AI-generated transcript of City Council 04-07-26

[Zac Bears]: Meeting Medford City Council, April 7th, 2026 is called to order. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[Rich Eliseo]: Councilor Callahan. Councilor Leming. Councilor Mulling. Councilor Scarpelli. Councilor Tseng. Vice President Zahra is absent. President Pierce.

[Zac Bears]: Present. Six present, one absent. Please rise to salute the flag. Councilor Lazzaro notified me that she's not feeling well and is not able to attend tonight's meeting. Announcements, accolades, remembrances, reports, and records. 26-067 offered by myself, President Bears. Resolution congratulating Library Director Barbara Kerr on her retirement. Be it resolved by the Medford City Council that we congratulate Barbara Kerr on her retirement as Director of the Medford Public Library and thank her for over 40 years of public service to the City of Medford. So pretty self-explanatory resolution in some ways, but I don't think there's any short way to describe the impact that Barbara Kerr has had on our community. Barbara has been at the Medford Public Library for decades. She is instrumental in receiving the, making sure that we received the, State Library Commissioner's Award to build the new Medford Public Library. And then also for the past now almost five years to open that library, to fund that library, to bring in additional funding from the members of the community and foundations to support programs at the library. And the library is more than ever just at the heart of our community. So Barbara has done so much for our city. She has been an amazing public servant, and she is having a retirement party this Friday at the library at 3 o'clock, so I hope that folks can attend. And we're going to get this resolution, assuming you all pass it, and I'll tell her who's responsible if we don't. pass this citation and get it on some paper and I'll bring it down and share it with her at her party on Friday. She's just been such an important figure here in our community and we're so thankful for her decades of service. Councilor Tseng.

[Justin Tseng]: I mean, I think President Bears, you really stated well the number of big projects that she's worked on for our city that families in Medford, that kids in Medford, that residents of all ages, seniors, and those who need internet access have, you know, really benefited from. Barbara's been there for longer than I've been alive. Her impact on the library is something that you see day in and day out. I remember when the library was running on twine and she kept it together. She was instrumental in shepherding in our new library. She is the godmother of the Medford Public Library and our community will be forever in debt to her service. I, you know, I'm really deeply grateful that not only does she have the, you know, has she had the energy to keep up a really complicated library system that we have here at Medford. She's gone up and, up and above in reaching out to us as Councilors when it came to advocating for the library budget. When it came to keeping us updated and tying us, linking us to the board of trustees. to make sure that every one of us knew what was going on at the library on a month-to-month basis. And because of that hard work that she puts in after hours, our library is now a stellar shining star in our community. So the impact is huge. They're huge shoes to fill, but I think all of us here in Medford can be really deeply grateful to Barbara's service to our city.

[Zac Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng. Councilor Scarpelli.

[George Scarpelli]: Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilor Tseng. I won't touch on much more than what Councilor Tseng said, but I want to talk about the barber car that people don't see today in a big, beautiful, fancy library that has all the bells and whistles. I want to talk about the barber car that was there when the roofs were leaking and she was running around with buckets to make sure she could keep the library open. or the person that needed to be reached because we need a community space, and Barbara would be the only person that would be helping our community make sure people could be heard. I think that Barbara's done so much that people don't understand. I know it's easy for some people to sit back and say, well, did she get a paycheck every Friday? Well, good for her. But Barbara's the type of person that goes above and beyond any paycheck. That's why I make the request that this council, Mr. President, finds a way that we do something right before it's time. I've seen too many great people of Medford that have given their lives to Medford, and then when they move on, we then decide that we should name something after them, and they're not there to celebrate it. I think it's time that we find a little corner of our new library that would have a plaque that has Barbara Kerr's name on it so everybody knows the impact that she's made. I mean, you know, I mean, our names are on the, a few of our names are on that wall. It's not Barbara Kerr's, but I tell you what, Barbara Kerr has gone above and beyond anything we've done, and our names are on that building. So it's a little embarrassing for someone like myself that has a name on a building to memorialize it, but someone like Barbara Kerr that's actually put the blood, the sweat, and the tears, and hopefully, you know, her name will live on far longer than will be here. So if we can, Mr. President, I would make the request that we add the possibility of going through the process and finding a room or a meeting space that has Barbara Kerr's name on it. So, again, thank you, Mr. President, for indulging me. So, thanks. And thank you, Barbara, for everything you've done. So, thanks.

[Zac Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. On the motion to approve by Councilor Tseng, as amended by Councilor Scarpelli, to reach out to the Library Trustees and request that we find a place in that library to name after Director Kerr, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli, I'll go to the podium. Mr. Castagnetti, you name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes.

[Andrew Castagnetti]: Andrew Castagnetti, Cushman Street Methodist. I just wanted to say that she's been there quite a while, and she's like an anchor. She's been a really nice person. She's done a great job. She's not here tonight, is she?

[Zac Bears]: She's not here tonight.

[Andrew Castagnetti]: She didn't come last year when you had an award for her either, I don't think. She's probably living in some place, in a nice place. But anyways, I wanted to ask her, I held off from last year, I was hoping to find her this year, that since the New York Post is the oldest continuous running newspaper in the USA, How come, can she make a last command in order to order for the Method Public Library? They don't have it.

[Zac Bears]: Thank you. We thought she'd done everything right. On the motion of Councilor Tseng, as amended by Councilor Scarpelli and seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor? Opposed? The motion passes. Records. The records of the meeting of March 24th, 2026 were passed to Vice President Lazzaro. Vice President Lazzaro is absent. Is there a motion to table? On the motion to table by Councilor Leming, seconded by Councilor Tseng. All those in favor? Opposed? The motion passes. Records of the special joint meeting of March 31st, 2026 were passed to Councilor Leming. Councilor Leming, how do you find those records?

[Matt Leming]: I find the records in order and move to approve.

[Zac Bears]: On the motion of Council, I mean to approve seconded by seconded by Councilor Maloney and all those in favor. Opposed? The motion passes. Reports of committee, 26-028, 26-029, 26-053, and 26065 offered by President Bears's committee. The whole April 1st, 2026 report to follow. This was a meeting where we discussed the snow removal efforts of the city and also we went into executive session to discuss a number of litigation matters. Is there a motion? The motion approved by Councilor Tseng, seconded by Councilor Callahan. All those in favor?

[Unidentified]: Aye.

