[Maryanne Adduci]: Test one, two.
[Marie Izzo]: Councilor Lazzaro. Councilor Leming. Councilor Scapelli. Councilor Tseng. President Bears.
[Zac Bears]: Present. Seven present, none absent, please rise to salute the flag. Announcements, accolades, remembrances, reports, and records. Records. The tabled records of the meeting of September 9th, 2025 were passed to Councilor Callahan. Councilor Callahan, how did you find those records?
[Anna Callahan]: I found them in order. Thank you so much for that update.
[Zac Bears]: Great. On the motion of Councilor Callahan to approve, seconded by? Seconded by Councilor Leming. All those in favor? Opposed? The motion passes. The records of the meeting of September 30th, 2025 were passed to Vice President Collins. Vice President Collins, how did you find the records?
[Kit Collins]: I apologize, Mr. President, I haven't had a chance to review them, so I have a motion to table.
[Zac Bears]: On the motion of Vice President Collins to table, seconded by Councilor Callahan. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? The motion passes. Acknowledgement of review of continued nondisclosure of City Council Executive Session Minutes dated August 19, 2025 under the Open Meeting Law. acknowledging that we are, um, not disclosing the minutes of the executive session of the City Council dated August 19th 2025 because they're still exempt from disclosure under provisions of the open meeting law. Reports of committees 24 073 and 24 354 offered by Councilor Leming. Councilor Leming.
[Matt Leming]: Thank you. At the Resident Services and Public Engagement Committee, we discussed the results of a few recent listening sessions and released the summer newsletter motion to approve.
[Zac Bears]: On the motion to approve by Councilor Leming, seconded by Councilor Tseng. All those in favor? Opposed? Motion passes. Motions, orders, and resolutions. 25-149, resolution to establish a recruitment and hiring process for the city clerk. We discussed this last week and I do have an update from the solicitor. Give me one second here. All right, so I went back and forth a little bit with Solicitor Foley on these questions that the council had about the process. I know folks were talking about wanting to see if we could all do a dupli-mary screening and how that would affect executive session. I'll just read, basically I think there's two options. One is three members could meet in a preliminary screening committee, which is something that is specifically spoken about in the open meeting law. And that group could, it's not a quorum of the body, that group could decide to go into executive session to screen applicants for an open meeting. for basically four interviews. The other thing that we could do is all members could look at the resumes and recommend whoever they want to be interviewed, and then that could move forward. You know, all of those people would move to the interview stages, and then Councilors who want to be involved in those interviews, one or two in each of the rounds could be part of the interviews, and then In either direction, we would receive three finalists who would then be coming before us in a public session and being, we would pick from the three finalists. I can read a little bit more or I could go to, I'll just read a little bit more. This is from the solicitor. The AG's Division of Open Government issued a determination on this issue and held as follows. A public body may create a preliminary screening committee to interview applicants for employment or appointment under General Law Chapter 30A, Section 1821A.8. That preliminary screening committee may meet in executive session under Purpose 8 to, quote, consider or interview applicants for employment or appointment if the chair declares that an open meeting will have a detrimental effect in obtaining qualified applicants Provided, however, that this clause shall not apply to any meeting, including meetings of a preliminary screening committee, to consider and interview applicants who have passed a prior preliminary screening. And a preliminary screening is defined as, quote, the initial stage of screening applicants conducted by a committee or subcommittee of a public body solely for the purpose of providing to the public body a list of those applicants qualified for further consideration or interview. And it says that a preliminary screening committee must consist of fewer than a quorum of the members of the parent body. And it may include additional members who are not members of the parent body. And then you have to keep minutes. Is there anything else in here? Solicitor fully said, in my opinion, less than a quorum of the city council members could serve on a preliminary screening committee, review the applications and resumes and assist in deciding who warrants an interview in round one. So I'll stop there. I'll go to Councilor Lazzaro and then Councilor Scarpelli and then Councilor Tseng. Councilor Lazzaro.
[Emily Lazzaro]: Thank you. My personal preference would be for us all to receive resumes and express our preference that way. I think it avoids open meeting law issues and gives us all an opportunity to see who the applicants are without making anybody feel put on the spot too early or that just seems like the most democratic way to go about it from my perspective. Thanks.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you. Councilor Scarpelli.
