[Unidentified]: don't dictate the process.
[Paulette Vartabedian]: Test 1, 2. Test 1, 2.
[Zac Bears]: Medford City Council, fourth regular meeting, February 24th, 2026, is called to order. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. Hold on. Shane's making a noise. You good? All right. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Marie Izzo]: Councilor Callahan. Present. Councilor Leming. Present. Councilor Millan. Present. Councilor Scarpelli. Present. Councilor Tseng. Present. Vice President Lazzaro. President Bears.
[Zac Bears]: Present. Seven present, none absent. Please rise to salute the flag. Just wanted to say before we get started that I received an email from a resident talking about how her neighborhood banded together to clear off her husband's wheelchair ramp during the snowstorm. And it was just a really sweet and lovely email about how neighbors can look out for each other, and stand up for each other, and come together when things are hard. And at times when there's a lot of frustration and confusion, and I'd say in some cases anger sometimes, after a snowstorm when the snow isn't where we want it to be. There's also, I just want people to remember how much our neighbors really do wanna step up and help each other out when things are difficult. And it definitely brought me a little bit of joy in the moments when I was looking out the window at a couple feet of snow. So just wanted to say that before we get started. Announcements, accolades, remembrances, reports, and records. 26-038, offered by Vice President Lazzaro and Councilor Tseng. Resolution to recognize and celebrate Black History Month. Whereas February is recognized nationwide as Black History Month, a time to honor the history, resilience, and achievements of black Americans. And whereas black Americans have shaped our nation and our commonwealth through leadership and civic life, education, labor, arts, business, science, and the ongoing pursuit of justice and equality. And whereas Medford's own history includes the longstanding black community of West Medford, whose residents have built institutions, sustained cultural traditions, and strengthened the civic life of our city across generations. And whereas Medford's early history includes the enslavement of black individuals, including those connected to the Brooks Estate, and acknowledging this history is essential to telling a full and honest story of our city. And whereas today black Americans, including immigrants and families across the African diaspora, continue to shape Medford's neighborhoods, schools, houses of worship, small businesses, arts, and public life. Whereas Black History is American history and its recognition strengthens our shared understanding of our past and our collective responsibility for a more just and inclusive future. Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Medford City Council recognizes Black History Month and celebrates the contributions of black residents past and present to the life of our city, and be it further resolved that the city recommits itself to advancing equity, opportunity, and belonging for all members of our community. Vice President Lazzaro.
[Emily Lazzaro]: Thank you. Very pleased to offer this. I was also honored to be the Medford City Council representative at the Black History Month celebration that was held right here in the chambers last weekend. And it was on President's Day. And when that event was hosted by our Office of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, run by Frances Nwaje, which was a really beautiful event, a great community event, even brought people in from other communities, and it's a great opportunity for people to come together and really appreciate and enjoy what Medford has to offer, food, celebration, our college students, our high school students, and just a great celebration of our community. And something that I mentioned during that event was that Medford has, in addition to a wealth of culture today, also has a deep well of history. And a lot of that history is a little bit uncomfortable when it relates to black Americans and our involvement, unfortunately, in the triangle trade and in slavery, and that legacy of slavery carries forward today. One of our historic buildings is the Royal House and Slave Quarters, which is now a museum. and the royal family was one of the first funders of Harvard University, really gave seed money to Harvard and allowed them to begin, and they were slaveholders, and that building, one of the buildings on that campus is, the campus of the Royal House and Slave Quarters is one of the only remaining freestanding slave quarters that is still in the Northeast, and it is a great, museum now, great way to still see what that would have looked like in the 17th century. And, you know, it's important for us to still revisit that history and understand how those people's lives were and how that legacy is carried forward now and what we can do to understand that history and how it affects us today. And we also have the slave wall. We also have the memorial at the Salem Street Burial Ground in Medford. These are things that are representative of our past. And they're not necessarily joyful, but there are ways to find joy and celebration when we understand what people in our community are able to make of an experience that was tragic in the past and is now something that has built resilience and self-belief and So, again, I was very honored to do this, and I'm very honored to be part of Medford's present and part of a community that is very strong and very present in this moment now. And just the last thing I'll say, because I've talked for too long, is that West Medford is one of the oldest continuous black communities in America and the West Medford Community Center is where my kids go to after school. And that community center has been in operation for a very long time and they just recently had a great success last year and lobbied State Department, the Department of Conservation and Recreation to build a path from the back of their center to the Duggar Park area and the river over there. And it was completed recently and it's a beautiful path and it's a great, safer way for kids and seniors to get across to basketball courts, and the river, and the walking paths over there, and the pickleball courts, and the tennis courts, and the playground. And that's because of the resilience and the grit of today's black Americans in Medford. And I'm so grateful to be able to celebrate Black History Month here in Medford every year. Thank you.
[Justin Tseng]: Thank you, Vice President Lazzaro. Councilor Tsengh. Thank you, Council President Bears. Thank you, Vice President Lazzaro, for co-sponsoring this with me as well. February is a time to honor the history, the resilience, and the achievement of black Americans, not as a separate chapter of our history, but as an essential part of it. Black history is American history, it's Massachusetts history, and it's Medford history as well. Black Americans have shaped our nation and our commonwealth and our city through leadership in civic life, in education, in labor and work, in arts, business, science, and the ongoing pursuit of justice and equality here. Here in Medford, we're home to the longstanding black community of West Medford where generations of residents have built institutions and strengthened the civic life of our city. Shiloh Baptist Church has long been a cornerstone of that work, and I want to be sure that they get the recognition as well. They helped to establish the Mystic Valley NAACP and the West Medford Community Center, organizations that contribute so much to Medford and have been pivotal in preserving and uplifting black history locally. At the same time, Medford's black community continues to grow and evolve. Black immigrants from across Africa and the Caribbean bring extraordinary energy, entrepreneurship, faith traditions, and cultural richness to our neighborhoods. They're small business experts and owners, educators, healthcare workers, artists, and public servants whose leadership strengthens our schools, our economy, and our shared sense of belonging. As Vice President Lazzaro said, recognizing Black History Month also means telling a full and honest story. Medford's early history includes the enslavement of black individuals, including those connected to the Brooks Estate and the Royal House. Acknowledging that history is not about blame, it's about truth, resilience, and about ensuring we build a more just and even joyful future together. This resolution both celebrates the contributions of black residents, past and present, and recommits us to advancing equity, opportunity, and belonging for everyone in our community. That work belongs to all of us, and I'm proud tonight that tonight we stand together to recognize Black History Month and to reaffirm our commitment to a more inclusive Medford. Thank you.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng. On the motion of Vice President Lazzaro, seconded by Councilor Tseng to approve. All those in favor? Opposed? The motion passes. 26-039 offered by Councilor Tseng and Vice President Lazzaro. Whereas Medford is home to a diverse and vibrant community representing many cultures, faith traditions, and heritages, and whereas residents across our city are celebrating Lunar New Year, marking the beginning of a new year in many East and Southeast Asian cultures and honoring themes of renewal, family, and good fortune. And whereas Muslim residents of Medford are observing Ramadan, a sacred month of fasting, prayer, reflection, and charity. And whereas many Christian residents are observing Lent, a season of reflection, sacrifice, and spiritual renewal leading to Easter. And whereas these observances enrich our city through traditions of generosity, gathering, service, and hope, be it resolved that the Medford City Council extends its warm wishes to all residents celebrating Lunar New Year, observing Ramadan, and observing Lent. And be it further resolved that the city of Medford reaffirms its commitment to being a welcoming and inclusive community where all cultures and faiths are respected and celebrated. Councilor Tseng.
[Justin Tseng]: Thank you, President Bears. We're so lucky to have three majorly important Cultural and faith, you know, events happening at the same time. Three observances that reflect the rich cultural and faith traditions represented here in Medford. One of the great strengths of our city is that so many different cultures, heritages, and faith traditions call Medford home. And in this season especially, that diversity is visible in beautiful and meaningful ways. Many of our neighbors are celebrating Lunar New Year. I know I am, my family is, marking the beginning of a new year in East and Southeastern Asian cultures, a time that is centered on renewal, on family, gratitude, and hope for good fortune in the year ahead. Certainly not limited to us, I wish that upon everyone else too, on behalf of the Asian community in Medford County. Many of our Muslim neighbors are observing Ramadan, a sacred month of fasting, prayer, reflection, and charity. It's a time that emphasizes discipline, generosity, and care for those in need. And many of our Christian neighbors are observing Lent, a season of reflection, sacrifice, and spiritual renewal leading to Easter. While these traditions are distinct, they share common values. Like I said, reflection, renewal, generosity, family, community, and hope. They remind us that even in a busy and sometimes divided world, we're connected by shared aspirations to care for one another, to strengthen our families, and to build a better future. At Medford, that diversity is not something that separates us. It's something that enriches us. It means our children grow up learning about one another's traditions. It means our neighborhoods are filled with different foods, languages, celebrations, houses of worship, different conversations about faith, values. It means that we have the opportunity every single day in this community to practice respect and understanding. This resolution simply extends our warm wishes to all residents observing these important seasons, and it reaffirms our commitment to being a welcoming and inclusive community, just like the previous resolution. A community where every culture and every faith is respected and celebrated. At a time when it can feel so easy to focus on what divides us, moments like this remind us of something deeper. That we are one community, stronger because of our differences, and united in our shared commitment to making our city a better place.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng. Vice President Lazzaro.
[Emily Lazzaro]: Thank you. Councilor Tseng put it really well. This resolution is about celebrating the diversity of Medford. We have many different faith traditions here and it's not common that Ramadan and Lent fall at the same time but I thought it was very interesting when I was explaining to my kids on Ash Wednesday because we are not, I was raised Catholic but I'm no longer a practicing Catholic. I bring my kids to Unitarian Universalist Church in Medford and They were asking me why people had ash crosses on their foreheads, and I used to do that as a kid. all the way through college, actually. And they, I was explaining to them, oh, it's the beginning of Lent when you give up something that you, that is a sacrifice for you because it brings you closer to God. And then as I was explaining it, I was like, oh, you know what, it's actually a lot like Ramadan. And actually, Ramadan is happening at the same time. That's so interesting because I remember their, have been times when Muslim friends of mine have been practicing Ramadan or observing Ramadan in the summer, and gosh, that's way harder because the days are so long. But right now, the days are shorter, and that's convenient. But it is a very similar practice where you sacrifice something for yourself, and that sacrifice and the struggle brings you some awareness of a sense of meaning and it brings you closer to God. So I thought that was a very interesting thing and when Councilor Tseng and I were talking about this resolution, that was something that I wanted to mention that there are often ways that these faith traditions and a lot of things about our human connectedness that bring us closer together rather than divide us. So I think that's something that really can come up a lot in Medford, that there are a lot of different practices that we do that are really more similar than they are different. In addition, the year of the firehorse has just begun, which is an incredibly exciting thing. It's characterized by power and drive and motivation to move forward and make progress, and I think that's a wonderful thing to celebrate and a great way to start the year and hopefully We can use that drive and power to do more than just shoveling snow off our sidewalks in the coming months. So I'm very excited about this resolution and wish the best of well wishes to everybody who's celebrating or observing these holidays. Thank you.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you. On the motion of Councilor Tseng, seconded by Vice President Lazzaro to approve. All those in favor? Opposed, the motion passes. 26-040, resolution to celebrate National Therapy Animal Day by Vice President Lazzaro. Whereas scientific research shows that interacting with therapy animals can reduce stress, relieve depression, slow heart rate, lower blood pressure, and strengthen the immune system. And whereas therapy animal teams in the city of Medford play an essential role in improving human health and well-being through the human-animal bond. and whereas therapy animal teams interact with a variety of people in our community, including veterans, seniors, patients, students, and those approaching the end of life, and whereas those exceptional therapy animals who partner with their human companions bring comfort and healing to those in need, and whereas we encourage more pet owners to consider becoming pet partners and volunteers to help our community by creating greater access to meaningful therapy animal visits. Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Medford City Council celebrate National Therapy Animal Day on April 30th. Vice President Lazzaro.
[Emily Lazzaro]: I have so many nice resolutions today, guys. This one was by request by a gentleman who lives on Mystic Street in Medford, who is the owner of a very lovely chocolate lab named Lily with soulful brown eyes, who is a therapy animal. And he does a lot of work with the National Therapy Animal Association, I think it's called, and they encourage people to sign their pets up for this kind of work. He visits prisons and rehabilitation centers and nursing homes and schools and all kinds of places where people may be experiencing difficulty, high stress, emotional problems, anything where, or physical problems. anything where it would benefit somebody to do, to relax, to experience some pleasure or joy, and therapy animals can be really, really helpful for that. So, one of the things that, um, This happens with great frequency in Medford High School. There is a therapy animal on staff, functionally, in the guidance office, I believe. And students, when they're having an emotional situation or they're going through something stressful, they get to interact with this dog who is always there and you know, I think it's a really wonderful thing and it's just, this is like an awareness raising campaign for more people to volunteer to get involved and for just the benefit of interacting with animals and this type of nature. to help people, so I just wanted to put this forward and I motion to approve.
[Zac Bears]: And the motion to approve by Vice President Lazzaro, seconded by Councilor Tseng. All those in favor? Opposed? The motion passes. Records, the records of the special joint meeting of January 21st, 2026 were passed to Councilor Leming. Councilor Leming, I also put these on for tomorrow night. We generally haven't had joint sessions where we've then had subsequent joint sessions and that's like a relatively new thing. So put them on both agendas. I think we could vote twice, but I wanted whatever your opinion is.
[Matt Leming]: Wouldn't it make more sense to table it until tomorrow night? Great.
[Zac Bears]: On the motion of Council, I'm going to table the records of the special joint meeting of January 21st, 2026 to tomorrow night's special joint meeting. Seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? The motion passes. The records of the meeting of February 3rd, 2026 were passed to Councilor Scarpelli. Councilor Scarpelli, how did you find the records?
[George Scarpelli]: I found them in order, Mr. President. Move approval.
[Zac Bears]: On the motion of Councilor Scarpelli to approve, seconded by? Seconded by Councilor Tseng. All those in favor? Opposed? The motion passes. Reports of committees 26014 and 25-149 offered by Council President Bears's Committee of the Whole, January 20th, 2026. This was Committee of the Whole with Armstrong Ambulance and we also talked about the City Clerk's position and reposting it. Is there a motion? Motion to approve by Councilor Callahan, seconded by Vice President Lazzaro. All those in favor? Opposed? Motion is approved. 25189, and it shouldn't say 25-149, offered by President Bears's Committee of the Whole, February 3rd, 2026, report to follow. We discussed the standard compensation ordinance, and I'm hoping that will come back in a couple weeks. Is there a motion? Motion approved by Councilor Tseng, seconded by. Seconded by Councilor Millan. All those in favor? Opposed? The motion passes. 26-031 offered by Vice President Lazzaro, Public Health and Community Safety Committee, February 10th, 2026. Vice President Lazzaro.
[Emily Lazzaro]: Thank you. This was a meeting where we discussed how to craft an ordinance or resolutions to the effect of trying to It was something that Councilor Callahan was looking to, can you remind me what this was about? It was, Councilor, is that okay?
[Unidentified]: Sorry.
[Anna Callahan]: No problem, thank you. Yes, it was a motion, just still at the very beginning stages, we're still working on it. basically ensure that law enforcement within the city limits of Medford will abide by the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution regarding certain seizures, and that they will also refrain from wearing masks aside from N95s and those necessary for their tactical deployments.
[Emily Lazzaro]: Thank you, yes, but it was a session in which we talked about the possibility of offering resolutions or ordinances not not a session in which we crafted an ordinance or a resolution. Motion to approve.
[Zac Bears]: Resident Services and Public Engagement Committee, February 10th, 2026, report to follow. Councilor Malauulu. Yes. One second. There you go. Thank you.