[Zac Bears]: Opposed? The motion passes. Hearings 26068, petition for a grant of location, National Grid 3960 Mystic Valley Parkway. Petition for grant of location, National Grid North Andover. Petition for a joint on pole at 3960 Mystic Valley Parkway, National Grid plan number J031179277. Medford, Massachusetts City Clerk's Office. You're hereby notified that by order of the Medford City Council, the City Council will hold a public hearing in the Howard F. Alden Chambers at Medford City Hall, 85 George P. Hazlett Drive, Medford via Zoom on Tuesday, April 7th, 2026 at 7 p.m. A link to be posted no later than Friday, April 3rd, 2026 on a petition by Massachusetts Electrical Company, DBA National Grid for permission to install a joint own pole at 3960 Mystic Valley Parkway. Following are the recommendations from the engineering division. The grant of location is limited to one joint owned utility pole located within the cement concrete sidewalk 3960 Mystic Valley Parkway on commercial street and labeled P6671 relocated as depicted on the sketch. The grant of location is conditioned on the removal of two existing joint owned poles currently in the middle commercial street right of way and labeled P6671 to be removed as depicted on the sketch and also the mid span pole P1974 that is no longer in use within six months of this approval. Before starting work, the contractor shall notify DigSafe and obtain all operable permits including a public right of way occupancy permit pursuant to section 74141 of the city ordinances prior to commencing work. No other utility structures or appurtenances are adversely impacted. National Grid shall ensure that all sewer, water and drain lines are marked prior to any excavation. Placement of the joint owned utility pole must be provided at least 36 inch clearance of accessible travel path around the structure in accordance with ADA regulations and city standards. and the placement of the joint on pole must be no closer than six inches from the back of Granite Curb. The cement concrete sidewalk restoration shall be done at the time of installation and in consultation with the engineering division per the requirements of an approved PRO permit. Any concrete sidewalk damage during this work must be replaced in kind and cleanly cut at the control joints. Temporary patching using concrete pavement will not be permitted. Call 7 8 1 3 9 3 2 4 2 5 for any accommodations and aid signed Richard Alicio Jr. acting city clerk. All right. Do we have a representative from National Grid here too. Great. If you could come to the podium and present and then we'll have discussion and I believe we have the city engineer with us on Zoom as well. Name and address for the record please.

[Cam Hansel]: Cameron Hansel, National Grid. So we're, National Grid is petitioning to relocate pole 6671 approximately 20 feet north on Commercial Street. The pole, there's an electric line that comes off the pole on the side and feeds a pole line that goes into 4000 Mystic Valley Parkway. And the pole line needs to be shifted in order for clearance away from a new building at 4000 Mystic Valley Parkway.

[Zac Bears]: All right. Are there any questions from members of the council?

[George Scarpelli]: Councilor Scarpelli. Thank you, Mr. President. I know we've had some questions in the past, but I see that the city engineer, just to follow up with him, He approves this process and it looks like the same questions that I had were outlined in the engineer's requests and recommendations. And as long as they're all followed, I would move approve with the word of the city engineer.

[Zac Bears]: City engineer Wartella, is there anything you'd like to add about your recommendations?

[Rich Eliseo]: I have nothing to add at the time.

[George Scarpelli]: I'm here just for questions. Thank you.

[Zac Bears]: Great. I move approval. On the motion of Councilor Scarpelli to approve with the recommendations of the Engineering Division seconded by seconded by Councilor Tseng. All right. We'll open the public hearing to people for, against or otherwise interested in speaking on this matter. Public hearing is open. Are you in favor of this position?

[Cam Hansel]: Yes.

[Zac Bears]: All right. Is there anyone else here who would like to speak about this petition about the joint on pole missing Valley Parkway and Commercial Street. Seeing none in the chamber if you're interested on Zoom please raise your hand on Zoom. Seeing none. I'm declaring the public hearing closed. Any further discussion by members of the council. Seeing none. On the motion. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[Rich Eliseo]: Councilor Callahan? Councilor Leming? Yes. Councilor Millan? Yes. Councilor Scapelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng? Yes. Mr. President, Lazzaro is absent. President Pierce?

[Zac Bears]: Yes. Six in the affirmative, one absent. The motion passes. Thank you.

[Cam Hansel]: Thank you.

[Zac Bears]: Petitions, presentations, and similar papers. 26-069, petition for a common victual license, Cilantro's Mexican Grill, Medford, LLC. This is to certify a common victual license is granted to Cilantro's Mexican Grill, Medford, LLC, DBA, Cilantro's Mexican Grill, Medford. Location, 495 Riverside Ave, Medford, Massachusetts, in the city of Medford. Hours of operation, Monday through Sunday, 10 a.m. to 12 a.m., so 10 a.m. to midnight. And we have a request as part of this for extended hours for 10 a.m. to midnight. The explanation is that our type of fast food business lends itself to a busy working customer and late night crowds, whether that be people working the third shift or just people out and about. As we did in our research on Fells Lake Plaza and the surrounding neighborhoods, we observed that it retains vibrant activity into the night. Most of the restaurants here cater to that late night crowd by staying open later. Panda Express, midnight. Raisin Cane's, midnight. Wing Stop, 1 a.m. Dave's Hot Chicken, midnight. And we figured we could try to capture some of that business. Do we have a representative from Cilantro's Mexican Grill? Wonderful. You can come to the podium. And I'll turn it over to Councilor Scarpelli.

[George Scarpelli]: Good evening. Good evening. Thank you. Correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. President. I know that we say we have our rules at 11 o'clock, but we've given the approval for 12 o'clock for that area. I just want to make sure that it's okay to this usually is a special permit request after, so without legal representation.

[Zac Bears]: We've reviewed the process and it's shifted. It's not a special permit. It's a request, a licensed request for extended hours and we do have that on there. So we have both documents.

[George Scarpelli]: The only reason why I just wanted to say, just to make sure that legally we're doing the right thing without a city solicitor again is pretty difficult. It's not your fault, but I just wanted to make sure I would might be a little bit standoffish if it was in a neighborhood that doesn't have the hours of operation that are in place with your competitors. But I can see that. If I can, though, the map says 495. What location are you moving it to? Is it Smashburg is moving, is it?

[SPEAKER_09]: Correct.

[George Scarpelli]: So that you're just taking the place of Smashburg?

[SPEAKER_09]: Yes.

[George Scarpelli]: All right. So everything is in order, Mr. President. I know that, again, What we've done in the past is a 30, 60, 90 day review when it comes to hours of operation that late. And I would stick with just offer that without any restrictions moving forward just to make sure that we get to revisit to make sure that everybody's doing what they're supposed to do and what they promised. And then after that, we're ready to go. So I wouldn't want to hinder it. So on that, I move approval, Mr. President.

[Zac Bears]: Great. So and just for you guys what that means we have a motion to approve the license with 30, 60, 90 day review on the extended hours. So that means if there's any complaints about the extended hours we'll hear from our building department, our police department and then we might have another conversation with you guys. But you know we don't expect that but it's just something we want to double check whenever we're doing the extended hours. Is there anything, well first any other questions from members of the council? All right. We want to give you an opportunity to our audience. We never know quite how big it is, but it's some people if you want to share about your business and what your guys' plans are for the business.

[SPEAKER_09]: Sure. My name is Sean McBride. This is Victor Ortega. We've got 20, 25 years experience in the restaurant business behind us. We're new to the area, but we have a business in Saugus, and it's been doing pretty well. And the people of Medford at least in City Hall have been very receptive and we're grateful for that Yeah, we you know quality cleanliness that's important to us and As far as the review 30 60 90 does that mean you start at 30 and

[Zac Bears]: Yeah, if we get reports, if we have 10 complaints of loud parties at midnight, you know, within 30 days, we might have a meeting, and then 60 days we'll check again, 90 days we'll check again, and we're guessing, and that'll be after you open. So, you know, we're guessing if at those three stages we haven't, you know, heard any complaints, then it's probably fine. And if not, then we'll have a conversation and see what you guys are planning to do. My hopes are that you know we haven't had to do that very much about it a couple of times in the last few years so but usually you know it seems like you guys have a clear understanding of your business plan and how your customers and you aren't planning to you know have any sort of. midnight raves at the restaurant.

