[Adam Knight]: I know we're going to alternate, but I need to
[Adam Knight]: So unless you decide to be very close to that. Being a mic as well.
[Adam Knight]: Okay.
[Adam Knight]: And then if I can get internet to my laptop, I can provide an audio source. Okay, so we might have a... All right, sorry to those on Zoom.
[Adam Knight]: I'd just like to ask Attorney Dash, how are you? Good to see you again. How long have the process has been for the applicants from start to recount? How long ago did they initiate this process?
[Adam Knight]: Four years?
[Adam Knight]: Have there been any significant delays coming relative to the legal aspect of this? Because we don't have legal counsel or city solicitors. Well, we were... You've got to wait three days to get somebody to call you back, four days, five days a week. I mean, ultimately what I'm hearing is that they started the process four years ago, and at some point it's going to present some sort of economic hardship. And, you know, we can only hold people over a barrel for so long as they try to shake them down in a negotiation going on in another department over here. But if this is just an issue, whether or not the council feels they should change the deed of restriction, I don't see why we should be the ones to hold them.
[Adam Knight]: In full disclosure, I live on Movement Street. You know what I mean? I live at number 200. I'm probably three football fields, four football fields away. I'm not a direct butterer. I'm not a butterer. I'm not a butterer. But, you know, just in the interest of disclosure, I'd like to say that.
[Adam Knight]: It's not a motion, it's more of a question. I mean, at this point, Councilor, this is my last meeting, I'm a lame duck Councilor. I'm not going to bring any racial items forward at this point. But, you know, I just kind of find it curious that, you know, it's taken these hardworking individuals in this community four years to get this process really rolling.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Councilor Caraviello is absolutely right. The coverup is always worse than the crime. And Councilor Bearsley is right. Trust in the public process is paramount, especially when it comes to elections. So why is it that we have an elections commission that's going to go hide under their bed? when the largest issue in this community has come up in a very long time. I don't understand how an election commission can vote 3 to 1 to postpone reporting back to this community the flaws and errors that occurred during their mismanagement and incompetency following that election. I sat up here the evening of the election, and I heard them read off the figures. I heard them read off the total vote count. And I said to myself, you're missing like 4,000 votes. You're wrong. You don't know what you're talking about, Councilor. You don't know what you're talking about. I know one plus one equals two. I know one plus one equals two. The way that election was handled was the most embarrassing sight I've seen in a long time. I worked on political campaigns since I was seven years old. I've never seen anything handled like that before in my life. The elections manager was not in this room the whole entire night. I was here from 8.05 until almost one o'clock in the morning And the elections manager was nowhere to be seen. All the vote totals in bags, unattended, all over this room. Individual members of the election commission, unsupervised, alone, going through the bags, looking through them, rifling through them. And you wonder why stuff is going missing. You wonder why we can't put it together, Madam President. That was the biggest embarrassment I've ever seen in my life. Now, shockingly, we do have a CEO in this community. who's been extremely quiet, extremely quiet about what happened during this election. Which leads me to believe that this behavior is something that's acceptable with this current administration. Because I know if it were me, and the integrity of my election would be brought into question, I'd be sure that the department heads and the board members by way of which I appointed personally, because I'm the mayor, would have their heads rolling down the street. The way that they treated election day volunteers, people that wanted to participate in the process and be involved, was shameful. And for them to now vote, to postpone the discussion, just tells you what kind of culture we have here at City Hall, Madam President. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: I would find it very interesting if the mayor could point out when she did become aware of these circumstances. You know, she's remained relatively quiet about it with the exception of a press release And historically, that office has been really good at press releases and social media. So it kind of concerns me, Madam President. It makes me scratch my head and wonder if the mayor had knowledge about this before Halloween and didn't share it with the community. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Ricky, first things first. It's your turn to pay at the Mets tomorrow morning. I've served on this council for 10 years, and I've never, ever served a year without you. And it's been a great ride. You know, I think back to when I first had the opportunity to meet you. I think I was in kindergarten, I was with your son Richard, running across High Street, going over to Hastings Lane, visiting the house, and you know, a lot's transpired since those times, and now here I am serving with you as a colleague, and I've had the opportunity to not only, you know, spend a lot of time around your family and your children, but also your grandchildren. And I really think that shows what you're all about. You're a true family man, and you're a true throwback to that old school politician. You're the type of guy that when someone calls you on the phone, you call them back. And if they don't answer the phone, you show up at the door. Because you truly care about people in this community, and you want to make a difference. And rest assured, Ricky, you have. You really have. You've done an excellent job, and it's been an honor and a privilege to serve with you. And it's even more bittersweet to walk out the door with you. So with that being said, thank you very much for your service. I do think that there are a couple of people in this audience that haven't been recognized yet this evening that I know you're going to take a chance to recognize. for the past, what is it, 12 years now? The family's been very good at... throwing you out of the house, letting you get out here and serve the people of this community. And what is to be said about a family that's so willing to share such a great man with so many people here in this community. So thank you, Carol and Lauren and Richard and Nikki for letting us have a piece of Ricky for the past decade plus.
[Adam Knight]: Well, Madam President, thank you very much. I didn't realize that subtlety was such a strong suit of mine, but apparently a couple of my colleagues feel so it is. Now, who would have thunk it? Back in 2013 when I was elected to the city council and I was the liberal. But thank you. Thank you for all the kind words that you said. You know, it's kind of weird getting out of the public life, getting out of electoral politics. And, you know, everywhere you go, you have people coming up to you. Thank you for your service. Thank you for your service. Thank you for your service. And I'm looking at them like they're crazy. I'm not a veteran. I don't know what you're talking about. Thank you for your service. It feels wrong to me. It feels like I should be the one saying thank you. truly. Serving the residents of this community as a member of this council has been an honor, truly has. And it's been a great run. I'm very proud of the work that together we've been able to accomplish and very thankful for the friendships I've been able to make along the way. You know, I wish the incoming council the best of luck. I thank my past and current colleagues for their service and work. We've had a lot of laughs. We've done a lot of good for this community. And we've always kept Medford in the forefront. To my family, they've been great. Sacrificed a lot to allow me this opportunity. And it's something I'll be forever grateful for. It's nice to see my old colleagues here, my old friends, Councilor Marks and I, at a number a number of great debates right in these chambers. Thank God for TV3, because we can go back and watch them and laugh at what donkeys we were making of ourselves as we picket back and forth. I'm upset that Representative Donato had to leave because I remember back a number of years ago, my grandfather was still with us. And I went over to the house all excited. I'm a young kid and I'm working on a political campaign. And I grabbed my grandfather and I'm saying, Hey, grandpa, we got to help this guy, Paul Donato. He's running for state rep. And you know, he's my friend. And Donato, guy's a bum. What do you mean? I'm not supporting Donato. It's a grip. What are you talking about? Now? This is, you know, 2000 or so. It's a grip. What are you talking about? He ran against my friend Dennis McKenna in 1982. I'm not supporting that guy. So if that tells you anything about the Knights in the way that we approach politics, you know, sometimes we have a long memory. But with that being said, this has been a job that I had never considered work. I considered it something that I love to do, a form of service and an opportunity for me to give back to a city that's given me so much. Sitting here tonight, being able to reflect on all the good that we've been able to accomplish together is truly rewarding. I thank you all for being here this evening. the people that put me in the seat, because without them, it never would have been possible. Most importantly, though, I do have to, again, reiterate thanks to my family and my campaign team for all the work that they put forward over the years. It's a very difficult job, and there's two jobs when you get involved in this type of business. And if you don't do the first job good, it doesn't matter how good you are at the second job. And the first job is getting elected, and nobody can do that alone. And you're only as good as the team that you have around you. You get elected, and you get in the seat, and then you've got to earn your bonus. But if you can't do the first job right, you're never going to be able to get a chance to do the second job. And my campaign committee worked tirelessly, tirelessly, over the last decade to ensure that I had this opportunity. And for that, I will be photographed.
[Adam Knight]: Praise me. Praise me.
[Adam Knight]: I got something here? All right. Is there any water in this thing? This is going to be long. Madam President, congratulations. It's been a great run as well. Maybe not as long as Councilor Caraviello and I, but that's because you chose to not make it that long. You could have served in the city council for as long as you felt like it. I don't know if you guys know this, Councilor Morell might be a tad competitive. She doesn't show it. but she might be a tad competitive. Very tenacious on the campaign trail. I've talked to several of my neighbors and they said they voted for her just because she wouldn't get off her porch. She's going to have to vote for her because she keeps coming back and she won't get off her porch. And that strategy worked out very well for the council, as evident by her vote totals. And when she first got elected to the council after her first foray into public office. We had a nice discussion when she came up here and we invited her up as a councilor-elect to observe. And I said to Nicole, she had a very, very, very important decision that she had to make that's gonna shape her future here on the Medford City Council. This decision that she makes is probably gonna be the most important decision that she makes as a city council. And she had to choose where she wanted to sit, next to me or next to Councilor Marks. And apparently, subtlety is not one of her strong spots either. And I lost out on that one, Councilor Marks. And since that time, she tells me that your private whisper conversations with Councilor Bears aren't whispers at all. I can hear you all the way over here. So with that being said, congratulations, Councilor Marks, you're responsible for helping shape and mold our president right now. But as I sit here and I see you there, and don't take this the wrong way, Councilor, but I feel as though your talents are wasted at the chair. You're an excellent city councilor, very capable on the council floor and a very formidable debater. I enjoyed the time where you'd step away from the chair and step down on the floor because you always brought forward well thought out arguments that were rooted in fact, not fiction. that was supported by Data Not Drama. And that helps move this body along. So with that being said, thank you very much for your approach to the office and for the way that you handle yourself and tried to handle this body. It's impossible to hurt a bag of cats and you did the best you can with what you got here. You know, we've had some great, we've had some great meetings and we've had, we've had some, some very, very, what we could say, colorful meetings over the past four years, and you've handled yourself with great dignity and great respect. You've carried yourself in a fashion that's admirable, and you're certainly worthy to wield that gavel and worthy to carry the title Councilor, and it's been an honor and a privilege to serve with you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Marks, on that topic, can you tell us what you made when you were in the school?
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, point of personal privilege.
[Adam Knight]: No, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: So do.
[Adam Knight]: We can dispose of the paper first.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Shortly after the budget debates in late June, following 16 weeks of pregnancy, my brother and his wife gave birth to their second child, Amira. And after several months of hospitalization, She was unable to withstand the college medical procedures and was laid to rest in mid-October. I've served on this council for a decade now. I think my record will reflect that my first eight years of service, I missed one regular city council meeting, and that was for the birth of my second child, Brandon. I don't think anybody in this room can say that I haven't come to these meetings prepared, ready, or able to do the work. When I first decided to run for elected office, it was with the support of my family and the understanding that they were always going to come first. That's what needed to happen during this time. So I do regret my absence from the council during this period of time. It's a very private and personal matter to both me and my family. But quite frankly, it was something I felt like I needed to share this evening, albeit reluctantly. I offer this not specifically of a justification for my absences, but for an explanation to the voters here in this community. You know, I've heard the conspiracy theories and underfunded criticisms and comments made by many people in this community, and I find it necessary that I address the situation. So I thank you, Madam President, for entertaining me at this time.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, it appears to be rather self-explanatory. I'm comfortable moving forward, absent the presentation from the administration.
[Adam Knight]: And with that, I will go- Mr. President, I just want to reiterate the fact that- Councilor Knight, I haven't recognized you.
[Adam Knight]: I do. I'd like to fact check.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, just on the facts, I believe you stated the school committee's salary has not increased from a figure of $12,000 per annual. Mr. President, you did mention that the school committee's Monetary figure may not have changed since the year 2000, but I do believe that their compensation structure has changed, which is something that's important to point out. Previously, their compensation structure was that of a stipend, which made the position a line item budget item. And now it's turned into a pension eligible health insurance eligible benefited position, which therefore can become what would be called an unfunded pension liability. So that's something that we also have to take a look at as we move forward. But the pay structure did change from the way that the committee was compensated to the way they are currently compensated previously, where stipends were added and included into their salaries to raise that pay and reflect pensionable monetary gain.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information on that, I do believe if the mayor's in the room, she can tell us when she was on the council how she collected health insurance.
[Adam Knight]: When she became mayor and didn't need it anymore?
[Adam Knight]: I just want to know when these discussions happen. I'll recognize you after Councilor Caraviello. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Must have some English teachers in the room today. Fiction, maybe a little fiction. There's some fiction going on here tonight. You know, it's a good story. But to me, being the cynic that I am, it does somewhat sound like a money grab for the faces that I share in campaign literature. You run as a slate, and then the first thing you do is move to give raises. I think that presents a questionable standard of ethics that the next council is going to have to deal with. And I don't think it's fair to them that they're going to be put in that position. When looking at the paper on face value, the paper is contrary to law. Um, you know, we look at MGL section 71 chapter 71 section 53 as the enabling language to give the city council the authority to issue raises. But if you look what that section of the general law says, um, in its first line, it says the school committee shall serve without compensation, but they may be compensated for this services by a majority vote of the city council. This has already been done. This has already been done. The language in the general laws that speaks to salary adjustments is governed under Chapter 44, Section 33A. And this section clearly reads that the annual budget shall include the sum sufficient to pay the salaries of all officers and employees, fixed by law or witness. Our budget's passed, and these figures are not included in that budget. The section also reads, no new position shall be created or an increase in any rate made by ordinance, vote, or appointment during the financial year subsequent to the submission of the annual budget, unless provision, therefore, has been made by means of a supplemental appropriation. Without a money paper, we can't change the ordinance based on state law in my reading, which is a question for the ever so invisible and elusive city solicitor. I thank the council president for entertaining me. Included in our packets this evening were a series of amendments that I have offered. In response to this paper, I would spare the chairman the long duration of having to read through it and motion that it be included as part of this paper going forward and hope that the new city council and their divine wisdom acts in the best interest of this community. We hear a lot of talk about a revenue crisis, the need for the city of Medford to raise more revenue the need for a Proposition 2.5 override. And when this issue came up previously, there was some discussion about whether or not it was really a revenue crisis or a spending problem. And I think that when we look at a paper like this, I think that it shows that we do have a little bit of a spending problem. And a solution to hard decisions a lot of the time is to throw money at it. And that does not fix systemic problems and issues. So with that being said, I do thank my council colleague for the time and do ask that the paper be included by way of a motion to waive the reading and include.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. First of all, I think we can all agree that diversity is important, and it's commendable for a public official to pursue diversity. I also think that this issue before us here sheds light on a perfect example of why diversity of thought and diversity of opinion is necessary when you go to the ballot box and you cast your vote to elect somebody to serve. Because without diversity of thought, without diversity of opinion, what you're going to see is more and more of the same. So I leave you with this. Moving forward, everybody behind this rail makes decisions. based upon what they feel is those in the best interest of the city of Medford in one way or another. And it's not easy to come out here every evening and be criticized and be trolled and be attacked. And all it is is an opportunity for us to have a discussion. Now, Councilor Penta came up and said that someone should make a motion to receive this and place this on file. Then what? It fails, then what? Then what? I think it's safe to say that we're all acting on behalf of the people. And it's that diversity of thought and that diversity of opinion on how do we address issues like this that's really coming into play right now. For these reasons, I'm going to support the paper this evening, because quite frankly, I attached five amendments to it that ask a number of significant legal questions as to whether or not this is even the appropriate process, or whether or not the paper is even in proper legal form. And as we move forward, this isn't going to be the last you hear of this. This isn't going to be the last you hear of it. It's going to come back. When your landscape is out there, blowing the leaves in your yard with an electric leaf blower. You know what I mean? You guys are gonna still be talking about the school committee and whether or not they're getting a raise. That's the fact of the mat, all right? But with that being said, you know, I think that, you know, when we move forward in this community and we think about what direction we're gonna go in, diversity of thought and diversity of opinion is something that we really need to think about.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, the more I think about this, the more I think that there could potentially be a solution. And, you know, week in and week out we come up here and we have Mina come up and talk to us about all the great things that the mayor's doing, all these grants and these outside contracts that they have and consultants that they have that are running the city. And one of the things that the mayor's been touting as of recent is the fact that we have a grant. We have this wonderful grant for a compensation equity study. Now, we got the grant. I don't know if the study started or not, right? But we have these titles. And they want to go around to every other surrounding community, and they're going to see what people in these titles make. Why wouldn't we refer this paper to the city administration for inclusion in the compensation classification study that's provided by grant funding? We're costing the city $0. I would second that. Take this off our table. Let's see what the report says when it comes back to see if they're being compensated equitably. I would second that. And if they are, they are. And if they aren't, we've got a report there that's been done by an outside third party that's compared this with all those surrounding communities and people in like responsible positions. And then we'll be able to provide something that's driven by data and it's not driven by desire.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to make it as a motion.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. And I join Councilor Scarpelli in offering my condolences to the family. Mr. Garrity was a great person, Lawrence State's resident, known by friends and family alike as Bayer. And I think Councilor Scott Nelly hit the nail on the head. Although he's left us here, he's going to leave a legacy behind. If it weren't for the Garrity family, I don't think the city would have been in a good position to create the Office of Outreach and Prevention. But they came up with this council and they advocated for this story out there, and they helped fight the addiction stigma. and it was because of their work that Wisconsin has been able to move forward this season, fighting the epidemic and I just want to echo Councilor Scarpelli's indulgences and also my gratitude for their services.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. It's amazing to think that what started out as a small convenience store in Malden three generations of family ago has now transformed into one of the largest camera stores around. I had the great pleasure and opportunity to go to school with both Scott and Gary, and I call them both friends actually. I see Gary quite a bit. He's moved back to Metro recently. And it's just great to see that they've been able to continue the family tradition and continue so much success with the business. So I want to wish them the best of luck in their future endeavors and congratulate them on such a momentous occasion.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: I'll defer comment at this time, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Point of clarification, Madam Mayor. It sounds more like a reorganization of the whole entire agenda than taking an item out of order. Can the council just explain the purpose for making the request.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you for the explanation, sir. Yeah.
[Adam Knight]: No.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, motion to waive the remainder of the reading and move for approval. This is a contractually adjusted wage increase that's been negotiated by the administration and the union.
[Adam Knight]: I have never been one to stand in the way of waiving the readings to ensure that hardworking men and women in the city of Medford receive the cost of living adjustments as they duly deserve.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. I think it's also very important to point out that this is 100% an enforcement issue. And we do have the controls in place and it's a matter of the administration taking steps that are necessary to ensure that neighborhoods are protected. So that's number one. And number two, we also have to think about what's prompting residents in this community to move towards not being landlords and instead being Airbnb operators. And some of it has to do with the discussion, I think, about policies that might go into effect in this community in the future. Some of it has to do with the fact that there's a lot of strong tenant rights laws And landlords feel like sometimes they're at a disadvantage when they go in to pursue non payment or rent issues and the like. So policy that we create also impacts these trends in housing. So it's important for us to look at the big picture as we move forward. But I can certainly agree with all my council colleagues and saying that this is 100% enforcement issue. And it's something that needs to be handled the forthright. Ultimately, you know, it's about protecting the neighborhoods. And right now we're not doing it. And that's something we need to do. So I thank the council for bringing the issue forward.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. I look at this in a couple of different ways. The first of which is, you know, all of this, getting involved between someone trying to sell a house and someone trying to buy a house and the regulations and restrictions that surround it is part of the due diligence process when you're purchasing a home. or when you're purchasing a piece of property. And I know that that's a process that's heavily regulated as it is. I think we better be very careful in how far we're going to be going in performing the due diligence for these private landowners conducting private land transactions. So, with that being said, you know, I can certainly see the issue going on with the lack of enforcement of BMPs in the community, the strict code that we've established that would provide you only 90 days a year for rental. But at the end of the day, you know, I think that there has to be a spot where government doesn't get so involved in people's lives. So, we have to draw our line somewhere. And I think that when that line is doing the due diligence for potential homebuyers. It just doesn't really fall within the scope of what a government service is. And I think that at the end of the day, we'd be providing far too much energy and effort and performing an exercise that's not going to reap great results. I think we'd be much better off putting our energy, efforts, and time into enforcement. So that's where I stand on this matter, but thank you.
[Adam Knight]: That's an old high five, Madam President, my apologies.
[Adam Knight]: On that point, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: I think it's important to point out that we probably do have one of the strongest short-term rental ordinances in the region. But again, it's an issue about enforcement. To Mr. Castagnetti's question, this has been reviewed at the state level extensively, and it's been determined that local municipalities can't ban them. But what we can do is regulate them, but we can regulate them only to a certain extent. And we've utilized our legislative power to do that to the fullest. The question now is, can the administration put the teeth that we gave them to good use, and be sure that our ordinance is enforced to the level that the taxpayers deserve?
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. I think moving forward as we go through our zoning reform, this is something we also might want to take a look at where the ADA requires a minimum of 20%. I don't think there's anything that could prevent us from requiring more than that, number one. Number two, as we've established policies in this community as a council through zoning reform that's reduced the parking minimums in certain developments with that obviously would come a reduction in the number of parking for handicapped blackout holders. So again, you know, an unintended consequence of policy change. So it's something that needs to be addressed. And I think a good way to approach that might be through our next round of zoning codification and maybe increasing the minimum number of parking spots that would be required or reserved for our disabled residents here in the community and elsewhere that are visiting our community.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. I am at a loss sitting here hearing that after the amount of money that we spent on outside council, that represents the mayor personally and not the city of Medford, an amount of money is some of the totals close to a half a million dollars. over $450,000 we spent on KP Law's legal fees in what appears to be violation of city ordinance, Madam Mayor, Madam President. Once again, I'm calling you Madam Mayor, because I'm just wishing it would be somebody else, but the one that's in there. When I think about this, Madam President, it makes me crazy, because for three years, I feel like I was talking in an echo chamber. saying we need to hire a city solicitor. We need a city solicitor. We need to hire a city solicitor. We still don't have a city solicitor. Instead, we have a private law firm that we paid a half a million dollars to. It's too busy to go to court and represent the interests of this community. That shows you where their priorities lay. It also shows you how inept this administration is. when it comes to the deliverance of basic city services, number one. And number two, the protection of the taxpayers' interests when it comes to having in-house legal counsel that represents the taxpayer and not the corner office. So here we are again, two months after the budget passed, asking for more money for a code enforcement office. So when we had an opportunity, when we had an opportunity to hold up a budget and get what we needed, number one. Number two, And we're coming off the heels of a budget where the mayor said she was gonna hire a solicitor and an assistant city solicitor for the council and never did. Unfulfilled promises, Madam President. Unfulfilled promises. This has been the number one issue, the number one underlying theme throughout this past term for this council is where is our legal representation? We're driving a ship without a compass. We're going into uncharted territory, and we need guidance. Please help us. Please help us. That's the council asking, and the council gets ignored. Now, Madam President, we have residents asking. They're saying, please help us. Please help us. And they're now being ignored. And KP law is defaulting on court appearances that they filed, that they filed. KP law is directing the board of health not to put clean it and lean it notices on homes after the council is directing them to do so because such levels of dissatisfaction in the public administration of the enforcement of code. So again, we can put the record on repeat. Madam president, here we are again, the same spot we were 12 months ago, the same ones we were the same spot we were 12 months before that. I sit here and I scratch my head every day and I say, let's name one thing the city does well. Let's name one thing. Our school test scores are down about eight, 9% across the board in the last three years. Our city streets look awful. Our sidewalks look terrible. We can't get trees trimmed. We can't get stumps removed. We can't get crosswalks repainted. We can't get 3-3 paved. The only saving grace we have in this community is we pick up that phone and dial 9-1-1. And we know that the police and the fire are always going to show up with or without a contract for 700 plus days. So when I sit here and I reflect on what's going on in this community and I ask myself, what are we doing well? What are we doing well? That's one of the hottest questions I have to struggle with every day. Because when I look around, I don't see anything that we're doing well, that we're exceeding at, that we're excelling at. I don't see anything that's putting Medford on the forefront, that's keeping Medford where it was. 10 years ago when I got elected, Medford was the hottest zip code in Massachusetts because of its large inventory of single family homes and its small class sizes. Boy, how times have changed. Boy, how times have changed, Madam President. We're a community that's losing its identity. And pretty soon we're going to be swallowed up and become just a pocket of Boston. The zoning reform that's coming up is going to be very important to us. And I hope the mayor keeps her word this time around and provides us with the tools necessary to succeed. Because right now, I feel as though the city is not in a strong position for now or for the future. Thank you, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. I have a question regarding enforcement.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Actually Tufts through their development has agreed with the city to pay taxes, property taxes, I believe in all the new purchases of land and I've done so for over a decade now. But I think Madam President that the most moving thing that was said tonight was take care of the good people because if you don't, you're going to lose them. And you're just going to get more of the bad. I really think that was the most moving thing that was said this evening. Take care of the good people. Give the good people some help. because that's all they're asking for. So I appreciate the gentleman. That's something that really resonated with me. I think that, you know, we all know what we need to do. We need to get action on this. We need to hold the administration accountable for their failures and delivering the basic public services that these people deserve. And I can't understand why we don't have a program or a maintenance plan or a review plan where we go out to these distressed properties, which we know we've had problems with. year after year and do a spot check once every 6, 8 or 12 months. I mean, it's basic, basic, basic stuff. The person that's answering the phone knows the phone's gonna, knows they're gonna get the phone call and when they see who it is that's calling them, know exactly what it's about. It's gotten to that point with people in this community. So I don't understand why we can't take a couple of steps and be a little bit more proactive and have an outreach program where, you know, when we know we have these distressed properties and these properties that are failing to do right by the neighborhood, that we don't go out there and do a little bit of outreach and preventative maintenance, as they like to say, to prevent this from happening and rising to this level of frustration.
[Adam Knight]: I want to commend my council colleague for suggesting that we move to supplement our code enforcement staff with the use of, whether it be retired police officers, was it, Councilor? Or code enforcement?
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, I mean, I think that's a great idea, especially when you look at how human resources in this community is handled. I mean, how many times have we had per diem department heads? We've had a per diem assessor, right? We've had a per diem building commissioner. We had a per diem veteran services director. Why can't we do that with code? That sounds like a great idea to me.
[Adam Knight]: That was an oldie but goodie.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I will be happy to waive the reading and give a brief synopsis as my intention is to request that this go to some subcommittee or committee.
[Adam Knight]: Jesus Christmas.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. I bring this resolution forward requesting that we have a little bit more accountability and some tracking and measurement of data when it comes to the use of take-home vehicles here in the community. Now, there are certain positions in the community that one would expect as a take-home vehicle, the chief of police, the chief of fire, the DPW commissioner, but there are other positions in this community where people are allowed to take-home vehicles. So the question therein remains, how much use and wear and tear is being put on these vehicles that's being utilized for purposes work. Ultimately, this council has appropriated hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions of dollars for the replacement of equipment and part of our fleet. And as we go through the process of replacing vehicles that are becoming, I guess we'd say, less equipped to deal with the wear and tear of our everyday work that we perform here in our community. It's interesting to see where these new vehicles are going and what their uses are for. Ultimately, you know, I think that there are some protections that we need to put in place to prevent the city from getting into circumstances where we might be liable for things that we didn't anticipate we were going to become liable for. Now, whether or not these trucks are provided by contract or by grant, the department head or the mayor, they do have implications. For example, Madam President, if someone were provided a take-home vehicle and they were injured in the line of work, the cost of that take-home vehicle goes towards their wage. So when they're out of work collecting compensation, they'd be compensated based upon the wage that they earn plus the value of the vehicle. So that greatly increases the city's liability when it comes down to certain issues of employees that are into the line of work, number one. Number two, take-home vehicles also increase the city's liability if there were an accident to occur outside of working hours, outside of city limits. There's also a question about how much of the city's resources in the form of gasoline and other maintenance and upkeep necessities are being placed on these vehicles through the commute to and from work and they're not used inside the city limits or for city purposes. So the intention of the ordinance, Madam President, is to put some restrictions upon this and put some data reporting requirements on this so the city knows where their fleet is, what their fleet is doing, when they're doing it outside of city limits and outside of city operating hours and how much wear and tear is being put on these vehicles that's being done not in the performance of the city duties but in the performance of traveling to and from work commuting and other items for life. I mean ultimately a take-home vehicle would be only utilized for the purpose of going to your house and from your house and when you get home you're going to get into your own private vehicle so tracking this mileage is very important I think for us in this community to be sure that our fleets are being maintained in the proper and most satisfaction in the court. also take on vehicles to present tax implications, if I'm not mistaken, Madam President. So these are things that we need to take a look at and be sure that we're complying with all standards of our federal state statute as well going forward. So that's why I raised the issue. It's something that seemed important to me. It doesn't seem too important to many of you, but I certainly think that asking that a city vehicle isn't something that's too much to ask, and that we track where these vehicles are going when they're outside of city limits, outside of working hours isn't too much to ask, and that we track the mileage on these vehicles when they're outside of city limits, outside of working hours isn't too much to ask, Madam President. So that's the basis of the ordinance, and I ask for my council colleagues to support sending this to subcommittees so that we can have a further discussion with our future legal counsel.
[Adam Knight]: It's up to you guys, really. It's an ordinance, so it probably should be fitting to go to that subcommittee, but if it wants to go to public safety, or if it wants to go to, I do believe there was a request prior to put together a subcommittee on legal services and litigation that we're still waiting to see. It could go there once that gets created, but whatever it is that you see fit, council, if it has any divine wisdom, I'd be happy to support.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. I think Councilor Scarpelli is correct. Things at Tufts University aren't very different than things at City Hall when it comes to labor relations. The only difference is our friends at Tufts University have the power to strike. And that's what they did. And I commend them for taking the steps that they see necessary to ensure that they secure a fair collective bargaining agreement. I support their right to organize. I support any group's right to organize. I do feel as though Tufts University this evening has been given a very bad rap. And I, in no uncertain terms, agree with the way that Tufts University is handling this issue with their RAs. Nor do I agree with their position on the issue. However, they've been taking a pretty good beating this evening. And I think it's important that we point out there are many benefits that do come with being host to a university. One is prestigious as such university. We keep talking about the fact that they don't pay taxes. That's patently false. They don't pay taxes on a portion of their property. And they've entered into an agreement voluntarily. But they've said that they will continue to pay property taxes on newly purchased properties. And this has been going on for quite some time. So Tufts University is not the villain that we make them out to be. Do problems come along with having Tufts University in our community? Absolutely. Every problem in every community stems from something. Tufts is not a villain. when we look at the benefits that they bring to our community, like diversity, like economic stability during unstable and poor economic times, or like the community of academics that tend to call Medford their home after being employed at one of the most prestigious universities in the United States of America. So, Madam President, I can understand that being a good neighbor is one thing, but I think that they've always been a good partner, they've always lent a listening ear, and they've always invested in this community. Whether or not you feel as though they're giving enough is one thing, but they always have been some of us willing to come to the table and sit down with us, and I think that that's important to point out. I just wish that Clemson University took that same approach with their RAs and was willing to sit down with them at the table and put this issue behind them and reach a fair collective bargaining agreement for all involved so that we can move on because ultimately the ones that get affected the most are the students and the school. So with that being said, Madam President, these parents are making a $70,000 investment for the kids to worry about whether or not their IRAs are gonna have a contract. So we need Tufts to get back to the table and negotiate this, because these Tufts students are residents of Metro, and the IRAs are residents of Metro, and they deserve our support. I support the people of Iowa. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: It's in the direct rebuttal to the statement. I just know I just don't want I don't want you to think that I'm saying the firefighters should go on strike or that I support that or that number or number two. that the firefighters would even consider that because I think we've heard time and time again the firefighters come up here and say all we want to do is keep Medford safe and we're going to continue to come to work no matter what and we're going to fight to do that and we're going to fight for fair wages in the meantime and if it takes 800 to 900 days we're not going to lie down but we're going to still continue to come to work today and I don't so I don't I don't think the firefighters would support the statement of saying we're going to go on strike. And I don't want anybody to think that that's what I was intending to say, or intended to say that they should do, because I don't speak for them. So I just don't want to be misconstrued or misinterpreted in saying that I think the firefighters should go on strike, or that I think the firefighters would go on strike if they have the power, because I can't speak for them. But from what I've heard and from my conversations with them, these men and women will come to work every day to make sure this community is safe, and they have. and they will continue to do so, and I don't see them ever, ever, ever taking a position where they take a strike action against the city. They'll continue to fight for fair wages in the proper format, but I don't ever see them doing something illegal in order to jeopardize the safety of the residents in this community, nor would I condone it, nor do I think they would. So thank you, Madam President, for allowing me the opportunity. I just wanted to be very clear in my words, and I didn't want to get them misconstrued, because sometimes that happens over social media. virtual Zoom stuff, not social media. I apologize.
[Adam Knight]: Don't activate me, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to adjourn.
[Adam Knight]: Excuse me? These are mandatory topics of bargaining, correct?
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, so you guys should be taking care of this at the table.
[Adam Knight]: You guys need to enact your rights. I mean, you know what I mean? You have rights under the- I don't get it, though.
[Adam Knight]: Amy, time out here. Time out here. We're not the administration. We don't negotiate contracts. That's the job of the chief of staff per ordinance. All right, now, I haven't seen the chief of staff in a contract negotiation. That's a whole different story. We have KP Law doing that.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, I agree with you there. But these are mandatory topics of bargaining. So when the administration is, you know, depleting the number of membership, the number of employees that are in the membership, you have to look at the work that's being performed. And if the work that's being performed by an employee that's actually union workers, not in the union, they didn't bring the city up on charges. You know, we've seen time and time again in this community, the level of respect that's given to organized labor by this administration. All right, and it's lacking, it's lacking and never before and I mean, I've worked in local government now for Shoot, since 1999, I represented union workers all across the Commonwealth from Worcester County to Springfield and back, all right, state, local. And I've never seen anything like this before, where employees are treated like this. And, you know, I just, I'm afraid for you for being up here right now, tonight and speaking out. I'm afraid for you right now from being up here and speaking out tonight.
[Adam Knight]: And the reason I say I'm scared for you right now is because I could go down a list of people have got they've gotten rid of come up here to this microphone and they've spoken out against some injustice, the councils agree with them, and those people are gone. So we look at Brian Karen's Mike for ready. Mike Durham, Aleesha Nunley, Molly kibbe. That's five people, right? That's five people, five people with families, five people who need health insurance. Five people that committed to work for this community that came up here and spoke on behalf of the people and the taxpayers and the world let go. I applaud you for your courage, Amy. I do applaud you for the courage that you have for coming up here. I think a lot of this stuff really is mandatory topics of bargaining and mandatory topics of negotiation that need to be addressed at the table. I agree with you that the actions of this body and the vote that some people take, given these people raises, there's no question about that. The council needs to fund this, the mayor needs to propose it. And the mayor did propose a significant pay hike for a number of people. What's the number councilor Bears? I believe it was 16 requests have been made so far for reclassification of positions and the council is- 18, we rejected 16. 18, we rejected 16.
[Adam Knight]: I hear you, and you know what? When nobody listens to us at this meeting, tonight's the night. It's our go-to, all right? Because for a year, we've been sitting there, and we've been saying that we need certain tools in the toolbox to do a job for these people in this community, including you, including the workers in the city hall, and we haven't been given them. We haven't been given the tools that we need to do the job. And tonight is gonna be a day of reckoning because I don't think there's anybody behind this rail based upon the debates that I've listened to that's happy with the direction that this community is going in, that's happy with the way that we've been treated, that's happy with the way employees have been treated in this community, right? And I think that's safe to say, nobody behind this rail based upon the commentary and the minutes that have been approved by this body, that nobody behind this rail is happy with the direction this community is going in. All right, so think about how frustrated you are. Now think about how frustrated we are. We're the last stop. You come to us for help and we can't get answers. The only time we can get answers is from January 1st to, you know, maybe, maybe, sorry, June 1st to June 31st, June 30th, you know, right at the, right at the close of the fiscal year. That's when we get answers. Hi, Camilla. Good, good to see you.
[Adam Knight]: Well, here's the problem, Camilla. I mean, ultimately, you want to time out point of information, you ask the question, let me answer it. Right. So you want to know where you can go and where you can turn, right? I'd say I'd say turn to the city solicitor. But we don't have a city solicitor. We have no we have nobody in the law department that's here represent the interest of the taxpayers.
[Adam Knight]: Well, Amy, I think that's inaccurate. The raises that have been, the raises that you're referring to have already been passed and they've already been funded. So regardless of whether or not this budget passed, these pay scales established by ordinance. everything except for I think Mary's position, the one that you referred to, because that hasn't been passed by ordinance and the human resources position that they keep ignoring us on. But ultimately, these classifications for non-union titles and the cost of living adjustment that's attached there too, was passed by this body, not unanimously, but it was passed by this body and it was funded by this body.
[Adam Knight]: Right, but you have the power to negotiate in these non-union policies.
[Adam Knight]: So just a question so the negotiations between the clerical union and the administration I'm going well. Really, no, I'm just thinking back to when the mayor put her budget presentation on opening night, and she said how great negotiations are going with all the negotiations and how close they were to settle.
[Adam Knight]: Amy, the council did also in that proposal that was given to us, the mayor didn't tell us what classifications were included in that. And then when we did an investigation and we looked into it, we found that the executive was included in that. The mayor proposed a raise for herself in that proposal and we cut that out. And the mayor had also proposed a raise for the council and we cut that raise out as well. You know what I mean, to stand by what we've said that you know what I mean, rising tide floats all ships and we think that you guys should go so...
[Adam Knight]: Again, these are cost of living adjustments. They're not performance-based.
[Adam Knight]: Right, but you're in a union, so you gotta negotiate that. They don't, you know, you have a collective bargaining.
[Adam Knight]: And I just want to just be on that point we did that last year Amy we did that at what one o'clock in the morning the mayor came up here in the magic money tree in her that grows in her office she shook it bunch of money fell out of it next thing you know we were going to get a lawyer that was going to come and help us out with zoning never happened. What else we're going to get out of that deal. City solicitor yeah assistant city solicitor the city council, never happened. Well, it's something else was supposed to come out of that too I think but you know what I mean. And then the way that they were going to fund all of these promises that they made to the council was they were going to take the money out of the negotiated salaries account, which is the account that they use to fund your raises. And this council said, no, you're not taking the money out of that account. All right. So if you want to find magic money, you better find it somewhere else because you're not balancing this budget on the back of the working people in this community. And the mayor went and took the money out of the public utility account. So now we look at the transfers that are on the agenda this evening, we'll see hundreds of thousands of dollars in transfers so that we can pay to keep the lights on.
[Adam Knight]: I'm just a little confused as to what leads us to mediation, because usually you go to mediation when you no longer can sit at the table anymore and make any forward progress, right? So mediation means you're at a stalemate at this point in time, right? You've reached what's called an impasse, is the negotiating term. You've reached an impasse in negotiations, and we can no longer move further or backwards. So my question is, if you're working with these unions and these employee groups, how have we gotten to a point where at impasse with multiple groups, if in fact we are working with them? Because it doesn't make sense to me if we're going to mediation to a third party negotiator, a third party to handle our negotiations, right? Outside person, right? Through mediation because we reached impasse, that doesn't sound to me like the definition of working together with somebody. So I'd just like to get a response from the chief of staff because she always likes to answer questions and provide points of information. So I'd like to ask the chief of staff, what got us to this point? Why are we at a point of impasse when these contracts have been open now since this administration got elected?
[Adam Knight]: My question is this, is Feinberg, Dumont, and Brennan an employee organization? they're not. And Feinberg, Dumont, and Brennan is a law office. They're a law office that also works with Local 25. All right. So the way that this works is if you're going to decertify from a union, they're a member of the SEIU and they want to decertify. You can't decertify when your contract is active. So what happens was the union said, we're going to decertify from SEIU. And they did. And they picked up private representation because there's a cooling off period that's necessary before they can apply with another union. But nothing precluded them from going to the table and negotiating once they decertified from SEIU and once that contract was open.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I just like to know what the timeline is. I just like to know what the timeline is. I'm just asking a question.
[Adam Knight]: point of information that men present. I do believe the council asked for a legal opinion as to whether or not that paper was posed with an and sound ethical footing, because what happened was the mayor asked the council to actually approve its own raise and erase for herself in the same year that they perceive it, we never received a response to that so if Nina could follow up on that, that would be good.
[Adam Knight]: question Madam President on that. Can you just tell me who represents the city in the collective bargaining sessions can the chief of staff tell you who represents the city.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, yeah, whoever that's her name Yeah, that'd be fine. Who represents who represents the city.
[Adam Knight]: And just on that note, Madam President, the administration's well aware of city ordinance section 2-680. Right. Okay. And part of that ordinance does read that the chief of staff shall be responsible for representing the mayor and I'll collect the bargaining sessions. Is the Chief of Staff employed by KP Law? Is the Chief of Staff KP Law?
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, on that point, the Chief of Staff is wrong in her reading of the ordinance because that was not the legislative intent. And I can speak to that personally because I voted for it in 2016 when it came up. I was a part of this body at that time. So a reading of it is incorrect and is not in line with the legislative intent. And I think that any other member of this council that was on the body in 2016 can also concur with that. All right, so the way I'm looking at this now is we have an essential function and essential duty of the chief of staff that's been taken away. The salary is still $135,000, but an essential function, essential duty has been taken away and it's been farmed out to a third party, private third party law firm. That's an expense. So when we sit down and we talk about why the council needs a city solicitor, it's to control these expenses and these wasteful spending habits that this administration has. So when we look at the chief of staff's title in the ordinance that supports the job that you're supposed to do, and we'll go through it, the majority of the duties have been taken away, but yet the salary remains the same. So when I hear members of our clerical union get up here and quite frankly, properly express dissatisfaction and disgust because they've been out of the contract for 48 months and then listen to the chief of staff come up here and try to explain our way out of the fact that it's because they're not able to sit down at the table and negotiate properly and then try to spin it by saying that they're precluded from doing it when I know for a fact they're not. It's just bizarre to me, Madam President. And I feel like what it is is it's for the cameras and it's not for us. And it's to portray a picture and control a narrative that's not a reality. So that's where I am with this. I thank the chief of staff and president of the clerical union, Mr. Naglia, for being up here this evening and sharing with us their insight on such an important topic in the community. And I am going to what I'd call use my reasonable deduction to determine who's being more truthful than not.
[Adam Knight]: I just like to join Council Scarpelli and offer my condolences. Although I didn't know Fred, as well as George that I do remember him from a very young age, when I was involved in Methodist soccer, and I also had the opportunity to go to college with the sun Steve, and what a good kid. Freddie Rita was just a nice guy. You know what I mean? George hit the nail right on the head. He was someone that wasn't afraid to put himself, put the community before himself and put himself out there to do the work, roll up his sleeves, get dirty and not seek an ounce of credit for it. He was a great man. Like you said, great family. And I joined my council colleague and extending my deep condolences to the family.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Was the mailing done, Madam President?
[Adam Knight]: How far out did those notices go? I know Mayor Longo, when she was a council, wanted to expand it to like 11 miles from where they were doing the project.
[Adam Knight]: It was 300 feet by law and then Mayor Lungo when she was a councilor wanted to expand that I think to 1000 or 600 or something like that and then it got passed. But then I don't think it's been a practice.
[Adam Knight]: Administration change.
[Adam Knight]: And then I just have one more question, Madam President. The process that Ms. Evans has outlined this evening, has that been reviewed by legal and been approved by legal as the proper way to enact such a measure that's before the body this evening?
[Adam Knight]: What I'm hearing is, you know, based upon a new zoning, the city council is not required to do this, this, this and this and now we have a special permit granting authority pursuant to this and so forth. This is the first time we've seen one of these papers before us where we're the site plan review granting authority. So my question was whether or not this procedural aspect was reviewed by legal counsel to ensure that we're in compliance with our own ordinance that we draft
[Adam Knight]: Right. So the council approved it. Now, we have a process that's in place as this process been reviewed by legal to ensure that it complies with what we put together.
[Adam Knight]: Right. And what I'm doing is asking whether or not because the council hasn't seen one of these and so many things have come through in so many years that this process that's being established now for the first time in so many years is legally sound.
[Adam Knight]: Okay and we've conferred with him and he says this is the way we do it.
[Adam Knight]: So no we haven't conferred with legal as to whether or not this is the way that we do it. and said this is the process that we're going to do I have we not I don't know why every question we ask, it's a yes or no question gets 6,000 different answers.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Madam President, before he starts, I just want to go back to that. So Attorney Desmond, the proposal is that all your deliveries are going to take place between 12 o'clock and 9 1 o'clock in the morning in a in a location that abuts a residential neighborhood between 11 to 12 for Sunday through Thursday and not every evening.
[Adam Knight]: It's not working out so great, though.
[Adam Knight]: And when you went before the CD board this proposal of eliminating the loading dock and then telling them that you're going to apply for a special permit before us to have the loading take place after hours was presented to them in that fashion. It was, and that was something that they supported.
[Adam Knight]: Does the applicant intend to apply for a license for an illuminated light or permit for an illuminated light sign?
[Adam Knight]: I'm assuming you'd want the light to light up if you guys want to be open to one o'clock in the morning on the weekends, you don't want people driving by it. Yeah, but there's also houses across the street, people that live there.
[Adam Knight]: Are there any new curb cuts that will be made from either Riverside Ave or the Fellsway to gain access to the property as part of the site plan?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: So, what you're telling me is that you're going to guarantee that these trucks that are delivering are going to follow this route every single time that they come here at 12 o'clock at night, three times a week or four times a week that they do it from now until the end of time as long as we have this permit.
[Adam Knight]: Because you did say they were going to be coming from Taunton, right? So it's guaranteed their first stop is Medford every time, right? Because they're coming from, I mean, those are the variables that I'm talking about. It's like, there's no way we can guarantee that they're going to take the same route every time and go in there the same way every time.
[Adam Knight]: And then you spoke about a couple of other Raising Canes that have very similar patterns, I guess, here. So is it their model that they don't have loading docks? Any of that sort?
[Adam Knight]: I don't care about out of state just yet.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, they're efficient plans for the business. But there might not be efficient plans for the residents that live in the neighborhood. And I think that's the number one concern right is the abundance right the people live across the street we have residents on Riverside we have residents across middle sector residents on the phone. And that's where I'm coming from on this but I appreciate it I'm not gonna keep saying we got residents live across the street I think you get it.
[Adam Knight]: Just one more question. Estimated number of vehicle trips per day to the store? Per day? No, per week or whatever you want. I can do math.
[Adam Knight]: Based upon my math, that's like an average hour, we're looking at 1.8 to 1.9 vehicles in and out every hour. I'm sorry, every minute. Every minute, every minute. 1.9 every minute.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, 114 divided by.
[Adam Knight]: Does that fall in the parameters of 41 a 65 days right from when we receive it?
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, we keep the public hearing.
[Adam Knight]: I think Councilor Bears might have some, he wants to say.
[Adam Knight]: I didn't make a motion. All I said was I don't want to wait the six day waiting period and I don't support voting on it until the six day waiting period is over.
[Adam Knight]: Suppose Madam President, where it's a special permit, the special permit should go with the business and not with the address as well, right?
[Adam Knight]: We already have that? I'm not in favor of this. I'm not putting any restrictions on it because I'm voting no.
[Adam Knight]: Right, so we can't put restrictions on a special permit. Can you put restrictions on site plan?
[Adam Knight]: Did that come from Alicia or did that come from a lawyer? That came from the Community Development Board. That's why I asked the question initially, Madam President, right? You know what I mean? At the end of the day, we need to make sure we're making decisions that are legally sound and strong footing and foundation. We don't have that opportunity with this administration. We haven't had it for three years.
[Adam Knight]: At this rate, Madam President, this thing will pass with a constructive passage because we'll never take a vote on it the way that this administration is with us when it comes to giving us legal opinions and legal advice and access to legal counsel. We can't put this on the table pending a legal opinion. We'll never get one.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, and we did it with BJ's too and then we got advice and then that advice ended up getting us taken to court again and then they called and said, what do you want us to do now? You know what I mean? It's like, it's just a, it's a comedy of errors in terms of the representation that we received legally here in the community, Madam President. It puts us at a very significant disadvantage when it comes to making issues, making decisions on issues like this that will have a vast impact on the quality of life of the people that are about us. All right, so I don't blame Raising Cane's. I thank Raising Cane's for coming here and wanting to invest in our community. All right, but the problem that I have is that the administration's not providing us with the tools to make informed and well-sounded decisions. Okay, so at the end of the day, what happens? Who suffers? The residents in this community, the taxpayers in this community. Why do they suffer? Because we're not able to make determinations that are going to impact things like growth, which is probably the most important thing in this community. So we get a letter that comes out, we get a newspaper article from the Boston Globe that says, you know, Medford's the fastest growing community. It can grow fast. The question is whether or not it's desirable. Is it a desirable place to live? I don't see Medford as being desirable right now. It might be growing fast, but I don't see it as desirable. And part of the reason that I don't see it as desirable is because the elected officials in this community aren't treated with respect or given the tools that they need to do their job properly and ensure that the taxpayers' rights are protected. So with that being said, Madam President, when it comes down to this paper that's before us this evening, it's something that I can't support. You know, we talk about economic development and growth here in this community. We had the opportunity to bring in a 300 plus million dollar development on Boston Ave, life science and biotech. It gets blown up by the administration, but we get chicken fingers. We get chicken fingers, though. You know what I mean? So that's the vision that we have in this community right now. That's the vision that we have when it comes to economic development. Fast food restaurants, nail salons, Dunkin' Donuts, banks. All right, we don't create jobs that bring a living wage. We don't create jobs that provide health insurance for individuals. When we're looking at this job model here, this position, this entity that's coming before us here, the job that it's gonna create aren't gonna pay people a living wage, not gonna pay them enough money to live in this community. I have serious and significant concerns about a two-lane highway drive-through where people in flag waver outfits are going to be out there waving people through. I have serious concerns about an illuminated sign. I have serious concerns about noise traffic and product drop-off, especially with the extended hours in an area that's abutting a residential neighborhood. You know, these are the reasons that I'm not going to support the bill. And I thank you for inviting me and providing me the opportunity to explain my vote.
[Adam Knight]: I'd just like the record to reflect Madam President that all these votes this evening are being taken without the advice of legal counsel.
[Adam Knight]: Question, Madam President, why wouldn't the same restrictions relative to the permit going with the business and the reviews be attached to this? They should be, yes.
[Adam Knight]: I just question.
[Adam Knight]: This was something that was brought to my attention by the many retirees in the city of Medford after an alert was sent out. by PARAC and the Massachusetts State Retirement Board, saying that the city of Medford hasn't fully funded its cost of living adjustment capabilities for the upcoming fiscal year. So as we see in this ordinance, I'm sorry, in this resolution, Madam President, the Massachusetts State Legislature, in its divine wisdom, did allow municipalities the local option to increase the cost of living adjustment for retirees to 5%. It allows us to add an additional 2%. Now, when we look at the cost of living adjustment that was given to retirees this year, it's actually higher than the 2% standard that the administration has put in place and in effect as the standard cost of living adjustment for active employees. However, we do have an opportunity, Madam President, for us to take a leap forward and take care of some of the retirees, the people that worked here in this community for a number of years, that made meant for the great place that it is. Okay. So when I look at this paper, what the request is, is to ask the administration to send us the request so that we can approve this document. There's a two part process for which this needs to be approved. And the first is the retirement board and the second is the mayor. So I'm asking that the city administration, retirement board, which falls under the purview of the executive, takes the necessary steps to ensure that our retirees are taken care of. We hear a lot of people come up to these microphones and talk how much they value the employees and what a great job they do and how much they care about the community and how wonderful all these people were. Well, show it. Put your money where your mouth is. know, I'm sure there'll be another narrative or another reason why this can't happen, Madam President, you know what I mean? And it's probably going to be rooted in not logic or reality, but what's going to control the spin. But ultimately, at the end of the day, this is the right thing to do. All right, these people are on fixed incomes. Okay, many of them live in this community. They're all elderly, they've reached retirement age. And if they reach retirement age that means they've put in at least 10 years of employment and service to the general public and the taxpayers of this community and they deserve to be respected, and they deserve to be rewarded. So with that being said, Madam President asked my council colleagues to support this paper.
[Adam Knight]: When the elections manager was up here, they had put this on our agenda, and they had tried to make us vote to support the proposal that they put forward. But they said that the council doesn't need to support this proposal. They were just putting us on there to make us aware of it, to put us in a position to support it. We didn't support it. We sent it back and we asked them to make those changes, right? So now we need an official paper from them saying that the Elections Commission has made this policy change, send it back to us and put it on the agenda just like they did previously, unless they're not going to be transparent this time around, because they had to change their mind.
[Adam Knight]: I'd appreciate a waiver of the remaining of the reader I think we need some bottom line there at this point.
[Adam Knight]: Motion passes. This evening we got, I believe our third and fourth budgets from the administration. We didn't get the I didn't see the press release that went out about how the administration's put out three more budgets since the initial one. But, you know, today at two o'clock, and again at six o'clock we got two additional budgets, right with updates or amendments or reallocations, and I'm wondering if the paper that before us this evening reflects those changes that have been made by the administration.
[Adam Knight]: Did the mayor meet with any of the councils personally in our office to discuss this budget? Or on the telephone? Or you for that matter?
[Adam Knight]: Did you meet with any member of this elected body individually to discuss the budget?
[Adam Knight]: It's not a trick question.
[Adam Knight]: So these conversations were outside the scope of the public forum.
[Adam Knight]: It's on that point of information. So I'm looking at this paper and it says that this was the mayor's fiscal year budget amended on 6 14 23. Today 6 2023. We've gotten two emails from you wanted six o'clock. I wanted two o'clock today that further amends the budget. So what you're telling me now is that the paper that's before us that was amended on 6 15 reflects those amendments that you sent us on 6 20.
[Adam Knight]: I did I was just gonna say on that point in these other communities normally when financial data is requested from the legislative body they receive it they're not told that they can't get it even though the ordinance says it should be providing it that the book should be provided to the Council upon request, you know, so you know when we talk about what they do other places. Let's talk about the good. But let's talk about the bad that we do here too because what other places do we don't do.
[Adam Knight]: So why do we have a meeting?
[Adam Knight]: Just a quick question. When did the mayor determine that it was time to have a discussion?
[Adam Knight]: Absent a vote of the council?
[Adam Knight]: Not as the leadership team, as council of business noted earlier.
[Adam Knight]: I'm not trying to trip you up I'm just saying as the elected president I had the same issue with john Falco, and I got my ass kicked for it. But I called him out on it, and I got a beating on it. You know what I mean, because I like the president to represent the interest of the body not the interest of yourself. So when you get elected president of the council. Right. different responsibility. You have responsibility to the people buying this realtor. Now you did what you did. It is what it is. All right. And I know that you haven't been in the chair a long time, so I get it. I get it. All right. But ultimately, right, we're a body. We're a body. We're a body. Now,
[Adam Knight]: We're a body, right? So right now what I'm seeing happened is we have a budget that's before us that wasn't the budget that we got when the press releases went out saying this is the first time you ever got a budget, because it was a fake budget, because the school department never passed their aspect of it before it comes to us, which is the normal practice. All right, now we have an administration horse trading, horse trading outside the public sphere. to ensure passage of a budget. The same administration that runs on transparency. That's not transparent. I don't care what anybody says. It's a classic divide and conquer strategy. A classic divide and conquer strategy. So the mayor for three years can fail to respond to the body public. Fail to respond to the body public. Then there's closed door deals with select Councilors. And other Councilors that are elected by the people of this community are excluded? You guys think you know about the open meeting law? I'm gonna tell you right now, I think you're teetering very close, very close to a violation. Just because you weren't in the same room at the same time doesn't mean there wasn't deliberation. I'm not making that accusation, but what I'm saying is, perception is reality. So the perception that I get right now is that the mayor picked up the phone, called a few people into her office, and cut a deal, left the rest of us hanging on the shelf. So we sat here, and we made votes, and we made speeches, and we made pledges, and we made commitments to the people in this community, to the people in this community. And sometimes making hard decisions isn't politically expedient. Sometimes making hard decisions isn't politically popular. But people didn't elect us to take the easy road. People didn't elect us to take the easy way out. So we've sat here and we beat our chests about, oh, we're gonna protect everybody. We're gonna get this, we're gonna get that. We've gotten nothing. This administration's accomplished nothing other than recycling and regurgitating old plans from previous administrations. And we're sitting here passing it like a rubber stamp, pot and parcel. Because it's not about Medford, it's not about the community, it's about what we can get on the way through the door. It's a disgrace. It's a disgrace and I'm disgusted. For the first time in my life, I'm embarrassed to be from this community. I love this city. I've loved this city my whole life, and I am embarrassed. When I go to neighboring towns and other communities, and I get people going, what the hell's going on with your city? What's going on with your mayor? What's going on over there? And we all say the same thing. I know it's a disaster. It's a disaster. I hear every single person behind this rail say it. I know it's a nightmare. I know. I know. Oh, it's awful. It's only going to get worse. Just wait till next year. And here we are. Give me the rubber stamp. Let's stamp it now. I got what I needed. Someone might've got a job out of the budget in the closed door deal. I don't know who got what. All I know is I got nothing. All I know is I got nothing. Not even the courtesy of a telephone call. I got a text message at 418. I'm not sure what time you guys met with the mayor, but I got a text message at 418 saying if I have any last minute questions on the budget, let me or Nina know. A text. A text. A text message at four o'clock. Two hours before a meeting, we were talking about $180 million plus. Enough's enough with this clown show. Madam President, I rest my case. I'm not supporting the budget. I'm not supporting the budget because I don't feel it's transparent. I don't feel as though it's an accurate depiction of the finances in this community. And I don't feel as though it positions us for a future of growth and for a future of success. All right, our school department is going to fall apart next year. We're going to have to lay off 33 teachers because all of our SM money is gone. Nobody cares about that, though. You know why? It's going to look good in the press releases this year. It's going to look good in the campaign material this year. Time in and time out. Time in and time out. What's the number one rule of an elected official? Once you become an elected official, get reelected. We all know that, right, Madam President?
[Adam Knight]: And I want to finish my question, Madam President. Ultimately, right. We've been asking. We've been asking. We've been asking for financial documentation. for two years and haven't gotten it. And now here we are at the budget and you say no, that's a mistake. Oh, that's a mistake. Maybe if they shared this information with us that we've been asking for, as the conduit of communication per the city ordinance that the chief of staff was as a badge. Maybe if some of this do you have a question for me? Yeah, I do. I do. How is it that we're planning a budget based upon figures that are mistakes?
[Adam Knight]: It's all this is, you know, so, so, so, so, so, so when it comes to clear that sucks. And when it comes time for us to do our research, we know clear that's not good so we asked for the information and we don't get the information, but then we're expected to make an informed decision. And then when it comes down to us actually sitting down and having a transparent discussion, the mayor doesn't divide and conquer strategy. You know, so that's where we're at in this whole thing. This is a joke.
[Adam Knight]: Let's just look at the law department as an example, Madam President. Now, we haven't had a city solicitor or an assistant city solicitor for a year. Last year, we budgeted what, about $422,000? We still don't have a city solicitor. We still don't have an assistant city solicitor, yet the department's budget goes up. How does that happen? There's nobody even in the office, but the department's budget is going up. There's no employees there except for Janice. There's one person in the office, but the budget goes up. How is that possible if the positions are vacant? I don't wanna hear we pass the COLA, because the person that comes in should be starting at step one. So I don't wanna hear we pass the COLA, because that's just another way to control a false narrative.
[Adam Knight]: Okay, why are we giving the city solicitor a raise when the position is vacant? Why is the budget in this the law office going up when the two positions that have funded through the vacant?
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, please don't.
[Adam Knight]: Okay, and didn't we not have vacancies in the finance director's position during that period of time?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, can you repeat that? Instead of taking votes as a body, we want us to email... No, you said you want us to email them individually instead of taking votes as a body and raising the issue with the body public? And not discuss them, yeah?
[Adam Knight]: It was never shame on you shame on me. Madam President ultimately right we talked about this is this is a communication issue right more than anything else. It's a communication issue. Would everybody agree this is a communication issue. Absolutely. Everybody. So who's responsible for communication from the mayor's office. Anybody, anybody know who's responsible for the communications from the mayor's office? Who went from the mayor's office? Anybody? No, it's not the communications director. It's not the COVID specialist, communication specialist or the other two people they got in that office. According to the city ordinances, there shall be a chief of staff of policy appointed by the mayor whose duty shall include managing communication and information both to and from the office of the mayor. So we talk about some of the problems that we have in this community. A lot of it lies in the application of the ordinances and the incumbents interpretation thereof. So when I sit here and I look at a lot of the problems that happen in this community, and I think about the things we get we get all upset about KP law, one of the biggest things we get upset about right, let's read the city ordinance. Let's read what the city ordinance says. Okay, about an assistant city solicitor, because the city ordinance says that the mayor may appoint an assistant city solicitor. Now, can anybody tell me in last year's budget what the assistant city solicitor was? I believe it was $422,000 was the legal department's budget. And our city ordinance says that the administration can't spend more than has been appropriated for the department. But we have correspondence from this administration saying they spent $450,000 on KP law. which exceeds the 422,000 in the budget. Whether or not that information is presented to us now as accurate is in question. But ultimately there's a significant misapplication of the city ordinances in terms of the way that the city is supposed to run. The first of which being there shall be a city solicitor. Well, there isn't. There shall be one, there has to be one, there isn't one. Then there are controls put in place through city ordinance to prevent wild and uncontrolled spending like what's going on with KP law. And we don't abide by that either. But to ensure that we are complying with it, we don't have the financial data before us to allow us to make that determination as to whether or not we're in compliance with our local ordinances. Last time we raised an issue about an ordinance, the mayor said, well, the city council can just change it. Last time we raised an issue about process, the chief of staff said, we'll just do it under suspension. This is the same administration that ran on transparency, the same administration that ran on community. Okay, so when we sit here yelling and screaming at each other, let's understand, we're not the problem. Us in this circle behind this rail are not the problem. You know what we are? We're frustrated. You know why we're frustrated? Because we've been putting a plastic bag and we've been trying to punch our way out for the last two years. That's why. So we got Zach and George getting frustrated at each other. Why? Because of the administration. Nicole and I becoming very good friends through this whole entire process. Why? Because of the shared concerns and values that we have with the administration. Doesn't look that way, but that's really what's going on. That's the fact and the reality behind the situation. Now, some of us speak a little bit more passionately than others. Some of us have been around a little bit longer than others. So some of us have a level of frustration that's a lot higher than other people's. Some of us have also had the experience of putting up with what I call a BS meter. We all have a BS meter. We can all smell it from a mile away. Some of us are better at smelling it than others. Some of us allow people to have a little bit more leeway when it comes to wafting their BS around here. I'm not one of those people. All right. I'm not going to sit here and waste my time listening to BS. That's not what I'm here for. I'm here to make good decisions on behalf of the taxpayers in this community. And I can't do that because this administration is fearless. So we sit here and we infight and we argue and everything else. We all want the same thing. We want the respect that we deserve from this administration so that we can do the job that the people in this community elected us to do. And we can't do it based upon the tools, the resources, the processes, and the procedures that this administration has implemented. And week in and week out, we express these frustrations. And week in and week in, we beat our chest. And week in and week out, nothing changes. Everything stays the same. Everything stays the same. And how do you make things stay the same? By doing things like divide and conquer. By doing things like cutting back on deals and making promises you're not gonna keep. By sending out press releases that control narratives that aren't true, but control the spin because there's no local media in the community. Those are the realities of the situation. That's what's going on. And these are the hurdles that we face as a body. But for people who are watching this or people that are sitting in the audience saying, Jesus, these people are nuts. What the hell is going on? We all want the same thing. We're just mad because they're not giving it to us. That's what it is. Everybody on this side of the rail shares the same value. They wanna make Medford a better place. Everyone on this side of the rail has been asking for the tools to do that. There's only one common denominator and one common thread. One hurdle, one reason that we haven't been provided with the tools that we need. And it comes from across the hall. And let's not forget that. Because at the end of this meeting, we're all gonna leave, we're all gonna be pissed off at each other and everything else for no reason. Because this is what the administration wants. This is the method that they created to divide a wedge between us. to make it so that this body can't be effective and that they can continue to move with reckless and abandoned and lack of transparency. And it hurts the taxpayers. It hurts the residents in this community. It hurts the process and it makes people distrustful of government. When people distrust government, they don't participate. And when people don't participate, then government operates in a vacuum. We have an administration that already said they throw a third of the voters off of active roles every year. When you're taking off the active roles, you know what you don't get in the mail? Literature from candidates that are running from office. Wow, imagine that. Now you're misinformed. You're an inactive voter that's misinformed, but you're expected to come out to the polls and vote. Let's think about what's going on here, folks, because we're not the problem. And we sound like we are, and we're not. We aren't the problem. Thank you, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: So move on a president provided that I could get a question answered. Historically, historically, the administration has presented us with this $500,000 request after the rates have been established after the budget's been passed and it's been used for rate relief. Is that going to be the current philosophy behind the expenditure of this plane that's in this paper this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, I mean every year we get a bill of paper for $500,000 that asks us to offset the rates to the. to the ratepayers for water and sewer through the retained earnings account is this going to be is that's this is this that same 500,000 or is this a different 500,000 or is this something that we're not going to see this year?
[Adam Knight]: So they haven't set the rates yet.
[Adam Knight]: I get $500,000 in rate relief if they do when they do, but we don't know what the rates are going to be. I think the motion itself would make sense.
[Adam Knight]: Section 22.
[Adam Knight]: First time in financial reading. Paper can be passed in one evening.
[Adam Knight]: We're transferring X amount of dollars from surplus to deficit to balance the budget, I'm sure, is what he's going to say, something along those lines.
[Adam Knight]: So certain accounts run a deficit and certain accounts have a surplus. And what we're doing is the bottom line remains the same and all we're doing is evening out the accounts. So that makes accounting easy, but at the end of the day, the bottom line hasn't changed, right?
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. First off, this is a good paper. It's a paper that I actually filed. This is a paper that I introduced a number of years ago under the Burke administration, and I'm glad to see that the administration has moved on it. I'd like to have a committee of the whole paper. I've seen this community do just fine in previous years without a stabilization fund and to think that if we don't establish this this immediate second and appropriate $5 million into it that the city is going to fail, I think is a little bit more of a a fear-mongering approach than it is actually the reality of the situation. So in looking at this, you know, the city's been able to survive for all these years without a stabilization fund. I think we should sit down and we should talk about it a little bit more and define parameters around the stabilization fund. I know state law dictates a lot of what we can and can't do, but I think it would be nice to codify that and to establish a process and a procedure very much like the better budget plan that's been put out to amend that charter, Madam President, the procedure and a process that makes it transparent and make sure that everybody knows what to understand and how to understand it.
[Adam Knight]: Sounds like it's a pretty big deal, Madam President, and it's 5 million bucks. We're not gonna have a meeting on it. been recommended by auditors, been recommended by bond council. It's necessary for us to keep our A plus rating and it's a $5 million appropriation and we're not gonna have a meeting on it.
[Adam Knight]: You're making it sound like they're going to be able to get bond council there at the auditor there and everybody else there in 10 days notice and I don't see that happening.
[Adam Knight]: Bond Council.
[Adam Knight]: And ultimately, is there anything that precludes this community from bringing this paper forward between now and March? while our free cash is being certified, knowing that we have more than $5 million in our free cash already. What precludes us from creating this in 90 days or 60 days, but before March? I'm just asking.
[Adam Knight]: It just needs to be recertified, right?
[Adam Knight]: We just passed like a $200 million budget, didn't we?
[Adam Knight]: Yes, which- We can establish a stabilization fund and not fund it, and then wait for the free cash to be certified, right?
[Adam Knight]: We could go through a legislative process and create actual legislation instead of doing this at the 11th hour and making a $5 million appropriation on it. You know, I think we're putting the horse behind the car. You know what I mean? It's like, if we're going to create a process, let's create the process and let's go through the legislative process and create it. Let's not throw $5 million into an account and then say figure the rest of that out later.