[Liz Mullane]: Yes, so we reviewed the January newsletter, which will go out shortly, as well as had a discussion about the ward meetings and what that might look like. And it was a great conversation to kind of get the ball rolling on that. And looking forward to kind of seeing how that moves on our next meeting.
[Zac Bears]: On the motion to approve by Councilor Malayne, seconded by Councilor Leming. All those in favor? Opposed? Motion passes. Hearings. We have three National Grid hearings. We'll start with 26-025, which was tabled from our last meeting. Do we have a representative from National Grid in attendance? Either in person or on Zoom. If you're on Zoom, please raise your hand on Zoom.
[SPEAKER_14]: Hi, this is Tim Williamson here from National Grid. I think Diana might be ahead of me to speak for this hearing.
[Zac Bears]: Great, thank you. All right, 26-025, petition for grant allocation, National Grid, 57 Swan Street. So we tabled this from our last meeting. And just one second here. We had a number of questions, so since we have a representative, it looks like we have Tim, or whoever wants to speak to 57 Swan Street, if you could raise your hand, and we will recognize you again. This is the petition for a joint own poll at 57 Swan Street by Massachusetts electrical company DBA National Grid. Tim, is that you?
[SPEAKER_14]: I'm sorry, I saw Diana raise her hand. I am actually here for the Boston Street Medford petition, but I might be able to answer any questions. I've worked for National Grid for a while. I don't know the specific details for this one, but I could try to answer any questions you have.
[Zac Bears]: Diana, are you here for 57 Swan Street? Or are you here for Riverside Ave?
[Diana Cuddy]: I'm sorry. Oh, I was having trouble. I mean, I'm here for Riverside app.
[Zac Bears]: Okay.
[Diana Cuddy]: The gas petition.
[Zac Bears]: So do we have anyone here for the electric petition at 57 Swan Street, Tim, I appreciate the offer. But we had a pretty extensive discussion at the last meeting. And I don't, I don't know if it's worth our time to catch you up on it.
[SPEAKER_14]: Gotcha. Yeah, if no one else is here, I don't want to waste the council's time. If I cannot answer those questions.
[Zac Bears]: All right. We have a motion from Councilor Leming to table until our next regular meeting. Seconded by, well, what I'm going to do first is I'm going to reopen the public hearing. Is there a motion to continue the public hearing to our next regular meeting? By Councilor Leming, seconded by Councilor Callahan. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion passes. All right. So, we'll go to 26037, petitioner location, grant location, National Grid, 336, 436 Riverside Avenue. One second, this is the same thing again. There we go. 26037, petition for grant allocation, National Grid, North Andover, petition for a proposed gas main replacement at 336 to 436 Riverside Ave. You're hereby notified by order of the Medford City Council, the Medford City Council hold a public hearing in the Howard F. Alden Chambers at Medford City Hall, 85 George P. Hassett Drive, Medford. On Tuesday, February 24, 2025, at 7 p.m., a link to be posted no later than Friday, January 20, 2025, on a petition by National Grid for the proposed gas main replacement at 336 to 436 Riverside Avenue. Wherefore, request that after due notice and hearing as provided by law, it be granted a location and permission to install a new gas main at 336, 436 Riverside Avenue, WO number 15483309, originally dated December 4th, 2025, and received and filed in the office of the city clerk on January 15th, 2025, and available for inspection in the office of city clerk at Medford City Hall. Following are the recommendations of the Engineering Division. Engineering Division received a petition from National Grid for installation of 1,420 feet of eight-inch plastic and 35 feet of six-inch plastic, low-pressure gas main, new low-pressure gas main in the existing Riverside Avenue in accordance with a plan set titled Proposed Gas Main Replacement, 336 to 436 Riverside Avenue. Engineering Division recommends this grant of location be approved with the following conditions. Grant of location limited to 1,420 feet of 8-inch gas main within the northern portion of Riverside Avenue. Before starting work, the contractors will notify DigSafe and obtain all applicable permits from the engineering division, including a trench permit. No other utility structures shall be adversely impacted and National Grid shall ensure that all sewer water and drain lines are marked at least 72 hours prior to the start of the project. National Grid must coordinate and butter communications with the city's director of communications. Any proposed gas main must be three feet away from public utilities and approved as-built plan and CAD files in the state plan must be on file at the engineering division at the completion of the project. All right, Diana, if you want to present anything in addition, and then we'll go to questions from councilors, and then I'll open the public hearing.
[Diana Cuddy]: No, Diana Cuddy, National Grid 170 Data Drive, Guadalupe, Massachusetts. I'm here to request the ground location for approximately a little over 1400 feet of gas main replacement to accommodate some water work to be done by the MWRA on a 48 inch water line that they have that we're basically above them. So I'm here today to request permission relocate the gas mains so the MWA can get it in and do some of their rehabilitation work. One of the nice things I just wanted to mention that because we're prompted to do this project in response to their work, this whole section of downtown Medford will have all new gas mains. So most of the side streets already have gas mains that have been replaced. And so I think that it's just a nice added bonus in a way. anyone has any questions.
[Zac Bears]: All right. Thank you. Go to Councilor Scarpelli and then Councilor Lueb and Councilor Scarpelli.
[George Scarpelli]: Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Diane, for always being here and present for us. We appreciate you. Questions I had really, I have a few resolutions on with our DPW, an engineering department, because I've received multiple phone calls from residents that are a little concerned about not just only this project, but others. I share with my councils with the question, is there an emergency that MWA is opening up the ground, or is there a gas emergency while we're opening the ground?
[Diana Cuddy]: I'm still trying to figure it out. So no gas emergency. But like I said, it's nice that this gas line will be replaced, which eliminates upcoming scheduled leaks or emergency leaks. So that's, I think, one of the nice bonuses about having us relocate this gas main and installing a new one.
[Zac Bears]: Thanks, Dana. We do have the MWRA here, and they've raised their hand. Patrick Smith.
[George Scarpelli]: Yeah, why don't we see if there's an emergency with that process. Patrick, I'll unmute you.
[SPEAKER_03]: Thank you very much. Again, my name is Patrick Smith. I'm a program manager with the MWRA. This water line that runs down through Riverside Ave, it has over the past 20 years, it's had a good probably about a dozen leaks over its time. We haven't had one recently, but back in 2019, we had three leaks actually within, I think, two months period. So it's an older steel main that is definitely need in repair. We're looking to slip line it. So we're just having, we'll have access pits. We're trying to minimize the disruption, but it's a water utility that is definitely in need of rehabilitation. And we have, National Grid in Diana to help us by moving the gas line way to the other side of the street so that we can actually perform our work.
[George Scarpelli]: Okay. Is the city engineer on, do you know? I find this being a problem because I think that I know correct me if I'm wrong, Council President, you've been, you were second to my time here, but we've always looked at projects during the winter time. that were left for emergency purposes. And it's been okay because we haven't had any major snowstorms in the past few years, so it hasn't brought up many, it hasn't had many issues come forward. But with what we had with the snowstorm a few weeks ago and now with the this past snowstorm, we're seeing what's happening when you open up the streets and put together a project at this magnitude and how it affects our neighbors and residents. And I think that's what I'm more concerned about right now is really understanding the timeline. Because what I have a resolution on, just so our partners at MWRA and National Grid, this isn't something that is really on you, but residents are really needed to know more, have more transparency and more understanding and communication from the city so our residents can prepare for any projects that are happening on not only their neighborhood, but major thoroughways. So what time of the day will this work be going to happen, if you can share that?
[Diana Cuddy]: Sure, yeah. I actually checked with the supervisor who would be scheduling that ahead of this meeting. We're in the winter moratorium now, so we're not able to pull a permit, street opening permit, to do the work. So we're hoping that if the grant allocation is approved, that we could file for the permit and start this project mid-April. And the working hours, that would be dictated by the permit from the Medford Engineering Department. whether it's night work, day work, weekend work, that kind of thing.
[Zac Bears]: Great. And are you guys sequential? So MWRA you would start after? Yes.
[SPEAKER_03]: Yes, that is correct. And we would be working closely with National Grid so that we're not falling too far behind them, but we need to make sure that they've actually performed their relocation before we start ours. But yes, we will both be scheduling this one right after the other.
[George Scarpelli]: Okay. So I think the clarity was the concern was that there was, um, this project was starting tomorrow or is done during the winter. Um, so that, that, that's a relief that start in April. Can I ask you the other question, concern that we have from our residences, how will the neighbors be informed of any inconveniences or, um, uh, parking or, uh, roadwork inconveniences that they might need to know?
[Diana Cuddy]: So ahead of the project starting, they'll receive a letter in the mail from National Grid. And it basically outlines the scope of the work. It gives the phone number for the supervisor. And it has some links for videos and things like that. They want to see how the impact will be for them. And then ahead of actually working right directly in front of their business or their home, they will be given like a door hanger that has more information about parking, the actual hours that, you know, if it's a driveway that they'll be impacted, they won't be able to, you know, get in and out. If they have an appointment or something, they'll need to park on the street during those couple of hours while they're straight directly in front of their property. And that's pretty much the twofold way that the abutters are notified.
[George Scarpelli]: Is that the same with them, Debra?
[Zac Bears]: Patrick, are you guys going to follow that same procedure with the residents?
[SPEAKER_03]: Yes, we do provide advance notice. Our public affairs group is very diligent and notifying well in advance so that we do not inconvenience or impact anybody.
[Zac Bears]: Great, Patrick. And Patrick, just so you know, we all know Fred Lasky. I know he won't be there forever. He's retiring soon. But, you know, thank you.
[George Scarpelli]: Just if we can, if we can have the contact information for those supervisors when the time comes, Diane, Tim, if we can, just to make sure that if our residents do reach out, we know who to contact. That answered all my questions, Mr. President. Thank you. Great. Thank you, Diana. Thank you.
[Diana Cuddy]: And I just wanted to add, I'm also available if anything comes up. Any questions for anyone? There will be a supervisor from National Grid and this project will most likely be done by one of our contractors. And then so the contractor supervisor is the one that will probably be on site every day, all day. And that information will also be on the butter notice.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you, Diana, for all your work. Appreciate you. Thank you, Diana. Councilor Callahan.
[Anna Callahan]: Thanks just one additional question. I assume that like part of the street will be you know you'll be tearing up part of the street and I'm just curious how much of it do you replace it. Will it be patchwork. Will it be a quarter of the street or half the street. Like what is the repair look like.
[Diana Cuddy]: So typically they just, I want to also mention there'll be a traffic management plan submitted with the permit application for the street opening permit. But with regards to construction, they usually try to minimize the amount of side or street that they'll disturb. It's usually the trench because our mains can be so shallow compared to something like the water mains and things like that. They try to just do like a two foot, three foot wide with trench. And that would go down the, the Medford Ave, and then a couple of tie-ins on the side streets. And then they would patch it in kind.
[Zac Bears]: Patrick, with your project probably being a little bit more impactful, and you guys are going second, are you guys doing some resurfacing that might also cover some of what National Grid is digging up?
[SPEAKER_03]: Yes, we are. That's also why we're going to be scheduling closely behind National Grid, because we were working with Tim McGivern, who is now the DPW director back when he was the city engineer, regarding roadway repaving, and we had agreed that with National Grid having to relocate and with our 48-inch pipeline work, that we would mill and fully overlay our length, which covers both the end grid plus another 500 feet further east. So we will be full mill and overlay Riverside Ave to the extent of our work there on Riverside Ave.
[Zac Bears]: Great. Is that going to be curb to curb or half?
[SPEAKER_03]: Yes, curb to curb. I was just going to say National Grid is moving to the north side. So we're basically on both sides of the street. So we're going curb to curb. Great news.
[Anna Callahan]: That's what I was hoping to hear. Thank you.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you. All right. That's a good chunk of road. 2000 feet of curb to curb repave. I think residents will be happy about that. All right, well, I think those are all the questions from councilors, so I'm going to open the public hearing. Folks can speak in favor or against the project. Diana, I'm guessing you're in favor.
[Diana Cuddy]: I'm in favor, yes.
[Zac Bears]: We have a couple of residents here at the podium, so we will go to the podium, name and address for the record. If you're on Zoom and you'd like to speak to this, please raise your hand on Zoom. Name and address for the record, please. You'll have three minutes.
[Nate Merritt]: This motion and the ones that you have subsequent. So just so you guys are aware, this goes from Spring Street to now what was the Budweiser MBTA area. A question I have through the chair is what is the length of time for the National Grid Construction Project? What is the duration of that time?
[Zac Bears]: Sure. Diana, could you speak to your project and Patrick to MWRA, kind of your expectations if you're able to start on April 15th?
[Diana Cuddy]: sure yep um it depends of course on the hours that we're given in the street opening permit and if it's nighttime or daytime work um but the it's going to be several weeks because um because it's just hard working on that particular street um up to 12 weeks is what they're estimating but it's not all in one spot it says they move down the street thank you
[Nate Merritt]: Yeah, so one of the concerns as a resident, right, we've got, you've got school to, you know, get kiddos to in the morning, work, so on and so forth, so even if it's during the daytime, there's no parking on Riverside Ave, so that's really not an option. That's why my ears perked up when I heard that's potentially some solution. There's no parking on Riverside Ave. There's no street parking at all. Never has been. Could you direct your comments to the chair, please? Thank you. Through the chair, but for your awareness, for folks who don't drive down that street very often, right, so that's where, how do we get in and out of driveways or is there a plan for us to park so we can, even if we have to walk on the sidewalk? When I spoke with the city engineer on this, at least for the MWRA portion, he mentioned that because it's a 48-inch water main that they'll actually have to shut down the entire street that they're working on. You won't be able to drive on one side because the trench is going to be too big. Maybe that's something that the MWRA folks could clarify and their duration of time with your time and then we'll go to your questions.
[Zac Bears]: I have the parking and how much of the streets can be shut down.
[Nate Merritt]: And otherwise, I do want to say that the gas lines have been, it's been whack-a-mole for almost a decade since I've left there. You can go see all the core samples drilled out of the pavement. Definitely want the gas lines replaced. That's a good thing. The curb cut is, I think, only an inch or two in spots. You know, some folks here remember a car jumped over the curb and threw my front yard. So I'm happy that the project is happening, but if it's going to be a year, two, three years in the making of this only during summer months, maybe it's something that you all should understand first in terms of that magnitude. Thank you.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you. All right. Diana and Patrick, could you speak to, I know Diana, you said potentially 12 weeks for your side. Patrick, if you're moving right behind them, is that, is your starting after their 12 weeks, or are you doing part of your project after they finish part of their project, and how long do you expect your part of the project will take?
[SPEAKER_03]: Well, our project actually encompasses not just Riverside Ave, but also two other locations within Medford. So we'll be scheduling as we can. The work within Riverside Ave, I believe it's over, I think, like a six to eight months period. We'd have to look back at the at the schedule. Again, as I stated, we're going to be slip lining this, so we're not doing a full trench opening of this 48-inch. So we were going to have these access pits. So there'll be areas that we'll be occupying, say, for a month at a time, a few weeks to a month. And we're going to do our best not to impact anyone. As far as getting in and out of driveways, we'll be managing that as if there are any detours required. I haven't looked at the construction zone safety plans in a while. Again, this was a project that we started back about four or five years ago and we're just bringing it back. So we need to go back and revisit that. And we had gone through Medford with the engineering department and your traffic department looking at those traffic plans. So we'll be revisiting that and we'll be sending that back to Medford for review and comment.
[Zac Bears]: Right thanks Patrick and I know we're just here for National Grid but appreciate you being here to talk about it since you're scheduling with them. Diana for the 12 weeks for your project starting in April. Could you talk about any need for shutting down the street and how residents will be able to get in and out of their driveways if there are any issues.
[Diana Cuddy]: Yep, so we actually because we're moving our gas main to the northern side of the street. We're going to be closer to the curve so we will not be shutting down the street, there will be a traffic management plan that, as I mentioned that goes in with the street opening permit application. So they'll be usually how they do it is they'll, you know, park a truck and divert the traffic around the truck to the other side of the street. There'll be most likely one or two police details there to help direct traffic, but we won't be shutting down the street.