[George Scarpelli]: Thank you, Council President. I concur with my fellow council. I think it's important that this council and this body maintain the total control of who this person is. I think it's important that I was going to lead with that, that once we all see the applications that we would report or send those top three recommendations or if we find that we found four out of, let's say, 10, that we give it to our committee of three council president bears. I think we talked about that. And, um, and then the final three would then the committee of three. I feel comfortable with the committee of three, then moving forward, uh, and making sure we don't violate any open meeting laws and then bring us to the final final steps. But I think it's important that, um, this position doesn't come from the administration. This position is the only position that works for us and we need to make sure that we have the trust of that person and their goals and our goals and the shared objectives are met without any influence because you could say there isn't, but if it's coming from a different office, there's no guarantee. So I think it's important that we follow through with this process from the first step to the end. So I would make the same recommendation that the council reviews all of the applications and then whatever set number that may be that we then send that over to the council president or the assigned or the chosen three council members that would then go through the process and then bring us the final two for any any final decision. So thank you, Mr. President.
[Justin Tseng]: Thank you, Councilor say. Thank you, President Bears. And thank you for working on this. Last week we spoke to the importance of, um, the council having say in the process, especially since the city clerk is partially responsible to the City Council. Um, this person, whoever they may be, um, is one of our only employees, if not the only employee that we directly supervise. And this employee will be in charge of modernizing an office that requires a lot of work. There's been a consistent effort down there for a very long time, and I know residents are claiming for things to pick up as well. And so we will really need as a city council to have the fullest say that we can in this process. In my opinion, that second option that Councilors Lazzaro and Scarpelli mentioned is the most inclusive way that we could move forward with this. It gives all of us a chance to have a say in the process as well, because I know all of us as councilors are looking for different things, maybe a lot of similar things, but we are all, you know, we have our approaches to the office. one could say that we are independent thinkers in this process. And because of that, I think that the second path of all of us looking at resumes and recommending candidates is a path well trodden and a path that will best include all of our diverse opinions.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng, Councilor Collins.
[Kit Collins]: Thank you, President Bears. I appreciate you working with Solicitor Foley on an approach to this. I think that I would be comfortable with either of the approaches that you outlined. I think I agree with my fellow councilors. I think the bottom line for me is I think it's very important that this hiring process be run by the city council and not by the administration. The city clerk is our employee, and I think it would be inappropriate for the hiring process to reflect otherwise. I would have been happy with either approach, but I'm happy to agree with my Councilors. I think it will be relatively easy for us to all review the resumes. I'm glad we'll all have a chance to weigh in, and I think it's a fair way to make sure that all of our preferences are accommodated, that we can each essentially have a say in who progresses to the interview round and take things from there. Thank you.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Callahan. And if you could talk for a bit, I'm trying to write this up.
[Anna Callahan]: Oh, great, I'll stall here. I was just going to say that I am very comfortable with this, but that I do want to highlight that there are two parts here that I think might be being talked about. I assume people are talking about a group of three, so we each get the resumes, we each can look at them and make a recommendation individually and privately. And then it sounds like a group of three, Councilor Scarpelliralee is suggesting, I'm mentioning you only to ask and make sure that I'm not saying something that's incorrect, that a group of three would finalize the list of candidates to interview. And then there is also the initial interviews conducted by, and that has city council designee. So just wanted to mention that as another point that I'm not sure if people are considering, but they're both of those, finalizing the list as well as the conducting of the initial interviews.
[Zac Bears]: Yeah, my interpretation was maybe we would take a vote tonight to designate three people who would then participate in those rounds. Does that sound right? All right.
[Anna Callahan]: I'm comfortable with that. Thank you.
[Zac Bears]: No, you didn't. Anyone else have any thoughts here? All right, give me one second then. My apologies to everybody. Sorry, I just want to make sure I get this right. Does anyone want to potentially put their name in as a designee? We can talk about that a little bit. Is anyone interested? I'll recognize you. Councilor Lazzaro.
[Emily Lazzaro]: Do I need to speak about it? I am interested in interviewing.
[Zac Bears]: Okay. Councilor Callahan.
[Anna Callahan]: I will, I'm willing, if no one else will do it, because I want to do my fair share of the work.
[Zac Bears]: Okay. Anyone else interested in being a designee here. I'm happy to do one as well. Oh, Vice President Collins.
[Kit Collins]: My. I was going to offer to count myself out, seeing as I'm the one Councilor who is confirmed to probably not be working with the next city clerk but if there are not enough volunteers, I'm happy to serve on the interview committee.
