, yeah, that's your answer, nothing.
[Fred Dello Russo]: No answer. Uh, point of clarification, Councilor Leong Gokern. I'm sorry, uh, Madam Vice President.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: It was back when we were discussing the 900,000. I think the point of clarification was not only is it 900,000 to a million dollars to actually buy out of the contract, but we also have hundreds of thousand dollars within our budget this term that we'd have to make up for because the revenues are accounted within our current budget. So that's my point of clarification. If I could speak on this. When the chief was involved and he was here three or four weeks in a row, things with OneRepublic One with Republic. Things were getting resolved. There's also things changing within the Traffic Commission on a weekly basis. Their last meeting was on March 10th, and if you look, I believe we were all given the minutes, about six pages long, and there's a couple pages with regards to concerns just with regards to the parking management program. They did vote to reduce the hours from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., down to 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., knocking two hours a day off the time when residents and customers do have to pay. So I offered, before this contract was signed, a free 15-minute parking. Councilor Marks upped it to free 30-minute parking. If some significant changes are made and Republic adheres to the terms of the contract with regards to placement, signage on vehicles and ticketing the proper way and allowing what Dan from Republic had mentioned, which is the a leeway with regards to five to ten minutes before one is ticketed, if they adhere to the fact that they had told us that if somebody is in the process of getting a ticket and the person says that's my car, the person given the ticket would walk away, no questions asked. Obviously we're not seeing that, we're not, Republic isn't adhering to what they said at the council floor, so we need to get a grip on that, I think we need to have a meeting in the next 14 to 21 days with Republic, with the chief of police, and hammer these out. And if things aren't changed, I agree. Things aren't going right, and I agree that we will have to do what we have to do. But I don't agree with terminating the contract tonight. There's too many unanswered questions with regard to our current budget, how we're going to pay the million dollars. And, you know, we've had blizzards, a few blizzards, which have hampered everything in this city. And I think we need to really sit down and discuss everything that's gone on and everything that needs to take place to better this process and hopefully resolve the issues that are presented.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Madam Vice President. Councilor Miles has waited patiently.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. I share many of the comments by my colleagues that were mentioned behind the reel tonight. And, you know, from day one, when the mayor made his proposal, members of this council spoke up and said, Mr. Mayor, when you outsource the enforcement, you're taking all local control out of the hands of the city. And we're seeing that now. How can you tell a company that has a 10-year contract that their revenue is based on whatever ticketing they go out and do, to say, hey, you know what, be a little lax, be a little understanding. It's never gonna happen. That is their revenue stream. You're not gonna get that company to say, you know what, we will be sensitive, we will, you know, if someone's in church, or someone just got out of mass, or someone ran into the store for a second, or someone's in a loading zone, and they're just delivering something into their store. You're not going to get that type of sensitive nature from this enforcement company. That's what they are, they're an enforcement company. And my suggestion, rather than throwing the baby out with the bathwater at this point, because a lot of time and effort went into this, My suggestion would be, any parking enforcement program consists of three major components. It's maintenance, collections, and enforcement. I believe, as I believed from the start, that we can do the enforcement in-house. We can control how aggressive we want in-house. We can hire the employees in-house. And if we were to take that component out, leave the other components, the collection, the maintenance to Republic right now, take that one component of just enforcement away from the picture, Will that still cost the city $900,000 to opt out a portion of the contract? I doubt it very much. And maybe that's what we should be exploring. Because as I stated from the start, I as one member of the council, and I think many members feel the same behind this reeling, is that once you lose the local control of enforcement, all bets are off. And that's what we're seeing right now. We're seeing very aggressive enforcement. Så my suggestion would be that we asked if Councilor Penta would be amendable to this. We asked the mayor to find out what it would take for us to take on the enforcement of this particular project. What is the dollar amount so we can opt out of the enforcement and we'll leave everything else in place right now. So the city would be responsible for hearings and enforcement. If you want to outsource the hearings, that's something you can look at. But those would be the two items that the city is responsible for. And as Councilor Knight mentioned, other than the Traffic Commission, they're the ones that really set the policy around this. So I think if we take that back in-house, the enforcement, I think we'll go a long way to make sure that we're the city that we wanted to be in the start. We don't want to be an aggressive ticketing city. That's not what the city of methods all about. We want to make sure cars are moved along. And that's been the, uh, the emphasis on this from day one. So, um, I, I would offer, uh, ask my colleague respectfully, and I think Councilor Penta brings up a lot of valid concerns. But I think that may be a good option to put forward, something that I believe will strike at a lot of the concerns that I'm hearing from residents about the aggressive enforcement. If I knew there was a way around it, there's no way you're gonna tell a for-profit company, you know what, go a little lax on the ticketing. That's their revenue. What business is going to say, you know what, Meffin, you're right, we'll go a little lax. You know, we won't hit those, we won't hit the residents or the out-of-towners as much. We'll go easy on the ticketing. It's just never going to happen. So I would ask my council colleague, Councilor Penter, if he would be amenable to sending that to the mayor to see if we could take that in-house at this point. I also noticed in the correspondence we received back from regarding paper 15-081 and 15-022 dated March 19th. We mentioned to the mayor and the parking traffic commission that without permit parking stickers, residents are no longer able to call and say there's someone parked on our street that doesn't belong here. And we got a response to the paper from the mayor saying we are investigating a permit sticker to be placed on all residential permit parking vehicles. Wow, that sounds familiar. That's what we've done for the last 10 years in the city. You know, it was this new parking program that said, you know what, we're going to do away with the stickers without any input from anyone. And they're finding out, you know what, that doesn't work. That doesn't work because a lot of what's the resident permit issues are called on by residents that call calling up and you're tying the residents hand by not having stickers on vehicles. So, you know, I think, you know, we're at a point where we are at right now, from no enforcement at all, nothing happened in the community, to at least a program, it has a lot of faults, but I think we could stick with a portion of the program and not can the whole program. And in my opinion, the enforcement is the big issue right now. Let's take that in-house, let's hire our own traffic crossing guards, our own retired police, let's put them on the payroll for 20 hours a week, Let's get some enforcement out there that we can control and say, you know what, we don't want it to happen like this. That would be my recommendation. I want to ask my council colleague, Councilor Penta, if he'd be willing to go that direction before we throw the whole program out.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor Camuso is next.
