The council approved a joint press release outlining the timeline and cost review for the Medford High School project, authorized capital and stabilization funds for municipal facility repairs and the police chief search, and received updates regarding Cataldo Ambulance operations. The council also tabled a supplemental appropriation to restore the law department budget and referred a fire department drone surveillance policy to committee.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: 19th regular meeting Medford City Council is called to order. Clerk Siegel, please call the roll.
[City Clerk Laurel Siegel]: Councilor Callahan? Present. Councilor Leming? Present. Councilor Mullane is absent. Councilor Scarpelli? Present. Councilor Tseng? Present. Vice President Lazzaro? Present. President Bears?
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Present. Six present, one absent. Please rise to salute the flag. Before we start, I just wanted to read something very quickly from. The City Council, tomorrow is Veterans Day, and the Medford City Council honors and commends the men and women who have served in the armed forces on the eve of Veterans Day, and whereas the liberties of the city of Medford and the nation are secured through the valor and sacrifice of the armed forces, whose members leave their families behind to serve in times of peace and conflict, and whereas veterans and their families demonstrate profound courage, resilience, and patriotism in making it fitting on the eve of Veterans Day for the Medford community to express our deep gratitude for all veterans. And thank you, Councilor Scarpelli, for putting that message forward.
[Councilor George Scarpelli]: Thank you, Mr. President. Again, I think that that's something we could recognize and something that I think this council has to recognize when we have one of our own members who just who just came back from deployment and actually celebrate him and his colleagues and all of our veterans who served to make this country what that country is today. So I think we owe a debt of gratitude to every veteran, and I appreciate you reading that, Mr. President, and a happy Veterans Day to all of our vets tomorrow. So thank you.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. Vice President Lazzaro.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli, for bringing this forward. I'd also just like to acknowledge quickly that our veteran services director, Veronica, who is now found a new position, so she will be leaving us if she hasn't. I can't remember when her last day was going to be, but she was doing a lot of work to reach out to our homeless veterans in Medford and the surrounding areas to try to help with accessing services, and that's really important. I think it's such a terrible thing how many veterans in this country are facing particularly difficult circumstances after serving the country. So just a plug for the kind of services that you can access at the Veteran Services Office here in Medford, and thank you to her. And again, just echoing Councilor Scarpelli's thoughts, and happy Veterans Day.
[Councilor Justin Tseng]: Thank you. Councilor Tseng. I think any thank you I give would be too brief for what the veterans of our country and our community deserve. I think every day about the debt that I owe our armed forces throughout the centuries of my family, you know, my family history, especially in the 20th century where American troops defended my family in Asia. preserved their freedoms and without them my family would not be here in this community. And that's just to talk about my family history and not about the debt that we owe our veterans as residents of the city of Medford for whom we all would not be enjoying the freedoms and liberties that we have today. Thank you.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you. Councilor Leming.
[Councilor Matt Leming]: I'd just like to thank my colleague for bringing this forward. I'd like to thank all of my brothers and sisters in the armed forces for serving America today and over its history, as well as their families who have supported them in their journeys.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you very much. on November 14th from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. at the East Somerville Community School to shop for donated winter clothes and coats free of charge and be able to resolve that we invite residents to participate in the city's winter preparedness event on November 19th from 5 to 7 p.m. at City Hall which will include a winter clothing giveaway, energy bill checkups, a vaccine clinic, MassHealth health connector assistance and information on heating assistance.
So those are two events that are coming up soon, preparing for the winter. Anyone have any commentary on it? Vice President Lazzaro.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Thank you. I appreciate you putting these events on the radar of everybody in town. Mamas is a great organization. Mutual aid is very important. They do a lot of great work in the city to that end. So it's just a, there's no obligation. You can contribute or you can receive aid. That's how mutual aid works. You don't have to contribute anything to receive aid. If you have something that you can bring to help, then you can bring something to help. If you need something, you can take something. Nothing about mutual aid is, you know, capitalist. Nobody is buying or selling anything. So it's just a really great way for people in community together can help each other.
I really encourage people to take advantage of this. Thanks.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you, Vice President Lazzaro. Is there a motion? Motion to approve. On the motion to approve by Councilor Tseng, seconded by Council Vice President Lazzaro, Clerk Siegel. Oh, actually, all those in favor? Aye. Opposed? The motion passes. Records, the records of the special meeting of October 21st, 2026, the records of the meeting of October 27th, 2026, and the records of the special meeting of November 2nd, 2026 were passed to Vice President Lazzaro. Vice President Lazzaro, how do you find the records?
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: I found all of those records in order and motion to approve.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: On the motion to join and approve the records by Vice President Lazzaro, seconded by? Seconded by Councilor Tseng. All those in favor?
[Unidentified]: Aye.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Opposed? The motion passes. Reports of committees 26-172 and 26-182 offered by Councilor Callahan, Public Works and Facilities Committee, October 21st, 2026. Councilor Callahan.
[Councilor Anna Callahan]: Thank you. We had a great Public Works Facilities Committee based around a couple of motions related to clearing of snow in our roads, and essentially there is one that we are uh, considering putting on the ballot, which would, uh, remove some of our legal liability for when we plow, uh, private ways. Um, we also discussed, um, another resolution, uh, that was about sort of routine maintenance and upkeep of private ways. Uh, and during that discussion, the resolution changed a little bit and ended up We're keeping that paper in committee and we're going to request some information. We're going to request that information about private ways be added to the website. We're going to request some legal counsel about adding a line item in the budget for maintenance of private ways so you can look forward to more information about private ways being available from the city and that I think is a good summary.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Callaghan on the motion of Councilor Callaghan to approve, seconded by Vice President Lazzaro. All those in favor?
[Unidentified]: Aye.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Opposed? Motion passes. Hearings 26195, petition, grant of location, National Grid 6D to 157 Fulton Street and Brogan Road. You are hereby notified that by order of the City Council, the Medford City Council will hold a public hearing in the Howard F. Alden Chambers at Medford City Hall, 85 George P. Hassett Drive, Medford, and via Zoom on Tuesday, November 10, 2026, at 7 p.m., a link to be posted no later than Friday, November 6, 2026, on a petition by Boston Gas Company, DBA, National Grid, for permission of a proposed gas main replacement at 60 to 157 Fulton Street.
Wherefore it requests that after due notice and hearing as provided by law, it be granted a location for and permission to install approximately 1,665 feet of replacement gas main along Fulton Street and Brogan Road by petition originally dated October 2nd, 2026 and revised October 20th, 2026 and received and filed in the office of the city clerk October 29th, 2026. The engineering division recommends this grant of location be approved with the following conditions. The grant of location is limited to 1,665 feet of six inch gas main within the northern and eastern portions of Fulton Street and Brogan Road right-of-way, as depicted on the plan. Two, before starting the work, contractors should notify DIGSAFE and obtain all applicable permits from the engineering division, including a trench permit. No other utility structures shall be adversely impacted. At least 72 hours prior to the start of the project, National Gribble Court can coordinate about our communications with the city's director of communications. Any proposed gas main location must maintain three feet away from public utilities, and an approved as-built plan must be on file at the engineering division at the completion of the project. Do we have a representative from National Grid?
[Diana Cuddy]: Good evening, Diana Cuddy, National Grid Gas, 170 Data Drive, Waltham, Massachusetts. I'm here tonight to request a grant location for 1,665 feet of gas main replacement. We're replacing this gas main because of its history of leaks and also the frequency now that we're seeing leaks in this area. And I'm here to answer any questions anyone may have.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Great. Do we have any questions? Councilor Scarpelli.
[Councilor George Scarpelli]: Hi, Scotty, how are you?
[Diana Cuddy]: I know you.
[Councilor George Scarpelli]: Thank you for being here tonight. This is my neighborhood and I think that one of the things that I think we find super important is making sure any work that is happening that our clerical works, unfortunately in neighboring communities they have clerical works that work for the city that work hand in hand with utilities or any major construction job or main jobs that are happening that really support the neighbors in that area, especially our neighbors, our elderly neighbors. So I just want to make sure that we have a pretty in-depth communication plan for those neighbors. And we have a point person that they can speak to and even share that with the council. We've done that in the past that we can have someone that we can reach out to instead of you. I know you don't want to hear me again. But just reach out just to make sure, hey, we have a, you know, there's some work being done in front of this home. It's an elderly neighbor. What can we do to make sure that they can, go in and out of the driveways or if we can traverse that neighborhood. So that's probably my biggest concern that I appreciate.
[Diana Cuddy]: And I can send the city clerk all the contact information tomorrow. I believe Matt Lally will be the supervisor from National Grid that's on this particular project. We are going to have a contractor do the actual work. They will also have a supervisor every day on the job site, and then a crew, of course, doing the work. Prior to the job starting, we will send out an abutter notice to every abutter along the way. And on that, we'll have the contact information and phone number for the supervisor as well. And then actually, that goes ahead of the construction. And then right when it's about to impact your house or the neighbor or whatever, there'll be a hanger on the door.
[Councilor George Scarpelli]: Okay, good, and I think that's probably the biggest concern that we always get, is when we don't prepare our neighbors when something happens. And this isn't that daunting, but it's something that's important that we get that information. So thank you so much.
[Diana Cuddy]: I agree, yep.
[Councilor George Scarpelli]: Move approval, Mr. President.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Sure, thank you. Any further questions for the petitioner, for members of the council? Seeing none, I will open the public hearing. Public hearing is open. Are you in here in favor of the petition?
[Diana Cuddy]: Yes, Diana Cuddy, Boston Gas, National Grid, 170 Dad Drive, Waltham, Massachusetts. I'm in favor of this petition.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Great, thank you. If there's anyone who'd like to speak in favor or opposed or otherwise on the petition, please come to the podium. Tony on Zoom, if you could just add your last name to your Zoom name or turn on your video so we can confirm that it's you. In the meantime, we'll go to the podium. Good evening, everyone.
[Sharon Deyeso]: Sharon DSL, Circuit Road in Mass Ave, Private Way. So I'm half and half. I did want to thank the lady for coming up and making clear announcement for the cause in some of the work that was going to be done. I don't have gas in my house. I'm a fossil person because I can't afford to do the gas line right now. But I'm just wondering in the impact of all of these movements, this isn't the first good job for safety that National Grid has been doing during the years. I'm not an engineer, but I think it's a simple feat. Could someone please go back and tell the company to please remove any broken sidewalks, any broken curbs that they have disrupted, and also remove the pink and the red and the yellow and the orange markings as soon as they're finished with the job. It's very, very appreciated. We're trying to build our city and maintain it, and, you know, that's their cost, and we love having them in town for safety, but that should really be done as, you know, something as a follow-up. It's a big complaint from everyone. Okay. Thank you.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you. Just just a minute. We'll go to Tony on zoom. Tony, if you can give us your name and your neighborhood, you'll have 3 minutes.
[CAS00002495_SPEAKER_04]: So, Tony love vacuum 105 Fulton street. My concern is what is their plan on repaving? Because whenever anyone opens up these streets, they leave them a mess.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: All right, anything else, Tony, before we go to the petitioner? Just you have your three minutes and then we'll answer all the questions at the end.
[CAS00002495_SPEAKER_04]: No, my major concerns of paving, because when fire trucks and trucks go by at, you know, 35 miles an hour, houses shake. So when they do real poor backfield jobs and repatching, as we see all over the city, you know, it's unacceptable. The street was paved probably 12 years ago. And it's in pretty good shape, so it'd be nice to see it in the same condition it was found.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: All right. Thank you, Tony. Appreciate that. All right. Is there anyone else here in the chamber or on Zoom who'd like to speak before we hear from the petitioner about the questions that have been asked? All right. Seeing none, the public hearing is closed. Diana, if you want to answer those questions.
[Diana Cuddy]: Sure. Yeah. Regarding the paving, we've actually retrained this group up in this area to do a better job with compaction and to remove some of the settlement that you'll see. And we have an inspector go out after 90 days to inspect the trench, the patch, the the settlement, and then they go back after one year. So if there's anything that they notice then that they will fix it. And then we'll work closely with Owen Ortala from the engineering department. If he's got any, a list of panels or, you know, sunken patches, we can work with him to have them restored and repaired. Regarding the markouts, so that applies to the patches as well as the concrete sidewalk panels. Regarding the painted markouts, I'm not sure if we can remove those, but I can find out and I can email the city clerk about that.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: All right. Great. Thank you. All right. We had a motion to approve by Councilor Scarpelli. Is there a second? Seconded by Councilor Callahan. Clerk Siegel, please call the roll.
[City Clerk Laurel Siegel]: Councilor Callahan? Yes. Councilor Leming? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng? Yes. Vice President Lazzaro? Yes. President Bears?
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Yes. Six in the affirmative, none in the negative, one absent. The motion passes and the grant application is approved. Thank you. Great. All right. 26196 submitted by the city council, public hearing proposed amendments to the Medford zoning ordinance chapter 94, 94-7.5 vacant and foreclosing properties. A public hearing will be held by the Medford City Council and the Howard F. Alden Memorial Auditorium, City Hall 85, George P. Hassett Drive, Medford and via Zoom on Tuesday, November 10th, 2026 at 7 p.m. relative to a proposed amendment to the City of Medford zoning ordinance to delete section 94-7.5 vacant and foreclosing properties. A link to this hearing and an agenda containing the details of the proposed amendment will be posted to the city's calendar no later than Friday, November 6th.
And we have here a response from the Danielle Evans, Senior Planner on behalf of the Community Development Board, date September 30th, 2026, Community Development Board recommendation. On September 16th, 2026, the CDB held a duly noticed public meeting to deliberate and vote on the recommendation of the proposed zoning amendment to delete section set 94-7.5, vacant and foreclosing properties. All the board members were present. Understanding that a new General Ordinance, Chapter 10, Article 8, regulating vacant buildings does not go into effect until August 4, 2027, the Board agreed that the deletion of Section 94-7.5 should be concurrent with the effective date of Chapter 10, Article 8, so there is no gap in regulatory power. Board member Sean Began motion to recommend that the city council adopt the amendment to the zoning ordinance to delete section 94-7.5 to be effective concurrently with the effective date of chapter 10 article 8 of the revised ordinances motion seconded by board member Buldini. The board voted unanimously six to zero by roll call to approve the motion.
Councilor Leming.