[Adam Knight]: It's like we're creating it and funding it in the same day. Why don't we create it?
[Adam Knight]: Does it take a super majority to create it or a super majority to withdraw from it? Both.
[Adam Knight]: I'm not sure what to say beyond that we've been on the floor for that amount of committee papers still in the paper now the paper is disposed of by being voted into committee.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I'd advise against it on a matter that's as significant as enough as our charter.
[Adam Knight]: Waving the comment.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, no, I mean, no, no, no, no.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to waive the reading.
[Adam Knight]: I'm just, I'm not sure if I heard councilor Scarpelli right. Is he saying that the staff of the mayor who came up here and said that she's holding people accountable? is scared to come before this council and be held accountable. That's what it sounds like to me Council Scarpelli is that they're scared to come before the city council and be held accountable, but the mayor comes up here and beats her chest, saying how she's holding people accountable when she's getting dragged out of here and handcuffs and making them undergo psychological evaluations. So I'm a little concerned about that and I thank the council for bringing that up and that's a very good point, but I know, and I'll end with this.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Madam President. I don't think that the engineer is the bad guy in this situation. I think that the engineer is the fall guy, which is a difference because we've had previous administrations in this community that have allowed private ways to be provided with maintenance and services, okay? And the only thing that's different is the administration, right? So this is definitely an administrative prerogative. It's something that we're seeing come down from the top. It's not coming from the engineer across the city, it's coming from the boss, the mayor, all right? So when we talk about this resolution and we talk about the issues that Councilor Scarpelli brings up, he says that the city is not maintaining private waste, which would infer that we're maintaining public waste, and we're not doing that either. But when we talk about the services that you're entitled to and receive access to as a resident on a private way, we talk about access to the public schools, access to public safety and first response, snow removal and trash removal. We don't get trees trimmed. We don't get sidewalks fixed. We don't get streets paved. What about the underground infrastructure? Is that the responsibility of the taxpayer? Is that the responsibility of the city? Okay, so where does it stop and where does it start is a big question. Now, I don't think people who live on private ways have a problem living on a private way, quite frankly, I don't think people that live on a private way would have a problem paying for some of these services that they want themselves. I think part of the problem is that they can't get anybody to provide them with help when they want to initiate their rights at City Hall. So if I lived on a private way and I said look at I want to put up a crash bar and I want to say resident access only. Say Wildwood Road, for example, right across the street from Medford High School. It's a private way. Why can't they put up, just like they have on Rosina Drive in the Heights, on Murray Hill Road in the Heights, a crash bar where cars can't drive down that street because it's a private way. And they can tell you when and when you can't. The fire department can still provide emergency access. The police department can still have emergency access. The MS can still have emergency access. and these residents that live on the streets that are abutting the Mystic Lakes complain year in and year out about the fact that neighborhoods being overrun and inundated by people that are parking on their private ways in front of their houses and their driveways and the like to access the Mystic Lakes. But the city doesn't provide them with the information or the tools necessary to protect themselves on their private way, but won't provide them the services either. It becomes very frustrating. And inaction is not an answer or a response. to a circumstance in the community. So meetings are great, but ultimately we've had a number of meetings on this back in September and even previously, and we're still talking about it because there's been inaction. And that's the difference between what makes a thriving community and what makes a failing community. So when we talk about the one thing that people want when they move into a city is they wanna make sure that their tax dollars stretch a long way, they get banked for their buck and they're provided with city services. We have over 30% of the streets in this community that are private ways and we're not providing those people with services. Thus far, I feel as though we're failing them. We're failing them because we're not providing them with any recourse information or ability to enact or enact their rights or enable themselves to protect their, their investment in their future destiny in the community. Thank you, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. These are some items that have been popular fodder for discussion in our community over recent months. Recently, the school department has met and they've discussed their budget priorities. Looks like they're about eight or $900,000 short from where they'd like to be. I've always had an issue with the school committee and their ability to manage within their budget sometimes. I feel like sometimes you've got to make hard decisions, and that's what elected officials are putting these positions for. And when it comes time to tightening the belt and spending within your means, sometimes our school committee does not do that. And as a result, we see some wasteful spending. It's been brought to my attention that some of these cost items that are included in this list, Madam President, are reaching astronomical figures. For example, it's my understanding that the cost for teachers covering hallway security duties is somewhere around $25,000 to $35,000 a week of ARPA money being spent for teachers to monitor the hallways up in Method High. So when we're talking about a school committee's professed shortfall of about $800,000. Let's take a look at some of the spending that we're doing when we talk about the investigation into the NHL softball team. I know we have attorney Howard Greenspan as the school department's attorney who's on retainer. Did KP Law conduct the investigation? Why? Why did KP Law conduct the investigation? Was that a special contract? Was that something that fell outside the scope of our contract with KP Law? Is that something we're going to be assessed for? How much did it cost? What were the findings of the investigation? Was it a worthy expenditure? Should we have used internal counsel that we have on retainer or should we have gone outside? Is this wasteful spending? So Madam President, these are some things that I want to take a look at when we talk about the position of data manager and the position of data director. From what I understand, they have the exact same duties, responsibilities and functions. The only difference is the salary. the incumbent that's in the position is a female who's going to make $10,000 to $15,000 less than the new appointee who's a male. But their responsibilities and duties really aren't that different. So I want to know what's going on. Why is there such a disparity in the wages between these two positions? And why is there a need for two positions with duplicate duties? Also, you know, Medford High has been on the news a lot. It's not for winning state championships, all right? It's because of violence in our school department. So the school department went and they hired a consultant. They spent a lot of money on a consultant to file a report, and this report makes suggestions. I want to know what these suggestions are, what the cost of the report was, and whether or not these suggestions are even being implemented, or whether it was just a, let's get us out of the news, hire a consultant to come in here and do a report, and then we can wave the report in the air and say, no, we did something, but not implement any of the changes that they've asked for. So when we talk about previous administration of the school department, and we talk about a gentleman like Mr. Belson, who'd come before us, and who would talk about school violence, well, Roy was one of the founders of the STARS program, right? The School Threat Assessment and Response System that's been implemented statewide, okay? That was in response to an issue back in the early 90s. What steps has this administration taken to put in something like a STARS program that would assess violence on our school systems and establish reasonable response? So these are some of the things that I have great concern about. We all talk about you can't put a price tag on public safety, but apparently you can't. I mean, if this is any truth to this expenditure at $33,000 a week in APA funds being assigned for teachers to monitor the halls, I think that's gross negligence in terms of spending, and it's a gross negligence of the fiduciary responsibility of the stewards of our taxes. So it's pretty self-explanatory. When we get the answers to the questions, we'll be in a better position to figure out exactly what's going on here. This council's been asking now for financial data for three years, and we haven't been receiving it forthwith. So my hope was to put this on the agenda to give everybody ample notice and time to prepare it, to give it to us before our budget discussions finalize at the end of the month, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: We'll survive without him, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: We'll survive without him.
[Adam Knight]: Number one, amend table of use and- Madam President, motion to waive the reading and refer to the CD board as pursuant to Massachusetts General Election Act 41A.
[Adam Knight]: On that point, Madam President, I'd just like to ask that the city clerk calendar this event. As we know, because this is a zoning change, it's pursuant to certain rules and regulations established by state law that create timelines for us to act. And if we don't act in time, then we got to start over from scratch. And this is a very important matter that I think we need to keep an eye on when we're coming into summer break. Sometimes these things fall off the shelf. So I just ask that the city clerk keep us in line to make sure that we do our job.
[Adam Knight]: Madam president.
[Adam Knight]: If we could get a written explanation from the city administration as to why someone would pay us for the use of pride, because I'm not too sure what that means. Yeah. That would be great, but it's 500 bucks. I mean, total value of this paper is $850. You know what I mean? I move approval on the paper, but I would like a written explanation.
[Adam Knight]: No.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, am I missing something here? All we're doing is announcing what the early voting dates are, because, you know what I mean? It seems like it's a pretty self-explanatory paper over there. All it is is a public service announcement, as far as I can tell, right?
[Adam Knight]: The paper before us has no language on it, legal or otherwise, saying it doesn't mean the City Council opt in to support early voting. It doesn't tell us when the dates are going to be. So from a legal standpoint, I mean, usually if there's an opt-in, there's some certain language that you need to adopt or support in order for an opt-in to happen.
[Adam Knight]: That's not the paper that's before us this evening.
[Adam Knight]: So we don't have to take any action. There's a courtesy. It's not a necessary mechanism of government for us to take a vote for this to happen, right? It's going to happen no matter what.
[Adam Knight]: We don't have to write the board just an autonomous board that's made its determination and they're presenting us their findings. I'm fine with that.
[Adam Knight]: The paper requires an election from the council. Yeah. So my worst fear is Oh, well, I didn't get a chance to vote because early voting wasn't open on Wednesday, the 5th. Well, the city council approved the schedule. City Council has no authority on this whatsoever. So we can recommend that they open on Saturday. I don't have a problem with that. But in terms of supporting the plan and not supporting the plan, we don't have to do it. I don't think we should.
[Adam Knight]: on the Now historically, up until Sandy Gale became the elections manager, we never had this issue with the census and with people getting pulled from the list and everything else. It's been a nightmare ever since. It's created a ton of problems in this community. We've had people coming up here saying the elections have been raked. I remember Richard Brady Daugherty up here screaming and yelling saying that the elections raked and Zach Baer's fault because he talked to Sandy and they were colluding to remove people from the rolls and everything else. It's a bad practice, you know, it didn't have that didn't happen. But that was the that was the general consensus throughout the community was that, you know, Zach was running around trying to control the voting. But anyway, what I'm saying is, why don't we cool it on that a little bit, relax a little bit, because it does create a situation where a lot of people get frustrated and it creates voter apathy, where they don't want to come out and vote. and they don't want to go and waste their time going through this ordeal of this. I know the elections are great, but they're overwhelmed when they get in there and they got one person that says, what do you mean I can't vote? Well, listen, I just talked to 4,000 people that can and you can't. Like, sorry, what do you want me to tell you guys? Today's the biggest day of the year for me, right? And they don't get the attention that they deserve. And then they have to come down to city hall and go back and go back to the back. They're not going to vote. They're just not going to do it. So I'll reiterate the fact, I don't think it's the best practice. I mean, it might be what you're required to do, what you can do. I think it's what you can do, not necessarily what you're required to do. But I don't think that it's working in favor of promoting full involvement in elections.
[Adam Knight]: example, like I have to fill out a census, I'm on the ballot, and I gotta fill out a census every year. And I can't vote for myself if I don't. This is crazy. I can't sign my own nomination papers if I don't fill out the census, but I'm an elected official in the community. To be an elected official, I believe I have to be a registered voter. Right? So I'm not a registered voter right now because I didn't fill out the census.
[Adam Knight]: I apologize.
[Adam Knight]: Right. And what I'm saying is that the past practice was never like this. And it was always very, it was always a lot easier than what's going on now. Now, if this is the way it's going to be, this is the way it's going to be, that's fine. I'm just saying that I don't think it's necessarily conducive to promoting full involvement in elections.
[Adam Knight]: How many voters are there?
[Adam Knight]: Including the 15,000 hit the road.
[Adam Knight]: It's like a third that you threw out, right? Mm-hmm. So like 33% of the registered voters are no longer, are inactive now. They're inactive. Because they didn't send back a census.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, right. But I mean, ultimately, you took a third of the population from inactive. Correct, as required. A third of the voting population, 33%.
[Adam Knight]: My experience with Somerville have always been they make things very difficult for anybody to do anything over there.
[Adam Knight]: Do they turn into a pumpkin?
[Adam Knight]: And then what happens?
[Adam Knight]: I understand your frustration with the- I mean, you can't just throw a third of the people in the community off the voter rolls. You want to say that they can still vote? Listen, you made them inactive voters. They're going to show up at the polls and they're going to say, no, you can't vote. Go stand in the corner and fill it out in the bad boy booth. Right? I mean, that's what happens, right? So it's hard enough to get people to want to participate. And I just think that this is a failed policy. It's not your policy. It's just a failed policy. You're saying it's to comply with the state law. I think that doesn't make any sense. It's crazy. It's crazy if you fall off the, if you don't fill out your census form, but they not send you an excise tax bill, pretty sure they do. You know what I mean? Pretty sure they do. So they're going to take away your right to have a voice, but they're still going to tax you.
[Adam Knight]: So we'll continue to- That was the past practice beginning within the last 36 months.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, there's a paper that I submitted to be included in the record this evening, pursuant to communications from city offices and employees, which is the section of the agenda that we're into this evening.
[Adam Knight]: I received a correspondence today from the firefighters union. And at our last meeting, I believe that I do have the right to initiate a point of personal privilege. The mayor told me that I was being distruthful at the meeting the other night. And this was the same meeting that the mayor said that she was very close to settling all the union contracts and that they were doing a great job and they were this close to settling all the contracts, including the fire contract. And this evening, Madam President, in our mailboxes before the meeting, we received a correspondence from the fire union. And what it says is this administration has been in office for three years and five months. Local 1033, I'm sorry, local 1032, which is the Metro Firefighters Union, has been without a contract for 706 days. The mayor spoke last week about how well negotiations were going with the fire department and that we were close to settling a contract. I just want to repeat that. The mayor spoke last week about how well negotiations were going with the fire department and that we were close to settling a contract. That was clear, right? That's what the mayor said? Okay. Well, this is what the union says. This could not be any further from the truth. the city is proposing in their budget double digit percentage raises to their non-union employees while unions in the city go years without a contract. We have new hires to this day who still do not have health insurance through the city of Medford because of administrative errors. The mayor's office represented that everybody was covered and that this problem was resolved. There's another thing in this letter that I'd like to point out, Madam President, and that's that in this budget that the mayor has proposed, they're cutting two more firefighter positions. At the same time, the mayor is putting out press releases boasting how the city of Medford is one of the fastest growing communities in the country. So we have a communication here from employees of this city. I'd ask that they be included in the record, Madam President. It was addressed to this council. It's highlighting issues and concerns that were brought up at last week's meeting. And it addresses certain things that were said, and I think that it should be included as part of the record and ask my council colleagues to support me and having this letter included as part of the record.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. I think we've certainly beat this issue to death. Ultimately, the matter that's before us is whether or not we want to support and extend that Iowa's permit for Oasis, all right? That's the issue that's before this council. The other issues are enforcement issues. Those issues fall under the purview of the administration. So the question that comes before us right now is, do we want to support a thriving business in South Medford? All right, now, when I drive through South Medford, I see several businesses that are successful, and this is one of them. I don't want to see them leave. Um, I don't think that we can blame oasis for being the source of all the problems and all things wrong in yale street and harvard ave All right, I don't have a street. I just don't think that that's possible. All right We have the opening of a green line station that's going in over there the noise and the drama and the uh adverse effects that are going to come from that alone will triple or maybe quadruply outweigh what's going on in oasis uncomfortable support in the petition this evening Ultimately, you know, the council does have the right to put restrictions on it, I wouldn't have a problem putting restrictions on it to Thursday, Friday, Saturday evenings, something like that. But I don't think we need to go down this road of making a mountain out of a molehill. It's not that serious of an issue. Ultimately, the question is whether or not we want to allow them to stay open for 120 minutes later than they usually do, or whether or not we want to put restrictions on those 120 minutes so that it's 90 or less. I mean, that's it. That's all that's before us right now. So, you know, I think we're complicating an issue and we're really kind of turning this into a patronization at this point. But, you know, ultimately I'm comfortable voting on the paper immediately.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, motion to adopt the gentleman's suggestion as a restriction on the permit.
[Adam Knight]: No.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: I didn't know my mic was off, sorry.
[Adam Knight]: I didn't know I was unmuted, I'm sorry.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: This is what happens when we allow debate after the vote gets taken.
[Adam Knight]: I'm Noah Gibson. I'm a junior. Excellent.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. And this is a resolution that I've been fortunate enough to put forward each year since my election. Charlie Sheeran was a great mentor to me. The first big boy job I had when I was in college was working as an intern in the senator's office and that turned into what seems to be a lifetime in politics now. But I couldn't have done it without the guidance and leadership of Charlie Sheeran. And Charlie represented the city of Medford with great pride and great diligence, Madam President, he served as our state senator from 1990 to 2005 when he passed as a result of battle with cancer. Charlie was a US Army veteran. He was a retired police officer, and he was a career public servant. When we look around the city of Medford, we see some of the things that remind us of the work that Charlie did, and we look around the second Middlesex district we see some of the things that Charlie did. Shannon Beach for example is named after Senator Shannon, in honor of all the work that he's done in restoring Route 16 in the Mystic Valley Parkway. So when I think back to my time with Senator Shannon and what was going on in his office during the time that I worked there, I talk about things like marriage equality, we talk about health care for all, we talk about the Green Line extension, these are great things, great issues that really made a difference in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and in the residents in this community's life. So I was very fortunate to have the opportunity to work and learn from Charlie. Another item that we're going to talk about I'm sure down the line will be and the roof of La Conte skating rink was fallen in, it was Senator Shannon who was able to secure the funds to be sure that La Conte skating rink was repaired, refurbished, and maintained so that we can still enjoy it to this day. So Madam President, it's with a heavy heart that I offer this resolution once again, but it's something that I feel is necessary to be sure that we in this community don't forget somebody that did so much for us. So I ask my council colleagues in joining me in supporting this resolution.
[Adam Knight]: I'm just glad Madam President, to see that been so successful West Medford Square that they were able to expand and that they're not on the Alta Cuba opening schedule. Seems like they've made an announcement to go down there and things are moving relatively quickly so congratulations gentlemen I'm happy to support the paper.
[Adam Knight]: So I'm recommending that there be a delay in the executive order made by the state government supersede any local action.
[Adam Knight]: unless the executive order supersedes the local zoning ordinance, which in my- Well, it may, and that's why I said, that's why I mentioned in part.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Just for explanation purposes from a historical standpoint, we have an issue like this that came up when Wendy's was looking for an outside dining facility and. what some of the concerns were was after hours when it's closed and no one's in the facility, people would be using the seats in the chairs to congregate late at night after 11 o'clock or 12 o'clock at night. So it was more of a nuisance value thing as opposed to becoming projectiles or what's it called, fodder for larceny.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor Knight, Madam President, thank you very much. And it's amazing here we are again. Now it was a baby. Well, 16 months ago, we passed this council in January, January 22. We passed a resolution asking that the mayor provide us very simple financial data, like Councilor Scott belly said the previous administrations, previous financial directors, but the same exact software were able to give us. All we want to know is where you're spending the money on a weekly basis. That's all. Then we said, not even weekly, monthly. Show us where you're spending the money on a monthly basis. Show us what account your money's coming out of and where it's going. The response we get from the chief of staff is, we don't have someone that has the time to redact that information. What needs to be redacted? The Transparency Administration, Madam President. Remember that? Community, unity, and transparency. I don't see any unity. I don't see any unity among the working people that work in this building, among the rank and file members of our DPW and fire department who have gone without a contract. I don't see any unity with the teachers who took a vote of no confidence in this administration and the school committee. I certainly don't see any transparency when, for 16 months, we've been asking for simple financial data. Follow the money. Where's the money going? And they won't let us look. They won't let us follow the money, Madam President. I think it's shameful. I think it's absolutely shameful. It's a smoke and mirrors game. So when I think back, and we're talking about the budget now, and I think back to that night, the last day of June, last year, and the mayor came up here and she all of a sudden, money was falling out of the sky all of a sudden. What was this council? It was $8 million deficit and then they found 4 million in the mayor's top drawer, right? Then they came in here and the council had some priorities that we needed funded, like an attorney. like an assistant city solicitor for the council and the mayor stood up there. And you know what the mayor said, I will hire an assistant city solicitor for the council. I will post the job in September. That was in June. We still don't have one. The job hasn't been posted. It's posted in February. That's right. And where did the mayor want to take the money to fund these positions? Can anybody remember? She wanted to take them out of the negotiated salaries account. The negotiated salaries account, the account where the administration puts money aside to provide cost of living adjustments for those same rank and file workers that she's beating on every day. We have a chief of staff that doesn't act like a liaison or a partner. We have a chief of staff that acts like a defense attorney. Refuse to answer questions, refuse to provide us with information, refuse to provide us with data. Now, when someone stands up before me, and we talk and we cut a deal, and they make a promise to me, and they don't fulfill that promise, I call them a liar. That's what I call them. And after all this time that's gone by, with no assistant city solicitor, with no phase two of the zoning review, I think it's safe to say the mayor's a liar. The mayor lied to this body to get what she needed, which was a budget, so that she wouldn't have to talk to us for another year. Because that's the fact of the matter, right? That's the writing on the wall. That's the rationale. If we were watching this TV show at home, that's what we'd see. The mayor came in here, she promised everybody everything. Sprinkles were flying from the sky. Everything was great. Two days later, she's down the Cape. Nobody hears from anybody. And now here we are, scheduling a meeting for May 19th to talk about the next budget, when we still haven't even gotten the things we were promised from the last one. Typical of this administration, Madam President. Typical of this administration. I want a mayor that leads. I want a mayor that administrates government. I don't want a social media influencer for a mayor in my city. And I feel like that's what we have. It's always lead with a press release. Go skating with the kids, go play rock, paper, scissors. But you can't drive down one street in the city. If you live on a private way and you call somebody to trim a tree and get a pothole fixed, good God, it's like you're asking for a miracle. It's like you're asking for a miracle. We've asked the DPW director about this private way issue and how we can have equity and parity among residents in this community. The administration closes their ears. They don't want to hear it. When we say we want to take some of these public private ways off the rules and put them as public ways, because that might help us get more chapter 90 funds because the city administration only appropriates $900,000 a year for road repairs, and that's money that's appropriated through our cherry sheet in Northridge City Coffers. The mayor does not match one penny, not one penny in road repairs in this community. So when we talk about priorities, I mean, the meeting's gonna be 24 hours long. But the number one priority that I have for this council in moving forward in the budget going forward is we hold the mayor accountable to her promises, to what she said she was going to give us. Because if she's going to lie to us, then she's going to lie to the people we represent, too. And we can no longer be a steward for the taxpayer in this community, because we're getting treated like mushrooms, getting thrown in the closet, in the dock, in the dirt, fed fertilizer in the way of press releases, Instagram posts, and Facebook posts. and expected to move forward and make informed decisions on behalf of the people that put us here. And then look in the mirror the next morning and say we're doing a good job. We're not doing a good job, Madam President. We're doing a terrible job. We're doing a terrible job in this community delivering services. I've never seen the city look worse. I've never seen the city look worse. It was a miracle today when I drove around the Winthrop Street Rotary, the Rotary which by the way, according to the contract on the Eversource project is supposed to be reconstructed, which hasn't been reconstructed and I mind you probably won't be reconstructed because it's too close to an election. You got to show some results somewhere. We've been holding all the results in the result bag, waiting for someone to run against us. And now we're going to pour them all out and show you all the good stuff we're doing. If we didn't have an opponent, if Consulate Gavreel didn't have the courage to run against his mayor. Council, budget priorities. My budget priority is an administrator that administers. A public administrator, not a social media influencer. Someone that keeps their promises. That's all. Not asking for much. Someone that comes to work, rolls their sleeves up, and does what they say they're gonna do, Madam President. Is that too much to ask for? Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, did you say which month was it this month or just a month, month of May, month of May. Thank you. So, Madam President, Councilor going to be a full budget.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much, and I would defer to Councilor Caraviello on this. He was a co-sponsor of this resolution, as he has been in the past, but I erroneously excluded him when I sent it to the City Clerk after speaking with friends from the Massachusetts Motorcycle Association. Yes, Madam President. Thank you, Mr. President, former Mr. President. As this resolution says, Madam President, there are hundreds, several hundred motorcycles registered in the city of Medford. Thousands upon thousands of motorcycles pass through our community daily with Route 93 cutting right through the middle of our city. And quite frankly, the condition of our roadways aren't great. So these are things that do lead to situations of accident. This is a resolution that I've been supporting now for a number of years. It's fitting. I first got involved with the Massachusetts Motorcycle Association when I was working for Senator Shannon, the first resolution we spoke of this evening. And through his office, I became very friendly with some of the individuals there that were working for a better Massachusetts when it came to rights and when it came to protections for motorcyclists. And one of the things that came out of this was motorcycle awareness period, Madam President, before us this evening. This is a paper that has been supported by the Governor and Lieutenant Governor. They've established the Massachusetts Motorcycle Awareness Period. And as the weather changes and we see more and more people taking their motorcycles out, it's just important for us to be aware and cognizant of the fact that these motor vehicles are going to be on the roadway. We're not used to seeing them so much in the bad weather, but the good weather's here before us now. It's a safety issue, Madam President, but it's also a sharing the road issue. So many of us are concerned about putting bike lanes in and bus lanes in, but we forget a little bit about those of us that drive motorized vehicles and those on the motorcycle are the most vulnerable when they're on the roadway. So with that being said, Madam President, I would like to ask my council colleagues to support the resolution and thank you all for indulging me with such a long piece of legislation.
[Adam Knight]: I'm going to present for me. I think the council for bringing this up and as we talk about Middlesex have something comes to mind, you know, as the weather's changing. And as we see the nicer weather get out we see a lot of people like to do what go get their car washed right. And we've had a lot of problems with the car wash down there in Middlesex Avenue. So, on top of Councilor Tseng's resolution I'd just like to amend it to ask that the city administration. ensure that the police department performs directed patrols down in the area to ensure safe passage of vehicular traffic. In case that there is an emergency down there, we don't want to impact emergency response times with the traffic coming out of BJ's and the car wash. It's a nightmare down there. And it's a pretty popular place, Madam President. So it's one of those things where we're a victim of a local business's success. So we need to take appropriate steps to make sure that the neighborhood and the residents and the quality of life are protected in that area.
[Adam Knight]: anything getting done in City of Oloroa the way that this administration has been running the city. And I thank you for bringing some of these issues up because they're issues that have been going on for a long time.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much. So ultimately what I'm hearing is this ultimately started three years ago with a request to have a tree removed. actually a sidewalk.
[Adam Knight]: And then for three years at a time, you were told you're on the list.
[Adam Knight]: And then you finally, actually, you finally came in touch with somebody in city hall and Owen that told you the truth after three years, right? Said, we're not going to do that. Right. They put you on the list and they kept telling you they're going to do it for three years. And they dragged you around for three years. And you finally found someone that told you the truth. All right, now, ultimately, an experienced public administrator, Madam President, to something like a sidewalk panel and a tree root to make a resident on the street that pays a lot of money in taxes very happy would be as an experienced public administrator, go to Eversource, and leverage your power with levers ever source to do some community mitigation, because that neighborhood has been under construction for the better part of five years. That's what an experienced public administrator would have done. And it wouldn't have had to elevate to this point where you're wasting your time coming up here to the city council because you've been making phone calls for years and years and doing emails for years and years and not getting a good response. an experienced public administrator, Madam President, would have reached out to their partners in government who are doing construction projects in the area and leverage that relationship to provide community and neighborhood mitigation. Something that I've been calling for for a very long time. Something that I've spoke to the DPW commissioner about at length on a number of occasions. So when I hear these stories and these reoccurring themes, in these issues that keep coming up and issues that we as a council have provided solutions for the administration, but the administration does not respond to us, does not give us the time of day, does not provide us with the tools, materials and equipment necessary to be successful in representing someone like Lisa. It's shameful, it really is. And that's the cycle that we're in right now. There are revenue issues, but ultimately what I'm hearing is I'm not gonna do it because I don't have to. Right, I'm not gonna do it because I don't have to. Well, for 28 years. someone did it, and no one made a big stink about it. The FBI didn't come in here and say, you can't be paving private ways, Mike McGlynn, that's against the rules. No one seemed to really mind too much when we were providing city services to the residents in the community. But it's when we see such a breakdown and degradation of the level of services that we provide, and when we're scrambling and trying to figure out how we're going to make it work, because we haven't invested the time, materials, energy, and effort, and we don't have the personnel, the qualified personnel, We haven't retained anybody with any institutional knowledge, and we haven't been able to track anybody. You get into a dire situation like this, where the ship is sinking, and now you have to make decisions and determinations like this, where you're pitting neighbor against neighbor and street against street. I'm pretty, I'm pretty sure most people don't know what a private way is and what a public way is. They know it's a green sign that they can turn down and take that street to get off of Winthrop Street to get the woman street if they want to, right, Wildwood Road, for example. So when I look at this and I hear these issues, I just find it very frustrating because a hands on public administrator, someone that wants to administer and manage would be able to address an issue like this. So I'm sorry for your frustration. I like your idea personally that you know the same level of services should be provided to any street in the city. And I, you know, I understand that there are certain rules we can the city can also opt out of the subdivision control bar if we want to, you know, but ultimately right now my hands are a little strong. in a couple of different aspects in a couple different ways. One of them is because we don't have a partner across the hall. Secondly, we don't have the financial ability to turn the street into a public way tomorrow, right so anything that takes place going to take a long period of time to happen. If in fact it is going to happen and from what I'm understanding the city is not willing to invest that money I think we as a council are. We as a consulate are willing to say, you know, this sidewalk panel should be picked up, this tree should be taken care of. Because if the tree falls down, what's going to happen? It's going to hit your house, right? And you're going to have a problem. If someone slips and falls in front of the house, who do they sue? Do they sue the city? Or do they sue you for the sidewalk panel?
[Adam Knight]: What else you're going to see is a devaluation of your property. Because you have the that's the reason for that.
[Adam Knight]: Right, right. So thank you for coming up and thank you. I certainly share some of your concerns and something I'm looking forward to working on.
[Adam Knight]: So what I'm understanding is that Councilor Beza has spoken with the facility manager. The facility manager says he has control over the room. We had residents in the community that had spoken with the mayor about the room, and the mayor said that the administration has nothing to do with the room. I'm just trying to figure out what's going on. This place is like Circus City. Thank you, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: Madam president, thank you very much. And, you know, as I'm reading this resolution, I'm thinking to myself that in effect, right now, we already have a moratorium on development. You know, we look around at the cities that are neighboring communities and we see what they're doing. And we see them passing Metro by. We've seen them passing by Everett, Malden, Somerville, Cambridge, Belmont, Waltham, Revere. The list goes on, the list goes on. Medford is no longer in the driver's seat. At one point in time, we were a community at first, and now we're a community that follows. So when I sit here and I think about, you know, how we can fix the process and change where we're at, it brings me back to the old saying, if you don't know what you stand for, you can't stand for anything. And, you know, we have a mayor here that runs on affordable housing. A mayor that says that her number one accomplishment was the inclusionary housing ordinance that I wrote. She runs on affordable housing, says that that's her number one success. Yet, when the reality is, there are three affordable housing developments in this community that she fights and takes it to litigation. So these are the things that I think Councilor Caraviello is talking about. It's a frustration because it's, don't look at what I'm doing, just look at what I'm saying. Because we don't have a leader, we don't have a public administrator or a municipal manager in the corner office. We have a social media influencer. That's what we have to do. Let's be honest. I mean, that's clear as day. That's clear as day. That's fact at this point. That's fact at this point. The city's falling apart. I'm going to go play rock, paper, scissors. I mean, come on. Enough's enough with this stuff. You know what I mean? Anytime something bad happens, there's a sign that says Maumau in front of City Hall and people are taking pictures. So when I talk about the direction that this community is going in, and I talk about what I think we need. The first thing we need is a municipal manager that knows what they stand for and where they stand. And then we need a vision for this community. And I don't think we have one of those either. So we can talk about all these consultants that come in and all the call-in center and this contract and this consultant that comes in to create a vision for you because you don't have one. Or we can take the reins of this process. Because for the last 18, 16 months, two years before that, we've been ignored. We haven't been given the tools to succeed. And it shows, because the city hasn't looked worse. The city hasn't looked worse. There's never been a partnership that's been this broken in this community in over four decades. And it shows, because the community looks awful. So I thank the council for taking the initiative to put a difficult topic to discuss on the agenda, but I thank him for knowing where he stands and what he stands for, because that's what this business is all about. All you have is your word in this business. That's the only thing that follows you around. In politics, the only thing you have is your word. If you're a person that keeps it, people keep you. If you're a person that doesn't keep it, the people get rid of it. The people aren't stupid. The people know what's going on in this community. And I thank the gentleman for bringing it up.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Thank you very much. I think it's important to point out also that this community needs at least, I'd say one and a quarter to one and a half percent of new growth annually just to sustain, just to sustain just to stay even. We need one and a quarter to one and a half percent of new growth each year, just to sustain. So when we talk about a project like the Boston Ab Project, it was going to bring an influx, an influx of money through taxation, through permitting, and more importantly, through the creation of jobs that pay a living wage, jobs that provide benefits for their employees, jobs that provide health insurance for their employees. Jobs are not a car dealership or a Dunkin' Donuts or a nail salon or a bank, which is, Medford's the capital of, I think, because, I mean, I think, what do we have, 27 Dunkin' Donuts in the city? There were 20, there were at least 20 Dunkin' Donuts in the city of Medford. That's our business model. That's our business model. But we have a property owner that comes before this council and asks us to support his project. He comes with representatives from the administration. We support the project, we give him the zoning. We carry him on our shoulders out of here like it's a big boom. He goes before the historical commission and they blow a $400 million project up over a garage that sits in the back of button train tracks that's fallen apart and decrepit. And their analysis, their analysis that they used was totally outside the scope of their authority in the ordinance. The historical commission is just one of many commissions that we have in this community, but it is out of control. Out of control. Well, it is. It comes back to smart growth and smart development. We can't grow and we can't develop smartly if our boards and commissions don't share a vision with the administration. And if the administration doesn't know where they stand or what they stand for, there's never going to be that shared vision. And that's where we are right now. That's what happens after three and a half years of no leadership. Thank you, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, this was a paper that was before us previously, and the administration had submitted it erroneously. There were a number of typographical errors that we asked for clarification. It's come back clarified. Ms. White's been waiting five years for her money. I think it's time we give it to her. So I move approval.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. I just want to join my colleagues in expressing my condolences to the family. Over the years, Stephen and I have become close friends and he's a great person. He was raised by two great parents and it shows. Stella's values show through and through in our son, Stephen. It's been a difficult time, as Councilor Scarpelli said, for the family and I just want to join in offering my well wishes to the family throughout this difficult time.
[Adam Knight]: If I'm hearing this correctly, I believe the gentleman just said that I'm sorry, I believe the gentleman just said this was, you know, look like it was going to be a purely residential project and then the reason they. developed with some sort of commercial component was based upon the wishes of the community of the city of Medford during the planning and development process. Is that correct?
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, because I remember when when this went through, and I think that that was part of the deal was that the city was trying to promote this mixed use development and adding commercial components to residential structures. So ultimately, this vacant retail space is actually a creation of our own public policy. I see no reason why we should stand in the way and I'd move for approval on that. I don't think this is an issue. I know this is a public hearing, but this is something I certainly don't have any problem
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor Knight, Madam President, thank you very much. Yes, I think it is important to point out you know the term paranormal is a dated term that's included in a zoning act and the question isn't whether or not they're performing functions that are paranormal in nature it's, you know, whether or not this function that they're performing where when it's best fit is underneath the zoning act right now that's what it falls under based upon the definitions that have been provided to us beforehand I certainly have no problem with the entrepreneur pursuing an opportunity to create a very successful business here in the city of Medford especially in a downtown district and that there is a market for this type of business I mean we see Salem Massachusetts for example with thrives on this type of business so I mean I wish you the best of luck and you certainly have my support.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight motion to receive in place a file, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. This is a project I'm very excited about. This is something that I think dates back to the Burke administration, and it's something that the director, the executive director, Director Driscoll has been keeping us very well apprised of over the years in terms of the progress that's being made in this project. I just want to commend him for the work that he's done. This is one of many funding sources that the Housing Authority has been able to utilize to renovate and revitalize the passes over there. And this project is going to be good for our community, good for our seniors, and it's going to be good in addressing some of the affordable housing shortages that we have here in the community. And for those reasons, I'll be supporting this paper this evening. When we look back at the application that's before us, what comes to mind for me is the multiple, five, six public meetings that we've had on this previously already to discuss what's going on, prepare us for what's going on. That's the way that financial management should take place in a municipality, especially one of this size. So, again, I commend Executive Director Driscoll. for all those work in keeping us informed and for seeing this project through from its beginning stages to its end. It's all too often that we see press releases that say what we're gonna do, but then we never see what we say we're gonna do get done. And I've always known Jeff to be someone that leads by results and not by press releases. And this right here is proof of the pudding, Madam President. So I certainly thank the Community Preservation Committee for their favorable recommendation and I move for approval on the application statement.
[Adam Knight]: you. Thank you very much. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Council night as the dissenting vote. I feel so. It's my obligation to explain where I come from. Why when voting against these amendments to, uh, these. Resolutions to move to amend that city job. Um from day one in my election to the City Council. I've always felt that the best path to try to change was through the time tested I don't support an abbreviated review. And I truly questioned whether or not people in power trying to expand their own power was the best course. And looking at the papers before us this evening, or the series of papers that are before us this evening, we still have the elephant in the room to deal with the fact that we have zero legal counsel at all to provide us with any support. The constitution of this community is the charter. And for us to move forward in haste without legal counsel providing advice, consent and direction, I think is something that we need to review with great caution and handle with kids gloves. So for those reasons and those reasons alone, I will be voting against this paper this evening. Since my election to the city council, there's always been some small movement in this community to review or amend the charter. And there's been small minority groups that have moved to try to collect the signatures to do such, and they have been able to do so, which tells me that there is a lack of interest in addressing the charter in this community by the general populace. And for that reason as well, I will be voting against this paper soon. I thank the Councilor for the work that he's done. I appreciate his initiative. You know, you got to start somewhere. And again, you know, it's almost what came first, the chicken or the egg. You know what I'm saying? We don't have the tools to address this. and he's put in the paper for this, trying to give us the tools, but it's really a philosophical and theoretical discussion as to how it feels the government should work and what's best practice for good government. So it's for that reason that I'll be voting against it this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much. I'm just thinking for, you know, this is a great school right I mean it's one of the most prestigious universities around you think these kids might not had across the street. You know, but with that being said, maybe we can we can ask our friends up at Tufts University to. have a class called look both ways before crossing the street. But I do commend the gentleman for putting the paper forward. But, you know, there has to also be some personal responsibility, I think, when it comes to pedestrian safety. And, you know, I think this is one of the perfect examples thereof. So with that being said, I'll support the paper this evening. But I don't think this is certainly a priority of the Council.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, on that, I just ask that any work that we do related to Riverside Avenue be coordinated with the MWRA and National Grid. If we think back, we had an opportunity to resurface Riverside Avenue for a significant stretch, I believe, from Freedom Way going up towards a narrow bread for lack of a better explanation. And the council was looking for some additional concessions curb stones and stuff like that. But ultimately, the MWRA and National Grid had a project that would have provided curb to curb resurfacing to that stretch of certain stretch of Riverside Avenue that was in significant need of disrepair for payout. the city council request that the administration move forward and resurface that roadway. That'll put us in a position where we'd have the five year moratorium placed on the road, and it wouldn't be able to be open. So we put ourselves in a situation where we had public utilities that were willing to resurface the roadway for free. And now we're doing it, we're paying for it, and we're locking it up for five years and preventing them from doing their underground infrastructure improvements. So with that being said, I just ask that the city engineer be provided with this information as well as Mr. Lasky over at the MWRA.
[Adam Knight]: So moved.
[Adam Knight]: Ultimately, Madam President, what it was, was a paper that was going to create a CAF 19 for the human resource directors position as well as other positions. But that position was included in the paper and that is a same or similar paper that has been rejected by this body and therefore is barred from introduction.
[Adam Knight]: It was taken off the table to be disposed of that it was disposed of and then it was reintroduced less than 90 days. So the council voted on it saying goodbye. And then the mayor brought it back, but the mayor brought it back before the cooling off period. I mean, we have rules, but we don't need them, right? And we could just throw them out. Ultimately, the rules are put in place is check and balance, you know, be sure that we stay honest and transparent.
[Adam Knight]: Clarification Madam President, so ultimately the paper was introduced this evening. I made a motion to have the paper ruled out of order. The paper was ruled out of order and now we're still talking about it. The paper's been ruled out of order. It's time to move on.
[Adam Knight]: Well, my question is this. If the paper's already been ruled on and it's been ruled out of order, what are we recessing on? Have you made a ruling? She did.
[Adam Knight]: The paper was out of order. That's it. That's it. That is all.
[Adam Knight]: Point of Parliament, we agree. Madam President, the paper has already been addressed.
[Adam Knight]: So the motion is... My motion is to... The question of the chair is whether or not the paper's out of order.
[Adam Knight]: So the paper will need a supermajority in order to move forward.
[Adam Knight]: Okay, just put it down a month ago. She just ruled it out of order.
[Adam Knight]: What was it the clerk puts out a report to do?
[Adam Knight]: We don't want them to forget Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Madam President, thank you very much. Ultimately, you know, we have two papers that are before us this evening, one paper for a loan of a sidewalks, and another paper for raises for non-union employees. And when I look at these papers, I say to myself, does our city need sidewalks? Ultimately, that's the first question. Does our city need sidewalks? Absolutely, our city needs sidewalks. Ultimately, this paper that's before us, I think, asks us to borrow more money than the city's been appropriating to repair streets in the community. They're asking us to borrow money. And, you know, I'm sitting there and I'm just thinking back months, Madam President. Months, we've been asking them where they're spending it. Why can't we be provided with the Warren articles? We've been asking for it since our prior finance director was run out of town under discrimination suits. All right, she was able to give it to us, no problem, with a push of a button. So I really don't understand this. You know, so when we talk about borrowing money, And we talk about an administration that prides itself on transparency, but this is the same administration that refuses to provide us with the documentation that shows where they're spending their money, as requested by the council on a number of occasions now, probably totaling in the double digits. It raises a red flag, Madam President. It raises a red flag. So when we talk about the loan, I talk about financial transparency and I talk about the request that this council has made. The request that this council has made for months and months and months upon end. And the answer that I get when I say, where is it? Where are the Warren articles? Oh, we don't have the time. We're too busy. Well, there are two non-union personnel in this room whose salary total about a quarter of a million bucks that are here before us for a raise, but they're too busy. to provide us with the documentation that we need. They're too busy to give us the papers that we've asked for. I mean, that's the excuse that we've been given, time in and time out. So they're not able to provide us with the simple financial data that their predecessors were able to provide us with, or willing to provide us with, maybe is more accurate of a statement. But yet, they're here asking for a race. So when I hear the term non-union, I think depominate. That's what I think when I hear the term non-union, depominate, because that's really what this is. This is a race for depominates. And when we look at this paper, and we examine this paper in its initial state, when it came before us, when the mayor tried to give herself a raise in this paper retroactively, without disclosure to the council, without a list of titles to the council, explaining what titles were going to be elevated. And this is the cost of living adjustment for non-union personnel, Madam President. This has nothing to do with the number of CAFRI classifications that the administration's put forward. Meanwhile, the administration's talked so braggadociosly about the opportunity to have a compensation study that's been forecasted from some grant that we were awarded. I don't see the compensation study, but week in and week out, I see titles that are coming before us for increases. Meanwhile, the rank and file workers, DPW, our police, our fire, our clerical workers, the people that we pick up the phone every day and call and say, can you fix this pothole farming? Can you do a wellness check on this family? I haven't seen my neighbor in a while. My father fell down, can you come help me pick him up? My basement's flooded, can you come over and help pump me out? Those are the people that aren't getting the raise. And the people that are getting the raise are the ones that aren't gonna provide us with the information that we need. I think this is backwards. I think a rising tide floats all boats, Madam President. But never ever will I put the management before the working people ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever. And that's what the administration is asking us what to do. And, you know, I certainly believe that non-union personnel in this community deserve a raise. And if you look at my track record, and you go back to previous administrations, you'll see who held up. a raise for non-union personnel when it wasn't equal to what union personnel were getting. When the prior administration asked non-union personnel to take a zero, I held it up. I wouldn't approve it. And I negotiated with the administration to defer that zero. So they took a zero one year and they deferred it and got a raise in the end that made up for it, Madam President. And everybody was whole and everybody was happy. There are ways to do this, Madam President. There are ways to work with labor. There are ways to work with the personnel in this building to make them happy, all right? There are ways to work in partnership and in concert with this council and with the people that are in this building, all right? I'd love to have a hands-on mayor versus a social media influencer. I really would. But at this point in this game, Madam President, where are we? We're no further ahead today than we were in January or the January before that. And for us to take these votes right now is going to send a message to those rank and file workers that have been fighting and struggling every day with the administration whose rights have been trampled to say, yeah, yeah, we hear you, but we really don't care. We're still going to reward them. And we're still going to give them their raises. And you'll get yours too, don't worry about it. If there's money left and she decides to appropriate it. So I can't, in good faith, Madam President, take these votes this evening. I want to support this paper to give the non-union personnel a raise. I want to support it when the time is right. The time right now is not right. I want to support. I want to support these sidewalks, because these are needs that our community have. These are needs that our community has. I want to support these papers, but I can't. I can't, in good faith, look at myself in the mirror tomorrow if I take these votes and vote yes, because I'd find it to be fiscally irresponsible. Fiscally irresponsible, because I've given this same goddamn speech week in and week out, asking about fiscal transparency, asking about where the money's being spent. And I get this, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. That's what I get. I get nothing but lip service and mumbo jumbo, Madam President. Nothing. I'm comfortable waking up in the morning, knowing that I took the good vote, knowing that I stood by my principles. No one that I'm not going to be walked over and pushed around. Not taken advantage of, taken for granted, and not being respected. Because that's what this is about at this point, Madam President. The rank and file workers not being respected. The council's not being respected. But we're being asked to do an awful lot. I don't think it's right, and I don't think it's fair. Thank you, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. A couple of things. First of all, the rank and file need it more. The rank and file workers need it more because they make less money. Right, the rank and file make less more. So, these races have a bigger impact on their life than they were in the department. Number two, we don't see our rank and file union workers getting reclassification requests presented to the city council. We don't have the FOB reclassification plan. The Friends of Brianna reclassification plan, depending on who you are and what role you're in, you might get a raise, you might not, you might get a reclassification, you might reclassify your title. Number three, Madam President, these non-union personnel do have a role in the breakdown in labor relations between the rank-and-file workers and the administration. You can't say that the chief of staff, that the city attorney, that the HR director haven't had a direct impact on the breakdown in the relationship and the morale with our rank-and-file workers in the fire department, in the DPW, in the clerical union. You can't say it, because we've seen them here expressing that. What was requested from the administration some 30 plus months ago was not a dearth of information. It was rather concise. A copy of the Warren articles once a month that shows us where you're spending the money. That's all we asked for. Now, usually when there's conflict, You don't have to act when there's conflict. You can take a step back and wait. So if your values are being conflicted, wouldn't now be the time to take a step back and not hurt anybody? Sit back and wait? Because that's what I'm comfortable doing this evening, Madam President. I don't want to vote him down. I just want him to sit right where they are. And let's see if some of these issues that we're talking about work themselves out. Because I'm not comfortable supporting these requests that are before us this evening, based upon the current events that are going on in this community, the circumstances that arise every time we request financial transparency, the circumstances that arise every time we request basic information. If we keep being the rubber stamp, we're going to get treated just like that, a rubber stamp, Madam President. I rest my case. We've debated this thing till we're all blue in the face. You know, it is what it is. It's a dead horse at this point in time, Madam President. But, you know, when I sat there and I looked at those workers that were standing here, the 200 workers that were standing here, and I told them I stood with them, I meant it. And I'm gonna stand with them. And that's where I'll stand. Point of information.
[Adam Knight]: Point of personal privilege on that, Madam President. Ultimately, the people that I'm trying to support in this community are the taxpayers, the people that put us here. That's who I'm trying to support because I see this lack of fiscal transparency as a problem. We haven't had this with any other administration. We've never had an administration run on a platform of transparency, and then shut all the lights off in City Hall.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Madam Superintendent, how does this application differ from years past and what changes were made based upon the feedback that you mentioned that you received? Obviously, we haven't been able to secure this. funding now for multiple years, we're getting feedback from the point the enabling authority. So what changes are we making to the application to maybe enhance our chances.
[Adam Knight]: So on that, Madam President, so the one difference, the difference is nothing other than the fact that we moved some items that were covered under the accelerated repair grant from last year over to the school grant. That's what I'm understanding.
[Adam Knight]: It's the same exact application as last year with the addition of these infrastructure items that were under the accelerated repair grant being moved over to this one. Is that accurate?
[Adam Knight]: The question they asked was, you know, how does this application differ from years past?
[Adam Knight]: So that one item, right, okay. All right, yeah, I was looking, because I had my files, I was looking, I usually have my files nice and organized, but I can't find the documents. Someone must have moved them, so that's it. But I was looking to see if I could look at last year's application and see if we could take a look at that as well. But I didn't have it in my files yet, because my filing system's a little screwy. But I'm looking at this so ultimately, this is the same application that we submitted last year with a couple of additions that application is the same application we submitted the year before.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. I'm just seeing, you know, a lot of money being spent that's not being spent in the classroom, and I'd like to take a look at that as we get prepared for the budget. Madam President, ultimately, you know, it's pretty cut and dry, right? It's an application we submit every year. All we're doing is asking for free money, so I don't see any reason why we shouldn't support it and move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, and looking through our responses that we received, I just like to point out, Council response to paper 23048 from my state delegation. This was a request made by the city council to ask that the dot and DCR provide some routine roadwork and. Representative Donato has gotten back to us, saying that both the DOT and the DCR have indicated that their repairs have been made. However, if we go right to this on-ramp right here, right beside City Hall, the repairs aren't done. So maybe we could just ask that the administration follow up on that request, please.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to revert back to regular order business.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, this is an issue that I've discussed in the past as well and I think it's really an issue of parking capacity, you know, we issue a permit to a repair shop, but we really don't put any restrictions or confines on parking capacity based upon the size of the lot. So if you drive down Mystic Gap, the first two shops you'll see in probably what Volsar and Atech. If you look at the parking lot at Atech, I mean, you can't fit a piece of paper between the cars in the parking lot there. There must be 35 cars in this very small parking lot. Now, you know, we approved the permit. I have no problem with these people trying to make a buck. You know what I mean? It's the American way. But, you know, at the end of the day, it's also creating issues where These lots appear overcrowded and unsightly. Mystic Avenue, for example, is a gateway road to our community. So we're going to drive from Somerville into Medford, and that gateway road is going to look like an industrial park, right? The condition of the roadway is bad enough as it is, but now to have, you know, unsightly businesses that really aren't a welcoming business to the community, I think is something we need to talk about as we go into our meeting tomorrow night. Also, it raises, I think, issues about safety, whether or not these lots are questionably safe. If you have a parking lot with 25 cars in there, how can you get a fire engine in there? These repair shops, they have flammables, they have combustibles, and it puts us in a position where we may be putting our first responders and our fire personnel at risk in responding to these, to cause these locations because of the overcrowding of the parking lots. So these are definitely things that we need to take into place. And I might just ask that this be set to fire prevention as well. So that fire prevention can be provided the opportunity to pipe in. It's all too often when we talk about permitting a new business, we talk about the parking and the impacts that it's gonna have on the community, but we don't really think about the impact that it's gonna have on fire safety and fire prevention as well. So I just ask that this paper be sent to the fire chief.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much and I think the council for bringing this initiative up by issue up raises a couple of interesting points. So, here in the city of Medford we have what's called the university accountability ordinance right as Councilor caveat noted down that provides us with a list of all the parcels were touched university students live in our community. And we also have another ordinance called the clean it or lean it ordinance. So I'm wondering how these two ordinances would combine and intertwine, right? If we actually sent our code enforcement officer out to remove the mattresses, could we then put a clean it and lean it on either the parcel or Tufts University where it's an extension of the campus? I mean, I think that it might make sense for us to try to see if that would be something we could tie to the university where we could use the clean it or lean it ordinance to see if we could get some relief in that regard. Tufts is pretty good at policing its own. There's no question about that. And if it comes down to us using the clean and lean and ordinance to promote and produce corrective action to bad behavior, I think Tufts would be on board because one thing they don't like doing is spending money. So with that being said, I think this is something that we can look at a little bit more. I'd like to get an opinion from the non-existent city solicitor. as to how these ordinances were intertwined and whether or not if we were going to utilize the clean, no-lead ordinance, would it be applied to the, could be applied to the university as opposed to the possible property owner? I'll put that in the form of an amendment.
[Adam Knight]: Just because the administration isn't doing their part doesn't mean that we can stop, we have to stop doing ours. So I'm going to continue to ask the questions.
[Adam Knight]: Whatever the board's comfortable with. Either way, it's one of the dozen of the others.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah.
[Adam Knight]: Whatever. I mean, at this point, it doesn't matter what we say. We're going to get what we're going to get, which is nothing. So, you know, I'll ask the question and let the administration, when they feel like we're going to have to do something with it, and whoever they send it to is fine with me because it's not going to move anyway, I'm pretty sure. Based upon my experience over the past 36 months. You're asking for a legal opinion?
[Adam Knight]: So the code enforcement officer can do that, but make a notification.
[Adam Knight]: Actually, Madam President, what I would do is I would draw and just ask for the code enforcement officer to report back to us. And then when we get that report back, we can look at it. And maybe by then I can have some answers as to what's going to apply in one month. That'll satisfy everybody.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, motion to send this back to the legal department. We have here a date of accident, February 3rd, 2021. Then when we read the description of the alleged claim, it says that the accident happened on or around March 8th, 2018. That's a big discrepancy. like to make sure if we're going to be spending money and this is a legal document, legal document that's going to be bound by law once the council approves it, that we're approving something that's accurate. And it doesn't appear to me that this is an accurate description of what happened when we have two different dates of accidents on the same document, which is, again, just another reflection as to why we should probably have an in-house city solicitor, instead of a hired gun that we're using to do all of our legal services for the mayor's office, as opposed to the city of Medford and its people. So with that being said, I'd offer a motion to send this back to the legal department for
[Adam Knight]: Can we just amend that to include judgments as well? Settlements and judgments.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, if we could just ask that the city clerk reach out to our friends at the American Legion to see what impact this will have on our election day operations as well, whether or not if those pocket spots are gone, the American Legion will still be able to continue to serve as a polling location during those days because they have operational needs to meet as well. So if they don't have those pocket spots, they might have to pull out of their agreement with the city to be used as a polling place. So that's something that I think we need to look into because we have an election coming up very shortly.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, on this issue, If we look at the agenda, I believe we do have some representatives from Eversource that are here. And the construction schedule is going to be something we're talking about. And as I'm looking at the handout that they gave us, it looks like they're going to be doing about 3,000 linear feet of milling and paving from Winthrop Street to Mystic Valley Parkway in the near future. So maybe we could hold the discussion on this topic until that comes up. Because it's brought under public participation, we can't make any motions. But if we bring it up underneath the Eversource paper, we'll be able to make some motions and have some action on it now.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much, and Mr. so thank you for a presentation once again this month. So you talked about some of the surrounding towns and I just want to get a good visual Can you explain, can you name some of the surrounding towns like Everett Malden.
[Adam Knight]: Medford. And I think Mr. Salt is important to point out the demographic differences of all these communities, right? So we have, we have more than ever, Chelsea, right? Then we have Newton, we have North Reading, right? Then we have Waltham, which is one of our number one comps. When we talk about what my community is doing, Waltham and Braintree are two that we always talk about. Waltham and Braintree do we always compare ourselves to. So when we look at what's going on, we're seeing that every other community can do it no matter what their demographic, right? Yes. No matter what their makeup or where failing. Correct. Can you tell me what the cost of a mediation would be?
[Adam Knight]: So we have five agreements in the city that are going to be going to mediation legal fees that are going to be paid privately because we don't have a city solicitor 50 labor charges five wage lawsuits and then
[Adam Knight]: And then a number of freedom of information requests that have gone unanswered. So we're at the Secretary of State's fighting for that.
[Adam Knight]: And a lot of the stuff that you request, I believe is necessary for you to have the proper information and tools to represent your membership effectively. So the way I'm looking at this, Madam President, what I'm seeing here is that this has become a situation where it's a refusal to provide information because they don't want you to be a strong advocate for your membership.
[Adam Knight]: really in some way. Well, Madam President, I thank Mr. South once again for coming up here and the advocacy that he's doing for his membership. It's not often, you know, I've been on the council for a number of years now, and it's not often to see this many people in the chamber. week in and week out, week in and week out, right, the issue needs to be addressed. I as one Councilor proposed it in the past and I still believe that this council should not approve any new positions in any reclassifications of existing positions until such time as the existing employees that we have in City Hall taken care of. That means that these contracts should be settled. We shouldn't be given any new, creating new positions or reclassifying existing positions until these people right here are taken care of. The five groups that are going to be going to mediation reach some sort of satisfactory conclusion that we can all live with. Because ultimately it's bringing the morale down in the city to the point where I wonder how these people get up every day and go to work because they're not feeling respected. They're not feeling valued. And that's not the values that we share. So I agree with the speaker. I mean, if it weren't for him coming up here every week and keeping the full court press on, I think this would be an easy walk for the administration. Steve's doing his job and he's really making us aware of a lot of things that are going on behind closed doors, things that we don't get to see. I know that this is the transparency administration, but it's not very transparent sometimes. And I thank him for taking the time, energy and effort to come up here week in and week out. I mean, the gentleman represents many, many, many, many units, not just Medford. But every time there's a meeting, he's here, he gives this time to come here and do this. And he's not wrong on top of it. He's not wrong. So again, you know, I'm of the firm belief that no new positions, no reclassifications until these contracts get taken care of. We need to take care of our existing employees. We need to show them that they're valued and respected. If the administration isn't going to do it, then we need to do it.
[Adam Knight]: I think the administration and KP law have been very clear that they don't represent the whole entire city they represent the mayor's office. Well they seem to be working for every department but they're only representing the mayor's, the mayor's interests, because they're the mayor's private lawyer, that's who their client is what so no one's representing the taxpayer.
[Adam Knight]: On that point though Madam President, the council passed an ordinance, probably 60 years ago, and the ordinance says there shall be a city solicitor. And the legislative intent is that for my research, behind that ordinance was to control legal costs so that we don't end up in a situation like this. So ultimately we have an administration that's working outside the scope of the existing ordinances. And she did take an oath to say that she would, to the best of her ability, uphold the ordinances of this community when she got elected to office.
[Adam Knight]: I'll just stop you for a second. Can we just talk about Boston Ave and High Street real quick?
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, if I may.
[Adam Knight]: Does it really make sense for us to even debate every single position? If we look at the report that the presenters have prepared for us, they tell us what the average weekday ridership is for each one of these stops. And I mean, if there's less than 25 people a day, I have no problem eliminating those stops. I think that, you know what I mean? If we really want to get this done, we're going to sit here and we're going to go over every single one of these things. And we're going to talk about the one elderly person that lives up on Winford Way that takes the bus obviously on an average 0.1 times a month, right? Why don't we just look at it from a ridership standpoint and say, if the stops aren't being used effectively or efficiently, right? Then just get rid of them. Right. And then when I think that, yeah, there's two conversations, there's the elimination and then there's the right, right, I think you get the eliminations for the easy, easy discussion.
[Adam Knight]: I just think, I mean, that would be my suggestion right now be anything with less than 25 per day, just get rid of. Well, I certainly have no problem eliminating those. Okay, anything less than 25.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, we don't have to do anything. All they're doing is giving us a presentation. They'd like us to do something. We don't have to do anything. I mean, what I'd like to see.
[Adam Knight]: So, I mean, what I'd like to see is that we do like a robocall like the mayor does for everything in the city when she has an opponent and says anybody that's in a bottle within what's the distance that she wants, 800 feet or something like that, that she proposed when she was on the council, anybody that's in that distance, we'll get a robocall and we'll discuss it. I'll get invited to a meeting and discuss that location. let the people in the neighborhood decide how it's going to affect them and the actual riders that are down there.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, I don't think anybody behind the rails opposed to the MBTA doing accessibility improvements. The gentleman explained it right. You know what I mean? I think he said that the PADI program is for the MBTA to provide accessible ridership. The bus network redesign project is a totally different thing. That's an operations thing, right? So the redesigns operations, this is to improve the network's safety infrastructure for accessibility. So, you know, I don't think we should get too crazy about it. They're willing to invest a lot of money in our community. They have engineers, they have the tools and the requirements to do it. So when it comes to that stuff, you know, I really don't have an issue with it. I think that, you know, the T has to comply, right? It's the subject of a lawsuit. So if we say no, what are you going to do?
[Adam Knight]: Could we do bump outs? I'm gonna say, can we not do bump outs? That's my position on this. Like every person that lives in that neighborhood's complaining about those lollipop sticks they put up there and the amount of traffic that it creates down there during rush hours. It's like... It's impassable in the morning. impassable the way that it's designed right now with those lollipop sticks.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. So how far is your obligation of accessibility? on city roadway when it comes to this project, right? So the bus pulls up, the bus stop, right? You're gonna go, it looks like everything's about eight feet in each direction, right? Is that about as far as you guys go? Because what I'd hate to see, right, is like you guys do the beautiful corner, right? And then it comes and it stops and it turns into a gravel pit all the way down the street, which is gonna be the city's problem or the city's responsibility, right? Because we've seen it in other places. If you look in front of Paul Revere's, they did the whole entire, over a couple of years ago, then they stopped. And when they stopped, it was like asphalt, potholes, tree branches all ripped up and everything else. And it really didn't meet the goal of what we're really trying to do. So when it comes to like the intersection improvements, like here, it looks like you go out a lot further here than you do over here. It looks like you're not going too far over here, over there, over here, over there. Which area, your scope of work, your work area scope, I guess, I don't know what you want to call it.
[Adam Knight]: Okay, so 40 feet is about that.
[Adam Knight]: I'm just talking in general, not just this particular site, but so it's 40 feet for where the bus stop is. And then if it was going, that seems like you're moving all the bus stops up to the corners.
[Adam Knight]: sidewalk repairs on the corners as well. How far down on the corner are you gonna go?
[Adam Knight]: And what's the gradient? The appropriate gradient.
[Adam Knight]: Great. Councilor Knight. On this location and on the Hastings lane location. across the street. Hastings Lane is a very difficult road to get out of. I grew up across the street. I grew up on Whitman Road, so I could see Hastings Lane from my house. I live on Whitman Street now. I drive through this intersection every day. Cars cannot get out of Hastings Lane as it is. The closer you move that bus to the corner, the hotter it's going to be. So if you're looking at where you're putting these two buses, You're moving one back closer to Woodman Street, one closer to Hastings Lane, so you're actually closing that side. Other way around. Other way around. Am I looking at this thing upside down? No, they're moving them farther away.
[Adam Knight]: Interesting. Oh, I'm sorry. To the dark blue circles. I'm sorry. I was looking at it the other way. I apologize.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah. These are complicated directions. I mean, yeah. It's a lot.
[Adam Knight]: Director of Transportation, done any community outreach to any of the neighborhoods about this? Or has this all been done through the MBTA's public participation process?
[Adam Knight]: My suggestion, Madam President, before we even take a position on this, that as a city, we do outreach to the residents that are going to be most affected by it. We've made preliminary recommendations that you can come back to us with their responses to those preliminary recommendations in the interim. We can do some outreach. It seems to me like the city's done no outreach to any of the residents in the neighborhood, so this is going to factor impact. Regardless of whether or not it's a third-party project or not, I think if we're using Eversource as the baseline or the example, we better do it different than we did it with Eversource. You know, we've gotten a lot of pushback and a lot of calls. I'm sorry. The Safer School Project from a lot of us that were in there, So I think if we're going to do this, Madam President, we should do our own due diligence as well. We will buy in a house, we wouldn't just take what the real estate agent was telling us, we'd do our own due diligence. I think that that's something that we need to do before we as a council take a position on it. I certainly don't have any opposition to many of the proposals that are before us. I think it's something that needs to be done. Don't get me wrong, but I also don't want to be the one that says, I can't believe you put that bus in front of my house. Oh, I didn't. You had an opportunity to come to 100 meetings. You knew about it. We reached out. We did our due diligence. I think that's important, especially with the lack of communication that we've been receiving from the coroner office for the past three years.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah.
[Adam Knight]: Great, thank you. Because I mean, ultimately the moratorium would come into effect right for the street opening moratorium. So these people wouldn't be able to get the street gets closed. They're not gonna be able to open the street for five years to get gas into the house. We gotta address this before this happens.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. If I could just reintroduce my motion that was made earlier in the evening during the public participation portion, that we reach out to the lead traffic engineer and to our representatives at EPSOS to see if the bike lanes that are taken with parking spots in front of those homes between Lawrence Road and High Street would be as a result of the mitigation package that was negotiated between the administration and the provider.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Bears. You're here to the Council President as well.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. I'm very thankful that Attorney Austin has finally given us a legal opinion, because every time we ask her for something, she scratches her head and says, that's council prerogative. I don't know. I'll look into it. I'll check it out later. But finally, she gave us a legal opinion. It didn't answer the question that we asked, because we didn't ask her to look at the council rules. We asked her to look at the city ordinances, and we asked her to look at the general laws. And this opinion is very, very narrow. And there's a reason it's very narrow, because it's not worth the paper it's written on. All right, these ordinances that this council puts in place to ensure that there's a city solicitor put in place with the legislative intent to provide a check and balance on the administration. It's a transparency issue. First and foremost, a transparency issue. So the mayor has the power to appoint somebody. She hasn't appointed a city solicitor. She's hired a private law firm. She said that her private law firm, the city ordinance say there shall be a solicitor. It doesn't say the mayor shall privately contract a firm. It says there shall be a solicitor and the solicitor will be compensated within the compensation schedule. The same schedule that she brought to us this evening to create another pet job for one of her friends. So when I sit here and I look at this, Madam President, it makes my brains boil because she sat up here and she promised. She made a promise to us. She promised us something. She cut a deal and the deal was that we'd have an assistant city solicitor. So whether her word isn't worth anything or just as much as the paper that Ms. Austin wrote her opinion on. But it certainly doesn't carry any weight in this room. When the mayor gives their word, in June. And here we are nine months later, and it still hasn't been carried out. Seven elected fish, seven of seven of the what 14 elected officials in this community at the local level. She gives seven of us her word. It was a lie. It was a lie. It was a lie. All right. It wasn't it's hot hiring people. I've never met a lawyer that went to law school, that had their own firm and they practiced law, that doesn't know another lawyer, that wants a part-time job making $125,000 a year with health insurance. I don't know a lawyer in the world that wouldn't accept that job that's out in private practice, that's out working on their own, that's out and hung their own shingle. I don't know a lawyer in the world that wouldn't do it. Maybe she doesn't know any lawyers. I thought she went to law school. I thought she practiced law. I don't understand how all of a sudden there's a shortage of lawyers in Medford, but not anywhere else. If you do the math, there's one lawyer for every 1,200 people in the state of Massachusetts. We have 6 million people. You do the math. You do the math, all right? It's nonsensical for us to sit here week in and week out and go through this. She's treating us the same way she's treating the workers in this community, the same way she's treating the representative from local 25, the same way she's treating the representatives from Massachusetts Teachers Association. All right, she's going to keep us in the dark and she's going to try to control the narrative. And that doesn't mean telling the truth. All right. It doesn't mean being transparent. It doesn't mean any of that. So we can keep sitting here week in and week out and wasting our time, really wasting our time, because we don't have the tools to build the house. We don't have the tools. She promised us the tools. She agreed with us. She sat here for 20 years and cried. Everything was awful. The city was falling apart. Mike McGlynn's the demon. Mike McGlynn's the devil. Roy Belson's hell incarnated himself. I never met two hard-working public servants that weren't afraid to be held accountable. They would come up here to this podium and answer the questions and give us the answers that we may not want to hear, but at least they showed up and they were present and they kept their word and they kept their promises. And enough's enough with this city solicitor nonsense. We don't have one, we need one, the ordinance say it's required. That's it. Madam Mayor, do it. Who can we even go to and say, what's our alternative? I'd like to speak to a lawyer to tell me what my alternative is. Can I have Ms. Austin's number? Hey, Ms. Austin, how do I get rid of you so that we can have a real city solicitor in this community? I mean, come on, give me a break here. Enough's enough with this nonsense. It's nonsense. It's nonsense. That door has not been opened. They said it's an open door, you can always walk in. Well, you can't walk in, it's not really open. You gotta call me and we gotta make an appointment. But, you know, we have an open door policy, but the door's not open. I don't even know what that means when she said it. I got a scratch on my head going, what's going on here? It's become so personal, so personal and so not about the city of Medford. When it comes to the workers in this community and Steve South, when it comes to people getting taken out of here by the police, people getting followed around with GPS trackers on their vehicles, people being required to undergo psychiatric evaluations. It's personal, Madam President. That's not government. That's not governing. That's politics and it's bad politics. And it translates into bad government. And that's what we have here in this community now. And you know why we have it? Because we accept the chief administrative officer of this community. We accept the fact that she came up here and lied, right? Threw her teeth to us. We're accepting that fact. We're saying, OK, it is what it is. Let's move on. What are we going to do? Well, let's ask her. Oh, she'll just lie again, right? I mean, enough's enough. Enough's enough. What are we going to do? What's the recourse? What's the game? What's the end game here? What's the end game? She ain't going to do it. We know she's not going to do it. Because her track record has proven that she will not. She refuses to communicate openly and transparently with this council about legal issues and financial issues. I don't know what else is important to us, but we control the zoning, which is a legal issue, and we control the budget, which is a financial issue. Other than that, all we are is a bunch of cheerleaders. All we are is the rah-rah squad. So I'm at a loss at this point in time. The lack of leadership that's come out of the corner office, the chief of staff doesn't come in to give us answers. When's the chief of staff have decided to give us an answer? She comes down to fight with us and yell and scream at us. She doesn't come down to give us answers. She comes down here to control narrative, control spin and not tell the truth. And we've caught them so many times lying. How do they expect us to have a relationship of trust with them? How? How is it possible? That's what I ask. Again, I think back to four years ago and how much better off this city was every single day. Every single, when I drive over that same pothole that's been on my street that I put through see click fix 27 times, right? I think about how much better the city was four years ago. And it makes me sad. It makes me sad to see how terrible the city looks, lack of curb appeal, lack of commitment or investment to deliver in public service, to deliver in simple basic public services. Like fixing a sidewalk, taking down a tree, fixing a pothole, striping a crosswalk. Enough's enough. I mean, when are we gonna wake up and realize that we're failing the people in this community? Because we are. Because when we go outside and we look around, it looks horrible. It looks horrible. We sat there and we listened to Mr. South tell us how Everett, Chelsea, Malden have passed us, how North Wedding, how Newton, how Waltham have passed us. And he's not wrong. And Stowe, Stowe, I know where it is. There's a golf course there. So at the end of the day, Madam President, we need to shed some light on some of the issues that are going on in this community. And the biggest failure that we have in Medford right now is the fact that we don't have a local newspaper to report on these issues. We have a communications director that gets paid $125,000 a year. to create new stories and to create spin and put spin on them however they want, and to go on every single social media platform in the world and run a campaign. and run a campaign, right? Because that's what it's all about. You know, the big hunt going on, right? Looking for Easter eggs up. It's spawned in a couple of weeks now, right? The bunny's going to be there. The bunny's going to be, how are people going to get there?