[Paul Camuso]: One thing we have to be cognizant of the fact is if we pay the money to get out of this contract. We are still, as a community, going to own the vehicles. We're going to own the kiosks. And then at that point, we could bring in someone maybe from another community that has done this, like Cambridge or Boston, and then do it in-house. But I think we... I'm just not there quite yet, Mr. President. I'm not there quite yet. But in the right hands, with the city being in control of the whole program, with the state-of-the-art equipment, that's what they call it, not what I've seen firsthand. But if we did make the investment, like Councilor Marks said, whether it was on a portion of it or the whole thing, it's not like we're going to scrap the contract and just waste $800,000 of taxpayers' money. We're still gonna have some equity and we're gonna have some assets that come along with all the equipment. And I do believe that if the right person, if we had a department head here running this program, that that was their job, not the chief of police who's taxed upon too frequently to deal with this when we have real situations going on in the community that need to be dealt with. But to be honest, I'm just not there yet. I agree with what Councilor Lungo-Koehn said. This has been a winter that we haven't experienced in ever, ever. State of emergency over three days. We're trying to get money from Washington because of the amount of snow that we've got from back to back to back storms. The city hasn't been able to focus as much time on this as they should have. The mayor should have never started this program in January, whether it was snowing out, no snow, I don't care. Unless we were south of North Carolina, this program should not have started in the midst of a New England winter. This should have started when people were out in a short-sleeved shirt with a pair of Bermuda shorts on, and they could take their time at the kiosk, learn it, Not going over snow banks. You throw the snow into this mix, and it's been hectic. There's a car on Barner Ave that hasn't moved since the snowstorm. Hasn't moved. It's right around number 18, 14, right around there. You're still dealing with snow banks on all the side streets. The streets are not back to an acceptable width at no fault of the DPW. But with that being said, I'd like to give it a little bit further to see what they can change. But Councilor Marks is 100% right. He's 100% right when he says there's not any for-profit company that is not out to make the dollar. It's all about dollars and cents and bringing in the dollars. Let's not anyone fool you. And that's going to be the same thing if we go for a for-profit TV channel. for public access. It's gonna be the same thing. It's gonna be the biggest person that pays the most money to get their advertisement on. So, when you're dealing with for-profit companies, like Councilor Mark said, everything's out. Decisions are made in the boardroom when they're looking at graphs and data and pie charts, and what they wanna do is make those pie charts bigger and bigger and bigger under one of the categories, and that's income. They want to make the income go up and the expenses go down. That's any for-profit company in the United States, as far as I'm concerned. The only time that they want to start slowing down on the revenues is when their tax guy tells them, hey, you're at a point now, why don't you slow down on the revenues? And they're not doing it because they want to give the Medford person a break. It's because they're being advised by their business people to start slowing down for tax ramification reasons. But like I said, at this point, coming off this winter, starting a program that should not have been started in the midst of a winter, I think the mayor was 150% wrong on that decision. I don't know how he came to that decision. I think a lot of it was this council, as well as the business community and people looking for the enforcement. And quite honestly, Let's call it like it is. This isn't a program you wanted to start three months before the people are getting out to make a determination on who the leaders of this community should be. And I'm not saying that that had any bearing on this decision whatsoever. But the fact of the matter is, it started during a time that it should not have been started. I think we have to give it at least, at least, another month to see where we go now. I don't even want to say we're out of the We're out of the realm of snow because we are in New England. But now that the snow is thawing, I think we're going to have a better understanding on exactly where the program can be improved, where it cannot be improved. We've dealt with a lot of these same issues. You look back to some of the bigger issues throughout the community since I've been on the council. And we had the water meter situation where people weren't letting us in their houses to change the meters. And you had to take baby steps. And ultimately they figured out how to work together and have the person gain access to the house. Then it was the recycling bins. People were up in arms over the recycling bins. It was as if we were telling people, you can't throw any trash away and we're going to start charging you for trash. That was ultimately the way we perceived it, and that's how the people felt at first. But as you drive around this community on any given trash day now, Everyone said we're not going to have enough room for trash. We're definitely not going to have enough room, and I need seven barrels for my house. If you don't have a two-family, you see very few and far between people that have out two trash bins that they're paying an extra fee to have that extra barrel. Few and far between. I mean, I challenge anyone to say differently. I mean, that's a fact as you drive around our community. The other things, other major things over this community that I've been here for the past 16 years, the building of the new schools. There was a lot of animosity, a lot of pushback on it, but over time, over time, people got to like them, and now people are just thrilled. We were talking earlier tonight about possibly using money to put more technology in the schools if the city thinks that there's a better use of that money rather than the public access channel. So, but I'm just, I'm referring to some of the major, major stumbling blocks that were, you would have thought that the world was coming to an end during some of those issues here in our community because of the complaints and everything else we heard. But as a community, everyone worked together and got to the point