[Zac Bears]: Right, and I'm seeing no objections from Councilors saying Scarpelli or Leming as to wanting to be one of the designees. Right. So Council is our has nominated herself. Councilor Callahan, and then I can do it or you can do a kid whatever you prefer. I can do it. Okay. All right, I will represent men as best as I can on this committee. No guarantees, guys. All right, so what I have here is, An update to section three interview process. So it would now read all applications will be sent to city Councilors for review and Councilors will submit the names of candidates they want to see interviewed to the director of HR to submit for the HR coordinator for scheduling of interviews. The city council will appoint three designees to participate in the interview process. All names of candidates selected for interview will be kept confidential. Initial interviews are conducted by city staff and city council designees. Specific questions and or scenario questions will be developed by the Director of HR and DEI Director for approval by the Council designees. All candidates for interviews will be asked the same standard questions. The DEI Director will formulate basically a rubric with the questions prior to interviews. Calendar invitation will be sent to all interviewers, which will include a copy of the rubric, questions, and the applications. Following the interview process, all documentation will be collected and kept on file by HR. the HR coordinator will contact candidates selected for a second interview and schedule time for the second interview. The second interviews will be conducted by, again, city staff and the city council designees. Specific questions prior to the second interview will be developed for approval in the same manner as the first process. So essentially if there are, like if we want to do, solve this problem type question. And then, the top ranking three candidates will be submitted to the City Council for action. Councilor Callahan.
[Anna Callahan]: Thank you. Do I remember correctly that we mentioned last time that it could be different designees for the second round of interviews?
[Zac Bears]: Yeah, I don't think we can this way. I think like we could decide if One of us wants to be in the first round, two of us in the second round, or whatever combination of that we want to.
[Anna Callahan]: Oh, so only these three people will be?
[Zac Bears]: In the first, in these, yeah, exactly. Because if we do more than that, then they're, yeah.
[Anna Callahan]: Thanks.
[Zac Bears]: Okay. Do we have other questions, thoughts? All right, is there a motion to adopt the amended process for the interviews? On the motion of Councilor Callahan, seconded by? Seconded by Vice President Collins. All those in favor? Opposed? Motion passes. And is there a motion to approve the main paper on the motion of Councilor Tseng to approve? Seconded by Councilor Callahan. Just gonna call the roll on this one. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. This is approving the whole thing as amended. Yeah.
[Marie Izzo]: Councilor Callahan. Vice President Collins. Council is our Councilor Lemon. Council Scott belly. Councilor Tseng President beers.
[Zac Bears]: Yes, 70 affirmative, none of the negative the motion passes. 25152 offered by Council is our encounter limiting resolution to increase pedestrian safety at Boston Avenue and high street me one second here. Whereas the city council received a letter dated September 28 2025 from Victoria burrows key age 10 that highlighted dangerous conditions for pedestrians at the intersection of Boston Avenue and high street and West Medford. Now therefore be it resolved that the Metro City Council request an update on the payment marking plan for the high street corridor. from Boston Avenue to the West Medford High Street Rotary and any other potential traffic calming and safety measures available to increase the safety of pedestrians. Be it further resolved that the Medford City Council invite Traffic and Transportation Director Todd Blake to present said update. Councilor Lazzaro.
[Emily Lazzaro]: Actually, if I can offer Councilor Leming to read the letter.
[Matt Leming]: Thank you. And I would like to thank my colleague, Councilor Lazzaro, for at least spearheading this. On September 28th, Medford City Council received the following letter. Dear Medford City Council, my name is Victoria and I'm 10 years old and I'm writing to you because I think there is a problem on Boston Avenue and High Street intersection. I live right near that street and have to cross it every day with my sister on our walk to school. Recently, my friend got hit by a car on that street. He was fine, but it was still scary knowing that it happened. A few years ago, my dad and I walked around with a petition to fix this street and we got over 159 responses. If you want to know more, visit www.westmedford.us. I really hope you can address this problem as soon as possible so me and 159 other Medford citizens can get where they need to be safely, since Syria, Victoria, Borowski. I'm familiar with that intersection. Medford has a number of very problematic intersections around town that we do need to improve that one, particularly if you're trying to get through Boston Avenue and turn onto High Street. It's very tricky, very risky, and it's sort of like the center point of a lot of roads coming into it. So I would appreciate any effort that can be done by the Traffic Commission and our transportation engineer to address this. And once again, I'd like to thank my colleague for her efforts on this.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Leming. Councilor Lazzaro.