[Adam Knight]: I'm sorry. Is it a recreation bunny? Yeah, the recreation bunny. I'm sorry. The recreated bunny. So anyway, Madam President, as I've said, right, what's the end game here, we're going to keep talking about this and talking about this and talking about this, they're going to keep asking for money we're going to keep giving them. They're going to keep asking for reclassifications we're going to keep giving them. We got to stop, we're going to shut the water off at some point, it's at some point we got to turn the faucet off, and we got to say, come to the table and be serious with us. And quite frankly, unless we do that, they're not gonna be serious with us. Because every single group in this community that's organized, right? I look at us as like a bargaining unit, right? We're the Medford City Council bargaining unit. We're getting treated worse than every other unit in the city, just about. Every other one, because all those units are coming to us and asking us for leadership. And asking us to say, what do we do? What can we do? Help. And we look at them and we say, we don't have the tools to help you because the mayor led us to. And that's where we are. So we come down and we have two and three hour meetings and they give us a talk about what great crosswalks they're gonna paint on the NBA TA's dime. None's getting done. None's getting done. 30% design, remember that. That was 30% design. All that is is an idea right now. That's years from coming to fruition. So Madam President, I rest with this. The city ordinances say we need a city solicitor. We don't have a city solicitor. Why is the mayor found it okay to be a non-compliance with the ordinances of this community that are designed to be a check and balance against abuses of power? That's what I want people to think about. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilor Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to approve.
[Adam Knight]: Okay, thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Sorry.
[Adam Knight]: Stormwater, right? Yes.
[Adam Knight]: I just once again like to recognize Councilor Falco for his work on this paper, Madam President, he was the one that started this and, you know, it's one of those things where you start some good work and you're not necessarily around to see it finished and I just want to be sure that he knows that we're thinking of him, and this is a great success and a great piece of legislation.
[Adam Knight]: Falco Housing Trust.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I do believe about three hours ago, we started a meeting. And when this meeting started, this room was filled filled with workers that wrote the contract. Talked about five bargaining units in the city side at least, plus police and fire, that's seven. Seven bargaining units without contracts. We talked about transparency, we talked about finance, we talked about morale, we talked about the way workers are treated in the city. I made a pretty strong statement, Madam President, saying that I don't think there should be any more reclassifications of positions or creations of new positions until these contracts get settled, until these working people get taken care of. The existing employees that are doing the work now, that are going without a contract, a collective group of people, not just an individual, five bargaining units, all represented by one person, fighting every day. for groups and groups of people, just like we are, to get the same information that we're looking for, they can't attain. I don't think it's right and I don't think it's fair at this point in time that we bring this paper up, Madam President. I think the gentleman's doing a good job. I said that when this paper came up for first reading. I don't have a particular issue with the paper other than the fact of when it's presented, how it's been presented, and the ongoing situation with the labor and workforce here in the community of Medford. So with that being said, Madam President, I can't support this paper this evening. I'd like to, I'd like to support it in the near future, but I can't support it this evening. So I'd ask that it remain on the table. I know it's a contrary to the motion that's been made, but I might ask that it remain on the table until these contracts get adjusted. It's not fair to these working people. It's not fair for the mayor to pick and choose and pick and choose who's gonna get upgrades and who's not. It's just not fair. It's not right. It's not collective bargaining. That's not organizing. That's nepotism. I don't have a problem. Again, I don't have a problem with the individual that holds the position. I think he's doing a great job. But at this point in time, I think that there are other people that are a priority. And the mayor said that they don't have any money for raises. And the mayor said that she has double the amount of free cash that they've ever had in the past. That's probably because we spent all our alpha money, but that's a whole different story. So Madam President, with that being said, I think this paper should be on the table.
[Adam Knight]: It was used on these one offs to give the personal people raises.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. And I'm just saying, you know, when the mayor was running her staunch campaign two years ago, she was very proud of this grant that they got from the Collins Center that was gonna be a compensation and classification study that we still have never seen. But the mayor has proposed how many one-off positions to get raises? Well, at the same time, stonewalling labor, all right? So when we're putting the individual in front of labor, I think that's wrong. When we're putting the individual department head in front of the lowest paid workers, in this community, I think it's wrong, you know? So when we talk about, you know, the difficulty to fill jobs, I think it has less to do with compensation and more to do with the fact that when you Google Medford, you see that people gotta undergo psych evaluations, people having GPS trackers put on their car, people are getting banned from city hall, people are getting taken out in handcuffs. I think that's the stuff that deters people from coming. The people filing racial discrimination suits, against the administration. I think those are more deterrent than anything else. I don't think the compensation is necessarily the biggest issue. So when I look at this, I just say, I think it's backwards. I'm not going to vote for it. And it is what it is. I mean, ultimately, we've been hearing about this grant since Dave Rodriguez was up there about the compensation study, but none of us have ever seen a copy of it. But the mayor has proposed I get at least seven, at least seven position upgrades and new jobs. Plus whatever she created through the Apple money that we don't even know about. Just one last point. So when we talk about the fact that you can't say that not approving this raise isn't good for the community. How do we know that when there's only a finite pool of money that we have to elevate the workers? And we're using this finite pool to elevate individuals versus collective bargaining organizations, groups that have ownership in their work. It seems to me like if you talk back, you don't get a race. If you're a loyal soldier, then you might get an upgrade, right? That's what it looks like, right? If you fight for your rights, you're gonna be going to mediation. If you keep your mouth shut and you're a loyal soldier, we're gonna give you an upgrade. If you are the federal funds manager and you come before the council and you say, whoa, whoa, whoa, something's wrong here during the budget debates, you get fired. So those are the things that I look at when I talk about fairness and the way that it's going. But again, you guys know where I stand on this. I've talked about it too much. I rest my case. Thank you, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information just on that, my buddy Biggie, I think it was Biggie Small, more money, more problems, right? I don't think, more money's not gonna make any happier, all right? It's just gonna make you better compensated. But if the environment's hostile, right, how do you address it? Oh, yeah, take more money and let me be evil to you? You know what I mean? I don't think that makes sense either.
[Adam Knight]: Just one point of privilege. I think it's also a point to point out that this isn't the race. This position is going to get upgraded. Then it's going to get the raises. And then the question is, are these raises retroactive? Or do the raises only begin when we create the position?
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Growing up in West Medford, I too had the opportunity Knowing Joan Gatto for a number of years, I grew up with her daughter, Julie, and I actually was at her daughter, Julie's wedding when she married my dear close friend, David Topper. And over the years, she's been a fixture in the West Medford community, a fixture at the St. Raphael's Parish, and someone that's always been willing to put herself out there for the community, a volunteer, someone that puts her money where her mouth is. She puts community first. And when you go down to her muffin shop in West Medford, you can see that it's a place where relationships are made. where communities developed, and it's really something that makes Medford a great place. It's really something that helps build the fabric of our community. So I thank her for all the work that she's done. As Councilor Caraviello said, the chamber couldn't have picked a better selection this year, and I congratulate her.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Yes, this is a request for the administration to provide us with a dollar for dollar breakdown relative to all upper expenditures to date. It's been brought to my attention that there was some concerns relative to the way that our funds are being expended. When we had our previous federal funds manager in place and that's my understanding that there's some litigation that's going on relative to the separation of the prior federal funds manager in the city right now, related to some of the directives that she had received and whether or not they fell within the compliance of the operative directives that were issued by the Feds. So what I'm asking for is a dollar for dollar breakdown to be sure that the money is being spent in accord with the federal requirements, Madam President. Ultimately, there are certain places that money can't be spent. For example, it can't be spent for legal services. So I'd just like to be sure that the money is being spent where it's supposed to be spent. It was a lot of money. We spent a lot of it. It seems like the man wants to spend a lot more of it this evening. So if that's the case, I want to be sure that we have a strong financial auditing and accounting of it.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. These aren't the run-of-the-mill portals. These, I think Mike, if you fell into it, you'd end up in Australia. These are the deepest portals I've ever seen in my life. They're definitely something that could damage public safety vehicles, ambulances, police cars, fire engines, and the like. We've seen tonight that we already have a request from the administration to spend some money to purchase some new public safety vehicles. And I think it would be safe to say that the conditions of our roadway have an impact. on the wear and tear of the vehicles. These departments operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year, and the conditions of our roads have a direct impact on the quality of our vehicles and the longevity of their routes. So with that being said, Madam President, I ask that the administration go down there in the interest of public safety and take care of these puddles.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Yes, on Doonan Street, a washing machine, looks like a living room set, bed. We're all spread out between those, say number 16 in the corner of Highland Ave. So when you take a look at what's transpired, let's say around February 28th, this was reported through C-Click Fix. Around March 7th, it was acknowledged by the administration. And to date, as recently as two days ago, the resident has said that those materials still lie outside their home. So I'm hoping the administration will get on this as promptly as possible. This is an illegal dumping issue. It's not something that's uncommon throughout our community, especially on roadways that abut state-owned and controlled roads, especially on properties that are French properties on the Metro Malden line as well, and that's some of the line. So with that being said, I'd ask that the administration take the necessary steps to address it.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I just ask that on a second, a side note or a side motion that this paper be sent to a director of the Board of Health to see what impact if this paper is passed at the state level, what impact it will have on our road and control ordinance here in the city of Medford, and whether or not we can take the steps that are raised in this ordinance at the local level, because that's really what we are as local officials, not state officials. We all know how I feel about sending this stuff up to the state house if they're not gonna give us money, or we're not asking for money. But with that being said, if we could send it to our Director of the Board of Health, so that they could review our existing ordinance to see how that complies.
[Adam Knight]: So that's just my update on that counter night, Madam President, I was wondering why it's taken 10 months since the mayor sat up here and told us that we were going to be able to get an assistant city solicitor and continue our zoning work but I think you answered the question it's been time Alicia is involved so of course it's going to be 10 months. Right, but ultimately the zoning falls under the purview of the city council. All right, and this is something we requested 10 months ago, and this was part of the deal that we made we negotiated settlement of the budget. So here we are now with two months left in the fiscal year, right two I'm sorry two months left in the calendar year and 10 months ago we made this deal, and we still move forward. All right, so it's just another indicator. that the administration is not going to cooperate with city council just another indicated the administration is not willing to provide us with the tools that we need to succeed. The administration needs the hand and everything they need to control everything that's going on. All right. I can't believe that we were able to get the zoning actually I can't believe it you know why because it was under the prior administration. That's why we're able to get the zoning completed that we got completed because the process started under a prior administration. Under this administration, we have not been given any transparency or any of the things that we have promised. And it's ridiculous that Councilor Caraviello needs to bring this up now, 10 months after the budget. As we sit here and we wait, we twiddle our thumbs and say, when can we get to work on the issues that really matter to this community? On the issues that are gonna generate revenue, right? On the issues that are gonna create jobs and on the issues that are gonna be the bridge to our future. I thank the gentleman for bringing it up.
[Adam Knight]: But to that point, right? Why is it growing into something that needs to go to the RFP process, right? When it's legal contract, it's legal services contract, doesn't need to go out to bid. We know we want Mike Wabrowski. Now we're going down this road, right? We're going down this road because they're trying to grab a job out of it. They're trying to create a new position out of it.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, I made the motion Madam President, I made the motion for us to go down the coast of reclassification and not rezoning. I did it and I made the motion and I believe the motion said as phase one of a two part project and that was then. Right, right.
[Adam Knight]: So what I'm saying is what the heck, what's going on with this administration. What is going on in the time that they've been elected, they haven't had a full staff of senior officials. And over three years, they haven't had a full complement of senior staff.
[Adam Knight]: I'm not asking her to do it.
[Adam Knight]: But I'm asking the assistant city solicitor that the mayor said she was gonna hire to do it. And she said she was gonna do that in June. And here we are in what, March now, we still wanna have the assistant city solicitor. I'm not asking director Hunt to do anything.
[Adam Knight]: If it's the first and the third, I'm good, but you know what I mean? Then if we're supposed to be off the second, you know what I mean? I get some childcare issues. I have a young family, you know what I mean? So I'm trying to do the best I can, but I can always come on Zoom. So you know what I mean? But Wednesday shouldn't be a problem.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, um, you know, I really don't think this should be about politics at all. Right, it should be about the city of Medford, and what's the best course for our city, what's our city's best course. Right. And ultimately, you know, Council of business right. All right. I don't think this is bad politics though. I think this is bad governing. That's what I think I think it's bad governing I don't think it's bad politics, I think it's bad governing. All right, it's not political at all. It's not political at all. It's bad governing. It's bad governing. And bad governing leads to bad outcomes. And that's what we're getting. So when I sit here and I think back, am I better off now living in the city of Medford than I was four years ago? What do I say to myself? What do I say to myself? I say, we have teachers taking a vote of no confidence in the school committee and the mayor. We got kids in our schools getting stabbed. Every street you drive down, you can't even, you can't avoid a pothole if you wanted to. We're failing in the delivery of city services. We haven't had one successful construction project since Mayor Burke closed the books. We're bringing out a brand new plan, a brand new plan for Medford Square that they took off the shelf when Stephanie left, blew the dust off of and said, it's mine. Is that it right there? Exact same proposal that was there from before, right? You know, it's not bad politics, it's bad governing. And bad governing leads to bad outcomes, and that's what we're stuck with right now.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe the paper before us as to whether or not we want to have a committee of the whole, no more, no less.
[Adam Knight]: My point here is, if anyone will share what type of communications with this.
[Adam Knight]: This administration has been horrible to the working people in this community. Absolutely horrible. All right, absolutely horrible to say it's all Steve salts, making stuff up is an absolute joke. An absolute joke. They're putting GPS trackers on people's personal vehicles. They're hiring private investigators. It's absolutely they just drove their own HR director out of town. Come on, continue.
[Adam Knight]: I believe I'm a Councilor and this is a council meeting. And as a Councilor, I have what they call a bully pulpit. All right, I have that. And that comes with the honor and privilege of being elected to represent the residents in this community. I need 5,000 votes and I got them. She only needs one, the mayor, and that's it. All right, so the only person she reports to is the mayor. But the people that I report to are the taxpayers in this community. I don't get in my car and drive to my suburb.
[Adam Knight]: Does that mean that the administration will not be giving us that report?
[Adam Knight]: Point taken, I hope you do.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, if I may.
[Adam Knight]: Tim, this is a paper that I think you're well aware I've supported in the past, I've led debates on in the past in support of it. I think it's something that we need, as Councilor Caraviello said, and I too share the same concerns that he has. I know the city needs it, but as someone who's very concerned about the lack of fiscal transparency and financial constraint that we have in the city, about our administration's inability to provide us with simple documentation as to where they're spending their money. And we've been waiting since January of 2020 to get that and still haven't received it. Speaks volumes, speaks volumes. Everybody says when you can't get an answer to something, you follow the money. And for three years, I've been trying to follow the money. and I'm getting stonewalled. And I don't know why, I don't know why, but it leads me to believe that there's something strange going on. The fish is rotting in Denmark or whatever they say, right? Now, I think you're doing an excellent job and I think you've done a great job with that department. And I think you've really moved it ahead, all right? And my vote this evening has nothing to do with you, with the job you're doing or with the department you run. My job really has to do with the fact that, you know, the first day, of January, when we all stood behind this rail, the first thing that we did was we raised our right hand. And we raised our right hand and we said that we're gonna do our best to uphold the Constitution in the United States of America, the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the ordinances in the city of Medford. So we sit here and we look at this paper that's before us and it's a loan order. So this is a loan order, it needs five votes. per state law. Pursuant to city ordinances, the city shall have a city solicitor, and the city solicitor is responsible for reviewing all legal instruments, a loan owner being one. We have no city solicitor. So we have no city solicitor that's here that works for the people of this city. We have a private law firm that's already come forward and said they work for the administration, but we have no attorney or solicitor for this community that works for the people of this community. All right, and that's been stated by legal counsel that we're paying. I don't know how much we're paying them, Some have set up to $2.7 million. KP law has been paid so far this year. That's a lot of money. I don't know if it's true or not. I'd love to know if it is or not, because I've been asking for the paperwork to look at it, but I just can't seem to get my hands on it. So ultimately, you know, we have a lack of fiscal transparency. We have an administration that comes forward for job classification changes every other week to create new positions and give certain and select individuals raises. All right, so when I'm sitting down and I want to look at the full financial picture of this community and what's going on, And I wanna say to myself, this is where the money's going and this is where it's being spent. I can't do that. So it's very difficult for me to sit down and take a vote for $1.5 million of borrowing. This isn't our money that we're spending. This is money that we're asking somebody to give us that we're gonna have to pay back. All right, so it's very concerning to me. I feel like you're a sacrificial lamb sometimes when you come down here. I know that you're working with one hand behind your back and I know that this stuff would be helpful. But I also know that as a financial stalwart for the taxpayers of this community, the people in the city deserve better. So it's very difficult for me to take a vote where I'm not confident that it complies with the ordinances in our community. And I'm not so certain as to what our actual fiscal picture is right now. It makes it very difficult for me to make this vote. And I know what's gonna happen. The next time somebody calls the mayor's office and they say, I need my sidewalk fixed. Well, the city council voted against the money, so you just got the way. That's what it's gonna be, right? Because it's not about governance, it's about politics, right? We went over this already. It's about politics, not governance. Governance versus politics is a big difference. So for those reasons, I can't support the paper this evening. I'd like to see a table for 90 days and maybe we can take it back up in June.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, motion to suspend the rules to take the fire engine paper, please.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Can anybody tell me what titles are covered under this before us this evening?
[Adam Knight]: It's kind of important for us to look at that. Go ahead.
[Adam Knight]: I don't know how you'd like to- I'll be honest with you, Madam President. You're asking us to spend 80,000 bucks on.
[Adam Knight]: I appreciate the financial transparency and the fiscal constraint that the administration has shown us by offering this paper with such a paperwork that supports it. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Well, we can separate, but I have a legal question on that. I don't think we can vote for our own raise. I think we need to vote for a raise to go if it's for this body that we serve on. I don't think we can vote for it in this term. I think it has to be a term that we're not in or it's an ethics violation.
[Adam Knight]: Oh, that's what this is photo proof of first reading and we didn't have a print out of the names on the list. I'm saying this is crazy. I feel like we've been kind of, they kind of tried to pull the rug underneath our feet here and stick a paper in front of our face to give the mayor a raise and never said it was for the mayor. And now all of a sudden, we're finding out that the 11th hour, Madam Chief of Staff, do you have your hand raised.
[Adam Knight]: No.
[Adam Knight]: It's never going to get worse bad politics is not going to translate the bad governance, we're going to make sure that you guys are safe.
[Adam Knight]: Tim. Yes. We absolutely stink at street sweeping. We are awful at it. It is something we are not good at in this city at all. I'm looking at this expense and I'm seeing it total more than half of the total expenses before us. I'd like to see us get 10 trucks and forget the street sweeper. Quite frankly, I don't see any value in the program that we're running right now. I think it can be done much better and probably cheaper privately. You know, so when I look at this and streets we've been since since you've been here, since you've lived in the city street sweep has been an issue. We are not good at it this twice a year thing is a waste in my opinion I don't think it does anything to help beautify the city. I don't think that it really meets any objectives and goals other than making people totally angry because of the notification system and the getting told I'm not getting told some streets do some streets don't. It's just a haphazard application. You know, you're in zone one today and we're doing the best we can with what we got without the full blown program. We're just not good at it. We're just not good at it. Is there you know, I'm one that would never say send something out unless we're replacing it with something we're doing in-house. But I'm thinking the amount of money and funds that we spend on the Street Sweeper program could probably be better invested if we gave it, put it out, it could probably be cheaper. And then we could do more internally, hiring more equipment and trucks and plows and stuff like that. I mean, I'm looking at this and I'm saying, the thing really, it comes out twice a year, right? The Street Sweeper?
[Adam Knight]: But I live on a main drag, and I'm gonna tell you, last year it didn't come out every night. The year before that, it didn't come out every night. You know what I mean? Because I live on a main drag.
[Adam Knight]: There's a schedule. Right. So why can't I, so I get a pack of restrictions on my street, it's supposed to get swept, but it doesn't get swept. But you know what I mean? It's not a good program.
[Adam Knight]: Yes. This paper that's before us this evening is attached to a paper that we voted on previously. The paper that we voted on previously requires three readings. So I'd ask that in the paper that we voted on previously, we amend it. So the dollar figure is not gonna be the same. So I'd ask that this paper be tabled and that the administration give us an amended paper that reflects the appropriate dollar figure based upon the vote that the council took earlier, excluding the mayor's office and the city council from the cost of living adjustment that the mayor's office proposed for themselves.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor Knight, Madam President, thank you very much and I think the administration putting this paper on this paper reflects a resolution that I had filed back in 2018 when I requested that the Burke administration create a stabilization fund, and I'm the basis behind that request at the time was that it was the best practice of municipal government is published by the Massachusetts, Massachusetts Municipal Association. as well as GAAP. All right. But what they also said was that as part of this best practice is that you should put between five and 8% of your total operating expenses into the stabilization account. So right now we have a $200 million operating budget. So 5% to 8% of that would be anywhere between 10 to $16 million for us to make this a sustainable account for stabilization purposes. So I think this misses the mark a little bit here, Madam President, and I too also feel as though we need to have a meeting to talk about a little bit further in depth, because if we're going to go through the process of creating a stabilization account, we want to make sure that it's viable and that it meets the standards of best practices. Ultimately, this is a bank account, it's a savings account is all it is. And if you want to take money out of it, you're going to have to get a two thirds vote from the council to do it. So I think this is a good thing, quite frankly, because I think, you know, it only takes four votes to spend the money. to get it out of this account. So that's something that I think is beneficial to the taxpayer in this community. So with that being said, I thank the council for bringing up the motion to send this to a committee of the whole and I look forward to discussing the paper. I'm excited about seeing it finally come to the floor.
[Adam Knight]: That wasn't a motion to amend the paper to $1, was it? For the administration?
[Adam Knight]: That's the mayor's paper, so I don't know if the mayor was amending the paper to $1. I misunderstood, I'm sorry.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I believe we're coming off, maybe a second or third 10 year contracts with our rubbish hauler right now. And I just like to request a copy of the legal opinion from the city solicitor that says that we're required to take this vote, because I believe we've taken this vote previous previous Council's taken this vote that votes dance. So the city solicitor could provide us with a legal opinion and as we stated the city solicitor is required to approve all these contracts to form the city is also required to approve all legal instruments in this matter before us here is a legal instrument so I'm hoping the city solicitor can give us an opinion as to whether or not they feel as well this council has to take this vote or whether or not the previous vote the previous councils have taken still stands, because this is going to come up on other matters. We have a trash contract we have a cable contract for example, which is another one that comes up in the council in the past has given the authority to the mayor to enter into these 10 year contracts it was one vote that was both stood in perpetuity until the council rescinded that authority. So I just asked if we could get that legal opinion as to whether or not the council spinning his wheels there and doing something that's already done, whether or not our city solicitor is provided can provide us with a legal opinion
[Adam Knight]: Oh, I think that there is a standing legal opinion from a prior city solicitor. And we have a public records retention law, so I'm pretty sure that that opinion would stand because that was the solicitor and we don't have one now.
[Adam Knight]: a date on it, one of the people in the text club puts a date on it, it'll, it'll happen. But you know what I mean? I know if I do it, I'm not going to get a date, sir. I'm not going to get any information from this administration.
[Adam Knight]: Set a precedent. Anyway. So every other paper that ever came would set a precedent now. So every other authority that we ever gave for contracts longer than three years, they'll have to come back to us. So it'll set a precedent. Interesting. Okay. So that's the cable contract. That was the parking contract. That was, you know what I mean? That's the trash contract. So it has an effect.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, the issue that's really before us here and the only thing that we as a body can do is authorize the mayor to enter into a contract that's in excess of 36 months or not. All right, if we authorize her that power we authorize that power if we don't, we don't. Ultimately, if we give her the 10 years. or whatever term that we deem appropriate, the mayor is still the chief negotiator in this community. So it's not like we can say, oh, we don't like this, and we don't like that, and we don't like this, take that out of the contract, and we're gonna give you the 10 years, right? It's either, she's the one that negotiates the contract, she's the chief negotiator, right? So when this happened with the parking contract, it turned into a nightmare. And the reason it turned into a nightmare was because we're not gonna give you the approval to enter into the contract, unless you take this out, unless you put this in, unless you do this, unless you do that. We took over the role of the chief negotiator, and it turned into a disaster, all right? It was an absolute disaster. So ultimately, the only issue that's before us is whether or not we want to allow the mayor to enter with a contract that exceeds the term of 36 months, right? At this point in time, I'm not comfortable with that. And I think that's really the issue, that's the only issue that's before us right now. I'm not comfortable taking that vote because I don't know legally what the ramifications are, but I'm very concerned about what could happen when we give her that authority. What happens if we give the authority to enter into a 10-year contract and now next thing you know, we're paying a trash fee? Right now we have free trash pickup. Other communities have a trash fee. And we just gave her the authority to do that for 10 years. Maybe the term's not going to be so favorable. So those are the things we got to think about. And right now in this stage in the game, I'm not too keen on thinking about them. I think that the administration should put out the RFPs and let's see what comes back. Because most likely what's going to come back is an RFP that's going to say, we want 10 years. Can you get the vote?
[Adam Knight]: There is nobody in this building that can give us, hello, any legal opinion in this building. Nobody in this building can give us a legal opinion as to whether or not we can even do that.
[Adam Knight]: We don't need to make it this big, long-drawn-out thing. We'll table it. Someone takes a motion, take it off the table. It comes off the table. We don't need to turn it into this big thing. I mean, if they get us a legal opinion, they get us a legal opinion. Not sure we're gonna get it, but... You know what I mean? Yeah, I would...
[Adam Knight]: The city one is a clearly specify that the city needs a city solicitor. And they say that the city solicitor is the only person in the city. who can approve an illegal instrument, that can approve a legal instrument. All right, that's every contract, every collective bargaining agreement. All right, anything that goes, any local option that we take and send up to the state house. All of that needs to be approved by a solicitor, a city solicitor that we don't have, because she just said the position's vacant. Well, our ordinance says it has to be filled. And our ordinance says that that's the person who's responsible for these major duties and responsibilities in this community. This position has been vacant for so long. If they just filled this job, We wouldn't have these fights, we wouldn't have these arguments, we wouldn't have these issues. If the mayor just did what you said she was going to do in June, and hired an assistant city solicitor to the council, we wouldn't have these issues. We wouldn't have them.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. I'd like to echo the sentiments of my fellow Councilors, Paul Howard was a great man, I someone that I had the pleasure of getting to know at a very young age picture Mr. Howard. 50 plus years old, playing full court basketball at Carr Park with, you know, 20, 25 kids between the ages of 15 and 25 years old and absolutely dominating. Paul was an amazing athlete. His accolades on the basketball court for Somerville High School back in the 50s and early 60s is something that I talked about very, very fondly to this day among my father and his friends. And whenever Paul Howard's name come up, They always speak of his work ethic and the type of gentleman that he was, just a kind man that went to work, put his head down and did the right thing. He's someone that's going to be sadly missed in this community, and I'm very lucky that I had the opportunity to call him a friend.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Again, Bob Maloney Sr. was a gentleman that I had the opportunity of developing a great friendship with. I remember fondly the summer of 2005 after the passing of Senator Shannon and I was working on the Callahan campaign for State Senate and Bob Maloney Sr. was in the office every single day making phone calls and we'd go out knocking on doors and he had such a way about him, you know, he was great. He'd walk up to the door, he'd knock knock on the door and he'd say, Hey, I'm Bob Maloney. I'm the city councilor from down here in this neighborhood. And this is the guy we're supporting for city council. So we're going to, for our state Senate. So we're going to put a sign on your front lawn and we're going to get you to vote for him. All right. Okay, Bob, no problem. And they'd walk away. The guy was amazing on the street. He was one of the best campaigners I've ever seen in my life. And he raised a great family of public servants that are following in his footsteps. To Gordon, to Sean and to Bobby, my deepest condolences. You're all great friends and it's very sad to lose a man of your father's stature, but he's in a better place now. And I thank the Lord and I thank you guys for your friendship and for the opportunity to have stood beside your father during a period of time where we were able to have a lot of fun.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to sever the amendments.
[Adam Knight]: Separate. Just one by one. Okay, that's fine.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. First of all, I'd like to withdraw my motion to seven amendments. And second Council business motion to approve the first reading. After taking a how to look at the amendments that he's made I don't see any reason to seven. This is something that I think we need to also thank our friend john Falco for because Council Falco was the person that kicked this off. And this wouldn't have gotten as far as it had if it weren't for john's diligence and john's work on this particular issue when he served as a member of the city council. So with that being said, Madam President, I support the paper and I thank the gentleman for his amendments.
[Adam Knight]: Don't encourage me, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: I'd love to speak, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: The paper before us is a paper where I question whether or not it's in proper form. If we look at the Medford City Council rules, Rule 30 will read that every order before a bond issue shall before its passage be referred to the city solicitor, who shall forthwith examine the same as to its legality and notify the council in writing of its findings. The city solicitor is a position established by ordinance, Madam President. Section 2-651, city solicitor. There shall be a city solicitor. We don't have one. Section 2-654, duties to legal instruments of the city solicitor. The city solicitor shall advise and cause to be drafted bonds and other legal instruments of whatever as required by the mayor or the council. Again, the city solicitor did not draft this paper because we do not have one. KP law is time and time again, confirm that they are not the city's attorney. They are the mayor's private legal counsel. Their client is the mayor, no more, no less. I question as to whether or not this paper meets the legal standard of merit and would move to have it sent to the Office of the Attorney General for an independent review.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor Knight. To that point, Councilor Benson, thank you very much. Can KP law serve as the assistant city solicitor? Because based upon the ordinance that this council passed at some point in time, it says there shall be a city solicitor, and there shall also be an assistant. And when there is no city solicitor, the assistant shall be appointed solicitor. That's what the ordinance says. So can the mayor unilaterally hire a law firm to work and be compensated at a rate of pay and a scale of pay far outside the compensation schedule that's established by the ordinance? I don't think she can. I don't think she can appoint a law firm into a position that's defined by ordinance with a salary attached to it. And we have to, at some point, bring this to a head. You know, six months ago, seven, eight months ago now, we sat here and we debated a budget. And like you said, the mayor said, oh, no problem. We're going to have assistant city solicitor for you guys. We're going to post it. It's going to be an in-house position. We still don't have it. And we still don't have it. That was all smoke to get the budget passed. You know, the mayor never had any intention of filling that position because if she did, it would be filled. Um, you know, so that's, that's why I raised the issue. I mean, we, we have no guidance whatsoever. You know, we're like the clown show, you know, we sit here and we talk and we have great ideas. And, you know, we want to follow through and we'd be very productive if we had the tools that were necessary to get the job done, but we don't. And it's very frustrating to not have those tools, especially when we have such a talented group of people that could do such good work, you know? So, you know, it's time we bring this thing to a head. does the city of Medford require a city solicitor? The ordinance says it does. I don't know why there isn't one. And if we don't have one, then there's a problem because there hasn't been one for quite a long period of time, which means that we're operating outside the ordinance, outside the defined parameters of how our government's supposed to operate. You know, that's like saying there's supposed to be a secretary of state, but we're just not going to have one. So that's why I raised it. And to the point of the paper before us, I support the paper and its theory. We need this equipment. We need these jobs to be able to be performed in-house. We need to get this done. But we also have $700,000 of a $1.5 million appropriation that we made last year that still remains unspent. You know, so in that regard, I think that, you know, we're not going to be in that bad of shape to put this off. You know, we want to wait a week. We're not going to get a response in a week or two weeks. We're not going to get a response by March 14th. You know, you know, it's going to take at least 30 days to get a legal response from the attorney general's office, you know, but, you know, it has to come to a head at some point. You know, when I support the paper that's before us, you know what I mean? You look at the capital plan, you know, you see these things in there. So it's not something that we haven't planned for. You look at the funding sources, that's a little different. You know, when you look at the funding sources in the capital plan, most of it says that it's going to be general fund debt. It's not going to be something that's borrowed. So, you know, that's where in lies the rub. But ultimately, In theory, it's a good paper, but in terms of process and procedure, this is something that we need to address. And I think that this is a way that we can do it.
[Adam Knight]: We did say that during the budget hearings that we didn't like the setup. And that's why we agreed to pass a budget when the mayor said that she was going to provide us with an assistant city solicitor that works in the building for the city council.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, it's not a big deal.
[Adam Knight]: Motion, keep them all together, we can vote them as one package.
[Adam Knight]: approval as amended. No.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, we're into suspension.
[Adam Knight]: We also have paper 23057 which is really similar subject matter, and that circumstance we had an opinion from the acting city solicitor at the time was in house in our city solicitor will give us an opinion relative to the way that these promotional advancements and salary increases should be implemented. We then received an opinion from KP law and then a revised opinion from KP law. again, KP Lawyers stated that they're not the city's attorney, they're the mayor's private attorney. They've given us two contrary legal opinions to the standing and acting legal city solicitor at the time. So, you know, we're kind of in the same circumstance with this paper that we were in the others.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: No, as previously stated, Madam President. I think the gentleman's doing great work, though. Don't get me wrong.
[Adam Knight]: I prefer a motion to table till third reading on the underlying ordinance, Madam President. Certainly a paper I'm going to support funding if the underlying position passes.
[Adam Knight]: Those withdraw the motion.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Madam President, it's been brought to my attention that parking enforcement vehicles aren't garage in the state, even nevermind the city of Medford. I've seen the vehicles driving around town with the nice fancy city of Medford sticker on it says parking enforcement on it, parking enforcement officers are in it but other vehicles. are not registered in the state of Massachusetts or in the city of Medford. So I believe that was a criteria in our previous contract with Republic Parking, and I see no reason why these vehicles shouldn't be both garaged and insured in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, nevermind the city of Medford.
[Adam Knight]: That was pretty good, all in one breath, Madam President. I appreciate that. Well, ultimately, it's been brought to my attention that there's been some unauthorized clear-cutting of forestry between the community garden and the dog park, say, going down to the waterfront over by Homel Stadium. It's caused a little bit of disruption to our ecosystem. The matter has been brought to the attention of the Office of Energy and Environment. Dennis McDougal has been involved in the examination and restoration of the area. The police department has also been contacted relative to the circumstances, but the clear-cutting persists, Madam President, so this is something that I'm hoping we can get ahead of, take a look at, maybe do some intervention, educate some people in the community about the dangers of clear-cutting forestry, especially abutting the Mystic River watershed, and maybe move forward and restore some of the damage that has been done to further beautify the area that's utilized by so many in this community.
[Adam Knight]: That I do not know. Okay.
[Adam Knight]: So on the motion of Councilor Madam President, Madam President, I'm gonna throw the motion on the questions been asked and answered. You know, it seems like everything that we were going to request they've already done.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President's rather self explanatory, as you'll know, on ramps and off ramps to 9316 and the like are in some rough shape, and I'm hoping that the dot can come out and give it a little bit of 10 to 11 care to prevent any damage to the resident of cities vehicles.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. I think it's just important to point out that these large scale nonprofits like healthcare institutions and universities also provide a great community benefit. namely jobs that provide a living wage. So we have to also take into consideration the economic benefits that they bring to a community. You see communities that have universities located inside them and the benefits that they have economically when the recession hits. So I think it's also important to point out the benefits that come along with having large-scale universities and large-scale healthcare institutions in the community that are non-profit as well.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe the city and Tufts University have an agreement where all new purchases of parcels outside the campus, the existing campus, would be put on the tax rolls.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. I'd be remiss if we didn't recognize our colleague, Councilor Caraviello. It was Councilor Caraviello's resolution under the Burke administration that got us involved in the opioid lawsuit. And without his foresight and vision, we wouldn't be here today receiving these funds. So I'd like to thank him for taking the opportunity to be invested in the war on recovery here in our city and the steps that he took to make sure that we received these funds.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much on these three firefighters bring a wealth of experience to the field, and I think that other city methods a safer place by having them being elevated to these positions of leadership so I'd like to congratulate them all and wish them a very successful and safe future to them and their families.
[Adam Knight]: I for one feels this is a good expense. I mean, I mean a good, a good initiative and a good endeavor because we look at the way that city's been spending money, lack of financial transparency anytime that we can set up a revolving fund or a trust fund to be sure that that money is being spent where it's supposed to be spent I think would make sense. So, by approving this we're actually providing an additional check and balance and additional control on the frivolous and wasteful spending that we're seeing that's coming out of the administration and the lack of transparency that was coming out of administration. So by approving this, we're going to be creating another layer of oversight. I think that's a good thing. So I'd move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: and President.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much. No, thank you for sticking around to hear a couple of these resolutions that are on the agenda this evening. Ultimately, the condition of our roadways in the city of deplorable. I think you know what I think we all know, right, you could drive in front of Bob's food store for the past five years, and the bottle hasn't been patched even, never mind a plan to fix it. You'll drive around the Winthrop Street Rotary going down High Street and you'll cross over the first pedestrian crosswalk there and ever since the first Eversource project, the Crosswalk has been sunken in for now eight, nine years now. I know our DPW, I know our commissioner, I know our mayor drives down these roads. So I know that they know the condition of these roadways is terrible, but we need to develop some sort of plan, some sort of methodology for how we're gonna attack this. We have C-Click fix and we have 50 DPW members. I don't see why we can't take them all one day and say, get on the roads, drive down our emergency arteries and document each pothole that's on there and then we can put a plan together. on how do we can patch these emergency arteries saving ultimately these the roads that our emergency vehicles drive down or EMS vehicles drive down. You know, when there's a snow emergency, these are the vehicles that we're not allowed to park on, because these streets are used for public safety purposes. So I think that it's something that we need to take a look at. And I'm hoping that through the leadership of your office, you'll be able to come up with a plan on how we can address that.
[Adam Knight]: I have one. Golden Ave has been a topic of discussion now for going in the better part of five years. We appropriated some money to have the underground infrastructure of Golden Ave repaired and then also have the above ground infrastructure of Golden Ave repaired. And I think that was supposed to take place over the summer. Do you have any idea what's going on with that project?
[Adam Knight]: One thing I want to talk about in the past I've spoken about with Tim when he was the city engineer was, you know, some sort of mitigation agreement. When these public utilities come to our community and dig up our streets and that. expect to leave their supplies their equipment, their stock on public ways or on public passes. So that's one way I think that we can look at this right if they want to leave the ticket stuff and get it out of here.
[Adam Knight]: So I think that that's something that if we look at strengthening those mitigation agreements, I think that might be able to be a way that we can expand that patch on the roadway to maybe go a little bit further than a foot.
[Adam Knight]: We could post it on the website?
[Adam Knight]: Yes. Okay, excellent. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I just think it's important to point out that every action has a reaction, right? And this whole process could be avoided if the mayor would just work with the council. We wouldn't have to go through the process of creating legislation to direct the mayor to be transparent if she would work with the council and be a partner to the council. So, you know, Imagine that we've gotten to the point where the council now has to rise to take legislative action to get the man to communicate us to communicate with us effectively when it comes down to the finances of this community. I mean, I think that's where we are right now. That's how far this relationship is deteriorated. Now, I've been in the city my whole life. You know, we've all heard the stories about what the council used to be like. when there was fighting and screaming and yelling across the pit, everybody couldn't get along. We get along relatively well here. This is probably the first time in 40 years that the council actually walks in unison on a lot of items. More often than not, we're in agreement. And the one thing that we all agree on quite frequently is the lack of financial transparency in this community. So I just think it's important to point out that the reason why the council has taken these steps is because the council isn't being provided with the tools or the opportunity to be successful in their job. So we need to pass ordinances. We need to make laws telling the mayor to communicate with us. Think about that. How outrageous that is. That's where we've, that's what we've come to. And that's where the relationship has deteriorated to. That's the level of respect that the coroner's office gives this body that's been elected by the residents of this community. So I thank Councilor Bears for taking a proactive approach.
[Adam Knight]: Can I just repeat that I missed that but you said it's going to put off the use of body one police cameras.
[Adam Knight]: You're welcome to. The way I look at this matter.
[Adam Knight]: No, I would not. Because right now I think that what we have in front of us is an 11 page ordinance with 12 amendments, right? This is craziness. All right. This isn't even something that's really important to the operation of our local government, in my opinion. Okay. We spent a lot of time, energy and effort working on something when I think we could have really been working on something else that matters to more people in this community. I understand that there's a group of people that care about this. I'm not really one of them. I don't think that this is something that's vital to the future of the city of Medford. Quite frankly, I think that it does things that can kind of hamstrung our ability to move forward and to promote a vision that adopts technology. When we sit down, when we first started talking about this ordinance, chat GPT wasn't a thing. And now look what it is, right? So in a very short period of time, technology has changed. And quite frankly, when we codify something in an ordinance, the government process is designed to move slow. And by codifying this in ordinance, I think what it's going to do is hamstring us in our ability to adapt the technology. So it's really not something that I want to support this evening. You know, I think when we're looking at the direction that we're going in here in the community, you know, We're working on a lot of things, but the results that the people want to see that I talk to are in the streets. They're on the ground, they're on the sidewalks, they're in the delivery of services. So while I can appreciate the work that's gone into this, it's not gonna be able to support this evening. And I asked my council colleagues to really think long and hard about an 11 page ordinance with 12 amendments on the floor, and whether or not that's a good transparent public process for us to take hold of and move on. I understand that the gentleman put a lot of work into it, as well as the lady, my colleague said I did an excellent job on this ordinance, don't get me wrong. It's just something that I have problems with, theoretically. So for those reasons, I will be supporting the paper this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Madam Mayor, I think we all know where we stand on this. Why don't we just take a vote?
[Adam Knight]: I'm looking at this. I have a question as to how it would work relative to the students in the dormitories
[Adam Knight]: You know, so students in the dorm, they say you gotta go, school's over. Yeah, I don't wanna go, I wanna stay. I wanna stay for the summer. We gotta give you notice, you gotta take it through the eviction process. I mean, I'm not sure, I'm trying to figure out how that would apply.
[Adam Knight]: To the university.
[Adam Knight]: Or off campus housing in the university for that matter, you know what I mean?
[Adam Knight]: I just don't know who to place a burden on the university. I mean ultimately they house thousands of kids up there, right?
[Adam Knight]: Right, but what it does do is it creates a punitive situation for where if the property owner fails to provide the certain notice, they're going to be fined $300 a day. So if we have a property on a Tufts University that has 900 kids in housing, and they fail to comply, 900 times 300 times 300 times every day at the fine. You know what I mean? They're one of our bodies in the community. We don't want to put an administrative burden on them. It's going to be punitive. I support the paper. I just, I think the fines excessive really is what it is. I mean, if it was 25 bucks or something like that, yeah, fine. 300 bucks for not sending somebody a notice about what their rights are when they get evicted. When, you know what I mean? We have all heard the term caveat emptied by everywhere, right? You also have to be able to have some accountability personally and know what your rights are as well, right? It's not government's job to hold everybody's hand all the time, right? Some people have to have some certain personal accountability, right? So if you run into a situation where you're gonna be evicted, right? You might wanna say, hey, what are my rights? Cause I'm being evicted. and have some personal accountability as well. I just think that the $300 fine is very excessive, especially because it's for every day that passes, it's another $300, and it constitutes another violation. If we brought that down to, you know, 25 bucks or 50 bucks, I would have a problem.
[Adam Knight]: That discretion part is what makes me curious, especially after listening to what Mr. Harris had to say a few minutes ago. What's good for the goose should be good for the gander. It shouldn't be at discretion. If it's violation, it's a violation. If it's not, it's not, right? I mean, ultimately what we're doing is putting language in here to say that the board of health director can haphazardly policy if they see fit, right? And fine up to $300, right? I don't think that's what we're looking to do. I don't think that's what the goal objective is. So ultimately, we're saying the Board of Health Director may at their discretion do this, right? So ultimately, we're talking about issues of equity. We're talking about government not being trusted. We're talking about putting controls in on government. But then we're going to give somebody the authority to act haphazard and apply policy unevenly.
[Adam Knight]: Just, Madam President, if it's about transparency, right, and it's about making sure that people are aware of something, then why are we attaching a punitive measure to it, right? Why are we attaching a fine at the end of it? if it's about transparency and it's about making sure that people have knowledge, right? I mean, this is always an excuse when it comes up to something, this is some reason why the people aren't competent enough to pursue what it is they need to pursue. There's always a reason we're trying to pass something. What about the person that doesn't have internet? Yeah, that one person, like, come on, it's 2023, the internet is everywhere. They're giving phones away. You walk into the store, they're giving you a phone for free. You know what I mean? Come on. Everybody has access to the internet. If not, there's plenty of places to access the internet, number one, number two. You know, I don't think that we give the general populace enough credit sometimes. All right, we don't give the general populace enough credit sometimes. But with that being said, I'd motion to strike the fine from $300 to $50, and then I'll move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Well, I'm going to, I mean, I'm making the motion to make it 50 bucks. And then if it passes, I'll move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, ultimately what we're doing is we're asking the landlord to give a piece of paper that the city puts together to the tenant. We're gonna charge them 300 bucks if they don't do that. That's a little much. That's a little crazy, but I support the, I appreciate the council's second on the motion.
[Adam Knight]: One more moment of motion to exempt Tufts University. Motion to accept Tufts University on campus housing University.
[Adam Knight]: Under B-5, I guess it would be. 4933-B-5, new section.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I offer a motion this evening as I look out in the audience and I see a number of our friends from organized labor that are here this evening. Normally they have been able to provide us with updates throughout the course of this past term. as to the status of the contract negotiations and the status of labor relations here in the community. And they've always very patient. They usually wait till the end of the meeting, sometimes three and four hours after the opportunity to speak before this body. So I thought it'd be a nice gesture to allow them to speak first this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. So thank you for being here. And once again, providing us with such a detailed outline as to the status of the negotiations for the 200 plus families that you represent here in the city of Medford. Um, recently it was brought to my attention that there's a certain issue with new hires and their ability to access health insurance. Um, you know, it's, I have a little bit of a background in the union as well. And it's my understanding that, uh, here in the city of Medford, the municipal employee is required to offer health insurance to their employees.
[Adam Knight]: She used to have to fill out this affidavit and submit it to mayor Burke in order to get her group health insurance that she was receiving from the city when she was a city council. and she had to file an affidavit that said I work 22 hours a week and that made her eligible for the health insurance that she received through the city. So I was looking at this and I'm not understanding why exactly a new hire now in this community that would come in that's working 37 and a half hours a week wouldn't be afforded the same group health insurance benefits that every other employee here in the community is being offered. Is there an understanding as to what's going on with the application of this benefit?
[Adam Knight]: haven't worked in insurance and haven't some experience in insurance it seems to me like the open enrollment period especially for employees in the GIC is usually what sometime around June or July is it? About then, yes. So what what they're saying is that if an employee that started now in January wouldn't be able to access health insurance while being a city employee for up to 11 months
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. Seltz. I'm sorry.
[Adam Knight]: You know, what I see, Mr. Seltz, to be honest with you, is a trend. It's a pattern, right? And I think it has less and less to do with good government here in the community. It has less and less to do with doing what's right for the workers in this community. And there's more to do with a vendetta, right? Someone that's vindictive, someone that's upset because you're speaking out, someone that's upset because you're expressing the concerns that your membership has and doing your job. And it might be putting some some rust on the can of the administration. All right. So the way I look at this is I see a lot of it is retaliatory. You know what I mean? I see no reason for this. I don't understand why the cost of living adjustment for one group would be more so than the cost of living adjustment for another group when the cost of living is really a reflection on inflation and how far you can stretch it all. And ultimately, we want to keep, you know, the rank and file employees in this community working. They're a hard working group. You know, I've had the opportunity to know many of these people for a very long time. And, you know, when You pick up the phone and you call, they always answer, they always deliver, they're always there. And like Councilor Scarpelli said, your group prides itself on showing up for work every day and doing its job, regardless of what the climate is here on City Hall, regardless of what's going on between the administration and the union, they come to work every day and they do their job. And that should be reflected in this wage package as well. I'm very grateful for the work that your employees do, that your members do, and that these employees do. I thank you again for coming up here and sharing with us your experience.
[Adam Knight]: And pursuant to a city charter, if I'm not mistaken, the mayor is the chief negotiator for the community, right? That's my understanding. The mayor is the chief negotiator, so ultimately we have five bargaining units with unsettled contracts and the chief negotiator refusing to meet with these five unions and instead sending an underling. It's paid for outside the scope of city employment.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Michael Callahan was a dear friend of mine, someone who represented the city of Medford and its people with great pride and dignity. He was a Vietnam War veteran, the founder of the Medford Consumer Advisory Commission and past commissioner. He was the aide to the late Senator John Bullock, an aide to the late Senator Dennis McKenna, the former assistant commissioner of racing and chief steward for the National Association of Government Employees, just to name a few roles that he helped, Madam President. Michael Callahan was also elected our governor's Councilor, and he served with dignity representing the people of this community for over a decade. Michael passed away on the last day of his term in office. He was never able to reap the benefits of his pension reward. But he was someone who has some fame here in the city of Medford for saving Wrights Pond. And if you go up to Wrights Pond now, you will see a memorial honoring Michael Callahan that Mayor McGlynn put in to recognize the work that he did. back in the late 80s when Medford was undergoing quite a development boom and the condos were being built around the city. There was a proposal to turn Wrights Pond into residential housing and Michael Callahan was the catalyst in organizing the neighborhood against this proposal and saving Wrights Pond and keeping it as the beautiful recreation destination that it is today. And with his vision and foresight, Wrights Pond is now probably one of the city's number one assets. So with that being said, I'd like to take a moment to honor my friend. This is something that I've put on every year since Michael's passing. He's someone that really cared about the city. We talk about having blue and white debates. We talk about people that step up to the plate and really put their money where their mouth is. And Mike Callahan was that guy. When he ran for State Senate back in 2005, his logo was, he helps people. And there was no more truthful saying than that. My county, I woke up every day to help people. And he took great pride in it. And he always said to me, you could measure your wealth in many ways. You could measure it monetarily, or you could measure your wealth in the number of lives that you touch. And Michael is just a great individual who touched many lives. And he was the wealthiest man.
[Adam Knight]: It's not so often that someone gets to reach the great age of 80 years old, an octogenarian, I believe they're called, Madam President, but John Grenard is someone who is very familiar to all of us who are involved in public life here in the city of Medford. John was a former member of the Medford School Committee, a former member of the Massachusetts House of Representatives. John served as the special sheriff to Middlesex County under Sheriff DePaola. He has a very, very, very prestigious record of public service here in this community. One of the most brilliant men I've ever met in my life when it comes to political analysis and the ability to look at an election. Also a great volunteer of his time, service, energy to many neighborhood and community groups here in the city, most notably the Medford Elks, for example, and the American Legion Post 45, where he'd perform countless hours of pro bono legal work for them and making sure that their assets were protected. John's been a great friend to me. He's someone who I admire greatly and I'm glad to see that he had the opportunity to celebrate his 80th birthday surrounded by his friends and family. And I want to take an opportunity just to extend a happy birthday to him and to let him know that he means a lot to the city of Medford still. And I ask my council colleagues to join me in this celebration.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. When I first got out of college, I had the opportunity to work underneath Senate President Thomas Birmingham in the Massachusetts State Senate. And he was certainly a brilliant man, a great leader, former candidate for governor as well. And I had a great opportunity to work on his gubernatorial campaign where I got to spend a significant amount of time with him and I learned about what a great person he was. raised in the community of Chelsea, representing Revere Charlestown and Chelsea. Thomas Birmingham was elected to the Massachusetts State Senate after defeating, I believe, Reggie Volk. And he served in the State Senate admirably, rising to the rank of Senate President. Most notably, he is remembered for the Education Reform Act of 1992. And the Educational Reform Act of 1992 established the standardized testing, standardized measurements of public schools so that we'd be able to identify and compare apples to apples data between school districts. It also enacted what's known as the School Building Assistance Program. And the School Building Assistance Program was something that we here in the city of Metric were able to utilize 23 years ago for the construction of other schools in this community. So when you talk about Thomas Birmingham, you talk about a gentleman who was surrounded by great help And when you talk about some of the great help that he was surrounded by, you have to mention on real world. Who serves here on our community development board, we have to. I'm sorry, CBA now, yes, yes, multiple hats. We talk about James Francis Xavier Walsh from High Street who worked under the Birmingham campaign and worked under Tom in his office. He was a great mentor and cultivator of great talent and a great individual that really cared about his community in this state and he accomplished a great deal. It would be sad to miss, so I ask my council colleagues to join me in honoring him and extending deepest condolences to Selma and the family.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. And Councilor Capello, thanks for putting this item on the agenda. I've known Tom for probably 15 years. His nephews, Matt and Joe, I know very well as well. And this is the first time I ever heard that story. about the Friday nights. It's amazing. Um, Tom is a great person, a great friend and like Councilor Caraviello said, he was a gentleman, a true gentleman, someone that, um, was bigger than life, but, uh, very quiet, very quiet gentleman, uh, someone that when he spoke, uh, it was with a purpose and, uh, it was usually, uh, to give you the right piece of advice to say the right thing. It'll be sadly missed. And I thank the council for putting this resolution.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to ask that the records be laid on the table, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: By way of history, normally what the consul would do is we'd put a restriction on the special permit or a condition on the special permit that would say that the special permit is attached to the business entity and not the address on the permit. So that if that business entity moved on, the permit would move on with the business entity and die. It would have to go back through the application process again.
[Adam Knight]: That's just explain what I think Councilor Scarpelli was getting at history. That's the way we've normally done it.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Um, ultimately, I think it's safe to say right that this isn't a project that any of this behind the rail were crazy about from the start, right? Um, that's why we went to court. Okay. Um, our recourse is very limited legally. You know, that's why the judge remanded the case back to us. Um, ultimately, what we're being asked to do is approve a storage tank, a flammable gas, flammable liquid storage tank, right? And It's a by right, it's a by right application. It just requires a special permit. Virtually every city board that had this application before we received it, signed off on it in one way, shape or form. So our request was very limited from the staff. So when we look at this, the only body here in the community that said no was the city council. Every other body negotiated some sort of condition or restriction or compromise solution. And the council dug its heels and it said no. And we lost. Okay, so now we're in the position where, although it's not necessarily a project that many of us were crazy about, it's the project that by right can be there and it's the project that by right we're going to get, in my opinion, after we take this vote this evening. I think that BJ's has come up and they've, you know, done a mea culpa on some of the bad neighbor issues. They've certainly been very forthright in their willingness to add additional conditions and restrictions and requirements that we're looking for to make us a little bit happier with the proposed use and the impacts and effects that it's going to have on the neighborhood. So with that being said, I think that the process has been a long and arduous one, and I'm glad that at the end of the day, we can come to some sort of agreement that protects both parties' interests. So with that being said, Madam President, I support the paper this evening, and I hope we can move for a vote, for a favorable vote in short order.
[Adam Knight]: Is it safe to say, sir, that based upon the amount of questions that you have relative to the project, that you'd be opposed to this project at this point in time?
[Adam Knight]: Based upon the amount of questions that you're asking this evening surrounding the project and how it's going to work, it seems like you're opposed to the project at this point in time.
[Adam Knight]: Ultimately, the way this works is because of the zoning in the area where the gas station is going to be located. They have the right to do this by right. All they're doing is coming to us for a special permit so that we can put conditions on it to protect the neighborhood. And I think we've accomplished that. But ultimately, we went to court on this. We said we don't want the gas station. We lost. That's why they sent it back to us. So now here we are today. What are we going to do? We're going to go and say, sorry, judge, we don't want to negotiate anymore. And then they send it back to the judge. The judge says, OK, Medford, you lose. And then all the restrictions go out the window. You know what I mean? Because that's the alternative at this point.
[Adam Knight]: I think this brings us right back to the beginning, right? That's why we voted no the first time. That's why we got sued. Because we said BJ should be better neighbors. And that brought us to where we are today with all these conditions and restrictions that we have on the permit.
[Adam Knight]: So, I mean, what we did was we did exactly what you're asking, what you asked us to do. We just did it a long time ago and we lost in court.
[Adam Knight]: Anyone else who was just to that point, and I thank the gentleman for putting the words in my mouth. But ultimately, why would I legal counsel agree to bring it back? If we had such a strong case? All right, why? makes no sense to me, obviously, because we weren't negotiating from position of power. And now we had the opportunity to negotiate a stronger agreement than we had. We were going in.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I do think it's important to point out that Attorney Austin said that The labor practices of Starbucks is not a significant or appropriate reason for the denial of the special permit and the conditions to the extent that I was. I for one feel as though Starbucks is not a very good employer. I feel as though they've gone a little bit too far in their efforts to impede with labor organizing in their corporation. I think it's shameful. However, based upon the slap that we just got relative to BJ's after a year long of legal haranguing, I do feel as though it would be the city's best interest financially to approve the document that's before us. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: I think it's important to point out this doesn't just apply to municipal buildings as well as private residences. Right, this would be all just municipal construction, it's all new construction.
[Adam Knight]: I don't, but you know.
[Adam Knight]: Just point of information, Madam President. I also don't think it's a good idea for the city of Medford to start getting into the transportation business now. We can't even forget shopping pencils in City Hall. We're gonna start freaking running buses all over the city. I mean, let's be honest here. You know what I mean? We got a parking department that we just opened up in a year, and it's been nothing but a nightmare. If we take over a transit department, who the hell knows what's gonna happen.
[Adam Knight]: Councilmember bears brings up a good point and it really never was a practice is something that I experienced previously. where when you don't fill out the census, you get removed from the voter rolls, and it's created some significant level of confusion across the community. In my historic involvement in the city, up until we hired an election coordinator, we really never removed anybody from the rolls if they didn't participate in the census. So you get into a situation where someone gets removed from the voter rolls for not filling out the census, now they become an uninformed voter, because now they're not on the voter rolls, so they don't get mail. They don't get mail, right? So they get mail from no candidate. So they become an uninformed voter. So now you have an uninformed voter. That's me, for example, I haven't missed an election since I was 18 years old. I didn't fill up the census this year. I went to go last year. I went to go vote and I wasn't allowed to vote. I was on the ballot. My name was on the ballot, but I wasn't allowed to vote. It's a bad practice. You know why? Because that person that goes into the voter booth to vote and they get told that they can't or that they're not on the list or that they're inactive is going to turn around and walk out the door and there's a chance they might not come back. So now we have someone that's become an uninformed voter because they're not getting any mail from the candidates because they're not showing up on the voter rolls. And then when they go to vote, it's actually an impediment for them to cast in their ballot. So I think the practice needs to be looked at. And again, it was never an issue up until we created this election coordinators position. And now we have an election manager. But I think it's a practice that needs to be looked at. It's a policy that needs to be reviewed because, you know, everybody talks about wanting to drive more people out to the polls. How do we get more people out to the polls? We don't have election day anymore. We get like election month for cry-eye, right? You can mail it in. You can come in from, you know, pretty soon we're going to be able to vote through our television or do it on the internet, right? and it's going to be able to be something you can vote for whoever you want, whatever you want for this month, you know what I mean? So, you know, the way that we're expanding access to voting, it doesn't make sense to me to take people off the rolls for not filling out the census. You know, I think that there's a better practice or a better way that we can look at it, especially if you look at the vote history of an individual. I mean, you're going to see someone that voted in 15 municipal elections in a row or 20 elections in a row and you're taking them off the rolls, but you know, they lived there, they paid the tax bill. You know, it's just something that I find very confusing when you can't, you know, the way the system set up, you can't register to vote in two communities. You know what I mean? You're going to get caught because so I don't know. It's just, I don't think it's a great practice that's conducive to promoting participation in elections.
[Adam Knight]: I'm still blaming you for kicking everybody off the road four years ago.
[Adam Knight]: I know why. It's because we complain that we call them up here so many times. So the administration said, you're making us look bad. Could you put something down and see how long it's going to last just to get the noise to go away?
[Adam Knight]: You know what I mean? That's why.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, you know on the appointment of President Tom I recall when we went through this process. I believe, I think, Rick and I were the only two that were on the council at the time, yeah man McGlynn was the mayor, and what man McGlynn did was he had a huge fundraiser. And at this fundraiser, they raised a ton of money. for private donors to create a maintenance and upkeep fund that would maintain the upkeep of the fountain. Then the fountain COVID came the phone has been shut off for at least three years right at least three years. Yes, at least three years, but there's a dedicated account here in City Hall and Councilor Caraviello is on point with this we need to find out what balance is left in that account because based upon the financial spending habits that I'm seeing with this administration, the lack of financial and fiscal transparency and responsibility. I'm thinking to myself that we're in a very significant fiscal crisis here in this community, because they're not sharing any financial documents with us. They're not showing us the Warren articles where the money is getting spent. They're not providing us with the quarterly updates that we're asking for and what the status of our financial picture is here in the community. So it's leading me to believe that these accounts that are sitting around for a little bit of time that had a dedicated and committed purpose that people have forgotten about are going to be getting graded soon. So I'd like to see that.
[Adam Knight]: Is there an email address, maybe a general email address, a customer service email address, or something like that?
[Adam Knight]: You sound like that Nigerian Prince I get the emails from today.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Thank you to the team from BJS for being here this evening. This has been quite a long dance for all of us, I think. And at the end of the day, looking at what's before us here and the proposals that have been made and the concessions that have been made, the mitigation efforts that have been made, can you just give me the ballpark cost as to how much all these extras for mitigation are going to cost PJs at this point?
[Adam Knight]: I just think it's important to show that you're making an investment. When you think about DJs, this is your first store, your landmark store. We talked about the history of the issues that we've had there, but ultimately you're a large employer here in this community as well. You know, I think you bring a lot of good to the community. And, you know, these quality of life issues are going to come with any big business that's located in an area that abuts a residential neighborhood. But it's important, I think, to point out the fact that you put money where your mouth is when you're investing in the neighborhood and investing in the community through the proposal that you made for us this evening. One thing I do have concern about would be an application for extended hours for operation of the gas station. Um, that's something that I don't think the neighbors would particularly care for. Um, that's something that I think that, you know, we'd have to address, you know, going going forward. If you came forward with that application, I don't want to end up in a situation that we're in right now.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, so we're not looking to have anything right because I just don't want to see us doing this again where you know the neighbors don't want it. We get to this long Toronto Priya fight about you know what's going to happen for a couple hours.
[Adam Knight]: Excellent. Thank you very much. I appreciate you guys taking the time.
[Adam Knight]: Also, Madam President, if I may, by way of the rules, isn't there a seven-day waiting period, six-day waiting period to allow for comments from individuals that may not have participated in the public hearing but wanted to exercise their opinion in writing?
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. I also think it's very important to point out what exactly It is that we're being asked to vote on. Ultimately, we're being asked to vote on a permit for an underground storage tank. That's a special permit that's allowed by right. All right, it's allowed by right, but requires a special permit for use. So when we talk about this proposal and the fact that it's been vetted and revetted, you know, both locally and legally, ultimately this matter wasn't remanded back to the city council for a public hearing because our rationale was on strong legal footing. And I think the applicant also recognizes that the history between the city, the neighborhood, and the applicant's business hasn't been great. But they've put a foot forward and made an effort both, I'd say, financially and physically to improve some of the quality of life issues in our community. And I think that's a positive sign. And I think that's a step in the right direction because ultimately, If we look backwards at everything that's gone wrong, then we're never going to be able to make progress. And I think it's pretty clear that when we did that during the initial public hearing, it wasn't the rational basis for a denial or the paper wouldn't have been sent back to us for this proceeding this evening. I'd certainly like to hear additional feedback from the neighborhood, from the residents during the six day waiting period before I make a commitment as to which way I'm going to vote. But I do want to recognize the efforts that the applicant has put forward in trying to rebuild this relationship and also investing in our community and addressing some of the things that are important to us that will mitigate and offset some of the impacts of the gas station should this underground storage permit be authorized.
[Adam Knight]: It's practice anyway, I believe, right? Yes. By rule rather, so yes, I would not make a motion to waive it.
[Adam Knight]: well-publicized labor dispute with its employee organization. And the reason that this paper was tabled was because we wanted to allow Starbucks the opportunity to right the wrongs that have been going on with their anti-union campaign. So it's my understanding that this anti-union campaign still prevails. And I'm certainly not opposed to giving this ample consideration, but I'm not going to give a consideration at a point in time where the workers feel as though they're being mistreated, and they feel as though their ability to organize is being impeded. So with that being said, this is certainly something that I have an open mind to, but right now I don't feel as though the temperature is right for this council to make a vote on this. So I'd ask the applicant to withdraw or refile when the labor situation gets resolved.