where they may not have loved the trash program, the new schools, this or that, but at least it was acceptable and tolerated for lack of a better word. I think we have to be cognizant of the fact that we have to be open and fair to the community. And at the appropriate time, I have no problem whatsoever taking a vote when I feel the end all be all and they're just totally out of the contract. And let's be honest right now too, if we tried to go after them legally and say we want to suspend the contract and Mark Rumley has to go to Middlesex Superior Court. and say it's because they don't have magnets on the back of their truck that say stay back. Don't even spend the $250 filing fee, because we're going to get laughed right out of that courtroom, Mr. President. And when we hear, when the business owners and stuff, the judges are going to want to hear that, our jury or anything. They're going to want to know where the city was financially damaged by it and by the things, the citizens are financially damaged because of the enforcement. But as of right now, I just don't think that they're in breach of contract enough where it would stand up. I'm not an attorney. We have one of the finest city solicitors in the Commonwealth, if not the United States, that works within our building. That if and when it comes to that time, him and his assistant city solicitor would be going to bat for this community. But I just don't think we're there at this point. I'm starting to repeat myself. So I'm going to cease my comments. But I cannot support it this evening. But I am getting closer to be able to take a vote in good faith that the program may not be in the best interest. But I think people have to realize that it's not as Councilor Caraviello said, we're going to just shell away 800,000, 900,000. It would be more that we're acquiring equipment, we're acquiring assets, and then it would be something like Councilor Marks stated. You bring in someone for $75,000, $80,000 a year that knows parking management. I mean, Councilor Marks traversed this whole area with Ronnie DeFranco and the Chief and Gwendolyn Blackburn when they were going to surrounding communities. There's people that specialize in just this. Just this. Somerville can do it, Cambridge can do it, You know what the difference is? And I think... I can say this now because I'm not on the ballot in November. The fact of the matter is, Mr. President, you go to Cambridge, you're paying the park to go to work. Or you're paying the park to go into jury duty at the courthouse. You're paying the park to actually go to something that you have to attend. The problem right now we're having is people are paying to park. We have to do more as a community to bring in more quality businesses to help sustain these other smaller businesses that are having a hard time. It's not a result of the parking that bestsellers went out of business or Ward's Gift is closing their doors. This just started. It may be a convenient excuse for people to say that that's why the business is a We have to do more as a community to bring people in that are going to want to pay the quarter to park. We're starting that. We've got Carol's Diner in Medford Square. He's booming on the weekend. We have to do more as a community to bring people to these centers and towns and squares. All too often, there's too many storefronts that are vacant, and I haven't really heard much from the mayor on giving tax credits to bring in quality businesses and things like that. Malden, the one business that I think we've did that for was Hof's Bakery. Hof's Bakery got a break on their tax obligations because they were hiring X amount of people, they were staying here, and what did they just do? They're moving to Malden because Maldon's got an incentive for them to go there, I'm sure. Whether it's the landlord, whether it's the city, whatever it may be, they're moving. This is the stuff that we have to do. Medford Square, we've been talking about the Medford Square revitalization for as long as... I was at the Gleason School when they were talking about it. That was probably the first study. When I was at the Gleason School in 1989, 1990. This is where we have to get aggressive. We have to get aggressive and make people want to come here. And this is not being insultive to the businesses that we have. It's not. But I said it before. We have to do something with the liquor licenses. The liquor license, the 99s and the Texas Roadhouses and the rest of them, those are middle of the road places. They don't even look at Medford. They don't even look at Medford because you have to have a burger in order to have a beverage. And these are the things that we have to do as a community. And this council has been working towards that. This evening, we granted a few licenses that hopefully Help out the businesses. But this city has to be more forward thinking when it comes to bringing in quality businesses. You can only talk about station landing for so long. It's like the new schools. Stations landing was a great improvement to that area. But how many years ago was it? 10, 12 years ago. We have to start looking to do more things like that. You got Shaw's Supermarket down here, which is an eyesore. It was a snow pile for For the whole winter, you gotta dodge snowbanks to go to Eastern Bank. In the parking lot. But I'm sorry I'm getting off topic a little bit here. But that's where we got to go. We got to do more as a community on that. And that starts at the top. That starts with the city administration working with his OCD director. And let's not kid ourselves. I often feel bad for our OCD director. And I'm going to finish on this. I often feel bad on our OCD director when sometimes this council or members of this council or the council in general or people in the community may say they don't do a thing or this or that. That's not true. They're doing what the person in the corner office is giving them the green light to do. Whether it's fair or unfair. Our OCD director in this community is Michael McGlynn. He's our OCD director slash mayor slash traffic enforcement guy slash treasurer collector. So anyone that thinks any different, you're sadly mistaken. But that's enough on that. But as far as this, I cannot support it this evening. But I think in due time, if it continues this way, Mr. President, I'm sorry for being long-winded, but I think it's a bigger picture we have to focus on than rather just this parking.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. We're going to take our votes as soon as Councilor Knight and the citizens speak. May I rest my case? Thank you, Councilor Knight.