[Emily Lazzaro]: Thanks. So there are a few similar intersections in that neighborhood where the city has implemented some traffic calming measures that have received a variety of responses from neighbors, some positive, some negative. There's a similar intersection to this one. even closer to where I live, which is at the intersection of Placestead Road and Woburn Street, which is, it's a very wide intersection. So the streets are very wide, though they're each, you know, one lane, but there's a lot of pavement around. And all of that pavement means that cars have to kind of creep out in order to see where they need to turn because they're at like a T stop. Not a T stop like the train, like they're coming at the end of the road and they have to turn right or left. In order to see the other cars coming or any pedestrians or bicycles, you have to like be in the middle of an intersection. And the curbs don't go far enough out. I'm not sure why this is that way, but it ends up making the intersections pretty dangerous for cars, definitely dangerous for bikes, definitely dangerous for pedestrians. Many of these intersections do not have any crosswalks at all. I live off of Woburn Street and when I go for jogs, I go down Woburn Street and I often cross this intersection where Todd Blake and his traffic department have put new paintings and like plastic railings to redirect cars that there's short of a curb cut, which can be very expensive. They're trying to direct cars to pull forward so you can see better, but there still aren't any crosswalks because the crosswalks would not be able to be ADA compliant, because you would have to do curb cuts and the curb cuts are expensive. Again, it ends up being a million dollars and taking a year as soon as you do curb cuts. So in the meantime, you can put barriers made of plastic, you can put painting on the ground, and it does make it safer. as an interim measure, and it's much less expensive. But sometimes neighbors think it's unsightly. It's a tricky thing to navigate. The intersection that Victoria Borowski mentioned in the letter we all received last week. She's 10 years old, she probably goes to the Brooks, she probably walks there from her neighborhood. This intersection is also very wide, lots of pavement. It does have a lot of crosswalks, but they're very wide crosswalks and cars will drive around curves to get to get through the intersection. I do wanna read a response that Todd sent me when I emailed him about this resolution. He said, we've implemented improvements at Boston and High Street on at least two separate occasions. As with other traffic calming initiatives, there have been mixed responses, especially from the aesthetics versus safety crowd. But as you know, I fully support implementing several once again. This involves paint, delineator posts, et cetera. Delineator posts are the plastic posts. There are in street warning signs that need to be repositioned, but they were still there as of yesterday. That is true. Those are the ones that say like you have to stop for pedestrians and crosswalks, but they can get knocked around. But they're there and they do slow cars down, I believe. We also have a pavement marking plan for the High Street Corridor from Boston Ave to the West Medford High Street Rotary, which would tie into the new DCR markings. There's new painting at the Rotary at the edge of Medford right before crossing into Arlington that was recently repainted. This resolution, the intention was for it to be an encouragement of further um, explanation and clarification and any other measures we can support for the traffic engineer and that department to keep, um, nudging along any extra safety measures we can do there because it is pretty dangerous. Um, the road is both somehow too wide and too narrow. I don't know how we've managed that. Um, But anyway, I appreciate Victoria's letter and her reaching out to us and telling us about this situation. And I'm not sure if Todd was able to make it today. I'm not on the zoom right now. He's not on. I don't I think he had a conflict, but maybe we could I would maybe motion to refer this to our public works committee if we wanted to maybe have a meeting down the road and talk more about it and how we can offer support from the city council, though this is really, I mean, perhaps a budgetary issue and something just in the traffic engineers department. Thank you.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you. Councilors are on the motion to refer to Public Works and Facilities Committee seconded by saying my company any further discussion. Seeing none. All those in favor. Opposed to motion passes communications from city officers and employees. We have to 5153 submitted by the Elections Commission Medford call for election November 2025. call for election. General Municipal Tuesday, November 4th 2025. We had ordered that the Elections Commission be and it's hereby authorized and directed to notify and warn such of the inhabitants of the city of Medford as were qualified by law to vote for candidates at our general municipal election on Tuesday, November 4th 2025 to assemble at their polling places and their respective boards and precincts and then to give their votes for Mayor City Council School Committee. Question one. And the polls have said General Municipal Election shall open at 7 a.m. and remain open until 8 p.m. We have further ordered that the following name polling places be, and they are hereby designated for the use at the General Municipal Election on November 4th, 2025. Ward 1, Precinct 1, Andrews Middle School, 3000 Mystic Valley Parkway. Ward 1, Precinct 2, Firefighters Club, 340 Salem Street. Ward 2, Precinct 1, and Ward 2, Precinct 2, Roberts Elementary School, 35 Court Street. Ward 3, Precinct 1, Medford American Legion, 321 Winthrop Street. Ward 3, Precinct 2, Temple Shalom, 475 Winthrop Street. Ward 4, Precinct 1, Tufts