[Adam Knight]: I do think it's also very important to point out that the City of Medford has maintenance and upkeep agreements with the DCI for a number of DCI-owned and controlled properties, Sleepy Hollow being one of those locations. So it might be in our best interest to also take a look internally through our DPW commissioner to see if in fact this area is an area that has a maintenance and upkeep agreement with the DCR, because it might actually be the city's responsibility, not the DCR's to maintain this area due to the agreement that they had to do, I think back under the Romney administration.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Ultimately, I don't think this is something that should be explored any further. It's pretty simple, all right? Either we want NIPS in our community or we don't, okay? We have no problem banning leaf blowers, but we can't ban NIPS. I mean, come on, let's be serious here.
[Adam Knight]: Not yet, not yet, but if I was a betting man- And we never will. If I was a betting man, I'd say a few years down the line, it's just gonna come into effect. But anyway, the delayed implementation, they call it, I think, is what happens. Effective four years from now, they'll be banned. If I was a betting man, I'd say that's what's gonna happen.
[Adam Knight]: But I don't understand why we can't ban nips. I mean, ultimately, if we want them in our community, we don't. And the argument that was made by the gentleman that owned the liquor store that People with drinking problems use NIPS to regulate their consumption is, quite frankly, probably in contradiction and contrast to every single public health advisory that you could ever read when it comes down to somebody who's dealing with addiction. All right. So that argument, I don't think holds any water in this community. This is something that's been laying around, just like many things that have been laying around when we send it across the hall to the administration. All right. So the conversation should have been started a long time ago. All right. We jumped out of this conversation already. We asked for feedback. We asked to get a response from the administration. We got nothing. Once again. All right. Once again, so we can either go down this road again, right. Or we can say that we're going to take affirmative steps and do it. Um, you know, I, for one think that they should just be banned in the community. Um, I'm not crazy about the 5 cent nickel, you know, return the bottle redemption on them. Um, because it's still going to leave us with the same problem that they're going to be everywhere. And then we're going to rely on somebody who wants to make a nickel to go around and pick them up. It's not going to be the city that's picking them up. We're still going to have the same problem. We're just going to try to create a revenue source to somebody who has the wherewithal and the work ethic to want to go around and pick them up and turn them in. I don't think that's the way that we should be handling this. I think that this is something that should be just blanket banned. I mean, it's a one ounce plastic bottle. It's a single use bottle. We'd be in single use bags. We're not going to be in a single use bottle. I think it would make sense, but I will support the motion this evening, but this is something that I think should have been done already.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I said this before, I see this as nothing more than campaign tactic by the administration. These are papers that we do not have to vote on. These are papers that are financial in nature. We still have not gotten the Warren articles. All right, we still haven't gotten them. But three weeks in a row now we've gotten papers saying this is how we're going to spend your APA money. All right, so something's wrong. All right, something smells rotten in Denmark. I don't know what it is, but something smells rotten. It's just not adding up, Madam President. It's just not adding up. I don't understand why. Where they're spending the money is such a secret, but then every week we can have somebody from the administration come and tell us where they're going to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars, which this council has no oversight authority on. I really think it's nothing more than an effort to campaign from the rail because the mayor has an opponent. Look at all the good stuff I'm doing now. Look at all the good stuff I'm doing now. For three years, I wouldn't talk to you. But now, the kitchen's getting a little warm. I want to come out and show my face. So quite frankly, I think it's an exercise in futility, number one. Number two, only a Councilor can put forward a measure that goes on the agenda, right? Every rule of resolution, every order of resolution has to be sponsored by a member of the council. So this is three weeks in a row the mayor's put money papers on. We've asked her for a financial plan. We've asked her to show us what's going on with the money, right? And we haven't seen that. And now we're getting fed piecemeal week after week, right? Because if you think back to the beginning of this fiscal year, how many supplemental appropriations have we been asked to make so far? How many jobs we've been asked to create? None of it fits into the financial plan. None of it fits into the capital plan. But because we're being fed piecemeal, And because we're not being provided with the documentation that we've requested now going on in an inordinate amount of time, years, we're unable to make informed decisions. So then we all sit up here looking like a bunch of goobers, right? Going back and forth, not being able to make a decision because we all wanna do the right thing and we can't because we're not given the tools in the toolbox. So last June, when we sat here and the mayor said that we'd have an assistant city solicitor and the assistant city solicitor will be at our meeting and they should be sitting right here right now, but the job hasn't even been posted yet. Who's the sucker? We are, once again, right? We look like the big dummies in the room. We look like the big dummies in the room. Enough's enough. Enough's enough with this administration and the spending and the lack of fiscal transparency. All right, it's not fair to us, it's not fair to the taxpayers. Okay, we're hired to do a job. The mayor sat here right next to me for a decade and she said, our number one job is to be fiscal watchdogs. And then she ran on a platform of unity, community, and transparency. I haven't seen any community. I haven't seen any unity with this body, especially. And I haven't seen any transparency when it comes to the finances in this community. So we're out. What's going on? What is going on with that financial picture? If you look on the agenda, Madam President, you'll see a paper. And it was a spending moratorium until the mayor complies. And we talked about it. And we said, let's give the mayor a chance. Let's give the mayor an opportunity to come around. the sacrificial lamb, Mr. Dickinson up here a couple of weeks ago. And he said, I don't even know what you're talking about. Warren articles. What do you mean? Warren articles. I don't even know what you're talking about. The administration, we've been talking about this now for three years. The administration has never even said it to the finance director. The left hand does not know what the right is doing. And we can't keep spending money. If the left hand doesn't know what the right is doing, because this body right here certainly doesn't know what's going on because we haven't been provided the information that we need. So this is just another perfect example of spending for the purpose of press releases. So, you know, when I look at these papers that come before the body, I look at the issues that are facing this community. Councilor Tseng said it best. government by social media. That's what this is Medford talk. There's lots of tech talks about Medford. So now that's how we're going to make our decisions. That's not how government works. All right. That's not how government works. Facebook, Facebook, TikTok, social media, not real life, fake life, not real life, not real life. So, you know, I, I'm looking at this madam president and I'm scratching my head and I'm saying that's another half a million bucks that the city administration spent. I have no problem with the project. It's a great project. I've known about this project for well over a year because the executive director at the housing authority came to us over a year ago. And he told us this is what they're doing. And he said he was going to ask for the funds.
[Adam Knight]: But we knew about it, not because of the actions of the administration, because the act is the Director of the Housing Authority, the person who's looking for the money, all right? And we still, again, have no idea what the financial picture is in this community.
[Adam Knight]: When are we gonna get the information, the financial information that we've requested now going on about about a 24 months?
[Adam Knight]: This is ridiculous. This is nothing more than an end around than a lack of transparency. They're hiding something. Follow the money. Everybody says follow the money. We can't follow the money because they're not showing us where it's going, which leads me to believe that they're hiding something.
[Adam Knight]: Present.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: No, I'd like to know why we still haven't received one copy of one Warren article since January of 2020, 2021 now, 2021. We have not received one copy of one Warren article. You sat here before this body and put a budget presentation on and we made it pretty darn clear that we want this document. This council has passed countless resolutions saying we want this document, yet your office has failed to provide it time and time again. Now, Bob, I know you're new to the city and, you know, at some point you got to say, I'm not blaming you, but now I am blaming you because you sat here before us in June when we asked for this document, we still haven't received it. The council has taken numerous votes. The mayor's office has said, refer it to the finance director in a response to this body. but we still haven't received it. Why?
[Adam Knight]: I mean, is this a for real story right now?
[Adam Knight]: I mean, literally. After a year and a half of waiting for this document. I'm sorry. We've been asking for this document for a year and a half and he goes, what are you asking for now? I mean, is this-
[Adam Knight]: No, this isn't even about frustration. It's about a waste of my goddamn time. All right, that's what this is. All right, it's a waste. It's a waste of all of our time to come up here and be pranced around like dog and pony.
[Adam Knight]: To be pranced around like dog and pony.
[Adam Knight]: They're not passed by this body. We've never voted on a Warren article in the last decade.
[Adam Knight]: I want to know how much money KP Law has received in the past year, for example. So I can take a look at the Warren articles and I can say, oh, geez, we have a budget in the law department that says they're going to spend $200,000. But I'm looking here, in the last six months, we've spent $1.7 million at KP Law. Why? And I can get ahead of some of these issues so that come the budget in probably, well, we'll get it, what, maybe June 30th. When we get to June 30th for, you know, July 1st vote, I might be able to have a little bit of understanding as to why we're in the situation we're in.
[Adam Knight]: 2020. We're going to start there. You know what I mean? We've been asking for it.
[Adam Knight]: We've been asking for it for four years, but you know, in three years.
[Adam Knight]: And I'm sorry to take my frustration out on you, but there's a mayor in this, there's a mayor in this building, right? And we send these papers to her and they just sit there and they don't move. They just sit on the desk. All right, so I show up here and I try to do my job as hard as I can. I try, I really do, but I can't do it if I don't have the tools. I can't build a house with a saw.
[Adam Knight]: Has the mayor's office ever called you and said, this is what they're looking for?
[Adam Knight]: Has the chief of staff ever called you and said, this is what they're looking for? Has the law department ever called you and said, the city council has asked us to draft an ordinance This is what they're looking for.
[Adam Knight]: So the law department hasn't called you, the chief of staff hasn't called you, and the mayor's office hasn't called you. But this council's taking at least a dozen affirmative votes to get this information. But then tonight, we have a paper before us to create another new job and give somebody else another raise. I mean, come on.
[Adam Knight]: I feel bad that they sent you out here to fall on your sword to be a sacrificial lamb.
[Adam Knight]: out of this account.
[Adam Knight]: It might also be helpful to go talk to the city clerk and say, hey, can I see a copy of the council tracking sheet? It says finance director, because there's probably literally 40 requests that we're looking for out of your office over the course of the last year.
[Adam Knight]: I'm just curious if a rank and file employee say in the Medford DPW for a year and a half failed to provide you with information that you requested, what would happen to them?
[Adam Knight]: I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. even when it's clear.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: First of all, I'd like to thank Councilor Scarpelli and Councilor Caraviello for being outspoken in their efforts to raise awareness as to what's going on in our schools. Neither one of these gentlemen were required to appear for the school committee meeting last night. They did so as concerned parents, grandparents, and public servants here in the city. And when I listen to what they say, and I listen to what people on the street say, and when I listen to what my kids say, and I listen to what my wife has to say about these public schools as an educator at 25 years in a neighboring school district, it doesn't make me feel good. It doesn't make me feel good at all. I feel as though we're failing our students. We're feeling the most vulnerable members of our population, our children. Councilor Scarpelli made a good point. He said, it's the one-year anniversary. I said, one-year anniversary? Are you talking one-year anniversary or what? One-year anniversary. It's December. Christmas hasn't happened yet. I go, one-year anniversary or what? He goes, no, you don't remember the two walkouts that happened last year? The two walkouts at Medford High School that happened last year? because of escalating violence in our public schools, when hundreds of children, hundreds of our students, our kids, our neighbors' children, our families got up out of their seats and they walked out of the school because they said, we can't take it anymore. We've had enough. Here we are exactly one year later. I don't think we're in a better place. I think we're in a worse place. I think we're in a worse place. We're in a place where parents are shut out, don't have the opportunity to speak. We're in a place where our kids are afraid to go to school. And I think we all know what happens when kids become afraid to go to school. We've all seen the documentaries on how gangs are formed. We've all heard the stories about kids that get bullied in school and then decide to bring weapons because they've had enough and shoot up schools. We've all seen this, it's happened in neighboring states. Why do we feel as though we're impervious to the same situation or the same circumstances? Because we're not, we're not. So we're in a place where kids are afraid to go to school. And we're also in a place where we see embarrassing news story after embarrassing news story after embarrassing news story in the headlines with the word mentioned. And that's a shame because the city is better than that. The city is better than that. And our kids deserve better than what they're getting. There's no accountability that shows it shows in this culture that's permeating our school system is transcending into the classroom. And we can all sit here and we can say, this isn't right. And this isn't wrong. but the data doesn't lie. The numbers don't lie. So let's talk about the numbers a little bit. Let's talk about the numbers. 42% proficiency in math, 50% proficiency in reading, 240th in the state college readiness index, 181st in graduation rate, and 184th overall. Our kids deserve better. Our kids deserve better than what they're getting. They don't deserve to go to school afraid. They deserve to go to school with leaders that are willing to step up and accept the challenge. Now, when this incident first happened, I got an email and the email spoke volumes in terms of the culture that's going on with this administration. And I have to take a look at it and just mention it because I think it really speaks volumes. If I can find it and remember how to work this thing. This is a confidential and urgent update relative to the circumstances at Medford High School from Dr. Marice Edouard-Vincent. MHS is currently in a stay-in-place due to a medical emergency. A student was stabbed in the restroom and transported to MGH. Four students have been identified. The police are here working with us. We're working on an official communication. What's that mean? We're working on an official communication. You shouldn't have to work on facts. You shouldn't have to work on truth. You shouldn't have to work on anything other than telling the people what happened and what you're going to do to prevent it from happening again. Here we are 60 days ago, two short months ago. Two short months ago, a girl was assaulted. terribly assaulted, captured on video, broadcast all across the local news stations. This poor girl has to go to school every day, shaking in her boots. If it weren't for the strength of her parents, if it weren't for the strength of her parents coming up here week after week, day after day, fighting to raise awareness about these issues, it would have gone away. And then 60 days later, we would have been talking about this gentleman that got assaulted and stabbed, and then it would have gone away. And then 60 days later, something else would happen and we'd bring it up again and we'd start talking about it. Let's get serious about it. All right. It's been a year. It's been a year since the students in that school told us they've had enough. It's been a year since they all got up out of their desks and had the courage to walk out. All right. They had more courage than the adults in the building. And now they have to have more courage than the adults in the building to go to school. because they're scared for their safety. This is sickening. This is sickening. And nothing anybody can say when they come up to this podium, all right, is gonna change the way I feel about it. The way it's been handled is horrible. Horrible. These aren't isolated incidents. A year ago, one year ago, the whole school said we've had enough and they walked out. This is not an isolated incident. And the longer we keep approaching this situation as an isolated incident, The more isolated incidents are going to occur. And then when the budget comes around, we're going to hear the school department cry poor mouth. Well, everybody wants to go to Minuteman and everybody wants to go to the charter school. Well, yeah, no kidding. Why wouldn't they? You're going to sign your kid up for karate when they're five years old just to go to Medford High. You can pay one way or you can pay the other. You can pay with peace of mind and financially send them to a school where you feel as though they're going to be safe and you're going to receive what you deserve. Or you can take the risks and send them to Medford High. And that's what parents are going to say to themselves. They're going to say, is it worth it to me to spend this money to not have to put up with stuff like this? And parents are going to say yes, because I'm a parent that's thinking about it. I'm losing faith in the Medford public school system. And I hate to say it. I hate to say it. Because I went to the Hervey School. I went to the Brooks School. I went to the Hopps School. I went to Medford High School. I played sports for Bud Kelly. I learned about what it's like to have blue and white in my veins. I learned about what it's like to be responsible, to want to be someone that gives back to his community. And that's why I chose to seek public office. And when I sit here and I watch some of my colleagues in government hide under their desk, it infuriates me. It's okay to say no sometimes, you know, and it's okay to say yes, but what you have to do is say something. You can't stand for anything if you don't know where you stand and what you stand for. Thank you, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, if I may.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much. You know, there's no such thing as a utopian society. And I don't think in this instance that throwing money at an issue and quite frankly, given the decision makers who aren't allocating funds properly in the first place, more money to spend. I don't think this is going to do anything for those children that need to go to school tomorrow. It might help in the long run, but it's not going to do anything for those children that need to go to school tomorrow. What this is about is reallocation. As of right now, The committee needs to live within its means because there is no funding request from the mayor before us. So we can jump up and down and say, we want more money, we want more money. We do that every week about every issue. But ultimately right now, the administration hasn't put the paper before this body, which tells me the administration isn't taking it seriously, which would again, move me to the position to say, you have to live within your means and reallocate your funds then to address this issue. So what's the plan and what are you going to do? And why are our kids going back to school tomorrow if you don't have a plan and you don't know what you're gonna do? Quite frankly, I think the school should have been shut down until after Christmas vacation. Blanket, sorry, high school's closed until after Christmas vacation. In the interest of safety, in the interest of us showing this community that we're serious about the issues that are before us. Because a year has gone by and we haven't showed that. So, you know, I'm certainly someone that recognizes that there's a need for resources, but I also think that there is room for reallocation of existing funds, existing policies, and existing practices that will improve the safety in our schools. Reversing some of the policy decisions that were made over the last year is a good start. But again, there's no such thing as a utopian society and there's never going to be enough. How much is enough? There's never going to be enough. There's never, we're never going to reach a point where you say, Oh, we're cool. This is good. This is enough money for us to do whatever we need to do. All right. That doesn't happen. That doesn't happen. Nobody says, I want to make less money next year than I made this year. That's just not the way it works. So, you know, we can keep throwing money at issues or we can say, where are you allocating this money? And is this a good plan? Because throwing money at issues doesn't do anything. It's not going to fix the problem if we're not spending it in the right place. And it's clear that the money we've already provided isn't being spent in the right place. So maybe it comes down to a reallocation plan. And then what can we do to supplement that reallocation plan, but let them live with the existing means that they have? Because quite frankly, it seems like every time something comes up to just anything in this community, quite frankly, anytime anything comes up, it's we don't have any money. We don't have any money to do it. We don't have any money to do it. All right. Well, if you don't have any money to do it, it needs to get done. Then what's the next thing you got to do? You got to reallocate. You're going to change your game plan up a little bit there, folks. You know what I mean? Bella check at halftime, you know, change the game plan, win the game. We're not changing the game plan at halftime. We're not taking a real strong self-assessment as to where we stand and then making adjustments to improve our position.
[Adam Knight]: My understanding that the student was relatively new student in the school transfer student. That's my understanding.
[Adam Knight]: And do you feel as though this might be related to a bullying incident or something like that, an underlying bullying incident? What was the basis of the argument, the series of events or event that gave cause to arise to such an action?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Could the student that stabbed the other student actually be let back into school? Not according to the law. Is it the intention of the school administration to expel that student?
[Adam Knight]: Yes. I'm asking if the kid's getting expelled.
[Adam Knight]: Was there a drug overdose? Is that what the drug overdose?
[Adam Knight]: And you did say that the police and the fire department were there today?
[Adam Knight]: What kind of support?
[Adam Knight]: So they weren't there in a security capacity?
[Adam Knight]: And I mean, I understand that, you know, violence happens in schools. Most high schools on the news every day, though, ours is. Ours is on the news every day, surrounding communities on the news every day. All right. And don't make this about the Medford City Council gets passionate about issues. So it's our fault that kids get stabbed in high school, because that's nonsense. All right. Because we don't make the policies up there. All right. The school committee does. They're the ones that set the policies. They're the ones that are responsible.
[Adam Knight]: Why are the 12 kids hanging out in the bathroom?
[Adam Knight]: I'm not trying to hold you accountable for the words you just said. And I have the floor. You don't have a point of information because you're not a Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: I'm finished, Madam President, because this is like ridiculous. This is ridiculous. So what's the plan going forward tomorrow when these kids go back to school? How are they going to be safer than they were yesterday? Let's answer that question, because that's really what the people care about.
[Adam Knight]: And to all those people listening, when you go to the school committee, remember that.
[Adam Knight]: But I just have a question. How many of those administrators and other individuals that were deployed in the hallways that trained in safety training, trained in how to keep somebody safe?
[Adam Knight]: I don't know. You keep piping in too, because I'm trying to figure that out. Everybody's interrupting each other, so maybe you should stop that.
[Adam Knight]: I'm a little bit less concerned about the counseling of the traumatized bodies. And I'm a little bit more concerned about how we're going to keep bodies safe from getting stabbed and beat up and fought and stuff like that. So obviously we've got a systemic problem there, right? These events are happening over and over again.
[Adam Knight]: We've had two major events in the last 60 days.
[Adam Knight]: It's not isolated.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Nothing more than what she's spending her apple money on. We don't have any say whatsoever. So I don't understand why we need to entertain these presentations. I mean, all it is is a dog and pony show. I really think it's nothing more than campaigning. It's really campaigning. It has nothing to do with what's going on in the city. There's nothing to do with what's going on with his body. It's campaigning. So I don't think that that should be allowed. I think that if the mayor is going to offer a paper that the paper should be related to issues that require council action by law.
[Adam Knight]: Right. So, so Madam President, what that really is, is that's a, We don't want to do anything without doing anything because we want you guys to make sure that if we do it, you're not going to say anything bad if we make a mistake, right? I mean, ultimately they want verification and validation of the decisions that they make it, but we don't have to take a vote on it. I mean, come on, be a leader, make decisions.
[Adam Knight]: No, I'd like to know why we still haven't received one copy of one Warren article since January of 2020. 2020 2021 now 2021. We have not received one copy of one more article. You sat here before this body and put a budget presentation on. And we made it pretty darn clear that we want this document. This council has passed countless resolutions saying we want this document, yet your offices failed to provide it time and time again. Now, Bob, I know you're new to the city. And, you know, At some point, you got to say I'm not blaming you, but now I am blaming you because you're sat here before us in June. When we asked for this document, we still haven't received it. The council's taken numerous votes. The mayor's office has said, refer it to the finance director in a response to this body, but we still haven't received it. Why?
[Adam Knight]: I'm sorry. We've been asking for this document for a year and a half and he goes, what are you asking for now? I mean, is this- I understand the frustration. No, this isn't even about frustration. It's about a waste of my goddamn time. All right, that's what this is. All right, it's a waste. It's a waste of all of our time to come up here and be pranced around like dog and pony. Director Dickinson. To be pranced around like doggies.
[Adam Knight]: They're not passed by this body.
[Adam Knight]: What are we looking for? I want to know how much money K.P. Lawrence received in the past year, for example. So I can take a look at the Warren articles and I can say, oh, geez, we have a budget in the law department that says they're going to spend 200,000. But I'm looking here in the last six months, we spent $1.7 million at KP Law. Why? And I can get ahead of some of these issues so that come the budget in probably, we'll get away, maybe June 30th. When we get to June 30th for July 1st vote, I might be able to have a little bit of understanding as to why we're in the situation we're in.
[Adam Knight]: All right, that's okay.
[Adam Knight]: Has the law department ever called you and said, the city council has asked us to draft No, the law department's never called me. So the law department hasn't called you, the chief of staff hasn't called you, the mayor's office hasn't called you. But this council's taking at least a dozen affirmative votes to get this information.
[Adam Knight]: I feel bad that they said you already had to fall on your sword and be a sacrificial lamb.
[Adam Knight]: of this account. Yeah.
[Adam Knight]: It might also be helpful to go talk to the city clerk and say, hey, can I see a copy of the council tracking sheet? It says finance director, because there's probably literally 40 requests that we're looking for out of your office over the course of the last year.
[Adam Knight]: I'm just curious if a rank and file employee, say in the Medford DPW for a year and a half, failed to provide you with information that you requested, what would happen to them?
[Adam Knight]: First of all, I'd like to thank Councilor Scarpelli and Councilor Caraviello for being outspoken in their efforts to raise awareness as to what's going on in our schools. Neither one of these gentlemen were required to appear for the school committee meeting last night. They did so as concerned parents, grandparents, and public servants here in the city. And when I listen to what they say, and I listen to what people on the street say, and when I listen to what my kids say, and I listen to what my wife has to say about these public schools as an educator at 25 years in a neighboring school district, it doesn't make me feel good.
[Adam Knight]: I feel as though we're failing our students. We're failing the most vulnerable members of our population, our children. Councilor Scarpelli made a good point. He said, it's the one year anniversary. I said, one year anniversary? Are you talking about one year anniversary or what? One year anniversary. It's December, Christmas hasn't happened yet. I go, one year anniversary or what? He goes, no, you don't remember the two walkouts that happened last year? The two walkouts at Medford High School that happened last year? because of escalating violence in our public schools, when hundreds of children, hundreds of our students, our kids, our neighbors' children, our families got up out of their seats and they walked out of the school because they said, we can't take it anymore.
[Adam Knight]: And I think we all know what happens when kids become afraid to go to school. We've all seen the documentaries on how gangs are formed. We've all heard the stories about kids that get bullied in school and then decide to bring weapons because they've had enough and shoot up schools.
[Adam Knight]: Why do we feel as though we're impervious to the same situation or the same circumstances? Because we're not, we're not. So we're in a place where kids are afraid to go to school. And we're also in a place where we see embarrassing news story after embarrassing news story after embarrassing news story in the headlines with the word mentioned. And that's a shame because the city is better than that. The city is better than that.
[Adam Knight]: And we could all sit here and we can say, this isn't right. And this isn't wrong. but the data doesn't lie. The numbers don't lie. So let's talk about the numbers a little bit. Let's talk about the numbers. 42% proficiency in math, 50% proficiency in reading, 240th in the state college readiness index, 181st in graduation rate and 184th overall. Our kids deserve better. Our kids deserve better than what they get. They don't deserve to go to school afraid. They deserve to go to school with leaders that are willing to step up and accept the challenge. Now, when this incident first happened, I got an email and the email spoke volumes in terms of the culture that's going on with this administration. And I have to take a look at it and just mention it because I think it really speaks volumes.
[Adam Knight]: This is a confidential and urgent update relative to the circumstances at Medford High School from Dr. Marice Edouard-Vincent. Our MHS is currently in a stay in place due to a medical emergency. A student was stabbed in the restroom and transported to MGH. Four students have been identified. The police are here working with us. We're working on an official communication. What's that mean? We're working on an official communication. You shouldn't have to work on facts. You shouldn't have to work on truth. You shouldn't have to work on anything other than telling the people what happened and what you're gonna do to prevent it from happening again. Here we are 60 days ago, two short months ago, two short months ago, a girl was assaulted, terribly assaulted, captured on video, broadcast all across the local news stations. This poor girl has to go to school every day, shake it in her boots. If it weren't for the strength of her parents, if it weren't for the strength of her parents coming up here week after week, day after day, fighting to raise awareness about these issues, It would have gone away. And then 60 days later, we would have been talking about this gentleman that got assaulted and stabbed. And then it would have gone away. And then 60 days later, something else would happen. And we'd bring it up again, and we'd start talking about it. Let's get serious about it. All right? It's been a year. It's been a year since the students in that school told us they've had enough. It's been a year since they all got up out of their desks and had the courage to walk out. All right?
[Adam Knight]: This is sickening. This is sickening. And nothing anybody can say when they come up to this podium, all right, is gonna change the way I feel about it. The way it's been handled is horrible, horrible. These aren't isolated incidents. A year ago, one year ago, the whole school said we've had enough and they walked out. This is not an isolated incident. And the longer we keep approaching this situation as an isolated incident, the more isolated incidents are going to occur. And then when the budget comes around, we're going to hear the school department cry poor mouth. Well, everybody wants to go to Minuteman, and everybody wants to go to the charter school. Well, yeah, no kidding. Why wouldn't they?
[Adam Knight]: You can pay with peace of mind and financially send them to a school where you feel as though they're going to be safe and you're going to receive what you deserve. Or you can take the risks and send them to Medford High. And that's what parents are going to say to themselves. They're going to say, is it worth it to me to spend this money to not have to put up with stuff like this? And parents are going to say yes, because I'm a parent that's thinking about it.
[Adam Knight]: I hate to say it. Because I went to the Hervey School. I went to the Brooks School. I went to the Hopps School. I went to Medford High School. I played sports for Bud Kelly. I learned about what it's like to have blue and white in my veins. I learned about what it's like to be responsible, to want to be someone that gives back to his community. And that's why I chose to seek public office. And when I sit here, and I watch some of my colleagues in government hide under their desk, it infuriates me. It's okay to say no sometimes, you know, and it's okay to say yes, but what you have to do is say something. You can't stand for anything if you don't know where you stand and what you stand for.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, if I may.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much. You know, there's no such thing as a utopian society. And I don't think in this instance that throwing money at an issue, and quite frankly, given the decision makers who aren't allocating funds properly in the first place, more money to spend. I don't think this is going to do anything for those children that need to go to school tomorrow. It might help in the long run, but it's not going to do anything for those children that need to go to school tomorrow.
[Adam Knight]: As of right now, The committee needs to live within its means because there is no funding request from the mayor before us. So we can jump up and down and say, we want more money. We want more money. We do that every week about every issue. But ultimately right now, the administration hasn't put the paper before this body, which tells me the administration isn't taking it seriously, which would again, move me to the position to say, you have to live within your means and reallocate your funds then to address this issue. So what's the plan and what are you going to do? And why are our kids going back to school tomorrow if you don't have a plan and you don't know what you're gonna do? Quite frankly, I think the school should have been shut down until after Christmas vacation. Blanket, sorry, high school's closed until after Christmas vacation. In the interest of safety, in the interest of us showing this community that we're serious about the issues that are before us. Because a year has gone by and we haven't showed that. So, you know, Certainly someone that recognizes that there's a need for resources, but I also think that there is room for reallocation of existing funds, existing policies, and existing practices that will improve the safety in our schools. Reversing some of the policy decisions that were made over the last year is a good start. But again, there's no such thing as a utopian society and there's never going to be enough. How much is enough? There's never going to be enough. There's never, we're never going to reach a point where we say, Oh, we're cool. This is good. This is enough money for us to do whatever we need to do. All right. That doesn't happen. That doesn't happen. Nobody says, I want to make less money next year than I made this year. That's just not the way it works. So, you know, we can keep throwing money at issues or we can say, where are you allocating this money? And is this a good plan? Because throwing money at issues doesn't do anything. It's not going to fix the problem if we're not spending it in the right place. And it's clear that the money we've already provided isn't being spent in the right place. So maybe it comes down to a reallocation plan. And then what can we do to supplement that reallocation plan, but let them live with the existing means that they have? Because quite frankly, it seems like every time something comes up, they just, anything in this community, quite frankly, anytime anything comes up, it's, we don't have any money. We don't have any money to do it. We don't have any money to do it. All right, well, if you don't have any money to do it and it needs to get done, then what's the next thing you got to do? You got to reallocate. You got to change your game plan up a little bit there, folks. You know what I mean? It's like Belichick at halftime, you know, change the game plan, win the game. We're not changing the game plan at halftime. We're not taking a real strong self-assessment as to where we stand and then making adjustments to improve our position.
[Adam Knight]: My understanding that the student was relatively new student in the school transfer student. That's my understanding.
[Adam Knight]: Yes. And do you feel as though this might be related to a bullying incident or something like that, an underlying bullying incident? What was the basis of the argument, the series of events or event that gave cause to arise to such an action?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Could the student that stabbed the other student actually be let back into school? Not according to the law. Is it the intention of the school administration to expel that student?
[Adam Knight]: Yes. I'm asking if the kid's getting expelled.
[Adam Knight]: So they weren't there in a security capacity?
[Adam Knight]: And I mean, I understand that, you know, violence happens in schools. Most high schools aren't on the news every day. as this as is on the news every day surrounding communities on the news every day. All right, and don't make this about the Medford City Council gets passionate about issues. So it's our fault that kids get stabbed in high school because that's nonsense. All right, because we don't make the policies up there. All right, the school committee does they're the ones that set the policies.
[Adam Knight]: Why is it 12 kids hanging on the bathroom?
[Adam Knight]: I'm not trying to hold you accountable for the words you just said. I have the floor. You don't have a point of information because you're not a Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: I'm finished, Madam President, because this is like ridiculous. This is ridiculous. So what's the plan going forward tomorrow when these kids go back to school, how are they going to be safer than they were yesterday? Let's answer that question. because that's really what the people care about.
[Adam Knight]: And I don't know. And to all those people listening, when you go to the school committee, remember that.
[Adam Knight]: but I just have a question. How many of those administrators and other individuals that were deployed in the hallways that trained in safety training, trained in how to keep somebody safe?
[Adam Knight]: Everybody's interrupting each other, so maybe you should stop that.
[Adam Knight]: I'm a little bit less concerned about the counseling of the traumatized bodies and I'm a little bit more concerned about how we're going to keep bodies safe on that, right? These events are happening over and over again.
[Adam Knight]: Two major events in the last 60 days.
[Adam Knight]: nothing more than what she's spending her Apple money on. We don't have any say whatsoever. So I don't understand why we need to entertain these presentations. I mean, all it is is a dog and pony show. I really think it's nothing more than campaigning. It's really campaigning. It has nothing to do with what's going on in the city. There's nothing to do with what's going on with his body. It's campaigning. So I don't think that that should be allowed. I think that if the mayor is going to offer a paper that the paper should be related to issues that require council action by law.
[Adam Knight]: We don't want to do anything without doing anything because we want you guys to make sure that if we do it, you're not going to say anything bad if we make a mistake, right? I mean, ultimately they want verification and validation of the decisions that they make it, but we don't have to take a vote on it. I mean, come on, be a leader, make decisions.
[Adam Knight]: I motion to adopt the lowest residential tax amendment present.
[Adam Knight]: Just for clarity, seek to amend it to adopt a minimum residential factor of 91.43.
[Adam Knight]: The motion is not to adopt a residential exemption.
[Adam Knight]: nine times that I've taken this vote. Ultimately, when we adopt a residential tax exemption, all we're doing is we're still taxing the same amount of money. All we're doing is shifting who are asking to give us that money. And based upon the analysis of our city assessor, the city assessor has shown that the break-even point would make more people actually pay more in taxes than those that would receive a break. So it didn't make sense mathematically for us to do this. there'd be more people in the community that were seeing their tax bills actually increase, not decrease, based upon the assessment that was performed by our assessor.
[Adam Knight]: Just one thing I'd like to point out, Madam President. In looking at the presentation that Ms. Bordeaux put on back in August of this year, she did note that at a 20% owner-occupied exemption, the break-even point would be any home valued at $707,000 would be the break-even. And the only value over that would be receiving an incremental tax increase. It looks like for every 90,000 dollars, it goes up about 200 bucks. Then the next 90,000, it goes up about 400 bucks. The next 90,000, it goes up about 800 bucks. The next 90,000, it goes up about 1600 bucks. The next 90,000. It goes up up there to 200 bucks. So if you look at a property let's say like 23 pushing street down here in the city of Medfield which is assessed at $803,000 right now that home actually wouldn't even meet the requirements for the break even point that home would actually pay more in taxes than we pay without the exemption.
[Adam Knight]: It's just going to move to not adopt a small commercial exemption.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to not adopt.
[Adam Knight]: I'm tired of hearing from Eversource. I want this done. I just want it to be over. Literally, Eversource came in this community my first term in office. This is my fifth term. It's nine years. It just needs to be over. It just needs to be over. These people need relief in this neighborhood.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much. So just to recap, currently, The project that the work is not complete by the contractor right the city has not accepted the roadway correct. Okay. The applicant ever source is required to have. a field engineer, a city field engineer. Can we get that information published on the Eversource pipeline website that we have here at the city, the page?
[Adam Knight]: I know, but can we get that information on there? So instead of people calling us, we can say, call the field engineer. He'll tell you exactly what's going on tomorrow. You don't want those calls either and you don't need it. Everyone, you're working on other stuff. We got a field engineer they're paying for. Why are you going to take the calls? That's what he's here for.
[Adam Knight]: All right. Lastly, when is it exactly with the drop dead project completion date?
[Adam Knight]: I'm sorry.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, I'm going through my files here. I have April 30th, 2015, 19th, 2015, October 20th, 2015. It's 2023. It will be relatively soon, relatively soon it will be, you know, so this is something that needs to come to an end. And it needs to be done before school opens again because every year. all summer long, it's nice and quiet. And then come the second, the third week in August, we decided we want to rip up every street in the city. I mean, this year we did it at the Brooke school, right? Literally the first day of school, let's start a construction project around four streets that surround the school. All right. We need to plan better. All right. So we, we, we can't put this neighborhood through any more undue strain and stress. Now I know there's a ton of benefits that come with this through the MOU. Um, I've exercised as much patience as I possibly can on this. Um, and I appreciate, um, all that you're going to try to do to get out of our city so that you can move on to the next eight miles of, uh, pipeline that you have to do somewhere else. I'm sure. Um, but with that being said, um, I'd like to see that, um, contact information published on the city website. And, um, I'd like to get a commitment from Eversource. This is going to be done before the opening of school.
[Adam Knight]: If I'd like to see a commitment that this is going to be completed before school reopens in September. And if we can't get that commitment that I'd like to see monthly written updates, relative to the progress of the construction. I'm here in my hand I have a card from a gentleman from Watkins strategies his name was Sean so tell him he was the senior public affairs specialist for Watkins strategy. Back when this job, he probably retired by now, it's been so long, but back when this job started, Sean would send us weekly updates and monthly updates saying, this is what to expect, this is what's going on. We also got updates like that with the Craddock Bridge project. And they'd say, the project is 73% complete. We've done this, this, and this, this week, next week we're doing this, this, and this. So then we don't have to call, we don't have to do this, right?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much. I think there's something else that we have to consider here. There are many pros and cons that come with living in a neighborhood that has a pocket or living in a home that abuts a park. One of the largest cons is that a small, minor change at that particular location can have major quality of life issues for the people who live in those homes. Look at, for example, place that park on a Saturday morning in the summer. Try finding a parking spot. Good luck, good luck. Driveways blocked every hour on the hour, can't get out of your driveway ever. So when you think about the mechanism that this administration loves to use to gather data, it usually consists of sitting behind a computer in an ivory tower, right? If you're gonna make a change, get out of city hall, get into the neighborhoods and talk to some people. All right, enough's enough. Because ultimately, if I get a survey about off-leash hours about a dog in the park, you know what I'm gonna do? I don't care about dogs. I'm gonna take it and I'm gonna throw it in the trash and I'm not gonna respond, because I don't care about dogs. The only people that are gonna respond are the people that do. So you're gonna get a skewed data set right from the start. Right from the start. Here's a voluntary survey that we're posting on social media. Okay, so you have to have social media. You have to follow the city administration. for you to even have access to participate in this data collection tool. Well, that's not going to give us fair representation of the actual thoughts of the people in this community. The data set's flawed right from the start. All this is, is a way to say, I have some support to do something that I want to do because someone asked me to do it. All right, it's not a good way to create public policy. Get out of the office, go talk to some people. Have a community meeting, have a neighborhood meeting. What park are you gonna do it at? If you're gonna do it at this park, I'm sure you must have a neighborhood meeting. I'm sure you must have called all the abutters. I mean, I remember when I sat here and the mayor sat there and we had to change all the notifications on any time anybody filed for a variance, just filed for a variance for 500 feet from the location in a circumference. But the mayor is going to change what goes on in these parks, which she, by the way, has zero authority to do, pursue it to two city ordinances and the parks and private policy. But that goes down a whole other path because, you know, if you don't know how government works, how are we going to get things done? Right. Right. So with that being said, I appreciate Councilor Scarpelli for bringing this issue up, but ultimately these surveys don't work. They're not representative of our community. And I've just outlined the reasons why. So how about we stop with the surveys and stop with, you know, these half-assed approaches that operate in the government. I mean, cause that's really what it is. That's really what it is. And pardon my French, but you know, I rest my case.
[Adam Knight]: It's upon the data that you just mentioned to us. It sounds like 66% of the respondents, the dog owners, which is, and you said none would respond, sir.
[Adam Knight]: And on that note, Councilor Tseng, I mean, you have me about one inch away from filing an amendment for this paper to bring back Frosty. So thanks for bringing that up.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, one of the benefits of working remotely is that I have the opportunity to see the Camp Lejeune water contamination lawsuit commercial 600 times a day. And that would lead me to believe, if I'm seeing it that much, many of our veterans who are elderly in nature are seeing it as well. And as we are all aware, whenever something like this comes up, The scam calls usually come along with them. So I was hoping that a veteran service director could set up a hotline for individuals to access that may be looking for information relative to the Camp Lejeune water contamination lawsuit, in an interest to protect them from scamming, phishing, spamming, phishing, and the like. I mean, ultimately, It's something we see out there every day. You know, the social attacks are more and more common. And I think it's important for us to take the steps necessary to provide our residents with the protections and safeguards that we can't, especially when something like this is being brought up. Ultimately, it's a lawsuit that addresses Parkinson's disease, cancer, and various other diseases that come along with the exposure to various contaminants, which would also lead one to believe that some of these individuals may not be in the best of health, which would make them even more vulnerable. So I'd ask that this correspondence be forwarded to the veteran service director with the support of my colleagues.
[Adam Knight]: I'd just like to amend the paper matter present to ask that that be published on the Vetted Services website.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, ultimately, our parking department is destined to fail if we keep operating the way we are currently operating. We need to do something a little bit different. Outreach, we're all outraged about the outreach from Eversource, but our parking department goes and throws up meters all over the place without talking to anybody in the neighborhood. It doesn't make sense to me, right? What's good for the goose is good for the gander. We should be holding our own employees to the same standards that we're holding those private contracts that are coming into the city to do business as well. I just had the opportunity to have a correspondence with the foreman. of the parking department and I asked him to meet with an individual who's working right across the street. As a matter of fact, at 99 Riverside Ave, they're doing some construction work to the affordable housing units there. And I asked the foreman to meet with the superintendent of the construction job for the simple purpose of understanding what the parking rules and regulations are in the region and where he could park his trucks. I sent that email to the foreman. The foreman never responded. I got an email from the director, CC'd with the mayor, with Nina, with the DPW director and the city engineer. All right, this department's never gonna work. It's never gonna work if the foreman can't pick up the phone and talk to somebody on the street. All right, that's what those offices are for, the foot patrol offices, right? They're down there, the parking enforcement offices. They're supposed to communicate with the individuals that are in this community. So ultimately, I think that there is a very significant lack of communication coming out of that office. There's a significant lack of understanding among many of the residents in the neighborhood, what's expected of them. And there's a haphazard application of the enforcement policy that keeps people a little bit concerned about the way things are going. So with that being said, I support the resolution wholeheartedly and thank my colleagues for joining me in supporting it.
[Adam Knight]: Ultimately, what I'm asking for is information relative to violence. high school. There have been a number of reports, a number of concerns. I've been contacted by a number of parents relative to this very issue. And I'd like to get a look at what data we're collecting up there to see if there are any trends or any type of circumstances going on that we need to know about. Ultimately, just like most other things in this community, we're left in the dark until brave parents and brave voices come up and fill us in on what's going on. And I think that it's time that we take a look at this long and hard. So I've asked for the last two years. I understand that this data is going to be very interesting because the last two years have been very interesting relative to the population and the public schools. But I'd like to see what we have there and I ask my council colleagues to support this measure. Second.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. It's been a longstanding practice that an employee for the city of Medford who's injured in the line of work and receiving workers' compensation benefits would be entitled to utilize sick vacation time or other earned leave time to make themselves whole. An employee injured in the line of work would be compensated by the city, the self-insurer, at a rate of 60% of their pay. So if an employee gets hurt at work and they're receiving comp benefits at 60% of their pay, they're not receiving 40% of their pay. And most times that 40% goes to pay for small things that aren't important to families, like health insurance and stuff like that. But recently the city administration implemented a policy after some, I believe, 70 years on the books of allowing workers in this community to utilize their sick leave when on workers' compensation. The city administration said, no, you can't anymore. And I'm not sure why they would make such policy of why they would take such steps to hurt families and put families in a bad financial situation on top of what's going on already with the injury that a worker suffers. So when looking at this, I've also seen that this allowance of the utilization of sick time for injured workers, collecting workers' compensation benefits is not applied even handedly. It's applied haphazardly. If this person, maybe you get it. If you're that person, maybe you don't. Yeah, we're not doing that anymore. No, tomorrow we are, today we're not. So quite frankly, if there were three people in the same department that got hurt, they might all get three different answers. And I don't think that that really works in the interest of humanitarianism, equality. or within the purpose of the Workers' Compensation Statute, or within the purpose of the utilization of John Sickly. So with that being said, I'm asking for an ordinance to be drafted. This is something that's happening, it's real, it's happening right now to workers here in the city. And it needs to be addressed in short order. And if KP Law doesn't write it, I won't. But it needs to be done, and it needs to be done soon, because we need to protect these people.
[Adam Knight]: All right. Sick time is earned time. It's their time. They earn it. It's to be utilized when they're suffering an injury or an illness. And the administration is using their discretion to say, well, you're collecting workers' compensation benefits for an injury that you suffered in the line of business. We're not going to let you be made whole. We're not going to let you utilize your earned time so that you can pay for your health benefits, for your wife and your children. It's sick, it's sick. And from what I understand, whatever your union affiliation is, has a little bit of what to do with who's going to be the one that gets approved and who doesn't. All right? And quite frankly, that's opening the city up. That's opening the city up to a number of liabilities. A number of liabilities. It's workers' compensation retaliation. It's discrimination against a disabled individual.
[Adam Knight]: That's my council college to support the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: And Councilor Scarpelli, an explanation, right? So you get 60% of your wages replaced through the workers' compensation system. Then they utilize their accrued sick time to make up the other 40%. We all do. So that they're made whole. But what happens in this circumstance is because they're not allowed to utilize that other 40%, they have to take that 40% from the 60%. So, because that's the only income they have, right? So now you're seeing a worker who's injured in the line of duty, who's not able to utilize their sick or vacation life, who's being compensated at 60% of their pay, but has a 40% liability that they have to pay back the city to keep the health insurance going. So in essence, if I got hurt on the job, I'd be getting paid 20% when I have accrued sick time in the bank that I could use to keep me whole and to keep my bills paid and to keep my family protected with health insurance.
[Adam Knight]: And I know it's not, you know, it's complicated. It's not the sexiest thing in the world, but I just happen to understand workers' comp, because that's what they do for a living.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Everybody watched the news. Metro made the news again last night, huh? Metro was on TV again. And once again, it was not to celebrate our community success. Once again, it was not to celebrate our community success. Let's think about it, the school renaming, the Diane Guarino disaster, violence at our public schools, but now a vote of no confidence by our teachers against the city administration and the school committee that passed overwhelmingly at a rate greater than 90%. After listening to all the drama, community outrage, the fear, and the concerns. One underlying theme that I keep hearing over and over again, no matter what the crisis is, is that people have no forum to voice their concerns, to voice their opinions, and to voice their criticisms of the school committee and the school administration. This council has made multiple requests for this to be addressed voluntarily, and nothing has happened, nothing has changed. Individuals go up to meetings that wanna speak and they're boxed out.
[Adam Knight]: These are the same public schools that she attended.
[Adam Knight]: and that she has to go through these lengths to publicize the situation to the extent that she has to get justice for her daughter. I said it last week, and I'll say it again. I think it's shameful the way that this situation is being handled. And I think it's shameful the way that those other situations that I mentioned are being handled. And I think it's time that we do something about it. When those people come up to this podium and they talk to us and they ask us for the opportunity to voice their concerns and their criticisms, we all tell them we're gonna stand with them. We all tell them we're gonna do more.
[Adam Knight]: She told us that we all have a role in this. And she's absolutely right. And this paper tonight is my first attempt at hoping to make this right, to address some of the inaction that this body and that the lower house, we'll call it, that the lower house has had as well. Being the city council, we have the opportunity to make ordinances. We have the opportunity to make ordinances that provide directives. And I think that underneath and based upon the circumstances that are surrounding us over the past several months, it's incumbent upon us to act.
[Adam Knight]: I know it's not in a perfect form. I know it's not in a final form. I know it's something that's going to need to be addressed and need to be discussed. But it's something that has teeth. It's something that has teeth. It's something that has requirements.
[Adam Knight]: to Nicole, to Rob, to Mrs. Guarino, to those that felt they didn't have an opportunity to speak during the school renaming, to the 400 teachers that stormed City Hall yesterday that feel as though no one's listening. Someone's listening. Someone's listening. We want to help. I want to help. I want to make it right. I said that last week, and I'll say it again. So with that being said, Madam President, I rest my case.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I must just say, if I can just interject, please.
[Adam Knight]: If I can just interject for just a moment, please. The issue isn't violence. in the schools. That's just one component of many of the crises that have occurred over the last two and a half, three years. All right. The issue is the body's total lack of an open forum or a vehicle to it for any individual in this community to address their elected school body or the superintendent of schools. All right. The point I want to point to the purpose of the proposal. The purpose of the proposal is to improve communication with our stakeholders and establish a vehicle to increase their participation in the development of policies and procedures governing our schools. That's what the purpose of this is. So when my colleague puts a B paper forward, I don't feel as though that really falls within the spirit of the paper. And the reason I say that is because just a couple of minutes ago, the gentleman made an amendment to Councilor Scarpelli's paper for KP law. And he asked that our finance director, Bob Dickinson, supply us with copies of the Warren articles. Now these copies of the Warren articles are something that we've been asking for now for, can anybody tell me? Probably the better part of three years that we still don't receive them, three years, Warren articles are where we spend our money. We don't get that. We've been asking for it by way of ordinance, by way of council action multiple times and we don't get it. So right now we don't even know what the financial picture of this community is. This council's debated papers and entertained papers concerning a moratorium on spending until such time as the administration provides us with an accurate financial picture of what's going on in this community. The administration has not done that. So it will be irresponsible for this body for us to say, hey, spend more money, even though we don't know if we even have any.
[Adam Knight]: I know you guys don't want to do me a cuppa because you were silent on the call the other night. And I appreciate that you get for doing that, for having the courage to come up and speak on a call like this. I really do. I appreciate it. I really do. I think you guys, it's great that you have the courage to do it now. But here's the thing, all right? The paper isn't about this one issue, all right? The paper's about the way the body handles the public and the way the body handles the public when issues of crisis or catastrophe occur in this community. All right, now, last I checked, there was no lawyer in city hall. We got a lot of legal opinions flying around this room right now, but there's no lawyer in city hall last I checked. We talked about that a little while ago too. So maybe the paper won't pass this muster, maybe it will. Why don't we send it to them and say, do something. Tell us why you won't comply. Why don't you wanna do this? Why don't you wanna listen to the people that put you here? Why don't you wanna earn your paycheck? Or you can challenge it, or you can just comply. If you can challenge it, you can comply. Why don't you just adopt a policy that says, all we're asking for here is three hours a month, three hours a month to earn your paycheck. That's not too much, I don't think, to ask. I don't think that's too much to ask. Send it to them. Let them say, no, we're not going to do it. Then they can tell us why they don't want to hear from the people. Let them say to us, Oh, well, you know, yeah, whatever. I don't really care that's not that important to me, I don't really want to listen to what you have to say or they could they could just clearly say, because we don't have to. But then we'll know where we stand. Then we'll know where was, then we'll know where we stand. I read for people, not for prestige, not for any other reason.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information. With the same hold true between other legislative bodies and various levels of government.
[Adam Knight]: Move rule.
[Adam Knight]: Who's going to give us the legal opinion? The mayor's private attorney?
[Adam Knight]: I mean, all she wants to do is prevent this from coming out.
[Adam Knight]: As I noted in my presentation with the paper, I did say the paper needs work. I did make a motion to move approval with the understanding that the paper probably doesn't have the support and it's going to die. I would be willing to withdraw my motion to move approval and have the paper referred to committee of the whole. For us to meet within the next 30 days to discuss some real legitimate. Options and opportunities for us to pursue certainly, you know. The councils have recent issues and concerns and a lot of them surround. legal basis and whether or not we're able to take such action. I certainly feel that we're in a position to do certain aspects of what we asked for. Maybe forfeiting their pay isn't something that we can do, but maybe wiping it out of the budget the next year is something we can do. So there's different things that we can put in place and different protocols we can put in place. So I'd be happy to sit down and further discuss language or put together a small working group of members of council to do that. in the interest of time, because ultimately, you know, Ms. Branley is right. What's the proposal? Where are we going with this? You know, if we're going to vote on it, it's going to die, and then we can't bring anything back for 90 days. It's a simple matter. We're better off keeping it in the committee and trying to work on something and getting it out there instead of with a paper vote that's going to fail and then be parliamentarily precluded from being brought back for 90 days.
[Adam Knight]: Move approval.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. President, thank you very much. Although I don't know Mrs. Giordano personally, I do know her son, Paul. He's a gentleman and a scholar. He was a great police officer here in the city of Medford. More importantly, he's a great person. If he's anything of a reflection of his mother, then God willing, she must be a great person as well. Thank Councilor Garavaglia for bringing this matter up. He seems always to be very well in tune and plugged in with the neighborhoods in this community. And this is just the perfect example of that. I move approval.
[Adam Knight]: I'm understanding you're working in a part-time capacity here in this community, right? And that you've moved on, you've left Medford and you're working in another neighboring community at this point in time as well.
[Adam Knight]: I don't want you to feel like you have, because you haven't. Okay. It's through no doing of your own. If it weren't for you being here this evening, we probably wouldn't even have this paper before us. Okay. Um, so thank you for being willing. All right. Be willing to continue to carry the torch. All right, we've had a revolving door personnel issues that I'm going on in city hall. You've seen it. And ultimately, you know what I mean? If you weren't good enough to come forward and to be here and to be willing to do this, you and Ted, I don't know where we'd be. All right, I really don't know where we'd be. So thank you for being willing to do that. I, as one member of this body, am comfortable doing what we always do. It hasn't hurt us in the past. I'm just more comfortable taking a tax vote in person. I understand what we're doing here tonight. We've done it, and I've done it 10 times before, and I'd be happy to do it 10 times again. So with that being said, even if we table it this evening and bring it back up next week, I, as one member of the council, wouldn't have any questions for you. I think you did a good job with the presentation, and it's really pro forma at this point. We do this setting of the tax rate every year, And the setting of this tax rate really supports the budget that had just been passed. You know, so all we're doing is really funding the measures that we've, we're setting the tax rate to fund the measures that we've approved. So, you know, I think that, you know, six one half a dozen or the other, but in terms of the job you've done here and the position that you think you put us in, you haven't put us in any position at all. And I wish you the best in pursuing better opportunities for yourself and your family.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor Knight. Thank you for coming to the rescue once again.
[Adam Knight]: Move the question.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, the only reason that I brought the motion forward was because I noticed that we had an inordinate number of people on the call. And after looking at what was left on the agenda, I don't think that they were too concerned about fiber optics funding from our APA program. So that's why I just wanted to make sure that in the interest of time, that these people have taken time away from their family to be here, that they had the opportunity to be heard.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much. Um, first of all, um I've known Nicole and Rob for quite a bit of time now, and I'm very proud to call them my friends. And I'm very proud of Nicole for taking the action that she's taken and standing up and fighting for her family and not letting this get pushed under the rug. All right. Um, it takes a lot for someone who's been so invested in this community for so many years to get up and to do what she's doing. And I know that the last thing that she wants to be in the last thing she wants her family to be is the center of attention surrounded by such negative energy. Um, so, you know, Nicole, thank you. And through you to, to Rob and your daughter, um, for putting up the fight. Um, because if you weren't going to talk about it, it was going to go away and you're not letting it go away and you shouldn't, um, ultimately, you know, There's been a systemic failure. The systems failed you and it's not right. And it's not an isolated incident. All right. We hear the stories every day. Um, the same mayor that chases down room is putting GPS trackers on, on city employees cars is the same mayor that's trying to control the narrative on this, but this administration should be doing is reaching out to this family. to see what they can do to protect the family, not reaching out to the newspapers to see how they can control a narrative. I think it's shameful. I think it's absolutely shameful. When I sit back and I think to just a few years ago, when I mentioned it previously, we had a city councilor standing in the auditorium at Medford high school, screaming and yelling like a lunatic at the superintendent over a gun magazine that was found in a little theater after a private rental. I'm still waiting for that former city councilor who's now a mayor to have this conversation with her superintendent. Cause I don't think it's happened. I haven't seen it. There are safety issues in our schools. There's no question about it. This is not an isolated incident. What happened to Nicole's daughter wasn't just kids being kids that got into a disagreement that ended up in a fistfight. It was a criminal attack, an organized criminal attack. And it's, it's, it's sickening. It's sad. It's sad to see that this woman can't get answers, that she can't send her daughter to school to receive an education and have the peace of mind that her child's going to be safe. Imagine sending your kid off every day, a nervous wreck. It's bad enough out there in the world, not having to worry about things like this. And imagine sending your kid off to school every single day being a nervous wreck, wondering if today's going to be the day that you get another phone call. You know, consultants, consultants, consultants, meetings, consultants. We have a pretty well-paid administrative staff over in the school department. We have people that are making salaries over $200,000, but we need consultants. The focus should be on the student. The focus should be on the victim. Quite frankly, I think Mr. Greenspan should be involved in this. I think immediately after this occurred, Mr. Greenspan should have reached out to the family. He is the attorney for the school department. I don't understand why Mr. Greenspan hasn't sat down with the family yet. The superintendent should have been over at the house, visiting the family. They should have been at the hospital to make sure that she was okay. Those are the things that happen in the community where our leaders are vested. Imagine being a parent and after this happens, you pick up the phone and you call the superintendent's office and they tell you that she's on vacation. Talk to me in a week. Are you kidding me? Are you kidding me? It's craziness. It's absolute craziness. Nicole, I stand with you. And I stand with the other families who have gone through this very same situation. And quite frankly, I have kids in the public school system too, and it hasn't been a pretty ride. You know, my third grader has quite a bit of trouble at school. Seventh graders in the playground at the Brooks School. The seventh graders have no business at the playground in the Brooks School. Why are they there? You know, what steps are we taking to make sure that our schools are safe? And why isn't the mayor acting with the same outrage that she acted with previously when a far less severe incident happened, when nobody got hurt. These are the questions that I ask myself every day. These are leadership issues. I'll walk through the fire with you. I will. I think this is terrible. And I think that there are some resources out there and there are some ideas for us to pursue. Like George said, you shouldn't be considering out-of-district placement. You shouldn't have to be forced to spend money to send your daughter to another school because you're not feeling safe. But maybe the city should do it. Maybe the city should send her to the charter school. Maybe the city should get her in there then. Maybe the city should take some affirmative steps to be sure that your tax dollars are being well spent and that your family is being protected. The number one role in government is to make sure that our community is safe. And we're failing it. And we're failing our most vulnerable citizens, our students. So for that, I'm sorry. And I look at this as a reflection of the failure of government. not just the administration, not just the school department of government as a whole. And as Nicole said at the beginning, very astutely, we all have a partner. I wanna make it right.
[Adam Knight]: I was just wondering if the dog and pony show was over now or if we're good to go.
[Adam Knight]: participate during public participation, but he's having some technical difficulties raising his hand if he's still on the call.
[Adam Knight]: I'm afraid of the classification. He didn't give him a step. So he's getting like a $20 a week raise. No, because he's going up from a $20 to a $21. So it's probably like a $300 a week, $400 a week.
[Adam Knight]: The difference between what was budgeted for this fiscal year and the upgrade. Thank you. OK.
[Adam Knight]: Can the chief of staff explain to us when exactly we are gonna receive any of this financial information that we requested in January of 2020 at the first meeting of this Medford City Council? And I believe if we look at the agenda here, the 33rd, we're now at the 33rd regular meeting at the first meeting, we requested quarterly financial updates. And we also requested that we receive monthly copies of the Warren articles with 33 meetings in. We've never ever once received any of it. But yet, week after week, we are asked to make votes on financial appropriations, on spending, on upgrades, on items that really revolve around finances in this community. And I don't think it's fair to us that you're gonna keep us here in the dark and make us beg for information that we've been asking for for the better part of a year now, 33 regular meetings. It's not fair to us. It's not fair to us to put us in a position where you're not going to give us the information and the tools necessary to make good decisions. So here we are again, treated like mushrooms, right? Put them in the closet, shut the lights off, throw one on them and see what grows. Yeah. Cause that's what it is. I mean, ultimately at the end of the day, that's what's happening here. You know, week in and week out, it's the same reiteration. We haven't asked for much. We've said the same thing. Give us a lawyer. We had to fight for that for nine months. Still don't have one. 10 months we've been asking for just simple, basic financial information so that we could make good financial decisions. We still don't have that. So I'm at a loss. The city's falling apart. The city's falling apart. Our schools aren't safe. We don't know what the financial picture is. We have a finance director who told us right now that he can't give us an update because the reconciliations are off and the information that I give you is probably gonna be wrong. But we're being asked to spend week in and week out. week in and week out. I'll say it again. The city's falling apart. All right. We don't know what our financial picture is. And our schools aren't safe. What more is there? What more is there? A strong financial background, a strong, stable, local finance department, you know, strong public education system. We're failing in both aspects. At least I feel as though we are, because I'm not receiving any information to the contrary. Thank you, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: So point, it's first quarter for this fiscal year, all right? But what about the fiscal year that just passed? The one that we've been asking for for that fiscal year too, all right? So you want to talk about the first quarter of this fiscal year? That's all well and good, but we've been asking for this for four, four, four quarters now, three from the previous fiscal year and one from this fiscal year.
[Adam Knight]: It appears that we're the only people in the world that can't hire 100 people that want to work $100,000 a year jobs. You know what I mean? It's crazy, huh? Imagine that. Manhattan, Mass, the only city in the world that can't hire people into jobs that get paid $100,000 a year. You know, we had a finance director. We had a very capable finance director. He ran out of town, right? Ran out of the town to do discriminatory actions. We had one. We had a finance director. We weren't in this situation. We created this situation that we're in. The administration's actions caused a reaction. That's why we're in this situation. It's not because of a lack of interest or the inability to hire. We had somebody in the job, but we ran out of town. And then for 10 months, because we ran that person out of town, this city was left with its pants down. And the taxpayers in this community are the ones that are suffering. So we can sit up here and we can make all the excuses in the world and talk about, well, this happens over here and this happens over there. Or we can be leaders. We can be leaders and we can say, hey, listen, this is the problems that are at hand. Let's tackle them and let's fix them. Let's not make excuses for them and they go cut ribbons every time something goes wrong.
[Adam Knight]: that served in an acting capacity, and again, was also kept in the dock, well, hundreds of thousands of dollars were funneled to KP Law to perform the legal services, KP Law being the mayor's private legal counsel, not the city's counsel, not legal counsel that works in the interest of the taxpayer, but legal counsel that works under contract for the mayor, not for the residents of this community. So when we had a city solicitor that sat in the city solicitor's office, which is now vacant, we have nobody in there except for an office administrator, No lawyers, no lawyers at all in City Hall. No lawyer in City Hall, none. KP Law on speed dial, probably $800 to $500, $800 an hour. And we're calling them on speed dial. We have an office right there, vacant, with two positions that probably total close to $200,000. So, well, we can look over in the city of Somerville and say, well, they're doing such great things. I mean, look at Pothouse Circle, for example, that doesn't make it get vertical. I don't know what does, you know what I mean? But I'd like to compare ourselves again, to be leaders and to be people are the first, not followers. So I really don't care what they're doing next door. I care what we're doing here and I know we can do a better job here.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Madam President. Thank you very much. I mean, through you to the family. I just want to offer my sincere condolences as well. Mr. Matarazzo was a friend, a friend. My father's known each other for a long time through the membership. Um, I had the pleasure to meet him on a number of occasions. Janice and Frank have been good friends for a long time, and I'm very sad they heard that loss. So I just want to join Councilor Caraviello in expressing my condolences personally.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I find that in the subsequent committee reports. In order, I move approval.
[Adam Knight]: If we could just take that list and send it to the parking office as well, so that they don't put streets to permit parking I think that might be helpful for them as well.
[Adam Knight]: I just more of a suggestion I know the chief of staffs on the call.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, apparently this paper that was before us tonight, November 15th, 2022, with an expected hire date for the person in the position of tonight, November 15th, 2022. This position must obviously not fall under this nationwide municipal hiring crisis, obviously, right? I mean, geez, we talked about all these positions that couldn't be filled, but here we are, we have a paper that was given to us at our last meeting, and they expect it to be filled today. This is amazing to me. You know why it's amazing to me? Because it's not fair and it's not equitable. Because when we had a presentation last week, it became very clear to me that this job was spoken for. All right? This isn't a job that's being posted. This isn't a job where we're going out and recruiting talent. This is a job where we're creating a job on the inside to take care of somebody. All right? Let's be clear. I mean, let's really see what's going on here. All right? Let's look at the history of personnel and employment in this community, in labor relations in this community over the last three years. All right? If you're a friend of the mayor, we're going to create a job for you and give you a raise. If you're not, if you're not, we're going to investigate you. We're going to fire you. We're going to have you taken out in handcuffs. We're going to make you submit to psychological evaluations. And if you're part of organized labor, forget about it. Forget about it. The way that you get treated if you're part of organized labor in this community is like dog meat, chopped liver. All right, how dare you be part of an organization that stands up for itself and fights for equity and rights in the workplace? What I look at this as, what I see this as, is it's an end around. All right, they want to give somebody a raise, but they can't do it under the confines of the existing cap position. Right, they want to take care of one of their own, and they want to increase somebody's wealth. All right, we have how many workers that have come up before us fighting, fighting for a fair and equitable cost of living adjustment? That's far less. in the race that comes with these reclassification papers. So week in and week out, we get select papers to give select individuals select raises that well exceed the mayor's 2.5% target, resistance point. Well exceed that. And it's good for those people. But when it comes to the rank and file working people that carry the city on their back, it's not good enough for them. So we want to talk about equity. which I know is a big, big topic among some of us in this council. We want to talk about fairness. Let's look at that. Let's look at equity and fairness. Let's look at the morale in this building. What message are we sending these workers? We are creating positions and giving people raises, left and right. We have organized labor coming up here, week in and week out, week in and week out, asking for our support, asking for our help. I cannot support this paper this evening. I don't like the idea of making an appropriation before we create the classification.
[Adam Knight]: I can't support this paper this evening. I don't think it's fair, I don't think it's equitable, and I don't think it falls in line with the values that this council has. We talk the talk, let's walk the walk. Let's stand with these working people. Let's stand with organized labor, and let's say, no, enough's enough. We're not playing favorites. A rising tide is going to float all ships, not just the ones that go along to get along.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, just to clear the record, I just want to make sure that she's aware I was the counsel to section 21 that all right, I'm not afraid to say that I did it. And I did it. And I did it on behalf of. the fiscal responsibility that I have here in this community, all right? So when we sit here and we look at what's going on, and we look at the narrative, and we look at the actual realities, all right? Enough with the lies, the spin, you know, the puppeting. It's not getting sold anymore. It's over. I mean, it's over. We're not buying it anymore. You know what I mean? That's just the fact of the matter, all right? You know what I mean? It's just the fact of the matter. We're not buying the story anymore, because the narrative never lines up with the fact patterns. The narrative never lines up with the fact that. You know, so we could sit here all week and we could say, well, that's not true. That's not true. The man came up here and she said someone said that there was a rumor that someone was doing this. So she spent 60 grand on a private investigator instead of calling the employee in saying, hey, there's a rumor.
[Adam Knight]: Rick, do you mind? I yield my time. Thank you. So, at the end of the day, let's be clear. I mean, this is coming from the person who, when we had four members of the DPW report that they've been exposed to COVID, she drove to their house and said, they better not be lying and they better come to work at Snowplow. You know what I mean? So, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Quite frankly, there's a haphazard application of policy. A haphazard application of policy. All right? What's good for the goose is not good for the gander. All right? It depends on who you are.
[Adam Knight]: The campaign starts in January.
[Adam Knight]: Announcements accolades remembrances reports and suspend the rules to take a permit applications if we can do that, please.
[Adam Knight]: So just as I understand it, with the approval of this rental location, what's going to happen is we're going to move some water pipes from the street to the sidewalk. We're going to get a brand new sidewalk. The city is going to go in, replace all the underground infrastructure, and then they're going to resurface the street curb to curb.
[Adam Knight]: I just like to point out, this is an existing business in the community already. All right, they have about 50-60 employees here in this community that contribute to the circular flow of our local economy. The proposed use, in my opinion, is less detrimental than the current use. I don't think that it really makes a big difference in terms of the impact. in traffic or safety in the area. And that's supported through the statements of our chief of police and our chief of fire in the application. So when I look at this proposal that's before us, I see a business here that exists in our community, that's looking to expand in our community and invest in our community. And I think we should make it easy for them, not hard. So I will support this paper in the statement.
[Adam Knight]: Could one argue that this is a ride share program and ride shares are designed to take cars off the street and therefore they have an environmental impact that's positive.