[Michael Ruggiero]: Sir, you wish to address the Council? Yes, Mr. President. My name is Michael Leggero. I live on 18 Pembroke Street. I'm worried that there's perhaps a false dichotomy forming. republic has violated the contract, then there's going to be no charge to the city of Medford. Um, I bring the council's attention to number 23. If there is a non of the contract page 15, if there is a non-monetary violation of the contract, they have 30 days to fix it. And if they don't, that's it. End of contract, no fee. Um, and on, as you mentioned, uh, Councilor Penta on, uh, Attachment RF0100, which is also mentioned in the contract, they have to identify license plates with a 98% accuracy. If they're tagging people at a 30-minute stop and they haven't been there for 15 minutes, that's also in violation of the contract. They would have to address that. Also, another issue, just a clarification, if we break the contract and we are found to be in fault, We don't own any of the equipment. It's all theirs. At least the kiosks and a majority of the equipment. So if we do break the contract and we are found to be in fault, the equipment goes back to Republic. Thank you. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So on the motion of Councilor Penta, and I will read it, offered by Councilor Penta be it resolved that the city terminate its parking contract with Republic from Tennessee pursuant to contract section 5, paragraph B11, or II, in the interest of the taxpayers of the city, small businesses, and the city as a whole. And I think we separated the two with a B paper offered by Councilor Caraviello, so we take the B paper first. So on that B paper offered by Councilor Caraviello, which we clarified earlier this evening, all those in favor? Councilor Camuso?
[Paul Camuso]: Well, Councilor Caraviello's motion is calling to send this to the Committee of the Whole within 14 days. As a council, I think we're all on the same page. Rather than take the vote this evening, would you respectfully Put it aside for 14 days, it's totally your prerogative. Okay.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor Penta is going to share with us the reason why.
[Robert Penta]: I heard what you said. I heard what everybody said. That this is what I get every single day between phone calls and dealing with people. And the fact of the matter is that that guy over there says nobody's complained. Well, if nobody's complained to him and we've all heard the complaints, either by phone calls, letters, people getting tagged signs going up. There was nothing. There's no honoring that for which the contract says they were supposed to be doing. I'm not going to continue to go on. There are more important things to do out here. We have a resolution coming up talking about potholes in the city. That's going to be huge. It's going to be so huge. That's just one of many things. And the mayor's worried about having his community day, having this and having that. I'm more concerned about how this city should run according to every single day. You know, you can talk about the snowstorm all you want. What's a snowstorm have to do with somebody doing their job? So if there's an embargo on there because of a snowstorm, okay, nobody got your tickets?
[Paul Camuso]: Point of information, I was referring to the snow emergency that was in effect.
[Robert Penta]: I'm saying, no tickets on the snow emergency, we understand, they gave tickets, whatever it is.
[Paul Camuso]: It was a three-week emergency, unheard of, that's the leadership.
[Robert Penta]: But putting that aside, that should not stop life from going on, from them to do their job, like they're supposed to. I shouldn't have to speak to the chief every time, and he tells me, I spoke to Dan Nash, they're supposed to be doing this, they're supposed to be doing that, When people get a ticket, and this is what did it for me today, yesterday, when people get a ticket, and they're parked legitimately, and they have to go and appeal the ticket, and take time off from work, knowing that they were in the proper spot, and then the guy has, you talk about being arrogant, that's the bottom line, being arrogant, not even I'm sorry, when it's supposed to be eight to six. And they're still collecting money out of the machines after seven o'clock at night. When you, Councilor Caraviello, on January 2nd talked about having the fascia of the machine in good shape, and it's still. We asked to put a light on top of the kiosk so people could see something at nighttime. And what about somebody coming into the square late at night or in the afternoon? How are they supposed to figure out that that box way down the street, I've got to go get a ticket and walk it back to my car? And who the hell didn't remember their number plate? and put the quarter in, and not put the quarter in, and the credit card. No, I'm sorry. I hear what all you said, but you know something? I say it, I do it every single day. As far as I'm concerned, the mayor can do it, doesn't have to do it. You guys can vote on it, don't vote on it. This is how I feel, and this is the direction I want to go.
[Paul Camuso]: But you may have the votes for it at a later date. Well, maybe at a later date, we'll see. Councilor Knight?
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. I too feel as though it's premature to take a vote to opt out of the contract. I think that, you know, we have a very divided council right now, but it's a council that's willing to take a look at the direction that our traffic commission is going in and try to work towards putting some resolutions and resolves in place. With that being said, you know, last week we did pass a resolution. We asked the traffic commission to come and appear before us with Republic. My council colleague, Councilor Caraviello, referred to a response that we received in our packet. However, that response wasn't to the paper that we just passed last week. So I think that, you know, we're going down one course and one train, and we're saying, come on down, let's talk about this, let's figure out what's going on, and let's come up with some sort of plan that can work for us. And now, a week later, we're saying, forget about it, let's eliminate the plan in its entirety. I think we're sending mixed signals and mixed messages. I certainly like the solution that Councilor Marks had. I thought that was an out-of-the-box way of looking at the situation, and I think that that's where the problem lies. I think the problem really does lie with over-aggressive enforcement. and then, you know, a very reasonable traffic commission that's willing to address some of those issues that come up. So we have aggressive enforcement with a reasonable traffic commission. Maybe the enforcement arm is the problem. So, you know, I think that this item needs a little bit more time to be hashed out, a little bit more time to be vetted properly, Mr. President, before I'm ready to take a vote to say that the program should be eliminated. As being said, Mr. President, I'd move on the question.