[Zac Bears]: And if somebody, if you know, if you're doing work in front of somebody's driveway, you're giving them notice in advance. And then, you know, how long could someone expect not to have access to their driveway if you're in front of it?
[Diana Cuddy]: So it's usually only a couple of hours, maybe four at the most. And then they just keep moving along. They do notify them, as I mentioned, basically the project scope will come in the mail to all the abutters. And then they'll put a door hanger up a couple of days ahead of when they expect to be in front of someone's residence and really impacting them in that regard.
[Zac Bears]: Great. All right. Thanks, Diana. And I know Councilor Scarpelli has a resolution on for upcoming major construction projects. So, Patrick, you know, I'm sure we'll take a look at what you bring back to the city and any amendments to the traffic plan since the design and, you know, kind of the planning phase a few years ago. So, we'll be looking out for that as well.
[SPEAKER_03]: So, we'll be happily submitting.
[Zac Bears]: Great, thank you. Seeing no hands on Zoom, we'll go back to the podium. Name and address for the record, please, and you'll have three minutes.
[SPEAKER_06]: Thank you. Matthew Hare, 20 Rockwell Avenue. I was wondering if I could get a little clarification on the repaving. Will there be any repaving into the budding streets, or is it just going to be from one curb to the next, literally?
[Zac Bears]: And do you have any other questions or comments. I'm going to write them down. I just want you to get your your questions out and then we'll go to that's the only one I have. All right. Awesome. Patrick I'm guessing since you're doing the Milan overlay you might be able to answer that. Will there be. How will the abutting streets be impacted on that.
[SPEAKER_03]: Yes, it will not be just going along a straight line in Riverside Ave. It will turn into the side streets to make this uniform in all the intersections. I can't remember exactly how many feet into the side streets, but it does cover the full radius until we hit straight street.
[Zac Bears]: Okay, so the turning radius on the curb.
[SPEAKER_03]: And it may extend a little further. I just can't quite remember.
[Zac Bears]: Okay.
[SPEAKER_24]: All right.
[Zac Bears]: And we'll have more information on the MWRA piece of this as well.
[SPEAKER_24]: Okay.
[Zac Bears]: Do we have any further comments in the public hearing on this paper? Seeing none, I'm declaring the public hearing closed. Is there a motion? on the motion to approve by Councilor Callahan, seconded with the conditions from the Engineering Division by Councilor Callahan, seconded by Vice President Lazzaro. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Marie Izzo]: Councilor Callahan? Yes. Councilor Leming? Yes. Councilor Malauulu? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng, Vice President Lazzaro, President Bears.
[Zac Bears]: Yes, I'm affirmative. None the negative. The motion passes. Thank you all. And Patrick, we look forward to further information and appreciate you being here. And thank you, Diana, as always.
[Diana Cuddy]: Thank you very much. Have a nice evening.
[SPEAKER_03]: Yes, we thank the council for their time.
[Zac Bears]: Thanks. 26-041, petition for grant allocation, National Grid. This is a petition for installation of three new underground electrical manholes and corresponding six inch conduit bank in the Boston Avenue right of way in accordance with the Tufts University expansion manhole and duct system. This is a petition for permission to install three new underground electrical manholes and corresponding six inch conduit bank in Boston Avenue right of way. Following recommendations from the engineering division, that the grant of location be approved with the following conditions. The grant of location is limited to six additional six-inch conduit bank on Boston Avenue from the existing electrical manhole 655 approximately 1,100 feet westward to University Avenue as depicted on the plan. The grant of location includes three additional manholes labeled MH-6551, MH-6552, and MH-6553 within Boston Avenue. Engineering Division recommends this language revision be submitted for approval to the City Council hearing. Granted location is limited to the conduit orientation as detailed on the plans. No other utility structures, condiments, duct banks, pipes, or other pertinences are adversely impacted. National grid will ensure all sewer, water, and drain lines are marked prior to excavation. Before starting work, the contractors will notify dig safe and obtain all applicable permits from the engineering division, obtain a trench permit pursuant to section 74141 of the city ordinances. And at minimum, the trench permit application must include a traffic management plan, permanent street restoration plan and schedule for pavement marking and restoration. So we'll hear a presentation from the petitioner. Tim, I will unmute you and then we'll have questions from Councilors and then we'll go to open the public hearing. Tim, go ahead.
[SPEAKER_14]: Okay, thank you Councilors. Tim Williamson, representing National Grid at 170 Medford Street in Malden. I'm here to answer any questions regarding this petition as just described. We will be installing the new duck bank along Boston Avenue and we will be performing most of this work in the evening hours to minimize disruptions to traffic and to coordinate with ongoing Tufts University construction. I will note that this project is specifically to serve The new buildings going in at Tufts University along Boston Ave and University Ave. We will notify all residents similar to Diana described for the gas project. We'll notify them ahead of time, plus hang door knockers. Fortunately, there are very few traditional residents along this span. Tufts University owns most of the property. abutting properties. We will be doing this, we're planning to start this work after the winter digging moratorium expires in April. And we will be doing, we're planning to do center line to curb restoration as we're only disturbing the roadway from on one side closest to Tufts University. We've submitted separate permits to the MWRA water system because we'll be running adjacent to some of their existing facilities. And we'll be adhering to all of the Medford engineering department stipulations you just outlined. We will also be working with the Medford Police Department to coordinate police details, and we will be able to maintain traffic along this roadway in both directions throughout. Are there any other questions before I continue on?
[Zac Bears]: If you have anything left in your presentation, we'll go to questions once you're done.
[SPEAKER_14]: No, I think that's the most of it. I will note that once we transition up to University Ave, it becomes technically private way. University Ave is owned partly by Tufts and partly by the residents on University Ave. And even though it's outside the, technically outside the purview of the petition, we will still notify all of the residents that we'll be working adjacent to and we'll maintain access to all of their properties and maintain traffic in both directions for them as well. That's all I have unless there are any other additional questions.
[Zac Bears]: Great. Do we have any questions from members of the council on this? Councilor Scarpelli.
[George Scarpelli]: Again, Mr. President, I thank the gentleman from the National Grid, but again, I think the questions that we're having, we're receiving from the residents is really understanding the scope of these projects coming from the city and making sure our representatives from the city are informing our residents and making sure that there's someone on the other end in the city departments that they can speak to. Again it's another bigger project. I know that the petition that mentioned that it's it's mostly Tufts but it's still residents of Medford that are impacted. So again we look at another another department that's understaffed and in other communities you have clerk of the works that are actually identified and specifically posted to those positions and those jobs so residents have people that they can reach out to. And those people, the ones that are making sure that everything that are required and requested by our engineer, that it's followed through. Because I know that as we get into the summer months, you start looking at the cleanliness issues and the dust particles and many different other concerns that I'm sure residents will have so I'm sure again. Same with the last job. Tim, if we have a contact for the supervisor on site that you can share with the council, it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
[SPEAKER_14]: Certainly. This will likely be done by our local civil contractor of choice, whose worked throughout the city of Medford for the last few years. and they are also overseen by our local national grid civil supervisor and trench inspector. So they will be providing letters to the abutting residents ahead of time and the door knockers before any construction actually happens. And we'll make sure access is maintained both to University Ave and Boston Ave throughout the process. And as they progress forward, you know, they restore the roadway at least temporarily each day to maintain access to all driveways, curb cuts, openings. And then once the project is complete, we'll come back and do permanent roadway restoration. And in this case, Boston have is, you know, relatively new newly paved so we'll do full center line to curb payment restoration. And I you know one of the things I considered when we suggested network was. There's not actually many residents, households along Boston Ave. Sometimes night work can be almost more intrusive if people are trying to sleep and you have heavy construction going on in the roadway. But there's a Tufts substation and a Tufts parking garage and then the MBTA station along Boston Ave. So there's not many Apartments or houses that will be disturbed by the work and doing it at night minimizes traffic impacts on a busy roadway.
[Zac Bears]: Thanks, Tim. And thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. I just have a couple of questions. Will you be starting this in April as well? Like, what's the timeline on that?
[SPEAKER_14]: Correct. Yeah, early to mid-April. And, you know, we're only talking three manholes, 1,100 feet, probably a couple of weeks tops of construction. So we hope to wrap it up by June so we can start pulling cables and get Tufts their new electric service. Okay.
[Zac Bears]: Just want to note one other thing there. You know, I know there's not a lot of, you know, people immediately on Boston Ave, but there's a bunch of houses across the MBTA right-of-way, and they're downhill from you. And when they did the Greenland extension, they took out all the trees. So there's not nearly as much sound buffer there towards those residents. So I think that's just something for you guys to consider in terms of noise. And one other thing on the repaving. So you guys are repaving centerline to curb. And I believe Tufts had also planned a complete restoration and reconstruction of Boston Ave when their project was complete. Is what you're doing a part of that or are you just repaving your impact and then they're going to come back in and do the rest of their work?
[SPEAKER_14]: Just our impact that would be outside of their area. If the areas where Tufts is doing full roadway reconstruction, we would most likely just do a grinding overlay about four to six feet wide to restore the trench area until Tufts can come back and do full roadway reconstruction.
[Zac Bears]: Okay. And yeah, I mean, it would just be helpful to understand, you know, what the gap is going to be between when you guys are able to finish your work and when Tufts is going to do their work, just if that's going to mean that the roadway is temporarily in a less, you know, in that state.
[SPEAKER_14]: Understood I'll have to coordinate off to check with Tufts and we can coordinate that with the engineering department, but they they should be pretty close pretty short time frames Yeah, I know tough says doing some waterline work crossing to Towards the MBTA lines or I'm sorry the MWA lines and Um, so we're coordinating that, uh, roadway construction with, with the Tufts group as well.
[Zac Bears]: Great. And if you could send that through, um, either to our city clerk or coordinate with Rocco to Rico from Tufts to get that information over to the city council, as well as our engineering division, that would be great.
[SPEAKER_14]: Definitely. Yep. We've already sent all this through to the Tufts group and I believe we've also sent some information to the Manfred engineering department, but we'll make sure The engineering department has our full construction plans with profile drawings Traffic management plans restoration details everything beforehand Great.
[Zac Bears]: I'm gonna go to Vice President Lazzaro
[Emily Lazzaro]: Thank you. I just wanted to underscore what President Bears said about the night work. Our residents that are living close to where that new building is being built near Tufts I think would really appreciate it if we did not do, if there was not overnight work being done. because of the way that sound is going to travel. We've had a resident recently reach out to talk about some overnight road work that was happening in his neighborhood and I believe he described it as torture and that his house was shaking. It's really critically important that our residents don't have The equivalent of like highway nighttime road work happening on their residential streets and Boston Ave is very close to residential streets. So it's I just really want to reiterate that we not treat roads in Medford that are considered not residential streets but they're everything in Medford is close to residential streets. They really should not be treated as though they're you know, city centers or highways. And I don't think it's ever really that necessary for us to do middle of the night, bright lights, loud jackhammers, road work when people are trying to sleep at night. So if there's a way that we can, I don't know if that can be articulated specifically in the grant application, but I would feel strongly about that personally.
[SPEAKER_14]: Yes, definitely. I agree. I wouldn't want that work going on outside my window while I'm trying to sleep as well. So I'll work with our project management team and the Tufts team to coordinate as much of the work to be done during the daytime as possible. And considering we can coordinate with the local residents to adjust parking schedules, open up the parking lane, to keep traffic moving in both directions during the day and get our work done and try to do as much as possible during daytime hours and limit night work, especially as we get closer to University Ave, where the houses are.
[Diana Cuddy]: Okay, thank you.
[SPEAKER_14]: Indeed.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you. Do we have any other questions from members of the Council? Rocco, do you want to say something? Oh, I'm going to let you go. Here you go.
[Rocco DiRico]: Thank you, Zach. Yeah, just if this is the open time to speak, just wanted to speak obviously in favor of this grant of location. This is really a cutting edge project. It's fossil fuel free. It's an all electric building. It meets the state's new stretch energy code. That's why we need this work by National Grid. It's really crucial to the project. and it's gonna house 664 more students on campus. Also, just to follow up on your question before, Zach, you are correct, Mr. President, that Tufts is gonna be as part of the larger project, putting in new sidewalks, new crosswalks, new trees, and repaving Boston Ave as part of the overall dorm project.
[Zac Bears]: Great. Rocco, just one quick follow-up. So do you know about how long it's going to be between when the National Grid finishes its work and when you guys are able to start your restoration work and kind of when you expect the street restoration on your end to be complete?
[Rocco DiRico]: I don't know for sure, Mr. President, but I can follow up with the project team and get back to the council on that.
[Zac Bears]: Yeah, I think just, you know, for both of you guys coordinating between Tufts, you know, we're doing a lot more and I think it's really great coordinating these construction projects. And obviously this one's mandatory because this is only happening because of this construction, larger building construction project. But, you know, If Tufts is not planning to do its street construction restoration until spring 2027, I think, you know, for you guys on the National Grid side, if we're talking about eight months, nine months, and a winter season between when you finish your work and when Tufts is going to do its work, I think, you know, we'd rather see that center line to curb repaving so that we have that for a year. If Tufts is planning to start and finish this project by the end of the fall winter season, I think, like, that might be a different story. But I just think the longer the gap is between those two projects, the more essential it is that as much as possible of your guys' work on the National Grid gets repaved for travel safety and street safety and the next winter season, which we hope will not be like this winter.
[SPEAKER_14]: Understood.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you. All right. I'm going to open the public hearing to people for, against or otherwise. Rocco, I heard you as being in favor. Tim, are you, I'm assuming you're in favor.
[SPEAKER_14]: I am in favor. Thank you.
[Zac Bears]: All right, is there anyone in the chamber who'd like to speak on this during the public hearing? Or if you'd like to speak to this on Zoom, you can raise your hand. Judith, I see you. Anyone in the chamber who'd like to speak on this item? Seeing none, recognize Judith Weinstock for three minutes. Name and address for the record, please.
[Judith Weinstock]: Hi Judith Weinstock, 144 Brigette. I know Rocco quite well, and so I know that Tufts will also inform neighbors. There's a monthly construction update, and it is true if you look at the map, it does look like there are not many homes along Boston Ave, but the downside area off the hill really does echo every single noise, the project that goes on on Boston Avenue. So just, I'm just letting folks, reminding folks of that the way Zach did. And I know that Rocco, you'll have the opportunity at one of the monthly meetings to talk about it, but I'm wondering if National Grid can also be sort of shown who the proximal downside hillside neighbors are, and maybe they can hang tag them to let them know if night work is gonna go on. That's all.
[SPEAKER_14]: Hi, did you say Burgett Avenue?
[Judith Weinstock]: It's Birgit, it's Charnwood. Rocco knows actually really, right Rocco? I mean, you have the specifics.
[Unidentified]: Yeah.
[Judith Weinstock]: Yeah. You know, who'd be mostly affected and you're closer to the project. So yeah, it just, I think it would be great if they knew a day or two ahead that if any night work, we're going to be done. Yeah.
[SPEAKER_14]: Yeah, definitely. I'll note that down.
[Judith Weinstock]: It's Bergen, it's Charnwood, it's Brookings. There's maybe one or two other things there, Rocco, you can help inform, I'm sure.
[SPEAKER_14]: Yeah, being on the other side of the tracks, I didn't have you on my list of notifications, so I will add that and I will specifically ask that we try to limit night work to minimize those impacts as well.
[Judith Weinstock]: I'm sure those folks that really abut the tracks there will really appreciate that, so thank you.
[SPEAKER_14]: For sure. Thank you for your comments.