[Adam Knight]: We have a statement from the chief of police saying that there is no anticipated traffic impact.
[Adam Knight]: Is failure to react within the 90 day window considered a constructive acceptance of the application?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: It was just whether or not failure to act within the specified timeframe under state law would constitute a constructive acceptance of the application. So it'd be like a yes vote, or if it would be that they'd have to sue us to do something, you know what I mean?
[Adam Knight]: I just wanna have the things that go to committee and then never come out, and then have us put in a position where it's acceptance by inaction versus taking a vote.
[Adam Knight]: Our city is an absolute human resource nightmare. That's been clear, it's been well documented across many, many news media outlets, social media, and the like, right? I think we can all agree, human resources is a problem here in the city. And financially, financially this administration practices absolutely zero fiscal constraint. All right, zero fiscal constraint. For literal years, literal years, not weeks, not months, literal years, this council has been begging for quarterly reports from our auditor outlining the financial health and well-being of this community. The city council, which is responsible for the appropriation of funds, right? The Harry Truman function of government, the buck stops here, right? We've been asking for these documents for literal years. Meetings about the financial health and well-being of the city, and we can't get that. All right? We've been asking for copies of the monthly Warren articles, which are documents that show where our money's being spent. We can't get that. I get a response in my email today from our city auditor, our CFO, our finance director. Due to our current staffing levels and the backlog of conciliations, our reports would be based on unaudited and possibly incomplete data. Every effort is being made to bring this data up to date. This office cannot say that these desired reports would be accurate to any degree expected. Let's spend more money though. Let's go spend more money, create more jobs. A job, by the way, that it sounds like the position's already spoken for.
[Adam Knight]: With a report from our CFO that pretty much says, I'd love to give you an update on the financial well-being of this community, but if I did it, it's garbage in, garbage out. It's not gonna be based on accurate information.
[Adam Knight]: The buck has to stop somewhere. I'm not saying this isn't a position that's a good position. I'm not saying it's a position that's warranted. I don't think it's as important as an assistant city solicitor to the Metro City Council. I don't think it's as important as a city assessor. I don't think it's as important as assistant city assessor. You know, we can only put cones up on every intersection around the city so many times, people are gonna run out of things to do. All right, so ultimately, I find this to be fiscally irresponsible. I mean, how can we as a body sit here and take vote after vote, multiple votes? I'm not talking one vote or two votes or three votes. We've taken dozens of votes on this. We've asked the city solicitor to come up with an ordinance mandating the administration to provide us with this information because they refuse to do it. But here we are being asked again to create a new job, to spend more money. I want us to all think back to that night. In late June, when we sat here, and the mayor was taking money out of the public utilities account to keep the lights on, to move money around, to provide this council with the demands that we made. And that was the only way we could do it, because there's no more money.
[Adam Knight]: I can't support this paper this evening.
[Adam Knight]: I'm going to invoke rule 20 from our city council rules, and this is a finance paper that's going to be laid on the table for one week's time, regardless of what happens tonight, because we have the right to do that as a Councilor. I was the first time I've seen this appropriation request on the council floor. And as such, I'm going to vote my rights under Rule 20. It's old Rule 20. I don't know what new rule is, but we leave them around. We never got copies of the rules after we approved them. I'll have them posted up on the website, I don't think. Oh, it is Rule 20. It's definitely Rule 20.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, motion to waive the remainder of the reading and move for approval of the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Steve was a dear friend of mine. One of the first people to ever come up and volunteer to work on my first campaign. back in 2013 and I met him through politics going back 20 years and he was always a gentleman that I held in high regard and someone who over that period of time I was able to develop a great friendship with. I just want to express my deep sincere condolences to the family, to Christine especially, on this sudden and tragic loss. Steve was a lot of things to a lot of people here in Medford and the Medford Housing Authority is evident by the number of residents that attended his memorial service. And he was a lot more than that, the people that he called family and friends. So with that being said, Medford is not better off today than it was yesterday with the loss of someone like Steve Gattaro. And if we could all be a little bit more like Steve Gattaro, I think Medford is moving in the right direction. So thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: So on the motion of Councilor carb yellow, we could just dedicate tonight's meeting on Steve's memory, Madam President, based upon as he has a service to our community.
[Adam Knight]: Can you bring up the chief of police's support of this measure or not?
[Adam Knight]: We're in a situation here in this community that's bordering on what I'd find to be a financial crisis. You know, when we talk about spending, we talk about the sharing of information, and more importantly, we talk about that letter that we received from the administration, October 25th at 1.40 p.m., which was today at 1.40 after several months of making requests. I think it's very troubling and scary that, you know, The city has a backlog of reconciliation reports. They haven't been audited. They're utilizing incomplete data. And they cannot say that they have accurately designed reports for financial reporting here in our community. And that's coming right from our CFO. That's troubling. That's very troubling, right? So the administration is spending and spending and spending, but I see no efforts being made to right the ship, especially with this body. And this body has extended multiple olive branches for a period of 36 months, trying to get to the bottom of this stuff and be a partner and we're not being brought to the table. Um, so, you know, as I stated a couple of weeks ago, when we talk about the financial health in this community, let's be real about it. Um, we had no treasurer collector from, January of 2020 to October 2020. We've had no budget director from July of 2020 to date. We've had no CFO from September of 2021 to March of 22. We've had no federal fund manager from 321 to 222. And we've had no assessor from 522 to the present. So when we sit down and we talk about our financial health in this community, we don't even have a finance team in place. We haven't had a finance team in place, but we're still being asked to spend. And when we ask for the information that we need to make informed decisions, we're not being provided it. which leads me to believe that they have something to hide. Councilor Caraviello has asked at least 30 times, how much money are we spending on outside legal counsel? The administration spent something ridiculous like $65,000 to follow around an employee and put GPS on his car to get a report that comes back absolutely unfounded. And the investigation starts off, I heard a rumor about a guy. I mean, that's what we're doing now. We're spending $80,000 in taxpayer money to chase down rumors. Come on, let's get real. So when I look at the circumstances in this community and what's going on, we need to stop the bleeding somehow. And I think that this is the best way to do it. So I'd ask that we put a spending moratorium on until such time as we get our quarterly report from our financial director. We get brought up to speed as to what's really going on in that finance office. The numbers don't add up. If the numbers don't add up, we can't just keep on spending and spending and spending. making assumptions off of inaccurate data and inaccurate estimations, how are we ever going to put the city in a position to succeed? You know, we have no tax assessors. We have nobody to levy taxes in this community. We finally have a treasurer collective out this whole time. But for the first 10 months of the administration, we didn't. We had some of those working part-time. Rumor has it the calls were getting wired to a house. They weren't even coming in the office. We have people that are getting paid now outside the budget in acting positions that are also working in other communities. All right, their vested interest and their loyalties don't lie here in the city of Medford any longer. All right, they're being paid for the city to comply with statute, not for any other reason. All right, so we need to do something. And this is my next best solution that I could come up with based upon the plethora of resolutions that we filed, the number of questions that we've asked, the number of promises that have been made, but not fulfilled through the administration. We still don't have a city assistant city solicitor for the council and the position hasn't been posted. So with that being said, I offer the paper. I don't anticipate it passing. I don't want to hold the city financially hostage. If good things are going to happen in this community, they should. They should. But at the same time, you can't ask us to keep spending money without telling us what the financial picture is, what our financial health and wellness is in this community.
[Adam Knight]: And if I could just add to that paper that the city council request the administration prepare an RFI for the city council to review relative to the hiring of an independent outside auditor. Council like would you mind repeating your men, please, the city administration produce an RFR an RF an RFR an RFP for the city council to review relative to the selection and hiring of an outside independent auditor.
[Adam Knight]: He's on the line for a raise. Let's get him down here.
[Adam Knight]: Right, well, I wouldn't mind going back to it.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, I'm not sure the answer either but I don't know if you're going to say something I was going to say attention to what's going on here all things back and have been a disaster. In terms of, you know, the media is that they're putting up on Boynton Road. Issues of tickets on streets that not permit streets and tickets that are going on guys that say they're on one street and they're on another street so In terms of our PACHA program and the application thereof, I don't think we're doing anybody a service. As the program continues to mature and develop, I'm seeing a lot more signage and a lot more meters go up across the community, but I'm not really seeing The data driven methodology as to why they're putting these in. I know that being common street with the development that's going to occur at Titan Gas Station at some point, the development that's going to occur up at Nathan Electric in the expansion of the Green Line, that area has been under particular scrutiny based upon what's going to happen when the Green Line comes active. But in terms of who has the overall authority to implement and initiate those changes. It's really the traffic commission. I'm not here in the city, but I know the city did something, because the end of Albion Street wasn't a mentioned project. It was a simple project, but it was invented.
[Adam Knight]: But the house is invented, but the street right in front of it.
[Adam Knight]: I looked at the map. Because it's a disaster what they've done over there.
[Adam Knight]: Did anybody, I actually I'm still waiting for the mayor to go yell at her superintendent like she yelled at Mr. Belson. because this issue right here is scary, all right? This isn't someone dropped something out of their pocket, it was found in the little theater by a custodian. This is a student got assaulted, stalked, assaulted, tracked down, five adults, six adults, seven adults, nine adults, 10 adults watching, no one intervening. I'm waiting for the mayor to go and treat her superintendent like she treated Roy Belson.
[Adam Knight]: I just, I mean, I'm thinking back to this whole situation where the mayor's at Fox 25 down in front of the school department over here. She called them herself talking about the gun clip, calls for a press conference. The school committee comes, they put Roy Belson on the stage in the little theater. And he sat there for four hours. And after 40 years of service to the city guard, his head beat it for hours and hours and hours. And the mayor led the charge. The mayor led the charge. She was like a raven lunatic. getting up out of the crowd, running up to the microphone, yelling and screaming at people. It was nuts. And now to have something like this happen under her watch and to not hold her own people accountable to the same level and same accord is shameful, in my opinion.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. I do believe, oh, it must be about a year and a half ago now, this council passed a measure and we sent it to the administration and shocker, never got a response. But what we asked for was the administration to analyze the feasibility of creating an Italian-American cultural district in South Medford to commemorate the contributions of many of our Italian-American residents here. When you think about people like Ernesto Martini, Alfredo Russo, and the likes, people that really made a big difference in this community over time. We've asked the administration to look into that. Year and a half might have gone by now, and we still haven't received anything from it, from the administration. So I know it's only been a year and a half, and it's usually about three years before we get something back from the administration. But I'm hoping that maybe we can put a reminder into the administration as maybe a B paper or as an amendment to this paper. I'm asking for an update from the administration on the feasibility of creating an Italian American cultural district as passed by the council previously.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much and thank you to Councilor Caraviello for putting this on. I've known Barbara DeCristofaro for as long as I can remember growing up in the same neighborhood. Friendly with her father, Jerry, for a number of years. He was a great guy. It's glad it's great to see Barbara pursue this promotional opportunity to be appointed by the administration to position sergeant. And I think it's important that you know the brass and our police department is reflective of the population that we serve. So with that being said, I'm hoping that I reach out director will take steps to encourage minority and female police officers to take these promotional exams. for Barbara to be promoted the first female sergeant in the city of Medford in the year 2022 is kind of showing that our internal recruitment is lacking. And we have many talented police officers that are here in this community that would help make the brass in our police department reflective of the population that we have here. But we have to encourage those individuals to apply for the civil service exams. We need to provide them with the tools necessary to study for the civil service exams so that they'll be in a position for being one of the first.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, as part of this paper just like an update from the city administration is Council beers mentioned, we had a $1 million grant project that was funded for the safe routes to school, and that created a bike lane from maybe halfway up the hill on high street to the work school, but part of that project also reconfigured the intersection at Wilbur Street high street. And since that time, property, personal residents that have bought including flooding, drainage issues and the like. We've seen McKay construction out there at least six times since this project was supposed to be completed. So I'd just like to get an update from the administration as to what the status of the drainage issue is on the corner of Woobin and High Street and how much money the city's expended since the completion of the $1 million grant project and remedying the design defects and on property damage claims since this project's been completed.
[Adam Knight]: Can you just explain what the significance of October 26th is?
[Adam Knight]: Yeah. Madam President, the city clerk be so kind as to investigate report back to the council as to whether or not BJ says any special permits extended our permit. So like, I think one way that we may be able to address this is by bringing them in and saying this is an issue that's going on in the community and you have a permit. and we don't like what you're doing, so we're gonna take a look at your permit and see if we can put some restrictions on it to safeguard the neighborhood. This has been an ongoing issue since I got on the council, between Budweiser and BJ's, you know what I mean? Tough neighbors, you know, large employers in this community, valuable neighbors, you know, bring some good to the community, no doubt. But you have to live there, I don't, right? And you know, I know where you live, I know where your house is. It's not a little tiny little street, you know what I mean?
[Adam Knight]: Well, when it's warm, if you don't wanna go and use your pool, I will. And I don't care about those crummy old men over there with their beer. I'll watch them and they watch me. No, I think that the best bet would be to see if we can call the brass in for BJ. We've tried this before. I mean, ultimately, I don't think it's gonna help situations that we are right now in the middle of litigation with BJs because we didn't want them to put a gas station in. So there's a lot of moving parts going on with that location, but I think that the special permit might be the best way to attack it.
[Adam Knight]: I think it is important to point out, though, that this is really a function of the administration. I remember when Mike McGlynn was the mayor, he'd get in his car and drive down there and say, I want to meet with the general manager. He wouldn't pick up the phone and call him. He'd say, this is what I want done, and go down there to meet with them. If you're not getting that type of service, you're not getting that type of service, and we'll do all that we can. But ultimately, this is an enforcement issue, not a legislative issue. So the administration has to buy into this. And if the administration wants to see it stop, then they have to send their people down there. They have to send code enforcement down there and they have to hold VJs accountable. This council can't do that. We can call them to the meetings and we can try to work on the permits that fall under our purview. But when it comes to the day-to-day operations of the community and code enforcement, that's a department that falls under the building commissioner. for an administrative branch and executive branch department, the mayor has to get them down there. And we can ask until we're blue in the face. But if a track record of asking is any indication as to what the administration is going to do, this is going to go on a file like this big right here.
[Adam Knight]: And we're not going to we're not going to hear back because that's historically what's happened. We've talked about it all day today in our previous meetings as well. We had a subcommittee meeting today to talk about two pieces of draft ordinances that we've asked for. The first one was offered in 2019. It was a two-sentence draft ordinance that needed review. The administration didn't get back to us. us. The second item was offered in 2020 was a little bit more involved but again the administration still hasn't responded to us. So these are items that this council is asking for for us to create legislation in this community, and we're not getting any, any cooperation. So my advice to you would be also to be sure to stay on the administration and let them know your level of dissatisfaction, because they're really the only ones that can solve this We're ready to fight with you. Thank you. I appreciate it. And use as much authority and power that we have. However, that scope and authority is limited under the purview of our responsibilities.
[Adam Knight]: Exactly.
[Adam Knight]: It's a great quiet street. It is. Only one way in.
[Adam Knight]: So Rita, does this mean you're not going to go to the celebration on the completion of the Medford square meter project ice cream truck that the mayor wants to do? I agree with you, and I know Councilor Carvialo and I had spoke on this, and Ricky was telling me how involved he was in working with Faye and the administration to get those taken out. It seems like the left hand doesn't know what the right is doing a lot of time. Thank you, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Madam President, I just think it's important to point out that, you know, Back in FY21, when we looked at the $6 million structural deficit that we had, and then again in FY22, when we looked at the $12 million structural deficit that we have in FY23, When we look at the old $700 million or so dollar structural deficit that we have, one of the things that I made very clear during the budget discussions was that we're not going to use the parking program to generate revenues and fill our budget shortfalls. And I feel like that's what's happening, right? We're expanding the park. Now, three weeks, three weeks in a row, four weeks in a row, four meetings in a row. We've had talk about parking right talk about parking talk about failures in the parking department, ticketing people but not supposed to get tickets going down the wrong street and giving everybody on the same street a ticket. Now the expansion of meters into residential neighborhoods the expansion of meters in front of churches and places of worship and schools and funeral homes. All right, it seems to me like we're trying to use this parking program to generate revenue. to address the structural shortfall.
[Adam Knight]: I'm sorry. And, you know, the packing program when first initiated and first implemented was to turn over spots in the business districts and to enforce residential packing in neighborhoods that were budding public transportation areas. that's expanded now into ninjas jumping out of trees and giving you tickets on if you're facing the wrong way if you don't have an inspection sticker if you have an expired sticker on your license plate uh you know it's it's getting it's getting a little out of hand yet um we get the residents on brook street that have been never-ending problem that's not going to be rectified anytime soon um parking still comes and gives them tickets um there's really no And there's been no dynamic amendment of any of these policy decisions that have been made to satisfy any of our constituency. And it just seems to me like the reoccurring theme, if you agree, it's great, we'll hug. If you disagree, it's gonna fall on deaf ears and no one's gonna talk to you.
[Adam Knight]: I'm pretty sure George Bernoski is like the media repairman. I think his title is like supervisor of media repair or something like that. I don't think he has any type of function that has to do with the supervision or the issuance of tickets. I think he's more of a a meter fixer, oversees the meter repair program. If it's my recollection, I remember when the mayor put out one of her many emails about her new hires that she classified.
[Adam Knight]: Council request that pavement restoration be done in a curb-to-curb fashion. Oh, sorry.
[Adam Knight]: Well, I mean, it's a question.
[Adam Knight]: So it says that this is a, what, a replacement project? A relocation project? They're relocating the gas main on Walnut Street, why?
[Adam Knight]: You're off right now. Similar to the work necessary on Riverside Ave, sounds like. Well, you guys don't necessarily want to do this, but they have to do water works. Are you going to get out of the way?
[Adam Knight]: That's a lot. So is the restoration going to be done curb to curb, or is it going to be one of these six inch trenches out to the middle of a street that in six months is going to fall apart and turn this into 600 feet of potholes?
[Adam Knight]: Does this have anything to do with the loan order that we just passed? No, no, right. We have it as a city engineer available.
[Adam Knight]: Cuddy, this is no reflection on the job you're doing. It's more of a reflection on the information that the administration provides us when they put these papers on the agenda. So, you know, here we are this evening and we're, you know, expected to vote for seven football fields worth of ground getting torn up and we have nobody here from the city engineers restoration is going to look like. And I'm not comfortable going into a neighborhood and tearing up, you know, 700, 800 feet worth of street, turning the neighborhood upside down and then not knowing what the final product is going to be. So I apologize for having to sit through this meeting this evening, but I'm without further information from the administration. I'm not very comfortable proceeding in any other fashion.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Quite frequently I get calls, especially surrounding some of these car repair facilities automobile repair facilities along Mr. Avenue, relative to the amount of footprint that vehicles take up. And also the parking of vehicles that they're servicing on public roads in public parking spots. So, one thing I've noticed is every time we get a permit. application before us that the traffic commission has to sign off saying that there'll be no traffic impact, but they failed to look at parking. They failed to look at the parking impact of this proposed business. So this proposed service might create. So what I'm asking is that the administration revamp the criteria in establishing these reviews to also take into consideration the parking impacts so that we have a better idea. We vote for something, what the parking impacts are as well as the traffic impacts. much to ask for. I think the administration could do a parking assessment or even maybe establish a certain criteria that would say the sex amount of parking spots per square feet. And that's it. Very similar to what we have in our zoning ordinance. But with that being said, Mr. President, what we're seeing, especially if you go down ST James Avenue and some of those streets off of Mystic Avenue, is that every single parking spot is taken up by vehicles all day long. Then six o'clock comes, the sidewalk rolls up and all those guys disappear. Then six o'clock in the morning, all those cars are back there again, but they're not people working. Those are cars that are being worked on. They're being moved in and out of garages and being put in the street and being put back in the garage. All right, well, it's a public way. Those parking spots are also necessary for other businesses to utilize. They should be turned over. I But ultimately, I think this is something that needs to be looked at, because it does certainly have an impact on, number one, public safety, and number two, our ability to turn over pockets and generate business for business owners and business storefronts in the downtown area.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This is an ongoing situation up on Fulton Spring Road. If you know where Mr. Falco lives, look down the street about four or five houses and you'll see that there's a situation down there where The pitch of the underground infrastructure for sewage is not appropriate. And this goes back now, several years, one of the homeowners there reached out to the DPW had representatives from the water department come up and take a look at what was going on. The solution that the water department came up with at that time was, are you going to have to jack your house up eight inches. So the gentleman went, invested $200,000, jacked up his house eight inches, and the day that they pulled the bulldozers away, he had another sewage backup. The city engineer, DPW commissioner have been working on this. They've looked at it. What they've been able to determine is that in a quote, I believe things are all screwy under there would be the very technical term that was used, but the pipes, there's a water pipe that goes over sewer pipe that goes under a gas pipe. There's a big problem, but this homeowner spent a ton of dough at the direction about water and sewer department saying that if you jack your house up, you won't have to deal with this backflow issue. They spent the money, they jacked the house up and they're still dealing with the issue. The DPW commissioner is well aware of the situation and I've been assured that he's working on it. I actually met with the residential homeowner this evening before I came to this meeting this evening. I'd like to withdraw this matter at this point in time and give the DPW commissioner an opportunity to continue to do come up to a significant and satisfactory remedy for our bodies involved. So I will be withdrawing this at this time. But I did want to just give a preface as to what this was all about, because I'm sure that would raise a lot of curiosity based upon the language of the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, that's not a paid holiday. That is losing her touch.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to suspend the rules.
[Adam Knight]: Well, I'll delay that then if we have questions. So thank you. Mr. President, thank you very much. I'm somewhat familiar with flex car and flex hub. One of the questions I have is this rental car is this going to be a rental car that's used for when they say drivers, you know, I keep thinking picturing driver like a Lyft driver in the Lyft driver works for Lyft and then they rent the vehicle through Lyft to use to provide the Lyft service to consumers. Or is this where these are just going to be rental cars that The driver is me, and I want to rent the car and I can just go through flex lift to get the car. Can she explain clarify that for me please. Yeah, absolutely.
[Adam Knight]: So ultimately it's somewhat like we have a post office over here and the post office has trucks and the employees of the post office use the trucks. And this is the same thing, the employees of Lyft would use the Lyft, the FlexLyft vehicles to perform the functions. Now, that's assuming that they don't have cars, right? Are they going to be authorized to park vehicles there all day while they take these FlexCars out? Or are you saying that they're more long term than short term? So I just, I think part of the concern that we're hearing from my colleague is that it's heavily congested. heavily congested area. And because of that, there are some public safety concerns that coupled with the fact that there's some issues with the garage. The excise tax, I think, was a great question. That makes a lot of sense. The business is going to be here. The vehicle should be garaged here so the city can offset the damages to our infrastructure with the funds that we generate. But I certainly support the gentleman's motion to table the matter. In fact, we need to go back to the table a little bit closer to an understanding of what this program is. I personally have no problem with it. I think it makes sense. I would make some recommendations that, you know, the special permit go with the business and not with the address. Do a 90 day review. But as of right now, it doesn't feel as though I think Lift Hub has been a pretty good neighbor in this community. They've been pretty open with us when they came to this community. They let us know they were coming. They invited us to come down. They've always been visible and available to speak with anybody from government that has any concerns. So I certainly don't have an issue with their business model or the way they run their business, but the quality of life stuff and the neighborhood stuff do some of the entities that the larger businesses that are residential property. So that stuff needs to be put into consideration. So I would second gentleman's motion to table it. Should he reintroduce it in an effort for us to come to some common ground and see if we can figure this one out. Because I think Lyft is a good employer to have here.
[Adam Knight]: If they work the hours, they can make the money, right?
[Adam Knight]: I just have a couple of more questions to a friend of sunny California might not be sunny there anymore at 630. But what are the requirements to be a Lyft driver in Massachusetts, where you need a driver's license in a vehicle right.
[Adam Knight]: Okay, and if I have a driver's license, but I don't have a vehicle, can I be a Lyft driver?
[Adam Knight]: Excellent, excellent. So ultimately, this also gives people who don't have the driver's license, the opportunity to get a job and work.
[Adam Knight]: All right. Excellent. Thank you very much. I would again suggest so I there's no one else to speak.
[Adam Knight]: I missed that. Can you say what this was for again?
[Adam Knight]: to have an ice cream to celebrate Paca Minas. Councilor Newton. I'm just trying to figure this out because this sounds like the most tone deaf proposal I have ever witnessed by this administration to date. After the last four weeks, the last month and a half, six weeks. You tell me how many months we've been talking about parking and what's going on with parking and how terrible the program is and how many failures have been with this program. And we're going to have an ice cream social to celebrate these failures?
[Adam Knight]: Ice Cream Social, Leprechaun Family Network.
[Adam Knight]: Oh, your parking ticket. I mean, listen, honestly, come on. Is Ashton Kutcher, where's Ashton Kutcher? Is he coming out? Are we being pumped right now, like seriously? Does this really happen? And this is what our government does?
[Adam Knight]: I mean, this is like the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard in my life.
[Adam Knight]: Or alternative, or alternatively, right? It's for, it's for, it's to create a pseudo, look that there is support for this field right program right so that you can put it in a press release like Justin said right so we have pictures but look at the pictures it was an ice cream social and everybody had a great time right anytime the going gets tough there's a ribbon cutting have we seen that trend anytime the going gets tough there's a ribbon cutting I'm just saying if the goal there's a lot of ways to go about it that don't require this process
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And Mr. Batten, thank you for being here. Another bank, Mr. Gav, shocker, right? Ultimately, you know, this is an example of wasted opportunity. This location was the site of a rather large scale proposal that would have created significant growth in this community, significant jobs in this community, and potentially significant housing in this community. But the administration decided to bring this corner into a different state. So with that being said, we're stuck with what we're stuck with. And I'm not saying that a bank is a bad thing, because a bank does bring us jobs, jobs that pay a living wage, jobs that provide health insurance, jobs that you can provide for a family with, right? So the next best alternative, right, is to bring jobs here that are going to be sustainable, that are going to be well paying enough where people can raise their We missed the boat with the development. The existing use is a bank. The proposed use is a bank. The existing signage is there. I don't think it hurts anybody. The signage that they look for doesn't seem to be too overly intrusive. It doesn't seem to be too obnoxious. It's illuminated. The illumination is going to shut off. there are no moving pieces it's not digital um you know i think that this you know is something that you know makes sense and just in the realm of fairness alone right i mean i don't want to see mr gab lit up like the las vegas strip you know what i mean um signs with movement i think would have created a problem um illuminated signs in the fashion that you've explained it i don't think it's going to create much of a problem um i'm happy to support this this evening um ultimately we know that um this application has been I would be happy to support this this evening. I ask that the special permit go with the business and not the address, and that we implement a 90-day review. And I would offer those in the forms of restrictions and move for approval on the paper. Second that motion, Mr. President. Yeah, that's a good one.
[Adam Knight]: No. We can still put the restrictions on it.
[Adam Knight]: Does anybody ever notice that anytime anything goes wrong in the parking department, it's always somebody else's fault and not the parking department's? Or is it just me picking that up?
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Bill Carr was a great Mustang. pillar of the community, father and grandfather, teacher, coach, community activist, good elk, a member of Post 45, American Legion, veteran, served his country and this community well, some that I have fond memories of that will sadly be missed. It's all too often that we're up here celebrating people and the achievements and contributions that they make to our community after their passage. And this is one of those instances where I think we should have taken an opportunity to look at the contributions that Mr. Carr had made to this community and maybe had the chance to honour him while he was still with us because he is someone that certainly has made a difference in the lives of hundreds of thousands of families in this community.
[Adam Knight]: I find this very troubling. So we have an IT department with no IT director or assistant IT director. We have a law department with no solicitor or assistant city solicitor. We have an assessor's department, no assessor or assistant city assessor.
[Adam Knight]: I'm not sure if we have an elections coordinator or not. I've heard various mumblings throughout the community that the moment that Ms. Gale was taken from her office, they had somebody filling her shoes with a higher salary.
[Adam Knight]: Human resource crisis. I thank the gentleman for putting the resolution on. the agenda this evening to raise awareness of the issues that are going on here in this community.
[Adam Knight]: The first community to sign up for the school building assistance program to get a 90% reimbursement on our schools. The first community to get a transit-based smart growth development in this state of Massachusetts mentioned. Where are our firsts? What are our firsts now? The council has some firsts.
[Adam Knight]: It's very frustrating to come here week in and week out and make recommendations on how we can improve the way that we deliver the most basic of city services and have it fall on deaf ears.
[Adam Knight]: From the sounds of it, as Councilor Bears said, there was a serious problem going on there that had to result in the termination of an employee. That position was never filled. So were these problems ever remedied? What is going on?
[Adam Knight]: Um, I think what we need to do is stop the bleeding. And councilor Caraviello is absolutely right. We need to stop issuing tickets for resident permit parking until mentioned or a mentioned parking department or whatever they go by these days can figure it out. Um, ultimately this is a department that never should have been absorbed by the city. You don't have the capacity to run a parking department. We're proving that daily. We went from having a vendor that wrote us a check. to a department that's come here before us now for over $800,000 in initial appropriations, and then another $200,000 or $300,000 in supplemental spending. We're still not getting any satisfaction.
[Adam Knight]: Now, we talk about reports, and we talk about committees. Forget the reports, and forget the committees. It's time to use common sense. When we talked about taking parking enforcement and doing it in-house, a committee was put together. That committee came before this body. And we spoke to that committee, and we said, please talk to us about resident parking, resident parking enforcement.
[Adam Knight]: When I say stop the bleeding, it's not just the tickets that are getting written. What about non-renewals to the registries? What about non-renewals for your license? What about non-renewals for your registration? Because of unpaid tickets that were issued unjustly that you can't get a remedy for here in City Hall.
[Adam Knight]: That's what the parking program was established for, to put the residents first. And we're not doing that. When we looked at, as Councilor Scarpelli said, the history of parking enforcement in Medford and why this program came to fruition, it was to turn over spots in the business districts. That's what it was initially proposed for. It wasn't to go into the neighborhoods, to go down Sylvia Road, a dead end street, and give people tickets when they've been able to police themselves and have no parking complaints for 50 years. It doesn't make sense to me that the Metro parking department is driving down Wellington Road when Wellington Road hasn't complained about a parking issue in 25 years, but the residents of Goldsmith Ave have been going on C-Click fix for the last six months and asking for relief and no avail. It just doesn't make sense to me. We have problem areas that are being identified. through these tools and modules that the mayor has touted as being so effective in the delivery of city services. But then we're not using the data that we're collecting from these modules to make decisions.
[Adam Knight]: I know that it's Hispanic Heritage Month. It's also today's national no excuse day. So I hope someone from the administration is on the call. Madam President, if they can bring that up. I do not see anyone.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I just, I do want to point out that these failures are really managerial failures. And, you know, when we talk about the human resource problems that we have there in our community and the human resource crisis that's going on here in Medford, In our packets this evening when we got here, we have charges, additional charges that were brought forward by local 25 who represent our parking enforcement officers. And it appears to me that the administration's not exactly treating them in the kind of fashion as well. Tracking devices and cameras, randomly changing our, randomly changing schedules from night to day and day to night. I mean, imagine having a family and having your schedule randomly changed. Next week you're working nights, sorry.
[Adam Knight]: That's an expense. I will say this, that when we implemented the parking program initially, what we saw was an increase in the local meals tax. which showed that there was a problem, and that those spots weren't turning over. And with the enforcement, those spots did start to turn over. And then what we saw was actually enhanced growth and enhanced revenue in our business districts through the local meals tax, because those parking spots were turning over, those restaurants were selling more product, and in turn, we were getting more money.
[Adam Knight]: Well, every signature's on it, so.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. So maybe you could explain to us what the role of the building commissioner is in the community and what role the building commissioner plays because it's my understanding that any zoning question and the city goes to the building commission, and the building commission is the one that makes the determination as to how those zoning decisions are made in this community. And we all know what a crucial role zoning plays in our ability to generate new growth. And when we're sitting here, beating our chest after $49 million of deficit spending over the last three years, and no revenue generation plan, it might make sense for us to prioritize this position, because ultimately the building commissioner is someone that does help generate revenues through permits and fees, and through rulings on zoning, as well as oversight of the code enforcement office, which is something that we all have had talks and discussions about in the past. Thank you, Mary.
[Adam Knight]: And I guess all I'm challenging is that... I think it was brought up through an official channel. I think the gentleman asked the mayor, right to her face, in negotiations, and she asked the team, right, in negotiations, and they haven't answered the question.
[Adam Knight]: One way or the other.
[Adam Knight]: And I agree with you 100%. I mean, ultimately, especially what we're seeing in the committee trend right now is I don't want to make a decision. So put a committee together and have them do it for me. Right? I don't want to make an unpopular decision. So I'm going to put a group of people together to make an unpopular decision and say, don't blame me. That's what they said to do. Right? It's a leadership issue, really, is what it is. It's a leadership issue.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Madam President?
[Adam Knight]: Also, it's important to remember, Ms. Brown, that some of these committees and boards are statutory and when you not necessarily backed by ordinance but but enabled through state law and in the majority of those circumstances and situations a residency requirement is outlined for example of a malcommissioned Brooks Commission the Brooks the Brooks Bar and the like. So it's important to remember that there's also state statute that covers and dictates a lot of the stuff that our ordinances support.
[Adam Knight]: As the authority through a regulatory action to establish the protocols and criteria for which a member of a board of commission under her purview would be fit, residency can be one of those selective criteria that she uses.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, if you may. Councilor Knight. I think this administration's been very clear about its approach to labor relations in this community. Quite frankly, we've seen personnel turnover, more frequently than the rooms at the Hyatt across the street. All right, there's a human resource nightmare going on here in this community. It's an absolute nightmare. A couple months ago, we had a representative from local 25 here before us that showed us a package of 40 somewhat various labor charges, grievances, lawsuits that are pending before the city. So it brought to my attention that yet another employee has been removed from city hall by escort. That's not the way you treat employees. If you respect your employees, You work with them, not against them. And I feel as though this administration has worked against a lot of the employees in this community as of recent. How much money did they spend investigating rumors on a DPW employee? How much money we've spent reinvestigating and rehashing the Brady List issue? On and on again, it's more about press releases than results. On and on again, it seems to me that the work that you people do is not respected. On and on again, it seems to me that three years without a raise, three and a half years without a raise, while other bargaining units are settling and getting raises, tells us something. It tells us something, all right? I appreciate the work that you guys do Amy, I worked with you, I was a bargaining rep for your union at one point in time, I think I did better than 74 cents an hour to I hope Jesus.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. So, in looking at this and the approach that's going forward I mean ultimately the city council doesn't have the ability to tell the mayor to give you more money, but we can stand with you in lockstep and say that this is a good fight.
[Adam Knight]: And I don't think you have the luxury of closing your door and telling people that you're too busy to meet with them either. Yeah. All right. When the general public walks in off the street, you guys don't have the ability to turn them away. But when you guys have concerns and issues that you want to address, The door's not open for you to address those issues and concerns. I, as one Councilor, appreciate the work you do. I know that the city's only as successful as the work that you do and the commitment that you have to being a part of this team. It's a two-way street, and the administration has to show some of that respect and responsibility as well. Moving forward, I certainly would never, ever, ever stand in the way of a contract race, a negotiated contract race that the union and the administration have been able to work out. But it seems to me that right now negotiation is not the approach administration wants to take we're seeing what's going on at the school department. My teachers have been the impasse has been declared and the teachers contracts negotiations. That's one of the larger bargaining units that we have here in this community. The work in this community that, you know, I send my two children to the public schools that sit there with these public employees for more hours of the day than they spend with me awake, right, when you think about it. So the investment that we're making in our employees here, the investment that we're making in retention of those employees that have that institutional knowledge is laughable. We're losing good people. More and more, we're seeing good people being walked out the door. More and more, we're seeing good people saying, I've had enough, I can't take it anymore. And they're moving on. And the only people that are suffering because of that are the residents of this community. I appreciate you guys in the fight that you're putting up. It's a good fight, it's a fight worth fighting. And I'll stand with you every step of the way to ensure that the administration takes the appropriate steps to show value for the work that you do.
[Adam Knight]: And I do find it curious, Madam President, when we take a look at this agenda this evening, papers from the administration, and we'll see that they're trying to upgrade a position in the Community Development Department, but we have created a new position, upgrading the existing position from the land use planner to a senior planner. Non-union role, we've seen more and more requests for non-union positions to get pay raises. More and more requests for non-union. positions to be reclassified. We still have the issue of our human resource director working out of grade now for the better part of two and a half years and not being required to pay back any money. Not being paid back any money to the taxpayers. So we have a human resource director who's being paid out of grade. This council voted down, voted down the reclassification of the position. Gentleman's still being paid between $69,000, I think more than what his initial salary was as diversity director. And here we are with teachers educators in this community, fighting for a pittance 2%. So what's that 35 bucks a week.
[Adam Knight]: I don't understand the message that you're trying to send. So you have a group of 500 teachers that you're negotiating with and you're going to the labor board and you're saying, We reached an impasse which really means we don't want to negotiate anymore we're walking from the table but then at the same breath is saying we do want to negotiate.
[Adam Knight]: Right, so now we're in a situation where we have other bargaining units that are receiving a cost of living adjustment right which is really just a cost of living adjustment to combat inflation at the battle inflation right so now we have units that have settled contracts at two percent and now we're giving cost of living adjustments at a different rate to other employees so it kind of sends a message of value the work of some more than others and that the impact on the economic factors that are happening around all of us um don't impact those traffic supervisors, for example, or those school nurses in the same fashion that they would impact the school teacher.
[Adam Knight]: Listen, we sit here and talk about craziest stuff for all night long about stuff that doesn't even matter. This is something that's very important to the lives of at least 500 people that reside in this community.
[Adam Knight]: That's okay, but it is what it is, right? I mean, we got to do with this, what we're here for, right? We voted to go bi-weekly. We're going to have to deal with some long meetings sometimes.
[Adam Knight]: I just want to get to the city staff. I'm happy to revisit it. That's great. That's great. We suspended the rules. We didn't have to. We voted for it. We're in the situation we're in. You know, when listening to what Mr. Murphy said about the most recent package being better than the last three collective bargaining agreements, I've been around a long time. And you know what? Maybe the employees took less back then, but we didn't hear him complain because they felt a lot more appreciated. And I think that that's really a reoccurring theme that I'm feeling and that I'm hearing across many departments here in the city, but the school department's not exempt. So when we sit here and we talk about the filing for an impasse as a way for us to move closer to a settlement, it's not. In my opinion, it's not. It sounds more to me like the administration just trying to control the narrative and the public perception as to what's going on than actual progress towards a settlement and really sounds just like a counter to the June budget job action that was taken and the job actions that are being taken now because the union's being publicly vocal about their position and the way that they feel to be treated. With that being said, Madam President, it sounds to me like you want to move on, so I'd be happy to rest my case.
[Adam Knight]: It's important to point out that the city staff is being paid to be here, and these people are here on their own, free will and volition as well. I just want that to be clear.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, motion to table until such time as the overwhelmingly large and looming labor relations problems that we have in this community can be addressed. I don't think it's time to create another position. We didn't have another position that's gonna cost us more money. We didn't have another position that's gonna cost us more money that's being created 60 days after the passage of the budget.
[Adam Knight]: Well, if legal, whatever, get back to us and answer our underlying and initial question, I'm sure that we'd be able to answer that question. But as of right now, it's been almost about a year and we still haven't received that information.
[Adam Knight]: I stand with the workers that were before us here this evening and reintroduce my motion. I don't feel as though we should be creating positions two months after the budget passed, after we've talked about how we have no revenues, about how we had to sit here and fight tooth and nail for what we asked for for eight months. And now all of a sudden we have more money. We have more money to create a new position, but we don't have more money. on cost of living adjustments that are recordable across the board for our school department employees. And we have eight collective bargaining agreements that right now are at an impasse or not being negotiated. And quite frankly, these contracts that are expired, they expired quite some time ago. So once they get settled, they're just going to expire again and they're going to be right back at the table in the next six to eight months. So with that being said, I reintroduce my motion to have this matter tabled until the labor relations dispute and the contracts are settled.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I asked for a ruling from the chairs that how many votes it takes to pass this calf, and whether or not chapter 44 twice, and I don't really know Zach's reading it for you know what, almost as good as what we have which is no lawyer but
[Adam Knight]: I do believe in June we discussed that with the mayor and we were talking about the budget, that document that you know sets up the spending for the next fiscal year which we're in now. That document, we talked about having an assistant city solicitor position to the city council, I believe. And the mayor came back to this council and made a compromise and said, yeah, if you vote for my budget, I'm gonna give you guys that. And it's gonna be posted in September. And it's September and we don't even have a regular city solicitor, nevermind an assistant city solicitor for this council. We have legal questions that have been looming for nine months that haven't been answered. We can talk about this stuff, so we're blue in the face. It's an irresponsible vote to take right now without the response from the city solicitor that we asked for nine months ago.
[Adam Knight]: This is crazy.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to waive the remainder of the readings and have this matter be passed upon vote of this council this evening, Madam President. It will save us the trouble of having to go through advertising. It will save us the trouble of having to bring this paper back for a third reading. We've had two meetings on it already. It's a 0% interest loan. It's a good idea. It makes sense. It's necessary for this community. And I think we've been able to establish that through the two meetings that we've had previously. I would second that.
[Adam Knight]: being a young father and having the opportunity to take my kids down to the public schools, my kids are at the Brooks. And just seeing the work and effort that they put in down there, they do an excellent job. These traffic supervisors are really underappreciated. Nothing's worse than when one of them's out and they have a uniformed police officer doing the traffic detail down there. They have it down to a system that the traffic supervisors where it just flows amazing. And any disruption to that usually creates chaos down in the neighborhood. But I'd like to just thank the the traffic supervisors that we have here in the community for doing such a great job, because they are an underappreciated resource. They're the people that we trust in keeping our kids safe. We've seen a number of tragic incidents over the years with traffic supervisors being assaulted, being yelled at, spit on, and the like. So I'd like to just make sure that they recognize the value that they have in this community.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Just last month, Donald and Mary Bonner celebrated their 50th wedding anniversary in Aruba, surrounded by their five. digits were the grandchildren down there. Mary Bonner was a traffic supervisor here in the city of Metro for a long time her husband Donald, a local auto body repairman, but they grew up on, they live on Hastings road lifelong Metro presidents, great people, great figures in the community. That was one of the houses in the neighborhood we could always. walk into the backyard, take a dip in the pool, get a drink off the hose, and use the bathroom if there's ever an emergency. A very welcoming family. They touch the lives of many in this community, and it's great to see them celebrate 50 years of wedded bliss. I hope we can all be so lucky. So with that being said, Madam President, I ask my council colleagues in joining me in congratulating them on this momentous occasion and also requesting the city clerk provide them with a citation doing the same.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. My two had the good opportunity of attending high school with Kimberly. I've known her for a very long time. She's a great person, very hard worker and someone that was very dedicated to this community. Her presence in that law office is going to be sadly missed. I've always found her to be someone that had the utmost of integrity. and someone that came to work prepared every day. So with that being said, Madam President, I hate to see her go. She's a very close friend and someone I respect very much. So congratulations, Kim. Wish you all the best in your future endeavors and hopefully you'll be able to help as many people as you have in a new job as you have in the past.
[Adam Knight]: Any Councilors, Madam President, just money papers come from the administration. Historically, there was conversation relative to the construction or reconstruction of the At that point in time, I don't think the mayor was too supportive of that paper or that initiative or endeavor. Presently, we're looking at a financial situation here in the community. We're looking at, what, $29 million in deficit spending over the past three years. So from a financial standpoint, I think we're not in a great position right now. The certain funds that were out there were available to us, whether or not they're still available to us is a whole different ball of wax and a whole different question. I know that there was several million dollars that was dedicated to this community through the federal government's transportation bond bill, and I know that there was several million dollars dedicated to this community from the state's transportation bond bill in order to get those funds released. It'd have to be an act of Congress, literally, and also an act of the governor at the state level. It's certainly a worthwhile endeavor. I know that we have some concerns about the traffic management in this community and the parking management in this community. Councilor Caraviello has a resolution on, coming up a little later, whether or not we have the capacity to handle this type of stuff, whether or not it's a good idea for the city to be in the business of parking, whether or not we should outsource it. We looked at having outsourced parking in the previous administrations and seem to generate revenue. Now we seem to be spending quite a bit of money and not getting anything back and not getting a return on our investment. That coupled with a lot of the confusion that we're seeing in the neighborhoods related to tickets, appeals processes, being pushed to outside court for a day in court, filing fees and the like is creating a situation over here. I certainly support anything that will bring business to our communities and revitalization of Medford Square. We've only been talking about that since the 80s. So, you know, if anything will help, I think it would be if I could graduate in conjunction with the work that we're doing at Chevalier. But I think we need a bit of a private partnership and a commitment in order to do that, as well as a commitment from the administration.
[Adam Knight]: On that note, Madam President, if you look at the recodified zoning ordinance, what the council did was allow for the opportunity, for instance, is where we can have public-private partnerships and entities like this. We have shared parking changes in our zoning ordinance, which allows an entity to have parking during the day for business and parking at night for residential or other uses, you know what I mean? So I think that that's something that we've really set the stage for. It's just a matter of putting a plan together and executing it. Exactly. The availability is there and the opportunity as well. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, ultimately, a convictual license is a license to sell food. By ordinance, we require the breweries to sell food. So this is a no-brainer. Move approval.
[Adam Knight]: And again, let's say, you're right-handed to have an irrigation system, right? You can't just water your lawn. Correct. So you'd have to put a $5,000 or $6,000 investment into your front lawn in order to get the benefit of the- That's the current rule, yes.
[Adam Knight]: A couple of questions. I don't think either one of you gentlemen, we had the last time that we went through a meter replacement.
[Adam Knight]: There was quite a bit of, I guess, problems surrounding that. Now, listen, I understand we need to get the work done. I understand that we're getting 7.8 million bucks for free pretty much, right? I mean, we just have to pay it back, but we're getting it at 0%. What's the plan to make sure that what happened last time doesn't happen again when we go through this process?
[Adam Knight]: Why don't we just explain that, what some of the big problems with the first go around.
[Adam Knight]: And the reason for estimations was because of outdated equipment that was given less than accurate readings?
[Adam Knight]: Leak detection.
[Adam Knight]: So last time, I think part of the problem that we ran into was that there was a lot of inaction, right? We didn't make up our minds as to what we wanted to do.
[Adam Knight]: And then we fell into a spot where the meters were at the spot where they needed to be done and they needed to be done immediately.
[Adam Knight]: And we're not at that spot right now. with some assurances that if we get this project done and we do it in a timely fashion, that we won't run into the same problems that we've had. With the lifespan of the new meters, we're taking out a $7.8 million loan that's going to be paid back over 10 years.
[Adam Knight]: And then we're going to pay the loan off in 10. So we're going to get 10 years for free. Yeah.
[Adam Knight]: The paper that's before us this evening is nothing more than an informational paper, if I'm not understanding it. Maybe that's what it looks like, right?
[Adam Knight]: Has the city applied for the loan and have they been deemed eligible for the loan?
[Adam Knight]: That's my next question. So we need to approve you to put the application in?
[Adam Knight]: I can see why, because they're not going to give you the money and then have you come back here and then us not approve it. That would make sense.
[Adam Knight]: And if you guys have any further questions for us, you know, we'll come and answer.
[Adam Knight]: Can we just offer that in the form of a motion that the mayor initiate the process?
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, it's my understanding that $5,000 is the maximum award an individual can receive on a slip and fall in a public way. It also appears that the necessary releases were signed and that the city is now, I guess, making this individual whole pursuant to the claim that's before it. I've moved for approval to pay, but so let me close the matter out and get Ms. Rooney the compensation that she deserves.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, yes, thank you to Councilor Caraviello for bringing this up. You know, this request is really in line with what we're seeing around the community and in neighboring communities. If you look at some of the newly opened establishments, my question as to whether or not the ratio is exactly what's been put out through way of ordinance. You know what I mean? If you look at some of the newer establishments, there's a lot of bar seating. That doesn't include outdoor seating. It only includes indoor seats. So I think this is something that's really in line with the practice. It's also in line with what we're seeing in neighboring communities. Councilor Caraviello makes a good point. People like to sit at bars, Restaurants also like to have that model because it allows them to cut down the amount of staff that they have. So they can have one person serves multiple day of multiple people from one location. So it's also an operational issue and an operational efficiency. So with that being said, I support the resolution or item we have a second motion.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. I think the easiest answer to this question is, you know, why have the kiosk accepting change credit cards is because we don't have the capacity as a community time to take this endeavor at this point in time. I think it was fully rolled out and it was not necessarily the best business decision the city could have made. But one of my biggest concerns that I had said when we looked at the revenue forecast previous years was that I'd hate to see the revenue deficit being made up from the backs of the residents of this community through pocket tickets. And if we're gonna have hypervigilant parking enforcement offices, we have to give the people in this community a chance to be able to pay when they want to. And I'd say walk 500 feet or 600 feet or 700 feet out of the business district that you're in to find another kiosk. I don't think that makes a lot of sense. And I really do think that this does focus around economic development and revenue. So this is something that definitely warrants a good hot book. And I thank the council for bringing it up in the second motion.
[Adam Knight]: on the motion of vice-president berries to refer to the appointment of president it was my understanding that the paper had to be passed before august 8th for it to make the ballot um the revenue is going to be the revenue uh so these figures wouldn't necessarily reflect any accurate data or data points for us to have a informed discussion on it um you know if we get better revenue figures maybe then we could take a look at something but at this point you know i think that it's a little bit premature to keep a paper open on an override proposition based on override figures that are going to be out of date, and it would be my recommendation to have a paper received in place.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. The reason I say this is because the paper doesn't make sense. If you look at what it says at the end, it says, from this assessment, the fiscal year beginning July 1st, 2023. The deadline to make that was August 8th, according to Council of Business presentation. So the paper's dead on arrival already. If the issue is that you want to have a conversation about revenues, we already have a paper that's on the agenda. We've been asking the mayor to come and present to us quarterly as to what the revenue picture is. We set the tax rate in December. You know, that's when we should really be stopped. That's when we should really start talking about this. When we set the tax rate in December to fund the budget that we just passed.
[Adam Knight]: I believe Mr. Baker said that the project started in 2005 and ended in 2007 and that the machines had a 15 year shelf life. I missed the beginning of that sentence, thank you. The machines had a 15 year shelf life, we're coming up on year 15 at the end of the next fiscal year and some of the machines are starting to fail already.
[Adam Knight]: on the motion of us, Madam President, just reiterate that the paper is in order to place on the ballot for the 11 23 election, an override question that had to be placed on the ballot by August 8 in order for the paper to be operational. The paper is moved. So we're having a meeting on something that's dead. It's in fact, it does pass.
[Adam Knight]: I'd just like to point out that there's really no need to amend anything. If you look at the agenda and we see paper 22026, which was filed the first meeting in January, In paper 22027, also filed the first meeting in January, requesting quarterly updates from the city, chief financial officer in the city's financial health, and a monthly copy of the Warren articles to see where we're spending our money, right, which is exactly what Councilman Bass is asking for in his amended paper, pretty much. meeting with the finance team to discuss revenue shortfalls, revenue growth, and the like, which is what we've been asking for since January of this year, since the first meeting that this council met. And quite frankly, going back to the term before, and we haven't got it. We haven't got, again, the paper before us is moved. It's dead on arrival. It was supposed to be passed to go to get on the ballot by August 8th. The paper is asking to be placed on the ballot. We have papers that are already readily available for us to act upon that haven't been acted upon, that have been on the table for eight months, with the administration failing to respond to them in any capacity. Why don't we take care of the first things first?
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, debt exclusion really shouldn't be used to address an operational deficit. The debt exclusion is normally used to address the capital need. You take the debt exclusion out to pay off a bond over a certain period of time to build a building or to take care of a project. To do a debt exclusion with an expiring use to hire 25 new DPW workers. Well, after 25 years, what happens? That debt exclusion falls off the books and then- You can't pay it. You can't even legally do it.
[Adam Knight]: Just know that no matter present that do believe you spoke on that, I'm not gonna be able to make tomorrow's meeting I do have a work obligation. Yes.
[Adam Knight]: And listening to what my colleagues are saying and looking at paper 22451, I think that merging the two papers together and developing an agenda for discussion with our state delegation would make sense. You know, we have a paper that was passed on May 17th, June, July, August, now three months have passed, 90 days. We haven't had the meeting with Senator Jalen. Senator Jalen hasn't been able to set up the meeting. Maybe the mayor's not available, I don't know. But, you know, maybe it's time to reach out to the other members of our delegation to see if they can move this along a little bit. You know, a state senator has a much larger district to represent 160,000 people across three to four communities, whereas state representatives represent 40,000 people each, you know, across one or two communities. So maybe reaching out to our state delegation on the House side might be helpful in moving this endeavor forward. But I think it would make sense for us to merge this along with 22451. and develop an agenda for items of concern. Now, I know we've passed a number of items relative to DCI roadways and other parcels and properties. So we can probably put together with the assistance of the city clerk, an agenda for discussion with a very short order and move on this.
[Adam Knight]: attack the problem, right? And we're going to say, listen, let's talk about the Fellsway now. Let's talk about the Fulton Heights. These are the seven issues we have in the Fulton Heights now. Let's talk about the Fulton Heights. Oh, you did a good job. Now come back. Let's talk about this again. Let's talk about this next. You know what I mean? Just for an efficiency purpose, really more than anything else. You know what I mean? The state's going to think we're crazy. We already sent them enough lunatic stuff as it is. You know what I mean? This is something that actually makes a difference. This is something that matters in our community. This is something we can move on. You know what I mean? That's why I get a little concerned when we send a lot of letters up to the statehouse that don't really have anything to do with real life issues that are going on. You know what I mean? You know, in terms of nuts and bolts and service delivery. So, you know, my concern is that, you know, if we're going and we're asking for help from the state, that we do it the right way, that we have a game plan. We have an order of operations. We have an organizational effectiveness so that we don't just go in screaming and yelling because we got a call from a neighbor about how they don't like the sidewalk. And, you know, the goal is we tried, but we never get the result. And a lot of that has to do with planning more than anything else.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. I'm thinking it might make more sense that we as a council, direct the DPW commissioner to address the issue and then report back to us in a defined period of time. You know, it's an infrastructure improvement. The DPW director's involved in all this type of work, right? When it comes down to traffic management, plans, permits, or ground opening and the like. So it might make sense for us to reach out to the DPW commissioner and say, DPW commissioner, what's going on? These are projects that you're aware of, right? Why is the product not coming back in the metric way? Why is the product coming back in the DCR way? please explain to us why and what steps you take to remedy it because, you know, ultimately, the DC has, you know, when it comes down to the nuts and bolts of public works, our public works director is the person, our infrastructure person is the public works director. The city clerk can send a letter and wait for a response. It seems like a lot of it might be technical in nature, and I don't know why. It might be a very easy answer to what Tim already asked. So it might make sense for us to direct the director of public works to do these inquiries and report back to us in a certain period of time. That's just my suggestion. I won't offer them a full motion or anything, but it just seems like it would make sense. Yeah.
[Adam Knight]: He has Madam President, we're talking about a sidewalk. He would turn this thing into a national project for a rocket ship to go to space to move.
[Adam Knight]: I would like to do it. I'm just trying to get it right.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. As we've discussed in the past, the city of metric right now is undergoing, it's probably the largest electrical infrastructure project that it's seen in 40 years with the other source pipeline project. And if. We talked back to 2013-2014 when this project first was discussed. One of the reasons that this project needed to come to play was because of the grid on the East Coast region and rolling brownouts that were occurring and the like, because the grid did not have the capacity to deal with the volume that's on it. So, when we talk about, you know, why are these power outages happening? I think that's something that we're well aware of and we've known about for the better part of a decade. And, you know, we're in the process of a construction project that's attempting to address it in a regional fashion. So that's something I point to keep in mind. And also, because this construction project's going on, the load's being distributed to other parts of our grid, which is putting additional pressure on our grid, right? So that coupled with, you know, the heat wave, And the amount of people that are cranking up the ACs, I think, has put some strain on the remaining infrastructure that's in place here in our community. At least that's what I've been able to read up on and what I've been able to find out and speak with Mr. Gilligan. So with that being said, I move approval of the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng. Any further comment? Yes, I appreciate that, Mr. President. The gentleman bringing this up, and, you know, we all have to be very hypervigilant over here. That's why I think, you know, when we talk with our friends and our neighbors and individuals that travel out of country, that we be sure that they take the appropriate steps when they come back to the country, back from vacations and back from stuff like that, that they take the appropriate steps to be sure that they're not infecting anybody else with some diseases like this. But I appreciate the gentleman bringing it forward. I too certainly have questions for the Board of Health in terms of the transmission of the disease and what steps we're taking. in order to prevent it. It's my understanding that was that immunization for this or vaccination for this at some point in time that was discontinued or eradicated due to the smallpox disease being eradicated. Well, I understand it's the same vaccine. So with that being said, I thank the gentleman and I second this motion.
[Adam Knight]: I think my interpretation was misguided, Mr. President, but it is what it is.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, this is to address some of the inequities that have come up through our Medford Historical Commission and the handling of demolition delays and demolition permits. When we discussed the budget, we talked about what was going on over there and the circumstances, and I was in a position at that point in time to cut their budget entirely based upon the treatment that they provided to homeowners and business owners in this community that are trying to invest their money and message. At just last night's meeting, it was determined that one of the members, one of the voting members is actually not even residing in the city of Medford. It was brought up at last night's meeting that there's an individual that's looking to file a cease and desist order against a historical commission and is threatening litigation against that historical commission right now. So there's a lot going on. But one thing that's not going on is houses getting saved and houses getting restored back to their political, cultural, historical significance. Now, when we sit here and we look at this community and we see the number of houses that have been fixed in the last 22 years or restored in the last 22 years, I think one comes to mind, and that was by agreement, and that was 22 Toro Avenue. And after that, I don't think we've seen any successes, Madam President, based upon our current ordinance. Right now, we add 16 parts to court, for example, to an 18 month demolition delay project that would have been a multimillion dollar project that would have increased growth in our neighborhoods, it would have increased the tax base in our neighborhood, and it would have addressed housing in our neighborhood. Projects fell through, why? Because they ran out of funding. Why did they run out of funding? Because of the demolition delay. So what I'm doing is asking that this council revert back to the way that the demolition delay was prior to the changes that were made in 2015. We can go back to the drawing board and figure out something that works in this community. But currently, right now, what we do doesn't work. We talk about restoring and preserving historic houses with political or cultural significance. Then you look at 20 Cushing Street. Can anybody tell me who grew up there? Michael McGlynn. His father, Jack McGlynn, before him, owned the home, a business owner in this community, a former school committee member, a former city councilor, a former mayor, a former state representative. His two sons, Richard and Jack, Olympic medalists. His other son, Michael, the longest serving mayor in the history of Massachusetts. That house isn't politically significant to this community. That house hasn't been given a historical designation, but Pacelli's, a pizza shop is. Something's significantly wrong with this process. All right, but ultimately the bottom line is our ordinance doesn't work. Our ordinance doesn't work and they're not reaching the goals that they've established. So with that being said, Madam President, I ask that this matter be forwarded to a committee of the whole for us to take a look at this, get redacted language and bring this back to a sense of normalcy and reality so that we can move forward as a community and we can continue to grow and not hold up people for inordinate amounts of time. for the process that is futile.
[Adam Knight]: So last night at last night's meeting, I believe it was applicant that was introduced. And they said, this applicant's here before us just because they just want to share with us what's going on with their project. And the applicant, is there anybody who had anything to say? The applicant says, yeah, I'm here. That's not what I'm here for at all. I don't know who told you that. I gave you a cease and desist letter. I'm trying to sue you. I want my demolition permit. So it's not necessarily all done in good faith. They give good stories. But the fact of the matter is, there's been comments that say, If we hold you up, we're happy. We've completed our goal. Set in live session. That's not what they're there for. That's not their objective. That's not the intent of the audience. They're not living up to the legislative intent. All right? They've gone way outside the scope of their legislative intent. When we look back to the beginning of our term, I'm sorry, we look back to 2021, when Governor Baker put out a release, I believe he said, in the Boston Globe, there was an article talking about boards and commissions running rampant in communities. And this is a perfect example.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. It's no longer historical commission it's a design review board. All right. Now what it is is it's a group of people that have gotten together and said we're going to tell you what your house can and can't look like and we're going to tell you what you can and can't do to the largest purchase, right, regardless, regardless of whether or not the person intends on knocking the house down and building another one and improving our community and selling it or living in it. All right, they're not the building code enforcement officer. All right, and they're not the zoning board. All right, so, and they're certainly not a design review board because the ordinance doesn't call for that, okay? So they're having individuals come before them and submit plans. Oh, these are what the plans will look like. This is what it'll look like. This is what it'll look like. The ZBA might shut that down in a heartbeat. It might not comply with building code. It's outside their scope. It's outside their authority. It's clear they've been abusing this power. And the reason it's clear is because if you're in the good old boys club, if you're in their network, you seem to get an expedited permit. If you're not, then you don't.
[Adam Knight]: On that profit that gets turned is an investment that comes back into this community. So when that parcel gets sold, it gets taxed at a higher rate. So if we look at the parcel on West Street, for example, that sold for $600,000.
[Adam Knight]: Right, but you're also talking about not not the board of this person just bought this to make a profit, the city doesn't have any benefit. The city has a great benefit when people invest in this community. And if we look at West Street we had a parcel that sold for 618,000 that got redeveloped and then the redeveloped process sold for 2.8. All right, that increases our tax base that gives us more money to do things we want to do.
[Adam Knight]: Last night, Madam President, we looked at the recertification of our zoning ordinances, this was the type of project that we were looking to bring it project like this is going to be something that's going to be able to create new growth in our community rejuvenate regenerate our tax base and I think it's going to be something that's going to be good for method. I appreciate john for coming up there and doing his homework and answering the questions that we asked last time. But ultimately, by making the small changes, we're gonna be able to create jobs in this community, generate more new growth, more tax base, more linkage fees. So I think it's gonna be something that's gonna be good for the community.
[Adam Knight]: So where exactly is this possible located? It appears to be grappa on the map.
[Adam Knight]: Just, if we accept it what I was thinking Council Scott probably was because we have the six day waiting period anyway after the close the public hearing that we request from the code enforcement officer listed suggestions as to what they would deem suitable for that area, and then we can put them on as restrictions to the special permit, when it comes for us.
[Adam Knight]: I am. I mean, I just think that, you know, ultimately there's a situation that's going on down there. Councilor Scapelli and Councilor Caraviello are absolutely right. If you're driving down in that area, You know, it's the auto mile, we have a lot of dealerships down there, a lot of car repair places down there. And what we're seeing is their vehicles getting parked on the public way, creating a lot of congestion. Just recently, I believe we passed a permit for Fresh Pond Automotive, I think it was. And although they have a lot of vehicles, a lot of parking for vehicles off street, if you drive past the location and take a look at it, I mean, you barely have an inch to get a car in or out of there. I knew our new zoning act also spoke a little bit to what types of what types of the number of vehicles that you keep on a parcel and the like. So I think it's going to come down to a code enforcement issue as well. But right now there is a problem that's down there. The one thing I will say is that I don't think that the It's not gonna be any more detrimental of a use than what was there before, right? It's not like we're creating a situation and making it worse. We have an opportunity to remedy it, make it better. But like Councilor Caput said, I'd like to see the guy be in business. I'd like to see him be able to operate. So I think that the suggestion of asking the chief of police and the code enforcement officer to give us some suggestions as to what we can do to make it a little bit easier down there for their needs would make sense.
[Adam Knight]: Is there gonna be a where's Barry setting?
[Adam Knight]: Just that most times those trucks, when they are parked, they do have someone that's inside them asleep. Normally they're long haul truckers that are, you know, limited by the amount of hours that they can travel on the road through federal DOT standards. So some where they could be going. somewhere else, but yeah.
[Adam Knight]: I second Councilor Scarpelli's motion to approve.
[Adam Knight]: Great, thank you so much. You're very welcome.