[Councilor Matt Leming]: I'd just like to thank members of the CDB for their work on this. I'm seeing that we have one of the audience right now, Ms. Calagaro. Hello, welcome. And I would motion that we adopt the CD board's recommendation that the deletion doesn't go into effect until August 4, 2027, and approve. And just to be clear to some folks that may be watching in the audience or at home, what's happening here. We passed a new vacant building ordinance for third reading, but we decided to keep it in, to move it from the zoning section to our building codes, which is what most other municipalities do. And we're able to, the city council is able to edit the zoning, the building codes on our own. In order to edit the zoning, it requires it be passed. to the Community Development Board for review. And in this case, the only edit to the zoning would have been a deletion of the previous vacant building laws from our zoning. So that's the layman's description of what's happening here.
[Councilor Justin Tseng]: Councilor Tseng. I also wanted to extend my gratitude for the Community Development Boards work in this and in approving this and sending this back to us. Just adding very briefly on to what Councilor Leming said, the new and updated vacant building ordinance expands the powers that the city has to hold commercial landlords accountable when they hold spaces vacant in our squares. It builds more bridges to reach out to landlords who are trying in good faith to find tenants. but can't find them, it builds those bridges by creating a list online, which our staff can use to connect them with potential tenants who are looking for spaces to open businesses in Medford. And it also heightens the standards for keeping vacant buildings, be it commercial or residential, in order, clean, and safe for the neighborhood.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you. Vice President Lazzaro.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Thanks. I'm just echoing everybody's appreciation now, but just it's great to have, especially, but I mean, the whole CDB, but Sean Began is a real estate lawyer and he was able to, I mean, it sounds like he was able to catch this, but I don't want to put words in anybody's mouth, but I do just really appreciate the, you know, diversity of perspectives we have on the CDB. So thank you for catching this for us.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you. On the motion of Councilor Leming to approve and adopt the recommendations of the Community Development Board for the effective date of the deletion from the zoning ordinance to be the same date as the adoption of the new vacant building ordinance and the general ordinances, seconded by? Seconded by Councilor Tseng. Is there any discussion on this item either in person or on Zoom? Seeing none in person, I'll go to Zoom. Dennis, if you could either change your name to have a last name or turn on your video, and then we'll recognize you. In the meantime, we'll go to Robert Kearney, name and neighborhood for the record, and you will have three minutes.
[Robert Carney]: Hi. Thank you so much, Robert Kearney, 50 Hicks Ave, Unit 6. First of all, I want to take us back and express some disappointment with the way the vote went down over the summer. You know, as a resident who really values public participation, it's very confusing for me to know when things are going to be brought up for public comment. Off the top of my head, when you all had this vote, the ordinance was listed under unfinished business, and I don't think the vote was taken up until close to 10 o'clock at night or past nine o'clock. Increased communication about when things will be taken up for a vote, I think will improve public engagement. I want to just also express my concerns about the vacant building ordinance in general. I can't help but wonder if the business owners and developers, once this is enacted, could potentially decide to open businesses or build elsewhere in other towns.
especially with the proposed debt exclusion that's going to be on the table as well for the high school. So I just have a few points that I want to share about concerns I have. First of all, for many landlords, vacancies are a landlord's worst nightmare. And I have concerns about the impact of this ordinance on property owners during extreme downturns, such as COVID. They may have existing tenants who struggle to pay rent and miss a payment or two. And then some of these businesses may go out of business and be vacant. I think we need to be thinking about times like that where landlords, despite their best efforts, could have extended vacancies. And it's appreciated that the fee could be fully or partially waived for a number of reasons, including the owner listing the property for rent. But I'm concerned that a full waiver is not guaranteed. And then earlier question, is it fair to impose a financial penalty on a landlord who is listing a property for rent and presumably trying to fill it? A landlord is already demonstrating financial hardship in my viewpoint, unless proven otherwise, that they have a vacancy in their building, especially if it compromises a significant portion of it and it's their only unit. So when we're looking at this ordinance as well, I would like to propose that it be revised to perhaps show instead that landlords should not have to pay a penalty and it should be guaranteed that they're automatically listing their unit for rent and that the burden should be on the city regulators themselves to show that the landlord's not making a good faith effort to fill the vacancy. So thank you for your consideration. And the final thing I'll also say too is we need only look at Mystic Ave and see how hard it is to develop businesses there, get business development there. We want to be very careful about doing anything that's going to further deter businesses from coming to Medford. Thank you.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you. We'll go to Dennis on Zoom, seeing no one in the chamber. Dennis, if you could give your name and your neighborhood and you'll have three minutes.
[Denis Dettling Kalthofer]: Yes, hi. So my name is Dennis Detland-Kaltofer. I live at 120 North Street in the Hillside area. Um, so my question is very, uh, brief, um, and it's not about this specific ordinance, but about the zoning ordinances in, in, in general. And that is that, so I've sent, um, several emails to city Councilors over, um, months and have received about, uh, various, um, zoning ordinance questions and haven't received any responses at all. And I called, uh, Councilor Tseng and left a voicemail, didn't receive any reply. I also left my phone number in, in, uh, some of those emails. Um, I just want to understand why, uh, some of the Councilors seem to be, um, uh, seem to be pro-development um more so than other Councilors and what that's about. I just want to understand that and get some feedback from my questions. So if there's in my emails are going into zoom into um spam folders I'd like to know that um but I want to know if if the the uh Councilors that received my emails if they looked at them and whether they had time to respond, or if there's some other reason why there's no responses.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Hi, Dennis. Well, on the email side of it, I will check to see if your emails are going into spam folders.
[Unidentified]: OK.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: And if they're in there, we will let you know and get back to you on that, or at least some of us will. But I'll check on that.
[Denis Dettling Kalthofer]: Thank you. And I can resend the latest one if that would help to find it easier.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Great, thank you, I appreciate that.
[Denis Dettling Kalthofer]: Thank you.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: All right, thanks, Dennis. All right, do we have any other comments on this item? Seeing none, on the motion, Clerk Siegel, please call the roll.
[City Clerk Laurel Siegel]: Councilor Callahan? Yes. Councilor Leming? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng? Yes. Vice President Lazzaro? Yes. President Bears?
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Yes, six in the affirmative, none in the negative, one absent. The motion passes. Motions, orders, and resolutions. 26-194 offered by Councilor Scarpelli. Resolution that the City Administration provide the City Council with an update on the recent vacancy in the Veterans Department. Resolved that the City Council request that the City Administration provide an update on the recent vacancy in the Veterans Department. Councilor Scarpelli.
[Councilor George Scarpelli]: I have yet to receive any information. I know that the residents that had questions that evening that were very nervous about having someone they can speak to in the office, I believe that the administration did put a body in that office to direct people or make the veterans or their families have a sense of confidence that they're being listened to. So I appreciate that. They've done that. I was hoping someone from the administration could shed some light in where we stand. I know that the, as we typically do now when we lose a director, we have an acting director, the former director come in as the acting director. I don't know if that's still the case or are they using another community's director that's helping with our benefits process for our veterans. So if we can get some answers from the administration, some updates for our families, that shared their concerns, I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you, Mr. President.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. Chief of Staff Nazarian is here, Madam Chief of Staff. If you could talk about this item, that'd be appreciated. Thank you.
[Chief of Staff Nina Nazarian]: Good evening, President Bears. Through you to Councilor Scarpelli, thank you for the question. As you stated, the office is staffed as much as we are able to do. It's generally staffed Monday, Tuesday, Thursday for anyone who's listening at home and would like to speak with someone in person from 9.30 a.m. to 1.30 p.m. Wednesdays from 8.30 a.m. to 3 p.m., and then again from 5.30 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. In that evening window from 5.30 p.m. to 7.30 p.m., Veronica Shaw, our outgoing veteran services director, who's now our acting veteran services director, is physically in the office herself. That information is also on our website. And then Friday, we're staffed the whole half day that we are open for City Hall. So that staffing occurred the day after, because the staffing change in the veterans office was kind of just challenging timing where our veterans director, Veronica Shaw, was leaving at the same time as our principal clerk in the office who is now on leave for a similar period of time while we have a vacancy.
So I anticipate that we will have more information in the coming weeks. We are beginning interviews next week and hope that we'll have something more long-term in the coming weeks. Thank you.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you, Madam Chief of Staff, Councilor Scarpelli.
[Councilor George Scarpelli]: I thank you for the Chief of Staff for the quick response and the support. We knew that there was some challenging issues with the staffing there. So we appreciate that veterans and their families have someone they can speak to. So thank you.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Leming.
[Councilor Matt Leming]: Thank you, Chief of Staff Nazarian, for coming along to this meeting. I would just like an update, if possible, on any plans to continue the project that Veronica spent a long time on, which is the shelter for veterans that she's building and getting funding for in partnership with the American Legion. I imagine that. Losing her will definitely won't do any favors for the project, so I'd just like to hear any plans about continued support for that and just keeping momentum going.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Leming. Any further discussion by members of the council? Seeing none, is there any discussion on this item by members of the public, either in person or on Zoom? Seeing none, on the motion of Councilor Scarpelli to approve, seconded by? Seconded by Councilor Callahan. All those in favor?
[Unidentified]: Aye.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Opposed? The motion passes. I'm going to turn the chair over to Vice President Lazzaro for the next item.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Item 26-199, resolution to approve joint press release regarding Medford High School project next steps sponsored by President Bears and myself, Vice President Lazzaro. Whereas the Medford High School Building Committee has completed its work to review, is this the final version? I'm sorry, did we amend this? Is this the amended version? OK, great, great. Whereas the Medford High School Building Committee has completed its work to review and finalize the scope of the project as of October 6, 2026, and has reduced the estimated cost by $150 million since the first estimate of this chosen option. And whereas residents need and deserve full and accurate information about the cost impact of the project on taxpayers. And whereas the city's financial task force established by the mayor, council, and school committee in 2023 has been meeting regularly regarding the MHS project and the ongoing work to determine the correct funding strategy to maximize grant funding and minimize taxpayer impact. And whereas an accurate and vetted estimate of taxpayer impact will be provided by city staff, including the city assessor and CFO with assistance from the city's bond council and the MHS project team established as part of the MSBA state funding process. Now therefore, be it resolved by the Medford City Council that we approve the publication of the press release below, and that we schedule a presentation of this work for the February 2, 2027 joint meeting of the School Committee and City Council. Be it further resolved that upon approval by both the City Council and School Committee, this release will be shared by the City of Medford and Medford Public Schools communication teams via all mail lists, websites, and social media channels currently in use by both teams.
President Bears?
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you, Vice President Lazzaro, and thank you to everybody, the hundreds and thousands of people in the city who have been working to pay attention to the Medford High School project. It's the biggest thing this city has done in a long time, maybe the biggest thing we'll do for decades to come. We are talking about the, you know, major renovation and partial replacement of the biggest municipal building, not only serving high school students and vocational students, but our young people in daycare and in the MFN serving residents with our pool and vocational shops, folks who go to Bistro 489 or cosmetology, serving athletics of all ages on the fields, and not to mention our music and arts and all the other community events and groups that use the space. So it is really probably the most important public building in the city of Menford. I won't go too deeply into the condition of the building. Anyone who's been there understands it's not in good shape. It's been 15 years since I was a student in the school, and it was not in good shape 15 years ago. Councilor Tseng can probably talk about it. Councilor Scarpelli, others, you know, it is in rough shape. But I think we all also know that this is a huge undertaking and an expensive undertaking and an undertaking that will have a significant impact on the residents of our city. So the purpose here, after a number of meetings of the financial task force, which includes the mayor, the chief of staff, myself, vice president Lazzaro, school committee vice chair and building committee chair, Jenny Graham, school committee member, Mike Mastrobuoni, As well as these meetings have included Superintendent Galussi, the city assessor, Jared Jagian, our finance director, Bob Dickinson, and several of the meetings have included outside bond counsel, folks from the MPS finance team, as well as folks from our architect and project team. We really have been doing a ton of work to make sure that folks get an accurate, accurate representation of the cost and the impact and that we're doing whatever we can as a community and as a city and as the city's leaders to minimize that cost impact on the residents as much as possible. So I want to talk a little bit about the resolution and the press release. The group had been putting together this press release and the Mayor had requested that we bring it to the city council and to the school committee for kind of some public presentations on it. My understanding is the school committee discussed this last night and approved of the press release.
And really it's to outline that on February 2nd, 2027, there will be a meeting in this room of the City Council and the School Committee where we will have the information fully vetted, put together to make sure that we have one true answer to what is this project going to cost the city and what is it going to cost the taxpayers. Over the next three months, there's going to be A bunch of work going on from our new construction manager, Suffolk Construction, as well as the rest of the project team and the city finance team to get us to that point. There are some milestones we have ahead where we really want to hear from residents about their concerns, their interest, what they would like to know more about. So we have on November 30th, a joint meeting of the city council and the school committee where we'll be talking about this matter.
January 20th, 2027, another meeting where we'd love to hear from residents. We will also at these meetings hear from the city's finance team, the construction manager, the architect and project manager as well with updates on their work. There's also a number of other opportunities to engage, including school building committee meetings on November 16th. December 14th, January 7th, and February 1st, and a school building committee community forum next Thursday on November 19th, which I really encourage folks to get out to. They're working for having child care for the meeting and really hoping to have an engaging community forum to talk about the phase that the project we're in right now, which is the schematic design phase. Something that's noted in the press release is that there will be some design efficiencies that the project team is going to continue to be looking into. That's because we're in the schematic design phase now. Up until October 6th, they were talking at the school building committee about the large-scale scope of the project. Now they've hired a construction manager, Suffolk Construction. Folks probably know of them. They're really big on very big projects. And they're turning the scope and the designs into real schematic designs, taking things from kind of a general big picture into the blueprints of what a school would look like. And that process means finding design efficiencies. And, you know, certainly the hope is through cost-effective materials and phasing options that there will be further efficiencies than were even found during the scope reductions that the School Building Committee conducted. Finally, I know that there's another piece of this that is really hugely on the minds of residents, which is, what is the city going to do to mitigate the cost impacts? Since March and the selection of the design, there's been scope reductions of $150 million. But there are a number of ways, and we've been really discussing them in the financial task force and pushing the administration to develop them and build a real plan around them to further mitigate the cost impact so that a bond repayment can happen from sources that are not just the debt exclusion. You know, we've all heard about private fundraising, and there's a group that Councilor Mullane's on that's working on that. A number of federal and state grants, in addition to the multi-hundred million dollar MSBA state grant, have been applied for. as well, but there are two other ones that we've really been working as Councilors, school committee members to get to a clearer answer on, including, of course, new growth. You know, if we were to have significant new property tax growth, would some of that be able to help supplement the cost of repaying for the high school? That's a big question. It's a long-range question. It's not a question you're going to have an answer of in 2044, we're going to have this dollar amount, but a real strategy to increase new growth and to use some of that to help pay for the project is something that we think should be explored. And then there is kind of this major shift in the city budget that's happening around when construction will be completed, which is the city will be completing its funding of the city pensions. And that is a multimillion dollar amount of money in every budget right now. It's almost 10% of the city budget right now that we are using to fully fund the pension system. that is going to be completed right now according to the actuaries in 2033. And if some portion of that could be allocated to assist, that could be meaningfully impactful on the cost to the taxpayer. So that's something we're really working on as well. And then, of course, something that this council has been really dedicated to is maximizing the exemptions that our residents have, seniors, folks with disabilities, veterans. And if there's any more room in those, I think that's something we're going to be working on too. Really, I think the message on this last piece is that all options are on the table. We're working diligently to get answers and have a solid plan on those revenue questions. Because while we need this high school, and a debt exclusion is necessary to pay for it, and it's going to be a significant cost to the city, there are tools in the toolbox and options on the table to do what we can to address the impact of this on taxpayers.