University Gantcher Center Rear, 161 College Ave. Ward 4, Precinct 2, 22 Walkling Court, Auburn and North Street, Fondacaro Center. Ward 5, Precinct 1 and Ward 5, Precinct 2, Mississippuck Elementary School, 37 Hicks Ave. Ward 6, Precinct 1, West Medford Fire Station, 26 Harvard Ave. Ward 6, Ward 6, Precinct 2, Brooks Elementary School, 388 High Street. Ward 7, Precinct 1, Mystic Valley Towers, North Building Entrance. Ward 7, Precinct 2, McGlynn K-3-8 Public School, 3004 Mystic Valley Parkway. Ward 8, Precinct 1, Senior Center, 101 Riverside Avenue. Ward 8, Precinct 2, South Medford Fire Station, 0 Medford Street. In-person early voting for the November general municipal election will be at City Hall, mainly during business hours, but also on the weekends. Saturday, October 25th, 8.30am to 2.30pm. Sunday, October 26th, 8.30am to 2.30pm. Monday, October 27th, 8.30am to 4.30pm. Tuesday, October 28th, 8.30am to 4.30pm. Wednesday, October 29th, 8.30am to 7.30pm. Thursday, October 30th, 8.30am to 4.30pm. Friday, October 31st, 8.30am to 12.30pm. So that's Saturday and Sunday, October 25th and 26th, and the week of October 27th to October 31st during City Hall hours. I think that's it for now, so I'll recognize Jim.
[James Blatchford]: Good evening, James Blatchford, City Hall, Room 102, Elections Commission. This is to present to you the call for election. The only other important date that's not on there would be the deadline for voter registration, and that would be the day before early voting starts, that Friday, October 24th, until 5 p.m. in Room 102.
[Zac Bears]: Great, do we have any questions? We do, I will recognize Councilor Scarpelli and then Councilor Sagan.
[George Scarpelli]: Thank you first, Mr. Blatt. Thank you so much. I think you've settled that office down and we're seeing so many great processes in place, so thank you. Just one question that came up with the preliminaries. Unfortunately, I think, I'm not sure if November 4th, the schools are open again during voting. I think it is. So the only question I have is that One of the schools, I know I talked to the principal, she felt terrible, but they had a parent night that evening, and all we heard were people saying that I couldn't park, so I just went home. So if there's a way that we coordinate with the principals to make sure or the superintendent that we clear any evening activities for election night, that would be super helpful. I know during the day, there's plenty of time for people to go in and out. There's plenty of parking at most locations, but I think it's important that when you run an event and you have 300 parents showing up plus voting, it made it very difficult and where people were just walking away from it. We hate to see that.
[James Blatchford]: So thank you. Unfortunately, I was not here when the schedule was set, nor was I here to negotiate with the school department. I can assure you moving forward, that is definitely a conversation that my office will be having with both the school committee and the administration. But I can tell you right now, November 4th, there is no school. So it is a professional development day within the school district. So there won't be any conflict during the day. Specifically, there shouldn't be any conflict during the evening. But looking forward to future elections, the governor has signed a bill that actually sets the election date. I believe it's September 1st for 2026. Um, and then the November election. And we've already spoken with the superintendent and both of those days will have no school, at least for Children. There will be professional development days. But for next year, we've already spoken with the superintendent. So that should be all set.
[Justin Tseng]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng Thank you, Manager Blatchford for all you do. It's noticeable how much progress the Elections Office has made in the last few months especially, but last year. I received some phone calls about folks who were, they were supposed to be able to vote, they weren't allowed to vote, but they had the, the word is slipping my mind. Inactive. Yes, inactive status attached to them. I know, I've mostly squirted away with them but I was wondering if you could take this opportunity to speak to what happened there, what residents should know going forward.
[James Blatchford]: Absolutely. So, um, first of all, the first thing if anyone has any questions about their status as a voter, particularly the inactive versus active status. As a voter, you get to vote on Election Day, no matter what. So whether you are inactive or active, it just depends on how much paperwork you have to fill out on the day. But prior to Election Day, you can always check your status at the Secretary of State's website. to see if you are an active voter versus an inactive voter. If you are inactive for whatever reason, which could include not returning your census form. I sent a piece of mail and it was returned to our office. Anything that we cannot confirm your current residence would make you inactive. So if for whatever reason anyone is inactive, they can always come into our office and update their status, they can sign a census form in my office. Additionally, you can re-register to vote almost. You don't have to, but you can, and it would update your status. But the easiest thing would be come down to my office where we can email you your census in which case you can sign and send it back to us.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you. Thank you. Do we have any further questions about the call for election? On the motion of Councilor Scarpelli to approve, seconded by Councilor Tseng. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Marie Izzo]: Councilor Callahan. Yes. Vice President Collins. Yes. Councilor Lazzaro. Yes. Councilor Levin. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli. Councilor Tseng. Yes. President Bears.