[Adam Knight]: Second, Councilor Scarpelli's motion to approve.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. I think it's important to point out that we have a deficit, because the council approved the spending. The council approved the spending. All right. And we certainly do have a revenue problem. But we also have a spending problem. And we have a prioritization of spending. Okay, so when we look at kind of override is the only two options I don't think that that's the case. I think, I think we had an opportunity to eliminate a lot of waste in this last budget. When we look at what's going on with KP law and this package here, $255,000 in outside legal fees. That's $255,000 that could have gone to the school department. The mayor gave us $300,000 out of the utility account, so the lights might not be on at the hockey rink come the end of the school year, but we got the $300,000 back in the budget, because she took it out of the utilities account. She wanted to take it out of the contract account. We have a spending problem. We have an embraced development to generate new growth. We're fighting 340B projects that would bring in millions and millions of dollars to this community. We have the gentleman up here today talking about a small scale project that's gonna bring in $300,000 annually, just our permit fees and property taxes, plus the jobs it's gonna create, which is gonna bring more revenue into our community in the circular flow of a local economy. We have inflated salaries in a top heavy school administration. We're not investing money in the classroom. We're investing money at the top. We're investing money at the top. I remember doing budgets with Roy Belson. He'd get up here and he'd speak for five hours. He'd know every single dollar, where it was being spent, why it was being spent inside and out. He didn't talk about rubrics. He didn't call somebody up here to speak for him. He got paid $160,000. He came to work for 20 hours a day and he knew that budget inside and out. We have human resource issues across every single department in the city. And we have a proven lack of fiscal constraint, transparency and mismanagement. So is now the time to give the administration more money to spend when they've shown us that they can't do it responsibly now? And we've been patent possible with it, improving spending above and beyond our means. So when we do that, yeah, I guess Councilor Bears is right when we spend above our means, the only thing we can do is ask for more money. But if we sit down, we take a look at the budget and we see that we have $100,000 human resource director in the school department, and 140,000 human resource director on the city side, and then I communicate, and then I'm working together. I think that's a duplication of efforts and wasteful spending. We need to look at this in a way that the individuals in this community if this goes through and quite frankly, I think that we do need to generate more revenue, how we do it is the question, right. Now if you look at the tax rate in the city I mentioned, it's very low compared to our neighboring communities, it's very low. And over time we've seen commercial properties in the number of passes that are commercial dwindle. So we're at about 7% now, you know what I mean, I'd like to see us at around 15 to 20. For us to have that strong commercial tax base that we don't need to have this conversation every year, but we can't do that with the zoning Board of Appeals that doesn't embrace growth with a historical commission that won't let anybody improve their own homes to generate increased tax revenue and improve curb appeal and neighborhoods. So, wow. This is a very. interesting issue, and it's an issue that needs to be discussed, that needs to be talked about, because we cannot continue to go on this way. We absolutely cannot. Our roads are the worst in the region. DPW is the most understaffed in the region. $2.6 million for DPW personnel will go a long way. It will go a long way, if the money ever gets there, if the money goes to where it's intended to go. At the very least, if this question does come to fruition, if this issue does come up, every individual should get an estimate as to what it's gonna cost them individually. And it would be great if we had an assessor in this community that could answer some questions and put that data and information together for us, but we don't even have an assessor. So for us to do this right now, I think is scary. We're looking at exemptions. Exemptions are great, but the money has to be shifted somewhere. And the more exemptions we pass, the more we're gonna squeeze those in the middle and they're already being squeezed. So we have a lot to think about here and a lot to discuss. I just see this as a spending issue and a spending problem here in the community, as well as a number of other issues that are going on that I think are putting us in a position to be a little bit less financially sound than we could be if we were a little bit more proactive. Three years ago, we passed the budget. And that budget had zero dollars and zero cents of deficit spending. Three years later, we spent $29.7 million in deficit spending. Thank you, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: First of all, I think it's safe to say that the budget that we have right now isn't the budget that any of us want. All right. The question is, will $12 million give us that. And I don't think it will. because the budget we have right now is the same budget that we've had for 40 years. It's just been tweaked and tweaked and tweaked and tweaked year after year. We've never really had a major comprehensive reform or a look at the way we spend in this community. We've never prioritized the way we spend in this community. I called for a zero-based budget when COVID hit. Perfect opportunity for us to break it down to zero and build every department back up. Start using, how about metrics and data-driven decision-making instead of reactive decision-making, right? We didn't do that. Now, week in and week out, And it's been going on for 30 years, you hear the same thing fix this sidewalk fix this road fix this street. We asked for more, we asked for priority spending in various areas across the community, and we're not getting it. All right. I see what Councilor bears is doing he's bringing a solution to a problem. All right. I think there's more than one way to do it. I know he thinks there's many ways to do it he's looked at them all, or the ones that he's looked at it, and he thinks that this is the best one. All right, and he thinks this is the best one because you know why it plugs the hole exactly right it stops all the bleeding. We're ready to rock and roll we're back to, we're back to even, and we're going to move forward right. I get it, I get where you're coming from, I do. I really do, I get it, right? But I still don't think that 12 million would give us the budget that we want or the budget that we're looking for or the spending in the priority areas that we've been asking for. And until we take that budget and break it down, break it down to zero to see whether or not we can make do with what we have a little more or a little less, I think we're doing, a little bit of a disservice. Now I agree, there's not a lot of places you can cut, but there are places you can cut. It's not so much cutting as it is moving the shells around, right? This account might have to go into that account, just like end of the year transfers that we see every year. We pass a budget, the budget isn't the budget. At the end of the year, they come to us and they say, there's a million dollars in the fire department's overtime account that wasn't spent, let's transfer it over here. Right, every year, there's a million dollars in this account that wasn't spent, let's transfer it over there. The budget's the best case scenario, right? When you look at the budget, the budget is just a picture. If everything went perfect, this is how it would be spent. But it's never spent that way. It's never, ever spent that way. And I think that there has to be a discussion, there has to be a process. But to say, let the voters, trust the voters, I've always trusted the voters, Justin. I've always trusted the voters. That's why we're here, because the voters trust us. I've trusted the voters I put my faith in them, and they've given me the opportunity to sit here and serve. So, when it comes up to a circumstance like this, where I think the process is a little bit flawed, because it's in the 11th hour, because we've been left with no other options, other than to say, can we live with this for another 12 months. and then start a process all over again, and exercise and futility if you must, at some points we think, because we have a partner that doesn't wanna cooperate, it doesn't wanna have a strong partnership with us. A chief of staff that comes up here and fights with us instead of works with us, gives us more defenses than answers, right? We're gonna be in the same situation again, I understand that. And I can appreciate Councilor Calls and Councilor Beall bringing this issue up and saying, look it, we have a large scale problem and here's a large scale solution. We can keep putting band-aids on things or we can go in for surgery, right? And that's really what this is. This is us making a decision as to whether or not we wanna do conservative treatment or go in for surgery. And that's something that needs to be weighed. And when you oppose with that question in your personal life, you surround yourself with the people, your family. That's our community right now. That's our family, the community. And you tell them what's going on and you get their input. So we really need to establish a process if this is the direction that we want to go in. And the process can't be this short. I'd be happy to have this discussion moving forward to get this ready to go at some point in time to get languages proper for us to see what our financial needs are and move on something. But now's not the time. Now's not the time. when we took a vote on Mystic Avenue in the middle of the summer, you would have thought Mayor Longo's head was gonna explode. You used that to catapult yourself into office. You thought that Stephanie Burke was gonna put apartments all up and down Mystic Avenue, no one was gonna be able to drive their car. Never happened. Nothing's happened on Mystic Avenue since. Nothing's happened on Mystic Avenue since. There's been no development, there's been no growth until this council passed the recodification of zoning. and was able to start generating revenue for this community. So we have some tools in our toolbox too right now. In September, we're gonna get an RFP out. I mean, in September, we're gonna get an assistant city solicitor, we're told. We're gonna get an RFP out for our zoning consultant to continue to build upon the work that we've done. We're gonna be able to generate revenue for that. So I think we're gonna be able to do our part in creating recurring non-tax-based, recurring revenue, not one-time revenue sources. But in terms of this question, in the direction that we're going in, I commend you on the hard work that you both put into this and the efforts that you put forward. I'm not comfortable with it, based upon the timing and the process, more so than the question that's being asked. I do have a couple of concerns that are legal in nature. surrounding this? Can we put a question on that says $0 or $1? Is it plurality? Is it 50% of the people that voted or just 50% of the people that voted the question? You know, that would make this, that would enable this in an act? You know, so there are a couple of questions that I have related to the process of passage as well as the financial side of things without an assessor. I just think we're in a real scary spot right now. We're talking about assessments and exemptions moving, shifting a pot of money around among a small group of people, we really need to know what the dollars and cents are going to be. Without an assessor, we can't do that.
[Adam Knight]: If I may offer a compromise, why don't we allow everyone to speak once and use their a lot of time and then they can come back up and speak a second time. We're not going to limit them to once. Keep them within their five minute framework. Let them speak. If there are other people in line that want to come up and speak, let them and then we can keep talking until we're done.
[Adam Knight]: The city budget actually pays the most for parking, because it went from not paying anything to now paying over a million dollars a year.
[Adam Knight]: I don't think that that's a fair assessment. I think everybody behind this reel gives a lot of their time and a lot of their effort, right? I don't think you can give enough time to do it. To make this city a better place, you know what I mean? So when you make that, I'm a politician, trust me. I mean, I just don't think that's a fair characteristic.
[Adam Knight]: Is he giving you any reason not to trust him?
[Adam Knight]: It's not even a motion, it's just a rule in one sentence. It's a reference to chapter 43, section 22 of the general laws, which says that if any member of the council objects, the measure should be postponed for that meeting. So it's postponed for this meeting. one of the rules hasn't been debated.
[Adam Knight]: Oh, still move approval. That's fine.
[Adam Knight]: Leave this companion paper that's the same amount of President 22435 and 22435 offered by Councilor Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Caraviello's abstention, I'd just like to mention that he was also a great member of this Metro community, not just the Grace Church community. Yes. And served that country well.
[Adam Knight]: Move approval.
[Adam Knight]: Why don't we open it up to anybody that's in favor or against before, like.
[Adam Knight]: Is there anyone else who would like to... Madam President, actually, I'd like to keep... Continue?
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I ask that we keep the public hearing open for 90 days. You need to... I'm sorry, not to close the public hearing to keep it open for 90 days.
[Adam Knight]: No, not with approval. Okay. Starbucks right now is in the middle of a quite a public dispute over the conditions that they placed their workers in allowing the five o'clock opening right now in the middle of a contract negotiation. I don't think it's the way to go. There's a strike going on at Starbucks right now for the Starbucks baristas relative to wages, hours and conditions of employment. I think that's something that needs to be remedied. I support the work of people and I think this corporate giant should go to the table, sit down with them. They're not broke.
[Adam Knight]: No, I just wanna keep the public hearing open for 90 days to be sure that our friends at the United Commercial Workers can come down and express their concern about this when the time is right.
[Adam Knight]: I was just gonna second the motion.
[Adam Knight]: So would taking these roadways from the school department as private property and then making them public ways allow us to utilize CHAPA 90 funds to repair them?
[Adam Knight]: Let's keep the comment period open in case there's any question about whether or not we need to have input from the traffic commission on such a matter. I don't think we do, but let's keep it open just in case friends of the traffic commission have some input they'd like to make.
[Adam Knight]: Why don't we just table all the Councilor Covey was okay.
[Adam Knight]: I'm the other guy. I'm that guy.
[Adam Knight]: I know, I know, but we don't live in Las Vegas, you know, 55 inch LCD screens.
[Adam Knight]: And my uncle was the quartermaster at the Milton VFW for a number of years. So I know what you're dealing with out there as well. So these are gonna be 55 inch screens?
[Adam Knight]: And there's only gonna be two of them?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, so we're looking at 220 inches, square inches of illuminated sign.
[Adam Knight]: Okay, in two locations.
[Adam Knight]: Designed for pedestrians to look at when they're crossing the street, right? They don't have to if they don't want to. Are there crosswalks in the locations where they are about the areas where the signs are going to be located?
[Adam Knight]: I know what you're talking about. With the placement, I'd like to see the placement be placed where a crosswalk is, right? So that at the very least, the stop sign crosswalk. So, I mean, someone's going to look at a distracted driving, something we talk about all the time, right? If you guys have driven in this parking lot, right? Yes. Yeah. You'd want the bulldozer, not the truck, right? I mean, it's crazy in there. There's a lot of cars, a lot of vehicles, a lot of heavy trucking going on. I'm not so worried about the internal illumination because I mean who's your neighbor half afraid you know what I mean I don't think that they're going to really mind too much if they see that. In terms of moving forward we have two now is there plans for expansion or is it just going to be two?
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, but if you work at Brown Rudnick, and you guys are slick talking lawyers, we approve it once, next thing you know, you come in and, oh, you approved it last time, now you're out, you can't do that now, what are you gonna do?
[Adam Knight]: Wait a minute, we're gonna get something electric before Somerville?
[Adam Knight]: No, you've addressed my concerns. As long as the crosswalk issue is addressed and this is located in close proximity to a crosswalk and stop sign, I certainly have no problem with it.
[Adam Knight]: But if someone's not charging, they don't have an electric vehicle, they just park there.
[Adam Knight]: And have they expressed willingness to do that?
[Adam Knight]: In other places.
[Adam Knight]: If we could get a financial presentation from the finance department, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President for me.
[Adam Knight]: Can you just discuss the nature of the settlement for $137,000?
[Adam Knight]: Previous city solicitor did something happen to our existing city solicitor that we need to know about.
[Adam Knight]: That's all. Madam President, in my, on my desk today when I came in I found a packet. And it was provided to us from local 22. I look at 25 rather and going through it. It has a number of charges documents. I'm wondering if, you know, based upon the fact that there's $192,000 of overspending in this account right now, and the administration's asking us to transfer that from the fire department public safety to legal. I'm hoping maybe gentlemen that gave us this packet can just give us a brief outline as to what's in it so that we have a better understanding as to what's going on on the side of things.
[Adam Knight]: On the underlying question, Madam President, if we could just get a review of the packet related to the law line item from- Yeah, I'm not sure I even did that.
[Adam Knight]: The messenger did pass it out.
[Adam Knight]: It's quite voluminous.
[Adam Knight]: I just do want to point back out to the meeting we had with Mr. Silverstein that said that these attorneys are not attorneys for the city of Medford. These attorneys don't work for the city council. His attorneys don't work for anybody but the mayor's office. Their client is the mayor. That's who their client is. That's where their loyalties lie, not to the taxpayers of this community. He made that clear.
[Adam Knight]: How much longer is the lying going to go on? That's my question. How much longer is the buffaloing going to go on? How much longer are we going to be left in the dock? And then in the last 11th hour, you come up here and ask us to spend hundreds and hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars. That's my question.
[Adam Knight]: How much longer do we have to wait for the quarterly presentations from the finance director that we've asked for for three years? Those are questions I can ask, too, if those are the questions you were willing and ready to answer. We've been giving you an opportunity now for 36 months to do so.
[Adam Knight]: Why can't we just approve the 500, and then when they certify the retained earnings, come back in the fall and do the other 250?
[Adam Knight]: But then after the retained earnings get certified in the fall, can you come back and request an additional 250,000 and then provide that additional rate?
[Adam Knight]: Well, I know, but earnings in three months, or maybe the way things are going.
[Adam Knight]: So right now, the only option we have is to either vote this paper through with $500,000 or table it until such time as the chief of staff can get the legal advice that this council has been asking for to have here during these meetings to get a determination as to whether or not the mayor's allowed to amend the paper for $250,000 on the floor the night of the meeting after it's been proposed.
[Adam Knight]: It's a lot of procedure problems.
[Adam Knight]: I just want to be adamantly clear that I'm 110% favor of water sewer rate relief. I mean, that's what the retained earnings are flawed. That's what we should be doing with this money. Keep a healthy amount of reserves and then get the money back to the taxpayer, the back to the ratepayer for relief. I certainly think that this is the way to go. The question is just when can we follow the proper mechanism to do it so that we don't find ourselves in a financial situation or a legal situation.
[Adam Knight]: Any discussion on this paper from the Council, Madam President, the way I'm reading it is that this paper is in accord with the surrounding agreement with when casino, which would mean that They're telling us we have to hire a motor vehicle graduate payment and a transportation engineer, or is this positions that were negotiated through this agreement? Maybe someone could elaborate. Are these positions something that we said, you know, when the casino gets open, we want you to fund these positions for the city of Medford annually, or is it a direct appropriation of money that they give us that we then turn and spend however we see fit?
[Adam Knight]: Absolutely. I'm just wondering if this agreement dictates that these are the funds, these are where the funds need to be paid. When you read this, the language of it says that these appropriations are in accord with or in compliance with the Medford and Winn Casino surrounding Community Impact Agreement. So does that agreement say that when we'll fund an annual transportation engineer and an annual MEO3? Or does it say that they'll provide us with funds that we can use in a discretionary fashion when we see fit?
[Adam Knight]: So the agreement with Wynn says that we can use these funds for anything. We're choosing to use them for these two positions.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to sever the police cruisers from the rest of the paper of course.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, we'll for approval or $165,000 to purchase a three new hybrid police cruisers to the police department.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Madam President, Mr. McGovern, how are you sir. Excellent. Quick question. this remediation project is the property owner responsible for payments of any of the radiation.
[Adam Knight]: Are there any other remediation commitments from any of the neighbors that are privately owned parcels there? I believe they've been exhausted. Has the city made any payments to private entities or interests relative to the remediation that is possible or abiding?
[Adam Knight]: If you can give me a breakdown of that please from your office if the expenses have been made payments to the to any of butter of the mediation project.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: If you're able to go over that briefly, as it relates to police cruisers.
[Adam Knight]: Any discussion or emotion on this paper, as I understand it, Madam President. This appropriation would replace the revenue shortfalls that came with poor economic performance in regards to permitting meals taxes, hotel restaurant taxes, and new growth, as well as development permitting. The ABA funds were put in place for us to replace revenues when we come into shortfalls like this. So it seems like it's something that we need to do. Whether or not we want to, we need this $7 million in revenue to balance the budget. We need this $7 million in revenue to be sure that our government continues to operate. We need this $7 million, the corporation I'm sorry not government corporations so this corporation operates. So, I just wanted to make that quick.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, it's not how I read chapter 44, section 32, but. Well, it's my understanding that, and Madam Mayor, thank you for being here, and I appreciate the fact that you've taken the hits you have, I've thrown them at you, you know what I mean? Yeah, you're standing here. You've thrown some good ones, too. I learned from the best, you know, you sat next to me for a while. Yeah, I did sit next to you, yeah. I missed this. So, my question is, looking at, Looking at this 500,000 that you're talking about, you're taking out of negotiated salary accounts. When the budget was presented, it was presented that there was a 2% cost of living adjustment was penciled into this, right? From the negotiated salary accounts across all the open contracts.
[Adam Knight]: Right, because what I'm hearing is that we have some money set aside. We've already made a commitment that it's going to be 2% cost of living adjustments, and now we're going to take money out of that account to fund these other items. So then that would leave less money on the table for these cost of living adjustments.
[Adam Knight]: Right, so what I'm saying, there are some contracts that are gonna be under negotiation right now. We put money into a negotiated salaries account to fund, hopefully, a settled contract. We've appropriated those funds at 2%. Now we're taking money out of that account. So there's not gonna be 2% in there for these negotiated contracts. Now, quite frankly, I don't think that these men and women that are out working every day, coming to work every day, should take less than 2%. They should get more than 2% anyway. You know what I mean? So if we're taking money. All we're doing is robbing Petey to pay Paul, right? We're saying make the council happy by giving them this money and opening the library, but now we get the contract problems still on our hands. We have open contracts and we're taking money out of negotiated salary accounts. It's a tug of war, right? It's a zero sum game. All we're doing is moving money from this part to this part.
[Adam Knight]: Right, but what I'm saying is based upon the financial presentation that's been given to us, the future budgeting projection has always been at 2% or more. So if we're rating that account and taking $500,000 out of it for an account that's already been looked at for future negotiated contracts, right, at 2%, we have less money in the pot now to spend. That we'll have to cover with free cash. We'll have to cover with free cash or some other revenue stream, right? Yes. Okay, thank you.
[Adam Knight]: I convinced you, huh?
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I think it's also important to point out there's no paper for a proposition two and a half over right before this council this evening. This is true. The only thing that's before us is the operating budget, right? The council is going to vote it up, vote it down and make changes to it. The question of a proposition two and a half over is not something that's going to be addressed this evening or solved this evening. I think the ma'am made that clear in her comments as well.
[Adam Knight]: And then they- Those NDA transfers, right? So ultimately you had $194,000 of surplus funds in your account from last- Right, those are because I had those extra positions that are now gone. Budgeted positions that were vacant, so we didn't have a true number of your actual operating budget.
[Adam Knight]: Right, and that's why we talked about the $1.9 million appropriations overtime and whether or not you're gonna be able
[Adam Knight]: Madam President. Have I talked about legal services?
[Adam Knight]: There is a line item in our budget number 0101515302. Last year, I put forward a motion asking that this line item be cut by the amount of $55,000. Council passed it. Around January, the administration came back and asked for supplemental appropriation to the budget, the amount of $55,000. That appropriation passed. That was the fund KP law. As we look at our budget this year, we see that line item has a dollar figure attached to it of $81,600. I'd ask that that budget be reduced by $81,600 for that particular line item for professional legal services, Madam President. I could go into the thousand reasons that I've stated previously, but I'll spare everybody based upon the late hour.
[Adam Knight]: Well, apparently, Madam President, the Council is doing much more than one ordinance per year, as stated previously. I guess we're getting some good work done. I quite frankly think we can operate without them. I don't think we need them. I think that that money could be better spent, quite frankly, maybe with a zoning consultant to begin phase two of our zoning recartification. As we sat here for the last couple of weeks and we looked, we saw that we were able to generate millions of dollars in funds for this community through the recartification effort with the creation of an O2 district. We've generated probably close to $6 million worth of permitting fees and new growth in the community based upon this effort. So I think that this is a worthwhile endeavor. I think it's a good expense, to be honest with you. And I think making the cut makes sense.
[Adam Knight]: I just like to point out that we were able to do it without KPMG law previously. I understand the chief's point. I understand the chief's point about reform and how things have changed, and I do, and I get it, chief. I understand that.
[Adam Knight]: Okay, but just the implementation of police reform to come out of the purchasing office if that's the case for a specific scope of service for that, for that purpose.
[Adam Knight]: Well, I would assume we have a city solicitor in this community that would pick up the phone and take that call and be able to provide you with that guidance, Chief. And I think that that's part of the problem. I think we're moving away from our in-house city solicitor, who has the institutional knowledge of 20 years of working in this building, and we're moving away from them to a private service that's being paid where we see a new face every other day and a new person every other day. Right now, when Councilor Caraviello met with the mayor to discuss the future of legal services here to the council, the discussion was pretty clear. The mayor made an offer, the council rejected it. The mayor said that's your offer and walked away and that was it. And then there was no negotiation discussion about it until tonight when we heard that there might be reallocation of funds that they're going to take it out of the negotiated salary accounts, which is set up to provide the funds for your employees and for the employees that sit behind you to fund this want for the council and it's not really a want it's a need we need this right. So, quite frankly, we did this last year and we were able to survive. We're able to survive. We did it last year, we're able to survive, but I don't think it's something that's going to impact our operations to the point of red flags. I think that it's something that we're going to be able to work through. And if the administration is serious about what they said, but they want to work with us and they want to put together a budget that works, then we'll be happy to come back to the table and discuss this further. But the council needs certain tools in their toolbox to be successful as well.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Bailey, I can appreciate that. I mean, here we have, But just city departments we get the city budget here and as I look at this budget and I see all the city departments talking about how they need legal services right and then I look at the budget here and I see the city department it's called legislative. That's us. We're a city department as well, and we also need the service, and we're not getting it to the level that we need it at. So that's why we're taking the action. That's why I'm taking the action I'm taking. I don't know what my colleagues are gonna do. They've supported this measure in the past, and I'm pretty sure they're gonna support it again. But I think that, again, like Councilor Scarpelli said, all those things that they do for you, they don't do for us, but we need them to do for us. And that's why we're making this move. Yeah.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, last meeting we talked a little bit about our prestigious historic commission and I had discussed my desire to slash that budget based upon the actions that they tend to live by, which is not, in my opinion, good for business here in the city of Medford. Ultimately, we do have an appropriation before us for what looks like $36,500, but part of that's a matching grant. And if I can get a commitment from my colleagues to have a committee of the whole on this to discuss the ordinance, I'd be happy to move off of my defunding of the historic commission for this point in time for us to sit down and have some talk over the ordinance to see if we can create an ordinance that actually works in this community. When you look at the historic commission and you ask how many houses have been saved. through the demolition delay process over the past 20 years, I think the answer is one, 22 Turoev, and that was done with a deed of restriction with the buyer prior to the purchase of the home. So ultimately, we have an ordinance that's a place that doesn't work. It's morphed itself into more of a design review board, and I don't think that it's really meeting the objections in the legislative intent that has been outlined in the ordinance when it was passed. So with that being said, Madam President, in an effort to provide the city with the ability to receive the matching grant. If I can get a commitment from my colleagues to move forward and have a Committee of the Whole on this issue to review the ordinance, I'd be happy to no longer further introduce that measure.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I as one member of this body support increasing the funding to the library, but I don't support taking out of the negotiated salaries line item. That's the money that's been set aside to pay the cost of living adjustments for the people that came up here and told us their story this evening.
[Adam Knight]: So I just don't feel comfortable taking him out of that account, because all we're doing is robbing Peter to pay Paul. We have a problem over here and a problem over here. We're going to take it from over here and put it over here, and then we'll deal with that problem later. I don't think that makes good sense. I think it makes political sense, but I don't think it makes good fiscal sense.
[Adam Knight]: Does Shane get paid for next day now? Because he's been here for two days. So Shane should definitely get paid twice.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. First of all, I think this council owes you a debt of gratitude because it wouldn't be where we are today, if it wasn't for your persistence. You're not allowed to sit down we're going to give you what you want the big seat you got to stand up. But we wouldn't be here today if it wasn't for your persistence. Since your election as council president, you've been across the hall banging on the door saying, when are we going to start the budget hearings? When are we going to start the budget hearings? When are we going to start the budget hearings? And it's because of that persistence that we're able to make the decisions that we've made tonight. And we were also able to receive the information that we've received, albeit in a fashion that maybe not satisfied many of us, but nonetheless got us through a process. Now, quite frankly, for me, Madam President, this isn't about an organization. This isn't about a corporation, all right? This is about our city, all right? This is about Medford. It's about our neighbors. It's about our family, our kids, all right? It's about the men and women that go to work every day and try to make this city great. And when we look at what's going on before COVID and since, we've seen an absolute HR nightmare. when it comes to various department heads in this building. We've seen the council call for quarterly meetings on the financial health of this community to no avail. We've seen the council beg and plead for a copy of the monthly warrant articles, showing us where the money's being spent to the point where we've had to ask that the solicitor draft an ordinance for us. When COVID hit, I thought it was the perfect opportunity for us to hit the reset button. to look at some zero-based budgeting, where appropriations are actually based upon measurables, not a recycled budget from when Mr. Glione was the town manager, with little modifications throughout the last 40 years. So here we are asking for information. Between May and July, we virtually go undergoing. And then come May and June, the council's got a seat at the table finally. And when we finally have a seat at the table and we raise all those issues that we talked about for the last year, we get told any action other than a rubber stamp will be detrimental to this organization. I don't think we can operate like this. I don't think we can continue to afford to operate like this. There's not a road in this street that you, not a road or a street in the city that you can drive down. It's not in disrepair. There's not a road or a street in this city that doesn't have a stump that's seven feet tall for some reason, but all the stumps are this tall. They're gonna cut the tree down, cut the tree down. I mean, come on, enough's enough, right? I mean, the things are gigantic, right? At the end of the day, you know, services have been degraded to the point where we have to hit the reset button. And, you know, as I said, for me, this is about this city. This is about our neighbors, our kids, our families, and the hard working men and women that go to work every day to make this city great. Those are the people with their boots on the ground. Those aren't the people with these things in front of their desks. All right, we're not the ones that make the city great. We make informed decisions to move that process along. But it's the people in this room that were up here advocating and fighting for themselves that make the city great. And they're what make a community. And quite frankly, I think that this budget doesn't support that. It misses the mark. And for that reason, I won't be voting for it this evening.
[Adam Knight]: No more important financial responsibility from our finance office than the fiscal health of this community and in the city budget. All right, I don't care what else is going on. Nothing's more important than the fiscal health of this city, and the operating budget, because we can't operate without. We can't move forward right so we got to get back to a spot where we can operate, and we can deliver services and we're not there. All right.
[Adam Knight]: We have five and a half hours, Madam Mayor. Madam President, I've been out for five and a half hours.
[Adam Knight]: I have a question as to whether or not a meeting can even go past midnight into the next day when it's been posted for yesterday.
[Adam Knight]: 22-409. Leilaniwa's petition for grant of location.
[Adam Knight]: Two questions, Madam President. The first question is it appears based upon the reading of this application that all the work will be done exclusively along the sidewalk?
[Adam Knight]: Will there be a traffic planning plan there? Will the road be closed down?
[Adam Knight]: Correct. I heard that Somerville really likes it if you could detour the cars through Somerville. Is that a metric when you do that? But all right, thank you very much. Now, how long is this going to take? Eight weeks. Eight to 10 weeks. And when are you going to be doing the work during the day?
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, if I do recall, There was some discussion when they were doing some Greenland extension work that we had half a street paved curb to curb. If I'm not mistaken, at one point in time, maybe within the last several years, maybe the city engineer, the former city engineer and now DPW commissioner. Yeah.
[Adam Knight]: Forget about that stuff. When did we repave that street? Was that within the last five years? Yes, it does fall into more than five years.
[Adam Knight]: All right.
[Adam Knight]: So we get it this way, but you guys will figure out this way. Exactly. Okay. Thank you very much. You're welcome.
[Adam Knight]: that I would even not move to waive it would be due to the large scale community act activity from some of the residents of the Lincoln Kennedy condominiums. I want to make sure that they're well aware that this project is going to take place before it goes off.
[Adam Knight]: I just want to make a note that this is the first time anything that said Brooks, master plan on it, that Tom Lincoln wasn't here for. I hope he's okay.
[Adam Knight]: I believe that the way that CPC is structured is that there's a certain statutory positions that are required representatives from the Park Commission, right? Representatives from the Historic Commission, and then we have some open positions as well. And those open positions would be subject to council approval where the other positions are not, if I'm not mistaken, correct, Joan? It's been a long time since we worked on this one. I know, I know, a long time. It's amazing. Now, where you are coming in as a general nominee. I heard you say a little bit about housing. Is that what your focus is going to be on here? Or is that going to be one of your areas of expertise that you're offering us here? Or, you know, why do you want to be on the CPC? Why should we vote for you? I guess is the question. That's what they ask me when I run for office every year. Let's ask you that question.
[Adam Knight]: and can we expect you to fill out the duration of the term? Yes.
[Adam Knight]: So it's now June 29th at 1249 in the morning. This council met as a body in May and set their budget priorities. That was like seven weeks ago, eight weeks ago. We went through an exercise of reviewing each department's budget. And when we reviewed their budget, we continued to reiterate what our priorities were. We went through another exercise of going through a budget presentation And now all of a sudden, at quarter one in the morning, the day before, the budget needs to be passed, we're at the table negotiating. There's something fundamentally wrong with this process.
[Adam Knight]: So now I sit here and I remember like in 2018 when at one o'clock in the morning, we took a vote about Mr. Gaff and there was outrage. We're doing it in the shadow of darkness. The people can't pay attention to what's going on. What's the story here? We should have been at the table. the week after we put this council priority agenda list out. And to have it be put on us now to be brought to the table to negotiate at one o'clock in the morning, literally like 46 hours before the fiscal year ends is irresponsible, I think. quite frankly, we've all set it behind this rail. Nobody makes good decisions after 11 o'clock at night. Nobody certainly makes good decisions after a seven hour meeting. And now's the time for us to start negotiating. There's something fundamentally wrong with this process. And I think part of it was the fact that nobody respected the council enough to think that they'd actually vote a budget down.
[Adam Knight]: So, now, for the first time, and I've been involved in metropolitan politics a long time, right, 2025 years. For the first time in my life, I've actually seen seven members of the Council come together and unify around one particular issue. One big issue. It's something that has to tell a story, right? It has to speak volumes as to the process and what went on. moment on I don't think it's fair that we're sitting here or one in the morning trying to negotiate a deal to pass a budget. Less than 2 days before the fiscal year closes with we were beaten down the door starting in April to stop this process we put our priorities out well in advance. Well before the public has given us this. So again. I think that this process is fundamentally wrong. The way that we're going about doing this is not transparent. It's not transparent at all. I mean, the taxpayers are sitting there watching this meeting for the last six hours. And now all of a sudden we get everything we want after we heard we're not going to get anything. I'm very confused by this process, Madam President. And I, again, Madam Mayor, I give you a lot of credit for coming here and facing the beast. You know what I mean? Absolutely. You know, you're in the belly of the beast. You know what I mean? You're going to hear it on the street. You're going to hear it on TV. You're going to hear it here. You're here to hear it. You know what I mean? You had to face the music and I appreciate that. Um, but I'm not comfortable with this process at all or the way that it's going down.
[Adam Knight]: The way I'm hearing this is that we're gonna take money from facilities and give us what we're looking for, restore all the cuts that we just made, then they're gonna come and ask for more money later on.
[Adam Knight]: They're gonna ask us for more money to make that appropriation, right?
[Adam Knight]: I just want a financial picture. I mean, because ultimately what we're doing is, in essence, we're just creating more spending down the road for later on, right? So we're gonna restore the facility's budget with free cash money.
[Adam Knight]: One information on that. Councilor Knight. It doesn't matter. We can just make an ordinance that says 20 hours a week would be.
[Adam Knight]: My question is, when's it going to be filled? I mean, we can say, Oh, yeah, sounds good to me. And then, you know, January, February, March, we still wait for the position to be posted.
[Adam Knight]: I'm assuming that the mayor would maintain her position as the appointing authority relative to the assistant city solicitors position?
[Adam Knight]: member of the council to be able to serve on the selection committee considering that or the city clerk therefore even with the person to be working in the council on the selection committee as they go through the process.
[Adam Knight]: How's this any different than the veterans office, right? Okay.
[Adam Knight]: We, we also talked a little bit about the work that I videographer does the amount of hours that he puts in the fact that, you know, his salary, that position hasn't changed in terms of stipend for now, as long as I can remember. but where we've made such a move to the hybrid version of meetings and the like, I'd like to see some sort of a cost of living adjustment or a salary adjustment to the videographer. And if we look at my budget here, we do a purchase of videographer services. And I'm hoping the city clerk can tell me whether or not 5202 would be the videographer services that we utilize for Shane.
[Adam Knight]: The way I see it, the kid barely makes minimum wage the way these meetings go. So I'd like to maybe revisit this and maybe make that an hourly position as opposed to having to be a monthly stipend position. Because right now I think he's getting $300 a month. And quite frankly, you couldn't pay me $300 to do what he did tonight sitting in that room in the back over there listening to this. So, you know, ultimately, this needs to be rectified. It's something we need to address. I don't think this is going to be a budget break. It's not going to be one to hold us up. But moving forward, I'd also like to get a commitment from the administration that they'd be willing to work with us on getting a videographer a more suitable wage than what is being compensated at right now.
[Adam Knight]: 500 bucks.
[Adam Knight]: Just like the CPA, there are buckets that you can use it for, right? We're saying that there's $300,000 in ARPA funds that we know that we can use for this purpose. We just have to make sure that we figure out what bucket that is.
[Adam Knight]: And then just out of curiosity, if that money was there previously, and we were talking about the school budget for six hours, how come we didn't grab that money a long time ago and put that on the table? And we probably would've got this conversation short by three hours.
[Adam Knight]: Sorry.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, sorry.
[Adam Knight]: For Chief Buckley, no.
[Adam Knight]: We're going to hold the committee.
[Adam Knight]: I never offered the motion to reduce the budget. I said that we'll talk about it via ordinance as opposed to finance.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, at the beginning of these discussions, I explained the reasons why I was going to vote no on this budget. I'm gonna have to find something else to talk about now that we've got 2 lawyers instead of one. All I wanted was a part-time lawyer, and we got two. So I'm very happy with the compromise that we were able to reach with the administration. I will be voting in favor of the budget this evening based upon the fact that we were able to restore $300,000 to the schools. That's for young children. That's for young public school children. I think this is gonna make a big difference. I've also been talking about ad nauseam, the need for this council to have the tools and the toolbox necessary to do the job. And with the appropriation of $50,000 for us to continue looking at phase two for the zoning consultant, and also $85,000 for our assistant city solicitor that will work part-time at the city council, I think a lot of our concerns are going to be addressed through those two mechanisms. So with that being said, it was a pleasure to work with the mayor. I was glad to see her here this evening so that we could actually work something out and negotiate it. And again, like I said, thank you to you, Madam President, for the work that you did in putting this together. and also thank you to the mayor for coming down here to the belly of the beast and facing the music and being able to work with us to negotiate something that can satisfy us.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, first of all, I'd like to thank Mr. Rafferty for being here this evening. He's actually here at our behest and our request. Previously, he was here before us to get a common victuals license to open up his restaurant. And we had a little bit of discussion about what was gonna be in the menu and the like, and where it's an establishment that serves alcohol. He has received a alcohol permit from liquor licensing commission. That license goes to one and but I am city of Medford in order to get extended hours need to come before the council so Mister Rafferty and his wisdom is actually following the protocols and processes that are in place here in the community. I commend him for complying. I am someone who really likes to sell it to make it thrown out the middle of the game. So I certainly support this measure wholeheartedly from what I understand. It has been quite a buzz about the business around the community a lot of people are saying good things about it, and I wish you the best of luck, sir. It's also very nice to see someone who resides in the community to invest their hard-earned dollars in this community and open up a business here. So, me as one Councilor, and I'm sure my colleagues behind the rail, I'm more than happy and willing to help you out in any endeavor that you need moving forward to make sure that this is a smooth transition for you as you open this establishment. but I support a lot of Mr. President, I'd offer the motion to waive the waiting period.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, Mr. Deveney of any of any being here today. Mr. President, by way of history, I believe this O2 district was something that we created the rezoning recodification and first one in 60 years. Right. And it was, um, well, we did stations landing. This parcel was actually the parcel that we had in mind when we started discussing this about a redevelopment opportunity. Councilor Caraviello and our economic development director spoke at great length about what we can do to bring biotech into this community. And one of the things was to create this office two district and create some dimensional requirements that might meet some of the needs that developers like this gentleman have. I was wondering if you could tell us how many number of jobs this would create in construction and also permanently once the facility is complete.
[Adam Knight]: So we're looking at one to 200 short term jobs that pay a good wage. And then one to 200 long-term jobs that also pay a good wage for people that work in this type of industry will be able to live in the community also.
[Adam Knight]: And also, I was wondering if you could tell us a little bit about how much money this would generate for the city in permitting fees and also increased tax revenues.
[Adam Knight]: Just last week, Mr. President, we had a neighbor of this parcel come to us with similar request. They informed us that they'd be able to create a very similar aspect of jobs and growth growth was a little bit bigger is a lot larger parcel. $3 million in permitting fees and $2.9 million in increased property tax revenues. This project here, it should go pot and parcel with the approval that we just lended last week. If we're going to redevelop, let's redevelop the whole area at once. We also see a project that's going to be taking place down at Walkman Court near the side of the train tracks. So with some proper planning in the next 12 to 18 months, we could see significant expanded tax base down to new jobs, as well as some revitalized curb appeal down in an area that's somewhat run down and blighted. So this is something that I think is good for our community to support a lot of.
[Adam Knight]: Salem Street or Salem Street, high street Salem Street.
[Adam Knight]: We're talking about a food truck permit. This isn't a food truck, this is a pushcart. And the city of Medford has an ordinance that prohibits pushcart services. Right, so whether or not we're for it or against it or anything else. This doesn't, this application isn't being presented to the council or the body in the right scope and form, right? So for us to vote on this as a food truck doesn't make sense because it's not a food truck, it's a pushcart. We have an ordinance that governs pushcarts at this point in time. It might not be the answer that you want to see in terms of pushcarts are prohibited, I believe, in the city of Medford. But from what I'm looking at here and what I see, I see a pushcart, not a food truck. I don't see this application as being appropriate for the food truck, application process. Listen, if you were here and you said I want a one day permit to go to go to circle in the square, which was a big event that we had last week, I want to say go for it. You know, I share my council's concerns. But I think that there is a solution. And when we look at the draft food truck ordinance that this city hasn't been able to put their head around since 2016. Now, something that I support, I think that the city should have the opportunity to bring food trucks and other opportunities. And I think competition, you know, is good for business, it drives costs down. So it's always a good thing for the consumer. It also creates better product for the consumer, right? So it's price control and better product. It's great for the neighborhood. It's great for the economy, right? Don't get me wrong. I think a food truck will be good. A food truck draft ordinance that we had that's been kicking around now for half a decade, has in it a contingency that says that the permit will be offered only if all businesses within 200 feet sign off on it. If Maryland, as well as for the difference, doesn't care, then John, That Martin Pastry doesn't care. And they say, yeah, we have no problem with it. Then why would we? Right? It's an opportunity to bring something new to the community. It's an opportunity for us to try something different, to liven up a dead space, right? I know we have the chess club down there whenever they're down there in the summertime as well. I know that we've invested a lot of money in this area down here to bring people to the square under prior administrations, and that focus is somewhat soft. So I don't think it's a bad idea. I don't at all. I share the concerns that my colleagues reiterated, have mentioned, and I also don't feel as though this is falling into the right process. but it's something that I think we could come up with a solution on and maybe Vic, I don't know what you think about that. Mr. Schrader. That was a wicked long point of information. I apologize for that.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, I guess in the food truck ordinance, the way it was presented today, just like I did when it was presented before.
[Adam Knight]: The term's already over pretty much.
[Adam Knight]: You know, welcome to Medford, right? You know, we don't want to give a bad taste. We don't want to put on a bad taste anymore. We're glad that you want to invest in our community, right? And I don't think it sounds like that somewhat, you know what I mean? It could be Boston.
[Adam Knight]: So, you know, obviously this is something I think that, you know, we've gotten a commitment from the majority of this body. It's something we want to work out, even if we create a pilot program and do something like that. I'll gladly be the pilot program. Right. Exactly. Right. You know, I think that's just something that maybe we can put a little bit of green.
[Adam Knight]: We wouldn't make the gentleman come back next week.
[Adam Knight]: I just had a question. I was wondering if the street was a private way.
[Adam Knight]: It is not, okay.
[Adam Knight]: That's important.
[Adam Knight]: They put you on the list and they'd be on the list forever because they don't do private ways.
[Adam Knight]: Maybe the chief of staffs on the call and she can ask us you can help set up an appointment with trying to get an appointment.
[Adam Knight]: I moved to take the budget off the table. How fast do you think she'll come back?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, I mean she wants a meeting with the mayor.
[Adam Knight]: We have a chief of staff is supposed to be responsible for this stuff because I don't know what else they do. Right. So this is something that the chief of staff should handle it. All right, we have a chief of people or whatever, we have an HR director to handle HR, we have a budget director to handle the budget, we have a chief of staff that handles what? Us.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much and thank you to my colleagues for putting this on Mr. Fitzpatrick was a great guy had the opportunity to meet him on a couple of occasions at the American Legion through various community events that are going on with his sons Sean and Brian will both close friends, both following their father's footsteps, with a commitment to service with a commitment to the veterans in this community, and they've given a lot. instrumental in decorating graves on Memorial Day and the like, really just great great individuals that give back to the city that there is. Fitzgerald's a great people, Fitzpatrick's a great people, and Mr. Fitzpatrick's gonna be sadly missed. I offer my condolences as well.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, if any of us have watched the news we've seen that it's going to be a bad season this year for ticks and the city of Medford is very blessed to have a great deal of open space. The Middlesex fellows the Medford woods, and 22 active and passive parks across our community. But with that comes the concern that we will be breeding ground for ticks. So I'm asking that the Board of Health put together a mediation program, report back to the council what the cost would be, and whether or not this is something we can work on funding so that we can keep our community safe from a public health standpoint.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. I know by mechanism of law, I do believe we're audited every year, but we've been using the same firm, I think, two decades. So at some point it becomes negligible, right? They're not going to say that they found something that they missed something last time. they're going to figure it out as they go forward. So I think that it might be something we also want to see go out to bed or be sent through the inspector general's office or maybe through the DKM list of auditors that might be available and open to us so that we can pick them from a state approved list of contractors as opposed to having to put the matter out to bed or to seek private counsel. But I think it's very important that if we do have this audit, that it's done in an open and transparent fashion. And then the administration does conduct informational meetings throughout the process as well. Ultimately, the biggest topic in this community right now is on municipal finances. After a little bit of yelling and screaming, the council was able to create enough noise where we found $4 million over in the administration side of things, they found $4 million. So, you know, I think that as it goes forward, we wouldn't be in the situation we're in right now, not from a financial standpoint, but from a communication standpoint, if the administration stepped up to the plate and shared with us the information that we asked for and shared with us the information that we needed. All right. And now as we sit here and we see the circumstances unfold, it gives us a reason to scratch our heads and raise question. Um, so this is a vote that I'm happy to take this evening. Um, you know, I hope that we're doing things the right way. I hope that we're not mismanaging our money financially, but right now, you know, track record shows that we are. Um, so I think this is a responsible resolution. I think it's a responsible course of action. Um, the question is going to lie in who's going to conduct the audit, and whether or not it's going to be the same group that's been doing it year in and year out or if we're going to go and have some new fresh eyes.
[Adam Knight]: Just to reiterate your point, Mr. President, I guess it is obvious that the financial software isn't the only thing in this building that doesn't talk to each other.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I certainly support them all heartedly. I think these are very reflective of some of the comments that we had last week at our budget meeting when we discussed, you know, what's going on in this community from a financial standpoint. A lot's changed from last Tuesday to this Tuesday, obviously, with the Boston Globe coming out over the weekend. But ultimately, I think that these are responsible questions that make sense, that put us in a position to make smart decisions, right? Ultimately, we wanna create a long-term successful future for our community. We wanna have the confidence and the ability to know that our taxpayers are gonna receive the level of services that they so deserve. And I think that this is information that's pretty much plain and simple. They get it in other communities. I don't understand why we can't get it here. So thank you for putting it forward. My supporter will have it. Thank you, Councilor Knight. Councilor Collins.
[Adam Knight]: So Councilor Bears, as I'm understanding this, this is more of a planning tool than actually a step towards putting an override measure on the ballot, but more or less a planning tool is to say to the mayor, Madam Mayor, we see what's going on in this community. Do you see something different? And if you do, how are you gonna tackle it financially? So I just wanna be very clear that this isn't the beginning of a two and a half override ballot question. What this is, us getting information from the city administration necessary for us to make a determination as to what direction the city is going to go in. Correct. But this is a planning tool really where it's we're asking the administration to say this is where we are this is where we need to be how can we get there without doing this.
[Adam Knight]: Not we need to do this so immediately do it.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'm just just a few minutes earlier this evening we had a gentleman before us who talked a little bit about a project that he wanted to do in an old to district that we just created. And as part of that discussion, we talked about how much money would be generated through these property taxes, right? And I'm just trying to find my notes here because I want to see how much money he said it was in permits. It was $15 per thousand square feet for the project. So I'm wondering, Mr. President, with the number of life science projects that are now coming online here in the community, and with the structural deficit that we see, whether or not it would make sense for us to raise that or to even attach permitting fees to the rate of inflation so that we don't have to get to a situation where annually or biannually or semi-annually or, I mean, quite frankly, I don't think these things have been looked at since the McGlynn administration. They can self-adjust based upon the inflation rate annually, as opposed to us having to pass an ordinance every year saying that this is what they're going to be. So I think it might be an opportunity for us to generate some revenue to close the budget gap, and to do so in a way that's going to be recurring and not be on the back of the residential taxpayer. Thank you, Councilor Knight in the paper Mr. President, I will withdraw, by the way, Councilor Carol.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, this is something I'm very excited about. This is the first petition that we've seen come before us after our newly codified zoning ordinance. This is something that we worked on specifically, actually, to create an O2 district so that we could generate life science opportunities here in the community. Mr. Walsh is a property owner in the community, as he said. He owns a substantial amount of real estate here in Medford. He's been a good neighbor, a good taxpayer. Mr. wash I was wondering if you could tell us a little bit about the revenues that the city will generate down through this process if you could.
[Adam Knight]: And can you tell us right now what an estimate is we're getting out of that parcel?
[Adam Knight]: I'm not much of a math guy, but it sounds like quite an investment in quite a worthwhile initiative for this community to look at. You know, we've talked about our commitment to life sciences, bringing jobs to this community to pay a living wage. We talked about, you know, the need to diversify our CIP in residential districts to keep us competitive with a strong commercial tax base so that I residential property or there's not burdened with balancing the tax tax burden on their back. I think this project makes sense, Madam President, I support it wholeheartedly will prove.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. It's amazing how much things can change in three short years. And FYI 2020 I remember that budget, I remember speaking on that budget when we voted on it. And I believe my comments were something along the lines of this is the best city budget that I've seen as a member of the city council. That was an FYI, 2020. Looking at Council of bears graphs. FYI 2020. What was our deficit spending. Zero. Three years later, $29 million in deficit spending. In FY 2021, I spoke of a budget. I warned about us becoming reliant on these one-time revenues to balance the budget. I warned about creating a structural deficit. I called for recurring non-tax-based revenues. I called for public-private partnerships for us to be able to offset some of this impact on the residential taxpayer. In 2002, I said the same thing. Since 2001, this council has been calling on the administration to come before us on a quarterly basis to discuss the financial and fiscal health and well-being of this community, to discuss our projected revenues versus our actual revenues, and to give us a snapshot each quarter as to where we are financially, so that come June 28th, seems to be the mayor's favorite day, we're not surprised with a situation that puts us in a position that says, spend $7 million of reserves or I'm gonna have to cut teachers. In fact, the budget that the mayor presented us says, spend $7 million of reserves and I'm still gonna cut teachers. This is financial mismanagement at its finest. We have a mayor that's not interested in municipal finance and the superintendent of schools is not interested in school finance. Three years down the line, this is where we end up. All right? When we abuse a finance director to the point where she has to leave the job for her own health and wellbeing, and we can't get someone to fill the spot for 10 months because we're bullying employees, this is where we end up. When you send every person in City Hall to come up here and carry your water and do your dirty work and give a three minute and 92nd budget presentation, and 92nd budget presentation over zoom over zoom. Thank you, Council bus over zoom. How important is it. How important is it 90% of life is showing up. At least show up. If you're gonna give us bad news, look us in the eye and give it to us. Tell us how we got here and why. Because I'm so tired of hearing one thing at this podium and then seeing a press release that says something totally different the same day. Government by press release. No transparency, no fiscal transparency. If there was fiscal transparency, then this council would have had their quarterly meetings for the past four quarters. And this wouldn't be a surprise to us, right? And then maybe we wouldn't be so outraged when the chief of staff comes up here and tries to sell us slush, because that's what it is, it's slush. You know what I mean? This organization, there's this organization. It's the city of Medford. This isn't an organization. It's where people live. It's not an organization. This is a government. It's here to provide services. And we can't do that operating in a $29 million, 36 month structural deficit. can't do it, can't deliver the services that the taxpayers deserve. The way we're spending with the way we're doing deficit spending, we can't do it, we can't do it we can't sustain. So console biz, let's look at you. It's out there, right? There's the talk, there's the discussion, there's the conversation that needs to be had, all right? It has to be had. We can either continue on the road that we're on right now and go down this path that we're on right now and continue to say, we're gonna throw good money after bad money and bad money after good money to keep us running in place, while we watch the likes of Everett and Malden and Somerville and Arlington and Melrose, give me another one, anybody, give me another one. All these communities pass us by. All these communities pass us by. Cambridge gives their high school graduates $3,000 each in opera money when they graduate. Malden gives them 1,000. We're broke. We're broke. How? How is that possible? How is that possible? Is it maybe because when you look at these other communities, you see cranes in the sky? When you look at these other communities, you see them creating public-private partnerships with developers that want to come into this community? I think that might have a little bit to do with it, a little bit to do with it, but you have to be present and you have to show up in order to develop these partnerships, in order to face the music, in order to get ahead of bad situations. You have to be present and you have to show up. I'm at a loss. I'm at a loss. I wanted one thing in this budget, and one thing only, to get Mark Wabrowski rehired so that we could go look at our zoning map, so that we as a council, again, again, acting as the adults in the room, can figure out a way for us to generate revenues to get us out of this mess. But for 50,000 bucks, now you just saw what $50,000 got us earlier this evening. The gentleman came up here and he said that they have a parcel of land and they're getting about $100,000 a year. 100,000 the city's getting out of it in property taxes. And through the work that this council did by creating an office two district, that parcel now is gonna generate us $3 million, $3 million in permitting fees. And the property taxes are gonna be $2.9 million higher than where they are today. So we got a consultant for 50 grand. The first project that walked in the door just got us 2.9 million bucks. I don't know. I mean, like I said to Mr. Walsh, I'm not great at math, but I'm pretty sure these numbers will add up. At some point in time, these numbers will add up. If we can create growth, if we can generate revenue in this community, because if we're running in place and we're not generating at least 1.25% a year, we're losing, we're deficit spending again. we have to generate at least 1.25% of new growth annually for us to just run in place. That's why an assistant city solicitor for this council is so important, because we've seen what we can do when we get the tools in the toolbox for us to go to work. And there's not anybody behind this rail that's afraid to go to work. We're all present. We're all here ready to do it. I think console base for going through the time, putting this together. You know, in years past this is something I said to him on the phone today in years past this is something that would have been we've ever would have been arguing yelling and screaming about this and that because you made a suggestion. He made a suggestion that we have a problem, all right? Now, I don't think that's a suggestion. I think that's a fact. We have a problem, all right? He also made a suggestion that there's a few ways out of it, and one of them is taxation. Well, yeah. Yeah, if we're not gonna develop public-private partnerships, we're not gonna generate new non-tax revenues, there's no other way for us to get out of it other than deficit spend and borrow from our reserves and watch our bond rating crash and watch our interest rates rise so we can't borrow and we can't build and we can't maintain. The conversation has to be had. The conversation has to be had. Now, this council is not going to go magic wand, boom, the taxes got raised, pow, poof, and that's it. It's going to be an open and public process, and the discussion has to take place. I'm not saying I want to see the taxes go up in this community. What I am saying is I want to see the taxpayers receive the services that they deserve at a level that's above mediocrity. Now, I can count on my hand all the tires that I parked this year driving down our public streets. Councilor Tseng told me he got one not too long ago. This gentleman owns a company that drives cars, a livery service, multiple vehicles. I can imagine, I can imagine the impact that this business owner is feeling for our lack of investments in our roads, the amount of money that he has to pay out of pocket on tires, on alignments. Add it all up, look what's going on. All right, add it all up and look what's going on. We've been asking for it, we've been calling for it for two years. The only reason this is a surprise to us, the only reason this is a surprise to us is because someone wasn't being transparent. And that's the fact of the matter. And now we're gonna be put in a position where it's gonna say, spend the 7.5 million in reserves, potentially mortgage, potentially mortgage the financial and fiscal health of this community for years to come. because for the past 24 months, I didn't want to deal with you people. Is that fair? Not to me. It's not about me. I don't care. It's not about me. It's not being fair to me. It's being fair to the people that put us here and being fair to the people that rely on us to make good decisions on their behalf so they can continue to live in this community. continue to be a part of it and want to be a part of it. Want to be a part of it. That's the biggest thing. I see people getting pushed away. People don't want to be involved anymore. Enough's enough. I'm so tired of it. I'm so tired of it. I can't take it anymore. And I think we're all getting there at some point because we keep asking, we keep asking, we keep begging, we keep crying. Please give us this information. We don't want it because we want to, you know, do something bad to you. We want it because we want to help this community and we want to do the job that we're elected to do. And sometimes that means bringing up unpopular issues and bringing up things that people might not want to hear, but it's a discussion that has to take place. You got to hand it to Zach. It takes a lot of guts to do what he did tonight, to put this on the table and say, look, This is what's going on. But like I said before, and I'll say it again, once again, this body is acting like the adults. So thank you Constance for putting this on. I appreciate it. I certainly have no problem with a resolution going over these recommendations that you made. I think we need to get these key takeaways back from the administration so that we can make a more informed decision going forward. But I'm very impressed with the work you did this evening. And I thank you for it because it's necessary for someone to tell the truth about the fiscal health of this community and what's going on and why we're in the situation we're in. And not do it through press release and social media posts. Use the forum for what it's for. So I've talked far too much about this. Thank you very much, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much as we've all had discussions and talked about the cost of living here in the city of mentioned. We've also talked about the fact that many of our department heads don't live in this community. And we also talked about the fact that many of the people that work in this community can't afford to live there. This council has been at the forefront of affordable housing issues looking at creating an affordable housing trust fund, looking at examining housing production plan. utilizing Community Preservation Act funds to create affordable housing opportunities here in the community. This is something they did in Philadelphia, Mr. President, where they passed a council ordinance that required preference be given to city employee and retirees in the city of Philadelphia, and they apply for affordable housing lotteries. So if you think about it, the people that, you know, work for our city and our school department are retirees, they're the people that actually You know, give their blood, sweat and tears to the community they're a part of the fabric of this community they want to stay in the community they live in they might be overhoused underemployed or under income, and can meet the guidelines, why not keep these people in the community instead of forcing them out by allowing them the opportunity to get a preference in affordable housing. Now this isn't to say that this is something that you want to pass or don't want to pass what I'm asking for. is what steps we can take. And then hopefully we can get a document or a draft to work off of. So I don't wanna say, you know, this is gonna be the end all be all at the end of the day, but there should be a process in place that we can look at and examine to see if this is something that would be worthwhile.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This location is a crosswalk, and the crosswalk is fine to fall into disrepair the curb stone is totally completely removed going around the corner. If you know Rockwell Terrace Rockwell Terrace is the street that would stretch between Hickey Park and Gillis Park. It's a small little cut through. Um, that is traversed quite a bit by, um, the league baseball players, uh, dog walkers, people that utilize in the parking lot, like, um, it's a safe pathway for individuals to cut through, um, and utilize the open space. But, uh, the sidewalk has fallen at the disrepair of the homeowner on the corner. is now being faced with the situation where many vehicles and cars are parking up on the curb, very close to the home, to the point where, you know, she can't even walk by on the sidewalk to get into her house because the curb stones gone so cars are edging closer and closer and closer to her home. but this looks like it's something that's an easy fix. They're doing the Gillis Park accessibility project. There's a construction project that's underway right now that we just funded. So I'm hoping that based upon the reports that came out of the OCD and the status of that project and how it's moving along, that this is something that can be added in there. It should be a really low cost item. It's just some granite curb stoning that needs to be put in and a little bit of asphalt or concrete. So it's not something that's going to break the bank, the crosswalk doesn't have to be designed, it's already been designed, it's already there, it's just in disrepair. So I'm hoping that this is something that can be addressed by the administration, but I would not hold my breath.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, this item is also on public participation portion of our agenda. This evening, we have Mr. Carroll and Mr. Kamara, both from the Chamber of Commerce that we're here, we're waiting to speak on it, where the night was going not quite according to agenda or plan. I suggest to the gentleman that we could pass this resolution that's on the agenda this evening, not worry about that public participation paper, and they can come back at a later date to present on what their questions and concerns are surrounding the garage.
[Adam Knight]: Speaking from the chair, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Or the town hall guide, whichever one you feel.
[Adam Knight]: Oh, I just took care of that one.
[Adam Knight]: Well, because I had the same paper on the agenda and he had the public participation. So I said, we won't worry about the public participation. We'll just pass this paper, which we just did. Okay, so do we need to? Nope, it's done.
[Adam Knight]: Individuals that have been waiting to put in a presentation this evening and we ran a little late so I'm hoping that we can get them out of here in the interest of their time.
[Adam Knight]: And what paper is that what paper number looks like we have a public hearing and we also have on the motion.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I for one don't have a problem with this application at all. What it does is revitalize an underdeveloped parcel. The parcel's been vacant for quite some time now. It's been somewhat of an eyesore in the neighborhood. Also, past use was a bank, future use is a bank. Putting a drive-thru teller machine in this location, I don't think it's going to be much of an issue at all. It looks like they have the appropriate lead space to queue cars up, you're not going to back up into the street, and parking and, you know, square footage. So I move approval. I second.
[Adam Knight]: Is there any questions from the council at this time Council night, Miss Connie welcome back I know last time you were here wasn't the most pleasant experience for you and apologize for that.
[Adam Knight]: Any further questions from the Council Council night, Madam President, I as one member of this body, certainly have no opposition to this project I think that I'm you know, based upon the meetings that we had earlier in the evening, even, we really need to figure out what's going on underground and get that stuff taken care of so that we can take the necessary steps to resurface our roadways into a condition that is suitable and worthy of the taxpayers driving their vehicles on. Right now, our roads are in the worst shape around. Like, you know, you know when you're entering Medford because it kind of starts shaking. So, you know, with that being said, I think that this project for 195 feet will give us an opportunity to address some underground infrastructure concerns. I'm hoping that the city engineer can speak a little bit about whether or not they coordinating any other underground infrastructure projects with the city during this period of time, while the grant location is being offered and the ground is going to be open. So maybe the city clerk and the city engineer can speak to that. I know this is Councilor Tseng's backyard, so I'm sure he's got a number of questions to ask about this coming up. but ultimately I'm hoping that maybe the city engineer can talk a little bit about our underground infrastructure there, and if the ground's open, whether or not there's a need to do any other work.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I do think it's also important to point out when you look at the conditions of improvement, the city engineer's office has been able to secure some mitigation for some existing defects in the sidewalks and streets there that aren't necessarily in relation to this project, but are going to get done as part of the project mitigation purposes. That's something that I'm happy to see. It's something we've called for in the past, and I'm glad to see that it's making its way into these grants.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, with all due respect, this is a pretty big issue we've been talking about for quite a bit of time, but I had no idea that they were coming tonight. I don't know if anybody else had any awareness whether or not they were coming this evening. Oh, they're here tonight to talk about it? Apparently, that's what the city engineer just mentioned.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Cabrera, I'll ask all my questions, thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. I had the opportunity to go through some of the files that weren't stolen from my desk by one of the members of the school committee. And what I found was a document dated 2015. And this document was on May 19th, 2015, which is our initial introduction to the Ebersole Statistic to Woburn Pipeline Project. At that time, we had some discussions where they said that this was gonna go to the Department of Public Utilities and then construction was gonna start in 2016. In 2017, I'm sorry, 2017 we met and this was pushed out to 2018 to start construction. The construction said it was gonna be nine vaults. As of our last meeting, February 4th, 2020, five of the nine vaults were completed. As we go through our old files and paperwork that we see here, it says Eversource is going to provide us with weekly updates via email. There'd be a Medford-specific website and Medford-specific community events and meetings surrounding this project. We haven't seen any of that. I don't know how many requests we've made to get the curb stones removed from the front of Victory Park that have been sitting there for two and a half years. You know, just small quality of life things. We know it's going to take a while to get the construction done, but don't leave the place looking like a dump for five years. five, actually seven, seven years now for seven years. All right. So I don't know how long it took them to build that tunnel in Boston. I think it was 14. We're almost halfway there. I mean, this is like the credit bridge part two. All right. We got to get this thing done. Now a quick question is the pipeline project portion in the city of Somerville complete?
[Adam Knight]: Is the pipeline project portion in Winchester complete.
[Adam Knight]: Is the pipeline portion in Woburn.
[Adam Knight]: 2015 was a long time ago. And this still isn't done. I mean, there has to be some accountability. What are the contributing factors to this taking so long? Is it that we don't have the crews to do the work? Is it that it had to be rebid? I think it had to be rebid at one point in time, if I'm not mistaken. But is it that we can't get police details to be out there? Is the city administration saying we can't run crews? What's the holdup on the construction?
[Adam Knight]: I mean, we've had enough of these meetings in the past where I don't think anything's going to please us other than the job being done and everybody being out of here. The residents of Winthrop Street now, since I've been on the council with my ninth year, we've done the Winthrop Street Rotary project that closed that area down for a year and a half. Then they did three years of the Craddock Bridge, which destroyed traffic right through the Winthrop Street Rotary. And then we started the Ebersource project. All right, so for the past decade, this area has been just decimated. with traffic detours traffic management plans and underground construction. So it needs to get done and I don't fault you sir I know this isn't your fault and all this is a gigantic regional multi billion dollar project that you guys are trying to get done, but we have to understand. I think we should take you up on your offer I think that this is something that could go into, you know, a little bit more detail. You know, as I pull out some more files and notes, I'm gonna have more questions and I got enough of them in here in front of me to make this go on forever. So I'm gonna rest my case and I'm gonna take the gentleman up on his offer and make a request that this paper be referred to a committee of the whole for future date.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. After a couple of years of uncertainty, a couple of years of confusion, we've finally seen a class go through the school year without having to learn remotely. And it's great to see the class of 2020 had to overcome, 2022 had to overcome some great adversity over their time in school. And I feel for them, Mr. President, I think that ultimately their ability to persevere through these difficult circumstances and reach the goals that they set their minds to shows what type of students that we bring up here in the city of medicine, and I wish them all the best of luck in their future endeavors, whether that's going to the workforce to be coming a member of society or to continuing their education. I think that this is very exciting time for these young adults and their future leaders of medicine so I'd ask my council colleagues to support the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. A couple weeks ago I was up at the little league field and the Red Sox were playing the Dodgers it was a great game. And as I was walking the field with my wife, I was approached by a couple of staff members from our recreation department. And they were having a difficult time because they had pulled permits for an adaptive kickball league. And the baseball, one of the baseball teams was using the field permit. And this turned into a little bit of a what was that word you used earlier kerfuffle kerfuffle turn into a little bit of a kerfuffle and as I thought about it and I walked around the community and I look at our business districts I see these what are they called so five boards or Sophie messaging boards. And I thought it might make a lot of sense to see if we can install those in our public parks, so that we can put community notices up there I mean ultimately when you drive by our parks on a Saturday you'll see a place that park pack of soccer players. They'll go by Drainfield, you'll see baseball players there all the time. You go up to the Field of Dreams and you'll see lacrosse players up there all day long. So I think it might make sense, Mr. President, as a way for us to expand the reach of our community notices, but also create some awareness about the permitting process, when the fields are available, who's gonna be using them, to take some of the confusion out of the game and to prevent kerfuffles like the one we've seen just a couple of weeks ago.
[Adam Knight]: If you take a look at our agenda, and we go to reports doing deadlines, you'll see paper 23039. I'm sorry, paper 22027, a monthly copy of the Warren articles from the chief financial officer. Now that was paper 27 from this term, right? So that must have been in the first two or three meetings, requesting that we get copies of the Warren articles each week, each month. And the Warren articles are actually where our money's going, where our bills are being spent. All right, so we pass a budget and the budget says this is what the bills are gonna be, but the Warren articles are actually where we are spending our money. And I think it's very important that the council sees that information, especially based upon the financial mess that we're in right now. So after two and a half years of begging for this information and having to get it in dribs and drabs and spatterings from the administration when they felt like giving it to us, I felt as though it was time for us, in order to really solidify our position here as being financial watchdogs in this community, that this information be solidified in the form of an ordinance so that it's not so mysterious and hard for us to get. Now, our new CFO, was very gracious and made it sound like this is a public document which I agree with them it is, and then it would be no problem for us to get them and I don't think it should be either. And that's what our previous CFOs and previous chief of staffs have all said as well, but for some reason I still haven't seen one and I can't tell you how long So with that being said, I think it's time that we we codify this to make it so that it's an official function of the position, so that they actually have to send it to us on a monthly basis as a requirement to their job, so that we have the information that we need to make informed decisions on behalf of the taxpayers. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: I feel like an old man now like the senior member over here for a minute of console caviar. So, Madam President, this was an idea rather came up in conversation with console beers and I ultimately when you take a look at the resolutions that this council passes. We pass a resolution and we send it to the administration and the administration supposed to respond to us within a specified timeframe is outlined in the city charter I believe it's seven to 10 days. If you take a look at the last six council packets that we have, you'll see that there's not one response to one council resolution in any one of those six packets, and that covers a span of six weeks so I think that's a little bit longer than seven to 10 days. So, my thinking behind this was that, you know, we need to take a look at. work product that we're putting out, not necessarily just the talk that we're talking, we need to walk the walk as well. And when we decided that the best use of our time would be in the committee process and committees as a whole and like one of the things that I always felt was lacking was our follow up on the items that left the council floor items that were on the agenda that left the council floor that went across the hall of the administration. If the administration doesn't respond what's the follow up right there's no follow up. So I thought this was a good way for us to keep track of some of the things that we're trying to do to make a difference in this community and also hold the administration accountable to the regulatory confines that have been established for us to work harmoniously. So I think that this is a step in the right direction for us to be a little bit more transparent to show what it is we're looking for what it is we're asking for and how we want to do it. And it also gives the administration the opportunity to say look at this is what's going on this is what we're doing, and this is why we can or can't. So ultimately I think this is a great idea. Council tracking sheet that the city clerk maintains already. This might take a little bit more updating and maybe bringing into sign of the times but I think this is a great idea. And I'd like to actually see it on the reports to section of our agenda weekly so that when you look at our agenda every week we'll say, you know, Council paper to 2001 was this past outstanding papers only be included on the agenda something like that some, some of the items that we can hash out another committee of the whole. But I think it's certainly a step in the right direction for us to be a little bit more transparent to show the work that we're doing. Because a lot of the work that we do doesn't necessarily take place on the council floor. It takes place outside of the council floor and we need to show that progress is being made.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, listen, I, I'm more focused on hyper local issues you know I didn't run for Congress I didn't run for state senator for Medford City Council I want to fix potholes I want to fix streets all right but I also want to protect people. And when I'm looking at this language and I'm listening to Councilor Tseng and Councilor Collins speech. I think all the saying is that Medford government should mind its business. to issues of sexuality, when we're being asked to enforce another state's laws and provisions.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, let's look at it from just an operational standpoint, right? Just from, I mean, we just talked about having a $7.5 million budget deficit, right? Let's keep our streets safe. Let's worry about that, right? Let's not get involved in other states, nonsensical policies.
[Adam Knight]: Why are we gonna get involved in that? That's the way I look at it.
[Adam Knight]: Is that the air system?
[Adam Knight]: If I could just amend the paper or offer a B paper, Madam President, requesting that the mayor provide us with a report on the status of the Adopt-A-Site program. Under the McGlynn administration, the Adopt-A-Site program was relatively successful. It was a program where local businesses could adopt an island or a rotary or a site in the city, and then perform the upkeep and maintenance on it in exchange for a small advertising billboard on that parcel. and that was something that seemed to work out pretty well. So I'm hoping that the administration can provide us with a report back on the status of that program.