Really where we're at, there's a lot of opportunities to engage over the next couple of months. And then in February, we'll reconvene here with the full answer to the question of what is this going to cost us with the experts from our finance team, construction manager, and the project team. So thank you to everybody. Appreciate you allowing me to talk about this. And I look forward to discussion by my colleagues.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Thank you, President Bears. Councilor Scarpelli.
[Councilor George Scarpelli]: Thank you, Madam Chair. And I appreciate Council Bears expressing, sharing some other thoughts along with what the press release looks like. And I think that it's important because I think that something we've all talked about since we started talking about the zoning issues when residential zoning hit and talking about the importance of communication. So I think we're on the right track here, because a lot of people are asking, what is this really about? And after talking to you and understanding that, making sure we have a comprehensive communication plan in place. And I think it's important that we've talked, I think, that myself, the leader of the council and Jenny Graham, the leader of the school committee, we had a discussion in the summer and we talked about this being something we need and something that I think everybody realizes. we need the high school to be redone. It's just, it's falling apart. It's the benefits are there, but the biggest issues and concerns are what? The impact in taxes. And like I said in that meeting, I'm sure that you'll concur with me, we talked about Something you brought up is really protecting the most vulnerable. And going back to when we talked about the ordinance, and it was easy back then because George became the no person for the ordinance, the increase, excuse me, of the override. And we said, you know, the biggest piece of that, I think, was really protecting, in my view, is making sure we had mechanisms in place to help the most vulnerable. And, you know, you hear, talk to so many different residents when you talk about this project, that it is important. We have to find a way to make it happen, but making sure that it's feasible, right? We're looking at different avenues. And I think this, as we talked earlier, and what you just said, Council President, is that we're bringing something forward in a plan. I think that's what's most important. I like that we're looking at other avenues, and I think that Maybe you can expand on this, because we've also heard on the pension part, which is a big dollar figure. It's something that I don't think anybody really knew. And I didn't know until you said it tonight. There's a misconception that that pension, if it does happen, how it can support this project is just this word that it can only happen for one year. And I don't know if that's something that, when this does happen, because it is a lot of money. And if we could find that as a pool of money to help support the tax base in moving this forward as a unanimous community effort, I think it's important to see what those impacts are going to bear for us. I think that's important.
I wouldn't be true to myself if we didn't talk about what I talked about when we had the override, and I talked about the financial team. And I see that. I'm not going to belittle anybody today to say that, you know, I don't want to discourage anybody. I don't want to be negative. But what I do want to do is when you look at the press release, it shows the financial team of yourself, our vice president, Jenny Graham, Mike Mastrobuoni, the mayor, the chief of staff.
I think that's one thing that this council would ask in a form of a motion that the biggest thing I talked about when the override was that I worked in the community where they look to financial minds of the communities, part of that financial team, making sure that the assessor is part of that team, making sure the finance director is part of that team. looking at Tufts University and the financial minds at Tufts and maybe asking someone to be part of that team as well to show everybody that we're all in this together and we're bringing in everybody possible to share any input. And, you know, the neighboring community that I'm talking about he brought in banking presidents from neighborhood banks and made them part of the process of do we need an ordinance. And, you know, it was pretty shrewd because discussion was, hey, thank you for being part of it. Now as we go on to this endeavor, how would the bank like to be a partner? And they used that to elevate the project. And I would ask that my colleagues would help me move this to a motion that we would expand the financial team to bring in financial minds, making sure that our assessor and financial director are front of this task force, because there's that misconception that we want to make this as positive as possible. And I think that if my colleagues would help moving that motion forward, I would make that form of motion. And then the other piece that we talked about in making sure that sending that message out, and I think that When I talk to people, they talk about, well, this side gave this number, and this side gave this number. But the truth of the matter is, and you can all concur with me, there is no number, right? Right now there is no number. So bringing that team together, and then having the communication tools in place, and really having those meetings, and I'm glad you put so many meetings, and we do have enough that we can really get everybody involved. But what I would ask as a motion as well is that we dedicate some of those times to those meetings where people can feel that they can come to that podium. Just like, you know, Council President, to your credit, I think in the last year a lot of people feel more comfortable coming to that podium. And there isn't negativity and people get to feel that they've been heard. And maybe there might be a question or comment that we can say, well, we didn't think of that. So I think that as a form of motion, we get to those meetings, we ask to have some sort of a built-in mechanism where we're listening more to the people's comments so we can get answers back to them, or mechanisms where they can send emails in where they're going to get answers that evening. You know, that we can run down and, you know, we've received these questions, here are some quick answers. And so people feel comfortable. I think that as we're moving forward, I think Unless we're all in on this together, I'm afraid this is going to turn into one side against the other side, and we don't want that. We want what's best for our children. We all want to move forward. I know that there are some misconceptions that I know that you shared tonight that, you know, I got a phone call just to share with the council that, oh, so the October date wasn't a true date, so we can go back and now minimize the project. No, that's not true. The project is over. But what we can do, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that the team that's doing the schematics now can look at the project in totality now and say, hold it. You don't have to build this wing with this 500 square feet. We could move it this way and now save another 500 square feet. And I just want to make sure that as we move forward, that type of dialogue is a dialogue that people, when they leave, they say, whether they like it or not, We shared it because I think you said a lot tonight that people were questioning that in your speech that you put forward that answered a lot of things tonight.
To me personally, the fact that you mentioned that what we talked about day one was looking at our most vulnerable members of our community, that's mostly our senior citizens that have agents in their homes and have single one income and don't have an avenue to support any sort of increase. And if we could find a way to support those residents, I think it'll go a long way. But again, Whether you like it or not, the project is done. This is it. It's right in front of us. So we now have to find a way to get the messaging out, making sure that we are listening to people, and making sure that we have the communication teams in place sending out the correct message. And then making sure that financial team is represented truly by people with financial backgrounds, that people can look and say, okay, I feel comfortable. This isn't a political group. This is a financial group working with our elected officials so we can move something forward. So I hope my colleagues will.
uh, join me in those two motions. And if that's the case, I will gladly support this moving forward. So thank you.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. Just a couple points of information. One is that the city CFO, um, is very frequently in attendance at these meetings, which President Bears did mention he's he's almost always there. And Jared Yang, Yang Jin, I'm not 100% sure how to pronounce his last name. The city assessor, he's also, he's been there a number of times. The, how, whether or not they're officially on the financial task force, I'm not, I'm not sure. But there, the, an effort is certainly being made to have the people from the city staff who are knowledgeable about the issues relating to, financial capacity of the city, how the finances work in Medford, but also school committee member Mike Mastrobuoni is the budget director in Somerville. He is extremely knowledgeable about how financial systems are run in a city, as you know, because you work with him.
So yes, and Jenny Graham runs her own consulting business where she works with cities and towns all around the region, coming in as a temporary CFO for their operations. And we have a great deal among the folks that are working on these projects. There is a wealth of financial experience. But all of that being said, we have your two motions, Clerk Siegel. So we will get to that once we hear from all the councillors. And I will go to Councilor Tseng.
[Councilor Justin Tseng]: The Medford High School building is one of the toughest challenges that we have to address as a city. As President Bears alluded to, I graduated from there eight years ago, and it's in rough shape. And it's in such a rough shape that it affects the learning outcomes of what happens in that building. We have excellent, excellent teachers, excellent students. But they can't sign up for the courses that they need to sign up for, that they want to sign up for. And our teachers can't maximize the use of their spaces to teach our students in the best way possible. And in order to tackle such a big challenge like this, we really do need to be on one team. So I'm happy to second Councilor Scarpelli's motions. And I wanna thank President Bears for for providing this draft of a press release that does, I think, highlight the fact that we are all on one team here, that despite any political disagreements, disagreements between the different positions that we might have in government, that we can come together around one vision for the city and for our high school.
As one team, we're able to do the things that I've heard residents ask us for through this process, that being clarity, ambition, and prudence. I think this approach that we are taking together across the political spectrum, across the landscape of who works for the city, provides clarity in making sure that Residents know that we have looked at all the options, that we are looking at all the options that we have on the table. And determining the most affordable, most cost effective path forward as a city in clarity that we are all looking at the same set of numbers that are fact checked.
This approach gives us the ambition we need to tackle badly needed repairs in a building that's falling apart. And ambition in building a world class school building, an institute to educate our future in. And the prudence in mitigating as much of a financial impact on our taxpayers with as many tools as we have in our toolbox. And a lot of that hard work will be up to us as Councilors as well. to work on new growth, to work on a number of the potential tools that President Bears raised. So I'm happy to second the motions and to second the approval of the press release as well.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Thank you. President Bears.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you, Vice President Lazzaro. I just want to say thank you as well to Councilor Scarpelli. Welcome the amendment. You know, I think there's a you know, maybe we're at a distinction without a difference point where we should just say this is the financial task force and these are the people who are on it because they're at the meetings anyway. And if, you know, I think that would be important I think for people to know who's fully part of this and I think give some folks additional, you know, confidence, right. I think that makes a lot of sense. I think we can bring that. Vice President Lazzaro seems in agreement as well. We can bring that to the mayor and our school committee colleagues and definitely want to say that having Mike on board this year has been an additive thing with his knowledge and experience. And I know you often talk about the things that Somerville gets right when it comes to process and he's been really at the heart of that. So I'd love to, you know, it's just been really great that he's been on board. I think he's bringing a lot to the table. I'm grateful that the voters elected him on the school committee. So definitely welcome the amendments. Councilor Tseng already seconded it. So I can only be the third on it, but I absolutely welcome them to my motion. Second thing on the pension, and I appreciate you bringing it up in terms of the multi-year piece of it, right? Right now we are spending every year, 10, 11, 12, 13 million. No, we're actually on this.
I could get into the actuarial table of the pension funding. I won't go there tonight, but we've been for now decades spending millions of dollars a year to fund the city's pension. The state has set a goal for communities to fully fund the city pension by a certain date. And we're actually seven years ahead of that date. That date is 2040. Right now we're on target for fiscal year 2033 to be fully funded. But I think the important thing to note is it's not just one year. You know, it's $13 million or more in general fund revenue that we're spending every year right now. That's what it's been budgeted for for decades. So when it comes up, if we were to say going forward in future budgets, we want to allocate this amount for several years, for 10 years, for a longer period of time, that's definitely possible.
This ties into the new growth question, right? I know new growth came up a lot around the override. And new growth, in a time when you're in a budget struggle, and I think that's where some of us felt we were with the override, we were not going to get $7 million of new growth in the next year. But if you're talking on a longer time scale, you know, building a real strategy for development and growth so that you may have some years in the future where you have 5, 6, 7 million dollars of new growth in a single year, that's really significant too. I think having that is going to be really important to making sure that the growing cost of health insurance for our employees and the growing cost of our, you know, cost of paying employees, right, We're going to need it for that. But if we can go above and beyond, and we're not just treading water, we're not just paying the health care increase and paying the salary increase, but really talking about, OK, we're not going to need to crowd out. We're not going to need to use this pension money to cover the health care costs, because we have this long-term strategy on new growth. I think that's really important, too. So some of these are long time scales. But this debt exclusion is a long time scale. It is 30 years. It's a long time. So that's, I think, an important thing for us to have factored in as well. But it's definitely multi-year as long as it's not our only, only strategy, right? But it's certainly something that we can use in the long run. In terms of the design efficiencies, I think something that's helpful to the point you brought up, we were in the what phase? What are we building? What's the educational plan? What's the scope of the project? That's what ended in October, but now we're in the how phase. How do we build it? How do we pay for it? And the construction manager team is figuring out how do we build it. And I think you got it exactly right. How do we put this wing together that maybe saves some space? And a big chunk of the design is this, you know, I can't remember exactly what they called it, but there's a grossing factor. They're multiplying the factor of every space by one and a half to factor in hallways and bathrooms and support spaces and HVAC spaces. And, you know, maybe we don't, maybe it isn't one and a half percent once you get to the blueprints, right? So that's another piece on design efficiencies. want to just come back around, I think to your point, Councilor Schapiro, about meetings, definitely invite questions and comments. I will work with the high school building project team to figure out what the email is for that, or we'll work with the clerk directly and we'll have our own council place where people can send questions and we can try to get answers out to people before. I think having some form of Q&A as part of the joint meetings I think is really helpful too, especially at those first two meetings. meetings, and then we'll have the number for February 2nd. And obviously we'll have that presentation then. I wanna point people again to next week on the 19th, the School Building Committee Community Forum, which I think is a great opportunity for folks. Go down there, a bunch of people from the project team are gonna be there. It's not a meeting where me and Councilor Scarpelli and Councilor Tseng and Vice President Lazzaro are gonna talk for 20 minutes.
Me and Councilors saying Councilors could probably not vice president Lazzaro. And a great way to do some interactive with the experts on the school building committee. And the last thing I want to note is. that there is a new project website, a new project FAQ that's going to be going up relatively soon for the high school building project. And I think that's gonna be really helpful in bringing all of that up to date. It looks a lot nicer than the current website and I think it has more up to date on some of the questions we heard tonight and other questions that people are asking. So that's gonna be useful as well.
That's everything I had, so thank you.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Thank you. Any further comments from Councilors. Seeing none. Do we have any comments from the public. I see one hand raised on Zoom and anybody who would like to speak in person can line up at the podium. I will go first to Zoom since Robert Kearney has had his hand raised for a while. Go ahead Robert.