[George Scarpelli]: It's like the cilantro reputation of big parties. It should be fine. It's just a process that we go through just to make sure we protect our neighbors in case. Of course. Very understandable.

[Zac Bears]: Yeah. Yeah. Anything you want to share about the menu or things that you're bringing to Medford that folks might be interested in?

[SPEAKER_09]: Yeah. Well, I'll quickly say in Saugus, it seemed very quiet after 9. So we initially only went to 10 PM. When we came here, we saw the plaza, and we said, wow, there's a lot of activity. So we figured we'd try for midnight, see what happens.

[Zac Bears]: Getting all those people right after Planet Fitness. Yeah, well, yeah. The gym helps.

[SPEAKER_09]: The supermarket helps. And there's a lot of people that work second shift, third shift. Yeah, we get a very mixed crowd. As far as the menu, we try to keep prices reasonable, but we don't skimp on quality. Minimal if hardly any frozen food. Everything's fresh brought in every couple of days We even have the kitchen preparing right behind the line where we present it Burritos tacos quesadillas all the famous stuff But again qualities number one Yeah, we try to keep the portions reasonable we'll never skimp on that and the prices are You know eleven twelve dollars right around that range, so for almost every item. Yeah.

[SPEAKER_04]: Great. Well, thank you both. Councilor Leming?

[Matt Leming]: So my parents visited Medford last week, and they're very picky eaters, and we were driving around. And right as we were driving back towards my apartment, my mom pointed out the window, and she said, hey, we could eat at Cilantro's.

[Unidentified]: Hey.

[Matt Leming]: She saw it and then I looked closer and it said opening soon. I'm saying, sorry mom, it's not open yet. So I'm very glad to see that we're making progress here in this very council meeting towards fixing that situation and hopefully I'll be able to eat there with her the next time they visit town. Welcome to the neighborhood and hope just looking forward to trying some of your vegetarian options.

[Zac Bears]: Plenty.

[SPEAKER_09]: Plenty of them. Thank you.

[Zac Bears]: Awesome. Great. On the motion of Councilor Scarpelli to approve seconded by Councilor Tseng all right we have any public participation on this matter. It's at the Old Smash Burger next to the Panera Bread.

[SPEAKER_09]: Yeah. Yeah. Great.

[Zac Bears]: Great. Anyone else from the public would like to speak on this? Seeing none, on the motion, Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[Rich Eliseo]: Councilor Callahan. Yes. Councilor Leming. Yes. Councilor Milling. Yes. Councilor Scapelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng? Yes. Vice President Zarros? Absent. President Bears?

[Zac Bears]: Yes. Six in the affirmative, one absent. The motion passes. Best of luck.

[SPEAKER_09]: Thank you.

[Zac Bears]: Appreciate you all. Thanks you guys.

[SPEAKER_09]: Thank you all. Hope to see you soon.

[Zac Bears]: Yes. Councilor Leming first. You want to do? On the motion of Councilor Leming to take paper 26-070 out of order seconded by? Seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favour? Opposed? The motion passes. 26-070, resolution to invite the residents of Brooks Park to discuss their experience with rats. Whereas the Tenant Association of the Brooks Park Apartments have been living with a rat infestation since they first formed in March 2024, with residents experiencing frequent sightings of rats behind the building in the parking lot. hearing rats living in the dumpster when throwing away trash, rats on the fire escape outside windows, rat holes along the front of the building, rats in the basement and laundry room, and rats in the city park across the building. And whereas the Tenant Association sent a request to Charles Gate Property Management requesting simple fixes to the heightened levels of rat infestation as detailed in the attached letter from December 2025, notably replacement of inadequate and unused dumpsters with new ones that close tightly, including those with a locked lid and side door. removal of unused dumpers such as the one that is sealed shut, more frequent trash collection, professional exterminator services, plugging rat holes in front of the building, and collaborating with the city in eradicating rats from the park. Whereas Charlesgate has not taken adequate steps to meet these requests since the letter was sent in December, now therefore be it resolved by the Medford City Council that the residents of Brooks Park Apartments and Charlesgate be invited, as well as representatives from the Board of Health, be invited to the City Council to speak about their experiences on the matter. Councilor Leming.

[Matt Leming]: Thank you, Council President Bears, and thank you to the residents of Brooks Park Apartments who have come to the City Council meeting to speak. I have a small presentation here. It's mostly just pictures that I took of the last two or three times I've gone to meet with the residents of Brooks Park Apartments. I'm going to send a request to share. We got this right here. OK. So these are these are a couple. So I've gone. OK so a little bit of background. Brooks Park Apartments was purchased by Charles Gate property managers a couple of years ago and they've purchased a few properties around the city and have developed a bit of a bit of a reputation for being unresponsive to residents' claims. I did invite them to this meeting, and they said that they didn't have adequate notice to attend, which I think is fair. But so it should be noted that when I did reach out to them, they did respond to me. Also in this agenda is a letter that the residents of Brooks Park sent to Charles Gates listing a couple of A couple of requests that they had for fixing the situation. But essentially, the residents of Brooks Park have been living pretty consistently with rat infestations. Residents have noted that they're frequently in the dumpsters. They see them on the fire escapes all the time. They see them in the basement under the building. And there's a couple, and the Board of Health is long on this. They've been doing what they can to amend the situation. But at the end of the day, this is a case of a landlord that needs to do a couple of very simple things to fix this situation. And they simply have not been putting the investment in these properties that they need to. So, picture it here, the four dumpsters that They have in the building. Again, these are dumpsters that are frequently overflowing with trash. Many of them have rats underneath them. One of the dumpsters, the dumpsters in the middle, has been just permanently sealed off when I visited there in December 2025, and it was still sealed when I visited there last week. It seems to be an operational dumpster, but the landlord decided to seal it off. The dumpsters are also way too small for this apartment complex. This picture here on the left is one that was taken by Dan, one of the residents of Brooks Park. And he said that this is a fairly normal state of affairs for the trash to be overflowing to this degree. The picture on the right is a picture that I took during our tour of the apartment complex last week. And you could see visualized here, I know it's a little bit dark, but a dead rat hanging out from underneath one of the dumpsters. So it's not really that hard to find physical evidence of this infestation that these residents have been dealing with. When I toured the apartment complex in December of last year, The residents typically hold meetings in their laundry room in the basement, which has its own odor to it. It's a place where rats are very frequently found. It smells like urine. As you can see, there's a corner that's just covered in rat droppings. The property owners have since cleaned that particular part up, but within the basement and the building in general, there's many holes that rats use to get in and out of the building. A lot of them go to the park in front of it, and then they seek out the building just to get some form of shelter. Outside as well, in some of these photos, the hedges in front have a lot of rat holes, which you could see in the top center photo. And there's also, you know, just during that tour, another dead rat that we found there. So for these residents, it's gotten pretty bad. It's an older building. I believe it was built in the in the 1920s and so there is a lot of work that needs to be done on it. But the point is with this situation, it's gotten pretty bad and there's a couple of very low investment, there's a couple of very low cost options that the landlords can undertake in order to fix this situation, namely just getting more dumpsters, getting, you know, getting more frequent trash pickup, making sure that the trash receptacles that they have can be sealed. And unfortunately, we've kind of come to a situation where they've been not responsive enough to these claims over the last couple of months that I thought it was necessary to bring this up at a City Council meeting and hopefully put some public pressure on them. Last week, the tenant association organized a tour in which a member of staff, a sanitarian from the Medford Board of Health also attended. That's Deanna Earl, pictured right here. as well as many members of the Brooks Park Tenant Association. They walked myself and Deanna around, just showed everybody sort of what the situation was. Dan, pictured here, kind of took everybody around, told folks where he usually saw the rats hiding. So this is definitely a case where, you know, the city knows what's going on. They are trying to do what they can. The park in front is public property and the Board of Health has, done its part, but we do need to get a more substantial response from Charlesgate and encourage them to put more of an investment in this property and help these residents out who've been living with the presence of rats for a very long period of time. But I've put a little bit too much time talking. I feel like I would be pleased if some of the residents who've taken time out of their evening to attend the city council meeting would be free to say a few words. And by all means, please, the floor is yours. Thank you.