[Zac Bears]: All right. Thank you all. And I appreciate this is a way for us to coordinate and get that out there. And just thank you to everybody. I know this has been a lot of communication and collaboration and it seems like that has been going okay for this project. So thank you for being here. I see no other comments in this public hearing, so I'm going to declare the public hearing closed. Is there a motion? On the motion to approve by Councilor Callahan, seconded by? With the conditions from the engineering division, yes. Seconded by Councilor Tseng. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Marie Izzo]: Councilor Callahan? Yes. Councilor Levin? Yes. Councilor Millenni? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng? Yes. Vice President Lazzaro? Yes. President Bears?
[Zac Bears]: Yes. So the affirmative and the negative, the motion passes. Thank you all. Thanks for answering those questions and making some adjustments. It's much appreciated. Petitions, presentations, and similar papers. 26030, petition for a common vixer's license, Lighthouse Cafe. We have a license transfer here certifying a common vixer's license for the Royal King Corporation DBA Lighthouse Cafe, 16 High Street, Medford, Massachusetts. License expiring 12-31-2026. Hours of operation, 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. Monday through Sunday. Do we have a representative from Lighthouse Cafe here? Awesome. If you could come to the podium and just share what you guys are going to be up to at Lighthouse Cafe, and we'll have some questions, and then we'll move ahead.
[SPEAKER_13]: Sure. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We're going to be taking over the Lighthouse Cafe. We're not changing any menus and any decorations for now. In the future, if we wish to do it, we obviously will get the permit from the city and we'll do it in future, maybe next year. So for now, we're just going to do the same menu, same hour of operation. Actually, update on the hour of operation. I don't know if there's a typo or one of them says Monday 6 a.m. to 10 a.m. That must be a typo. And also on the address, when I verified the address, it was supposed to be 20 High Street. It came up at 16 High Street. I don't know if it's the 16, the whole house, yeah, right? It's the lower number, yeah, that comes up on here. Okay.
[Zac Bears]: All right.
[SPEAKER_13]: So that's all.
[Zac Bears]: All right. So Mondays, you'll have the option to be 6 a.m. to 10 p.m.
[SPEAKER_13]: Yes.
[Zac Bears]: All right.
[SPEAKER_13]: We'll get that corrected.
[Zac Bears]: All right. Great. Do we have any questions for the representative from Lighthouse Cafe? All right, seeing none, is there a motion? On the motion approved by Vice President Lazzaro, seconded by Councilor Tseng. All those in favor? Actually, we should vote on it. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. Thank you.
[Marie Izzo]: Councilor Callahan? Yes. Councilor Leming? Yes. Councilor Malauulu? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng? Yes. Vice President Lazzaro? Yes. President Pierce?
[Zac Bears]: Yes, I'm in the affirmative, none the negative, the motion passes. Thanks, you guys. You're good. You can stay for the rest if you want. You can stay for the rest of the meeting if you want, but you don't have to. Thanks. 26042 submitted by the city clerk, petition for common victors license Chicago scoops LLC DBA Coldstone Creamery. So we have location 61 Station Landing, Medford MA, City of Medford license, common victors license expiring December 31st, 2026. Hours of operation, 11 a.m. to 9 p.m., Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and then Friday, Saturday, Sunday, 11 a.m. to 10 p.m., and otherwise, notifying the city clerk on location ownership or name change, adhering to the ordinances, et cetera. Do we have a representative here from Coldstone? All right. And Chicago Scoops LLC. If you could speak to the project and what's going on here, and then we'll go to questions.
[SPEAKER_11]: Yes, President. So Chicago Scoops LLC is actually the current owner. Are we going to be the Scopology LLC doing business as Coldstone? So that's not going to change. So Coldstone, as you might be aware, is a franchisee. So we're just taking over the franchisee. We are not operating as an individual restaurant or anything. So the menu, everything's going to remain exactly the same. If there are any changes in the future, we'll contact you guys, get your approval, and move on with that.
[Zac Bears]: Just two questions, are the hours changing at all?
[SPEAKER_11]: Yes, sir. So the request we have put in right now is 11 a.m. to 11 p.m.
[SPEAKER_24]: Okay.
[SPEAKER_11]: And that's more for the summertime, right, but we want to get the approval from the council at this point and address any questions that the council might have. Essentially, we're going to be operating right now from 11 to 10 p.m., and then during the summer hours, we'll move to 11 p.m. We also have another franchisee location, so we'll make sure that we adhere to, if we hire any kids, we'll make sure that if it's a school night, they get out on time, or we will take care of all the loss.
[Zac Bears]: Okay. And sorry, you said that Chicago Scoops LLC is the current owner.
[SPEAKER_11]: Yes, sir.
[Zac Bears]: And what's your name? Scoopology LLC. Okay. Give me one second to confer here with our city clerk. Vice President Lazzaro, I'll let you ask a question in the meantime.
[Emily Lazzaro]: I actually don't have a question. I'm just supportive of staying open later in the summer or at any time as an ice cream place, especially because when you're a high school child, high school aged child, and you can't go to parties and you don't want to be drinking, a great thing to do is go out for ice cream and you want to stay out as late as possible. And I think staying open until 11 is a wonderful thing to do because then kids can go out late to an ice cream shop. So I support it. And I think we should allow more businesses in Medford to stay open later because it's good for revenue and it's good for the city and I'm supportive of this idea. That's all. Should I vamp?
[Zac Bears]: One second, if you want to. We love ice cream. Thank you for selling ice cream to people. We're just double-checking here. We have the Scoopology thing here in the system. OK, yeah, the application you put in has the 11 to 9, not the 11 to 11.
[SPEAKER_11]: It might be mistake president. We can resubmit that we can operate with 11 to 9 right now and.
[Zac Bears]: You don't need a special vote of any kind to operate until 11 anyway. It's just like what's in your license. You know, you don't, there's not an extra threshold until we're starting to talk about after 11. So we could amend this here on the floor to read until 11 if that would be your preference.
[SPEAKER_11]: Yes, sir. Thank you so much.
[Zac Bears]: Do we have any questions from Councilors or any objections to having this until 11 p.m.? ? Yeah. Is that so 11 to 11 every day?
[SPEAKER_11]: Yes, sir.
[Zac Bears]: And then if you want to be shorter than that, that's your discretion. It's just not limited here.
[SPEAKER_11]: Yeah, we like to be consistent so people don't have to go to Somerville or other towns.
[Zac Bears]: Okay. All right. So this would be amended to 11 a.m. to 11 p.m. Monday through Sunday. All right. Is there a motion on the floor to approve as amended? On the motion to approve as amended by Vice President Lazzaro, seconded by Councilor Mullane. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Marie Izzo]: Councilor Callahan? Yes. Councilor Leming? Yes. Councilor Mullane? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng? Yes. Vice President Lazzaro? Yes. President Bears.
[Zac Bears]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, none in the negative. The motion passes. Thank you. Good luck. Motions, orders, and resolutions. 26-043 offered by Councilor Scarpelli, President Bears, and Councilor Tseng. Resolution to request comprehensive litigation reports since January 2019, quarterly litigation status reports, and independent review of litigation. This one is a barn burner. Whereas the Medford City Council has a duty to the residents and taxpayers of Medford to ensure that public funds expended on legal matters, including litigation events, settlements, judgments, and outside council fees are accounted for transparently and managed prudently. And whereas a review of publicly available records maintained by the Department of Labor Relations It reveals a dramatic and unprecedented increase in unfair labor practice charges filed against the city of Medford. Specifically, during the period of 2011 through 2019, a total of 22 unfair labor practice charges were filed against the city, an average of 2.75 per year. Whereas during the period 2020 through 2024, a total of 74 unfair labor practice charges were filed against the city, an average of 18.5 per year, representing a 573% increase. And whereas the Department of Labor Relations found on July 30th, 2025, in MUP-22-9436, City of Medford versus Medford Firefighters IAFF Local 1032, that the City violated Mass. General Law, Chapter 150E, Section 10A.5 by refusing to hold grievance hearings as required under the Collective Bargaining Agreement, constituting a repudiation of contractual grievance procedure, and whereas a review of publicly available decisions of the Massachusetts Civil Service Commission reveals that during the period 2011 through 2019, a total of nine civil service actions were filed involving the City of Medford, an average of 1.125 per year, whereas during the period of 2020 through 2024, six civil service actions were filed, an average of 1.5 per year, a 33% increase, including cases involving police appointment bypass, fire lieutenant promotion disputes, and other personnel actions. and whereas a review of publicly available decisions of the Massachusetts Housing Appeals Committee reveals that during the period of 2011 through 2019, zero affordable housing appeals were filed against the city of Medford, whereas during the period 2020 through 2024, two such appeals were filed, specifically Zoning Board of Appeals versus D.I.V. Fellsway LLC, number 2020-07, in which the city asserted a Chapter 40B safe harbor defense regarding a proposed 278 unit development at 970 Fellsway and the Housing Appeals Committee issued an interlocutory decision on October 10th, 2023, finding that the city had not met the 1.5% general and area minimum threshold. rejecting the Zoning Board of Appeals land area calculations, and B, ZBA versus MVP Mystic LLC, number 2020-06, a companion Chapter 40B case that was settled on June 24, 2022, when the city withdrew its safe harbor claim. And whereas a review of publicly available federal court dockets reveals multiple lawsuits filed against the city and the United States District Court, for the District of Massachusetts since 2019, including but not limited to Ayala et al. v. City of Medford, Fair Labor Standards, Fargo et al. v. City of Medford, Fair Labor Standards, Benjamin v. City of Medford, Guendolfo v. City of Medford, and its police department, Prisoner Civil Rights. And whereas IAFF Local 1032 filed a class action lawsuit in Middlesex Superior Court in March 2024, Buckley versus Lungo-Koehn, for failure to issue payment of contractual benefits under the collective bargaining agreement, including 2.5% raises for 2021 and 2022, 3% for 2023, and COVID-19 hazard pay, representing potentially significant financial exposure to the city, and whereas the cumulative data across multiple forums, A 573% increase in unfair labor practice charges, a 33% increase in civil service actions, the emergence of housing appeals where none previously existed, multiple federal wage and hour lawsuits, and ongoing labor disputes with both the Firefighters Union and the Teamsters, demonstrating a pattern of escalating legal conflict that warrants council scrutiny. And whereas the cost associated with defending these matters, including fees paid to outside council, settlement payments, judgments, retroactive pay obligations, and the diversion of staff time and municipal resources are borne entirely by Medford taxpayers and reduce funds available for essential municipal services, and whereas the City Council does not currently receive regular comprehensive reports on pending and resolved litigation, associated costs, or financial exposure, limiting the Council's ability to fulfill its fiduciary and oversight responsibilities, And whereas transparency in municipal litigation is a recognized best practice endorsed by the Government Finance Officers Association, the International City-County Management Association, and the Massachusetts Division of Local Services. And whereas the residents and taxpayers of the City of Medford are entitled to know how their tax dollars are being spent on legal matters and whether the City's litigation posture is fiscally prudent and consistent with some municipal governance. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Medford City Council that we request the City Solicitor and the Law Department in coordination with the Mayor's Office and the Finance Department prepare and deliver to the City Council within 60 days of the adoption of this resolution a comprehensive litigation report covering the period from January 1st, 2019 to the present. which shall include one, or sorry, A, a complete list of all lawsuits, claims, administrative proceedings, arbitrations, and other legal actions in which the city of Medford was or is a named party, whether as a plaintiff, defendant, respondent, or intervener, and any court, tribunal, or administrative body, including but not limited to United States District Court, Massachusetts Superior Court, District Court, and Land Court, Massachusetts Appeals Court, and Supreme Judicial Court, Civil Service Commission, Department of Labor Relations, Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination, Housing Appeals Committee, State Ethics Commission, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and any other federal, state, or local forum. For each matter, the case name, docket, or case number, forum, date filed, nature of claims, current status, pending, settled, dismissed, adjudicated, and outcome, if resolved, C, total legal costs associated with each matter including but not limited to fees paid to outside counsel identified by firm name and total amount per firm, expert witness fees, court costs, mediation and arbitration fees and any other litigation related expenditures. D, total settlement payments, judgments, awards and other monetary dispositions paid by the city identified by matter, the funding source for each litigation related expenditure, general fund appropriation, insurance recovery, reserve fund transfer or other. F, an estimate of the city's current aggregate financial exposure from all pending litigation. G, a summary of insurance coverage applicable to litigation matters, including carrier name, policy limits, deductibles, or self-insured retentions, and claims history. Be it further resolved that the beginning in the first quarter following the adoption of this resolution and continuing quarterly thereafter, the city solicitor shall provide the city council with a quarterly litigation status report to be delivered no later than 30 days after the close of each calendar quarter, which shall include A, a list of all new lawsuits, claims, or administrative proceedings filed by or against the city during the quarter. B, a list of all matters resolved during the quarter, including the nature of the resolution and any monetary payments made or received. C, an updated summary of all pending matters and their current status. D, total litigation-related expenditures for the quarter broken down by outside council fees, settlements, and other costs. And E, year-to-date cumulative litigation expenditures compared to the budgeted amount for the fiscal year. Be it further resolved that the city council hereby directs the finance director to include as a discrete line item or a schedule in the city's annual budget submission beginning with the next fiscal year budget cycle, a detailed accounting of all litigation related expenditures for the prior fiscal year and projected litigation costs for the upcoming fiscal year categorized by a type of claim, forum, and outside council engagement. We had further resolved that the City Council request that the Mayor authorize an independent review of the City's litigation costs, practices, and risk management procedures for the period January 1, 2019 through the present to be conducted by a qualified independent auditor, municipal finance consultant, or law firm with experience in municipal risk management that does not currently represent or contract with the City of Medford, and that such review shall A, evaluate total litigation costs relative to comparable Massachusetts municipalities of similar size and demographics. B, assess whether the volume and nature of labor relations disputes, unfair labor practice charges, and civil service appeals indicate systemic deficiencies in the city's human resources, labor relations, or management practices. C, review the city's use of outside counsel, including the process for selecting, retaining, and overseeing outside legal services, and whether such engagements are cost-effective and competitively procured. D, evaluate the adequacy of the city's risk management and loss prevention practices, including whether the city maintains appropriate insurance coverage and whether claims management procedures are consistent with best practices. And E, provide recommendations for reducing the city's litigation exposure, improving labor relations outcomes, and strengthening internal controls to minimize avoidable legal costs. Be it further resolved that nothing in this resolution shall be construed to require the disclosure of information protected by attorney-client privilege or work product doctrine, provided, however, that the city solicitor shall make every reasonable effort to provide the information requested herein in a manner that maximizes transparency while preserving applicable legal privileges, and that any claim of privilege shall be asserted on a matter-by-matter basis with a specific explanation of the basis for withholding. We had further resolved that the comprehensive litigation report, all quarterly litigation status reports, and the independent review report, once delivered to the City Council, shall be made available to the public on the City's website and maintained as public records in accordance with Mass. General Law, Chapter 66, Section 10. We had further resolved that the City Solicitor shall appear before the City Council or a committee thereof designated by the Council President to present the comprehensive litigation report and respond to questions from council members regarding the city's litigation posture, cost, and risk exposure. Be it further resolved that copies of this resolution shall be transmitted to the mayor, the city solicitor, the finance director, and the city clerk and that this resolution shall take effect upon adoption. All right. That was long and detailed and important. I'm going to go to Councilor Scarpelli and Councilor Tseng as my co-sponsors and then to my fellow councilors. Councilor Scarpelli.