[Robert Carney]: Sure. Robert Kearney 50 Hicks Ave. Unit 6, eager to address our high school building issues and open to the idea of a new high school. But as it currently stands, I have to say I cannot support this building project and speak today in opposition, primarily based on concerns about the high cost, which I do not believe the building committee has sufficiently provided a good rationale for. At just below $700 million, it seems way overpriced. Today, I provide statistics about what neighbors in our state are spending to illustrate my concerns. Triton Regional Middle High School, which serves Byfield, Rowley, Newberry, and Salisbury, will serve anywhere from 895 to 1,070 students, depending on whether it's grade 7 through 12 or 6 through 12. There is an RFP that went out in September on notice registry for this school that estimates the cost for a new build to be $250 to $300 million.
Or in other words, a cost per student of $234K to $335K. Medford High School is expected to serve 1,395 students. Based on per student cost range, compared to the Triton RFP, if all else is equal, I would expect the cost for a new high school for Medford to be much lower, $312 to $468 million. Instead, we're looking at a projected cost per student of just below $501,000 per student for Medford High. Or how about Lexington High? $660 million estimate for 2,400 students?
or 275K a student approximately, or the Revere High project, $493 million estimate for approximately 2,450 students, approximately 201,000 a student. I'll also raise for the record that while Revere High does not have a separate vocational high school as part of the project, they will have space for vocational programs. And both of these are coming in much closer to the Tritton range than they are to the Medford project. Given that, I simply do not believe the building committee has presented and convinced me it's done its due diligence. So I call on this council to rescind this resolution and to call on the building committee to go back to the drawing board and cut costs. They haven't already.
The council should reach out to building committee members And so should the building committee reach out to members of these three previously mentioned schools to compare notes and share them clearly with the public so that we can better understand this delta and projected per student cost. Our taxpayers deserve a more fiscally rigorous process than what is taking place. Until then I cannot comfortably support this. Thank you.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Thank you. We will now go to the podium. State your name and neighborhood for the record, please.
[Nick Giurleo]: Thank you. Thank you, Nick Trolleo, West Medford. I have to take this opportunity to express significant concern about the affordability of the new high school we were planning on building. At a cost of about $700 million, with taxpayers expected to finance about $500 million, even without final data on anticipated household impact, it should be pretty clear to all of us that this is far beyond our means as a city. The about $500 billion figure is, in fact, the first we've heard in many months on anticipated taxpayer impact. I wonder where it comes from. The press release does not say. The last and only other time we heard about anticipated taxpayer impact was many months ago from the city assessor. The data he modeled indicated an average annual increase to the average taxpayer's bill in the order of $1,000 or more a year.
I hope we can all put emotions aside and recognize objectively that as much as we want and need a new school, a thousand or more dollars a year over a 30 year period is not something the average resident is going to be able to afford. We just last week saw the results of state and national elections demonstrating to what extent the people of not only Medford but our whole country are concerned about cost of living. It resulted in some very significant changes to the composition of state and federal government. Take it as a warning. People are worried about how they're going to make ends meet, which is directly related to decisions our elected leaders make on taxes and spending. I am deeply disappointed by the failure of the building committee to make space changes this summer that would have brought the total project cost to a reasonable level. In my view, that would have been about $600 million or less.
To name only a few examples, you'll see in the design of the project an almost 1,500 square foot, $2.4 million teen health center. A teen health center would be nice, but I would hope we could all agree it's not a necessity for a functional high school when we're going to be building a large and impressive nursing suite. Unfortunately, both the school and building committees would not entertain removing this luxury item from the project. You can also recall discussions at the last building committee meeting about an 800 square foot conference room in the central office suite.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: One more minute.
[Nick Giurleo]: As even some members of the building committee pointed out, this is enormous. It could have been reduced, but we heard the school superintendent offer an impassioned defense for it instead. There was also a refusal to make reasonable reductions to classroom size, take away some bathrooms in places where they hardly made sense and to consider more structural efficiencies like keeping the early education program in the neighborhood schools and considering whether Curtis Tufts needed to be relocated. At the last building committee meeting, the last opportunity to reduce space we were told, we actually saw space increase in multiple areas. All these reasonable changes would have added up in square footage and I think would have brought us closer to where we need to be at $600 million or less.
I believe that this press release is premature. We need to go back to the drawing board. The total project cost needs to be reduced to a level the average resident can afford, so we can guarantee a yes vote when it comes time to vote on the debt exclusion next year. I ask that you all not question the motives of those who are asking for reconsideration and view them for what they are, which are bona fide doubts about how our city can move forward under what we are planning. That's three minutes.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Thank you so much, Mr. Giulio.
[Nick Giurleo]: Thank you.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: I'm going to now go to Zoom. Mr. Garrity. Mr. Garrity, you can speak now. I'm asking you to unmute.
[Paul Garrity]: Good evening. My name is Paul Garrity. My name is Paul Garrity, 40 Cedar Road. My question is, Given the project timeline, it looks as if there'll be a vote by the council on the approval of the budget to fund this project. My question is, will a firm number in terms of city contribution and state contribution to the final project cost be available prior to that vote by the council?
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Is that the end of your comment? Thank you, Mr. Garrity. OK, we have two amendments. Oh, I'm so sorry. Yes, we will go back to the podium. Thank you. Wait one sec. OK. OK.
[Dina Caloggero]: Hi I'm Gina Caligero. I'm from South Medford and I thank you for allowing me to be here tonight and I'm very happy to hear that this council is very dedicated to mitigating the affordability and ensure that we don't overburden the taxpayers. I visited Medford High School. I graduated Medford High School in the 80s. My father, my mother, my husband, me, my uncle was a teacher at the vocational school. And I think I've aged better than the school. I really do. So I think we definitely need a new high school. We do, in comparison to the other buildings. But I am extremely concerned about the cost and affordability. I looked through a lot of the documentation on the high school building committee, and I didn't really see a study on what is affordable to the taxpayers of Medford. I didn't see it at all.
And I'm a little concerned about that, especially for the older seniors that are on fixed incomes right now and trying to really struggle to get through paying some of their property taxes. My husband and I recently went through a very relatable, I think, experience. We needed a new stove. And we had a budget on what we could afford for that stove. We saw high-end models with extra features, but they were out of our price range. Instead, we found a very good, practical stove within our budget, and it gets the job done.
We use good ingredients. The meals we cook taste delicious. And I think they would taste the same if we prepared them on the higher end stove. Everybody in Medford hopefully agrees that Medford desperately needs a safe, efficient, and updated high school for our students. A high price tag isn't the only measure of success. Just like cooking, what truly matters is what we put into the school. The quality of the teaching, student support programs that help our children. Hopefully, what is presented to the taxpayers is a reliable and practical approach to a high school.
As we wait for the final cost estimates and also what other revenue sources will support the project, I urge the city to keep focus on fiscal responsibility to make sure we don't overload taxpayers beyond their means. Let's build a functional and safe high school that our community can proudly afford. so that we can invest our energy and resources in what counts. So I want you to consider these points as well. You know, 80% of the property, 80% of the property tax revenue is residential right now. And I completely agree with you that we need to stimulate the economic growth in this city. Mystic Avenue is barren, right? And it's one vacant building after another. So let's focus on that. Let's focus on other measures to fund the building. That's your three minutes.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Thank you. I will now go to Lorna Wilkerson on Zoom.
[SPEAKER_23]: Good evening. I'll make this brief. My name is Dr. Lorna Wilkerson. And I'd like to say that I would like to support what Nick Giulio and Mr. Carney had previously said. I've been a physician for both high school and college students for 34, almost 35 years. And I've looked at the plans for this. I can't even understand how the student health that you are proposing for this high school has been put together. And I would happily speak to anyone who would be a medical clinician who could justify the cost of this. this sort of palatial clinic for a high school student, especially in concerning the other health students in other high schools supporting and other colleges actually in the community, all of which I've worked in in the last 35 years. That's all I have to say. Thank you very much.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Thanks so much, Lorna. I will go back to the podium. Rick, nice to see you.
[Richard Orlando]: Good evening, everyone. My name is Rick Orlando, Winford Way, Medford resident. I was going to talk about the points that Mr. Connie brought up. There are numerous surrounding communities with, it's a great information base to get the best ideas from other communities. The important point on that was that question was raised probably six months ago at the building committee by one of the members who asked the committee what would go out and look at other communities. It was rejected. My question is why? That should have been an element of the investigation.
Another point, why does the high school include scope not supporting academic delivery and improvement? Educational academic excellence should be the primary objective of the high school. Why is the teen health center with the additional cost needed at the high school? Those costs are not refundable by the SBAB. Medford citizens should have a say on the scope, especially optional non-academic items. Another question that's come up, why do so few citizens know about the high school project? The building committee will claim they have reached out to the public and the citizens. On the street, awareness and information on the project is not common knowledge at the detail level. Most of the input received was from school administrators and teachers. Although this is needed, what about Medford citizens that will be paying for this project to increase taxes? The Medford building committee has not been and environment for open debate and sharing of ideas. Most of the committee members do not engage, aside from yes or no, on votes. Votes on expenditures, presentations by the professional service firms, either no on public involvement, and questions are usually at the end of the meetings and not really given their due time. How many years will the citizens' taxes be increased? Some citizens are under the totally wrong impression, excuse me, that taxes will only be for five years. The high school project is a major capital project and will require more. One more minute. Likely for 30 years.
Numerous requests for estimates have been made but not provided. Citizens should not be kept in the dark. This is inexcusable. When costs are finally shared, we will probably hear from the building committee. I think we heard a little bit of it tonight that it's too late. We can't make scope changes. So all of this discussion going forward for purposes of cost reduction are really not going to do much. The charge of the building committee, this is my last point, is to represent the Medford citizens' needs and get the best value for the city and its citizens. The committee has been in place for years. It was established by the city. There are 24 members, 14 voting and 10 non-voting members. Approximately two-thirds of the building commitments hold positions in city government. There is little debate at these meetings. After two and a half years, how would you rate the committee on their charge?
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Thanks so much, Rick. Point of information, we did visit a number of We visited Arlington, I think people went to Waltham. I visited Arlington for sure a few years ago as part of the building committee. I just stepped down and was replaced by Councilor Mullane over the summer. But we did, we visited a lot of schools so we could see some examples. And if, are there any other people who would like to make public comment? I see one more person at the podium. Please state your name and neighborhood for the record.
[Sharon Deyeso]: Sharon Diesso, Circuit Road in Mass Ave in Medford. Long time resident. One of my first questions could be answered really by anyone. Probably George, you might know. How old is the high school?
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: But you can finish your comment, and then we'll get back to the questions.
[Sharon Deyeso]: I think the issue of a new high school goes far beyond even coming here tonight. It's sort of like a plague with any ideas and projects that comes to this city, like the police station in the library. I think the high school is, what, about 62 years old, 63 years old? That's very sad that we're even here discussing this money tonight. If I were on a council, I would not even suggest moving forward with this unless there were a linking part of it that established a maintenance fund for that new building. Secondly, and it's not criticizing anyone's backgrounds because I don't know them personally, I did go to one meeting or maybe two regarding the subject, and I wanted to know from my neighbors. They said we heard that they might put in a new high school. We don't even care. We don't have any kids anymore. Why should we have to pay for it? Aside from that, I went to the meetings. And I did ask at one, how many people on that council, I think there were appointees, were actual architects? I think there were 24 members or 21 members altogether. Does anyone know? You're talking a huge amount of money and the people here don't even know how many people are on the board. Two architects out of maybe 21, 22 people.
Two engineers slowly raised their hands. Then I asked, how many people have ever raised a building, a school, or have been in a project where a new building was erected? One more minute. One. So do the math yourself and think about the people who put this whole project and did all the comparisons. I respect them for the time. If they were appointed, I would appreciate their time, okay? And also, did you know that in most of the schools, if you ask the principals, for the next three years, the numbers of enrollees are down. So there's a lot to this. I would not recommend that you put this forward with the date yet. I think there's a lot that goes into this project, much more behind the scenes that you think about. And I really think that people who are a little bit more competent should have been on a board like this. There should be at least four to five people on a board like that who had raised or helped build a school. And again, I would not do anything unless there was a passage linked that this building, if it were to pass even up to ballot, has a maintenance fund. Thank you so much, Sharon.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Okay, up next.
[Paulette Vartabedian]: Go ahead. State your name, please. Paulette Vartabedian, Central Lab, Medford. My comment is more on the financial aspect. And I appreciate Zach's comments about all the things that you're looking into to help support the financial aspect. I'm a third generation Medford resident. And I was the second class to graduate from the old new school. And I'm a one income family. I live okay now, but if we have a debt exclusion that raises our taxes 1,000 or more, I'm going to be in the lower income and have to go for some of these things that people are in the low income bracket. I've worked two jobs since I was 14 years old, and to think that that may happen to me is really outstandingly disappointing. So please, please, please, I know you are, but please look into what this is going to cost the taxpayers. In my immediate area, which I would say maybe a five-minute walk from my house, there's 12 houses for sale. This is what I'm going to say next is looking ahead, but if this debt exclusion passes, How many people are going to want to come to Medford with the high tax rates? So that's also something to consider. And the last thing I'm going to say is I certainly hope that Suffolk Construction is a better builder than who built this old, new high school, which is only 50 years old. If you built a house, if anyone built a house, and in 50 years you have to tear it down because it's fallen apart, I don't think you'd be happy. That's all I have to say. Better last more than 50 years, even though I won't be here.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Thanks, Paula. Okay, Micah, you're up.