[Zac Bears]: Thanks, you guys. I'm really glad to have you here. And if you could just give us your name and your address when you speak, let us know, you know, who you are. And we really want to hear your story. And we're grateful to all of you guys for organizing, Councilor Leming for working with you and engaging the city on this. So thank you for being here. And also apologies, we never run on time. So I apologize for that. But again, thank you for being here. Name and address, please.

[SPEAKER_08]: appreciate all of you for having us speak and to Councilor Leming in particular for your support. My name is Steve Meacham and I'm with the Housing Justice Alliance. We work with tenant associations in many communities, inner suburbs, including Medford. And one of those is the Brooks Park Tenant Association. We came here actually two years ago seeking support for our efforts to get a collective bargaining agreement. And just so you know, we won that partly due to your support. the things that you do make a difference. But we held that walking tour that Councilor Leming referred to last week, and we've been just trying to fight this rat situation. I'm going to let our folks here talk about it. But even for me, I've been to countless meetings in the laundry room in the back of the building, and I've learned, don't walk back there unless you have a flashlight and are ready to make noise, because there's a lot of rats. So thank you for having us, and I'll let these guys introduce themselves. Thank you.

[SPEAKER_01]: Good evening. I am Julia Forster, and I have lived at Brooks Park in Medford for almost 24 years. I live in Building 8, Apartment 19. I am here this evening to discuss the rat population and to share with you how it is affecting my life. They do not pay rent like we do. I go outside to empty the trash. One hears them in the dumpsters. Click, click. They run up the roof covering the boiler and run down the fire escape. One sees them in the back running from one garage to another and under the cars. In the common areas such as the basement where the laundry facilities and storage areas are, they are seen and smelled. P.U. They can also be seen in the front of Brooks Park behind the hedges darting out of their burrowed holes and running across the road to the park. I am scared to go out at night and I won't leave without my flashlight. They are getting bigger and fatter and there are more and more of them. Again, they do not pay rent. I have alerted Charlesgate and sent photos several times. They do have someone who comes around and does something. One sees the huge black boxes everywhere. But these guys are still here, and nothing has changed. Charlesgate needs to be put on notice. We need new dumpsters with tight lids so the rats won't get into the trash. Thank you for attention to this serious matter.

[SPEAKER_04]: Thank you.

[SPEAKER_07]: My name is Christopher Ramos. I live at 10 Brooks Park apartment number 12. I'll try to keep this quick. I pretty much I'm in and out of the apartment quite a bit and rats are literally running past my feet. The picture that the Councilor showed of the rat hanging out of the dumpster, that rat has actually been there for a few months now. I remember when I first saw it, and I should have took a picture when I first saw it, but I thought it would have been morbid, so I didn't do it. But when we took the tour, like, I literally saw the rotting corpse still hanging there, and nothing's been done about it, and it's just really disgusting. Thank you. Thank you.

[SPEAKER_15]: Hi my name is Matthew Bonvaloir. I live at 16 Brooks Park. This actually technically isn't even the building in question. My landlord is actually totally separate landlord. I don't quite have the same issues. So this problem isn't necessarily my problem as it's their problem but it's slowly becoming that and it certainly affects my day to day life. I've lived here for four years now in Medford. You know, you see rats around the city. It's a city. You're going to see rats. But this past fall into winter especially, it's been bad. Just as they described, you see them darting under cars, broad daylight. Don't take the trash out at night. We have a totally different dumpster. They're probably 200 yards away. Totally different spot. But you still don't take the trash out at night around there. But still, even with all of that, up until last week when we had our meeting, I didn't realize just how bad of an infestation it was. As you saw from some of the pictures, we were actually outside. It was still light out. And when we were standing there in that little driveway, I saw two live rats, not the dead ones that we also just talked about. So there's a dozen people standing outside. It's still light out. And we got rats darting around. That's definitely an infestation, not just a little problem. If someone in my building were to leave a door or window open too long now all of a sudden now this this is as much as my problem as it is theirs. You know I really hope you can help us come to a conclusion here because I certainly have seen things take off and in the negative direction this past year. And I just really appreciate your time to listen to us today and hopefully we can come to an agreement and just improve the situation and the city as a whole. Thank you.

[Zac Bears]: Thank you. Anything else you guys would like to add at this time?

[SPEAKER_08]: At this time, I don't think. Thank you.

[Zac Bears]: Great. Thank you. Thank you for voicing this and then we're going to talk about it a bit more. Councilor Leming, could you give us kind of some thoughts on how the visit went and what the health department thinks they may be able to do?

[Matt Leming]: Well, so the health department, well, so the visit went, I mean, it was a nice way to engage the community. It definitely reflected that it's a concern for most of the residents there. It's one of the primary focuses of the tenants union right now. My impression is that Charles Gate, they're trying to put as little investment in these properties as they can. They did send me a list of repairs that they have done. It's mostly been things like painting the hallways, which is nice. But when it comes to things like capital projects or what residents are largely requesting, which is things like repairs to the holes in the building or getting a new dumpster that actually seals shut. Those requests have largely so far fallen on deaf ears. The health department, a lot of their job sort of revolves around trying to work with the landlord just the same as the tenants association is trying to do. So encouraging the landlord to actually put these investments in the properties themselves. So yeah, I would say the interaction, I mean the interaction itself with the residents overall went well. very very positive positively and I think that the city has really done really done its part and Sort of addressing addressing some of these problems. We really just need to keep up pressure on the pressure on the landlords themselves and kind of show them that this is not an acceptable way of doing business, which again, Charlesgate, we've seen stuff like this happen with them before. They spend a lot of money to buy this property. They spend a lot of money to buy other apartment complexes around Medford, so clearly they want the properties. I know that the planning department, when Brooks Park was first being sold off, there was an affordable housing developer that was also bidding for the property, and they just got outbid by Charlesgate. So there is capital being put into this. It's just not actually being put into the maintenance itself. So, yeah, a lot of this really just reduces to sort of naming and shaming landlords who choose to not make the repairs that they need to be making.