[Zac Bears]: Yes. After the affirmative, none of the negative, the motion passes. 25-154, submitted by the Elections Commission, Medford Election Warrant, November 2025. This is functionally the exact same information, but per the law, we need to vote to approve this, and then we all need to sign it. And I think I have the copy here for us to sign. With a pen. Yes. But I'm guessing that with this folder that says election warrant, that's probably what it is. I'll just quickly summarize. Warrant for Medford November 2025 general municipal election. Greetings, in the name of the Commonwealth, you are hereby required to notify and warn the inhabitants of said city or town who are qualified to vote in elections to vote at the various wards and precincts on Tuesday, the fourth day of November, 2025, from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. for the following purpose, to cast their votes in the general municipal election for the candidates of the following offices, offices, mayor, city council, school committee, and question one, as thereon at the time and place of said voting given under our hands this day, seventh day of October, 2025, the Medford City Council. We'll all sign it and then post it at each polling location in the library and City Hall no later than October 24th, 2025. Any further discussion? On the motion to approve by Councilor Scarpelli, seconded by Councilor Tseng. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Marie Izzo]: Councilor Kelly, Vice President Collins, Councilor Lazzaro, Councilor Leming, Councilor Scarpelli, Councilor Tseng, Vice President Bears,
[Zac Bears]: Yes, seven in the affirmative, none of the negative, the motion passes.
[Marie Izzo]: Thank you all.
[Zac Bears]: All right, here we go. We'll pass this around and then we can get a tip. Public participation, to participate outside of Zoom, please email rolicio at medford-ma.gov. Is there anyone either in person or on Zoom who would like to participate? All right, we'll start at the podium. I'm not seeing any hands on Zoom. Give me one second here.
[Micah Kesselman]: All right, name and address of the record. You have three minutes. Sure. Micah Kesselman, 499 Main Street. So I am here once again to bring forward to the public as much as possible, and I'll be here as long as it takes, at as many meetings as it takes, that right now we are in a crisis that is worsening every day when it comes to ICE and federal overreach into our city and community, and we're seeing people snatched up still. And this council, for the most part, has been fairly active and engaged on this subject. Nevertheless, this council is limited in power and authority and what it can do. Who is the other half of that power and authority that can do more is and continues to be, and for the foreseeable future will always be the mayor and the MPD, the cops. And neither of them have done a single goddamn thing to protect. No swearing. Our community. We gotta avoid that. this continuing illegal activity and federal overreach. The mayor has not even made it a twinkle in her eye, given any attention whatsoever that it merits, and it needs to be the top of her priority list. I will point out that in the last two weeks alone, two people have been shot in Chicago, and Video recording directly contradicts everything DHS has said about it and shows that they were attacked without cause effectively by ICE and DHS agents. Two people were shot. City Councilors have been, or the equivalent aldermen, have been arrested for demanding warrant judicial order or articulable probable cause when agents are doing their abductions. An entire building has been raided like it was a military compound. Children frog marched out into the night into vans in their underwear and zip tied. No warrants or orders were presented when that happened. This is getting worse every day. In Massachusetts, in Lemonster, units were using a child to lure a father out of a house. They were effectively conducting, they were conducting a crime, not effectively. That was, out and out, that was a criminal act. That was illegal. We can enforce laws against lawbreakers. Just because you have a badge doesn't give you a right to commit crimes that are clearly crimes. The cops can do something and they have to draw a line and they have to say what side they're on eventually because it's really coming to that. It's ridiculous that they haven't even tried to protect the community that they're supposed to. And I'm one of very few people remaining who still have patience and tolerance that expect and ask the cops to actually work on behalf of the safety and security of the community. So if they want to have a relationship with this city that they supposedly work for, they can start doing their job. That also goes for the mayor. I will mention, and then I will end this long rant, that in Chicago, one thing that has happened recently was that the mayor of Chicago recently put into effect ice-free zones where, you can look into it, but effectively, people who live there and businesses that live there can put up signage that makes it an area that they're presumptively disallowed from entering without warrant. They're not going to call for the arrest of any agents violating this ice-free zone, but they will use this as a grounds for suing the federal government for illegal activity, basically. And this is something, this is a milk toast bare minimum thing that we could do in this city too. And if more cities went about this is every city that's being impacted did this same thing. it wouldn't fix it, but at least it would be the kind of lawfare that could be effective. So I'll leave it at that. And I will be here again next session and the session after that saying the same freaking things until we see something come from the administration on this. Thank you. Thank you.