[Micah Kesselman]: Micah Kesselman, 499 Main Street. I just wanted to make, I'm fine, like I actually really support trying to find ways to reduce the cost and everything, of course. But as far as I can tell, I'm the only person so far who's commented tonight that actually has a child in the school system in Medford. And we'll actually have a child that is going to be making use of this new building. There's a lot of benefit to centralizing these services into a large central structure where they can get a lot of synergy between different aspects of the school system. And that's like, I don't want that to be lost sight of. And I guess as far as a question goes, I'm curious in your experience how many of the actual people in the city who actually have children in the school system are attending and getting information and contributing to these discussions. Because at the end of the day, we're the ones that are actually going to use this. And I'll also add that we're talking about growth. And one of the things that attracts people to cities, and I know this from a lot of my friends who have children too, is the school, and the quality of the school, and the quality of the school system, and the quality of the actual buildings and schools themselves. So having an updated modern school will bring in more young families to this city. Young families have to move somewhere within the vicinity of Boston. It's inevitable. There's going to be growth as a result of just the way our economy kind of is right now and how garbage it is. So if we can do what we can to attract them into Medford and build a community with these other young families, that's going to increase our tax base too.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Thank you. Okay, seeing no further public comment, I will go to President Bears.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you, Vice President Lazzaro. Just super briefly, I think it's really helpful to hear the questions that people have, concerns that folks have. I think we can take what we heard tonight. We can bring it back. I know that there are a lot of examples on the cost comparisons to other schools. Revere and Lexington, you know, we're almost two years behind them in the process. So when you're looking at the cost, you have to look at that element of it as well. I haven't looked at Triton, I have looked at Revere and, you know, I'm not on the school building committee either and I know that there were a lot of site visits but I think we can bring back some explanations and understanding around this site, what this building does today that it needs to keep doing, the site conditions themselves are difficult, the hilliness, et cetera. Like I think there's some explanations for comparison that will be helpful and then we can bring that back to the project team. And I want to go back to just one other question which was, Will cost information be available before the vote of the council and the vote of the public? Definitely. So that's part of this. We're going to be getting the cost impact February 2nd. In March, early March, there would be a vote by this body to put any debt exclusion on the ballot. That would be after all of the schematic design, the cost impact, and the state mass school building authority, their meeting on the share and the reimbursement, and all of that. certainly would happen before a vote of the public in June 2027. So this will be the voters decision in June. And part of putting this out tonight is to let folks know what the timeline is for when we're going to be talking about these questions. So I just wanted to put that out there really quickly.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Thank you, President Bears. So this is we are only talking right now about approving or not the press release. Not the high school. for whatever that's worth. And we have now three adjustments. Is it three of them or one of these votes is for the approving the press release? So, and they were all offered, well, the amendments. Okay, great. And we don't need a vote to approve the press release? Yes. Great. Part of your motion. Understood.
Offered by Councilor Scarpelli, seconded by Councilor Tseng. Madam Clerk, can you please call the roll?
[City Clerk Laurel Siegel]: Councilor Callahan? Yes. Councilor Leming? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng? Yes. Vice President Lazzaro? Yes. President Bears? Yes.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Six in the affirmative, one absent. The motion passes. And I'm gonna step down, okay.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: 26-200, resolution inquiring into contractual and community impacts of the sale of Cataldo Ambulance, offered by Councilors Scarpelli, Councilor Callahan, and President Bears. Whereas emergency medical services and reliable ambulance transport are critical components of public safety, health, and welfare for residents of our community, and whereas Cataldo Ambulance currently serves as the primary provider of emergency medical and transport services under negotiated agreements with the City, And whereas reports and discussions have emerged regarding a potential sale of Cataldo Ambulance, and whereas any transition in ownership, management, or corporate structure of a primary emergency services vendor introduces potential uncertainties regarding service continuity, response time, staffing levels, and enforcement of existing public agreements, and whereas the City Council seeks to proactively protect the public interest, ensure strict adherence to previously negotiated terms, and understand any legal or operational contingencies available to the municipality. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Medford City Council that we respect the request that the city administration, including the mayor's office and relevant public safety officials, provide a formal update and comprehensive analysis regarding the potential sale of Cataldo Ambulance Service. Be it further resolved that this inquiry specifically request the administration to clarify, one, the exact legal and contractual impacts a sale would have on the community and the active agreements currently in place. Two, whether existing contracts contain assignability clauses, performance guarantees, or change of control provisions that protect the city's interests. Three, what measures the administration is taking to guarantee that emergency medical service levels, response times, and local staffing remain uncompromised. be it further resolved that the Council receive an update on businesses that have complained that Cataldo Ambulance is using their private parking lots as bases of operations due to the continued lack of a fixed base of operation for Cataldo and Medford, and be it finally resolved that the City Administration be requested to provide a written response or appear before the City Council at its next regularly scheduled meeting to brief the body on these matters.
[Councilor George Scarpelli]: I appreciate everybody's input, because I think that when I did get this, I reached out quickly to Representative from Cataldo, Mr. White, who's been very on the ball when it comes to communication. He quickly contacted me, and then he reached out to the owner of Cataldo, Dennis Cataldo, who's here this evening. the understanding and they can explain it so maybe I can have them explain the process. I think that when we first saw this and residents heard about it, the These were the issues and the questions we all had which would be responsible questions to ask. But I think that I believe the representatives of Contaldo could share the information a little bit better. But what I heard from Ms. Contaldo is very simple is that whenever there is just a conversation in the world of healthcare now, it goes public. So I believe it was a little premature And I would yield to Mr. Cataldo after my colleagues had something to say to just express what the true situation is when it comes to the situation. Then I'll have questions about that later, Mr. President. But thank you.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. Councilor Callahan.
[Councilor Anna Callahan]: Thank you. I primarily came on board this because I have received calls about Cataldo Ambulances parking in parking lots that are for businesses, and those businesses believing that their customers are not coming into their business because there's an ambulance parked there. They believe that there is some ongoing issue in the business, but there is, in fact, nothing happening in the business. I started receiving calls, and then I learned about this, so that's kind of why I came on board. But I'm very interested in hearing from someone from Cataldo, so I appreciate you being here.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you, and just before, sorry, just a minute, thank you, and then I'll go to you, but yeah, I was a co-sponsor here as well, just my quick two cents is, I appreciate the explanation that we'll hear from you, from the information I saw about this potential sale. And maybe that's not correct and we'll hear about it. But to have our ambulance service shift and then less than a year later the sale of the company after we'd been, you know, I think it just brings significant concern. So that's really my concern. You know, you signed a contract with us and now that might be changing and I'd like to hear more. So thank you for letting me share my two cents.
[SPEAKER_25]: Thank you, Mr. President and members of the council. I'll address the publication that was availed to the public by the Health Policy Council regarding the sale of the company. So that was information that was inaccurately transmitted to the public. This was a procedural application to the state Health Policy Commission that was to gain an opinion on their oversight of our operation and a potential sale to another entity in Massachusetts. That is a result of what we call, we kind of like to call it part of the Stewart effect, which resulted from the Stewart Hospital failures. So the state requires any entity with a revenue of more than $25 million involved in a healthcare transaction to seek the opinion and approval of the state. In advance of any substantive discussions with the company that we are in discussions with, we reached out to the state and provided a baseline of information in which there was no final agreement, there's no imminent sale. It was really for an opinion to see which direction the state would take in viewing our application. So there's nothing to report there. I'd like to tell you that there was more to report, but that is something that I have no information further to provide. As far as ambulances in parking lots, first, I've heard of it.
We've been in business for 50 years. We provide over 75,000 911 transports a year. And in the last 36 years, I have never received a phone call about an ambulance parked in a private parking lot that was providing ambulance coverage. So I would invite you to forward any complaints or questions to me directly. I will deal with them. If ambulances are in parking lots, they are being positioned in a manner to provide services best to the community, period. There's no other reason for them to be in a parking lot other than for them to be in a strategic location to cover the community. That's what I got.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: All right, thank you. Do we have any questions for Mr. Cataldo? Councilor Scarpelli.
[Councilor George Scarpelli]: I can. Thank you, Mr. Cataldo. I think that it's important to hear that. I think it's important that for the administration, I think this is a great exercise, that this is something that we should work with our administration for the questions that we've asked, Mr. President, that we use that sort of a template so the administration can really help us as a council understand if this happens, not with just Cataldo and the ambulance services, but other contracts we have so we know what the processes are as we, if this does happen. So I would like the exercise to continue in that context, but just to inform you, we did, we had an issue and I believe I called Rob at Cappy's, and just for one business, and I think that, If we can, Mr. Cataldo, moving forward, I understand completely strategically moving ambulances, but to that case, maybe if we can look at municipal sites in those areas that, you know, that we can work with our emergency team and say, hey, instead of going to Cappy's, why don't we, you know, move over to the state police parking lot, just for the fact that it has come up. And just so I wanted to share that.
[SPEAKER_25]: Yeah, I mean, if anybody has an issue with where we happen to station vehicles, we call them posting locations. We're happy enough to move it to another location if it's providing. any type of anxiety for any individual or business. We don't have any issue with that. There's plenty of opportunities to move vehicles to strategic locations.
[Councilor George Scarpelli]: Perfect. I only bring that up because I know that when I did call the office, it was done in 15 minutes for that one location that they did move. One of the questions was that people thought that They kept having inebriated people that the Cataldo was just posting to give people Ubers or something. So that's, you know, a little facetious, but that was something that I wanted to share with, through Councilor Callan as well. So, but thank you for being here and explaining that. Thank you, Mr. President.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you. Do we have any further questions? All right. Just to reconfirm, no imminent sale.
[SPEAKER_25]: No, I'm in sale. All right. When information is available or if information becomes available, you'll hear it directly from me. You won't see it posted on a public website. Okay.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: And on the businesses, if we see, if we hear from a business, we should forward them to you if they're concerned about the placement of ambulances.
[SPEAKER_25]: I am available daily for any reason at all, actually. All right. People don't hesitate to reach out to me for bills, ambulances, or any other reason. All right, great.
[SPEAKER_07]: Patrick Tyler, I work with Dennis, bodyguard. We do actually have a base of operations in the city of Bedford. So I just wanted, for the removal of all doubt, because I read that and I'm like, just to be clear, since the inception of the contract, 281 Middlesex Ave. We purposely deploy ambulances throughout the city based on where we know the data shows the calls are going to be. Hence, we have an average response time of five minutes or less to all of the emergencies, which there are plenty. Fully respect Cappy's, fully respect any other business. We want to be harmonious as Dennis just indicated. Daria from the mayor's office also has immediate contact and access to me and Rob and we immediately address any concerns because we're supposed to be submariners, run silent, run deep. All right.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Great. Thank you so much. All right. Seeing no further questions from the council, are there any members of the public who would like to speak on this item? Either in person or on Zoom, you can raise your hand on Zoom or come to the podium in person. All right, seeing none, is there a motion? Councilor Scarpelli, motion to approve? On the motion to approve by Councilor Scarpelli, seconded by? Seconded by Councilor Tseng. All those in favor? Opposed? The motion passes. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Communications from the Mayor 26133.
We have the General Stabilization Fund Appropriation Request to Police Chief Search. We've been putting this one off for a while. Do we have any questions for the Chief of Staff or would we like the Chief of Staff to just discuss the paper? Seeing no questions, I'll go to Chief Staff Nazarian.
[Chief of Staff Nina Nazarian]: Thank you, President Bears. I'm here to speak on this paper. I request that the council, on behalf of the administration, approve the paper by way of an update on the screening process. The mayor and the chief are taking the lead on this recruitment and screening process, and another very large decision for the city and for the mayor. The city's DEI director, Francis Wojciech, did a second round interviews today, and three to five candidates are projected to move forward by the end of the week for the panel that is slated for November 18th, as I recall.
So those are the high level updates and I would ask the council to approve the funding on this. Thank you.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: All right, thank you. Vice President Lazzaro.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: It's November 18th, I'm on the panel. The question that I have is what the appropriation, how much I have, okay. So it's on the agenda, but there's no,
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Yeah, I don't think the paper, because it's so old and tabled, I don't think it's attached to the wall.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Okay, can you remind me, Nina, Chief of Staff Nazarian, if you have it handy, can you tell me how much it's for and what it pays for exactly?
[Chief of Staff Nina Nazarian]: Thank you, President Bears, if I may, through you to Councilor Lazzaro. Yes, of course. $35,000, and it is to pay for the consultant, MGT, who has been assisting the city with the recruitment process. Their roles and responsibilities are expansive in terms of the recruitment, and they are responsible for things like screening candidates initially, doing background checks, and a variety of other components to their work.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Thank you.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: I would motion to approve. All right. On the motion to approve by Vice President Lazzaro, I will go to Councilor Callahan.
[Councilor Anna Callahan]: I was actually hoping to get a little bit of an update. I know that the city council had requested that we have a committee of the whole where we could discuss with the recruiting firm what concerns we had and the way forward and how this recruitment for the police chief would actually happen. And then there was a request from either the administration or from that firm that we do them individually. I know I would prefer that we do this as a group so that all of us city councilors can in a public meeting hear each other's questions and concerns as well and not be siloed. And I wanted to know if there was an update on that process.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you. Councilor Callahan and Madam Chief of Staff.
[Chief of Staff Nina Nazarian]: Thank you, President Bears, through you. Councilor Callahan, I understand that the history was such, as you described, you know, the request was made and the advice back from the consulting firm, MGT, was that it be done in smaller sections. And largely that's because of the nature of these types of Recruitments and the process and the types of things that get discussed. They're really not matters that are subject to public discussions, a recruitment process and the types of details and the types of comments and questions that would typically result in those types of discussions would potentially create challenges for the city to navigate. So I suspect that's why MGT made that recommendation. I did not speak with them directly on that, but I can tell you that for, you know, even the veteran services director position that was, that I spoke on earlier today, it's not something Recruitments for positions are not things that employers are typically able to speak about in levels of detail that one would hope we'd be able to speak to, which is why, you know, separate and not public meetings are preferable because you won't see me this council won't see me or anyone in the administration present numbers of candidates, for instance, in a public meeting. Those are just they go against best practices in terms of. recruitment and in terms of hiring processes. So, you know, I know that the mayor at the time had offered, I think maybe once or twice, probably twice in my recollection, to see if Councilors were available on certain dates. And I know that at the time, Council Vice President Lazzaro had expressed an interest to serve on the screening committee and I think that's the direction that we ended up effectively going because I don't believe there was a, there were Councilors who had, I don't recall, I would, you know, you all would know best as to whether you offered to attend a meeting. But again, I know that it wasn't the one that you're describing, Councilor Callahan, which is a public meeting.
[Councilor Anna Callahan]: If I may, I believe that at this point in the process where, you know, the earlier in the process that we possibly can, I think it is deeply important that we have a meeting that is a public meeting where members of the public can also state their preferences for what we want. in our vision of our next police chief. I think that's crucially important. I also happen to have attended one of the meetings with MGT and knowing from that meeting the topics that we discussed, the topics that are important to me in terms of our next police chief. that almost none of them had any personnel issues. We were not talking about those details. We were talking about the vision of what our next police chief should be from a sort of larger scale. And I think it's really important that we have that as a public meeting. Of course, we can always have individual meetings if we want to talk about things that are more specific and more detailed that have anything to do with personnel matters, that have anything to do with things that should not be discussed in public, but that does not prevent us from having a public meeting to discuss those things that the public should not only know about, but should be able to weigh in on. And I continue to request that we have a committee of the whole where we can have a meeting with this recruitment firm and the public to talk about our next police chief. Thank you.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Callahan. Chief of Staff, do you have any further item, any response on that?