[George Scarpelli]: Thank you, Council President. I know people giggle because we're at that point in this administration's tenure that, for one, Councilor, I've been standing on a soapbox crying and pleading to get real numbers so we could be educated in our fiscal responsibilities to make sure that our monies are going to to the necessities that we should have every day as residents of the city. We're crying that we don't have enough money and we're in trouble that we don't have enough staffing and we get to a point where we have to file for an override. And as we move forward, you're realizing something daunting and something frightening is that the fact that this administration and this mayor for the last four years has led us down a path that is costing us hundreds, thousands, if not millions. In the last four years of the mayor's administration, we haven't had a city solicitor, a stable city solicitor for many, many years now. We see that when we did have a city solicitor, we knew that the smaller claims were being taken care of in-house, which saved us thousands of dollars. But I know that this is winded, and Councilor Bears had to read it out because I think this administration has to know exactly what we need so we can get the information to our residents, and then we can make decisions as city councilors to where Our monies need to go. Remember, we're in charge of the budget when it comes to either moving it forward or voting it down. And the mayor has been funny. For years, I've been asking for a breakdown. And they come up and they say, no, the line item is X. And we are here. And look at other communities, what they spend. And we are on power or under. And then Councilor Bears and I would fight, and we would go back and forth. I remember Council President, and then we realized something. He's not wrong. Council President wasn't wrong. The line item that the mayor presented is correct. It fell in that timeline, felt in that fiscal criteria. But what we're seeing is that We're losing a lot of money, and we need to know where we're losing money. And then as we've gone through our research, and it's pretty intense research, as you bring this forward and put it all on the table, when you hear it, it's long, and you want to giggle because it's so long, but it's really something we need to really take ownership of this council and make sure we, as fiduciaries, that we make sure that we understand where the money's going for this community. When you look at the lawsuits that have been settled, and you see the lawsuits that are out there, and you see the path that the mayor has gone down, especially in the last couple months, when you see the impact of the ambulance contract as a very blatant point, that really brought this to fruition for me was that we realized that you had one company A was providing this service, and then company B was providing the same service. What we heard and what we all received in our packet is a request now of, I believe, $188,000 requesting funding back to the Armstrong Ambulance Company because the city has not fulfilled their requirement for the money that the mayor did not request correctly. And then we see different contracts that we're seeing that are hurting our community. You see the 40B projects, which held up affordable housing in this community that's needed, the increase in tax base, which is definitely needed, the income that would have come forth through permits. You see the money that we've lost. and valuable time, and we've seen developers that have gone and run away from Method because of these lawsuits. This type of hatred, and I say hatred because it's blatant that it's union-based. It's blatant that the mayor is attacking our workforce. You look at our employees in the city. You see how hard they're working. The numbers are down. Morale is down. HR has divided them. But they're still trying to work hard and trying to pull through, push for us. And I think that's impressive. But we are losing so much money because of, it seems to me, a more personal and ego-driven, narcissistic focus. And we need to get the numbers so we can understand where we're going tomorrow and where we were yesterday, because there is a lot of money that has gone out this door. Something that I would also ask, Mr. President, if I can, when we ask for a report from outside counsel, one thing I'd like to see is the breakdown of what that outside counsel is being paid for. Because what we're hearing more and more often is that Our workforce are being followed by private investigators. But we don't see that in the line. You don't see Magnum PI line item for $10,000. Somebody's paying those private investigators that are chasing our employees around, trying to find something. And that's sick. Because most of the time, from what we're hearing and seeing, is that a lot of these cases, the city loses. We have to pay our legal team. Then we have to pay their legal team. Then we have to pay the settlement. Then we have to pay these private investigators and so on and so forth. I think it's time that this council gets a true picture of what is happening in this city when it comes to the finances that are being wasted on trivial lawsuits. The other piece that we have to talk about is also asking and getting an update and where our insurance premiums have gone from 2019 to present. Because what we're hearing is a lot of these lawsuits are being paid out by our insurance companies. That's why we have insurance. Well, that's not that simple. When we're paying out hundreds of thousands of dollars in lawsuits, with through our insurance companies. That means our premiums are going to, uh, to increase. And I think we need to get a better understanding with that, too, Mr. President. Again, this was when this was a very long resolution, but it's it's something that we need answers and we need some guidance because we'll give the time allotted that we know it's a lot to ask for. But I think this council realizes when I ask for an audit, and maybe my council didn't believe that was needed, but this is the exact reason why I want an audit. Not for the fact that we're saying that someone's stealing something or something illegal is going on. But when you're seeing the mismanagement of funds to the levels that we're seeing, with the loss of revenue that we were we were getting from Armstrong Ambulance, for instance, the questions that we have with our contracted services, and how many contracts we're hearing that aren't in compliance today. When we see the monies that are leaving the city because of lawsuits and settlements, when you see us fighting 40B projects, which you can't beat, you can't win, 40B projects, 40Bs were created to support the mission, which is helping affordable housing. What we're seeing now is the mayor losing that and then filing appeals, knowing you're going to lose again. So it's going to be interesting to see where the funding is going and how much money this city has wasted. and fighting personal vendetta, as it seems. And again, Mr. President, I know it was KP law. We've had a city solicitor. Then it's KP law. And we has anybody seen an actual month to month recently? Has anyone? So that's when normal communities, councils, you get a budget. And every month, you get the breakdown of where we're spending money on a month-to-month basis. We used to get it once in a while. And they used to read through and used to go down the column on the right and say, KP law, KP law, KP law. And they used to highlight it. And it was great, because in the school department, they would have KP law. In the fire line, it would have KP law. In this department, you have KP law. But in the law line, it still fell into that budget line. So we were seeing where the money was going. So we know hundreds of thousands of millions of dollars have gone out the door to KP Law. But from what I gather now, we now have another law firm that the city is using. From what I gather from our workforce that is going to these legal hearings is that these law firms are coming in with teams of two, three, four attorneys. And I'm sure they're not saying, we're only gonna charge it for one attorney. So it's imperative that we get these numbers, because I will wait for the period, but then if we do not get these numbers, I will ask my colleagues. Again, to vote for an audit, an outside audit to come in, to look at situations exactly like this, look at situations exactly what's happening with the money we lost to Armstrong Ambulance, look at the funding with the trash contracts, look at these other contracts that are falling off and seeing where we've lost money and why we're in such dire straits other than the climate that we're in. Because there is something amiss here. And I've been saying this for years now. The mismanagement of this community's finances are frightening. And this information that was gathered, this information that was put down, and then was read by my council president, thankfully, it should speak volumes. I know a lot of people tune out in the first two minutes, but read it. Look at the numbers from when this mayor took office, and look at who she hurts, and look at who she attacks, and look how much money it's costing us. Because it's going to be important as we move forward, especially in this budget season. Because if I don't get these numbers, I will, for one, will not support any budget that this mayor creates to come to this podium and ask for my support. I can't do it. So thank you, Mr. President. So again, I would ask for those pieces also be added in, that we get the breakdown of the law firms and break their invoices down for any private investigators that are paid out through those law offices, and then Ask for an update on insurance premiums, where it was in 2019, where we are today. And then if I can make an amendment to while we're here, because I know that we've been asking the city solicitor's office, city solicitor office, well, we don't have a city solicitor again. So one, if we can get an update and where we are when it comes to the hiring of a city solicitor. And two, who is going to report to us in place of the city solicitor. I know that our friend that is running that office today, it would be just unfair for her to do that. So thank you, Mr. President.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. And Councilor Hangiff, if I may, just before you go, you know, we're a long way from 2024 here, and I think Something that got lost in those debates in 2024 was that two things can be true at the same time. And we spent a lot of time, Councilor Schiappale and I, and many of us going back and forth and saying, we were making an argument around the structural deficit and the structural issues that cities and towns across the commonwealth are facing when it comes to our finances. And instead of having the conversation about is the city's litigation approach the right approach, what's the fiscal impact of management decisions like that, instead it was if you're saying that, that means that you don't believe in the structural deficit. And I don't think that that was ever true. And I think we, for years now, have been put in this situation where we felt, I'll speak for myself, I felt the need to defend decisions made by the administration to avoid the appearance that, basically to justify that the larger structural question of being an underfunded city is true. And I think it's actually true that you can be an underfunded city and bad decisions can be happening, right? And that's where we're coming to here. You know, as Councilor Scarpelli noted, right, you look at the top lines of the budget and it seems like the law department is under budget, but then there's other places where legal expenses are happening or settlements are being paid out through insurance and that's going to affect us in the future or more claims are being filed, that kind of thing. But I think the larger point here is Even if none of these lawsuits ever happened and nothing was going on, the city wouldn't have saved enough money to address the fact that we're facing 30 or 40 years of underfunding. But when we talk about excellence and accountability and making sure that people believe in government, it's a lot harder to make the case about underfunding and structural deficits when there's other stuff that's happening that makes people think, well, what are they doing with that money anyway? Right and that's that's the issue here you know. Two years ago, I looked at the numbers and I said, well, they make sense, right? And I trusted in the information that was being presented to us and that is being presented to the community. And in 2025, we hired a city solicitor and it wasn't the most, I didn't agree with him on everything, but we had someone in that office and we were building a working relationship. And then right as his probationary period is coming up, he's gone. And now we're back to this situation that we were in for years, where there's no city solicitor who's representing the city. We're back to outside legal counsel, racking up outside legal fees, like we have to go to them every time for one-on-one things, and communications get missed, and there's more lawsuits, and there's more issues, and there's more claims. And I don't feel the same way that I felt two years ago, that I have the trust and faith that the right decisions are being made when it comes to litigation. You know, Councilor Scarpella uses the word audit, I would use a different word, independent review, bring in an expert, look at what's going on. Is this happening in any other city in Massachusetts? Is this the way that any other city in Massachusetts is approaching legal expenses and litigation. Is this what labor relations looks like in any other city in Massachusetts, right? And I don't think that means we didn't need an override. And I don't think that means we don't have a structural deficit and we don't have underfunding. But it's a lot harder to make the case on the facts around the budget and structural deficits and really funding our city, supporting our workers, doing the things we need to do as a city, when other decisions and other operations and litigation is happening that undermines trust and faith that people have in their government. And we have big decisions coming up, right? There was a faith issue and a trust issue, and that's why we don't have a new fire station under construction right now. And we're going through an MSBA project that's going to be the biggest thing we've done in 50 years, and we need a new high school. And we can't have trust and faith issues. We need people to understand that that process is going well, that yes, it's a major investment, but that we need to do it. And if there's other things going on around litigation and questions being raised about our expenses and another year without a city solicitor, it's going to be harder to convince some people to do big things. And so, I appreciate being able to work together. I think that these questions that are being asked here, the data that we're seeing demand that we ask these questions. And I want to see the answers. I want to understand what the impact is. And, you know, maybe when you lay all the facts out, it doesn't look great, but at least the facts are out there. And I don't feel like I have to go digging into line items to try to justify and defend practices that I never even had a role in, right? That's another thing that this council has been put in a really bad position, is defending decisions that we didn't have any voice in because we're trying to keep faith. We're trying to maintain trust, we're trying to make sure that people believe that government And city government is doing its best and trying to solve big problems. So I hope that we can get answers that show what's happened. I hope we can get an independent review that shows how we should be acting differently. And I appreciate that we're working together across that issue because, again, two things can be true at once. The city needs more funding. Our departments need more staff. We have structural deficits. And from all the evidence in front of me, this city's approach to litigation and labor relations is not one that brings trust and that is the most fiscally responsible, and not one that I'm seeing modeled in any other city here in Massachusetts. So I want these answers, and I'm glad that we're working together to find them. Councilor Tseng.
[Justin Tseng]: Thank you. I wanted to thank you two for your words and for putting together this, you know, very resourced resolution and, you know, having me, inviting me to look at it and co-sponsor. There are a lot of words in this resolution. There are a lot of words that have been said and I think are on the dot. But I think underneath all of what we're saying is we need more oversight. Residents trust us with their tax dollars, their schools, their streets. And with that trust comes a responsibility to understand the full financial picture of our city. And over the last few years, as this resolution shows, the volume of litigation facing Medford has increased. We see lawsuits, labor filings, administrative matters. And these are a part of governing as a complex and growing city. It's not unusual for disagreements to happen. But what does matter and what is unusual in the volume is how we manage the situation. Right now, our council doesn't receive regular comprehensive reporting on the total scope of our litigation exposure, what we're spending, what's pending, how it affects long-term planning. We know lawyers are expensive, but what we can't do is stand by instead of finding ways to reduce costs for our city. And this idea has real implications, like Councilor Scarpelli and like President Bears was just saying, we need to build trust. Every dollar we spend on prolonged legal conflicts is a dollar that we can't spend fixing our structural deficit, investing somewhere else in classrooms and road repairs and safer streets and services our residents rely on. And in some cases, we're worried that the city's position in the lawsuits are positions that are, that have inhibited revenue growth in the city. We've worked hard to make meaningful investments in this community over the last few years. And protecting that progress and building the trust that we need in our community to tackle systemic underfunding and to take on big projects like a new high school requires clarity and it requires discipline. Strong cities are built on strong working relationships. When disputes escalate and linger, they also consume time and resources and energy. They create uncertainty for the families of those who work in the city. They strain the very systems we depend on to deliver services. And like Councilor Scarpelli said, Morale is low, and too many workers have told us that they don't feel heard or appreciated. If better reporting helps us identify patterns, strengthen internal processes, and resolve issues earlier and more constructively, that benefits the entire city, from the people doing the work every day to the residents they serve. Something that has been said in the city council, and it's not original, but it's been said recently a lot, is that sunlight is the best disinfectant. Transparency builds trust. If our practices are prudent and necessary, regular reporting will show that. If there are opportunities to improve coordination or risk management, this gives us the information to do that thoughtfully and responsibly. I actually find this resolution pretty measured. It protects attorney-client privilege. It asks for a comprehensive report, quarterly updates, and an independent review of litigation costs and practices. These are tools that support stability and accountability in any well-run organization. Oversight and good management go hand in hand, and trust comes with verification. I believe that our shared goal on the city council and in the city writ large is a financially stable city, a strong and respectful working relationships, and a government that residents can feel confident in. I think this resolution is a step towards that.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng. Councilor Molina, I saw you earlier. Do you still want to go?
[Liz Mullane]: What I wanted to kind of follow up is, A, to thank you for putting this all together as someone who's kind of obviously new to the council, but seeing some of these things ad hoc, some of these different lawsuits, actually seeing it laid out in this manner of the increase of what's happened since 2019, the different areas in which you've been impacted with it, it was really eye-opening to see it all put together in this way, so I appreciate that it's highlighted in that way. But I also definitely agree about trying to have that budget line put together so that we can actually see what that overarching impact is. And I had originally put it on to Councilor Scarpelli when you said the insurance premiums. That was something that pops in my head and also. You know, what are we going to do without a city solicitor and having someone come up and be able to present this information as well. I think being able to get a better sense of when we're going to see or know or hear anything about a new city solicitor which seems to be obviously as this has been outlined. pretty impactful position for all of us, I think is also really important. So I just appreciate all three of you putting this together, the depth of which it took of putting this information all in one place, because I think it's important not only for us, but certainly for the residents to see exactly where some of this money is going towards, and we need to figure out how we can really address this moving forward and have a better sense of what is actually happening with a lot of these different litigations. So, thank you.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Malauulu. Any further comments or questions by members of the Council on this paper? Seeing none, we'll go to public participation. We have two hands on Zoom. Looks like we have at least one or two people in the chamber, so we'll start in the chamber, and we'll alternate between the chamber and Zoom. Go to the podium, name and address for the record, please. You have three minutes.