[Paul Camuso]: I would ask you, is this in proper form to be voted on at this point, where it's not our jurisdiction? The mayor is the signatory authority. I just asked the question. Another paper of this nature was ruled out of order a few weeks ago, and then it was withdrawn by the petitioner. So I'm just asking for the consistency.
[Fred Dello Russo]: I think the clerk is saying that it's construed as a recommendation. I don't know. I think everybody's shared their thoughts on this tonight.
[Paul Camuso]: Motion a table then, until we have that meeting, which is undebatable.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Motion to table that motion, which was undebatable.
[Paul Camuso]: What does that do to the D paper that we have for Councilor Caraviello? You can call a meeting at any time and hopefully you respect his wishes within 14 days. The President knows what we want to do. Fourteen days, have a meeting. Call the roll for the motion. Motion to table.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Call the roll. On the motion of Councilor Camuso to table, which is undebatable, it is undebatable, Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Camuso?
[Joe Viglione]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Caprio?
[Joe Viglione]: Yes.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes. Six in the affirmative, one in the negative. The motion is tabled. 15-305 offered by Council Marks. Be it resolved that a portion of the $143,000 in state aid to fill potholes and repair streets as part of the Governor's Winter Recovery Assistance Program be used to stripe the raised crosswalk on Withrop Street in the interest of public safety. Council Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. I'll be brief because of the late hour. As we all read in the local paper and received a correspondence from the mayor, the city of Medford is in line to receive $143,000 of state aid to help with the filling of potholes and repair of streets throughout our community. I would only ask that the raised crosswalk on Winthrop Street, which if you come up or down Winthrop Street, you'll realize that other than the yellow neon signs on both sides of the street. The raised crosswalk itself blends into the road and is very difficult to see when you're coming up on it, especially if you're at some speed. And I would ask that the white markings, which were originally on the raised crosswalk, be replaced back in the interest of public safety with just a portion of the $143,000 towards the repair of streets and potholes.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion of Council Marks for approval, all those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. 14-308, offered by Councilor Penta. Be it resolved that the City hastily participate in the Governor's proportionate share allocation for this past winter's pothole street damages to cities and towns. Medford's allocation is set at $143,334. The program will be implemented this month, with all qualifying work needing to be completed by June 30, 2015. The State Department of Transportation will issue one-time contracts with municipalities, allowing them to draw down their share of the $30 million. Medford's share is $143,334. for the specific purpose of road and facility repairs that include patching of potholes, cracking, and other surface defects, including paving projects and repair and or replacement of signage, guardrail storm drains, storm grates, or road striping or painting. These contracts will include a use it or lose it clause to ensure that funds are spent and projects are completed by June 30th. All work invoices must be provided to the Massachusetts Department of Transportation by July 31st, 2015, and MassDOT will reimburse cities and towns as invoices are received. Along with this amount from the state and with the city having in excess of some $6.5 million in free cash, for which this council voted to expend some one million from free cash for our street recovery restoration, our city taxpayers should expect nothing less than having their street attended to. Councilor Penta.
[Robert Penta]: Mr. President, it's quite obvious the Baker administration has done something a little bit different than the prior administration. They're holding cities and towns accountable, they're giving them deadlines, and they're indicating it's a use it or lose it program. And at the same time, with our council making the request the administration take a million dollars out of free cash. This, I think, works hand-in-glove with the street restoration program that I offered here some weeks back, that every single taxpayer in this community should identify their particular street, either by phone, by taking a picture, sending it in, and hopefully getting something that's time-stamped and dated, either from the clerk's office or from the Department of Public Works. That way, they are showing some authenticity as to what they're doing. Again, anyone who might be watching, news media that's out there, anyone that has a problem on their street, a crack, a road depression, a sidewalk or a curbing or whatever it might be. If some damage took place during this past winter, take the picture, make a request, put it in. And I think that needs to be something that the city council should get a handle on as to how many requests came in and how is the city going to make its determination. The $143,000 is a limited amount, as we can tell, but I think it would be something that gets the ball rolling, knowing that we have that to start off with. And I know we have another million dollars, hopefully, that the mayor will go forward and expend for the purpose of the streets. There isn't one street you can't go down that there is not a depression, a pothole, a sinkhole, or whatever it might be. Front ends, cars, tires, and everything under the sun has been attacked this winter, unfortunately because of the storm. It is what it is, and that being the case, Mr. President, I move forward on this. And I like—we haven't gotten a report back, and I think we deserve a report back on the request that the Council made and to have an idea just what this administration intends to do over and beyond the $143,000, since, in fact, we asked for a million dollars to be taken out of free cash to be used for something that's desperately needed on a daily basis. And this is like a subject matter that I was talking about, you know. The parking enforcement, you know, you could talk about that. The problems are still going to be there. But this is something that's happening every single day. It's in the face of the single taxpayer in this community. And they don't deserve to have their streets turned into a battleground territory, unfortunately, because of what happened during the winter. We have a responsibility to these ratepayers. They pay taxes in this community. They pay the salaries of everybody in this building. And they deserve their streets to be repaired.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion of approval by Councilor Penter, all those in favor. Roll call vote has been requested by Councilor Camuso. Councilor Caraviello. Oh, I'm sorry, a couple of people want to speak.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. You know, I appreciate Councilor Penter putting this out, but, you know, every manhole cover in the city, in the main streets are all sinking. Why can't some of that money be taken out of the water and sewer accounts? Precisely. You know, rather than the free gas. I think, you know, I saw last week in the newspaper that there's an RFP out for potholes. I don't know how many potholes they're looking to fill, but that RFP should be made to look at every pothole in the city and every manhole cover that's sinking and get an actual cost, see how many manhole covers are sinking, take that part of the money out of the water and sewer account that that's building versus just asking for a million dollars to do a bunch of streets. $143,000 goes nowhere. I did half my driveway for $4,500. So I'd say $143,000 isn't going anywhere.