[Zac Bears]: Certainly, we can submit this to them, get a copy of the resolution and submit that via the channels that you have. I guess more what I was going after, obviously, it seems to me that this is becoming Obviously, it's a huge issue for the folks in the building. It's also a neighborhood issue as we heard. Is the health department prepared to issue warnings and citations for anything or is that a next step that's possible?

[Matt Leming]: I would, so I do wish that we had some representatives from the, from the, from the health department here. I know that they did, they did go on the, they, one of them, the sanitarian did go on the tour. But I would, I would request that, yeah, I'd have to get information from Mary Ann to see exactly, to see if anything right there currently would require that they issue a warning or a citation. Great. Let me go to Councilor Callahan.

[Anna Callahan]: Yeah, my questions are very similar. I just was curious what tools the health department and the building department have. And maybe if we don't have a good answer here in the room tonight, I would make a motion to send this letter and our motion to both the health department and the building department and just ask what tools do they have to deal with these issues.

[Zac Bears]: Great. So we have the motion of Councilor Leming as amended by Councilor Callahan and Councilor Leming. So the motion amendment by Councilor Leming is to submit this to Charles Gate, formally share this approved resolution with Charles Gate and by Councilor Callahan is to request from the Health Department and Building Department what the next steps are on warnings and citations to address this health issue. Councilor Tseng.

[Justin Tseng]: I just wanted to offer my sympathies for this really unfortunate, really gross situation for the folks living there. I can't imagine what it's been like to live with that level of rodent infestation, rodent corpses, rodent waste around. It's certainly not a livable environment. And I'm sure that this council will stand in support of the tenants union and those living there and in support of those living around the building because as I think other Councilors and members of the public have acknowledged already, this affects the neighbors as well. I'm glad to hear that Our city departments are doing what we can. I think I had similar questions as President Bears and Councilor Callahan. If there's anything that the city can help with regards to You know maybe setting the stage for a demand letter at some point to compel the landlords into action. Be it kind of through inspectional facts like establishing those facts. I think the city should look at those avenues.

[Matt Leming]: Yeah I have informally. Sorry. Yep. I did have informal conversations with the health department about, you know, what can you do to prevent these infestations. And most of the answer, the answer that they gave, they said it really reduced to sealing your trash and making sure that your trash doesn't get around and just making sure that cleanliness is generally enforced. That's why I keep emphasizing the dumpster situation in this particular. in this particular context. If you actually go to the buildings, the dumpsters are very clearly too small and inadequate for the residents living there. This is just a very simple fix of taking the old, very broken dumpsters away and putting in one that rats can't chew through. The health department, they very likely can put out citations, they can charge fines, but at the end of the day, it's going to be on the landlord to either get bigger dumpsters or have more frequent trash pickup.

[Justin Tseng]: Yeah, 100%. I'm taking all of that was through the president, through the chair. I, you know, I think we should be exploring those options. I'm sure, as you mentioned, the health department is. I would also, you know, I think it's important to tell the public and to tell the landlords that in the state of Massachusetts, it's the landlord's responsibility to keep their residence spaces free from infestation, which includes rodent control. And that is a responsibility of the landlord legally in here. You know, I think whatever we can do to help the tenant's union with that, if that ever, you know, if we ever come to that point, I think is helpful. Of course, hopefully, this will be resolved peacefully.

[Zac Bears]: Yeah. In addition, Section 6113 of the Road and Control Ordinance from 2021 requires permits for dumpsters and fees to be associated and integrated pest management plan. And that's for all dumpsters on residential or commercial property. So there's definitely a review mechanism and requirement for the integrated pest management plan as well under the city ordinance. So that was one of the earlier ordinances that I worked on. So I know that that's an important thing. And we have some amendments actually to that that we passed recently as well. I'm not going to have to look that up separately. I think there's many tools that we can try to leverage here to make sure that the property owner is following our city ordinances and also making sure that the property is, you know, at least on the dumpster side of things, that's a start. Councilman.

[Matt Leming]: Yeah. And I know that, I know that, you know, council, this council has had issues publicize or let's see, codifying a lot of the ordinances and Mary Ann only recently got the most updated copy or learned that the most updated copy of the rodent control ordinance had been ordained. So hopefully we do start to see the Board of Health implement some of those.

[Zac Bears]: That section's from 2021. So they know about that. Section I read. That one I got on MuniCode. All right. So we have the motion of Councilor Leming, seconded by Councilor Mullane as amended by Councilor Callahan. All right. Any further discussion by members of the council? Seeing none, is there anyone from the public who'd like to speak in addition on this item? We have one person in the chamber. If there's anyone on Zoom, please raise your hand on Zoom. name and address for the record please and you'll have three minutes.

[Paulette Vartabedian]: I'm not suggesting in any way that the council is dragging their feet on this, but I just want to point out something that how We really, really, really, really need to move fast on this. Rats don't have a breeding season per se. They can breed all year round, but in the winter months it's much less. But March and April they start really, really populating. One single female rat can produce 56 or more. rats a year. They come in, the gestation is 18 to 22 days, but the females can start reproducing three days after that at 25 days. So if you think, say if we have 100 rats and 50 of them are female and each one of those are going to produce 56 babies approximately, your population is going to explode. So that's basically what I wanted to say is that Again, I'm not suggesting you're dragging your feet, but you really need to move on this. And if the citation is the first step, and then start finding, because it's obvious that their landlord is not doing what needs to be done. And all you need is one person to come down with something that a rat carried, and what happens then. But thank you.

[Zac Bears]: Thank you. Any further comments on this matter? I definitely agree we need to move on this quickly. All right. Seeing none. Thank you for the Brooks Parks Tennis Association for everything you've been doing. Thanks for coming tonight sharing your stories with us. And we're going to keep pushing on Charles Gate and also seeing what other levers from the city we can use to address the rat issue that you're facing in your homes. So thank you for being here on the motion. All those in favor. Opposed. The motion passes. 25-136, Resolution to Update Inclusionary Zoning for Fractional Affordable Housing Incentives. This is an update from a paper that we approved in December, which referred the affordable housing fractional incentive to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund Board for specific recommendations. And we do have that back. from the affordable housing trust fund board. We have our housing planner Catherine Buckingham here with us. We have a letter from I think we have Lisa Ann Davidson, the chair of the affordable housing trust on Zoom as well. We did receive a letter back, dear city councilors, on behalf of the Medford affordable housing trust fund board, I'm ready to express enthusiastic support for an ordinance that would allow the city of Medford to accept fractional payments to be paid in lieu of rounding up the number of affordable units created. This past fall, Councilor Leming presented Resolution 25-136 to the Board supporting a fractional payment ordinance and calling on the Affordable Housing Trust Fund Board to make recommendations on how to update this policy. In subsequent months, the Board was given frequent updates from city staff members and provided feedback regarding specific language for this ordinance. The Board unanimously voted to voice our approval of this ordinance as included below. This change has a potential to increase the amount of housing constructed by reducing the incentive for developers to limit the size of their developments in order to avoid rounding up. the number of affordable units they're required to provide. Furthermore, the revenue from fractional payments will be a valuable funding source to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, allowing future investment in supporting affordable housing in Medford. We respectfully request and encourage members of the City Council to support this important initiative, and thank you for your steadfast commitment to enhancing affordable housing opportunities in Medford. Sincerely, Lisa Davidson, Chair of the Medford Affordable Housing Trust Fund Board. And the ordinance here is Fractional Payments Suggested Language. You know what? I'll let you handle it, Catherine, but I'll go to Matt first.