[Steven South]: Good evening. Thank you, Councilor, President Bears. Thank you to the full council. Congratulations on your new position, Rich. and congratulations joining the party, Councilor Mullane. I just want to say I haven't always agreed with all of you about everything, but I definitely agree with all of you about everything that you've said thus far. Thank you to President Bears, Councilor Scarpelli, Councilor Tseng for putting this forward. I don't think I said Steve South 106 Damon Road. So I am a resident of the city but I've also done business professionally with the city since 2008 negotiating contracts and representing members for a labor organization. That being said I appreciate all the work that went into this. There was a lot of research but I think I have some additional information that I want to share with you. So. Just going back a little bit, from 2008 until the end of 2019, I dealt with two different mayors, multiple, I believe the second superintendent was at the tail end, and we had exactly zero, that I was involved in or knew of, zero wage and hour lawsuits, none, during that time. So that's, I don't know, 12 years. From January of 2020 until current present date, there have been many, many lawsuits, federal lawsuits, wage and hour lawsuits. I believe we filed over 50 unfair labor practice charges just with my organization alone in that time frame. Last year at one of these meetings when we were talking about just this, because I've been talking about these lawsuits and labor relations and labor charges and private investigators for many years with Councilor Scarpelli publicly and privately, and the mayor said last year at one of these meetings she wasn't aware of any lawsuits, which was not true. So I just wanna give you a little, just a little history during, since January of 2020. The ones that I'm aware of, and this is just with one single attorney, and I know there's others representing other groups against the city. John Howard and the school custodians said he settled for 475,000, and you guys never voted on that. I guess they didn't know they were supposed to vote those back then. After that, Connors et al., which is the school security, that's another $28,500 the city settled for. CODIS, which is also school security, that's another $12,000. Ayala et al, that was the DPW, that was another wage and hour lawsuit, $32,800, the city settled for. Sandra Burbine-Gale, that was a unfair labor practice, the city settled for $47,500 and she has another open wage and hour lawsuit that's pending. I believe it's in the couple hundred thousand range. Mike Nestor, who was the Teamsters steward for the DPW, he received $165,000. And then there was another lawsuit that you guys approved last year. I guess it's supposed to be confidential, but I'll tell you, you settled in executive session for $120,000. So that's just the ones that I'm aware of with one attorney that were settled since January of 2020 with this administration. Mind you, zero the prior two administrations that I was aware of. We're talking just with these 880,800, that's just the settlement amounts. That doesn't count with the city, the hundreds and hundreds of thousands the city is paying KP Law or this other law firm to represent the city. I do want to point out, and we're talking about labor relations as well, And I apologize, I think I'm going a little over. There are numerous other lawsuits both with this attorney and other attorneys that are pending. One of them being last year when the mayor thought it would be a good idea because allegedly the city found an unused medical syringe at the DPW that they brought the entire DPW workforce back to the, DPW yard, and drug and alcohol tested the entire DPW. Now, for any of you that know anything about labor relations, that is a violation, number one, of the collective bargaining agreement, okay? Can't do it. Number two, it's a violation of DOT regulations, which govern municipal and other drug testing related to having a CDL license. Violation all over the place. It also violated, coincidentally, the city's actual drug and alcohol policy. It violated that. That action of testing everyone violated the city's own policy. But most importantly, and what the lawsuit is about, is the city and this administration violated the civil rights of those employees. And that was illegal search and seizure. And the one thing that I'm most confused about, and we're talking about bad decisions that cost the city a lot of money. If a syringe was found, why would you breathalyze the whole DPW? Do people put alcohol in syringes as well? I was so confused by that. And I'll wrap it up by saying this. Number one, I appreciate all of your efforts. I hope you get what you're looking for in all the documentation. I had previously multiple times requested the information you're requesting. And the info I got back looked like something out of Area 51. It was mostly blacked out. So I hope that you're able to get it in your capacity. But as far as what I think the city really needs, number one, Councilor Scarpelli said we need an independent audit. President Bears, I believe you called it an independent review. Sorry. I don't care what you call it, but I think it needs to be done. As a taxpayer, I want to know, and I know you all live here and pay taxes. I think we need to know where our money's going. And this is unnecessary. It's unnecessary. So I would ask that this administration stop breaking the law. Stop illegally firing people. Start paying people according to state and federal law, to the Attorney General's wage and hour laws. Pay people correctly what they deserve. But really what I think we need, and I'll end with this, is we need a new mayor, and we need an administration that respects the employees that work for them, whether they're union, non-union management, and we need a city solicitor, because a lot of these issues would be settled with a simple phone call or an email or an in-person meeting to say, of course that's not legal, of course we can't do that. But the same people that the city administration is asking, can we do this, if the answer's no in this litigation, they get the hourly rate of defending those litigations. So how is that an independent decision? I know I went over, I appreciate your patience, President Bears. I appreciate all your kind attention and I thank you for putting this forward.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you. Gonna go to Zoom, I'm gonna go to Mr. Castagnetti on Zoom. Name and address for the record, please, and you'll have three minutes. Andy, you're unmuted, but we can't hear you. All right, I'm going to come back to him. I'm going to stay on Zoom. I'm just going to go to Munir Germanis. Munir, name and address for the record, please, and you'll have three minutes.
[Munir Jirmanus]: Hi, my name is Munir Germanis. I live at 3 Summit Road. And I just have one comment to make. We elect three bodies in Medford, the school committee, the city council and the mayor. Two of these bodies hold weekly public meetings, discussing various issues and seeking public input into the decisions they take. The third one, the mayor or the administration does not. Can the city council propose a change to this process that has the mayor also hold weekly or bi-weekly public hearings to give citizens more transparency in discussing the various projects that the administration is working on and consider public input into these decisions before they are made? and then publicize them through occasional appearances at city council meetings or in social media. Thank you.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you. All right we'll go back to the podium. Name and address for the record please of three minutes.
[Micah Kesselman]: Micah Kesselman 499 Main Street. I will echo what many others have said tonight and say thank you for putting this together. This is phenomenal. It's a really great ask. The only thing that I think it could be improved with is including an assessment of the quality of the legal product that is delivered to the mayor in relation to all of these cases. language in here that has law firms with expertise. So they should, without a problem, be able to assess the quality of the legal deliverables. And because, like was just mentioned, these litigations aren't entered into in a vacuum. They are preceded by advice and counsel from this same firm that, in my experiences, produced not impressive deliverables. So such that you can add that in or in your own review and discussion with any auditors, have them give you their impressions and assessments of the quality of the legal product that's being provided by outside counsel, in particular KP law, I strongly encourage you to do so. All right, thanks guys.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you. We'll go back to Zoom. I'll try again, Mr. Casaneni. I'm gonna unmute you. Name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes. All right, you're unmuted, but if you just give us, there we go. Name and address for the record, please. You have three minutes. We heard you a little bit. All right, I'm just gonna stay at the podium from here on out. Name and address for the record.
[Nick Giurleo]: Good evening, Nick Giurileo, Forty Robinson Road. So I support this resolution. Lately I've been looking into lawsuits filed against Medford, and it's clear to me that there are many of them, both in federal and state court. The dockets are usually public records, but the discovery attached to different filings, like the deposition transcripts of city officials, those are usually under protective order, which essentially means that the public can't see them, despite the huge public interest in looking at, you know, how our city officials are responding to questions under oath. I'd caution all of you, however, as much as I like this resolution, that it seems just based on the mayor's recent behavior, her administration is probably not going to respond to this resolution. That's why I think you kind of need to escalate things here and pass this as an ordinance or ultimately utilize the council's subpoena power. I'm not entirely sure if you have it, but I think you should utilize it if you do. Because really I think ultimately the mayor's not going to be responding to any of this, along with the resolutions on other topics that have been passed recently calling for information without any sort of legal obligation to do so. Another thing I'd like to do is just say You know, while the council is initiating this procedure here, this process here with this resolution, I don't think that absolves the council from blame as to why the city is being sued so much. So yes, our mayor might not be transparent. I think almost everyone agrees on that. But a careless lawmaking has also led to. this plethora of lawsuits against the city. I think one of the best examples of this is the recently passed Values Aligned Ordinance. Despite a legal opinion warning all of you that the text as worded had issues, you decided to pass the ordinance anyway. The mayor then vetoed it, and you had another chance to refine the language, but you chose a second time not to do that. And now we're being sued in federal court. I myself have warned you guys about this. Others did it as well, but now we have that lawsuit. So ultimately, you know, I think there's a lot of blame that could be placed here in terms of why we're in this position. But I do appreciate this resolution and I hope you'll follow up on it if it's passed and also consider that option of passing an ordinance or using subpoena power. Thank you.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you. And I appreciate that and, you know, you're not wrong. I think the council has taken two actions in the last six plus years since I've been on the council where we have where a lawsuit or a threat of a lawsuit has been initiated based on our decision. One is the investments ordinance. The other was our decision to deny a license for BJ's Gas. So those are our two. And I think for me, it's just important to state kind of the difference in motivation, right? I don't think, when I was looking at the investments ordinance, We're going to untested waters, right? Things where there's not case law, things where we haven't tested that question. But we're doing it because we're trying to do what at least a majority of the council felt was the right thing to do, right? And sometimes you pass a law, you put it out there to try to do the right thing, and someone sues you to stop it. I think we were in the same place on BJ's gas. We said there's gonna be a bunch of impacts here and Because of the way that we had crafted the decision, we didn't put ourselves on a strong legal footing around that either. We had worries about traffic impact, we had worries about community impact, and those had been You know, I think, quite frankly, since it's open, those have played out a little bit. But because of the way that, I think it was special permit under 40A, because of the way that we had rationalized our denial of the special permit for this use, we went through the lawsuit and we ended up settling and allowing it. And those were our two, I think, that were initiated by the council. But to me, both of those came from a place of trying to do the right thing. And it seems to me that the litany that was just laid out, the justification and the rationale for all of this labor strife and litigation hasn't been coming from that place. So I acknowledge what you said, and I admit, we wouldn't be being sued about the investments ordinance if we'd never passed the ordinance, right? That's 100% right. But why? Why did we pass it? It wasn't to hurt anyone, it wasn't to, settle a score, it wasn't to try to, you know, get some leverage. It was to try to do a good thing. I think the same thing on BJ's gas. So I just want to say I appreciate your position, and normally I wouldn't do this, but yeah.
[Nick Giurleo]: If I may, just very briefly, I don't doubt that all of you had good intentions with this ordinance. And I personally supported the idea behind it. It's just obviously there were some concerns that were raised by council. And I would just suggest to all of you, you do have the power to amend the ordinance as well. Right? And oftentimes when a party is satisfied, they'll dismiss their lawsuit. So maybe you make an amendment to the ordinance, the people who are suing are satisfied, and they say we don't need to bring this forward anymore. Just a suggestion. Yeah.
[Zac Bears]: And I'm hoping that, I think we're going to have executive session to discuss this in the next couple weeks. And I think that's the kind of process we'd want to go through, a good faith process, to maybe get to an answer on that question. So I appreciate that. Thank you. Thanks.
[Emily Lazzaro]: point of information, there have been other ordinances that we have passed in this body where we have received advice from council, very conservative advice, to not pass things because there may be a possibility that something would be in danger of litigation. But other cities have already passed similar ordinances and have not. uh, that we've observed, um, face litigation. So, um, there are, the thing about the values line ordinance that I just wanted to note is that, that was the first time that a city in Massachusetts had ever done something like that. And that is because, um, it was a bold, uh, step in the direction of progress and, um, making a choice to be bold and that sometimes that's how these things go. And I think that's, as President Bears was saying, very, very different than governing from a place of petty score settling. Thank you.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you. Yeah, and I think it's the double standard, right? We've gotten a bunch of legal advice, mostly from KP Law. Don't do this. It might be bad. You might put the city at legal liability, you know. Right. Right. One time. And it's really more the double standard of if the mayor doesn't want something to happen, then the advice is, well, don't do it. It might put us at a liability. But then all these other decisions that have been made by the administration have put us at significant legal liability, right? That's the piece of it where, and I think the breakdown too, right? We've gotten this advice from KP Law over and over again, and I think there's a breakdown in the relationship. We've never really been able to build trust there that the advice is good advice, and if we had a city solicitor, then the process would have gone differently. And we had a city solicitor at the time, but he wasn't assigned to work on this issue. All right, sorry for that. going down that rabbit hole. Let's go back to the podium, name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes.
[Nate Merritt]: Hey, Mayor, 373 Riverside Ave. I, too, am actually very glad to see this come up on the agenda. Mr. President, did heck freeze over? So, when you start mentioning fiscal responsibility, I got to wonder what happened here. But in all seriousness, I know you've presented for many years in the past, you know, our financial state and you've been trying to wrap your arms around it. So I do appreciate that. And unfortunately, everybody loses when a lawsuit happens against the city, legal fees. So it's not productive versus, I'm sure all of you in your own homes, right? There's only so many dollars you get in for income, and you need to decide where to put those. And if everything was great, gold bricks were falling from the sky, then we could do whatever we want. But sometimes we have to make tough choices. it's even harder when you don't have more income coming in. As you alluded to, we've got, you know, potential overrides now on the docket for an almost billion dollar school. Any dollar that doesn't strain someone is, you know, we could fix a road, right, if you are gonna take it from them. But if it's productive, it's one thing. If it's not productive and it's going to lawyers, sorry, Nick, but, As a community, right, it's not productive for the entire community when it's going out the window in legal fees. One thing I would want to mention is that if you are going to get numbers, especially because your time span is from 2019, the value of a dollar in 2019 is half of what it is today, roughly, right? Just especially in any type of, you know, construction, labor, so on and so forth. So time value of money is something where you may want to take those numbers as you get them, if you get them, hopefully you get them. And then, right, apply time value of money into 2026 dollars. So, I think it'll have more impact if you do that versus you leave, you know, half a million dollars in 2019 is a million today, which is how many roads we could fix.
[Zac Bears]: So, thank you. Thank you. I have a great chart of the city budget adjusted for inflation if you ever want to see it. All right, we'll stay at the podium. Name and address for the record, please.
[Patrick Clerkin]: I'm Patrick Clerken, 14 Bennett Place, and I generally support this resolution, but what I wanted to talk about was broadly related to the transparency, accountability, and accessibility of municipal governing bodies, and particularly in relation to at least one of the comments made on Zoom about is there anything that the mayor does to really engage with the public like the other bodies do? It just so happens that this past week this came to my attention. Somebody sent this to me. I don't know where this is posted outside of a patch article that was sent to me, but the title of that article is Medford launches community outreach task force. The group is now in need of residents from all parts of Medford to make up its roster. The office of Mayor Breanna Lungo-Koehn announced that the city is forming a new task force that will aim to increase and enhance communication among all residents throughout the city. The community outreach task force is now looking for ambassadors from various neighborhoods in Medford to join staff. and monthly meetings in which they will be given the opportunity to provide insights and suggestions to the Mayor's Office and Communications Department on relevant issues affecting their fellow residents and community members, which will then help inform communication and community outreach efforts. Representatives from the Haines Square, Hillside, Lawrence Estates, Wellington, North Medford, South Medford, and West Medford are needed to fill out the task force. Lungo-Koehn, Interested parties can apply online now and should have strong community involvement and be open to meeting monthly and as needed with the mayor's office staff. And there's a link to that. This is in a patch article. So if you can just go on recent patch, you'll find it. Thank you.
[Zac Bears]: I call it little city council. Name and address for the record, please. You have three minutes.
[Micah Kesselman]: I have one minute. Second, yeah. Michael Gosselin, 499 Main Street. Threw me off, yeah. So I actually just want to I actually sort of echo what one of the previous speakers just mentioned just a moment ago. Yeah, if you look at the values-aligned investment ordinance, you know, one of the biggest issues that resulted in it being in the state that it was in was KP law's failure to provide an actionable quality work product and legal deliverable. And that in and of itself, I think, makes a huge statement upon the quality of like, what is the mayor paying for? What is the city paying for to get from this law firm? They cannot provide actionable legal products with months of time to deliver on it. So that is yet another example of the failings of our legal spend. With that said, no one is surprised that that ordinance was sued on, was sued over. The lawsuit is bankrolled by major Zionist conservative groups. Like, you don't have to be a legal maven to understand that they were going to sue on it somehow. So, I mean, yeah. But that said, again. We need to figure out what's going on with the legal spend, because none of it makes sense. Not the quality of what we're getting for what we're paying for, not what we're actually even paying for, and not, you know, what they're doing, like why we're paying for this legal work. None of it makes any sense. So, yeah, definitely pass this. Thank you.
[Zac Bears]: All right. Councilor Leming.