[Chief of Staff Nina Nazarian]: Not at this point. Thank you, President Bears. And I hear Councilor Callahan that that's the best I can say at this point. I haven't been involved at that level on this matter. I'm just speaking to periphery and my broad knowledge on the subject of the recruitment firm, the processes that took place and the emails that I was that I'm aware of that went out. So like I said before, the council knows best of where things stood in those discussions as I was not closely following that one, not taking the lead in the office on that one.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you. Yeah. Just my two cents on it is that, you know, we really did hope for a public meeting. We understand that the consultant was not In favor of it. Personally, I would still like us to have a public meeting about this hiring process. It's very important. So that's just where I stand on it. But thank you for engaging with us on that. We appreciate it. We have a motion on the floor by Councilor Lazzaro. Is there a second? This is to approve the appropriation. And I did actually find the paper is in here.
The 35,000, this is 2C on the paper from July 9th for the police chief search. Is there a second on Councilor Lazzaro's motion? Seconded by Councilor Callahan. This is a motion to approve. Clerk Siegel, please call the roll.
[City Clerk Laurel Siegel]: Councilor Callahan? Yes. Councilor Leming? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng? Yes. Vice President Lazzaro? Yes. President Bears? Yes.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Yes, six in the affirmative, none of the negative, one absent, the motion passes. All right, 26201, Capital and General Stabilization Fund Appropriation Request submitted by Mayor Brianna Lago-Kern. Dear President Bears and members of the City Council, I respectfully request and recommend that your honorable body approves the following appropriations from the Capital Stabilization Fund in the amount of $85,000 for the Schematic Drawings and Feasibility Study for the Recreation Center Rehabilitation Project and $71,000 to fund repairs and weatherproofing at the fire headquarters, including but not limited to window replacement and resealing windows. Capital Stabilization Fund has a balance of $11,182,980.
And then we have a general stabilization for $24,476.44 for repairs at the old police station due to a flooding event. As of the writing of this paper, balance of general stabilization is $5,960,000. And there's the $35,000 request we just had. And we do have the facilities director here, David McIntyre to answer questions. So I will turn it over to David. I see Kevin Bailey here as well and the Chief of Staff. So we've got enough folks to answer the questions. But David, good to see you.
[vRbVV80gLgM_SPEAKER_06]: Thank you. David McIntyre, the Facilities Director. I think it's laid out pretty straightforwardly. I'm just here to kind of respond to any questions you all may have.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Do we have questions? So we have the rec center rehab, weatherproofing at the fire headquarters, which I'm guessing might be somewhat related to flooding event at the old police station, because they're the same building.
[vRbVV80gLgM_SPEAKER_06]: They're actually a little different.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: OK. All right. All right. We'll take them. We'll do all three then separately. We'll start with the rec center. Do we have any questions on rec center rehabilitation? Kevin, do you want to talk anything more, speak to that anymore? You don't have to. I'm just going to jump in. No, don't. Sure. Briefly. I just wanted to make sure you had a chance if you wanted to say anything.
[Kevin Bailey]: No, I can be very brief. Just more here to talk about the programming, but we are certainly in need of a recreation center, as you are aware. We are closed right now because of the gym floor. But we are moving into winter, and it's a struggle. If you look on our website, we have been trying to be proactive in using our recreation bus. Add some programs like going to Central Rock Gym and doing a ski club. I'm working on some programming, new programming over at Laconie Rink. But there is at least 10 core programs that we typically run in the winter that we don't have space. I know a lot of people have mentioned going to the schools. But during the wintertime, that is also the peak of winter sports. There is not really any indoor space right now. And we are working really diligently. We have been even working since September to try to find that space. And right now, we're just coming short of not being able to provide the different programs and services that we usually are able to run in the winter. And as I said, in many years past, we need a recreation center. We're very lucky to have it. And I just hope that we can move this quickly so that we can get this gym repaired and be open again.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: All right, great. Councilor Scarpelli.
[Councilor George Scarpelli]: I appreciate it. I don't want to beat this to death. I think as a city, I think there has to be a partnership, Kevin. I think that there has to be some movement, some support from the school department, that it's something that I'll look into tomorrow. But there's got to be a way that during this time that everybody has to chip in and feel a little bit of the pain and maybe look at giving you the opportunity, at least one of the gyms in the city, that you could do some of these programs. You're talking about 10 core programs. That's very important for a lot of residents. You know, as a recreation professional, we all know when you start losing the connection for those core programs, it's tough to get them back. And you've done an amazing job, but people don't realize these are self-sustaining programs. So what you bring in, it supports your budget. And what people don't understand, if we don't have that, we'll be talking about this at budget time. I think that offline I think we'll talk see if there's something we can do to look at other avenues that we could see that maybe the city can support that because maybe. Looking at a private entity and seeing if there's a way that we can fund it, let's say a $10,000 rental for a winter, saves us $100,000 in fees that we're saving during the budget season. So I think it's important that we look at that. But I agree, I think we need to move forward as quickly as possible to move forward with the facility so we can get this rectified and back online. So thank you, Mr. President.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. Any further questions on Rec Center? Just one from me, Kevin. This is a feasibility study for the schematic drawings. How long are we looking right now at being closed?
[vRbVV80gLgM_SPEAKER_06]: I think we're going to have a better sense of that once we start this phase one, but it's looking like at a minimum towards the spring. We will have more information once we start this process and they start seeing the existing conditions of the space and start to build our requests for, hey, this is exactly what we need and this is the timeline we're going to be focusing on. So starting this as soon as possible is really going to get us rolling on better defining those timelines.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Yeah, because I see phase 1 and then I'm like, well, that means there's phase 2, maybe phase 3. You never know how many phases once you're in phase 1.
[vRbVV80gLgM_SPEAKER_06]: I understand.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Is it phase 1 and just phase 2 is, OK, we have this now. We're making a decision on construction. Or are we thinking we're going to try to make sure that the building can be open at least somewhat? I just want to make sure. So, you know, I think the goal here is to minimize the time that the space is unavailable, which I'm sure is your goal, too, but just if you could talk a little bit more about it. Yeah.
[vRbVV80gLgM_SPEAKER_06]: Yeah. So, again, I don't know the specifics to whether there's a phase three. There would certainly be a phase two where, in my current understanding, would be a construction phase. Yeah. Okay. You might have a 1.5, which is kind of building a proposal where we're going out and finding those contractors. Okay.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: All right. Great. Thank you. Sure.
[Kevin Bailey]: And I agree with like one of the things that we did discuss is what is the priorities right now to get us back open and what are other things that would be nice to have but we can be operational during that construction phase. The other part that makes this a little bit of a challenge too as you know is we have an after school program through the YMCA of all Method residents coming in there for after school. So when it comes to the construction phase, this is also one part that makes a little bit of a challenge is we need to make sure that we don't close the recreation center and close the after school program or relocate it to an area that is difficult for parents to pick up. So that is also something that's very much in our mind as well of making sure that the after school program continues to run while we do this construction work.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: All right. Great. Thank you.
[Kevin Bailey]: Thank you.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: All right. Let's go next to talk about the waterproofing at the fire headquarters and the police station flooding event. Do we have any questions on that for members of the council? Councilor Scarpelli?
[Councilor George Scarpelli]: Again, this is something with the main street, with the fire at the headquarters, is this the reason why we have to maintain what's happening in the police stations? The old police stations are so.
[vRbVV80gLgM_SPEAKER_06]: So I can provide a little more context to these. So for the weatherization there was some window replacements that I inherited when I came in back in January. So those were completed and that was on the front facade of the building above where the bay doors are. There's a few remaining sets of windows that we would like to target for that. When there's heavy rains, especially wind-driven rain, we're seeing water get into the building. So replacing the remaining sets of windows and then going around the rest of the facades and kind of doing strategic sealing is what we're talking about in this section B here. And that's just to, again, prevent rain or, you know, when it comes to it, if there's a lot heavy snows or whatever, from getting water into the building. In regards to this other section here with the old police side, We recently turned on the heat at the fire station. Now the heat serves the whole building both the old police side and the fire headquarters side. And we had an incident where a old valve failed. So that system had a failure that led to a flood that was not related to anything weather based other than we were just trying to heat the building. That's been rectified at this point. That amount of money reflects the mitigation cost to make sure we cleaned up that space so it wasn't, you know, any sort of hazardous or anything like that.
[Councilor George Scarpelli]: Okay. And I appreciate it. Thank you for looking into it. But to the Chair, to President Piz, I think this brings up another question. This being just a window and just a valve, what happens if something big happens and We don't have a plan in place for a, you know, updated fire station, because one plays off the other. So it might be something that just bring forward tonight, but it's something that we should start talking about again and looking at the option of what we really want in this community and what we really need, because today is just what it is. If it's a bigger piece, if it's a, you know, because of that, you know, the inactivity in that side of the building that has to heat. What happens if the big system goes and we're looking at a million dollar project in a facility we know we have to update? So I think this is a conversation down the line, but I want to make sure that, I think all of us believe, and said it one time or another, that we're all looking at the bigger picture with this and that we don't want to be here in 10 years and people say, well, just like we're talking about the high school. The high school is 50 years old, but we didn't upkeep it. We didn't maintain it properly. That's why it's in the situation it's in. No different than what's happening with the Main Street station and the existing building. if we don't start moving on this and making changes, and that's getting us a new FIEST headquarters, we're just going to be throwing more money at it over and over again. So I just, I only say that just to let the residents know, because that was a question someone had. Wow, they still, how's it tied in? We're still talking about that. I think that's something that we're all looking into. That's all. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you very much.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. All right. Do we have anything on the police station, old police station? This is the closed old police station. There was a flooding event. Do you have anything, any questions on that? No. Could you tell us just a little bit more about what we're fixing?
[vRbVV80gLgM_SPEAKER_06]: Yeah, basically when that event happened we had to call ServiceMaster to come mitigate the water that was in the building and remove, you know, carpet tiles and things like that so we prevent any kind of future mold or health hazards from being created in that space. Same thing you would do if you have a flood in any facility, you know, you call in a professional mitigation company, so.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: All right, seeing no further questions from members of the council, are there any questions from members of the public on any of these items, either in person or on Zoom? Seeing none, is there a motion? On the motion to approve by Councilor Tseng, seconded by Vice President Lazzaro, Clerk Siegel, please call the roll.
[City Clerk Laurel Siegel]: Councilor Callahan? Councilor Leming? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli?
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Yes.
[City Clerk Laurel Siegel]: Councilor Shakes? Yes. Vice President Lazzaro? Yes. President Bears?
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Yes. Six in the affirmative, none in the negative, one absent. The motion passes. Thank you. Thank you. All right. We have 26202 submitted by Mayor Breanna Lungo-Koehn, Supplemental Appropriation for Fiscal Year 2027. Dear President Bears and members of the City Council, I respectfully request and recommend your honorable body approve the following supplemental appropriation for fiscal year 2027. To fully restore the balance of the proposed law department budget originally presented June 4th, 2026, that's $269,295.81. so that appropriation, that sum be raised and appropriated from the fiscal year 27 tax levy. Chief of Staff Nazarian will be in attendance to address the council. Please note that Chief of Staff Nazarian is not available on November 17th, which will be the last opportunity to levy these funds. Given, as you know, the tax classification hearing has been scheduled for November 17th, and once the council takes votes, we'll no longer be able to raise and appropriate any further funding in FY27. Approving these funds by or before the tax classification hearing would also avoid a scenario where we leave up to $269,295.81 unlevied. Thank you for your kind attention to this matter. Sincerely, Brianna Lundgren, Mayor. Do we have any questions or comments from councilors before the Chief of Staff presents?
Seeing none, Chief of Staff Nazarian.
[Chief of Staff Nina Nazarian]: Thank you, President Bears and members of the council. I am here to answer any questions of the council, and I hope that the council will approve the full law department budget. As you've stated, President Bears, as a part of the record, we're flagging that given the Massachusetts general finance laws and given the tax classification process, we are flagging that Once the tax rate hearing votes are taken, we will no longer be able to levy funds for the law department budget.
President Bears, as you are aware, and I think Vice President Lazzaro and Councilor Mullane is aware, there was a request to determine whether there were alternative methods in which there could be you know, funds set aside. I have spoken with finance director Bob Dickinson, and we cannot think of a feasible way to go about setting funds aside. So that is a challenge that we face. And I can also say that the mayor has reached out to a number of firms Um, since the last communication that you provided president bears with names of firms and organizations that might do an audit, the mayor intends to reach out to multiple more. As we have stated in the past, we have never heard of this type of audit and the folks we've consulted with on this that are experienced in governmental practices also have not heard of this, but we. We're committed to inquiring and trying to see if we can find firms to do this type of work. We have no issue with doing an audit. We just want to make sure that we are considering the question and a firm that has the past experience in doing that type of work. Um, as you stated, president bears in the letter, I'm not available on the 17th. I'm happy to work with the council if the council requires more time between now and the 17th on questions that exist. I know the mayor is also not available, but we will both make ourselves available between now and then. And, um, I think that's all I have at this point. And again, I'm happy to answer any questions and try to move this forward with you all.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: I just wanted to also offer, you know, if it's helpful, you know, I'd be happy if you want to pass my contact information along to any firms if they have any specific questions about what is being requested. I'd be happy to try to field or answer them to give them more clarity. That is certainly something I'd be happy to do. in terms of the audit. I also did a little bit of a follow-up on this myself about the alternatives because I wanted to just make sure that I had some items and I can forward some of this to you as well. But I talked to some municipal finance folks and they suggested that the city could appropriate these funds as a transfer to stabilization or a supplemental appropriation to a general fund contingency account. I think something similar to like what we used, what was passed a few, maybe two or three budgets ago when there was a bunch of funds in a, I think like a contingency account for future contract negotiations. I think that was something that was done, maybe fiscal 24, fiscal 25 budget, I can't quite remember. And then the other piece was that the finance director could lower another revenue source to offset as well. I think that would probably be the least favorable of the options, but the supplemental appropriation to general fund contingency or appropriate transfer to stabilization seem to be possible.
And I just wanna say, I appreciate the meeting that we had last week collaborating to move forward on this. I think we understand the administration's position of So, I think that's a really good point. I think that's a really good point. nature of this and really just, I hope maybe some of those alternatives could be helpful. Cause I know we don't want this to fall to be unleveled this year for sure. So hopefully that maybe the supplemental to a contingency fund would be possible.
I'll give you a chance to respond. And then I do have some, at least one Councilor wants to speak.
[Chief of Staff Nina Nazarian]: Thank you, president. Yeah, we've considered the stabilization fund piece. That is a concern because we don't want to raise any red flags, especially with our most important project being the high school for which we're going to need a bond rating review issuance given the project size. I know that that's a subject that's important to all the electeds. Officials of the city of Medford, so that's that one. We don't really want to go down that road. I did. I did speak with Bob about a contingency type thing, but.