[Matt Leming]: Thank you, and thank you, Catherine, for coming out here, and Lisa as well on Zoom for coming out here to present this to us. Very pleased to see that the Affordable Housing Trust got back with recommended language on on for fractional payments. Just so that folks sort of understand what this is from a more layman's perspective, I'm just going to try to explain the math behind what's going on here. Under Medford's current ordinances, you can build nine units by right and none of them have to be affordable. They don't have to be affordable under the MGL definition of affordability. when you get to 10 units, when you get to that threshold, 10% of units have to be affordable. So if you build 10 units, then one of them has to be affordable. The issue with that is that after 10 units, like between I believe 10 and 20, 10% of however many units you're building have to be affordable, and the issue with that is that if that becomes a fraction, then you have to round up. So if you wanna build 11 units, Then that means then 10 percent of 11 is 1.1 and you round up to 2. So that means that essentially what this means is that we have a lot of nine unit buildings in Medford. And if you start and people are strongly disincentivized from building certain levels of units like certain numbers of units because you know you really don't want to build an 11-unit property because then you're required to make two of those affordable from 11 until, I believe, 20. What the fractional payment does is it means that if you want to build 11 units, then you don't have to build two affordable units. You have to build one affordable unit, then you can take that 0.1 in fraction, like fraction of a unit, take the equivalent amount that that would cost and then put it into the Affordable Housing Trust instead of building an additional affordable unit. What this does, in effect, is it allows us to get more units built and more money into the Affordable Housing Trust, which is, I'm sure, a goal that everybody can agree advances the goals of affordable housing. different ways that municipalities have implemented these fractional incentives. And I'm glad to hear that the Affordable Housing Trust has given us a proposal for how to do that. And with that, I would appreciate it if the chair would be able to turn it over to Catherine, who's prepared a presentation on this.

[Zac Bears]: Senator Buckingham.

[Katherine Buckingham]: Yes, hello. Thank you for having me. I do have a presentation, which I believe I can share my screen on Zoom. Okay, so I'll do that. And if anyone wants to confirm if they can do that, or see that, sorry.

[SPEAKER_04]: We can see it. I want to go to slideshow mode. Yeah.

[Katherine Buckingham]: Let's see. Okay. Councilor Leming actually did a lot of the work for me, so I'll kind of breeze through the parts he already explained. But this is the current ordinance with respect to the inclusionary zoning that Councilor Leming spoke about. So up to nine units, there's no regulation requiring building affordable units from 10 to 24. Then 10% of those have to be affordable. And as you can see on the slides, 25 to 49 units have a 13% limit for, requirement, and 50 or more, up to 15%. That's just background. We're not going to change that. In 94, 8.1.8, This describes the requirements just only point number one is the only one we're referencing. It currently says fractional units where the number of have to move my zoom sidebar to read all this where the required number of affordable units result in a fraction of a unit. The required number should be rounded up to the nearest whole number. That's what it says currently. The challenge, as Councilor Leming described, is it discourages development above certain thresholds. I kind of walked through exactly the example that he already gave, so I'll skip that. So this is the proposed language. Would it be helpful for me to read the whole thing? Okay. I'm just going to bring this over here. So replacing what it previously said for point number one, it now would say.

[Zac Bears]: It might be easier to explain it than to read it verbatim.

[Katherine Buckingham]: I mean, it's basically exactly what Councilor Leming said. It's just saying instead of rounding up, you now have an option. You can either A, round up and build that extra unit or you can alternatively Whatever fraction of the unit you need to build, you can just, there's language in here about how you find that exact calculation. Whatever that number is, and it's tied to EOHLC, which is the Massachusetts Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities. They have a metric in there which we will use as our reference point so that we don't have to update the language all the time. So whatever the value of one unit would be based on that, You would say, say it's 0.1 units, then take 10% of that. That amount could be then contributed into the Affordable Housing Trust. So you could either build the, you could round up, or you could make that contribution to the trust. The benefit of that we see is that instead of the current situation where developers are disincentivized for building above certain thresholds. Now they could, instead of have to build a whole extra unit, which could cost a lot of money if they're just making a payment of a fraction, then they have more incentive to build more units. So the trust is getting money and more housing units are being built. Does anyone want me to read through more of this language? I kind of talk, the presentation I explain a bit more, but.

[SPEAKER_04]: I think, yeah.

[Katherine Buckingham]: Okay. So important clarification, this would not be a payment in lieu of an entire affordable unit. So we're not saying if you're supposed to build 1.1, make a big payment equivalent to one unit and a tenth of a unit. You have to build an entire unit. This only applies to that additional fraction of the unit. So that, and at any time jump in if you have questions. So the benefits, as I mentioned, more housing is created overall, increasing revenue for the Affordable Housing Trust, and then with that increased revenue, the Affordable Housing Trust will have more available funds to support the creation of affordable housing in the future. And here I'm kind of going through math similar to what we talked about before, so I don't think I need to go through all of it. But the end result being, as we discussed, more units being built overall and also more revenue generated for the trust. I only wanted to make that clarification because Medford as a city in general, we tend to prioritize the building of units rather than generation of money. Other cities do offer pay in lieu for entire units. We have decided as a city we would rather build more units. However this we feel like is a valuable tool because it's not replacing a whole entire unit that would be built. Hypothetically it could be but in practice what happens is they're just not built. So we find this to be a win win. If there are any questions I'm happy to answer that.

[Zac Bears]: Any questions for our housing planner? So this is, oh, Councilor Tseng.

[Justin Tseng]: I don't have any huge questions. The one question I have is, are we gonna track the success of the ordinance? I mean, I'm fully in support of it, but is there a way for us to track the fractional payments to the Affordable Housing Trust?

[Katherine Buckingham]: Yeah, absolutely, the treasurer and I work together in keeping track of all the payments going in and out. And that would certainly be something we would track.

[Justin Tseng]: Great, thank you. Thank you for your presentation, for Councilor Leming's hard work, and for the hard work on the behalf of your department and from the Affordable Housing Trust Committee. I, I think this is, you know, a win-win solution. As you said, it brings more revenue into the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, which our city benefits from. And it also I think patches up a, a kind of unattended consequence of a, of a good policy that we have. And so I think this is a pretty straightforward win for the city. And I am excited about it. Thank you.

[Paulette Vartabedian]: Thank you.

[Zac Bears]: Great, thank you. Seeing no further questions from members of the council, this is a zoning amendment, right? So we need to refer to this.

[Katherine Buckingham]: Yeah, it's for 94.8.1.8.

[Zac Bears]: So we need to refer this to the Community Development Board. So that's the motion tonight. We're not able to advance this. It needs to go through the zoning process. So the motion would be to refer this to the Community Development Board and they would schedule a public hearing and then we would have a public hearing and then we'll have a final vote on it. Councilor Leming, is that a motion to refer to Community Development Board?

[Matt Leming]: Yes. I was also just to make sure. Do we have to refer this to legal to?

[Zac Bears]: Community Development Board, it'll go through that process.

[Matt Leming]: Okay. So I moved.