[Matt Leming]: Yep, so just wanted to offer my support of this. I do agree with the sentiment that we're very unlikely to get a response. That being said, I think the information laid out in this resolution is solid enough and laid out in a convincing enough way that I think that news coverage of it alone will help to, will help to bring light to some of these issues. I don't believe that this body has any subpoena power, but. We have subpoena power. We do? Yeah. Oh, well, that is, that's education for me. Can we cut that for me? Haven't used it yet. Haven't used it yet. Well, we haven't used, yeah, we haven't used it since, we haven't used it since I've been on, but no, okay. Well, you learn something new every day. But anyway, let's just forget I said that, folks.
[Zac Bears]: We have at least one power.
[Matt Leming]: What?
[Zac Bears]: I'm just saying, we have at least one power.
[Matt Leming]: Yeah, well. But regardless, I think that... Again, the, what is laid out in this resolution, which is very, very fine, which is written very well and lays out the case in a very convincing way, is enough so that we can at least get one or a few news articles out about it and then bring some attention to this issue. So I do agree that getting a response from this will be, will be quite tricky given the previous experiences of this body. So I'd just like to thank everybody who took time to draft this and everybody who helped my colleagues draft this as well. And I'm glad we're doing this.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Leming. One more. Name and address for the record, please. You have three minutes.
[Paulette Vartabedian]: I'm Paulette Bardabidi in 27th Central Ave. I have three questions. Oh, well, one, two questions. a statement that I support this 100%. That if the answers come up that everything is kosher and correct, then any doubt is out the window. So this whole back and forth can stop. But if there is something, we'll know what it is and we can correct it. The question is, if the mayor does not respond to this, if it passes and she does not respond to this, Is the council willing to go to the next step, which I hope they do, because we do need to get these answers. And just the gentleman right here that spoke, the 800 plus dollars that was given out in lawsuit payments, plus the KP law, which I'm assuming hundreds or hundreds of thousands, that's like one point something million that we would have had that could have gone to the school. But that's that. But again, I hope that if we don't get a response, the council will continue and go to the next step until we do get the responses. The question I have is that what is the problem that we're having not getting a solicitor, is it that we're low balling the pay or is it the working conditions? It seems ridiculous that we're going years and years without a regular solicitor and that's my question. Thank you.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you. The council I think has voted to raise the pay for that position twice because the justification was that we were too low. So we've raised it twice. We had someone for six months and they were let go right before their probationary period was up, and that was the first, you know, person who made it. We were told by the administration was basically we weren't getting good applicants, so we raised the pay, then we got somebody, then they only lasted six months, and I don't know if the pool is small because of pay issues or because people don't maybe want to work in this building in that job.
[George Scarpelli]: That city solicitor was hired three days later. George, here you go. Sorry, Mr. President. That city solicitor that we lost was then hired three days later to a bigger community. That city solicitor went home after his full day of work with a note on his door that said, thank you, but you are now terminated after your 90-day review. And it happened, by the way, on election night. So, there's a lot of questions that have to deal with maybe this administration doesn't like to hear what's best for this community, but wants to hear what's best for them. So, thank you.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. On the motion of Councilor Scarpelli, seconded by. On the motion approved by Councilor Scarpelli as amended, seconded by Councilor Mullane. because that's who I was looking at. All those in favor? Opposed? Motion passes. 26-044, a resolution request DPW update on major utility infrastructure projects. Whereas City of Medford is currently experiencing or scheduled to experience significant utility work on multiple roadways, including High Street, Boston Ave, Main Street, Riverside Ave, and Willis Ave. These projects are being undertaken by various entities, including MWRA, National Grid, other utilities. Whereas these infrastructure projects have significant impacts on traffic, parking, businesses, and daily lives of residents in affected neighborhoods. And whereas the council and residents would benefit from a comprehensive understanding of scope, timeline, phasing, and impacts of each project. And whereas the city currently posts some project information on the city website, and there is an opportunity to review and enhance how this information is shared with the public. be resolved by the Medford City Council that we respect the request that the Department of Public Works, in coordination with MWRA, National Grid, and other utilities, conducting or planning major infrastructure work, provide a briefing to the Council on current and upcoming major projects, including project scope, timelines, street-by-street phasing, and anticipated impact to residents. It further resolved that the council request a review of how and when project information is posted to the website and communicated with residents in affected areas with the goal of ensuring that neighbors receive timely, clear comprehensive notice well in advance of construction. And we had some good conversation about that earlier and I will recognize Councilor Scarpelli.
[George Scarpelli]: Thank you. I don't want to prolong this. I think that we kind of actually spoke to it and we heard the residents biggest concerns is that I think having a a place where our residents can go and, again, having a better form of communication where they can see where projects are and how it affects their neighborhoods, and then having an avenue to get these questions answered to prepare themselves and their neighbors to any construction that's moving forward. I think that, again, these are issues that I know that they're out there somewhere. But I think if we have a better, a more transparent, and a more informative process, especially when it comes to the specific neighbors that are being affected by these projects, I think it would be very helpful. So thank you, Mr. President.
[Justin Tseng]: Thank you. I just wanted to chime in quickly and say that I fully agree with Councilor Scarpelli. I think this is a great idea. I think a problem is when residents or anyone really doesn't know what's happening to their daily lives, what's going to affect their daily lives. And I think this only moves to make things more comprehensible, transparent for residents.
[Zac Bears]: Any councilors saying? Councilor Callahan.
[Anna Callahan]: I just want to thank Councilor Scarpelli for bringing this forward. I know that, you know, in the public works and facilities committee, we sometimes ask the DPW to come in and to talk about how we're going. And I think having something that's at the full city council is actually a great idea because more people do come to these meetings. They don't check out the committee meetings quite as often. So just, you know, asking for a review of like what the upcoming projects are I think is really great. And I think it's very reasonable to just request a review of how and when project information is posted to the website and communicated to residents. So very reasonable. I like the idea of having something in the city council rather than at a committee. So I think this is a great idea. Thank you so much.
[Zac Bears]: On the motion to approve by Councilor Scarpelli, seconded by Councilor Callahan. All those in favor? Opposed? Motion passes. 24-045 offered by Councilor Scarpelli.
[George Scarpelli]: Mr. President, we can waive the reading.
[Zac Bears]: On the motion to waive the reading by Councilor Scarpelli, seconded by Councilor Lazzaro. All those in favor? Opposed? Motion passes. Councilor Scarpelli.
[George Scarpelli]: Thank you. I think, again, with this, it's a resolution that requests that all utility projects will public notice, including information, season, construction, moratorium. I think that, to be a little of the fact, that one of the biggest things, the concerns that we had were that our neighbors actually thought that more than one, but a handful, thought that, especially the Riverside Ave project, was happening today. And with the situations that we're, with the weather and everything, we're really making putting our residents with an uneasy feeling. So I think that this is very important that we bring this initiative forward to make sure part of that notice, especially understanding so our residents understand the winter moratorium. And I know it's there. Again, it's another process that's already established, but again, put out there so our residents know what that consists of. So that'd be easy, Mr. President. Thank you.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. On the motion of Councilor Scarpelli to approve, seconded by? Seconded by Councilor Tseng. All in favor? Opposed? Motion passes. 26-046 offered by Councilor Callahan and President Paris. Resolution to support home sharing and request implementation plan. Whereas the City of Medford and in our entire region are in a housing affordability crisis and whereas over 65% of residents are singles or couples but less than 20% of our homes are studios or one bedrooms. And whereas the City of Medford has a larger proportion of senior citizens than at any other time in recent memory, many seniors would like to age in place but have concerns about continuing to upkeep their houses or performing other basic tasks. and whereas building new housing takes time and may require zoning changes, and whereas home sharing has been shown in other communities to provide hundreds of units of affordable housing, keep seniors in their home and aging in place longer, reduce loneliness for senior citizens and increase a sense of community, all without infrastructure changes, and whereas the City of Medford on average added only 75 new units of housing per year from 2020 to 2024, And whereas an advisor from the National Shared Housing Resource Center estimated that a city like Medford could expect to place 100 successful home shares in the first year and 500 each year after that. And whereas home sharing program might require at least some funding and staff to run successfully. And whereas nearby towns might also benefit from a home sharing program and may be willing to share the benefits and costs of such a program. Therefore, be it resolved that the City Council recognizes home sharing as an important cost effective tool to increasing housing availability and affordability, supporting aging in place and reducing loneliness and expresses its intent to consider funding such a program as part of the FY27 operating budget and be it further resolved that the City Council hereby request that the Mayor, through the appropriate departments, provide the Council with a written response no later than March 31st that does one of the following. One provides an implementation plan for home sharing which could include a proposed program model and administrative home, estimated staffing and operational requirements, estimate of funding, a proposed timeline for launch, and identification of any opportunities for grants, partnerships, or cost sharing when they bring municipalities. Or two, states of the administration does not intend to prioritize implementation of home sharing in fiscal 27 with a brief explanation sufficient to inform the city council's budget deliberations. Councilor Callahan.
[Anna Callahan]: Thank you. I just want to give a little bit of background. So I'm sure everyone knows that housing and the cost of housing especially is really at a critical point. So many residents that I have talked to are increasingly concerned about it whether they are homeowners or renters. And, you know, I really heard, especially when I knocked on thousands of doors my first election cycle, so many seniors that I talked to really talked about their concerns about being able to stay in their homes, you know, not knowing how long they would be able to age in place, also not knowing where, even if they could move, which they didn't want to, where they would move in Medford, that they wanted to live near their neighbors, and they lived there for 20 years, 50 years, their entire lives. I just heard this over and over, and I am always looking for creative solutions to our problems that have worked in other cities. I also have one of the things that I noticed early on as I was looking at housing is that 50 years ago Medford had maybe 8 or 9,000 more people living here with less housing. putting all these things together and then looking at other cities to find out what other cities have done to sort of solve this problem that we have, a lot of which is, you know, older senior residents who have a home that has maybe four or five bedrooms. There's only one or two people living there. That causes, you know, a little bit of a crunch for us in terms of housing. But I know from my mom, you know, she moved to the area to be closer to me and my sister the two years before she died. She died a year and a half ago. She was in her she was 85 when she moved here. And even just her moving into an apartment here with us living very, very close. It was incredibly stressful in ways we never anticipated. You know, she seemed to be sharp as a tack and, you know, she certainly appeared to be cognitively all there, but we realized after she moved that, she was running a lot of her life on kinesthetic memory of how her apartment functioned. And she had trouble turning on her dishwasher, which had a button that said start. Like, you know, the things that she was unable to do and that gave her so much anxiety were unpredictable for us and really difficult. And so I really have compassion for people who do not want to move when they are older. But also keeping up your home can become quite difficult. A lot of the seniors are lower income than the people who have moved in since then. Medford was that place where you could afford to buy when you were working class person 50 years ago, 30 years ago. So, as I looked at other communities, it became clear that many other cities across the country are having similar problems that we are having. Just it's the baby boomer generation. there was this solution that really appealed to me that has worked in some cities for five years, in some cities for 25 years, and it's called home sharing. Home sharing is basically a matchmaking service that helps older senior residents or senior residents who have extra rooms in their home to find one person who is a little younger than they are and who can help them to stay in their homes longer and they usually pay some portion of monthly payment and they also often have an agreement to help around the house. So it's usually really beneficial for both parties. It has proven to be incredibly successful in other communities that have similar demographics to ours. And, you know, we've, there are a number of other volunteers who work with me and have been working with me on this project for probably about a year and a half. And what we, we've done a lot of legwork and some of that legwork has included the housing staff person here in Medford. So, that staff person is kind of up to date on the things that we've talked about and the discoveries that we've made. There are private organizations, both nonprofits as well as for-profits, that could come in to our community and offer these kinds of services. Sometimes they require an agreement with the city, sometimes require some form of payment from the city. Also, we really think that this could be attractive to other communities, Somerville, Malden, Arlington, who knows, and that having the city of Medford reach out to other communities to ask whether they would be interested in sort of having a joint, you know, two city, three city approach where the cost would be much less. It often does not take a lot of people. It could be one staff person. It could start off with a half a staff person divided between cities. But essentially what we came to was an understanding that we had done enough research to come to the point where without the city of Medford being able to make some calls and to commit in some way that we cannot move forward any further as a volunteer organization. So, it is going to require the city of Medford to just state that it is interested in this and to put even a tiny amount of resources into it, which could be the housing planner spending a few hours, You know, making some phone calls and then some decisions being made within the planning department about, you know, how this is moving forward. And really the request from the administration is not a large one. It is simply to understand. whether they will devote some resources, and again, some resources could be a very small amount of resources, to further investigate and to get enough knowledge to understand whether this kind of program would be able to move forward. If we even had an agreement from the mayor that we would have one staff person who would spend a few hours reaching out and doing some research to come up with some sort of a conclusion, that could be sufficient as well, but that is resources. What we're looking for here is we think that we have found a really excellent solution that could provide Medford with something that we need, which is a lot of affordable housing very easily with no zoning changes, with no new development, with no change to the infrastructure. I certainly believe in all the tools, in the tool belt that we can have to tackle our affordable housing crisis here. This is simply one tool. It's not a panacea. It's not going to resolve everything. But it would be a great tool to have in our tool belt given how much it sort of matches what we need. It's very inexpensive. We could collaborate with other cities. I just would love to sort of, you know, ask the administration for a yes or no answer, and with a little bit of detail as to whether or not they will be able to move forward with something like this. Thank you so much.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Callahan, and thank you for letting me co-sponsor this with you. I think this is one of the many tools that we could use to try to match folks. who may want support in their home, whether that's support around the house or financial support or moral support, emotional support, with folks who are trying to be good neighbors, maybe younger folks who are trying to stay in the community. I think it's just a great way to try to link people, because I think one of the biggest gaps that we find in this day and age is that it's harder than ever to make connections and build community. So if we could build a program that people trusted, And that... you know, had all of the procedures in place and the security, the verification, you know, everything that we need to make sure that, you know, if the city is going to get involved, that folks are getting matched up, you know, as best as we can. Never going to be perfect, but folks who are struggling to stay in the city, whether they're young or old, putting them together so that both folks can stay, I think is a really noble cause and something we should work on. So, thank you. Councilor Tseng.
[Justin Tseng]: I just wanted to thank Councilor Callaghan for putting forward such an innovative idea to tackle the housing crisis here in Medford. I think I've always said that we need as many tools in the toolbox as possible to tackle the challenge. And this is frankly an awesome one. I think that this resolution and what it's asking for, the policy behind it, is fundamentally about expanding people's freedom to choose the life that they want to live and to choose the life that fits them best. It gives seniors, as you said, the option to age in place with support rather than feeling pushed towards downsizing or isolation. It gives young workers, students, and families, and single adults access to housing that might otherwise be out of reach. And it allows homeowners to decide how their home property can meet their needs, especially as the city around us is changing. It doesn't impose a single model of living, but it does create structured opportunities and lets residents opt into the program. think an approach to the housing crisis and to government that increases the agency of anyone to choose what they want to do, to build flexibility into our housing system and trust people to make good decisions when they're given more options.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you. Councilor Scarpelli.