I think to a degree there is some reality that that those funds are accessible to the administration at the point in which they are approved. So for purposes of transparency, for purposes of this discussion, I think it's. important for me to say once the funding is approved, as long as there's a lawful expense against it, then I don't think that there can be any conditioning of a appropriation from that point forward. I'm happy to discuss that further and perhaps we need to discuss it offline. Perhaps I'm missing the point that was made by whomever you spoke to.
Then I don't fully follow, to be candid with you and the council and the public, the lowering of another revenue source to offset. But again, I'm happy to speak offline and discuss those further so I can better understand them and make sure that the conclusions I'm coming to are not inaccurate. Right? So.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Sure. I appreciate that. We can talk more. Go to Councilor Scarpelli and then Vice President Lazzaro.
[Councilor George Scarpelli]: Thank you, Mr. President, but I'll be honest with you. This isn't something that this councilor has questioned the information that's been asked for in the past year. This is something that I've been asking for and been blatantly misled in the process of getting us the information that's needed. So again, to come here again and say that we need this because of that and we can't get information because no one's available moving forward is typical of what we've been seeing with this dog and pony show. And Mr. President, I'm not going to support any sort of uh, supports this line until we get the answers that we've requested. We've requested the proper way. We've requested it to many different channels and we've been stalled and delayed and moved aside and given information and that is, is useless. And then, um, witnessed the administration spend multiple hours on information that we didn't need. So as one Councilor, this is something that I've been questioning and now as we move forward with seeing my council colleagues have seen the gaps in the issues that we've identified and the funding mechanisms and the questions when it comes to the businesses of this community and this administration with the lack of a city solicitor and the lawsuits that are coming over and over again. We had the fire department here again just a few weeks ago, everybody, let's not forget that, that expressed to us the situations where all we ask our administration to do is look at things in a different light so we're not going after our employees and spending the citizens' money on frivolous lawsuits or arbitrations that aren't and shouldn't be used. And so I'm not going to, it's very simple for me, Mr. President. I would not support anything until we get the answers that we've requested multiple times in professional manners. And again, to say that this is what you need to do and we can't be here We won't be available. No one can be available to answer any of our questions, but we'll do it offline. Okay? And then you, in the same breath, you want to, you want to mention the word transparency. It just doesn't pass the smell test, Mr. President. So I will not be supporting this at all. Thank you. Thank you. Vice President Lazzaro.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Respectfully, I cannot do this anymore. I can't do it anymore. I can't talk about this anymore. We have been talking about it too much. I motion to approve. This is the agreement is that we, oh God, we, it's just a segment. It's because.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: No, they're asking for all of it.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: This is all of it?
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Yeah.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: This is not what we talked about?
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Yeah. We already did the segment. This is all of it.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Okay. What we talked about was one month, we get the proposals for a, we had a meeting, we said that we have to wrap it up because we're boring everybody to tears, including ourselves. We have to, It's so boring. Do you know what is... There's a train station that is extremely unsafe, and a man was killed crossing the train tracks, and there has been $5 million in the hands of the MBTA to improve the safety of the train station, and they haven't done it. And the other day, I was driving by, and I saw a bunch of people in reflective vests and hard hats standing by the train station, and nobody had told me about that, even though I've been in communication. irritatingly constant communication with this guy named Adam at the MBTA. And I've been asking him for a timeline because I put a resolution on the agenda that said we're going to have a committee meeting to talk about the train station. And we're going to talk about the safety improvements. And Adam told me there's $5 million already earmarked, and they just haven't done it. And they knew about this from 2023. And this guy got killed in the meantime. John Westwater was killed by a train. And I saw all these guys and these women, people, in reflective vests and hard hats. So I just pulled over and I said, hi, I'm a city councilor. I would love to hear what you guys are talking about. Why don't you tell me what you're talking about? And while somebody from the Federal Railroad Administration was talking to me, somebody from Keolis said, you can't be standing here at the train station where everybody boards the train without PPE on. And when I laughed, because I said, this is where you get on the train, he said, well, it's not safe. You can't stand here. And then he called me condescending. So what I would love to spend our meetings talking about is why Keolis and the MBTA and the Federal Railway Administration is not talking to us about the safety procedures they're trying to update and where that $5 million went to improve the safety of the train station so that people won't be hit by trains and killed. If it's not a guy who has early stage dementia, it might be a child.
or somebody else or any of us. What I don't wanna talk about anymore is the law department budget. So no, Nina, this is not what we talked about. Brianna, this is not what we talked about. You can't just put whatever you want on the agenda and save it for the end. What are you doing?
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Councilor Leming.
[Councilor Matt Leming]: Are we able to cut the amounts in here so that it's only a month? We don't have to act right now.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: We already approved this month's funding. This is about the levy issue. I think the issue, frankly, is there's this dispute about whether the money will go unraised. And it sounds like the chief of staff is saying, if we do a supplemental appropriation, they can just spend it on this purpose and they don't wanna be perceived as doing it and run around us. And so I will coordinate with them offline. Hopefully we can stick to the track here. Councilor Leming.
[Councilor Matt Leming]: I just want to make sure I'm understanding the issue correctly. We already, you already proposed, we already approved a month. They just kind of sent this in even after it was- Basically, we're gonna do the tax hearing next week.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: And by law, once we've done the tax hearing, we can't appropriate from the levy for the current fiscal year anymore. This is like the most- Well, the problem is that we, this is like a really technical thing, is that we would lose this money because it was never appropriated. And the administration is saying, essentially, like we could raise it on the levy next year, but again, if it was never appropriated. I'm going down a road here, I think.
[Councilor Matt Leming]: Wait, wait, wait. Wait, so yeah, the money wouldn't be spent, it would just go to free cash.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: It wouldn't go to free cash, it would never be levied because it was never appropriated, so it would never be collected. So it couldn't go to free cash. It's basically what my understanding is from talking to some other budget folks. So there's some options. One is put it in stabilization, which means it would need further approval by us. The administration has raised a concern about that, that it might raise a red flag. I'll try to track that down. The other one was put it in a contingency fund. I think the chief of staff just said, basically we could spend it on the KP law anyway, even if you did that. So we don't want to be perceived as uh, trying to end run this whole thing. Um, and I will follow up on the third piece, which is we could levy the money by reducing, I believe what the suggestion was is, um, can't think of the name of it right now, but essentially saying we're going to get $269,000 less in permits. And it doesn't mean we're actually going to get $269,000 less in permits. It's just going to the state and saying we think we might get less, and then if we got $269,000 more in permits, it would fall to free cash, so.
[Councilor Matt Leming]: At this meeting, are we able to just make a motion to? To table. Motion to table.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Councilor Tseng? I second. All right. On the motion of Councilor Leming to table, seconded by Councilor Tseng. All those in favor? Aye. Motion passed. All those opposed? Motion passes. This is tabled to the next regular meeting. Sorry, Madam Chief of Staff, that was an undebatable motion. I will go next to 26197, Medford Fire Department Unmanned Aerial System Standard Operating Procedure Use Policy under CCOPS Ordinance. October 20th, 2026, to Honorable Members of the City Council, Medford Fire Department UAS Program and Ordinance. Dear Members of the City Council, the Medford Fire Department has established an unmanned aircraft system program to enhance emergency response capabilities, improve situational awareness, and increase the safety of both emergency personnel and the community. Utilizing an aircraft equipped with high-resolution visual and thermal imaging capabilities, the department can provide incident commanders with real-time aerial information during structure fires, hazardous material incidents, search and rescue operations, natural disasters, and other public safety emergencies. This technology allows potential to evaluate hazardous conditions, locate individuals in distress, identify potential dangers, and make more informed operational decisions while minimizing unnecessary exposure to dangerous environments. The program operates under applicable FAA authorizations and established operating procedures. The department recognizes the importance of protecting individual privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties as outlined in Medford Ordinance 877, an ordinance to promote transparency and protect civil rights and civil liberties with respect to surveillance technology. The UAS program is intended exclusively to support legitimate fire rescue and emergency management functions rather than routine surveillance or monitoring of the general public. Aircraft deployments will be incident driven, limited to legitimate operational objectives, and conducted without discriminatory or viewpoint-based targeting. Departmental policies will establish appropriate safeguards covering the collection, access, storage, retention, and dissemination of imagery and other information obtained during operations, ensuring that such information is managed responsibly and in accordance with applicable laws and city requirements. The Metro Fire Department is committed to maintaining transparency and accountability regarding the use of this technology and to satisfying the applicable review, approval, and reporting requirements established under Ordinance 877. The department welcomes city council oversight and the opportunity to provide its operational procedures, proposed surveillance use policies and supporting documentation for public review. Our objective is to establish responsible and transparent UAS program that respects the rights of Medford residents while providing firefighters with a valuable tool to protect lives and property and public safety. Attached to this letter is a more in-depth explanation of how the fire department will comply with section 50-73. Respectfully, Chief Todd Evans, Medford Fire Department. We do have a surveillance impact report and use policy submission under section 50-73 for this technology. I will pause there and go to Vice President Lazzaro.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Thank you. It's a really thorough report. I did take a look at it. But the other reports that we received from other departments in response to the CCOPS ordinance have been thus far discussed in the Public Health and Community Safety Committee. So I would just make a motion that we send this to PHCS and discuss it there at a future date. So that we can have some more time for Councilors and residents to sort of come through the report, bring any questions. It's a great report. So I think it sort of deserves the attention and time it needs to be looked over. This is the first time we've had a report for this technology.
Second, was that a second?
[Councilor Zac Bears]: No, second.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Okay, great.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: We have a motion from Councilor Lazzaro to refer to Public Health and Community Safety Committee, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. Councilor Callahan.
[Councilor Anna Callahan]: Thank you so much. I actually was also going to request that it be reported out to committee. I have lots and lots of questions and I really do not think that tonight is the time to bring up those questions. We need to have someone. you know, from the fire department who will be able to answer all of those questions. I think the community, this is also the first time they're seeing it and we've had a few days and I think I certainly have spoken to quite a number of people in the community who have many questions and, you know, we're not really prepared today. So I fully support having this go out to the public health and community safety committee.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Great. I'll just add I talked to Chief Evans about this, kind of gave a little bit of a fill in on CCOPS and the procedures. They then took that and created the proposal, you know, the documentation around the ordinance in addition to their use policies and other documents. So, you know, I know that they're taking this seriously. They want to be in compliance with the ordinance. In my conversation, the chief did talk about this is for fires. This is for fires and people in danger. This is not for law enforcement. So, I do think that's important.
I hope you guys in committee have the chance to kind of get into some more questions. And I also just want to thank Lieutenant Brennan, who I know has put a lot of work into this, who was here. Vice President Lazzaro gave him the heads up earlier that this was probably going to go to committee, so he maybe didn't need to sit here until the end. And I know that he's done a ton of work on this and will be able to work with you guys and answer questions on your committee. So, just wanted to let you know kind of my involvement before this point. On the motion of Vice President Lazzaro to refer to committee, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor? Opposed? Motion passes. All right. We are now to public participation. We have a public participation petition from Andrew Dahl. I don't have the petition language in front of me. Ah, thank you. This is from Andrew Dahl, 141 Sturgis Street. People don't obey the traffic laws in my neighborhood. We need help before someone gets seriously hurt. Couldn't agree more. Thank you for being here, and you will have the floor.
[SPEAKER_20]: Thank you. I brought my friend and neighbor, Rick Paone, and he's the father of two of the young fine gentlemen that we're trying to protect around the street. uh... so i would like to defer to him to explain to what's going on sure thank you
[SPEAKER_11]: Rick Paone, 142 Sturgis Street. So there are multiple issues, one being the speed at which the general public does travel down Sturgis Street. It is one of the only through one ways from Fulton to Highland Ave. And despite having state police presence that live on the street, it's just completely ignored. The speed at which people travel is just unacceptable. It's to the point where it's a real big public safety concern. We've exhausted all resources between Andrew and myself, reaching out to both Medford Public Police Department and the Traffic Commission, and we have increased a lot of visual awareness between stop signs, recently painting one-way direction, and putting several signs there and it's still in addition to the speeding concerns people are traveling up Oregon Street taking the left up the wrong way and people also are turning up Highland Ave the wrong way for the for the entirety of that section of the street. And it's just a matter of time where between the wrong direction traffic and the speeding. It's just a recipe for disaster. And that intersection is directly in front of my house. And I have several videos between Andrew and myself, probably north of 60 that have been submitted over the last six plus months, I'd say. And we're still to the point where it's happening at a frequency where it's just a matter of time before someone gets seriously injured. My kids and myself are one of the major concerns because of our proximity to that intersection.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: All right. Well, thank you for bringing this to us. I appreciate all the work that you've been doing with your neighbors, going to the police, going to the Traffic Commission. I know it's a lot. It sounds like you've hit a wall. Yeah. And that's, you know, I'm sure hard after going through a bunch of work. I just had a quick question before I go to some of my colleagues. When you went to the Traffic Commission, what did they, you know, what was the intervention? It sounds like they did install more signage and paint, but beyond that, there wasn't further, was there a request that you guys made to them?
[SPEAKER_11]: I'm just Italian, I'm naturally loud. So there was a request for more of a physical barrier, whether it is a speed table or an actual stop sign, or multiple stop signs, whatever needs to happen to slow people down. They did install, like I mentioned, they installed additional stop sign on Morgan at the intersection, recently put down the one-way, right turn only, put a one-way in front of Andrew's house. It replaced the signs on the Highland Ave side, and it still happens. I mean, we both have cameras on our houses. It happens multiple times every day, all day.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: I know the neighborhood. I grew up in the Heights, but I know the Mustones on Morgan.
[SPEAKER_11]: So you're familiar with that?
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Yeah, I know. I'm like, okay, so you're coming this way from Fulton, you're picking up speed towards Highland, Morgan hits you about two-thirds of the way down. I'm familiar with it. I guess my question... Sorry, what? Sure, yeah, go ahead. Yeah, absolutely. But I just wanted to, so basically the stop sign's not working, the paint's not working, you'd like a speed table or a speed bump. Correct.