[Zac Bears]: All right, seeing no hands on Zoom, we'll stay at the podium. I think I'm gonna address the record and you'll have about three minutes.
[Maryanne Adduci]: Mary Anna Ducey, 2 North Street. I was here last week at your meeting and I had asked that you people consider going back to the weekly city council meetings, primarily because the meetings get to be too long, too many people want to speak. I'm going to use the August 5th meeting that didn't end until 1.25 in the morning. So I was quite surprised that you were having a meeting tonight because you just had one last week. So this was an unscheduled one apparently. So I want to know if you people have discussed it, the possibility of going back to the weekly session because I asked last week that you think about this. And the voters and I want to know if you're going to consider that.
[Zac Bears]: We haven't had a vote to change the rules. You know, we do meet every week, we meet in committees on a weekly basis and we have regular meetings every two weeks. We are having back to back meetings because we rescheduled our September 23rd meeting because it was Rosh Hashanah. And we have again, at the end of the month, back to back meetings also because of a holiday rescheduling.
[Maryanne Adduci]: Okay, so are you possibly gonna consider going back to weekly? I mean, I know you haven't discussed it, but are you going to consider it?
[Zac Bears]: I can't speak for anyone else, but Councilors could put on a request to change the rules if they wanted to go back or change to a regular weekly meeting. But I will just note, we've met more since the shift to the committee structure, and those meetings tend to be shorter, focused on one or two topics. They are happening. every week we're meeting, you know, at least the first 18 months of this term, we were meeting, you know, three or four times a week, you know, two to four times a week. We had more meetings this term than we did in the previous term. So it's not that we aren't meeting weekly. Yeah.
[Maryanne Adduci]: Yeah. I understand your meeting committee, but you don't have the formal council meetings, you know, every other week is scheduled unless you have to make up for a meeting.
[Zac Bears]: Right.
[Maryanne Adduci]: So, but I know voters, and other residents would like you to go back to the weekly. So I'd like you to strongly consider doing that, especially if the referendum question passes and you get 11 city councilors. That means everybody's gonna need an opportunity to speak, which will lengthen the meetings. So I think you should really consider this going forward, especially if you get 11 people on the council. Okay, thank you.
[Zac Bears]: All right, I see Ellen on Zoom. Ellen, one second, I'll unmute you. You should be able to start your video when I unmute you if you want, and you'll have three minutes. Name and address for the record, please. Oh, Ellen, we can't hear you, give me one second.
[Epstein]: Okay, I think I'm good now. Ellen Epstein, I live on Grove Street, and I just have a quick question, a procedural question, which is, can you give me some examples of why you go into executive session. I heard one mentioned earlier, like if you're talking about hiring or looking at resumes, that kind of confidentiality. But what are some other reasons you might go into executive session? Thank you.
[Zac Bears]: Sure, happy to tell you. There are a few reasons that a council can go into executive session under the open meeting law. One is to discuss reputation, character, physical condition, or mental health of an individual, or to discuss discipline dismissal. That's the first one, that section. This is Mass General Law, Chapter 30A, Section 21A. The next one is to conduct strategy sessions in preparation for negotiations with non-union personnel or to conduct collective bargaining sessions or contract negotiations. The third one is to discuss strategy with respect to collective bargaining or litigation if an open meeting may have detrimental effect on bargaining or litigating position. The fourth is to discuss the deployment of security personnel or devices or strategies with respect thereto. The fifth is to investigate charges of criminal misconduct or to consider the filing of criminal complaints. Six is to consider the purchase, exchange, lease, or value of real property if the chair declares that an open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the negotiating position of the public body. Seven is to comply with or act under the authority of any general or special law or federal grant and aid requirements. Eight is to consider interview applicants for employment or appointment by a preliminary screening committee, if the chair declares that an open meeting will have detrimental effect in obtaining qualified applicants. provided that this will not apply to any meeting, including meetings of a preliminary screening committee to consider and interview advocates who have passed a prior preliminary screening. That's the one we were talking about earlier. And then the last one is to meet or confer with a mediator as defined in section 21, 23C of chapter 233, with respect to litigation or decision on any public business within its jurisdictions involving another party group or entity. Well, there's one more, sorry. Ten is to discuss trade secrets or confidential competitively sensitive or other proprietary information provided in the course of activities conducted by a governmental body as an energy supplier under a license granted by the Department of Public Utilities. So that wouldn't be us, but actually it might be. That's a long paragraph. It might apply when a municipal aggregator determines that such disclosure will adversely affect its ability to conduct business. We do municipal energy aggregation. So potentially, if we ever had to meet to discuss a new energy aggregation contract, but those are the 10 exemptions. And then there are some other, I've timed myself off. There are some other requirements. We have to convene in an open session. Majority of members have to vote to go into executive session with a roll call vote. And the chair has to state which of those 10 reasons the body is entering executive session.