[Fred Dello Russo]: As amended by Councilor Caraviello. Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This morning I had the opportunity to speak with our highway superintendent relative to this very issue. And I asked exactly how far $143,000 would get him. And a highway superintendent said that this $143,000 will be very, very helpful to the city of Medford to restore our roadways. In the conversation, you know, we continued to talk about the program and what direction the city was going to go in, whether or not they were going to participate and so on. And one of the things that came up in discussion was the fact that if we're going to get $143,000 in money, And it's for the purposes of repairing our roadways, what's the best way to use it? Would it be the best use to take that and put cold patch down so that we can get through the rest of the winter, Mr. President? Or would it be the best use of that money to wait until the winter's over to grind streets down, right back down to the bone and build them back up the way that they should be built? Much to my happiness, Mr. President, they're going to be doing a bit of both, from what I understand. There'll be some sections of High Street that are going to get ground down all the way in the near future, and there's also going to be some patchwork that's being done. So I certainly commend the work of our DPW to take this twofold approach, Mr. President, to grinding the streets down, but also repairing some of the patchwork that needs to be done. With that being said, You know, I think this is a great initiative, a great project, and I commend the highway superintendent for being in front of the issue as opposed to behind it. Thank you, Councilor Knight.
[Paul Camuso]: Councilor Camuso. Thank you, and as we know, $143,000, really, with this stuff, like the Council has stated, isn't going to get us far. It's going to be very helpful for potholes and things of that nature, but look at Central Ave. When they actually ground it down and actually did the job, it's very limited what this is going to get us. I'm glad that this council I took a vote last week under the leadership of Councilor Penta, or two weeks ago, to appropriate, or at least ask the Mayor to appropriate a million dollars of the taxpayers' money that's in an account right now, unencumbered. Very, very important word. Not encumbered. It could be used for any purpose with a vote of this council. So the $143,000 is great. But if the mayor puts $1.143 million on the table to do this community, you're going to see that get us some places. So once again, this council is bringing forward good ideas as far as I'm concerned.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion of approval, all those in favor? All those opposed? We have two papers on the can. Offered by councillor, oh no. Communications from city officials, boards and commissions and employees. 15-313. This is on the motion of Councilor Lungo-Koehn to waive a portion of the reading. This is notice from the City Clerk and Chief Election Official, Edward P. Finn, notifying the citizens and municipal elected officials of the election calendar to begin Tuesday, June 9th, with nomination papers being available. Without going through the whole thing, Thursday, July 28th, last day to submit our papers for nomination. Preliminary election, Tuesday, September 22nd. General election, Tuesday, November 3rd. Yours truly, Edward P. Finn, City Clerk, etc. Papers in the hand of the clerk. offered by Councilor Caraviello, be it resolved that the, on the motion of approval from Vice President Logan Kern, all those in favor? All those opposed? Motion approved. Offered by Councilor Caraviello, be it resolved that the Medford City Council commend Team Medford on their vigil this past Sunday that drew a tremendous crowd to the City Council Chambers. Mr. Councilor.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. You know, for those of us who were here Sunday, This room, the hallway, was overflowing with people. I mean, we were turning away people. It just goes to show what the response and the need for this type of service in this community. In fact, tonight, during the Council of the Whole meeting, the attorney of Peter Miranda said he sold the building on Judge Hester Drive to a drug counseling firm. which will be coming in the next year or so. But the thing is, we had this huge outpouring of people in the support, and everybody got behind it. This morning, I pick up and read the paper that our state senator is the sponsor of the bill to legalize marijuana in the state. So this whole room, this whole council supporting stopping drugs, and our senator, is supporting groups. I mean, talk about a message being sent. But again, I want to thank Penny and her group. Did an excellent job, brought everybody out here Sunday. And let's just say, I hope to continue. We move forward and hopefully help some of these people in this community. Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. All those in favor, Councilor Penta.