[Adam Knight]: Well, it's good to see that DCR has been out there. I didn't know if they were participating in No Mo' May or not. But I would like to ask the sponsor if I could, if you'd be willing for me to amend the schedule, just to request, amend the resolution rather to request the maintenance schedule for Medford-Holme parcels from the DCR and the DOT.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, if I recall correctly, I think one of the biggest issues when this issue first came up was the fact that they didn't want fences, they wanted to be free range. And the issue was that when the dog is off leash, but in a fenced in or caged in area, they may feel cornered and become aggressive. And that's why they don't want any fence there. I think that that's what the sticking point was last time. That coupled with the fact that I believe we were stuck uh, in a situation where the pox department and the pox commission has a policy that's in place and they weren't willing to make a ruling on it until, uh, some further information was provided to the city of industry, uh, administration relative to, uh, bathroom facilities and the like down to that box. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, just on that note, I do believe, oh geez, maybe it was three months ago, four months ago, there was an administrative issue, a personnel issue related to our director of IT and the city administration made some personnel moves related to questionable activity or surrounding union involvement. At the time, they said that the gentleman was removed from his position due to significant security issues surrounding our network. And this council has asked for an update now two times on that. And I'm hoping we can get that information back as well, because this might be a reason why our website's not getting updated, because there's some security issue. And we don't know about it. We've asked, but we don't know. And that could be a potential reason as to why we're not seeing our website get updated so frequently. So I just ask of the city administration, once again, for a third time, to report back to the council on what exactly the security threat or issue was.
[Adam Knight]: the city definitely participated in some of our money for design.
[Adam Knight]: It's my understanding that at one point in time, there was some discussion with the local college to do a public-private partnership with Tufts Park and do the whole entire field with AstroTurf and a clubhouse and everything, but it's out of administration testing.
[Adam Knight]: We never did. No, because last time Ms. Nazarian came up and said, you know, I'm very confident, and so is KP Law, that we've complied with the provisions and chapters outlined in the question. And I said, well, when are we going to get the response? And she said, it's going to be coming.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I find the records in order and I move for their approval.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight, Madam President, thank you very much. Mr. Mookie is one of the best department heads, I've had the pleasure of working with, and I've worked with department heads all across the Commonwealth of Massachusetts as representative for union employees in a municipal setting. And my relationship with Mr. Mookie over the years has grown to a friendship. He's someone that I respect, someone that I admire, someone who, as Councilor Caraviello said, brings a wealth of knowledge to the table. When you think about 38 years, that's a pretty long time. When you look at the city, look at the community, you see what's happened over that 38 years. Anytime there was a shovel on the ground, Mr. Moki was there to make sure that it was done the right way. That includes the new schools, stations landing. It includes Chevalier. It includes the science labs. It includes the field of dreams. It includes the turfing of Fort Melton. So when you think about the impact that he's had on this community over 38 years, that impact is going to last well, well, well, well into the future. These are things that have made our community great. And he's someone that had a hand in it. When you talk about his style as a department head and the way that he runs his department, I think it's safe to say that that is the only department in city hall where every employee is cross-trained. Where every inspector can be a code enforcement officer and every code enforcement officer can be an inspector. And when someone's out, they don't miss a beat. That's a testament to the vision that Mr. Mookie has, and how this is supposed to work. I've always said that the building department here in the city of Medford is a team, and they work very well together. And Mr. Mookie just happens to be the person that's driving the bus. And when we talk about institutional knowledge being lost, that's always a concern. But I think that Paul's done a great job cultivating talent in his office as well. So I look forward to seeing the next generation of leaders coming out of the building department here to work with us. But this is about Paul and all that he's done for this community. He's a great person. He's someone I've had the opportunity to speak with a number of times. I've had the opportunity to sit down with a number of times and enjoy his company and his conversation in a professional setting as well as in a personal, private setting. He's someone that I will certainly miss and I thank him for all that he's done for this community. And I second Councilor Scarpelli's motion to invite him down for citation.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, can I speak to the debate that Councilor Bears and I had? Go ahead, Councilor Bears. It was very persuasive.
[Adam Knight]: Last week we sat here with our city engineer and our director of DPW and they talked about a need for certain equipment. to take certain functions in-house, that being grinding of stumps and the shaving down of sidewalks that are in disrepair. Annually, this council normally appropriates anywhere between a million to $1.5 million for sidewalk repairs. We also talk every year about whether or not we could handle this in-house. Earlier this evening, we talked about our budget priorities, and one of our budget priorities would be increasing the staffing level at the DPW. And in partnership or concert with that, I think it would make sense for us to also increase the equipment that they have. So they get some of this work that is necessary. As we said earlier in the day, the function of government is to provide services and we need boots on the ground in order to do that. We also need equipment to do it. So this is a request that the administration price out with this piece of equipment or cost that the city engineer and the city public works director was speaking up and to present it to the council for either inclusion in the capital plan or for a supplemental appropriation request.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. This has been a topic of much debate and as evident by future governor Healy's. lawsuits, also legal proceedings. And it's really the age old argument of, you know, is this an employer, an employee or a contractor? And, you know, when I think about this, I think about it in the simplest terms, right? I mean, I've called Lyft before a bunch of times, I've called Uber a bunch of times, I've never called Joe the driver. I've called Uber and Uber has sent me a driver, right? So, you know, it's really employee misclassification, in my opinion. You know, Uber, Lyft, these ride share hailing companies, you know, they have the control, the direction of the employee and anything the employee does is really in the furtherance of Uber and Lyft's name, right? It's in their interest, it's in furtherance of the employer's interest. That's a three-part test to determine whether or not you're a Councilor or an employee. I mean, I'm sorry, contractor and employee. So, you know, when you look at what's going on, it's clear that these companies are taking advantage of workers. They're doing it through, like Councilor Caraviello said, vehicle leasing programs and financial lending programs that are making these individuals, quite frankly, financially bound to these organizations. So if they wanted to leave, they wouldn't even be able to. You know, so when you look at this and you sit back and you say, what's right is right, what's right is right. The, the way that they're classifying people the amount of money that they're putting into this case. It's ridiculous. It's absolutely ridiculous and just shows you there's something wrong. I haven't seen this since what was the last one with a right to repair. Right. Millions and millions of dollars are going into this to fight something. Why, because it's good for the working person that's why. And what we're seeing this console concept is this is the first step. in an effort to eliminate workers' rights and workers' benefits, so that big business doesn't have to be on the hook for these liabilities, and so that individuals are going to be tasked with the responsibility of planning for their own retirement, their own future, because they're not paying into Social Security, because they're not paying into healthcare, and at the end of the run, we're going to see a situation where we have a lot of people that are going to need more from government. So this is actually a policy I think that's going to make sense because it's going to protect us economically it's going to protect that name is going to protect the residents of this community, and it's going to prevent big business from taking advantage the little guy. So I support this whole heartedly and I think the council put it on the agenda this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President. Actually, a question. I recall getting a correspondence from the administration at some point saying that they stopped the construction on the episodes project because they wanted to make sure that the condensate con and shell was accessible for the summer.
[Adam Knight]: I'm just trying to look it up.
[Adam Knight]: I'm just Madam President. If in fact, we are going to be sending a letter right past that that letter come out of the Committee of the whole subcommittee. That's the only question I have but I support them out.
[Adam Knight]: It's 60,000.
[Adam Knight]: We don't have the number ratings, Mr. Castagnetti. We're not aware how many people are in the audience.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, motion to suspend the rules.
[Adam Knight]: That is correct, Madam President. I'd like to take the last paper on the agenda out of order for this evening, paper 22356, a request for an expenditure from the law department.
[Adam Knight]: The only reason I ask is because we're the clerks and employee of the council. When we need to invoke the rule of necessity to properly appropriate the funds. concerned about that. But I certainly have no problem proving the funds and gentleman had a switch back up into his house. I certainly warranted remediation questions whether or not how we take the vote, we take the vote is a straight roll call vote as we usually do it, we have to invoke the rule of necessity, or does it doesn't matter. Because the city solicitor has not provided us with an opinion, it does matter. It doesn't. So just like to be on the record, you know, I raised the issue
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. I know that there are a number of DCI-owned properties that have service contracts with the city, where the city is afforded the opportunity to maintain and upkeep certain properties, one of those being the Condon Shelves, Councilor Caraviello was speaking of down at the sleeping hall. So I just ask that as part of this paper that we get a copy of all the service and maintenance agreements that we have with the DCI, so we know who's responsible for what. Ultimately, it is the DC has land, but the city in the past has signed on to be responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of certain houses. So for us to make an informed decision, I think we need to know what fossils those are, and whether or not those agreements still exist, and whether or not they need to be maybe beefed up a little bit to get us what community needs and benefits necessary to protect this.
[Adam Knight]: Second.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I just asked that this paper also be sent to the Director of Recreation. I know the Recreation Department's been expanding their programming related to blotchy. If you look at the Recreation booklet, you'll see that they have pickup games, I guess is what you want to call it, of blotchy down there as well. So I think this is something that the recreation department's really trying to take a look at investing some energy and effort into and having the state of the art quality facilities is what's going to really increase participation, I think, so I think it's a great measure. The budget quotes are something I was always very supportive of. I was the sponsor of the initial resolve under the Burke administration that brought these to fruition, and Councilor Caraviello is right, the specs are not up to community standards.
[Adam Knight]: six to eight weeks, it's July.
[Adam Knight]: I don't think it was intentional.
[Adam Knight]: Does the city replace sidewalks on private ways?
[Adam Knight]: I don't think it's... How about if we make it a yes or no question?
[Adam Knight]: So the intention would be, I guess, moving forward, the city would be moving away from paving private ways, the sidewalks are private ways.
[Adam Knight]: In this map with the 1700, or the 2100 sidewalk panels, Does this include private waste in this assessment?
[Adam Knight]: Does not include private waste?
[Adam Knight]: And percentage wise, number of public waste versus private waste that we have in this community?
[Adam Knight]: There's a lot. Yes, there's a lot. So, in essence, there would be a third of the streets in this community, if we expend these funds, that would receive no benefit from it, regardless of when we do it, right? Because we're not gonna be paying for private sidewalks going forward for right now. If they're issued as well.
[Adam Knight]: There's a community benefit, yeah, but as the person that's said, I'm on the list for 11 years, and then you say it's private way, you're going to be on the list for another 11 years.
[Adam Knight]: And if somebody resides in a private way and they want to replace the sidewalk in front of the house, can they do it? All they have to do is pull a permit from you guys? It's not our problem.
[Adam Knight]: They can do it. Do they even have to pull a permit from you guys?
[Adam Knight]: We have no real assessment on a third of the streets, just with the condition that there's about a third of the streets that are private ways in the community. We did no assessment on those Starbucks whatsoever.
[Adam Knight]: Not the formal assessment, okay. I like this approach. I think that this is very helpful, you know what I mean? It looks like we're going to get more bang for our buck, right? Ultimately, it's like the sneakers that we're wearing most of the rubber off of are the ones we're going to replace, right?
[Adam Knight]: Yes, I think it makes sense. You know what I mean? We're getting bang for our buck. you know, methodology, which we haven't seen in a long time. It's something I've been calling for for a long time, you know, so I appreciate what you're doing. I think that we need to really take a look at how we handle private ways in this community. It's not like they pay less taxes. I agree. In some most instances, they pay more. So when you look at the streets that are private ways and the homes that are on them, right? Bigger houses, bigger lots and the like, right? So we need to wrap our heads around this because the taxpayers in this community should receive the same services regardless of whether or not this street has been publicly or privately accepted. You know, that's legal mumbo-jumbo. The regular citizen in this community doesn't care about that. Right, what they care about is the fact that Councilor Bears said, we can disagree on just about everything in this place. The one thing we all agree on is our roads and sidewalks are in bad shape and we need to invest in them. All right, I'm happy to spend this money. I wish there was another zero at the end of it. Right, and I know you guys do too, right? Ultimately, at the end of the day, I know you guys do too. In the future, I'm going to call for a meeting. We can start really looking at talking about this private way stuff because, you know, I think that it really needs to be addressed. But, you know, you guys did a great presentation. I appreciate your work. Welcome aboard. Congratulations on your new appointment, maybe permanency. That's great. You've done a good job and you've proved it, you know what I mean, time and time again when you come up here. So thank you very much. I appreciate your honesty and openness in answering the questions.
[Adam Knight]: I don't know if you know the answer to this. Does accepting more public ways increase our eligibility or benefits for funding through the state house, maybe?
[Adam Knight]: Right, but if we turn these private ways into public ways, do we get more money too?
[Adam Knight]: There's a process, right?
[Adam Knight]: You got to get seven, you got to get four here to agree to the five here to agree to this. So that's not enough. So I have to stay where you're coming from.
[Adam Knight]: Well, let's forget about that until I bring it up later on, because I think we're getting way off track. No problem.
[Adam Knight]: I don't remember the policy at one point in time. Same thing where all the neighbors chipped in.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I move for approval of paper 22317 and 22318.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, looking at this application is before us. There are a couple things that I'd like to point out. First of all, there was no place in the city of Medford at 11 o'clock at night we get a good cookie. So this is certainly a need that we have here in the community. Second, when you look at the application is before us, the gentleman's only asking for Fridays and Saturdays, it's only asking for one additional hour. You know, I think this is really. He's not asking for much. It's a brand new business, it's been very successful, a lot of talk about it. From what I understand, a state representative has already broken the record for the most crumbled points that you can get in a month or something like that. But in all seriousness, I think this is a good proposal that's before us here. I just ask that the license go with the business and not the address should it be approved. And I'd be happy to motion for approval of the papers before us this evening. Sure.
[Adam Knight]: I have no problem voting for this.
[Adam Knight]: He answers one question. When is El Tecuba going to open? We've been waiting eight years for them. We're only waiting four for you.
[Adam Knight]: I can't answer that either. We need your common fix license to go apply for the liquor commission to get your liquor license. Then you get your liquor license. Yeah.
[Adam Knight]: For 11 to 1, even if they lick the licenses to 1 AM at the state level, you have to come back to us for the extended hours permit. So if there's any opportunity for us to further vet this, it's going to be coming before us, I think. Right. I don't see this being harmful, but I would defer to the council. Or I'll make a motion to remove approval.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I think it was my father that told me this a long time ago 90% of life is showing up. I mean, how can we put somebody in the election commission as a vote? It's crazy. So it's pretty much, I never did this before, but now I want to do it. So put me on a commission and we have a line of people that have participated every day that want to be vocal members of our community and vocal members of boards and commissions that get bypassed. I don't think she's a good candidate just based upon the fact that she's seeking a job on the election commission and doesn't vote locally. And it's a local appointment to a local board. It doesn't make sense to me. Doesn't make sense to me. I mean, I'm sure that she's a great person. I Councilor Tseng said that, you know, the people in our boards of commission should look like the people live in our community. I don't know what this mommy looks like because I've never seen her before. Since this application has come in, I've never seen or heard from her. I've never gotten asked if I have any questions about her. She's never reached out to me and said, I'd like your vote. Do you have any concerns or questions? I've never got any of that. which is normal practice when you have an applicant that comes before this board, they usually reach out to you and ask for your vote, and they ask if they have any questions or concerns before this type of event happens. So I, as one Councilor, can't support this. Like I said, 90% of life is showing up. It takes 30 seconds to vote. It takes 30 seconds to vote. How can you go from not voting to saying, I want to be an elections commissioner? It takes 30 seconds to do it.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, voting is your voice, but voting also shows that you're invested in the community that you live in.
[Adam Knight]: I'm president. I understand this because I have a job. I have two kids. I have actually three jobs and two kids, but I still go out and vote.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. I agree with all my colleagues, and I think that's why last term, this council voted to pass the ordinance to promote prevent and support behavioral health and establish a commission to do all these things that this ordinance before this proposal before us this evening is asking for. If we look at that ordinance that was passed on three to 21 and established a series of goals. One of those goals was to set community wide goals to create a strategic plan achieving mental well being for all of that residents, and I think that that's really what speaks with this paper speaks to this evening. Also, we look at the composition of this commission will see that it has the director of the Board of Health, the police chief or his designee the fire chief or his designee superintendent of schools or a designee, the manager of prevention and outreach the director of diversity, The director of the senior center the director of veterans services or a designee designees from our EMS provider, the director of school counseling and behavioral health behavioral health specialist from Tufts, a behavioral health health specialist from Lawrence Mural Hospital, and three community members appointed by the map. So it's clear, Madam President, when this paper first came out. We as a body made sure that there was more of a focus on the students in our schools and the young people in this community. If you remember what the first paper looked like when Mayor Burke put the paper out, Madam President, I did a little bit of work. And through the subcommittee and committee process, actually, we were able to meet on a number of occasions and really hash out the details in this paper. And we came up with a nice document here. And quite frankly, if you're looking for what Councilor Tseng's asking for, And what this ordinance calls for, it's the same thing. And where this matter passed on 3-2-21, and the commission is required to file an annual report with the mayor and the city clerk, it looks like probably within the next 60 days, we should be seeing what their annual report says. So that's something I'm looking forward to. I'd just like to amend the paper and add that as a request that the administration provide us with a copy of the behavioral health commission's annual report, whereas the commission has been up and running now for a period of about 14, 15 months.
[Adam Knight]: President for me.
[Adam Knight]: This application is before us is endorsed by our superintendent lines, who in my opinion is probably one of the best department heads that we have here in City Hall. Mr. Randazzo does an excellent job. He's done a great job with his budget. He's been able to cut his budget by about $400,000 when we transferred two LED lights and took over the maintenance of our streetlights. He's quite a department head and he's laid out a pretty nice plan there from what I can see in the application that's before us. You know, when we look at this stretch of area, for probably the better part of the last five years, the residents in this neighborhood, and I know you wouldn't know anything about this, Madam President, at all, have had to deal with the Eversource project and have had to deal with the blasting project for quite a bit of time. The conditions of the Eversource project call for significant restorations and sidewalk installation at Lorraine Road and Winthrop Street, as well as curb-to-curb paving for the whole stretch of Winthrop Street. Coordination of these projects is key in order for us to make sure that when we get curb-to-curb paving, five days later, we don't have an application for someone to have a granite location for a ground opening to come in and say we need to go and lay these telephone wires down now. So I think it's in our best interest to conditionally approve this paper right now so that the city engineer's office can coordinate with Eversource because, you know, it's only been like half a decade. So this project should be almost done, you know, maybe before, you know, 2029 or so. But ultimately, you know, in placing my trust in the department head that we have here, Mr. Medazzo, and also looking at the circumstances that are before us and the damage that could be done should this grant location not be offered, I think a conditional permit is warranted at this point.
[Adam Knight]: Madam president. Thank you very much. Um, in my time on this council for about nine years now, um, I think we've had some great successes and I'm very proud of my track record and the track record that, um, when we've been able to work together. the things we've been able to accomplish. When I look at our accomplishments and I look at the good work that we've done in the building of consensus on issues that impact our community, it always happens when we go through the process and we properly vet the process through the subcommittee and the committee of the whole process. And I think that that's really where our time is best spent. So when we talk about what our most successful endeavors have been, we talk about inclusionary zoning. We talk about recartification of zoning. We talk about breweries. We talk about the library, the new police station. We talk about the responsible employer ordinance, the wage theft ordinance, the science labs and the media center at the high school. The list goes on and on. All that work was an idea that started on the council floor. And then it went through a very open, deliberate public process. And during that public process is where the progress was made. During that public process and that vetting process in the subcommittee where we actually rolled up our sleeves and tackled the issue that was before us, we were able to produce great results. When the administration buys in and gives us the tools in the toolbox, when they give us a lawyer, we've done amazing work, amazing work. And it's all come through the subcommittee or the committee of the whole process. So when we look at our successes, we look at the Stanley cup and we see the names that are registered on it, right? The names that are registered on it are all the issues that have come through this proper vetting process, right? And quite frankly, I find that my time is far better spent in a subcommittee meeting or a committee of the whole than it is behind the rail on a Tuesday night. Because we're not tackling issues behind the rail on Tuesday nights. We're raising issues, we're throwing ideas against the wall to see what sticks, and then we're kicking it across the hall to the administration. But when we own an issue, and we take it from the subcommittee to the committee of the whole and back to the floor, we make a difference in this community. And the track record shows it. So I'm gonna say right now, Councilor Caraviello has asked for this West Medford revitalization group. And he kicked it across, we've kicked it across all to the mayor's office. We said the mayor put it together. Last week, the subcommittee on zoning and ordinances, the subcommittee on ordinances met to establish a beautification committee. And we're gonna pass it and we're gonna own it. And we're gonna send it to the administration. The mayor's either gonna sign it or she's not. She's gonna veto it and send it back. And then it's up to us to decide whether or not we wanna override it. But we're gonna own the issue. And we're gonna say, we're not happy with the curb appeal in this community. So we're putting together a beautification committee because we own the issue. And we've been able to do that because we've gone through this vetting process. And quite frankly, again, my experience tells me my time is best spent. in the attack on the issues. And the reason I say that is because we have a work product to speak for. So Madam President I, my two closest friends on the council my two closest to my closest friends in life. I've worked with George and john I mean George and Rick for a number of years, and I've known them my whole life, right, I disagree with them on this issue. And the reason I disagree is because I feel like our best work is done. When we're in there with our sleeves rolled up, when we're not choked up with the tie all the way around our necks, choking ourselves, worrying about what's going on in the camera, we're worrying about what's going on the issue right in front of us. We've done that work and we've managed to meet every week. And imagine how much more work we could get done if we were better utilizing our time. Point of information.
[Adam Knight]: After they pull them after they pull after they pull the membership. Because meeting for the sake of meeting isn't accomplishing anything not a second meeting if it's for the community. To do what? To discuss the items on the agenda?
[Adam Knight]: I mean, it's just hard to understand information Council night, there's been a paper asking to reduce the number of council meetings to three per month that laid on the table for I have to say since 2012. But it's never been discussed though it's not like this came out of the blue, this is something that's been discussed there's been there was a rules reform paper that came up previously.
[Adam Knight]: So the question now, pardon me, until now, it's made it out of subcommittee and it's made, so it's made it out of subcommittee now.
[Adam Knight]: But when we did it before, Adam, it was we met every single Tuesday night. Right. But we still had subcommittee structure, Bob, and we went through that. We still went through polling membership. What's your schedule reflect? And when can we do it? All this is a minor scheduling issue. So turn this into like, you know what I mean? It's the end of the world or something, because you can't come down here and scream every every Tuesday instead every other Tuesday.
[Adam Knight]: And if you have to wait every other week so much of an emergency that you're waiting for a Tuesday night to come here then there's something wrong, there's something really wrong with government.
[Adam Knight]: Not from us to the administration and back.
[Adam Knight]: That's personal. Can't tell that one.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Phillips, thank you for checking in this evening. It suggests that you might give the superintendent of schools a call and let her know what a great job her athletic department is doing and her team over there at the community schools. Bobby Maloney, our athletic director, Rachel Perry, our assistant athletic director, Our ACEs, they do a great job for us. And I know that the superintendent would love to hear that they did such a great job and what an impact that having the pool open for you meant to you during the COVID pandemic. So if you could do that, I think that'd be a nice feather in Bobby and Rachel's cap as well as the rest of the staff over there.
[Adam Knight]: Council night was a borrowing paper I believe requires three readings only reading the paper is going to come back to this council for further discussion and debate, because the bar paper so requires a third reading before the money gets.
[Adam Knight]: It's my understanding we lost the sidewalk contract last year because we couldn't get them to go out right so we appropriated the funds and the money went. I don't think we ever spent the money from last year sidewalks, because it's not carried over. Mr. Karen's was talking about how the construction market was hot and JD DiRenzo wasn't able to come out and perform the work and they will be contracted with, if I'm not mistaken, but I don't, I mean, we have a, we have a DPW commissioner now right. Tim. Oh, it's Tim McGibbon, that's right. They shuffle around so much over there, I can't figure it out.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, based upon the review of the paperwork, I see no issue or problem with this, and I would certainly move for approval. We all know that the CPA application is a lengthy process that's properly vetted by at least nine members of our community that serve on various boards and commissions. We've all spoken in favor of how much we support the Chevalier Auditorium and how much we want to see this auditorium be the economic driver in our square. I think facade improvements is something that we've all spoke about in the past I think this is something that I support wholeheartedly and I'm sure that my colleagues do as well, and I'll certainly move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President is a member of this fund I am very grateful that the board has moved in its divine wisdom to make this cost of living adjustment applicable to more members in our system. Ultimately, when we think about these individuals that are receiving these benefits, these are the people that are the ones that made our city great. These are the ones that worked for 30 plus years dedicating their lives to public service so the metric could be the city that it is or once was. So with that being said, I thank the retirement board for their efforts I think Mr. Jordan and Mr. Minerva especially, and I will move approval of the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, I'm just wondering if you could give us a breakdown as to what our unfunded pension liability is. Yep, so the percentage is what our percentages of the even if that makes it easier. We're at 64% funded 64% funded and do I know we were we were on a, we were at a great clip to comply with the directives to, you know, make ourselves so sustainable and fully funded. Are we still on track or has the second recession set us back a little bit in that regard.
[Adam Knight]: 2040. So we're seven years ahead of schedule.
[Adam Knight]: Excellent job. Excellent work. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: No, just refer to a committee of the whole Madam President to interview the applicant.
[Adam Knight]: Well my motion would be to have a committee of the whole to meet with the applicant to see who they are I appreciate the work that Sandy's done. I glad that the administration finally stopped sitting on their hands after the primary election of last year to come around and start appointing people to these boards. Ultimately, we're in a position now we're up against a wall. Right. We're up against a wall. We don't have anybody that can even approve nomination papers for candidates that are running for state office right now in our community, because since September of 2021, the administration hasn't acted on vacancies that are in the registrar's office. So much so that this council had moved to change the format of our elections office to establish an election commission from a board of registrars of voters. So it's very frustrating to be put in this position. I remember when I sat in that chair next to me a long ago when I had this was almost a quote that she'd say you know how can you give us something today and expect us to vote on it with no information. I appreciate what Sandy's done in the office and I also appreciate what she has to say but this candidate has not fully been vetted. The reason this candidate has not been fully vetted is because it requires Council approval, and the Council hasn't approved this candidate, and that is the vetting process that is the check and balance that we have for right. That is the advice and consent process that's established when we establish one of these elections commissions. So my theory and my feeling would be that each one of these individuals should be put through a committee of the whole process, where we get to interview them, ask them some questions, talk to them and feel comfortable with them. Because ultimately, we want someone that's going to be impartial, someone that's not going to bring politics into the game, someone that's going to act in the best interest of this community and not as an activist. And those are things that you really can't find out unless you talk to somebody. So those are my concerns with this. And that's why I call for a committee of the whole, I'd let my motion rest on the table and hope a colleague would second it.
[Adam Knight]: So in that point, if there's no hurry, then let's have the committee of the whole, it sounds good to me, I like it. We're not behind the eight ball and we're in a good spot, then let's vet this properly.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, yes, I was not. I had a child care issue. Um, was not able to make the meeting. You're correct.
[Adam Knight]: Not to say that the motion would have been the same had I been there. It just, uh, the motion's gone and seconded so we can move on.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information. Is there any particular information that we'd like to request from the administration prior to us tabling this paper so that they're aware that there's something in particular that we're looking for whether it's just a resume a CV letter of support from the mayor, or whatnot. I think, do we want the applicant to attend the meeting, or would a resume suffice do we want the applicant to attend with a resume.
[Adam Knight]: I'd just like to add a copy of the application as well then Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Charles Shannon was a mentor of mine. I had the opportunity to work for him from 1999 until his untimely passing. He was a United States Army veteran, a retired police officer, and a Massachusetts state senator. He had over 50 years of government service to this Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the United States of America, and also the city of Medford. And there are many things that Charlie did in his tenure as the Massachusetts State Senator representing Medford, such as supporting marriage equality, supporting universal health care, supporting the extension of the Green Line, which we're now seeing 17 years after his passing finally come to fruition. These are many of the items that Charlie worked on that he helped put in motion. Not only that, he was one of the most prolific constituent service senators in the state legislature during his tenure there. He was someone that never left anybody behind. I had the opportunity to work for him with Councilor Caraviello's son for a summer. Council marks former Council marks was a staff member and Senator Shannon's office as well. He was just a great mentor to many people and a great friend to many, but also he was a great representative for this community in Medford in the state legislature he always delivered for us when it was time to deliver. And if you go down to Shannon Beach in Winchester Medford line, you'll see that that was renamed in his honor, recognizing some of the achievements that he's done in the town of Winchester where he But Charlie was a great friend he passed away 17 years ago and I hope it's important that everybody recognizes the work that he's done and that we keep his memory alive. As we continue to go on. People have always said that someone has always done a better, better than we have before us and Senator Shannon was one of those people. I hold myself with great pride, having the opportunity to work with them in great humility, having the ability to recognize that I could ever fill his shoes. So with that being said, I'd ask my council colleagues to support me in this measure and uh, dedicating this meeting to him and having a moment of silence, uh, to recognize all the work that he did on behalf of our community. Uh, he passed away of a very public battle with cancer, uh, over three terms as a state Senator. Um, the Senator battled cancer. I remember going to his, uh, hospital room at the Dana Faba, bringing him the. State Senate calendar and, uh, working with him while he was in isolation because he was having, um, bone marrow transplants while he was still going to work every day. I mean, that's just the type of person he was. He was very dedicated to this community and to his job. He did his best to never miss a vote while he sat there and battled his illness. So it's something that was really amazing to watch, to see how much he loved serving the public and how much he loved fighting for those that were in need. And it's something that we should all really aspire to. So with that being said, I asked my council colleagues to support the matter.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Mr. Harrington thank you for being here. I do believe when you were given your presentation I heard you say that you spoke with the mayor and the chief of staff and they suggested that they wanted to do this outside of the bid process is that correct.
[Adam Knight]: Right, so that would, so what's the, I guess the question is, I mean, anything needs to, any contractor, but I think it's 10 to any, any pervading some services over $10,000, I believe would require it to go out to public bid. So it sounds to me like we're getting this done for far less than $10,000.
[Adam Knight]: And where did the funding come from?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, so you took it out of your operating funds that have already been appropriated?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, excellent. And moving forward for room 207, I mean for room 201 and for the console chambers, what price tag do you think would be attached to that?
[Adam Knight]: with me on you tell me, I'm not familiar with who Teresa the point is that you development sustainability, I believe.
[Adam Knight]: Did you say it community development.
[Adam Knight]: We must be more like an IT when this won't be more of an IT function than community development.
[Adam Knight]: So, Oh, no, no, I'm not saying it is. I'm just a little confused as to why we're paying somebody in the planning department to do an it department job or a job that you can do. But that's a whole different ball away. That's all different. That's an administrative issue that has nothing to do with you or the work that you're doing. Ultimately, you say these things and I just go, huh, I don't know what that means. I just know that if you're going to make it work, it'll work, right? But it seems like based upon these methodologies, the way that they're going to work is it's really going to be user driven interface, right? So the chairman of the meeting, it's only going to be as successful as the chairperson of the meeting. So I would suggest then that the administration implement some type of mandatory training process for the chairs of their boards and commissions that are going to be responsible for this, so that they can do it without a hitch. Ultimately, if you have you know 20 somewhat boards and commissions and this responsibility is going to fall on the chair of each. I think that some training module on methodology should be put in place so that everybody comes in with the same sense of comfort and understanding as to how this works, so that the public isn't the one that's the side that suffers.
[Adam Knight]: And I would also recommend that one computer be used for each board and commission as opposed to individuals bringing their own individuals using different different computers if we can have one computer in each workstation where each border commission has their own dedicated login I think that will cover pretty much the same concerns that we have but we have the, the, the ability to do it. I just think that we need to make it streamlining consistent across the board that sounds like you're on top of it Kevin so thank you. Amendments, recommendations, however you want to put them forward. We don't necessarily have to vote on them. I think Kevin wrote them down and I'm pretty confident in his ability. He's been great since he's been here, so I'm not too worried about it.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. All this talk about IT starts getting me thinking. I know back when the mayor's office tried to force our former IT director to resign under the guise of what was said was IT vulnerabilities, and this council asked for a report back from the administration. We never received that report. I think that, you know, the termination of a former IT director was more around protected union activity than actual performance on the job, but that's just my opinion. But the reasoning that they gave when they terminated our former IT director was that there were IT vulnerabilities here in the city. And at that time, this council had asked for a report back from the administration as to what those vulnerabilities were and what steps they was taking to protect the information that the residents in this community share with their government. in the operations of the day-to-day delivery of services. And I'd just like to have the paper reset to the administration asking for an update because we've never received a response to that paper as to what these IT vulnerabilities are, what steps are being taken to secure them, and whether or not there will be a request for funding in the future necessary to make us so safe. Again, I still question the circumstances of the termination of our former IT director He was in the middle of, uh, of organizing members of the administration to join a labor union. And, um, he was terminated with, uh, really no warning and no progressive discipline. Uh, so it raises a number of concerns for me, but the administration to give a reason. And they said the reason was it vulnerabilities and the council still has not received a report on that. And that's something that could become very costly to this council in this city in the future. If in fact there really are. IT vulnerabilities. We don't know because we haven't gotten the report, but if we do get a report, then we might be able to position ourselves to figure out how much is it going to cost us in the future when the budget discussions start as to how to address these IT vulnerabilities, along with these other very positive IT issues that are coming along that Kevin's bringing to the table. So I'd just like to offer that as a B paper to make sure that the administration responds to the prior paper requesting what the IT vulnerabilities were surrounding the termination of a prior IT director.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Madam President, one of the many emails I've received about all the wonderful things going on in this community. I heard that the administration was putting together a community wide cleanup. And I would suggest that we forward this resolution to her office and ask that she put this in as part of her community wide cleanup efforts that are coming up in just a few short weeks.
[Adam Knight]: Shocking.
[Adam Knight]: I thought they could do it.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Any of us that have gone through Medford High over the past, I guess, what looks like 50 years will be very familiar with Bill Mazzacca. He was a security officer there for the last 47 and a half years where we went to school every day during rain, snow, sleet, and hail to protect the children in the city of Medford. But he's always been a great individual, a great public servant, and someone that I've always respected. It was very interesting when I brought my son up to kids corner for daycare, and I sat there and my son said, Oh, I was talking to Mr. Bill. And I look over and there's Bill Mosaic, who was Mr. Bill, when I was a student at Medford High School. But he's just a gentleman who's dedicated his whole life to this community. Someone who's done great good for the students in the city of Medford. And he's someone that deserves a little bit of recognition for the hard work that he put in. He's someone that was always behind the scenes a man of not many words, but great action. He's someone that the city of Medford should be very thankful that they had the opportunity to have for 47 and a half years. So with that being said, Madam President, I'm asking my colleagues to join me in extending some congratulatory notes to Mr. Mazeka in the momentous occasion of his retirement.
[Adam Knight]: I certainly understand that the city of Medford has a very strong Haitian population. Growing up in this community, I've gone to school and come friends with a number of people that are from Haitian descent. And I certainly have no problem with a commission on the status of citizens of Haitian descent that's being created by the state legislature. But I've said it before, I'll say it again. I'm not putting my name on a letter. going to speak of Mariano or Senate Spelker, unless it's us asking for money for the city, because pretty soon they're going to become tone deaf to the wants and desires of our community. Um, so for that reason, I'll be voting against this this evening. Um, I certainly support the piece of legislation as a private citizen, but as a member of this body, I don't feel as though it's good practice for us to continue to put our noses into what's going on with the state. Um, I haven't never gotten a letter from a state delegation telling us to vote a certain way in a resolution that's before this council. If we want our delegation to come down and present to us and talk to us about some of these pieces of legislation, I think that might be a little bit more productive because, well, Council of Business is pretty well-versed in a lot of this stuff. I don't think all of us are. And I think a lot of us would be a little bit more comfortable if maybe we had members of our delegation come down and talk to us, tell us what this bill does and why they're in favor of it or why they're opposed to it. And then the council can make a determination as to whether or not we want to encourage our delegation, the people that represent us on Beacon Hill, to support that. So with that being said, I thank the council for bringing the measure forward. And I also thank him for being so up to date and involved in the goings on at Beacon Hill. However, my focus here is in the city of Medford. And I think that this council really needs to take a look at what's going on in this community. And if we're going to Beacon Hill, well, one thing we need more than anything is money. So that's what I think we should be asking for. But I thank the council for the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, yes, I'll be supporting this measure this evening. If we remember back to the mistake River Watershed Association and the presentation that they made to us several years ago when they were coming to us for some community development block grant funding or CPA funding I believe it was. and they were seeking funds to design a shared use path along the Mystic River down to Shannon Beach and then beyond Shannon Beach down to Wedgman Station. I think that this is a key link to us bringing that project to fruition. It's gonna allow us to connect the multimodal transportation roadways to the two train stations as well. So that's gonna be something very beneficial to the communities to split the people out of them.
[Adam Knight]: I believe that stretch of roadway is DCR controlled. The crossing right from Route 16. The crossing is yes. I know Councilor Caraviello is going to run for that. I know that he's been working with them on the guide rails as well with DCR. So I think the DCR would have to be involved in doing anything that doesn't cross their road or block their road.
[Adam Knight]: Madam president. Thank you very much. Um, when looking at the language of this, first of all, it looks very much like a rent control bill to me. Um, rent stabilization, anti price gouging protection. Sounds like rent control to me. Um, it's a homerun petition and we're going to the legislature. We're asking them to let mention create its own laws and make its own specific set of laws for just people live in this community. This is gonna go to the state legislature and it's gonna go right in the circular file. All right, it's good for show. In practice, it's never gonna happen. We're talking about a regional housing crisis, but each community that we live in is gonna have different rules of application as to how it applies. I think it's also important that we look at the policies that we adopt. If we take some blame for the rising cost of housing in our community, when we advocate for the Green Line, We know the Green Line brings increased property values. When we advocate for the revitalization of Medford Square, and we ask people to present proposals on how we can improve and better our downtowns, we're part of the issue. We're the government, right? And we're asking people, how can we revitalize downtown? Bradley Road's right downtown. We're saying, let's bring the Green Line. Well, we know the Green Line's gonna bring high property values. We've been waiting 20 years for the Green Line to come. We still don't have a parking plan for Ball Square, as we're going to notice if we look at this. We knew it was coming. We've known it's been coming for two decades. We've known it's been coming for two decades. We can't address the problems that have followed in our purview and the problems that followed in our scope. Is it really reasonable for us to think that we're going to be able to create laws that are different than those of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts that just affect just our community right here that relate to something as large scale as a regional housing crisis? I don't think so. Personally, I'm going to vote against it. And I don't find it reasonable for us to go create rent control locally in one community. I think this is something that does need to be addressed at the state level. If I were a little bit more familiar with these two bills, if I had like a state rep and some staff on my team, and I'd have them research the bills and provide the bill summaries and the like. But as of right now, I just think that this is nothing more than a, hey, we tried. It didn't pass up at the state house. Blame the rep, it's not my fault, right? That's what it looks like to me. It doesn't look like it's rooted in reality. I appreciate the gentleman for bringing the issues to the table, and I appreciate the lady for bringing the issues to the table. But we've seen bills like this filed in other communities, and they've gone nowhere.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, and the reason why they've gone nowhere is because we can't just have one set of rules for Medford, a different set of rules for Somerville, a different set of rules for Allington when it comes to something like housing. When we're trying to go with the Metropolitan Area Planning Council and address a regional crisis, we can't have rules that just work in one area and not in another.
[Adam Knight]: At that point, the competition and I think it's important to point out, you know, we're having a very heated debate on an issue that's before us this evening, but there have been other housing related initiatives that have been before us. And one of those was the creation of the affordable housing trust fund. And that's something I think we're all on the same page with right we want to create an affordable housing trust fund where we can create units here in this community that are affordable to create that competition to drive the cost down. Right. So that's something we're working on. We actually have a piece of paper that's been drafted by the administration that we're working on with the administration to bring through the legislative process. And that's something that I think we'll see benefits from because when you look at the taxes that you referred to. We also have the Community Preservation Act and part of the CPA is the ability to generate 10% of those funds that we take it from the CPA, which is 1.5% of the total tax roll on and above. 10% of that goes into the affordable housing bucket for the creation of affordable housing, the retention of affordable housing. So that gives us an opportunity to begin to start creating units and then hopefully creating competition. Unfortunately, I think 6,000 units wish I had something like that according to the, to the governor's MBTA MBTA community. document the municipal modernization bill. Um, so, you know, it's going to take a lot of work for us to, to be where we need to be. Um, but I agree with you. I think that, you know, competition is really the answer. Uh, a lot of the times creation of units is what's necessary, how we create these units and where we create these units is late. Therein lies the rub, right? We don't want skyscrapers all over Mr. Gaff, right. We want to keep the fabric of our community. And at the same time also maintain the level of services that we're providing people, which isn't great right now. And if we have skyscrapers, all of them is to have, I can just imagine the level of services that we're going to get with that influx of people, the traffic and so on. Um, so I certainly understand me a comment and that was my concern as well. I feel like some of the stuff is really good. The person that owns our two or three family home. might have been in the family for three generations. And now the children have moved away, but they've inherited the home and they've used it as an income property. And it's something that the family's worked on. There's also the question of the transfer tax that's been discussed and how you fund these affordable housing funds. And the fair share amendment has a transfer tax component to it as well, where you could buy the worst house on the street and live there for 30 years, pull permits every year. get all the work done in the street to make it the nicest house on the street, you're paying an assessment every single year. And then when you go to sell the house, you have to pay another fee or an assessment to create affordable housing, right? So there are gonna be trade-offs here. And the biggest question is always, right? What's the biggest question in everybody's life, right? How are we gonna pay for that? How are we gonna pay for that? That's where we are right now.
[Adam Knight]: But I agree, I think competition is the answer. And I thank you for your comments because I think we share a lot of the same concerns.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I will not be supporting this paper this evening. I have A number of concerns, ultimately, for the last three years, small businesses have been under relatively stringent regulation and oversight I think that we need to let them breathe a little bit. This proposal may have a significant impact on two of the larger employers here in this community, Bianchi Foods and Monogram Foods. Both of those individual employers we've entered into tax deferred agreements with. Both of those are large scale food processing plants that do, I believe, use this type of material. Monogram foods is also in the process, I believe, of undergoing an evaluation to determine whether or not they're going to be subject to our solar ordinance. So I think that these regulatory changes that we're making right now are not at the right time. We need to let our small businesses breathe and we might be making a decision that's going to have a large residual effect on two of our largest employers here in this community. So for those two reasons, I will not be voting for this paper. I also have questions and concerns as to whether why we're focusing ourselves such a narrow scope of just food service establishments, polystyrene juice and a number of other areas as well. For example, packing materials, styrofoam coolers, we've all, we all know what a styrofoam cooler is. We've seen them everywhere. So, you know, I think that, well, it's a good, a good how to measure. I don't think that it's appropriate for our community at this time.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to approve.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, as you're aware, Monday is the marathon, and these individuals that are fortunate enough to have a bib have trained probably for the better part of the last year. I think Councilor Scarpelli can talk a little bit about that with his wife being an avid marathoner who ran last year. But with that being said, I'm every year the council does extend its well wishes to those participants that reside in our community. Dave McGilvery mentioned resident is the race director for the Boston Marathon a proud graduate of high school, grew up on the Fulton Heights area of the city of Medford and he's done great work with this race. And it's nice to see that we're back in action after a couple of years off. So I'd like to wish these runners all the best of luck. I have several friends that are running that you mentioned that I will save the risk of embarrassing them by letting people know that they're friends of mine. But with that being said, Madam President, I do wish them all the best of luck. And I ask my council colleagues to join.
[Adam Knight]: Just this past week, a lot was going on in the city of Medford. We had a police officer rescue someone from drowning in the Mystic River. We had a severe shooting down at the courthouse on Route 16. And we had a very significant car crash where a motor vehicle actually burst into flames and crashed into a car. Last week was also EMS dispatch week. Madam President, I think it's very important that we point out the work of our first responders and the work that they're doing here in this community. Not just our EMS dispatchers, but also those that EMS dispatches out, which would be our ambulance providers, our fire department, our DPW, and our police. I think they're doing an excellent job. And as we look at the news and we see what's going on around the world as it becomes, as the restrictions are lifted slowly, we're seeing a lot more gun violence in neighboring communities, a lot more knife violence in neighboring communities, a lot more car accidents going on because people for the last couple of years have been spoiled. They've not been on the roads driving around. And then obviously we all know the issues that people have with mental health these days. So with that being said, I think it's very important that we recognize the work that our friends down at the police department and the fire department do in dispatching out the necessary EMS providers to be sure that we're all safe in this community. So with that being said, I'd just like to offer that. I'm not on the formal resolution, but just as a thank you in this recognition of dispatch week.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I found the records in order and I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. This was a resolution that had been passed by this previous councils on multiple occasions, this information. has been very difficult to get and has not been coming forth with. So I think that at this point in time, it would make sense that we move forward and codify this request so that it would be part of our local law and therefore a requirement that we be provided with this information so that we can properly prepare for the financial responsibilities that we have as council.
[Adam Knight]: Second.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. At the risk of being told I'm not in any position to discuss this matter, I'd like to bring it forward anyway. It's been brought to my attention that Park Medford has been ticketing the letter carriers in our community. So the individuals that deliver us medications, bills, mail documents and the like, employees of the United States government, not the state government, not the local government, who are exercising their duties for the post office, not being held harmless in the execution of those duties, Madam President. Past practice has always been that our letter carriers would be held harmless when they were using their personal vehicles to conduct post office business. And this policy has apparently changed with the implementation of the in-house parking program. So I'd ask that the traffic commission take up the issue and create a letter carriers pass so that our letter carriers that are using their personal vehicles for post office business can park on city streets to deliver the mail and medication and the other materials that they so deliver to the residents of the community free of interference from parking.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, yes, as the resolution reads, the traffic commission I directed signage to one ramp said to keep this road that has displaced vehicles. These roads, but measure blitz victory park, the backside of victory park, and there's access to walking trails back there. But what's happening is the street is very narrow street. It's getting overrun by vehicles, residents in the street can't back out of the driveways, can't find parking in the front rows. So it's creating a situation where the Signage that the traffic commission put up has really displaced a number of vehicles to another neighborhood. It's now feeling a negative impact. So in the interest of parity, the traffic commission will take simple steps to treat this neighborhood as they treat others and ensure that the signage is erected so that neighbors don't have to go through the weekends of recreational events going on in the community, very similar to what's going on now.
[Adam Knight]: If we could just get a copy of the contract between the town of Wilmington and the city of Medford for these services from the administration. I appreciate it.
[Adam Knight]: I think this is the wrong forum.
[Adam Knight]: So I think, yeah, exactly as the inappropriate for you're in the wrong.
[Adam Knight]: No one can throw you out of that apartment but a judge, right? It's not like after 60 days, they're gonna lock the doors, take away the key and take all your stuff. I mean, they can't do that, right? It has to go through a process.
[Adam Knight]: I understand that everybody has a personal circumstance, there's 32 units in the building. But you know, ultimately, right, it's, you have to vacate, or what? Well, we're gonna take you to court, right?
[Adam Knight]: But it's a no fault eviction because it's not for non-payment of rent. Right. You know what I mean? So it's not for non-payment of rent, it's not for, you know, selling drugs out of the apartment. No, no, no cause right it's it's a contract issue right it's a contract issue between the property owner and the tenants that are in the property. Right. So, ultimately, the forum where it's going to be resolved would be in some type of mediation, whether in the court system, you know what I mean as this goes through the process but the notice to quit. It's just like, listen, in 30 days, we're filing an application. That's really what it is, right? So it's, they're giving you a 30 days notice to say they're going to take action. Right now, through the discussions that have happened here at this body and through the administration, they've said, look, it's not going to be 30 days now. It's going to be 60 days.
[Adam Knight]: Right. And if anybody is a tenant at Willow's leases up, we're not going to move on them. Right. We're going to wait 60 days.
[Adam Knight]: Right. So that's going to initiate the process, but think, Between the, what was it? 18 units that have leases and 14 that don't?
[Adam Knight]: Or vice versa.
[Adam Knight]: 18 with leases, right? All probably expiring at different times. All the 60 day notice to stick with. By the time this building gets empty, how long, how much time is this going to pass?
[Adam Knight]: I mean, yeah, you're talking about public service.
[Adam Knight]: I'd be happy to take Mr. Delfano's appointment as well. However, I was a little concerned about that appropriation. I've listened to Councilor Caraviellola now for the past five weeks, every morning at breakfast, talk about how he's been trying to get that released from the city solicitors office. So I'm glad to see it go.
[Adam Knight]: One of the first papers that was heard in the first meeting last term. And we requested that the city solicitor's office draft us a draft ordinance to establish a beautification committee. And after 30 months, we've gotten this great document here. It's like the Magna Carta. It's a page and a half long. And on it, it establishes the criteria for us to establish a beautification committee here in the city of Medford. And the purpose is to act as an advisory committee to the city and city departments to address issues that the regular citizen cares about, that regular people are concerned about, the lack of delivery of quality city services here in our community. The curb appeal in this community now is worse than it's ever been. I've lived in this community my whole life, and I've never, ever, ever seen it look worse. I've never seen it look worse. Our roads are in tough shape. Our sidewalks are in tough shape. There's stumps everywhere. State-owned properties are in disrepair. State-owned properties are sloppy. I think a beautification committee can help us. I think a beautification committee can help us direct where we want to see our efforts go. I think a beautification committee can help us raise awareness on issues. So the mayor's office and the mayor's lawyer has provided us with a draft of this ordinance. I think it needs a little bit of work. I'd obviously be happy to refer it to the rules and ordinance subcommittee for us to properly vet. I'm looking at this document here. It went from an advisory beautification committee established by the city council to the mayor's beautification committee that she's going to be able to appoint and remove members that are free. Well, it's not necessarily what I was looking for. But I think with the leadership of Chairman bears and that subcommittee will be able to come up with a document that everybody would be able to. So with that being said, I'd make the motion to refer the paper to the subcommittee.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, as we all know, elections have changed a lot over recent years with early voting, with the adoption of technology, and so forth. So I think this is a good measure. It's a way that we can move into the 21st century. I support the council's initiative, and I think that it's something that will help us all in the long run. So it's something that I support a lot of, and I'll be happy to vote for it this evening.
[Adam Knight]: And by way of history, how are you, by the way, good to see you. It's good to see you as well. Don't take it personal. I never did. In June of 21, we passed the budget, and that budget was $250,000 to hire a director and three control specialists. June of 21. In December of 21, the mayor came before us with a paper, 21631, which was a request to enter into a contract to lease vehicles for a period that exceeds the three year maximum duration as outlined in the general laws. And also for us to create some employee classifications in our compensation adjustment factor ordinance. And during that presentation, it was discussed that the department was going to be moving in a direction where they wouldn't be working with one director in three offices anymore, that they wanted to create several positions. One would be a specialist that would run in the $47,000 to $53,000 range. One would be a full person that would run in the $49,000 to $55,000 range. One would be a repair person in that same range and a lead repair person at $53,000 to $67,000 per year. And at that time that would have brought the whole department up to I believe nine with the director's position correct.
[Adam Knight]: Now, on February 8th, This council took up paper 21631 that was introduced by the mayor in December. We introduced week one of this term and the administration tabled that paper based upon a question for a sufficiency of the vote as to whether or not we wanted to create these positions. My concern wasn't So much about whether or not we want to create the positions, but it's whether or not we're creating these positions. That fashions compliance that's in compliance with the general laws. So on February 15th, this council took a vote on paper, two, two zero seven four. asking the city solicitor to give us an opinion as to whether or not the city of Medford is in compliance with general laws chapter 44 section 33a when it came to the creation of these positions and the funding thereof. That was February 15th. March 15th just passed. We're now coming up into April. We still haven't gotten an opinion from the solicitor's office as to whether or not these positions are created appropriately. We've already made an appropriation initially of $250,000 to fund this department. And we've already allowed the administration to enter into a long-term lease that exceeds the statutory requirements outlined by general laws. I think we've been very fair with the department. But the question still comes on. When we have a legal question, we're asking the mayor to give us an answer, the city solicitor to give us an answer so that we can have the guidance that we need so that we can live up to the oath that we all took to abide by the rules of the city council, the ordinances of this community, and the statutes established through the general laws. And that information still isn't forthcoming. I find it very difficult for me to take a money vote tonight. It has nothing to do with the program. It has nothing to do with what you're trying to accomplish or what direction we're trying to go in here. It has more to do with me being concerned that we're not spending appropriately, and that we're not complying with time-tested standards that past administrations have always complied with. And that's where I stand on this issue. I can see this transfer coming to us again at the end of the year as an end-of-the-year transfer, and it's something that most likely I'll have no problem supporting. But at this point in time this evening, based upon the history of these classifications, the lack of respect, the lack of response that the administration has given this council when it comes to seeking legal guidance, leaving us in a position to look like Mickey the Dutz. We couldn't do our jobs if we wanted to. Well, because we don't have the tools to do it. We don't have the tools to do it. And it seems to me the only way that the city administration seems to listen sometimes is when we talk about money. We talk about money, that's when they start to listen. Now, I'm supportive of a parking program. I think that we need to sit down and take a look at this because we can't be doing it drip by drip. 250,000 here, 45,000 here, a long-term lease here. I don't think that that's the way we should be doing it because we don't have any idea what our spending plan's really gonna look like. This council has voted in the past to have quarterly presentations by our CFO to tell us where we are in terms of revenues. We've asked for copies of the Warren articles on a monthly basis so that we can see where our money is being spent. We have to beg for it. We do not get it. We have to beg for it. Beg for it. I want to know where the money is being spent. When I say, yeah, I vote for this appropriation, I want to see that Warren article that shows that money going out. And we can't, we don't see it. We don't get it. We do not get it. So that reason, and that reason alone, I'm not going to be supporting this paper tonight. I can't confidently take this vote because I still haven't gotten a response from the city solicitor as to whether or not these positions are being created appropriately and whether or not we're in compliance with what we're supposed to be doing.
[Adam Knight]: I pay for my child care at the public schools for credit card. I pay for all the recreation. Yeah, no, that's online.
[Adam Knight]: Mine is on the same point. Are we going to be expecting to get a formal response to the council resolution that was sent to the mayor's office?
[Adam Knight]: Just one more question. Um, based on the staffing levels, what would the annual personnel cost be for the department?
[Adam Knight]: And at this staffing level, about how long do you think it would take before the department is self sufficient or self funding.
[Adam Knight]: Okay, thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: I understand Councilor fabulous frustration with the circumstances in the situation, however I don't feel as though further. encouraging the Historical Commission to use their power to weaponize themselves against developers and our community is a good public.
[Adam Knight]: Would it be possible for Ms. Hunt's office to mail out these resources to the individuals that reside in that residence so that they, even in the mail, they've received notice to quit. We know that the whole entire unit, according to Councilor Caraviello, has received a notice to quit. Why can't our office just mail them all this information that we're talking about right now so that they'll get a copy of the pamphlet in the mail, they'll get a copy of housing families' contact information and all that? Ultimately, what are the odds of in a city of 60,000, The residents that 26 to 22, 22 to 26 Bradley wrote us in here right now, watching the council meeting, right down in the chat, what they're talking about. Probably very slim to none, right? If we really want to help them, why don't we reach out to them directly?
[Adam Knight]: Hunt, do you think you'll have to wait as long as we do for a legal response?
[Adam Knight]: This was the paper we took up tonight, but thank you, I appreciate your work.
[Adam Knight]: I doubt if any of them are reading that on them, Mr. Rick, I mean, ultimately she said that legal counsel said not to do that, right? So if we have a housing partner, that we're working with like ABCD or housing, you know what I mean? Maybe we let housing families, we let them do it and then we'll fund the mailing, something like that, you know what I mean? But it's a slippery slope, we got the middle of something like this, you know what I mean, from this level. So, you know, I think we should send them something, but if legal counsel's telling us not to, or they're not getting the opinion, let's have a report back to us with the next step side with the action plan that's from our office. Why are we dictating? You know, they're getting the legal advice. They're the ones that have the experts, the housing planner and the office. Why don't we have them report back to us in a 14 day period is what the next steps are.
[Adam Knight]: It's not my ponder that I'm just interrupting my good friend over here.
[Adam Knight]: I think Madam President, if I may, it's important to point out that consistently, the city administration's only committed the chapter 90 funds that are given to us from the state to be used for resurfacing projects, which are about about what $900,000. And if we look at when the last full road in this community was resurfaced, I think it's safe to say that it hasn't happened in more than 16 months, we had a full carpet car resurfacing of the roadway in this community. So the commitment's not there. The commitment has to be there as well. When this council said we need to have a long-term plan, we have a capital plan, and then we did a pavement assessment. Well, that just threw the capital plan right out the window because the pavement assessment comes with a bill of $100,000. Then we have a needs assessment at the high school that's going to the school building assistance program up in the state that's saying that we need another significant investment in another facility as well. It's all about prioritization of the funds and I've always been a strong advocate in holding our public utilities accountable, getting community benefits from them when we offer them the opportunity to stage their equipment on our roadways, mitigation and the like. So I think it's going to take some out of the box thinking as well. It's a creative thinking in order for us to address some of these issues because they're longstanding and they're not going anywhere. They're only getting worse. That's why I brought forward that issue that you referred to earlier in the evening. So I thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: I'm very grateful that we finally got to this point. This is something that I recall taking up, I believe, in my second term as a member of the council. This evening, there's someone that's not a member of this body anymore who deserves credit for getting us this far, and that's John Falco. Madam President, John really made joining a priority during his time as the president. John worked very hard in bringing us to where we are to help us secure Mr. Bobrowski and his leadership. to get us to this point. We've met probably for close to 60 hours as a body on this topic over the course of 24 months to get us to where we are today. It's been a very open and deliberate process. It's been very transparent. There have been, I believe, nine draft documents that have circulated among the council that have all been vetted through public meetings. We've had the duly required public hearing with Community Development Board. Notices have been posted. The Community Development Board had an opportunity to vet this motion as well, and they came back with a series of over 70 recommendations that the council took up in a meeting, went through each and every one of them, addressed each and every one of them, and we finally came up with this document right here, Madam President. This is a document I'm very proud of. I think that this body should be very proud of this document, and in this young stage in our term, this work product that we're putting out so far is something that's great. And I support this measure that's before us wholeheartedly, and I vote for approval.
[Adam Knight]: I'm convinced that the best path to ensure comprehensive and informed review of our city's charter is to follow the time-tested path of gathering signatures and complying with the various provisions of the general laws that surround that process. There are some that would disagree. And to them, I say that, you know, Charter is our local constitution, and in effect is a document that's far too important to allow an abbreviated review and to take shortcuts. The process established in the general law specifically establishing charter review is more than just a procedure. It's the right of local self-government, and the politicians shouldn't be deciding this for the people. This alone should give every resident the reason to pause and say, let's let this process unfold in its time-tested wisdom. the initiative petition process. Proper discernment is never rushed. A perfect example of this proper discernment was in November, 2015, when the people of Medford spoke at the ballot box and overwhelmingly adopted the Community Preservation Act. The success of this program can be attributed to the Preserve Medford campaign. Now this group could have came to the council and pleaded with us to take shortcuts and to put this matter on the council agenda and to put it on the ballot, to do a homeown petition and to send it forward. But instead, there was a grassroots campaign with efforts devoted to speaking to residents door to door, in the community, in the streets, at the parks, addressing concerns and issues, and raising awareness and educating the electorate about the CPA. And as a result, because people got a chance to talk, information was shared, concerns were raised, and it was time to vote. The voters were informed, aware, and knowledgeable. It was democracy at its best. Coming off a three-year pandemic, We have not had the ability to attend our children's games or school events. Graduations and proms have been canceled. There's absolutely zero sense of normalcy. We don't have the strong relationships with the neighbors in our community that we've had prior to the pandemic, and we need to build those back up. In a time when we have no sense of normalcy or stability, I don't think our child should be treated with any less care than the CPA. The residents of our city deserve every opportunity to absorb the information before they're asked to decide on whether to do anything to our child. And the initiative petition process meets this mark. I hope my position's not misunderstood, Madam President. It's an important issue, and my disagreement is not over the method, is over the method, and not over the motivation, and over the process, and not over the principle. But ultimately, this should be a grassroots effort that comes from the ground up, not the top down. The people shouldn't be making the decisions for the politicians. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe that this was raised Madam President some 2436 months ago with the question was asked to the city solicitors to whether or not the city's in compliance with the Municipal Monetization Act and these provisions that you speak of. To date, we have not received response from the administration. I just like to highlight the fact that our ability to conduct business is hampered when we are not provided with the tools and toolbox necessary to do such. And here we are some period of time later, now addressing an issue that we could have put to bed a very long time ago had we been provided with the support necessary for us to conduct our business. As we look at the work that we've done this evening, when we have someone in our corner that's willing to provide us with the legal advice that we need, we are able to put out a very good work product. When we don't have that, here we are. Before May 2nd, we have to do something. We've been waiting since the Municipal Modernization Act passed for an answer as to whether or not we're in compliance. So I'd just like to point that out. And once again, reiterate my priority for the budget for this year to have an assistant city solicitor dedicated to the Medford City Council.
[Adam Knight]: Is Mr. Mulkey on the call as well? With the zoning issue?
[Adam Knight]: So multifamily, do we just do we know how much. with the dollar figure, the grant eligibility would be on the table that we lose access to. So is it $100 million worth of grant money, or is it $65,000 a grant?
[Adam Knight]: We've been receiving them in the past.
[Adam Knight]: Question? Are they saying we have to change our zoning? Or are they saying if we don't change our zoning, you don't have access to these grant funds?
[Adam Knight]: In essence, we don't have to do anything.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, that's what I'm what's the trade off how much money we get from these grants if we're not getting any money from the grants is it really worth creating 6500 units.
[Adam Knight]: Does it have to be within a half a mile from a train station located in your community or just the train station?
[Adam Knight]: And that's more than half a mile of a station, right? The only circles that we have, but we have Winchester station, you have Oak Grove station, you have ball square station. You might be able to take those 6,500 units instead of slapping them right in Wellington circle, which is probably where they're going to end up going. Um, be able to spread them around.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, I think the idea is that most of these stations like the Greenland, for example, isn't, it's not Medford train, it's a regional, it's for the region, right? So why should Medford bear the brunt of all the housing? Why shouldn't the region? If the train station is there for transportation needs for the region, and we're trying to meet housing needs for the region, then why shouldn't our regional partners that utilize this service that we have also feel some of the impact?
[Adam Knight]: I don't think Tufts University's property would be taken into consideration, right, at all for the density calculation.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Yes, I just last Tuesday, there was a chemical spill, I believe, or an evacuation of the chemical laboratory at 62 Talbot Street. That's about all the information. I've been able to find out about this. I'm sure that it was an event that was handled appropriately by our first responders and by our friends at Tufts University, but it's nice for us to know exactly what happened, what went on, to be sure that we can provide a sense of relief to those that live in the neighborhood who are asking questions and have concerns about what they live next to and what risks they may pose to them. So with that being said, I'd ask the administration to respond to this, and Tufts University to respond to this request in a timely manner, and ask my council colleagues to support the measure.
[Adam Knight]: It's people like you that make the city go around. Thank you very much for putting your life on the line for the residents of this community. I certainly as one member of this council don't have much of an opinion one way or the other. Relative to Mr. Delano's appointment to this position I think that, you know, basis, he is a resume that would enable him to meet the basic criteria of the job and I think that he'd be able to do a good job at it. He has shown us through his History is a firefighter that he knows how to serve the public. My issue isn't necessarily with disappointment at all, Madam President, my issue is the fact that right now we're in the middle of state election cycle. And we have candidates that are in the process of trying to get their nomination papers certified, but we do not have a board of registrars. in our elections office to certify these papers. So while I understand the importance of a liquor commissioner in this community, I don't think that that carries the same weight as a registrar of voters here in our community. And I think that the mayor needs to act on these appointments that are necessary for us to comply with state law so that we can conduct our state elections that are coming up. And so the candidates that are participating in these state elections can have the opportunity to get their paperwork certified. Now, all three of our registrars have stepped down in the past 12 months. We have no registrars of voters. Now we have a look at commissions retiring as well as an appointment that's backfilling that and I'm going to support Mr. Dolfano when the time comes. I certainly have no problem with his application before us this evening. However, I do have a problem filling appointments when we have a big void down in our elections office and we have a major state election coming up right now and we need a board of registrars down there. We have legislation pending in the city solicitor's office that we've been waiting on from the administration now, and I'm sure Councilor Bears can talk a little bit more to that than I. We've met on it, we've had Committee of the Whole on it, something that we all support in establishing an Elections Commission. So those are a couple items that I think are very important that should be taken precedent over some of these appointments that have come before us, Madam President. Mr. Belafonte, like I said, this has nothing to do about your appointment or your ability to do this job. It really has to do with the administration and the approach that they're taking in addressing some of these issues. Um, you know, we're looking at a board of registrars that's been vacant now for how long, Mr. Clark, can you tell me how long, Mr. Lasky and Miss Murray.
[Adam Knight]: Okay, when was this appointment made temporarily?
[Adam Knight]: Is this temporary appointment allow us to comply with the Secretary of State's guidelines and standards?
[Adam Knight]: And Mr. Crowley still serves as a temporary appointee. That is correct. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Only one person on the board. I'm still sitting ex-officio.
[Adam Knight]: On that, Madam President, I do believe, looking at the general laws, that I think these appointments to the Board of Registrars are supposed to come through the City Council as well and be appointed by the City Council for confirmation. So, I'm not sure that the Mayor has the right to appoint Mark Corrales to the Board of Registrars without confirmation. Temporary or not.
[Adam Knight]: I have I talked about the need for this Council to have a lawyer by any chance this have I have I spoke about that at all ever because I mean the left hand doesn't know what the rights doing and no one can scratch the head across the hall. All right, I don't know what's going on. But I mean, ultimately, I'm looking at the general law right here and in the first section says the position shall be filled nearly as reasonably as possible. and it should be confirmed by the council, unless that charter says something different. I'm just, I'm at a loss. I'm at a loss to the inaction on easy items that keep us in compliance with state law. Easy items that keep us in compliance with state law. Now, Bob, I'm gonna vote for you. I'm gonna vote for you. I support your resume. I support your appointment. You know, however, I don't support the antics and the human resource nightmare that we have going on across the hall.
[Adam Knight]: Council night to clarify a little bit on what you can ask the court with all due respect I don't think it's your job to clarify the actions the administration. I appreciate what you're trying to do I really do my frustration level on this is like going through the roof because, you know, we all take an oath to comply with the law to withhold the laws of the Commonwealth of Constitution the ordinances of the city, and I feel like it only, it only applies when someone's looking. Sometimes, it only applies when someone's looking at if no one points out it's just going to continue it's just going to continue just going to continue. It's very frustrating, but but please continue I do apologize for interrupt.
[Adam Knight]: It's curious also that it just so happened to be like right before an election. And, you know, we still, we're just finding out now, right, the chief of staff just finding out now about a resignation of a member. Now, now, but it was in November, right before the election, right. And it was an appointment that was made temporary. And that person still never before the council made permanent and it's been well over 90 days.
[Adam Knight]: I, for one, as one member, I wouldn't require Mr. Delfano to come back. I don't think this is an issue about him. I think it's more an issue about what's going on across the hall. That's why I voted not to table, because I don't feel as though he should be held victim for his boss's mistakes. But with that being said, I'm satisfied for him to not have to return.
[Adam Knight]: If I may, to the Carroll family, my deepest condolences. I know Maura, I know Tommy, and Leslie and Jill, and, you know, One thing you can always say is that Mrs. Carol and the Carroll family have always been involved in the community they've always been people that have been giving to the city of Medford, and she's in a better place now I wish her family all the best. She rest in peace.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Councilor Caraviello, thanks for putting this measure on. Linda and Jim, both great people. You know, growing up, having a lot of friends that lived down near Tufts Park and Tufts Square Tobacco, that was always a place where kids could go to find work. And I have a number of friends of mine that going through elementary school, junior high school, and high school would be over there doing side jobs at Tough Square Tobacco for Jim and Linda. Two of my close friends actually ended up becoming employees there through high school, working at the East Boston store, selling cigars. They became cigar aficionados, working with Jim Schena. They're great people and they're real neighborhood people that took care of the kid next door that would be sitting on the front porch and watching the kids play in the street, making sure that nobody was causing any damage to the neighborhood, no one bothering the kids. Real neighborhood people, real good folks. And he's gonna be sadly missed. His presence in the neighborhood's gonna be sadly missed. Post Street won't be the same.