[SPEAKER_20]: Matt has been very helpful in the beginning in coming to us. I feel like we've stalled at an impasse. As soon as yesterday afternoon, we have this one particular neighbor, not that I'm singling anybody out, but she just happens to be the shining example. She's been stalked through twice from the Method Police and asked to stop, and that stops her for about a week or so. And yesterday, she came down Morgan and took a very hesitant 40-mile-an-hour turn right onto Sturgis Street. For the record, that's a lot of sarcasm. That was at 436 in the afternoon. Yeah. Almost got into a head-on collision if she was about a quarter of a second faster. And then, again, we're talking about 436. And I can show you all of the videos I have of the next 40 cars over the last 30 minutes that went flying down that street. If she had been either a quarter second earlier or about a minute later, then we would have had another disaster on that street. We're talking about life-altering obliterated vehicles, school buses. We have a bread truck that comes down that street at 1.30 in the morning. I have videos of police supervisors and fire department that also go up that street, the runway. And I don't understand what we need to do to stop it. It's just it's becoming a very frustrating point. And that's why we've taken this measure to come and get a petition so that way we can show you that we're not the only ones in the neighborhood that feel this way.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Yeah. No, I appreciate you guys coming before us. I'm going to go to my colleagues and then we'll come back around, but I'll go to Councilor Scarpelli and then Vice President Lazzaro.
[Councilor George Scarpelli]: So yeah, as a resident of the Heights, everything's a cutthroat and it's dangerous. I mean, I live in a dead end and we still have people flying down and then they do the quick turn and they side swipe cars and everybody's walking up the neighborhood pulling the ring cameras to make sure we can get license plates. So I get it and we tried this when we had issues in the past and I think that what worked and I think I'm going to recommend this is that we hold a, a site meeting with everybody involved on a Saturday. And what we do is what we've done in the past, Council President, I think some of my colleagues were here, that we come to that intersection and we bring a traffic engineer, we bring the sergeant, the traffic sergeant, the city council, whoever can make it that day. with the neighbors, bring the neighbors out. And what we do is we sit there and we first, we did it up in Fulton Street, right on Fulton Spring Road. And as we were in the meeting, people running the stop sign. And that moved the needle a little bit. And I think that until we get everybody there and we're seeing, because we took an active role back some time ago when we were trying to sway the process of ways in eliminating the cut-throughs, and that's where the do not enter signs started coming up, and then all these other options. But there's got to be something we can do, and I think that the more people that go to that site and bring people there together, I think that might help. I think we're at that point right now, from what I hear, you've exhausted everything. So I would recommend, Mr. President, if we can, is let's call for a Saturday meeting on the site with the traffic engineer and our traffic sergeant and anybody else that we need to make the needle move or actually stop.
[SPEAKER_20]: So if we could do that. One of the issues that has arised is the fact that this is an issue that the city has somewhat, I don't want to say created, but Once the city decided from East Porter Road to Elm Street, every single street that's method property, which is all of them on the left-hand side, they now all house a do not enter sign. But they're all 7 a.m. to 9 a.m. residents only. And nobody, the public is just oblivious to stuff. So they see that do not enter sign at the end of Sturgis Street, Now, I'm a lifelong resident of the city since 1978 and in North Method, and I will tell you that the upper Sturgis Street from Fulton to Highland has always been a one-way. It has never changed. It's never been a only between residents, for residents only from any given time. And it's being blatantly ignored by everybody, by residents, by people just trying to cut through. And I mean, it just happens. I don't know what more that we can do. I'd be more than happy to entertain a Saturday meeting with everybody. I would be sure to let all my neighbors know they can't attend, that they will, especially those ones that have young children. because that's really what my concern is coming here. It's not to catch one person, it's to stop the violations from happening. So that way we don't have a larger problem and somebody has a really bad day that day. Yeah.
[Councilor George Scarpelli]: So I would make that motion. I know it's public participation, but If we can make that recommendation and then from there, we can move on to some other options that we've tried in the past. So once we get all the players there, then we could brainstorm and get things done, so.
[Councilor Justin Tseng]: Yeah.
[Councilor George Scarpelli]: Great.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Vice President Lazzaro.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Thanks. This is something that I've worked on a lot before. The unfortunate thing that I've found in a lot of cases is that you don't get traction unless somebody dies, which is horrible. And I would love to communicate the importance of these issues before a tragedy like that happens, and I think the idea of a walking audit on a Saturday is a great one. That was something we did for the Salem Street Rotary that was changed and updated recently. I mean, the man that was crossing the street there did die, but then when it was updated, we walked with a large group of people, a lot of neighbors, the police department, the traffic engineer, all these people, and MassDOT, because they're in charge of that. Rotary we walked all the way around the Rotary and you realize how hard it is to walk all the way around. But there are some people that are involved in nonprofits in the city and are really good at advocating. Emily Stein and Ellery Klein there with Walk Medford and Safe Streets Alliance Emily. Emily Stein is a her father was killed in a pedestrian accident so she started this nonprofit and It's, they do really incredible work. They're very keen advocates for this sort of thing. And I really, really would love to get the attention of people before somebody gets seriously injured or killed. Are those streets, do we know, city-owned streets?
[SPEAKER_20]: Like city, they're city streets, I think, not state.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: And is Highland a state street? State road?
[SPEAKER_20]: DCR.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: DCR is really hard to work with, though they did put in a raised crosswalk near where I live that now you get to see trucks bottoming out on, which that's the satisfying thing.
[SPEAKER_11]: Yeah, that's the thing is there's a dip just after the intersection. I was really happy when they were doing pipe work because they left the dip. So for people that are cutting through, they do bottom out. They don't know the dips there. But something more aggressive would be.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: I'm going to give you guys my card. And if you can send me an email, I can connect you with those people. And maybe we can all work together on setting something up and finding a way to get attention to that issue and figuring out how we can get DCR's attention on it, too.
[Unidentified]: That'd be fantastic.
[Councilor Emily Lazzaro]: Because the important thing is to really communicate with the people, all the people that make decisions on it. I'll loop you in. You want to?
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Sure.
[Councilor George Scarpelli]: Yeah.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Sure. That'd be great. Thanks for that invite, Paul. Thank you. All right. I just want to go back to something, though. The Traffic Commission, when you brought up table speed bump, further stop sign, is there, OK, first question, is there a new stop sign now at Sturgis and Morgan on Sturgis?
[Unidentified]: No.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: No, there's only one on Morgan. Just on Morgan. OK. And so what you're asking for is, at the very least, a stop sign on Sturgis at Morgan.
[SPEAKER_20]: Correct. Correct. Right at that intersection. I feel like we could put up a sign.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: I feel like we could put up a sign, guys. That's the whole last thing.
[SPEAKER_11]: I was like, hey, can we get one over here, too? Because... Yeah.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: I do not endorse guerrilla stop signs.
[SPEAKER_20]: What I was hoping for was that if we can get a couple speed tables, and I know how expensive they are, or even some... Removable speed humps. Yeah, I got a great way to pay for that and that's to put that stop sign there and a traffic officer, right?
[SPEAKER_11]: Yeah, probably make it open.
[SPEAKER_20]: I guarantee you you're going to make at least $50,000 in the first month just handing out stop sign and speeding tickets.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Now this might be a deep inconvenience, it's just a thought. I'm not saying I endorse it, but I'm wondering if it's been thought to make Sturgis, to flip the direction between Morgan and Fulton. So like you'd come down Morgan, basically you'd almost turn it into only for you guys, right? You could only get to your street from Morgan and you could either go right or left. I think that's complicated. I see the, you know, it might make things really inconvenient.
[SPEAKER_20]: Well, we do have a young lady who lives in that section who is going to, about to give birth in November.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Yeah, yeah.
[SPEAKER_20]: So I don't, I'm not sure if that young family would be willing to go for that idea.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Sure, sure.
[SPEAKER_20]: I mean, we can pitch whatever.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Yeah, even temporary. I'm just, you know, because you make the point. The stop sign, to me, is a no brainer. I'm not on the traffic commission and I'm not the traffic engineer, but to me that seems... really simple, like you need to stop here, because people are not listening.
[SPEAKER_11]: Enforcing the speeding part of the equation would be very helpful, especially where people are very oblivious, and if they're not paying attention to the right turn only giant arrow in the middle of the street, and then another one-way do not enter as they go up the wrong way, in addition to the two do not enter one-ways on Highland Ave, If we can at least get one of those 2 equations out where it's not just a death sentence where 2 people are colliding going the wrong way and speeding at the same time.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: No, I just wanted to check on that. Because I think the speed tables, to me, it makes the most sense to put one about halfway between Fulton and Morgan, maybe something at the intersection, and then people will get the message. We just had someone, Alexander and I, had a friend call me and say, I just went over this thing, what's going on in the road? And I'm like, there's a speed bump there now. And the next day, they didn't go over it at 30 again, right? But these interventions.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
[SPEAKER_20]: that the removable speed humps, the speed bumps might actually help systematically put along that street to slow people down.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: All right, we're going to set up another meeting. We'll try to get all the relevant folks out, Councilor Lazzaro, Councilor Scarpelli, Councilor Leming, thank you for helping on this so much up to this point as well. Yes, thank you. And we'll get working on that. I really, you know, maybe I can follow up with you offline. I'm just wondering, did the traffic commission say no? Did they say no to the stop sign? Did they say no to the speed table?
[SPEAKER_11]: They haven't said no.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Yeah.
[SPEAKER_11]: But these were the, it was explained to us that the steps that we've taken so far is what they can do as an immediate action. Yeah. And it's just, I don't think it's going to happen in a reasonable time at which we're going to stop something from inevitably happening.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Okay. All right. So we'll have this meeting and then we'll need to take it back and, you know, at the very least, the stop sign feels like it's not a huge thing.
[SPEAKER_11]: But I'm sure someone will tell me I'm wrong, I'm sure. Councilor Callahan. Yeah, absolutely. I think that would help us significantly.
[Councilor Anna Callahan]: Thank you. I know that what I'm going to say is not going to help you guys today, but I do want to bring up something that I brought up at the Ward 5 neighborhood meeting. You know, I know some of the folks on Governor's Ave who have been fighting for similar traffic calming measures for over two and a half years, desperately trying to get them. They are not happy yet. You know, they have not gotten what they need, and they're also afraid for their kids. you know, the people who, you know, might get hit. There are folks in South Medford, on Willis, and, you know, in a lot of those streets that, Winchester, somebody was recently hit on that corner of Winchester and Harvard. You know, this is not exclusive, sadly, to your street. There are many streets that I think need a lot of help. And I just wanted to bring up sort of a longer term dream, which is that the city actually enforces our laws. And, you know, I would love to see not only a parking department that hires people who actually go out and enforce our parking, which I think most people in Medford really appreciate, but a traffic department that has non-armed traffic people whose job it is to go and enforce our traffic laws.
I don't know the legality of that or anything, but I just want to say that I think enforcing our traffic laws is something that would help in so many of these cases. to save lives, to save people from injury. And, you know, I really hope that we can have a city that enforces our laws, especially traffic laws that really can save lives. So, thank you.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you. Yeah, I think there's a larger question here that you guys are a part of, which is like, what is our street safety culture in Medford? And a lot of people are just driving way too fast everywhere. You know it's a really big problem that we're seeing everywhere. It puts pedestrians in danger because neighbors in danger puts bicyclists in there but it put drivers in danger right. It puts the driver who's speeding in danger it puts the driver who they may. run into in danger, and we really need to shift that. And some of it is education, it only goes so far. A big piece of it is enforcement, and we need more of it. And then the biggest piece is physical infrastructure. If we know there's a place where people are just going too fast, we need to slow them down. Right.
[SPEAKER_20]: Excuse me. And with it being in one way, we have cars on both sides of the streets at all times of the day. If this was to come to fruition with someone come flying around that corner and someone's right in the right spot at the right time, there's going to be no avoiding it. And they're either going to end up slamming into the house that I live in, or they're going to end up in Rick's front yard. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
I don't even allow, I have seven grandkids, sir, and I don't want to allow them to come to my house because of the safety issues that are in this neighborhood.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Yeah, and that's just not right. That's not how it should be. It's not fair, you know, not fair to you and your family, not fair to you and your family. And then there's a lot of families, we hear this all the time, they just feel unsafe. Whether they're in their front yard or at the corner or on a bike or trying to cross the street or even in their car. You know we've heard a bunch lately on Winthrop Street of people zipping around a school bus with the stop arm out. Right. It's something we're trying to work on too. So I really appreciate you guys coming down here presenting. I'm glad that we could all hear from you. And we're going to work on setting up this meeting to see what we can do to kind of advocate for the Traffic Commission to do more here to keep your streets safe.
[SPEAKER_20]: Thank you.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Thank you so much. Thank you guys so much. All right. Appreciate everybody's time. You'll hear from us. All right. We are now done with that petition. We're going to go to general public participation. If there's anyone who'd like to speak generally on any item for three minutes, either in person or on Zoom, please raise your hand on Zoom or come to the podium in the chamber. Do we have anyone on Zoom? Seeing none, we'll go to the chamber.
[Micah Kesselman]: I'm Mikey Kesselman, 499 Main Street. Actually, I just really briefly want to echo what the previous commenters were talking about and actually what Councilor Callahan mentioned, that we have these same exact issues in Ward 5 in South Medford. Everything feeding into Main Street and Harvard Street as well and a bunch of other streets have crazy issues. And I do want to point out that enforcement does not really significantly change these behaviors. That generates revenue for the city, which is great, which can go into fixing the structural issues. But the city streets just need to be designed better. They really desperately need to be designed better. that fundamentally. So I'm glad that they're able to get support, because some of you guys live in their particular neighborhood. But for those of us who don't have you guys who live in our neighborhoods, we deal with this same exact issue. And it's like, we're by the Missituk. So it's wildly dangerous for people to be zipping down Main Street and just ripping out of random one-ways that are cut-throughs. The other thing I wanted to point out, too, and just make sure that all of you are aware, the issue with the report from the fire department, and it's wonderful that they're trying to comply with CCOPS. However, this should have been done prior to the acquisition, and this is a really important part of this entire process. So my understanding is that they were advised that this is a post hoc sort of report that is generated. But this is all supposed to happen before the city commits to acquiring this surveillance technology so that there is input on the civil liberties risks inherent in these types of technologies. So that's just for future reference. And whoever advised them at the city and city hall that this is the way to do it, they advised them incorrectly. So that should really be addressed. The city should understand how its procurement process actually works.
Thank you.
[Councilor Zac Bears]: Is there any further discussion in public participation?
|
total time: 49.24 minutes total words: 9020 |
total time: 23.32 minutes total words: 4050 |
total time: 16.2 minutes total words: 2383 |
total time: 4.54 minutes total words: 673 |
|
total time: 2.73 minutes total words: 407 |
total time: 6.55 minutes total words: 1063 |
total time: 3.09 minutes total words: 641 |
|