[Zac Bears]: On the motion to refer the proposed zoning amendment to the Community Development Board by Councilor Leming, seconded by? Seconded by Councilor Callahan. Any further discussion by members of the council? Could you stop sharing, Catherine? Thank you. Any discussion by members of the public on the referral to the Community Development Board? Seeing none, Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. Actually, I don't think we need a roll call on this. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion passes. Thanks, Catherine. Thank you. All right. I would request that we table papers 26-073 and 26058. I'm going to schedule a special meeting next week for consideration. Is there a motion? A motion of Councilor Tseng seconded by? Seconded by Councilor Callahan. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? The motion passes. 26065 offered by Mayor Breanna Lungo-Koehn. Submitted by Mayor Breanna Lungo-Koehn. We do have an updated paper on this. Matters discussed in executive session last week. Let me just pull this up. April 7, 2026, litigation settlement. Dear President Bears and members of the City Council, I respectfully request and recommend your Honorable Body approve the following settlement amounts which were discussed in executive session on April 1, 2026. Joseph P. Caraviello and Son Inc. versus City of Medford, $235,000. Delia Trinos-Romero versus City of Medford, $4,135.74. Plymouth Rock Assurance Corp. ASO Mike's Landscaping versus City of Medford, $2,800. Commerce Insurance ASO Brian T. Geary versus City of Medford, $5,000. Safety Insurance Co. ASO Joanne Saro versus City of Medford, $3,000. Electric Mutual Insurance versus City of Medford, $4,000. Fargo et al. versus City of Medford, 28 885 10 and Convoy versus City of Medford 19,000. Thank you for your kind attention to this matter. Sincerely, Brandon O'Connor, Mayor. I know these were discussed in executive session. If there's anyone who wants to speak further on these before we move ahead on them. You know, these are settlement amounts, and my understanding is that the council, I was actually unable to be present for that, but that the council did take votes to advance these settlement amounts to the regular meeting for final approval. If there's anything else anyone would like to say on the matter, this is on the litigation settlements from executive session last week.

[George Scarpelli]: That's okay. No worries, George. I saw, I don't know where we are, but I apologize.

[Zac Bears]: I know that we started, so it's just what, I just read out the settlement amounts for the Caraviello versus City Romero, the various insurance ones and then Fargo versus City of Medford and Convoy versus City of Medford. So I just read the settlement amounts. I know that the council voted to advance these for approval after the executive session discussion. I believe from what I read that, The council agreed that these were the best possible options given the situation. But beyond that, I leave that up to you guys to share. Councilor Scarpelli.

[George Scarpelli]: Thank you, Mr. President. And what could be shared and what can't is very difficult. So I think that what we heard is something that as a council, I believe we agreed to move forward with those recommendations. But again, it leaves to this council to do our due diligence to look into questions that we'll have later about, you know, what's this costing our community where we accept what's offered, I believe, that night. We listen to the attorneys and listen to the cases, and I believe this council We'll move forward to approve those and move them forward, but I think we need to do our due diligence moving forward to get a better understanding of the cost breakdown of what not just the lawsuits are costing the city, but also what the litigation is costing us with these firms that are being used to represent the City of Medford because it's getting tiresome. Thank you, Mr. President. I would move approval.

[Zac Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. Any further discussions by members of the Council? Second. The motion of Councilor Scarpelli seconded by Councilor Tseng. I just want to add, you know, some of these are items that we've dealt with as a council for years and are always going to happen, you know, insurance lawsuits relative to vehicle damage due to an accident or, you know, things like that. I think one of these items is around a contract where there was a disagreement on whether the vendor had provided the effective services or not and wanting some of that to be repaired. A couple of these are on, you know, personnel matters. collective bargaining questions and are not the things that we are used to seeing as often, certainly in my early tenure on the council as we have seen more recently. So, I accept that given the position that we are in, these seem to be the best settlements that can be reached on these matters, but I think there's a larger question as to, you know, whether or not we should have ended up in these situations in the first place. And that's not so much speaking to these specific situations as in general. So I just wanted to give a little bit of context, given the limits available to us on these items and the settlement agreements. We have a motion from Councilor Scarpelli to approve the settlement amounts, seconded by Councilor Tseng. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[Rich Eliseo]: Councilor Callahan? Yes. Councilor Leming? Yes. Councilor Maloney? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Council is saying Vice President Zahra is absent. President Bears.

[Zac Bears]: Yes. Six in the affirmative, one absent. The motion passes. Give me one moment here. All right, we have 26071, Board and Commission Appointments. And we have a number of them. We have Conservation Commission, Jessica Walla, Elections Commission. That's the only appointment to the Conservation Commission. We have Elections Commission, Henry Miller and reappointment, Democrat, William O'Keefe, Republican, Mark Davidson, Democrat, Gino DeSimone, Republican. Garden Commission, Linda Arrini, and Zoning Board of Appeals, ZBA, Mark Crowley. For the new folks, we do have their applications and our resumes. We received them in the packets. And just a note, per the charter, this is if a majority of the council objects to any one appointment, then they would not be appointed. But if we do not object, then they move ahead. Any discussion on these appointments? Specifically, any motions to object or otherwise? And it looks like Jim maybe wants to speak to the Elections Commission. So any councilors want to speak right now? Seeing none, our Elections Manager.

[James Blatchford]: Thank you, President Bears. James Blatchford, Elections Manager, Room 102 here at City Hall. I just want to speak briefly on the Election Commission appointments. My commission's terms expired March 31st. I need to be able to approve nomination papers. I need three signatures to do so, so I would urgently request that the council please give me a commission so I can get their signatures on the file and so I can approve nomination papers.

[Zac Bears]: And Jim just to clarify very quickly because I want to make sure we make the right votes. Does Chapter 51 Section 16A require our approval to confirm elections commissioner.

[James Blatchford]: I don't believe so but I I'm not an attorney.

[Zac Bears]: All right, let me double check that. These were submitted kind of under the, now we're in this new thing where some ordinances and some laws require us to confirm people, and now the charter requires us to not reject people. So we need to figure out which one this is.

[James Blatchford]: I believe under MGL, it does not. It's an appointment by the mayor after a recommendation from the local committees.

[Zac Bears]: Sorry, Justin.

[Justin Tseng]: Yeah, it's what I'm seeing.

[Zac Bears]: It looks like it says. And I think we did this the first time around. Subject to the approval of the Board of Aldermen, the city manager, the select 1.1 member. That's the term of the 7th Elections Commission as far as in the case of vacancy occurs inside board of the Mayor's Senate to the approval of the Board of Aldermen, City Manager Schlechman. So yeah, we do need to approve this. So let's make sure we do it right. All right. So we'll need a couple of motions here. First we'll need a motion to confirm the appointment of Henry Miller and William O'Keefe, Mark Davidson and Gino DeSimone to the Elections Commission. Councilor Leming.

[Matt Leming]: And no, I'm good with that. This is a, I mean, considering that we've received the applications and resumes were applicable, I do see this as a good faith effort by the administration to provide the council with as much information as they have when making these appointments. Just would like to bring up the point, though, if we, does, the current charter says that for most of the multi-member bodies, I believe, we're just required to not reject them. But could, my question is, could we just approve these anyway? And that could be, that could in effect be the not rejection. I mean, the difference between not rejecting and an explicit approval just seems like a bit of a, it just seems like a bit of a, I don't know, a Scrivener's thing at this point. Like if we vote to approve these, the applicants, then clearly we're not rejecting them.