[George Scarpelli]: Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilor Callan, for bringing this forward. I know that that's been one of my biggest initiatives, and I appreciate that, looking to see how we can support our senior citizens, especially when you're looking at, you know, the residents that we have here in Medford that were fortunate to have the opportunity to buy a house for $50,000 20, excuse me, 25, God, 50 years ago, and now taxes and other life expenses really start affecting their future. But I know that looking into this, I know that my biggest fear with this is that, you know, when some residents that did read it saying, you know, how does this, how would this affect legally? You know, there's the fact when you talk about home sharing, how does that, how would that play out? But, and you know, the safety and the wellbeing and how the city would support such a legal measure. moving forward and supporting it but I would not stand in the way I would support it and see where the mayor would go with that to see what answers we would get to help everybody understand the process. I know that we did an extensive you know housing plan years ago and at the time this wasn't even you know hatched you know isn't even it wasn't even an egg it was you know but now as you see what's going on being creative and trying to find ways again it's options it's not going to be mandated for people to say you are now going to do a b and c but i think that really understand the legal ramifications when we look at partnering up and looking in avenues like this is going to be interesting to see as we move forward so thank you
[Anna Callahan]: Just very quickly, I want to reiterate, and thank you so much, Councilor Scarpelli, very reasonable concern, absolutely, but I do want to reiterate that this is a program that has been done in many other cities, and I believe that those legal questions have been, you know, hammered out, you know, for years and years, and so I really am hoping that we lean, we're not going to, My goal is never to roll our own, to do a DIY solution, but that we choose solutions that have been proven in other places to work. And then we use what people have learned in other cities so that we do it right the first time. Thank you so much.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you. On the motion of Councilor Callahan to approve, seconded by Councilor Tseng. All those in favor? Opposed? Motion passes. Communications from the mayor and I'm going to propose here that we in a minute take the 26050 and 26-051 and then we put the executive session at the end and we adjourn from executive session just so we can move through this quickly and we can wrap it up in the in the other room. So we'll start with 26047 submitted by the mayor fiscal 26 cpa appropriation request trees menford city park invasive plant inventory and i believe we have theresa dupont here who i'll recognize theresa could you present this absolutely um hopefully everybody can hear me but um so good evening mr president steam numbers of this council i'm theresa dupont the community preservation act manager
[Theresa Dupont]: for the city of Medford. I'm joined tonight remotely by Kim DiAdronde and Amanda Bowen of Trees Medford to ask for your support in approving an appropriation request in the amount of $10,000. And this funding would undertake a professional inventory study of invasive or non-native plants within Medford City's parks. The point of this inventory study will aid in identifying problem areas for future education and public outreach purposes. as well as for planned removal efforts. Invasive plants are quickly becoming everybody's problem. We got black swallowwort creeping up fences and hedging, Japanese knotweed and tree of heaven is displacing our native plantings. Garlic mustard is just everywhere. So this is an important first of many steps to do what we can to actively protect Medford's biodiversity. We don't really know what we don't know. So the plan is to educate ourselves and set a solid foundation to create a removal game plan of these invasive plants as they're taking over our green spaces. This was a project that was brought to the CPC by Trees Medford. So we're really blessed in Medford to have a great strong tree advocacy partner. And again, Amanda, Kim and I are here to answer any questions of the council and ask for your approval and support.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you. Do we have any questions from members of the council for manager Dupont? I see Amanda's here too. Sorry, I missed you, Amanda. Seeing no questions and the motion of Councilor Tseng to approve, seconded by Councilor Callahan. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Marie Izzo]: Councilor Callahan? Yes. Councilor Leming? Yes. Councilor Malayne? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng? Yes. Vice President Lazzaro? Yes.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you guys. Hope you enjoyed the rest of the meeting. Thank you. Take care. 26048, submitted by the mayor, donation acceptance from Jay Tangney. Dear President Bears and members of the city council, I respectfully request and recommend your honorable body approves under general law chapter 44, section 53A, a donation of the amount of $800 by Jay Tangney through a check for a specific veteran in need of housing. Veteran's name is withheld to protect their confidentiality. Respectfully submitted, Brianna Lingo Kern, mayor. On the motion approved by Vice President Lazzaro, seconded by Councilor Callahan. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Marie Izzo]: Councilor Callahan? Yes. Councilor Leming? Yes. Councilor Malayne? Yes. Councilor Scott Felly? Yes. Councilor Tseng? Yes. Vice President Lazzaro? Yes. President Pierce?
[Zac Bears]: Yes, I'm in the affirmative. None in the negative. The motion passes. On the motion of Vice President Lazzaro to take papers 25050 and 25051. Out of order. Out of order. Spend the rules to take those papers out of order by Vice President Lazzaro, seconded by? Seconded by Councilor Callahan. All those in favor? Opposed? Motion passes. 25-050. Submitted by the mayor. Special legislation to remove police chief and deputy positions from civil service. I respectfully request and recommend your honorable body vote to authorize the mayor on behalf of the city to petition the general court for special legislation. Okay, on the motion to suspend the reading for a summary by the vice president. Seconded by? Seconded by Councilor Leming. All those in favor? Opposed? Motion passes. Basically this is a request from the Mayor that we ask the State House to remove the Police Chief and Deputy Police Chief from civil service, which would change how they are appointed and their protections under the law in terms of their positions. We did receive a note from the Chief of Staff to the Mayor that said, that they were not planning to send anyone to the meeting to discuss this paper, but that they said that the unions had agreed to it in their contracts, but they weren't sending anyone to the meeting to discuss this further. So essentially, they're just asking us to approve it with this letter that they've sent. So I will recognize Councilor Scarpelli.
[George Scarpelli]: Thank you, Mr. President. This is the, I thought somebody would be here to answer some questions, especially a representative from the leadership team with the police department. I don't know if they knew that they'd be invited. So I don't feel comfortable voting this through until I see it from a representative from the police department and their union members. So I would motion to table this if we can.
[Zac Bears]: On the motion to table by Councilor Scarpelli, seconded by Councilor Tseng that motion is undebatable. All those in favor? Opposed? Motion passes. 26-051, board and commission appointments. We have here some board and commission appointments. As folks know, under the charter, we now approve all board and commissions and multi-member bodies of the city. We have had some back and forth on this where I think the council agreed in our last meeting that we would like to see them all come before us so that under the charter we have our right to review them. The administration was having some pushback on that. They did not want to go through this process. You'll note here that unlike some of the other commissions that we've approved in the past, we don't have any letters for folks. We only have resumes for a couple of folks. You know I don't want to slow up the business of these boards and commissions. I think their chairs and their current members are doing their best and you know it is a new charter so we're moving into it. But I will just say as a council president that I was disappointed that the mayor who pushed so hard for this charter was not planning to really follow through with following the process outlined in the charter. The proposed process was just that they email them to us, and if any of us object, then maybe we'll talk about it at another meeting. And I think we really have to take collective action as a body at public meetings. That's what City Council's all about. So we do have here reappointments, Jennifer Keenan to the Historical Commission, John Lopes to the Board of Assessors. And then we do have new appointments, Sarah Burnt, Historical Commission, Henry Miller and Council on Aging, John Dubuque, Water and Sewer Commission, William Williams Park Commission, and we had a late addition of Luke Beck, Historical Commission. We do have resumes for John Dubuque and William Williams. You know, that's the long story short of how we arrived at this list here. I would like the process to improve. But with that, I'll recognize Vice President Lazzaro.
[Emily Lazzaro]: I would like to see resumes for each of the new appointments. I would just say that I actually incidentally met Sarah, who is being offered as a new appointment to the Historical Commission at Twisted Tree, which is one of our new coffee shops in town. And we chatted a little bit. But when she was there, she had a whole binder full of information about the Historical Commission. I'm sure she has a resume that she could send along that we could review here at a public meeting and amongst ourselves. And then we could see how well qualified she would be for the position. And we would be able to share that with the public as a public document. And I think that's a bare minimum kind of thing for somebody who's being appointed to the Historical Commission. And just know, you know, what qualifies you to be on a board or commission is important for the public to know. I appreciate the two people's resumes that we have now. But in, on other, you know, on our Elections Commission we have, You know, recommendations, we have resumes, we have, you know, like, I don't understand why this would be any different. And my suggestion, I would motion to table this until we have the full materials.
[Zac Bears]: There are two other Councilors who want to speak, but.
[Emily Lazzaro]: I mean, yeah, and if somebody doesn't want to second until you speak, that's fine.
[Zac Bears]: Okay. It's undebatable, so if you want to hold the motion.
[Emily Lazzaro]: I'll hold the motion.
[Zac Bears]: I'll let Councilor Leming.
[Matt Leming]: Yeah, we have two resumes here, and I think, personally, I think the reappointments are fine. I know some of these people I know personally, which isn't satisfying for the public process, personally fine with reappointing the ones that the names on this list that I've worked with in the past. I can understand if my colleagues wouldn't agree with me on that because they wanted to be part of the public record, so I could sympathize with that. But I would generally agree with the sentiment that we, it needs to be part of our standard operating procedure to have resumes for all of the new appointments to these boards, as well as have them show up here in person just to ask, just so that we could ask questions, understand what their backgrounds are, and even give folks watching this some idea of what these different boards and commissions do. So I would be comfortable tabling this if that's what other folks on this body feel like doing. Again, just to echo what was said before when the charter said that, a body gets, that the council appoints, or the council confirms appointments to these boards, that means that they appear before the council in public, and we vote on it as a public body. It shouldn't be done by email.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Leming. Councilor Scarpelli.
[George Scarpelli]: Thank you. I appreciate Councilor Lazzaro and the spirit of our processes. I think that I would support, you know, I would second that table. But again, too, with Councilor Leming, I think that some of these people that, like I look at Henry Millon, for example, someone that we know what he's all about. We've worked with Henry and he'd be a great member of that board and commission. You look at the two resumes that are, obviously the one person, Mr. Dubuque, I believe, did you read his resume? If we can, I'd rather hire him if we can. I don't know why we're making him a member of the commission. We should make him the head of everything. He has every license under the sun. So, but yeah, so I would, you know, I would have been comfortable with approving the resumes that we have. In fairness to Councilor Lazzaro's, Vice President Lazzaro's motion that being consistent in what we're doing here, I think it's important that we stay consistent, so.
[Zac Bears]: Thank you. Vice President Lazzaro, and then I do have a little context.
[Emily Lazzaro]: Just as a final thing, it's nothing to do with anybody's capacity to do the work or qualifications. The process cannot be the mayor handpicks somebody and places them in a role because we've approved a new charter that does not articulate that as how we will be doing things moving forward. And it's been recommended to us that we start to implement the charter now. And because that was voted on by the residents, I think that it's appropriate for us to do this going forward now. And by the same token, like, the way Medford used to operate was that, oh, everybody knows Henry. Henry gets to do whatever he wants to do. Sure. We know Henry. We know Henry is great. I saw Henry in front of my apartment the other day, and I said hello to him. Yes. Okay. But, like, I know people in town. A lot of people don't. Anna talks about this all the time. Like, the people who get to make decisions in Medford shouldn't be the same people who always get to make decisions in Medford. We need to be able to present everybody publicly. We need to have new and different people having opportunities, and we need everybody to see publicly all of this information. Neutrally, every time Henry gets appointed to a new position, we need to see his resume. I'm sorry, Henry.
[Zac Bears]: His only advantage should be his incredible ability to charm a public body.
[Emily Lazzaro]: Exactly. And his beautiful smile.
[Zac Bears]: Yes. No. And I think that's fair. I mean, I think there's three options. I think we can approve these and say we're not approving them again unless you follow a formal process. Then we can table them for two weeks and say, please follow a formal process or we can approve some and not others. You know, I think there's two things there. To be honest, like there was significant pushback. I really don't want to slow down the boards and commissions. If we table it, I'm going to get a bunch of people being like, why did we table this?
[Emily Lazzaro]: Send them to me. I'll table it and send them to me. Blame it on me.
[Zac Bears]: So, you know.
[Emily Lazzaro]: I officially take the blame.
[Zac Bears]: I just want to relate to my fellow Councilors that I did say that when we talked last meeting, folks wanted them to come before the public meeting. And the other thing here is that the charter provision is a majority of us can reject. And if we do not unduly, we can't unduly reject and it has to be within 30 days. So, there's some time clocks here. If we wait two weeks and say, you know, please submit everything, I think we're within the time clock. It's really untested and we don't have legal. So, not to bring it back to the entire conversation we've been having all meeting, but it's my perspective that submission for the council agenda and then the publication of the agenda is the receipt of this. So, either it started on Friday or it starts today. And the administration was very much like, we do not have time to write letters for all these people. So, you know, I'm happy to forward those emails to the clerk to forward around. So, just that's what it is right now. So, to the boards and commissions who really want their people reappointed, it's Councilor Lazzaro's fault.
[Emily Lazzaro]: It's Councilor Lazzaro's fault.
[Zac Bears]: Councilor Leming.
[Matt Leming]: I would, at first, I'd be fine with the motion to approve the, William Williams and John Dubach and table the rest for the next meeting. I did want to just, because those are the ones that we have the resumes for, but I did want to say this. This whole conversation here has been a bit of a frustrating point for me because when we do anything that involves boards or commissions for folks that, and the folks that are appointed to them, the people that are putting in their time to volunteer, it's very difficult to criticize the process by which this happens because people in our position are afraid of potentially offending the folks that are being appointed to these boards. So you know, Jennifer Keenan, I like Jennifer a lot. She sends me postcards. I have a little magnet on my refrigerator that she sent me with the Patriot schedule. And so, I'm sorry, George, okay? Jennifer likes- She just knows you're not going to sell your house anytime soon. You know, I mean, what, she's a good real estate agent, what can you say? But no, but you know, with Jennifer, and so I know her, but again, like my colleague was saying, we don't have a resume in here, so what I'm afraid of is, Jennifer coming to me and being like, why did you table my reappointment to the historical commission? And that's where the criticism of the process, the criticism of where the city's doing this can potentially get these volunteers who are misunderstanding where the council's coming from in the crossfire. And so I understand, I'm a politician, I'm slowly learning tact. I'm getting there as I learn to be. as I learned to be tactful with my constituents. But I'm just illustrating, I'm saying all of this to illustrate that I don't appreciate having complications with these appointed boards and commissions and having volunteers who are putting their time into it get confused or get in the crossfire. I would appreciate it if the administration would just send us resumes and very short letters on day one and inform folks that they're being confirmed on this day just so that we didn't have to go through this. I mean, it's not really a whole lot of paperwork. You copy and paste it. And we do need, and it's good for the public as well, because they get to see the folks who are serving on these boards and commissions, and they get to learn a bit about the different boards and commissions that run the city. Thank you for listening. I hope that the process gets less rocky as time goes on.
[Zac Bears]: Yeah, and again, I think like execution of the law is in the charter is the job of the executive branch. And like the clerk just let me know that Sarah Burns already taken an oath of office, but has not been confirmed. So, and honestly, like, and Jennifer Keenan and John Lopes, like I put them on here as reappointments. We got an email about reappointments, but they weren't included in the last email that I got. So if you guys, I don't think they're really listening to me. If I'm going to be honest. The motion to table by Council is seconded by Councilor Callahan. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion passes. 24049 Litigation Settlement, Hassett v. City of Medford. Request to enter Executive Session for General Law Chapter 30A, Section 21A3. Votes may be taken. All right, dear President Peres, members of the City Council, I respectfully request and recommend your honorable body enter Executive Session pursuant to General Law, Chapter 30A, Section 21A3 to discuss strategy with respect to litigation concerning the matter of Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, ASO Robin Hassett versus City of Menford. I also recommend that the City Council's agenda state that Executive Session notice that votes may be taken. Attorney Janelle Austin of KP Law will be present to provide the Council with guidance on this matter. Thank you for your kind attention to this matter. So motion to enter executive session and adjourn in executive session, we will not return to open session. On the motion of Councilor Tseng to enter executive session, we will adjourn from executive session. We will not return to open session and votes may be taken. Second by vice-president Lazzaro. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Marie Izzo]: Councilor Callahan? Yes. Councilor Leming? Yes. Councilor Malayne? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng? Yes. Vice President Lazzaro? Yes. President Pierce?
[Zac Bears]: Yes. I have the affirmative, none the negative. The motion passes. We're entering Executive Session. Thank you. We will not return to Open Session and we will adjourn from Executive Session.
|
total time: 62.18 minutes total words: 4639 |
total time: 16.17 minutes total words: 1002 |
total time: 11.43 minutes total words: 992 |
total time: 6.82 minutes total words: 396 |
|
total time: 23.97 minutes total words: 1134 |
total time: 10.19 minutes total words: 283 |
total time: 1.86 minutes total words: 183 |
total time: 3.87 minutes total words: 446 |
|
total time: 2.75 minutes total words: 126 |
total time: 1.75 minutes total words: 192 |
||