[Epstein]: But not to the public. You don't state it to the public.
[Zac Bears]: Well, you have to state which of the purposes, but not like the specifics. So you have to say we're entering it under purpose six to discuss purchase, exchange, lease, and value of real property. But we don't have to say it's for this property for this reason.
[Epstein]: Yeah. OK. Thank you very much.
[Zac Bears]: Great. Thank you. Is there anyone else who'd like to participate in public participation? Seeing one in the chamber. We'll go to the podium. Mr. Castagnetti, name and address for the record, please. And you'll have three minutes.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: Thank you, Councilor Bears, Andrew Castagnetti, Cushman Street, East Medford. Before I start, this is the second time this happened to me. I'm having problems getting on the Zoom. Out of 10 years, this is the second time I've had problems. It says to enter the meeting passcode. I don't see it on the agenda. Which link did you use? Sorry?
[Zac Bears]: Like, where are you seeing the link? Or like, what did you click to get to that screen on your screen?
[Andrew Castagnetti]: I did everything that I've done for 10 years, but now it says they want a meeting passcode. All right. It's not on this agenda as far as I can tell. But you're having people on Zoom, they got through okay, correct?
[Zac Bears]: They did, yeah.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: More than one?
[Zac Bears]: Yeah, there's at least, there's been like seven or eight tonight.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: So you know what the passcode is?
[Zac Bears]: I think it is 479095. It's at the end of the call-in number.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: With a number sign at the end?
[Zac Bears]: Yeah, so yeah, so the six numbers before the pound sign.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: Okay, I'll try that later on and I'll put the number sign in this time.
[Zac Bears]: Okay.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: Thank you.
[Zac Bears]: All right. And yeah, we'll see if we can update that. If you go to our agenda website, the MedfordMA.CivicClerk, and I think if you go to the city events calendar, when you click the link, the password is already a part of it. If you're entering just, if you're typing in this URL, then it might need another passcode. So I'll double check on that, but I think it might be an issue of how the link is getting posted.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: Thank you. All right. I appreciate your help.
[Zac Bears]: You got it.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: I have three minutes.
[Zac Bears]: I'm going to restart your time because we're talking about pass codes.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: Thank you. You're good. Sometimes your city councilors talk on world issues at the same time versus fixing up newest pothole in town. So now I am, I am talking world issue. Today is two year anniversary. October 7th, 2023, the slaughter of 1,200 Jews and non-Jews at a music festival. They took hostages. It seemed horrible as far as on the newscast, but I'm not here to blame because I wasn't there and I don't know who these characters are. So I'm not placing blame, but I feel horrible for them and the families. So I'd like to please hear my prayer. Almighty God, creator of heaven, earth, all sentient beings, and more, please get me and all of us to be and do the best that we can, now, always, forever, and ever, in our quest for eternal, blissful peace. Amen. Now, I don't have the authority to ask for a moment of silence, so I'm gonna end by saying Lastly, my Christmas wish this year is the Mideast has an everlasting peace for the first time in the last two, maybe 3,000 years, period. Thank you for your time.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you. Is there anyone either in person or on Zoom who would like to speak during public participation? Seeing none, I'm gonna close public participation. Are there any motions on the floor? The motion to adjourn by Councilor Lazzaro, seconded by Councilor Callahan. All those in favor? Opposed? Motion passes, meeting is adjourned.
|
total time: 21.81 minutes total words: 1513  |
total time: 1.24 minutes total words: 143  |
total time: 1.12 minutes total words: 108  |
total time: 1.84 minutes total words: 171  |
|
total time: 5.81 minutes total words: 154  |
total time: 2.98 minutes total words: 255  |
total time: 2.3 minutes total words: 202  |
|