[Robert Penta]: This one was jam-packed. In all the years that I've served, I've never seen so many people attend That was really a heart-throbbing particular day. But I couldn't help but think when I looked up into that ceiling and I was hoping that that ceiling did not fall down. That's a disgrace. That's been like that for almost two years now. It's patched. You're right, Councilor Dello Russo, the whole building is a disgrace. The unfortunate part about it, this place was marred. Mr. President, will you get an answer on this? Find out, are they going to repair this or not? You know, this is the city, this is the people's chambers, and this has been two years. The top of the roof, right? God, I don't know what he's thinking on a daily basis. Maybe he just doesn't care what's going on, but there were people here that do care. Madam Vice President.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President de la Russo. Back to the vigil on Sunday. I just want to concur with my colleagues. I want to also thank Janelle Rocco, I believe, who is the organizer. The two hours were perfect. I mean, from the speakers to the reading of the names to the crowd. So I just want to thank Janelle and Penny and Brooke. And it was moving. And I think it did what it set out to do was to break the stigma.
[SPEAKER_11]: Thank you.
[Joe Viglione]: Sir, you wish to address the council? Yes, Joe Villion, 59 Garfield Ave, Manfred Mass. I too was taken aback when I walked into the council chambers. We have this beautiful hall out there and all these beautiful paintings on the wall. And there has been the Christmas thing out there. It's like 15 cartons and three empty bottles. So all the people that came in here for a vigil saw boxes of trash. Two or three months ago, there was a steak knife there and there was a box cutter there. And when I go to New York and I go to record companies, I have to go through the metal detector. We have a steak knife on top of boxes of stuff. It looks like someone's basement. But right out here, when you walk in, there's just piles of stuff. And if someone's coming from New York and they're coming to the vigil because they're visiting a Medford resident, which probably happened, or someone from out of state, what are they thinking about us? The ceiling, boxes out there. This mayor has got to get it together because this is Medford pride. And the vigil, God bless that this room was packed, but Medford pride.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. On the motion of approval, all those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. Christmas candles come down, and Santa's sled. Offered by Councilor Camuso, be it resolved that the DPW remove the mattress, box, spring, and TV illegally dumped at the corner of Elm Street and Fulton Street.
[Paul Camuso]: Move approval. They were going to do it themselves, but it's nasty, so they don't want to touch it.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion to approve by Councilor Camuso. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. Councilor?
[Paul Camuso]: One more thing. City Hall really is, if I may, falling apart. We had this beautiful event here Sunday with hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of people. And when the gentlemen that were here walked into the second floor men's room, That bathroom has been covered with caution tape, the urinal, for about two and a half months. You know what? If it's beyond repair, if it's beyond repair, take it out, cap off the hole. This is a basic plumbing job.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Basic.
[Paul Camuso]: Very basic. We can get someone at Minuteman, Volk could come up here and do that.
[Fred Dello Russo]: An apprentice would be sent to do it.
[Paul Camuso]: I'm speechless. I'm speechless for once. You would think that you'd want to get the building ready for those type of events. I mean, I understand not every office in this city hall has their own private bathroom in it, like the mayor's office, but for us little people that have to use the public restroom, it's disgusting. If we can get that fixed.
[Fred Dello Russo]: We'll do some research on that. The tabled records of February 24th are still in the possession of Councilor Knight. Mr. Clerk, have you received those changes dispatched to you from the Councilor? The changes initiated by Councilor Caraviello have been handled.
[Adam Knight]: Well, what happened was, Mr. President, I got a set of minutes and the set of minutes was incorrect. Then there were going to be some corrections that were made. I got another set of minutes that came out that had corrections in them. So before I could bring the corrections up at the Council meeting on the initial minutes, we got a new set of minutes. I got those new set of minutes. I looked at those new set of minutes. I've gone through those new set of minutes. I've made one change, Mr. President, and it comes under the first item on the GIC. And Councilor Penter and I having a little bit of a disagreement as to what it should read. What the president read into the record was, Councilor Penta asks that the record reflect he also spoke as a member of the Massachusetts Municipal Association. Councilor Penta would like the language to read that Councilor Penta did not speak as a city councilor, but as a member of the Massachusetts Municipal.
[Robert Penta]: Councilor Penta. Councilor Penta wishes the records to be recorded as speaking as a member of the Mass. Municipal Association. Board of Directors and not as a city councilor. If you go to 17.22 on the tape, that's exactly what I said.
[Adam Knight]: What was written to the record by the President is what I'm going to go with, Mr. President. I've gone over this thing three or four or five times, so.
[Robert Penta]: Well, I want to be as exact as can be.
[Adam Knight]: As do I, because, you know, my name's on it, Mr. President. That's why I gave it such scrutiny. I wasn't going to move for approval if I feel as though it wasn't an accurate reflection of what happened at the meeting. You know, so I'd move for approval as amended, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So what will the, Mr. Clerk, what will the record actually say then?
[Clerk]: According to Councilor Knight, it's basically almost the same.
[Adam Knight]: We just said that, you know, I was under the impression that if someone was going to be behind the rail and they were going to speak, but not as a city council, but as an average citizen or a member of an organization, they would get up and they would address the council from the podium. That didn't happen, which started leading me to have all these concerns saying, what's going on? Why is it happening here? And then I watched the tape and it says he was also a member of the MMA as opposed to exclusively speaking as a member of the MMA. So, I went with what the president said because of the fact that, you know, parliamentary procedure would do that. Which president? You. What did I say? Councilor Penta asked that the record also reflect that he spoke as a member of the Massachusetts Municipal Association. And I may have said something to the effect of so noted.
[Fred Dello Russo]: You might have said that too. Thank you.
[Robert Penta]: And all I added on is was as a member of the Massachusetts Board of Directors and not as a city councilor, because that's exactly what I said. 17.22 into the minutes.