[Zac Bears]: Yeah, I think that's true. I just think we need to make sure that we're getting I think we're, you know, as we don't, still do not have a charter implementation process from the administration. I just want to make sure that for things that by law, charter or ordinance, we need to confirm. We take separate votes specifically to confirm those appointments. And I actually think the Garden Commission might be one, weirdly enough, on here too. So certainly like approving the other ones, but I want to make sure I don't want this process, in the past when we had to approve or reject nominations before the new charter went into effect, we received a letter indicating as such. We did not receive those letters for these appointments. So I want to make sure that we're still getting them for the ones that require our confirmation in addition to kind of that lower level of information, the resumes or applications for simply the ones that we don't have to reject, if that makes sense.

[Matt Leming]: Right. And, Council President Bears, to follow up on that, if we, under the charter, and this could just be an implementation thing, if we vote here to not reject those appointments, does that mean that the moment that not reject vote happens, they're appointed? Or does it mean that at the date of the appointment, 30 days after submission, they are then appointed? Because it does seem like, again, if we just say a yes vote, that could, in effect, be, okay, they're appointed then, instead of having to wait 30 days for somebody we already voted to approve slash numbers.

[Zac Bears]: I believe it's we have the right to reject within 30 days. I don't think it waits for them to appoint necessarily. But in this case, I think it's different because it's the same thing. It's the state law.

[James Blatchford]: I would say out of an abundance of caution approval would be yes.

[Zac Bears]: Appreciate it. Sure. All right. So you get.

[Matt Leming]: Yeah I'm good.

[Zac Bears]: On the motion of Councilor Tseng seconded by Councilor Malone to confirm the nominations of Henry Miller and William O'Keefe Mark Davidson and Gino DeSimone to the Elections Commission. Mr. Clerk please call the roll.

[Rich Eliseo]: Councilor Callahan? Councilor Leming? Yes. Councilor Mullane? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng? Vice Presidents are all absent. Opposed and in pairs.

[Zac Bears]: Yes. Six in the affirmative, one absent. The motion passes. So we've confirmed those. That vote reflects that we voted to confirm those appointments. I think the language you've mentioned is fine, Councilor Leming, for the other ones. If we want a motion to approve the nominations of Jessica Walla to the Conservation Commission, Linda Arrini to the Garden Commission, and Mark Crowley to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Is there a motion? The motion by Councilor Scarpelli to approve those three, seconded by? Seconded by Councilor Tseng. Mr. Clerk, please call the Councilor.

[Matt Leming]: Apologies. This could be my bad. I'm looking through the digital version of the agenda packet because I gave somebody else my copy. I'm seeing the resumes for who we have here, but what page is the actual list of of appointees in the agenda?

[Zac Bears]: I think the actual list didn't go into the agenda, just the resumes of the people.

[Matt Leming]: Is that, would that create an OML issue?

[Zac Bears]: No, it's on here, and the people are named.

[Matt Leming]: Well, I mean the people who aren't named, though.

[Zac Bears]: Everybody's named. Sorry, can you read? Jessica Walla, Linda Arrini, and Mark Crowley.

[Matt Leming]: Okay, yep, move to approve. Great.

[Zac Bears]: On the motion, Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[Rich Eliseo]: Councilor Callahan? Yes. Councilor Leming? Yes. Councilor Millan? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng? Yes. Vice President Zero, absent. President Pierce?

[Zac Bears]: Yes. Six in the affirmative, one absent. The motion passes. Where are we? 26072, Capital Stabilization Fund appropriation request. Dear President Bears and members of the city council, I respect the request and recommend that your honorable body approves the following appropriation from the Capital Stabilization Fund, 20 new pole pads and related expenses in the amount of $13,800. Elections Manager James Blatchford will be available for questions on the request. Capital Stabilization Fund currently has a balance of $9,960,851. Respectfully submitted, Brianne Lungo-Koehn mayor. On the motion to approve by Councilor Scarpelli, seconded by? Seconded by Councilor Tseng. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[Rich Eliseo]: Councilor Callahan? Yes. Councilor Leming? Councilor Maloney? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng? Vice President Lazzaro, absent President Pierce.

[Zac Bears]: Yes. Six in the affirmative, one absent, the motion passes. We do have one more item ready for third reading. The third reading on the face surveillance. Is there a motion?

[SPEAKER_09]: Motion to approve the third reading.

[Zac Bears]: On the motion to approve for third reading, proposed ordinance banning face surveillance technology by Councilor Tseng, seconded by? Seconded by Councilor Leming. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. Yes, 5 in the affirmative, 1 in the negative, 1 absent. The motion passes. Public participation. To participate outside of Zoom, please email rlco at medford-ma.gov. Is there anyone who'd like to speak in public participation on any matter for three minutes? Either in the chambers or on Zoom. You can raise your hand on Zoom or come to the podium in the chambers. No takers tonight? Oh. Name and address for the record, please. You'll have three minutes.

[Micah Kesselman]: Micah Kesselman, 499 Main Street. This is not anything super important, but I do want to remind the city council and the city as well in general that May Day is coming up not too long from now. It is an international holiday celebration of the power of the people, really, and of labor and, you know, workers' rights to be included and determine the scope and aspect and actions of their government. So I very much hope that the city will do something, at least, in recognition of this incredibly important holiday. Or at a minimum, just acknowledge it. And that's about it. Thanks, guys.

[Zac Bears]: Thank you, Micah. Seeing no one in the chamber. Oh, we got one more. We broke the dam. Name and address for the record, please. You have three minutes.

[Jennifer Yanko]: Jennifer Yankel, 16 Monument Street. I've just been thinking about this ever since the rat discussion happened. I'm really... astounded that the city has no means of dealing with this more directly. I mean, aren't there nuisance laws? I think if my neighbors complained that my bees stung them, I would have to get rid of them. It seems to me that having rats, because you're negligent about you know, the dumpsters is a no-brainer. So I'm just expressing my astonishment that there's no way to just say, you know, this doesn't work in Medford.

[Zac Bears]: We do have a dumpster permit with a fee and that requires a pest management plan. So I think there's very, I think there's actually very clear ways for us to require them to have dumpsters that meet the permits and the fees. So I'm hoping we'll explore that.

[Jennifer Yanko]: Yeah, I hope so, because it sounds like really the people that are living there are really suffering. And everybody around them, according to the report we had on rat reproduction, will soon be suffering too.

[Zac Bears]: Yes, I mean, it seems to me like something that, you know, next week someone should go out.

[Jennifer Yanko]: Okay.

[Zac Bears]: That's my, I mean, I can't direct anyone to do anything, only the mayor can, but it seems to me like it's a no brainer as well.

[Jennifer Yanko]: Yeah, I think it's a really high priority. Thanks.

[Zac Bears]: Thank you, Jennifer. All right. Is there a motion on the floor? All in favor? Motion to adjourn by Councilor Tseng, seconded by? Seconded by Councilor Malauulu. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion passes and the meeting is adjourned. Thank you.