[Adam Knight]: There was action on the paper. There was action on the paper. It was a letter sent, I believe, to the administration and to the legislature.
[Robert Penta]: No, no, no, no, no. No, the action on the paper was actually to be to be advised And to report back from the administration any plans to increase the charge of the plan for the employees. So there was action? It was a request, yeah, to get information.
[Paul Camuso]: But my question is, I think it's fairly simple. I think I got a good understanding of what happened. Was there a roll call vote? If there wasn't a roll call vote, you could have... There was a roll call vote. There was a roll call vote. I know exactly what I said.
[Robert Penta]: You know what I'm saying. I understand that, but my speaking, I wanted to be recorded as speaking as a member of the Mass Municipal Board of Directors and not as a city councilor. My vote might have been a city councilor, but my speaking was not. Whatever.
[Richard Caraviello]: I think what the councilor was trying to say is, if you were speaking as a member of the MMA, You should have spoken from the other side of the podium. Right, and that is what we discussed actually, the official position of the MMA. If I want to speak for the Chamber of Commerce, then I should go behind the rail and speak from the podium.
[Paul Camuso]: Does the MMA, on the particular issue you guys are talking about, whatever it is, does the MMA have an official position on it?
[Robert Penta]: – They support G.I.C., yeah. This goes back to 2009, when this council voted on it, they talked about it, and they discussed it.
[Fred Dello Russo]: – Well, perhaps what the most pertinent facts are is what should the records indicate?
[Adam Knight]: – What should the record reflect, and should it reflect whether or not what the president read into the record, or what was Mentioned during a speech when the gentleman wasn't speaking as a city councilor, apparently. I mean, I don't know. I'm deferring to the language that the president referred to when he read it into the record.
[Paul Camuso]: That's the language. Why is this hooky? It's not a big deal. I didn't make a big deal that he did.
[Adam Knight]: Well, like I said, Mr. President, my name's on it and I move for approval. I want it to be an accurate reflection just because. Motion for approval by Councilor Knight.
[Robert Penta]: If it's an accurate reflection, then you get to watch the minutes of the meeting.
[Adam Knight]: I have. That's what I've come up with.
[Robert Penta]: There's a motion for approval on the record.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Motion for approval by Councilor Knight. All those in favor.
[Robert Penta]: Wait, wait, wait. What are they? What are the words? Read it. The way he presented it to us. Read it. I don't have it. Read it. What is it? You have it. What did he give you? It's the same thing. What is it, Eddie? Just read it, please. I don't have the records in front of me.
[SPEAKER_04]: Where's the book? The e-mail that I sent to the city. I know, but it's just—Councilor Penta asks that the record reflects that he also spoke as a member of the MMA.
[Clerk]: Yeah, and that's what I have.
[Fred Dello Russo]: As recommended by Councilor Knight. All those in favour?
[Robert Penta]: No, no, no. You said you accepted before wishes to be recorded as speaking as a member of the Mass. So then we go back to the original one.
[SPEAKER_04]: Councilor Penter wishes to be recorded as speaking as a member of the Mass.
[SPEAKER_11]: Municipal Association.
[Robert Penta]: Not asked to be recorded. Wishes to be recorded.
[Paul Camuso]: There's a difference. How do you present the records? That's my question.
[Adam Knight]: I read the references saying that Councilor Pender wanted to also be recorded as being a member of the Massachusetts Municipal Association.
[Robert Penta]: And I said that. That's exactly what I said that day.
[Fred Dello Russo]: On the motion of Councilor Knight for approval. All those in favor. All those opposed? The ayes have it. Councilor?
[Robert Penta]: You have to read it. Read it. Nobody's reading the words. You have it, Mr. Clark. What are the words?
[Clerk]: I don't have them. So you don't have it. He said he sent it to you. But I don't have them with me right here. But you just said you wanted wish instead of recorded.
[Robert Penta]: I'm going by what you had last time. It says Councilor Penta wishes to be recorded. speaking as a member of the Mass Municipal Association.
[Adam Knight]: The email I have in front of me reads, under paper number 15053, the vote was taken and the president noted, Councilor Penta would like the record to reflect that he also spoke as a member of the Massachusetts Municipal Association. The minutes should reflect that, hyphen. Councilor Penta spoke also as a member of the Massachusetts Municipal Association.
[SPEAKER_04]: That's what I sent. That's right. That's what it says.
[Fred Dello Russo]: So on that motion.
[Robert Penta]: That's the motion.
[Fred Dello Russo]: All those in favor. All those opposed? Motion carries. Records, March 17, 2015, were passed to Vice President Lundgren, Madam Vice President. The correction will be shared with the clerk on that motion of approval. All those in favor? All those opposed? So moved. On the motion of Council Marks for adjournment. All those in favor? All those opposed? Meeting adjourned.
|
total time: 36.47 minutes total words: 2044  |
total time: 41.54 minutes total words: 2964  |
total time: 12.75 minutes total words: 1145  |
total time: 18.46 minutes total words: 2014  |
|
total time: 8.74 minutes total words: 696  |
total time: 36.46 minutes total words: 1960  |
total time: 15.38 minutes total words: 948  |
total time: 2.57 minutes total words: 214  |
|
total time: 2.86 minutes total words: 264  |
|||