[Adam Knight]: Just if I may add my condolences to the Casey family. Joe's become a friend over the years, and I only didn't know Mr. Casey personally. His reputation preceded him. He was a man that was well respected in the community, and if his children are any indication of what type of a person he was, then he was a great gentleman as well.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Jerry DeCristofaro, who passed away February 26th, he was a lifelong resident, lived in Summit Road, the father of Barbara DeCristofaro from Metro Police Department and Dr. DeCristofaro Registrar. Jerry spent 45 years in public service for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. He served as Chief Investigator for the Licensing Board. He was responsible for establishing the rules and regulations there and enforcing standards for our licensees in the Commonwealth. known for his classic resemblance to Luciano Pavarotti. Mr. De Cristofaro was someone that was loved by many. He had failing health in his later years, but I remember him fondly growing up in metropolitics as someone who's always been there to lend an ear and lend wisdom and lend advice. He's certainly someone that did a great deal for this community. He raised two wonderful children who believe in service, as evidenced by their work, and he will be sadly missed Madam President. So, Jerry to Christopher our dear friend who served this community in this Commonwealth of Massachusetts for the better part of 50 years, I'd ask that this council joins me in extending condolences to his family on their recent loss.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Brennan, I wish you the best of luck. I certainly have no problem with this application that's before us this evening. I'm looking forward to seeing the Cummings Center come to completion. I think this will be a nice, what they call, anchor store to bring some foot traffic through the neighborhood. There's a couple with the opening of the Green Line Extension. Hopefully in a few short months, we'll transform that neighborhood to make it a little bit more vibrant and We all know if there's a Starbucks, people go there. So it'd be nice to see us put traffic down there and another opportunity and an option for an amenity for some of the college students and neighborhood residents. So thank you for your application, sir.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: All right, I have no problem with the reading from the chair.
[Adam Knight]: This is a measure that we vetted properly, we've gone through a number of meetings on and it's something that I support a lot of leak. What this does is it allows senior citizens the options to defer their taxes. If in fact they find themselves in a financial situation and they make the income hardship guidelines. I think this is a policy that would make sense for those in our community especially based upon the housing shortages that we're seeing the economic circumstances that we're seeing right now. That in fact that we have a large population of senior citizens living in this community. I think this only makes sense to provide them with this type of relief and I support it will hardly move approval.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight, Madam President, thank you very much. This was on the agenda last week and I requested to be tabled for the opportunities of my council colleagues to also speak on it because they know James and Maureen very well, as do I, and if anybody played Medford pop Warner in the late 80s and early 1990s, they'd know Jimmy Heath as the man with the best mullet in Medford. He and Maureen have been married now for 30 years and Maureen's been a active participant at the St. Francis Mothers Club for a number of years. They've raised four beautiful children here in the city of Medford. and they recently celebrated their 30th wedding anniversary. Many of us may know Jimmy from his time down at Pocanti Skating Rink, driving the Zamboni, or up at the Field of Dreams, working there as a ticket taker and a security guard. And many of us know Maureen from all her involvement through youth sports, Metro Pop Warner in particular. So with that being said, Madam President, I'd ask that my council colleagues join me in congratulating two individuals that displayed the type of community that we here in Metro believe in, James and Maureen Heath, and the momentous occasion of their 30th anniversary.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Many of us know Kevin and Kathleen from Medford youth softball and Medford youth lacrosse Kevin was one of the inaugural coaches in the Medford youth lacrosse program back in the late 90s. Um, he rose up the ranks to become a past president actually, uh, just giving up the title just a few years ago. And, um, when you're looking for Kevin or Kathleen, you'll probably be able to find them at one of our fields, uh, at one of these practices, softball, lacrosse, uh, sometimes the hockey rink, even I imagine that, um, but they just celebrated the 20th anniversary of the two great people that have dedicated a lot of their time, energy, commitment to this community. Um, especially in the realm of, uh, youth sports and, and bringing our programs together as volunteers and boards of directors and coaches and the like. So with that being said, Madam President, I'd like to first recognize Kevin Finnegan, who was a senior when I was a freshman in high school, who was very good to me growing up, someone who I've been able to develop a friendship with over the years, and someone I've been able to work with on a number of these initiatives, especially the Medford Lacrosse Program. He's someone that's really put his money where his mouth is. He's someone that's always been there to show that his actions speak louder than his words. A man of not much to say, but a lot to do. And he's someone that I admire, and he's a friend of mine. And I certainly wish him and his wife a great anniversary. 20 years is a great, great, great achievement that I congratulate them both. So with that being said, I ask my council colleagues to join me in supporting them this evening in their celebration and also recognizing the work that they do in this community to make sure that Medford is a place where we can all thrive.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Larry, congratulations and thank you for all you do. When you sit down and you think about 20 years of service, and then you look behind this rail and you look at this body combined we have 31 years behind this real combined 31 years of service Larry has 28 by himself. The institutional knowledge that this man possesses is amazing. He's seen it all. He's been at every single city council meeting for 28 years. I would have found you not guilty, Larry. I would have gave you parole a long time ago, literally. But the institutional knowledge that you possess and the friendship that you've shown me over the years has been something that's tremendous. Larry's a man of few words. But if you ask him a question, he'll certainly give you an answer and he's been here and seen it all. He's a great resource to all of us and he's something that we need, especially when you see the transition through City Hall and the department heads and the like. You know, we need someone that has an institutional knowledge that can guide us in the right direction, point us in the right way. And Larry's that person. You know, the City Messenger's job is to deliver the papers and to make sure that we're informed with the provided with the materials that are necessary for us to prepare for the meeting but Larry does much more than that, and his title messenger does not necessarily reflect all that he does for this body. So Larry thank you very much I support this wholeheartedly. We've been a great friend for a long time and I wouldn't want anybody else sitting in that chair for you.
[Adam Knight]: Did you say till 12pm. Yes. Okay, so, so if we approve this from this evening you'd be able to operate from 7am to 11pm, anything after 11pm requiring extended hours permit, there needs to be approved with this console. So you need to fill out another separate application, and be able for us again for us to deliberate that issue. issue speaking as one member of this body. But if we were to approve this evening and then Friday night, you're open till midnight, that'd be a problem. So we just want to make you aware of that.
[Adam Knight]: have been paying attention to the recent ongoings and current events here in the community. Just recently, one of our state troopers from the Wellington Barracks was critically injured in a motor vehicle accident on Route 93. Her services are actually being held this evening up at, I believe, St. Anthony's Church in Urbana. But Trupa Bucci was a 34-year-old state trooper who was relatively new on the job. She had a career prior life working over at Encore Casino as a security specialist over there with a number of Metro residents that I know very well, including Arthur Simmons and Jason Wong, for example, who called me to express their concern over the circumstances surrounding this terrible accident. My life was taken well too short due to a preventable motor vehicle accident. I think it's all too common that we see the way that people drive on the roadways. The condition of our roads, the circumstances that led to this event show that a lot of it has to do less with driver training and less with driver responsibility than it does with actual design. And we sat here last week, we talked about Vision Zero. We talked about using design to make our roads safer because sometimes there's just nothing we can do to prevent an accident. And when you hear about the circumstances surrounding this incident, I think it's safe to say that the truck driver was not necessarily at fault, and this was an accident that just occurred. It was really something that was almost preventable, unpreventable. But to lose a trooper at age 34 years, with so much potential and so much life ahead of her. It's something that's very sad. She suited up every day to make sure that this community was safe. She was stationed right here in our city, and she responded to the calls that we all make. And I think it's very important for us to recognize the sacrifices that she's made sacrifices that her family made through her service. So with that being said, I asked my council colleagues for this resolution, and I'm sending family of tomorrow G, not only her personal family but also extended family at the Masters of State barrack state his back to.
[Adam Knight]: Now Madam President, thank you very much and I do believe the councilor Scarpelli is a co sponsor of this resolution. Just recently, Mr. Boyd passed away. someone who lived in the city of Medford for, geez, got to be 70 years, was a military veteran and just an all-around good person. His son, Buzzer, and I are very close friends. His son, Billy, was just elected not too long ago to the New Hampshire State Legislature, and the city council had honored him on this achievement as a high school graduate, getting elected to the New Hampshire State Legislature. So as you can tell, he's a proud father who raised a good family of public servants. He was, as I said, was a veteran, as was his son, Bowser, after him. And recently he passed away. He will be sadly missed. Mr. Boyd was quite a character. I fondly remember a conversation that I had with him when the tree in front of his house was removed and he called and wanted the tree replaced. So I reached out to forestry department and I asked that they replace a tree in front of the Boyd's house. And they went down and they replaced the tree. And Mr. Boyd called me. And he said, what the hell is this? And if you saw what this was, it was Charlie Brown's Christmas tree. It was the funniest looking little tree I'd ever see. It was maybe eight inches tall and didn't have a leave on it. And me and Mr. Boyd just laughed and laughed and laughed. It was one of the funniest things that this happened to me in government service. You know, when you call and you ask them to plant a tree and the gentleman says, the trees come in and we're all excited about the tree coming and then There it is, you know what I mean? It's a little twig sticking out of the ground. He didn't know whether it was supposed to water it or pull it out. It was just, it was a really funny circumstance. And he and I laughed about it. And his son and I laughed about it as well. But just a great person. I take it from us, well, far too soon. Many of us that live in the Salem Street area would see him driving around in his beautiful Corvette. And that's when we know that Mr. Boyd was out and about. But with that being said, I'd just like to ask my council colleagues to extend a note of condolence to the family for a United States military veteran who's served our country and served this community so well. He's raised two civic-minded children in Buzzard Valley. One's a state rep, the other one's a veterans advocate up at Post 45, and they've both done great things for this community as well as their father. So with that being said, I'd ask my council colleagues to join me in this resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I do believe that these were all discussed in the Committee of the Whole and they were all voted out, recommended favorably. We have a CPC that does a great job. We have a group of people that properly vet these applications. They go through a very open and deliberate process. They keep us informed every step of the way. These are projects that we've talked about in the past. These are projects that we've all openly supported in the past. I personally think that I have no problem this evening moving for approval on all items before us.
[Adam Knight]: found them in disarray. This week, I find them in array.
[Adam Knight]: I do have a couple of concerns relative to a business being open until 2 a.m. seven days a week in a residential neighborhood. We know this location, we know where it's located, Lambert streets and right there on the corner, but it's a number of homes. What type of business do you get? Is mostly a volume foot traffic? Can the applicant give us a little bit more insight into what's going on at the place? Is it mostly foot traffic, mostly delivery type of stuff? I mean, I'm very reluctant to say yes, they open till two o'clock in the morning on Sunday, right? With foot traffic. I don't want this to be the place where people are leaving the casino or the bar room and they're saying, let's stop at Medford at Casa Pizza on the way home because it's right off of the Fellsway. So that's a concern that I have. And so I was just wondering, is it mostly a business delivery? Is mostly a business walk-in? And maybe we can just provide some insight to that.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. So would a delivery only restriction be something that would be suitable from 11 to 2am without work for you, and then maybe on Friday and Saturday, allowing them to stay open till two o'clock in the morning for patrons as well something like that.
[Adam Knight]: That sounds absolutely correct, Mr. Chairman. I'd certainly support the application with those restrictions in the 90-day review. After the 90-day review, if things are going good, then maybe we can move on some of those as well. But I'd hate to go grant a full approval and then have them come back 90 days after operating. Let's maybe ease into this a little bit and take a look at it. And at the 90-day review, if we can lift some of these restrictions or requirements, we might be in a better spot in protecting the neighborhood.
[Adam Knight]: I'd often lose his conditions, Mr. President. I'm not a president.
[Adam Knight]: Happy birthday, Carol.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Lasky, thank you for your service. I remember one of the first votes that I took as a city councilor was in support of your appointment to this position. I think you've done a great job here as well as at the MWRA. And it's without hesitation that I will support Councilor Caraviello's recommendation this evening. Over the years, I've had the opportunity to work with you in various capacities and you continue to put out a great product for the city of Medford and your actions have always spoken louder than your words and your track record is proven. So thank you very much for all you do for the community. I'm happy to stand beside you and support you this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Last week, this item came up and I did a fairly poor job at explaining it. We discussed ordinances and how ordinances are passed in this community. An ordinance requires four votes to be passed in this community unless it's statutorily required otherwise. and the confusion was raised last week based upon the fact that I feel as though we need an opinion as to whether or not this section of the general laws applies when it comes to creating positions via ordinance and giving pay raises via ordinance and whether or not a two-thirds vote is required or a simple majority. I've had preliminary discussions with the city solicitor, who's indicated that she's 90% sure that it would be requiring a two thirds vote to pass these provisions that are before us. Before we go further and get the solicitor's opinion. I do want to say that last week, things got a little out of hand a little crazy in terms of parliamentary procedure and the like and it was not my intention to create any type of confusion, but rather to get clarification. And I know I have speaking with the chair that, you know, it could have been perceived that I was trying to take a shot at the chair and that wasn't my intention at all. My intention was to move forward on the paper and move forward appropriately. As I've said in the past we've all taken an oath. We've taken an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States, the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and the ordinances of this community. And I feel as though that's a paramount responsibility for every one of us behind this rail. And when an issue like this comes up, when it comes to financial malfeasance or financial compliance, I feel as though it deserves strict scrutiny. That's why I raised the issue this evening. That's why I asked for the solicitor's opinion. And that's why I've become so passionate about these issues. There's a taxpayer dollars that we're discussing here. And we're discussing taxpayer dollars. of the utmost importance that we're complying with laws. So with that being said, through the chair, it was not my intention to create confusion or to implement any delay tactics. What it was, was to create clarification to be sure that as we move forward, we do the right thing, we comply with the law, we get an opinion from the city solicitor. So for the rest of the term, we don't need to think about this stuff anymore. So that's where this comes from, Mr. President. I again, ask the solicitor for an opinion as to whether or not these papers before us would require the two thirds of the simple majority and she's informed me that she'll be able to give us an opinion later on in the week. So I'd ask my council colleagues to approve this measure so it can officially be sent to her office for an official opinion back to the council, as opposed to an opinion to an individual Councilor who gave her the heads up because it was something I put on the agenda.
[Adam Knight]: Well, the paper speaks for itself, the clarification piece was whether or not the two thirds vote will comply, I mean ultimately. The question is, is the city of medford in compliance with the aforementioned provisions if we don't vote on it, then. didn't do anything so yeah we're in compliance right it's whether or not when we when we take the boat in the action now we need compliance right so i think that the question is um you know where the paper is put forward in a fashion that will comply with the financial requirements that are outlined in this in this question um and whether or not um we need four or five votes to pass the provisions that are before us
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much when we look at this, it's amazing to see that Lawrence Memorial Hospital got such great grades. When you look at. The grading system of the 100 best hospitals in America looking at the way they provide care for Medicaid patients and seeing the Lawrence Memorial Hospital falls in the top three in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts is great. And when we talk about Medicaid patients, who are those people? Those are people aged 65 and older or under age 65 and disabled or suffering from Lou Gehrig's disease or end stage renal failure. Individuals that are the most vulnerable in our community. So it's great to see Lawrence Memorial Hospital transitioning through a period of time where they were struggling and being able to move into a spot where They're able to provide outstanding patient care and they're being recognized far and nationally. So with that being said, Mr. President, I might ask that this matter be approved by my council colleagues and that our friends at Lawrence Memorial Hospital be invited down to receive an official commendation commemorating this wonderful achievement that we also ask our state delegation to come down and join us in the celebration. I think that we as residents of Metro take for granted how lucky we are to have a hospital and a university in our community. The hospital and the university both provide great, great assets to this community. They provide us with the ability to be stable during difficult times, and it's great to see the success continuing on at Lawrence Memorial Hospital. So with that being said, I ask my council colleagues to support the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Just because it's curious. I mean, just because it doesn't have an emergency room doesn't mean it's not a hospital.
[Adam Knight]: Right. So, you know, New England Baptist is a hospital, but they don't have an emergency room. So, you know, I think it's very similar around the level of care that they provide a hospital level services. They just don't have the emergency room.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This is the car wash that was formerly known as Randy's on Middlesex Avenue. And they're a special permit holder relative to assign variants. And what's going on in that parking lot is that there's been an inordinate amount of traffic gridlocking. noxious amount of noise acoustics loud music and the like being played over exterior PA systems and accidents in the parking lot that have warranted police involvement and submissions with the neighbors concerning access to their facilities and businesses that share the entrance and exit to that strip mall. So with this being said, I'm hoping that we can have these individuals from prestige car wash come in and sit before our subcommittee on signage to discuss some of the ways that we can improve the signage that we have out there to prevent gridwalking and to improve the flow of traffic. For example, maybe entrance only one way, exit only another way. Just some little low-hanging fruit ideas that we can improve what's going on in the neighborhood. Because they offer free vacuums this time of year especially, what happens is they have VIP membership and regular membership. And if you're a VIP, what happens is just like getting on the plane at the airport, you get to cut the line. So you could have people sitting in line, 15 minutes, then next in line, VIP comes in, goes right in front of them and goes to the vacuum. So what's happening is these people are sitting in queue for an inordinate amount of time, building up into the main drag and the thoroughfare and the like. So I'm asking my council colleagues to support the resolution and see if we can do a little bit of work to provide some neighborhood relief. Thank you, Councilman. Councilor Scarpelli.
[Adam Knight]: You wanna go? Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President, thank you very much. So let's look at this a little bit, because I think this is craziness. We have Shavire Auditorium, which is a city-owned asset. We have Bill Blumenreich Presents, which is a vendor that the city has contracted with after issuing an RFP. We have this individual in the last year of his contract, And we have what we've all stuck our chest out and pat ourselves on the back about the success of the Cheviro auditorium right. So here we are, this console Scarpelli said the crown jewel of Method Square. And we're letting a vendor in the last year of his contract, take the lead. We're letting a vendor in the last year of his contract take the lead on the economic future and the economic stability of the crown jewel of our Tata district. This is insanity to me. This is absolute insanity to me. The man needs to make up her mind and take a position. Read the agreement. Does the agreement say if this bridge is being built, it will be in violation of the agreement? And if it is, get a lawyer and file suit. I'm so sick and tired of listening to, well, we have this law firm for this, and we have this law firm for that. We're hiring law firms all over the place, and we're not investing in homegrown talent. So anytime an issue like this comes up, where are we? We're sitting on our hands. looking for direction, looking for help, waiting for someone to bail us out. It's not fair that Bill Blumenrecht, our vendor, is sitting here trying to bail us out of this gym. This is a city problem. The city should take leadership on it. 2,500, I have no problem voting for 2,500. I'll give them the three hours of legal work at $800 an hour that they're gonna do for 2,500 bucks. The city should be driving the car. I said it last time and I'll say it again. This is a wait and see approach to sit on your hands. So what happens is, well, we tried and it failed, but it's not my fault, it's Bill Blumenreich's fault, he took the lead. Own the issue, be accountable, show leadership. This is supposed to be our crown jewel, our greatest achievement, Chevalier Auditorium, breathing life back into our downtowns. This isn't the way to defend it. This certainly isn't the way to grow it. And this certainly isn't the way to show a partnership with our vendor, who's invested a ton of money in making it successful down there. We need to take the lead. We need to be the ones driving the ship. I'm so sick and tired of taking the wait and see approach, the lack of leadership, the follow the leader. On something like this, something as simple as this, well, we all know this is the best thing that's happened to Medford Square in 20 years. A measly $2,500, and we can't even get that? We should have Brown, Rudnick, and Golston in stores. Farm retainer signed that filing suit right now. I appreciate you for entertaining my rant, I did my best Councilor max impersonation there. I'm getting a little passionate about the issue. And I miss my friend daily. But with that being said, Mr. President, thank you very much and thank you to the count my constant quality for bringing this measure forward, I will be supporting it this evening.
[Adam Knight]: And secondly, some of us are confused, the ground with gold cinder blocks if they can get this thing.
[Adam Knight]: I respect the work of the chairman, but you know, when we're looking at an issue like this, legal strategy is what we need. We need legal strategy. And I know that the commission's made up of a number of great individuals that do a lot of work in this community. I don't know how many of them are lawyers. I don't know how many of them have expertise in contract law and dealing with issues like this. And I think that that's where the council's concern is coming from. Like, we don't care about the drop in the bucket, 2,500 bucks. We care about the long-term impact. Bill Blumenreich's contract is up in a year. And he says, you know what? Encore's happening. It's just not, I'm just not in it anymore. There's nothing, nothing here for me and he walks. What happens to our case? What happens to our case if Bill decides he doesn't want to renew and he walks and we're in the middle of litigation? I think that's the big concern that I have.
[Adam Knight]: Does anyone... I'm aware of at least 20 labor charges and three MCAD complaints pending at this point in time.
[Adam Knight]: There's over 20 labor charges filed anyway, for failure to negotiate, violation of rights and the like. And then it's my understanding there's at least three MCAD complaints that are pending.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, with the labor charges alone, the labor charge is not even litigation. I mean, that's pretty much just fighting with your employees.
[Adam Knight]: Those aren't lawsuits in court yet.
[Adam Knight]: It's administrative law, though, so it's not like, you know what I mean? It has to go through the Administrative Tribunal first. Right.
[Adam Knight]: John, let's not get the political data confused with the political reality, all right? The name of the position was whenever they were going to call it to see what they could do to get it passed, all right? Ultimately, the roles and responsibilities were going to be the same no matter what they were. But they just wanted to change the name to see if the name was going to change the temperature of the council to get it passed at the time.
[Adam Knight]: Anytime that a motion's been made on the floor, communication with the city staff should come directly to the council until the individual constantly constantly made the motion right so ultimately, last week I raised the question as to whether or not this is a use that would have to go to our community development boards outline the chapter 94 of our zoning act. And I asked the question as to whether or not this is one of those uses because the paper before us didn't say what the use was that we were voting on. So the question would then come from this council to the administration. The administration would assign it to a council, to a staff member. The staff member would report back to this council via the administration. I haven't received any correspondence or communication relative to this subject matter. I don't know if my colleagues have or if the clerk has.
[Adam Knight]: Right, the question was whether or not it wasn't whether it wasn't allowed to use because a special permit right, it was allowed to use special permits before us the question was whether or not to go to the CD board before the council voted on it pursuant to 94. 9481B of the Zoning Act.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Although I did not know Mr. Palmisano. Well, he was a neighbor of mine grew up around the corner from him. And he was always a gentleman that was well respected in the neighborhood. If he's anything like his son Carmen, then we know that he's a great man. His son Carmen and I have become friends over the years. Carmen carries himself as such a gentleman that it's only fitting to say it's a reflection of his father. And recently the city of Medford lost Mr. Parmesano, and I'd like to ask my council colleagues to join me in extending our deep and sincere condolences to the family of a lifelong Metro resident.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And looking at section two of this paper that's before us this evening, this proposal, it says the charter commission shall be composed of one commissioner elected from each of the eight wards and one elected at large. This paper also says that this charter review is being brought forward underneath chapter 43B of the general laws. If we look at section six of chapter 43B of the general laws, it says the charter commission shall consist of nine registered voters of the city or town elected at large. So it sounds to me like we have a conflict of language here right now, Mr. President, with the paper that's before us versus the plain language of the state law that governs charter review.
[Adam Knight]: With all due respect, this council for three years has been beating our chest, screaming and yelling for legal representation, and now we're getting asked to schedule our meetings around the lawyers at KP Law that we haven't been able to meet with for two and a half years.
[Adam Knight]: It's not about the license, it's about the process that we need to take as a body to be sure that we're compliant with the law.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Not one of my normal resolutions that I put on, but I did get a call from a number of concerned citizens who were out walking their little pups and they had questions and concern as to whether or not the salt mix that the city was using was pet environmentally friendly. So with that being said, I said I'll get an answer for them. This is the approach that I'm taking to get such. So I'd ask my council colleagues to support this measure and hopefully the answer is yes, but thank you. Very pessimistic about that being the case.
[Adam Knight]: Relatively self explanatory Mr. President, this is a resolution that was put forward and passed by the previous council unanimously seven to nothing in April of 2021. I'm at that time this council struggling with the effects of the pandemic, we provided a draft resolution to solicitors office and we asked them to craft a resolution that would fit Medford. The reason we asked for this was because of the impacts. that the pandemic was having on the youth in our community, their ability to interact, the mental health pressures that they're facing. Today, we still have not seen a draft ordinance. I'm hoping this is something that we can get in short order, Mr. President. April, May, June, we're getting there, you know what I mean? It's almost the year. So with that being said, I ask my council colleagues to support the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Tseng.
[Adam Knight]: Any further discussion, if I may, Mr. President. Yes, I'd like to make a public service announcement. There's gonna be two feet of snow, there's gonna be a snow emergency, all right? So, temporary signs, we don't need them. If two feet of snow is coming, we're gonna be in a snow emergency. That goes without saying.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, winter starts in December, man. Don't you live here?
[Adam Knight]: But ultimately, there's one thing I think that a lot of people don't do anymore. And it's this crazy thing, they pick up the phone and they call somebody and they ask a question, right? Like call the police department and say, is it a snow emergency? And what side of the street am I supposed to park on, right? A lot of people are afraid to pick up the phone these days and call, but we have great resources here in the city of Medford. The police department staff 24 hours a day. We have somebody at the police department that's in dispatch that could always answer a question if anybody has a question about where I went to park. And we also have the night watch. The night watchman in the DPW is also available to address questions and concerns like that. So there are resources out there for individuals in this community that have questions about where to park during snow emergencies. The DPWs during snow emergencies is operating 24 hours a day. So there's always someone that's available to answer a call and answer a question. So with that being said, I hope that the individuals out there in the community that are having such difficulty figuring out where to park, also take advantage of some of these old fashioned resources, like not signing up for alerts, but picking up the phone and asking the question. Does that get you the same answer?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think, if my memory serves me correctly. This paper was put on in the council voted to request that the mayor write a letter to the Gaming Commission. The mayor wrote a letter to the Gaming Commission reported back to the council that you wrote a letter to the Gaming Commission and suggested that we do so as well. If we're going to send a letter to the Gaming Commission, after we just directed the mayor to send a letter to the Gaming Commission, I think we need to be sure that we're consistent in our message. If we look at our agenda this evening, we want to send letters to every member of the State House, the Speaker, the Senate President, every member of our state delegation. We want to send letters to the Mass Gaming Commission over here. We're like letter-writing nuts right now, Mr. President. At the end of the day, we need to have a concise and consistent message. It should be delivered as a city, not as one body in the city, this body in the city, we need to take a look at what the mayor wrote and craft a letter that shows some consistency, so that we're not asking for two different things. I think that's very important. All right, if we're going to be sending letters to places, we need to be sure that our game is tight, and that what we're asking for is what we're asking for. It's not for the cameras, it's for the policy, it's not for the politics. All right. I mean, ultimately, that's what it comes down to, Mr. President. I think that, you know, if we're going to be asking the Gaming Commission to take a stand, the stand that we're asking them to take can't be a stand of the city council, it can't be a stand of the administration, it has to be a stand of the city of Medford. stand all of us together unified. So with that being said, I have no problem sending a letter. I just wish that we could probably work with the administration a little bit more cooperatively in addressing large issues like this that are impacting our community, especially when the mayor's action came at the directive of the council in the first place. So with that being said, I support the intent of the paper, but I just want to be sure that what we're sending is a message of consistency. Thank you, Councilor Knight. Councilor Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I certainly support the theory of the measure. I certainly support the measure. It's something that's very interesting. I question whether or not it needs to be reviewed by the solicitor or whether this came from legal counsel. Maybe the other sponsor of the resolution can offer that this has been worked on through legal counsel of some shape or form, maybe with UFCW.
[Adam Knight]: Any further questions? Mr. President, that highlights some of the questions that I had. It's certainly an interesting theory that the council can tie licensure requirements to union membership. It's very interesting.
[Adam Knight]: I was referring to wasn't the peace agreement, but rather the requirement that a project labor agreement be in place.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, so I mean, Mr. Camacho I know you don't know me from a hole in the wall. I came from the unions I worked at SIU for a number of years I negotiated over 40 contracts I represented close to 12,000 employees between Worcester and Essex County and Suffolk County and Middlesex County so I've certainly been familiar with the union world and it's something that I certainly want to support but like Councilor Behr said if we're going to do it let's do it right and if you like what you said if we're going to do it let's do it right so I just want to make sure that We don't get challenged. We're in a process right now where it's taken probably, we're probably the slowest community in all the world to license the marijuana facility in Massachusetts. And we've gotten this far, and I'd hate to see the process stalled. The administration's done a great job of doing that already. So with that being said, I certainly support this. I support working families. And I always will. If you don't know what you stand for, then you can't stand for anything. This is certainly something that I stand for. I stand for good wages. I stand for health benefits, retirement benefits for workers. I stand for a living wage. I think that these are things that bring our community up, right? If we have good wages in the community, then people can spend their ancillary money in the circular flow of our economy. The discretionary funds go back into our economy. It's a good thing. So with that being said, I support this wholeheartedly and I have no problem seconding the motion by the council. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Because it's a zoning paper, Mr. President, and we have a zoning codification issue that's coming up, it doesn't have to be part of the codification. It can go through as an amendment to the existing zoning ordinance for the cannabis licensure, right? And it can go through the process itself. In fact, we have to do it that way. We don't have to tie it to the recodification and blow that thing up, you know what I mean, as we're going through the process, because we're at the Penn Yard line.
[Adam Knight]: We're gonna have a motion to join it right. And then we vote on the motion to join it. And then the motion goes down. You really can't bring it up.
[Adam Knight]: We'll have the opinion. Well, why don't we amend the paper to ask for a legal opinion on this language right here? The senator has a solicitor now, she'll get that back to us. That's fine, yeah, that's fine.
[Adam Knight]: One major question.
[Adam Knight]: If we want the solicitor to give us a legal opinion we need to ask the city.
[Adam Knight]: That's not a legal question. That's an operational question.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, this gentleman works for the UFCW as a representative of a labor organization. He's not an entity with the city.
[Adam Knight]: I'm not sure- I assume.
[Adam Knight]: The gentleman is a representative of a labor organization. He's not a representative of the community. He probably doesn't even know who is applied here in the city of Medford because he doesn't work for our community.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. I would just like to reiterate my concern that this council's focus should be on the items that fall within its purview and control. We have a very, very responsible, receptive, and capable state delegation. A very, very capable state delegation. We're not the House of Representatives. We're not the Massachusetts Senate. Thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands of bills are introduced every day in both parties. This council is gonna sit here and spend our time weeding through those bills and not doing the job that we're doing. We're doing something wrong. We're elected to do the city's business. This is State House talk. For this reason and this reason alone, I'm not gonna support this measure tonight, Mr. President. Week in and week out, send a letter to Karen Spilka, send a letter to Ron Mariano, send a letter to Karen Spilka, send a letter to Ron Mariano. Enough's enough. They're gonna think we're lunatics. Every other week, they're getting a letter from the Medford City Council saying, Medford wants this now, Medford wants that now, Medford wants this now. This guy in Medford, you know what I want? More money. There's one paper on this agenda this evening that I will support. A paper asking for an increase in House Fund funds to this community. I will support that paper. But as for us, continuously, week in and week out, supporting this piece of legislation, that piece of legislation, this piece of legislation at the State House, it's not moving this council forward, it's not moving this city forward. It's moving an agenda forward, but it's not moving us forward.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, from a procedural standpoint, there is a paper that's pending.
[Adam Knight]: We'll kind of put the cap before the horse, this is why I raised the issue.
[Adam Knight]: I don't necessarily agree with that. It's our point of information is our point of personal privilege. Ultimately, the paper that they have before me is asking whether or not the papers that we're going to be voting on that we just taken from the table are in compliance with the general laws. So if this paper wouldn't be moved, and we take a vote, and then the vote says that we're not in compliance with the general laws, I think it was a situation. And that's just my understanding of this. And looking at the way that positions have been created and the way positions have been funded, I think we have a significant financial transparency issue, and I think we have a significant financial compliance issue. especially with chapter 44 section 33a related to the human resource directors position and potentially these as well that are outlined in this paper and that's why I raised the question. Everybody behind this rail took an oath. Part of that oath was to uphold the rules of the constitution, the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the ordinances of the city of Medford. I don't think anybody behind this rail can answer the question as to whether or not the city of Medford is in compliance with chapter 44 section 33a. Quite frankly, I don't think our CFO can answer that question. But I do raise the question because if I'm going to be taking a vote and putting my name on it, I want that vote to be in line with the oath I took. That's why I've asked for this paper to come first. I won't be supporting the three papers that are before me this evening because this paper, I think, addresses a lot of the questions that have been raised over duration relative to the compensation adjustment factor system and the approach that the administration is taking.
[Adam Knight]: This is an ordinance for third reading. It will need five votes for passage. Failure to pass will result in the paper being tabled for a period of 90 days and not being able to be reintroduced. What role is that? It's an ordinance. An ordinance is required five votes. So if this doesn't pass, then it fails. And if the paper fails, it's been disposed of. And if it's disposed of, the paper can't be reintroduced to the council for a period of 90 days.
[Adam Knight]: It's 44. Look at this chapter 44.
[Adam Knight]: If we had legal counsel, it'd be like this.
[Adam Knight]: You need four to take off effectively.
[Adam Knight]: It's chapter 44. It'd be around section 18 or 20. I think section 22 has to do with the financial paper being tabled initially. Section 134, administration of government. Chapter 43 is for finance. Off hand, no. But I know I'm right. Would somebody like to call President Demeritus, Robert Mayorko?
[Adam Knight]: I'm not challenging the ruling of the chair.
[Adam Knight]: To permit a member voting present when the motion order resolution under consideration by the council forbid his or her participation as the conflict interest of law directs such members should do so should should so address the council in the chair and for me as to why the Councilor is voting president present. I don't think there's anything in here that says you can vote present unless I think you have to vote unless you have a conflict of interest. There's a rule in there and I think that that's not it, as I look at it, but from what I understand.
[Adam Knight]: It happened again.
[Adam Knight]: I'll be happy to move for reconsideration should the paper come back requiring five votes.
[Adam Knight]: I will for reconsideration put it back on the table. I have no problem with that, but you're saying that I lost the vote, so I can't. I can only move for reconsideration if I won the vote.
[Adam Knight]: Move for reconsideration on the paper and then ask that it be tabled and then we'd say yes and yes. We move on.
[Adam Knight]: It's a public information paper. It's a public participation paper that has no number. So the clerk has the authority to include it on the agenda next week. The council doesn't take action on those papers anyway. We just sit there and listen, right? And then it's up to us to take an action on it the next week, the following week to comply with OML. So the clerk can just reissue that.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: I move approval, Mr. President. I think we all know what a great man Mr. Bates was.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I do have a quick question. What is the proposed use that's warranting the council to review for special permit?
[Adam Knight]: The reason I ask is because if you look at our zoning ordinance, it says if we get an application for certain uses, uses 12, 22, 23, 24, 27, 30, 31, 33, 34, and 49A, those matters should go to the community development board before the council takes a vote on them. So in terms of just compliance with the law, I was just wondering where we were on that, if this in fact was an application for one of those items.
[Adam Knight]: I think that would be more of a question for the building commissioner or the city solicitor than this gentleman. I think he's just an applicant and the use is really not something that he'd be classifying his facility within a table of use chart. That would be a determination that would be made by the building commissioner.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I just want to be clear. If we're going to ask the question to the city solicitor, I think we better put it in appropriate terms. The question to the solicitor would be, does this application fall within the scope of section 94-81 subsection B of the Medford zoning ordinance? Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I certainly have no problem supporting this measure this evening. I would like to remind everybody that no piece of legislation comes out the way it goes in. And when we look at what's going on at the State House, we'll see that there are thousands and thousands of bills that are filed every year. And if this council is going to be focused on our goals and priorities, I think our goals and priorities should be that that fall within our purview. However, this is a meritorious resolution that I will have no problem supporting this evening. However, I do want us to earn the side of caution and to move forward in a fashion where we're not taking up items that we are dealing with the deal with the state legislature when we elected a state legislature to do that for us. I think we have a very capable representation up on Beacon Hill. And if we're going to be taking up state items and state bills every week, it's going to make for very long and unproductive sessions. So with that being said, Mr. President, I certainly will support this this evening. However, I'd hate to see this become a trend of every week that we're sitting here, voicing support for this piece of legislation and that piece of legislation that's outside of scope and purview of authority.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. President and through you to Linda, Paula and Patty. who I've been fortunate enough to develop a great friendship with over the years. Thank you for the work that you've done. I've been a strong advocate for the Consumer Office since my election to the City Council, and I've always felt that they were the unsung heroes in City Hall. These individuals are trained by the Attorney General to handle consumer complaints and disputes. They do an excellent job in resolving matters of anything from scams to the cold cut machine, not being accurate at the supermarket and you overpaying, um, they've done an excellent job. And, um, one thing I know about the three of these women is that they really loved what they did. They really loved their job so much so that, um, when the state grant was cut, um, the ladies worked out a job sharing schedule so that nobody would lose their job. They were truly a group of people that cared about each other and worked together as a family. This office was created in 1978. It was created as the benefit consumer commission and its first commissioner was the late great Michael Callahan, our governor's Councilor. And Michael took great pride in this office. And he was one of his greatest accomplishments in his 50 years of government service. And when you look at what's going on from a human resource standpoint in city hall, Look it, three individuals with 90 years of combined service don't just walk out the door on the same day because they're happy. All right? I wish them the best of luck in their retirement, but we need to get to the bottom of what's going on in Medford City Hall, because it's getting to be embarrassing. I heard this morning another employee was escorted off the premises and told that they need to submit to a psychological evaluation. I've been told that these three individuals were told that they need to be replaced with younger and more energetic employees, which led to really a retirement in duress. So while I don't want to rain on the parade of the great work that these three individuals have done in the community, I also think that we as a council owe it to them to investigate as to what's going on and to why the three of them would have left on the same day so abruptly. So with that being said, Mr. President, I rest my case. I thank them for their service and I congratulate them on their retirement, wish them the best and let them know that they always have a friend in me.
[Adam Knight]: Does the sponsor of this resolution have any idea if this will impact the MBTA assessment on the city of medicine. I don't know it sounds like it's going to cost about a billion bucks and pretty sure we're going to be caught paying for it.
[Adam Knight]: That would probably come from the MBTA advisory board if the measure passed and was ever ended up funded. Number one. Number two, the governor's budget has come out. The governor's budget is not that pretty. Um, again, if we're going to be sending letters up to the state house, I think the letters that we should be sending up to the state house, they give us more chapter 90 money, give us more local aid money, give us more money for our schools. Um, and you know, when you give everybody a, when you ask, when you ask for two slices and you get a half a slice, you can't complain. Um, but if he asked for one slice and you only, you know, you only give them an option to give you one slice, then, um, you gotta, you're in a better position of power from negotiation. Um, so I'd hate to see us be in a situation where we're. sending letters up to every single chairman up in the state house, asking for this and asking for that. And at the end of the day, we're passing a ceremonious legislation and we're not cashing in on our ability to get the big bucks. Um, you know, it's a great, great idea. You know, something that certainly, uh, uh, sounds like a pie in the sky, um, possibility. Um, but you know, it's going to have to be funded. It's not going to be funded, um, through the forward funding mechanism that they have right now. through the sales tax because it's going to cost way too much to do that. So it's going to come down to an assessment on our community as well. So there will be a financial impact there. As Councilor Caraviello did say, our community is super assessed when it comes to the MBTA and our services are lacking. We've seen service cuts across the board from bus service to commuter rail service to express bus service. So, you know, that's something to think about, you know, are we going to ask for more, pay for more and get less. Is that something we want? But it also has environmental and economical impacts that will, you know, make a difference here in our community from a public health standpoint. So it's something we need to think about in a way. That's why we have a state legislature.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think it's important when we look at this, resolution what it says. It says celebrate and support. Now, when we talk about the debate and discussion that we've had over a resolution that's asked for us to celebrate and support something versus what we did in our first four meetings, I think we spent 3 million bucks in our first four meetings and we've talked less about it than we've talked about this topic right here. Okay, so it's a resolution that's symbolic in nature that says let's celebrate and support this unity. And I certainly don't have a problem with that. But what I do have a problem with is that the budget has been passed now for quite a bit of time and we still don't have a director of diversity in the school department or on the city side. So, you know, when we talk about things, let's really talk about them. Let's, let's, let's, let's put the issues out there. Let's lay it out there. You know, we still don't have a diversity director. We still don't have a diversity director. It's been three years, no diversity director. So if we're going to make the commitment, let's really make the commitment. If we're going to talk about it, let's walk about it too. That's where I'm coming from, Mr. President. So I certainly support this resolution. I have no problem with it. Like I said, it's a resolution that asks us to support something. I have no problem doing that. Um, so for that reason, I'll be voting for that this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah. On that point, Mr. President, I think, you know, when we look at traditionally this administration's personnel functions and the way that they go about it, They haven't had any problem bringing back all three employees, retired employees, to perform these functions. We looked at what went on in the treasurer's office. We're looking at what's going on in the CFO's office. I mean, we're bringing back part-time retirees to fill these positions. Why aren't we doing that in the diversity office too? Why is that office less important than these other offices?
[Adam Knight]: Eight months. Eight months, we're gonna be on the next fiscal year's budget pretty soon.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: It's quite lengthy, so- Rick, it might be easier if you read it.
[Adam Knight]: Which is the first paper's positions?
[Adam Knight]: Yes. Mr. President, can I request that we keep these on the table for one more week, just so I can have an opportunity to review the paperwork again. I'm a little confused as to what's before us this evening and where we're taking it off the table without the papers in front of us and just like for the professional courtesy to have one more week to take a review.
[Adam Knight]: It's more of a request, I guess. It's more of a request.
[Adam Knight]: Just say no and push the vote. I'll vote against it and you guys can get what you want. I mean, at the end of the day, when we're talking about urgency, we've had the diversity director's position that's been vacant friggin' for 36 months. So, you know, I think that, you know, when we're gonna sit here and we're gonna worry about urgency, I don't think that that urgency is shared all the time with colleagues in government across the hallway.
[Adam Knight]: And the only reason I ask is because I voted. Differently on both papers, so I just want to be sure that I can have the opportunity again to review them and be consistent in my efforts as I go forward in the
[Adam Knight]: Just withdraw the motion and we're done. Yeah.
[Adam Knight]: Just withdraw the motion. Yeah.
[Adam Knight]: So you want to bring it back up next week.
[Adam Knight]: Maybe we can refer that to the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, it's still the Office of Community Development to me, whatever they want to call it.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much and I know that you and I was supposed to be co sponsors on this I apologize for leaving you off. I know that you and I spoke about. But it's the Sobato family are owners and operators of Expressos pizzeria on Boston Ave. Mr. President, but just that just closed very recently. And for 40 years they operated at that corner and they were one of the first businesses in this community to get an extended hours license. And they really set a trend up there. They serviced my neighborhood that I grew up in, as well as I'm sure Councilor Collins will tell us, Tufts University population for a great deal. But they've always been a great neighbor and a great partner in the community. And after 40 years, they're hanging up the aprons and the pizza wheel. So I think it goes without saying that they deserve some recognition for the community building that they did here in this city. And they've offered this community, Mr. President. They're great people, a great family. I had the opportunity to grow up with some nephews, some of our nephews in the Davises as well. great kids, great people, all giving to this community now. So with that being said, I'd ask my council colleagues to support this resolution and send it to the administration for the request.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Scarpelli.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I've gotten a number of complaints recently from members of the community seeking copies of minutes or copies of meetings related to especially the Cannabis Advisory Commission as well as the Historic Commission. And these documents or records are not available readily on the website. So after multiple calls, I thought it might make sense for us to reach out to the administration and ask them to take the appropriate steps to ensure that this material gets posted publicly and transparently, and that the council take the appropriate steps to ensure that this is a standard and a norm, not an anomaly.
[Adam Knight]: We certainly have no problem with that, sir.
[Adam Knight]: Council night, Mister President, thank you very much. Yes, yet again, a nice personnel issue has made its way to the newspaper that's identified a number of issues that are going on here at City Hall. One of those issues, I believe, would be an IP vulnerability. It's my understanding that our IT director, after 24 years of employment in the city of Medford with an exemplary record, was removed from his position based upon some certain IT vulnerabilities that the council has not been made aware of. This is very concerning to me, Mr. President, because of their IT vulnerabilities. Similar to what we saw in the past, the administration wouldn't disclose to us when the number of personal information was taken from the city website maybe nine or 10 months ago. It just raises cause for concern, number one, and it also raises cause for liability for the city. And if there's going to be a liability that's placed upon the city, it's going to end up costing the city money, and the council should know about it, because we're the steward of the taxpayer dollar. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'd ask that this motion to move forward that we set up an executive session with the city administration for us to discuss these it vulnerabilities to see what steps we need to take to ensure that the personal information and data of the taxpayers in this community is protected appropriately.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Litigation and representation has been the topic of discussion. Most of those terms so far, Mr. President, for the last four or five weeks, that's all we've been talking about is litigation and representation. And recently, this council passed a money bill to amend the fiscal year budget to allow the mayor's private legal counsel to really have an open checkbook for litigation. And when we look at what's going on here in the community and you think about the litigation that's pending, and the amount of money that's been appropriated, and whether or not that amount of money is going to be able to stretch to cover the issues that are in dispute right now, it raises some concern for me financially. So when you think about the more than 25 labor charges that are against the city right now, when you think about the 340 developments that the city's fighting right now, that doesn't look like we're fighting a winning battle. When you look at the potential issue with the cannabis advisory commission in the conflict of interest concerning one of the members of the selection committee. It just puts me in a position as the president to sit here and think about what we're doing with our money and whether or not we should be planning appropriately for future spending. You know since this term started I think we've spent a lot of dough in 4 or 5 weeks and I'm hoping that you know we can kind of responsibly manage our budgets, our plans, our finances. And I think that by establishing a subcommittee on litigation, that will give the council a better idea going forward as to what steps we need to take to fund the law department in an appropriate fashion to ensure that we secure our legal representation moving forward, to be sure that we secure our zoning consultant moving forward. So I think that this will help us address a number of the concerns and issues that we've raised, Mr. President. May I ask for my council colleagues' support?
[Adam Knight]: If I'm with me, I know that the president's strong pencil also has the power to strike and create the subcommittees as we discussed at the beginning of the session, but I personally have no objections. What direction this council chooses to go with that direction, I want to go for transparency purposes. So be it, I have no problem with that whatsoever.
[Adam Knight]: Paper 22054 offered by Councilor Caraviello. Be it resolved the Medford City Council will have the mayor start looking into purchasing vehicles for the Medford Police Department, most patrol cars are now four plus years old with high mileage. Councilor Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: seven the affirmative zero and the negative the motion passes Council paper to to 055 offered by Councilor Caraviello be resolved the city council request the administration please provide the council with the findings of its review of the clerk's office along with all legal costs associated Councilor caveat.
[Adam Knight]: Oh, this is an appropriation request that I support wholeheartedly I certainly have no problem with the appropriations that are requested here by the administration. In particular, the walking clock project, I think we're very lucky to have Jeffrey Driscoll running the Metro Housing Authority, the premier housing authority director in the state of Massachusetts. He's the housing authority director that trains the other housing authority directors across the state. He's done an excellent job he's really. moved our housing authority forward, very similar to the way that Mike Durham has moved that veterans office forward. He's done a great job. And I've been looking at this request. I think this is what the CPA is really intended for. It's a perfect use. So with that being said, I support it wholeheartedly. In terms of the Riverbed Park project and the accessibility improvements to Chevallier Auditorium, again, two items that we've been talking about for a long time, two things that I think are important to this community. So without being said, I'd move for approval on the table.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mister president, I do think this paper is rather self explanatory. We do a pending litigation right now with BJ's wholesale. And for that purpose, I'd call for executive session for us to get an update from the city. So where we stand the status of negotiations and the such. Thank you. Councilor Knight. Councilor Kirby.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President. Councilor Nait. I see this is no more than a request to put a 20 foot trench in and to put a pole in and I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, that would be the. Sorry, what was that?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. So the Goulding family of fixtures in the Lawrence Estates neighborhood of Medford. find Mrs. Goulding at St. Joseph's Parish every Sunday morning, praying for his son, Michael, who was a police officer for the better part of three decades. He served here proudly and admirably in the city of Medford, starting off as a patrolman and rising through the ranks to that of lieutenant, at which time I had the opportunity to become the chief of the Western Police Department maybe, what was it, four years ago? And he left us. Mike left us and he went over to Western and me finished off a great career there. He's sent him on that had given a lot to this community meant a lot to a lot of people in this community me being one of them. And I'd asked my council colleagues to join in and not congratulating him in his retirement, it's not too often that we see one of our own rise to the level of chief. These jobs don't come up too often, there's only 300. somewhat cities and towns here in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and for one of our homegrown talents to achieve such a great accolade and finish off his career at the pinnacle of where it could be is something that's admirable so I'd like to congratulate him on this achievement.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much at the risk of repeating my entire speech from last week, I will move for approval as amended, I'd request that this be added on to the reports to section of the council agenda 30 days time.
[Adam Knight]: Able to hold up these very important items of one through seven. However, I would be happy to put them on.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This was a several papers that came up at the close of last session. But as we have CPA discussion starting tomorrow I thought it would be prudent for us to keep this on the forefront of the front burner. Ultimately, we do have some physical plant requirements at Metro high school and in Last week's packet, if you went through it, you would have found in there a petition from a number of individuals that utilize our pool facilities at the high school complaining of lack of hot water when they use the facilities, aside from the fact that that is probably the grossest thing in the world because there's probably a violation of What about standards. It's something that needs to be fixed we have a state of the pool, we have a state of the art science lab state of the art fields, but we don't have hot water in the locker. This is something that should have been fixed long ago. And the funding is an issue. Why don't we seek an eligibility determination from the CPA to see if in fact we can use those funds to address this very basic and simple maintenance request. In terms of the resurfacing of the field of dreams, there was discussion regarding the condition of the field of dreams and I know Councilor Scarpelli is far better versed at this than I am, but there is need for maintenance and upgrades at the field, and we've discussed a need for funding. And again, CPC is an opportunity for us to pursue funding for that. And lastly, in our packet last week we also received a report from the home of the mission, aligning the physical plant requirements of one else stadium, and what we need to do an updated press box being one of the things they're right concessions them being another. projects that we want to undertake. We have a funding mechanism that's available for us in the CPC, so I'd ask that they also pursue an opportunity to see if they have eligibility for funds to pursue these endeavors. So with that being said, I ask my council colleagues to support the measure, requesting that these entities take the appropriate steps to determine whether or not they're eligible for the funds.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mister President, thank you very much. That chapter of the general laws is what limits a municipal contract to no more than 36 months. Just recently, we heard that the city administration had entered into a contract for police body cameras, which is something I'm sure we're all very excited about. However, it was also brought up that this contract was a 60-month term, which raised the question as to whether or not this type of program would fall under Chapter 30B section 12. So I'd like to ask the city solicitor whether or not this paper would require council approval to enter into a contract that exceeds the statutory term of 36 months.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. As I stated when we went through the whole entire situation, fiasco, whatever we want to call it, with the administration's actions to the Veterans Service Director, I took a position and that position was that I opposed the regionalization of the Veterans Service Office. I felt as though the City of Medford deserved to have a dedicated representative for the veterans, and I feel as though Winchester's veterans deserve no less. I can understand where Councilor Caraviello is coming from. I understand that Winchester has a personnel problem, but they can't staff their position. I certainly have no problem with the City of Medford helping out, but I do want to be sure that the City of Medford remains the number one priority. So with that being said, regionalization is not something that I support. I'm very weary of hearing the word regionalization. When I hear the word regionalization, it makes me think county government we all know how well that worked out. So with that being said I will be opposed to this measure this evening, but I can certainly respect and appreciate where the council is coming from and why he's bringing this measure forward. This is more about a philosophy on government than it is about anything else.
[Adam Knight]: Move to take up petitions, presentations, similar papers.
[Adam Knight]: Hours of operation, Mr. President, if I could just ask what the hours of operation would be.
[Adam Knight]: Excellent, thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. Again, I will reiterate my statement from last week. This matter presented itself when the Medford City Council at a meeting where it established its priorities for the term said that a priority for this council was to retain independent legal counsel for the Medford City Council, to get a lawyer for the council, an assistant city solicitor to represent the council. Now, I believe by statute, the city solicitor is required to represent both the council and the administration impartially. When KP Law was before us and Jonathan Silverstein was before us, he posed the question and the question was, if in fact you're retained by the city of Medford, who do you work for? Do you work for the Medford city council, the city of Medford or the city administration? And his answer was, I work for the administration. So here we are, the council asking for independent legal counsel. We have a letter from the mayor, a communication from the mayor that says, it was agreed. It was agreed that request for council attendance or advice will be submitted through the president. It wasn't agreed. The council president at the time is sitting right here and he's saying it wasn't agreed. On face value, this paper is untruthful, because it was not agreed. It was not agreed. Now, here we are, and this issue first came up, and it first came up in July, June, June. It first came up in June of 2021. And I find it curious that this paper never found its way to the council agenda, Mr. President. Never found its way to the council agenda until Councilor Marks and Councilor Falco were gone. The administration had plenty of time to bring this paper to the table and to negotiate with the then-council president terms that would be satisfactory to the council that set those priorities. And instead what they did, shockingly, was sat on their hands for three months and waited for the weather to change, and then brought the paper forward. And I think that's shameful. I think it's shameful. So here we are in no further or better of a position than we were back in June when we cut this item out of the budget because the council was not satisfied with the services that we were receiving. But the paper's back on the table and we've not moved one inch closer to a positive resolve. Councilor Collins makes a point. She says, there might be a disruption in services. You're gonna hear that a lot, Councilor Collins. You're gonna hear that a lot. You have to pass this tonight, or Rome's gonna burn. We want it now, we need it now. If not, Medford's gonna fall apart. It's a sell, that's all it is, is a sell. Medford's not gonna fall apart if they don't have these contracted legal services in this budget. This is an increase to the budget, another increase to the budget. Week two of the new term, Week two, we've already seen this year's fiscal budget increased twice. In two weeks, two proposals to increase the fiscal year budget. $191 million, $191 million isn't enough. More, spend more with no plan. Piecemeal, week by week, let's come over here in dribs and drabs and see how much we can get out of the council. It's not right. It's not right, it's not proper. The council voted to set a list of priorities. One of the list of priorities was to be able to retain legal counsel to advise it in matters. Because we haven't received that advice in the past. And we've seen what great progress we can make when we have the tools in the toolbox. We've seen what great progress we can make when we have Mike Wabrowski sitting there running meetings for us that take on the first comprehensive zoning reform that the city's seen in a number of years. That's not from the court of office. That's from the council chambers. That's where this is coming from. That's where this work product coming from. Give us the tools to succeed and we'll succeed. This negotiation is not negotiation. This paper is untruthful on its face. There was never an agreement made. There was never an agreement brought back to this council and voted on by this council. The council set a priority. They said the priority was gonna be to have legal counsel. We cut this item out of the budget because we didn't have it. There was no negotiation, there was no settlement to the issue at hand. The council is once again, get him pushed aside and get him bamboozled. For that reason, that reason alone, I will not be supporting this paper and I support Councilor Scott Cowie's motion to table it. If in fact we're going to have a constructive dialogue, let's put everybody in the room together. Let's talk about it. All right, the mayor thinks she has the keys to the car now because she has two new councilors over here. that don't have the institutional knowledge or the level of frustration that some of us share from the lack of responses that we receive from our office when we're trying to move the city forward together. And for those reasons, I will not be supporting this paper this evening.
[Adam Knight]: I'm just wondering if when Chief of Staff Nazarian gives her presentation, she can give me an estimate as to when the requested draft ordinance that I put forward back in 2020 with KP Law would be forthcoming relative to establishing a $15 minimum wage for all city and school department employees while she's giving her presentation to the answer.
[Adam Knight]: It was 21 months ago, maybe 20 months ago we made the request.
[Adam Knight]: If I may, Mr. President?
[Adam Knight]: I find it very interesting that, you know, KP Law has been given such control of this community. model that we're adopting really provides the city with lack of control direction and retention. And it also really puts us in a position where we're becoming overreliant on the outsourcing legal services here in this community. You know, we'll sit here and we'll talk about all the niche laws with a niche law that we can have expertise on. I mean, ultimately, we have people from the administration going to sick people's houses and checking up on them as part of a labor dispute, we have union busting going on. All right, we have labor charges being filed against the city left and right. Okay, we're in with there's over 20 labor charges filed against the city right now. over 20 labor charges. So I'm not too sure what type of advice we're getting, but it doesn't sound like good advice to me. When I hear that the chief of staff is going to sick people's houses on a Friday delivering them lettuce, I don't know what kind of advice we're getting, but it doesn't sound like good advice to me.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, as indicated in my lengthy soliloquy on the previous matter relative to my concerns relative to the spending in this community. I've raised this issue in the past, and I put it on the agenda again. Before Anishal Natalie was moved on to greener pastures, she would appear before us quarterly and provide us with a presentation on our fiscal health and wellness. And part of that would include, Mr. President, discussion about our forecast of revenues versus our actual returns, where we are in the budget right now in the process of spending, what our debt service obligations are, so on and so forth. We now have had this great influx of money coming in from the federal government. We have ARPA money. We're looking at what about $49 million I believe was the figure to be spent over the next three years we've already spent about a quarter of that with no federal funds manager. So my concerns really focused on being sure that we act as fiscal stewards, and that we are aware of what direction we're going and how much spending we're committing to, and what position we're going to be putting ourselves into the future. And I'd like to see our chief financial officer, as well as the necessary consultants that seem to be providing a great deal of services to this community, to be here as well, to answer the questions that we need to address, Mr. President. But this is something that we did last term. It was something that proved to be very successful, and I'd ask my council colleagues to support it.
[Adam Knight]: Ultimately, Mr. President, I don't think that the city council's ability to be updated and be filled in as to what's going on in this community should be subject to the personnel disasters that are going on across the hall.
[Adam Knight]: I don't care who the CFO is or auditor is, but that's the person that should be here. And if they don't have the answers for us, then that's going to be very indicating as to what direction this community is going in financially.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. As you're well aware, we pass a budget every year and that budget says we're gonna spend money on this and we're gonna spend money on that. But then we sit here and we say, how much money did we give KP Law? The Warren articles are what will tell us that. The Warren articles are what we spend our bills on every month. In other forms of government, sometimes the Warren articles have to be approved by the city council on a monthly basis. That's not the case here in the city of Medford. However, the Warren articles are very telling as to what direction this community is going in, where our money is being spent, whether or not we're meeting the obligations, the goals that we've established through the budget process. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'd ask that this practice be reinstated. Again, this was an item that, And Aleesha Nunley-Benjamin was providing us with previously before her departure from this community. And it showed us quite a bit of information. I do believe when we reviewed this information last time, we found that there were a number of lawsuits that were settled that were over the sum of $2,500, which require council approval that were never brought before the council, for example. So there's a lot of spending practices that are going on here that I think we need to take a closer look at. And the Warren articles will be very telling to us as to what direction our communities going in and whether or not we're adopting the generally accepted accounting principles that are so recommended in municipal government. So with that being said, I asked my council colleagues to support this resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Under the Burke administration, the city of Medford a very successful senior work off program and the senior work off program provided senior citizens in this community with the opportunity to volunteer their services here for the city in exchange for an abatement on their property taxes up to I believe it was 1000 or $1500 per person. This program, I believe has been discontinued. in light of probably COVID and a number of other factors. But this is a benefit that with the adoption of a local option, we can extend to veterans here in this community as well. And I think that that would be a good thing, Mr. President. We have a number of veterans in this community, over 2,000 veterans reside in the city of Metro. And I think if we can take the appropriate steps to adopt a provision like this and then request that the administration implement, I will be able to provide some property tax relief to a number of people that served our country. So I'm asking if the council support this measure and I'm hoping that we can move post haste to have a meeting with the solicitor and the assessor to determine what steps we need to take to appropriately implement. Thank you Councilor Knight, Councilor Stroud.
[Adam Knight]: I think if you read the text of it, because it's wicked long, I don't blame you for missing it. The solicitor and the assessor appear before the Council without lining up for upper steps.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, in a regular session. I mean, that's fine. Either way, it's fine with me. I'd like to do it in regular session. If there's no, doesn't sound like there's going to be much opposition to it. If there's no opposition to it, we can do it in regular session.
[Adam Knight]: Nice for the veterans to get the support in City Hall.
[Adam Knight]: Well, the paper before us would be the disposition of the paper would be asking them to appeal before us and give us a presentation. So we dispose of the paper, send it to the administration. We're ready to come back to you with the answer.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I do believe that that area would be referred to as a sleepy hollow. And if it's my understanding, there is a maintenance agreement between the DCR and the city of Medford, where the city of Medford actually agrees to maintain and control the cleanliness of that area, if I'm not mistaken.
[Adam Knight]: Is that when you say sleeping on the condon shell?
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, I too would like to amend this further, just by asking that the administration respond to the Council in writing and then post it on the city website as well. So this information can be readily available to citizens in the community have concerns about their loved ones and such facilities.
[Adam Knight]: On a vote of six in favor and one and one abstention.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, I see this nothing more as, you know, streamlining the way that we do business a little bit. Ultimately, I think it's safe to say that The President has always been given some flexibility and leeway in establishing subcommittees, whether or not they outlined in the rules or not. So I think what we're really doing is kind of splitting hairs a little bit over an issue here that's not really that big of a deal right ultimately. We have a number of subcommittees. My first term, when I was elected, Councilor Camuso and I went over the list, and I recommended that he create a number of different subcommittees, and he just created them. We didn't have to go through rules change or anything like that. So when I'm looking at this, I think, you know, we talk about some of the ad hoc committees that we've voted on to allow the president to have discretion to create. You know, I don't think this is anything that's outside the norm of the power vacuum that we've allowed in the past. So I certainly have no problem with it, Mr. President, ultimately. You know, we have a number of items on relative to the rules, the rules will be reviewed. But in terms of, you know, committees and committee structure and the standing committees, I don't think it's. worth getting into a hours long debate over it when historically, you know, the flexibility has been there for the President to take such action. So with that being said, I certainly wouldn't question the Council President's authority in appointing the subcommittees that are currently standing, the ones that we've, you know, we just transferred all the papers over that are in the standing committees now. So those standing committees need to be chaired. We just voted on that. That was the second paper we did. So ultimately, at the very least, the council president should have the ability to, at the very least, chair those subcommittees. And then if this is going to be an issue we can deal with in the future. But in terms of allowing us the ability to continue conducting business, I don't think that this is something that you get in the way of that. So I don't want this to be something saying, you know, we can't do anything anymore until we figure out who's going to be the chairman of the rules committee, the licensing committee, because we just took a vote to transfer all those papers that are in those committees over this year. So those committees right now are already standing committees. We took a vote on that. So I think we're really kind of beating a dead horse.
[Adam Knight]: of the Committee of the Whole is going to be the establishment of what the new committees are going to be, then yeah, I don't have a problem having the Committee of the Whole in that, provided that the existing and standing committees still stand, you know. I'm not in favor of that whatsoever. We already verb that in standing array, so they're already in place. If the councilor has questions and wants to vet it, I don't have a problem providing that opportunity.
[Adam Knight]: I'd certainly second the motion with the understanding that the other standing committees will still be filled.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. This is something that I support wholeheartedly. Councilor Bears has brought up two issues that are very important to me. The $15 minimum wage for city and school department employees and also a sick leave bank ordinance for city and school department employees. These are two items that I brought up two years ago, asking to draft ordinances from our city solicitor appointment. and they must be very long pieces of municipal legislation, Mr. President, because it's been 24 long months, and this body's not received draft ordinances of either one of these items. So here we are this evening, and we're gonna have a paper asking us to further fund legal services in the administration, to further fund the legal service line item, to expand the budget for this fiscal year. This is a perfect example, Mr. President, of why this council needs its own legal counsel. This is an item that should have been addressed long before, long before today. This is an item that we could have handled through municipal ordinance that would have provided a sickly bank program for municipal employees and school department employees, just like they offer to state employees. Merit on the state legislation of which I printed out, drafted and submitted to the city solicitor's office when this ordinance proposal was made. So with that being said, Mr. President, I thank the councilors for bringing this measure forward. It's something that will benefit a number of workers here in this community, and it's something that I support wholeheartedly. I don't need a meeting with the solicitor or anybody else to know that this is something I'm going to support. What I need a meeting with the solicitor for is to make sure that when I vote for it, we vote for it the right way, so it's implemented properly.
[Adam Knight]: I've personally known Michael for a number of years, probably the better part of 10 years, Mr. President. His wife's a business owner here in the community as well. She runs a law office right down in Medford Square. And Michael's looking for an opportunity to continue in his wife's footsteps and be a business owner in the city of Medford. We all know GNP is a wonderful establishment here. It's some of the best pizza that you can get in the city of Medford. And I think this is gonna be a great opportunity for Mr. LaChapelle to partner up. with one of our existing successful businesses and expand upon the successes that we've seen there, Mr. President. So with that being said, I certainly have no problem by supporting this document, this paper that's before us. Like I said, I've known the gentleman for a number of years in a professional and personal capacity, and he's someone that I believe will bring a number of great assets to our community.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd be happy to give a brief synopsis if someone would like to waive the reading.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, this is my biannual attempt to have a meeting night change from Tuesdays to Wednesdays. Ultimately, because we have an open meeting while it requires 48 hours of posting, the City Council is required to get its agenda items into the City Clerk by Friday, unless there's a holiday on that Monday, which would require us to get it in on a Thursday. Now we all know that the majority of events in this community in the majority of time that we are able to be free to interact with constituents occurs usually after the working hours on the weekends. So the situation I find myself in a lot of times Mister president is that the agenda has been published on a Friday afternoon and I'm down to Matt 7 a cup of coffee and someone comes in asking me to help with some. And I don't have the ability to bring that item to the table and put it on the agenda, because the open meeting requires that we have to have the meeting notice posted within 48 hours, because of Saturday and Sunday, not being included in the counting of those 48 hours, we lose two and a half days to get items onto the agenda. So this is nothing more than really, Mr. President, an attempt to allow us to do business a little bit quicker and to allow us the opportunity to put things on the agenda in a faster fashion. Also, when you think about this building, right, Wednesday night is the night the City Hall is open late. So instead of having City Hall being open on Tuesday nights just especially for the City Council meeting to meet this whole building for us to come in here to conduct our business, the building will already be open. The building will already be heated. There'll be personnel that's in here already. department heads they're already working late. So if we do need to talk to somebody we may have the ability to have them come right down and speak to us, Mr. President, we'll be able to get answers a little bit quicker. If we have committees as a whole, existing staff will already be on hand. So department heads won't be dragged in there on Tuesday nights to deal with council business and then also be dragged in again on a Wednesday night so that, you know, we can take their life into consideration as well. But I think that this is really just an opportunity for us to allow us to represent our constituents better because it gives us the opportunity to get the freshest items that are in our head and put them on the agenda immediately. After the weekend, we can put something on the agenda on a Monday, and it's gonna show up on the agenda for Wednesday evening. And I think that that's just a little bit more efficient and effective. So that's why I bring this matter forward. And with that being said, Councilor Bears and Councilor Morell have been so generous in their willingness to send items to the committee of the rules. I would be happy to make a motion to send this item there as well to be further discussed. I have brought it to the table before it has failed before. I would not like to see this fail again, so I'd be happy to deliberate and discuss with my council colleagues what they feel would be best direction for us to move.
[Adam Knight]: You know the mayor still would be bombed by our 10 day requirement to respond items that have passed by the House. So whether the meetings on the Tuesday or Wednesday the administration still about to act within the 10 days. The forecast right so if they use Wednesday's you know the employees and the staff is still required to work at 37.5 hours a week. whenever it may be, right? It's just a time management issue at that point, right? So the night of the council meeting should have no bearing on whether or not members of the administration can conduct the job that they're being paid to do within 37.5 hours a week that they're being paid to do it. Sure.
[Adam Knight]: On that point, Mr. President, I think it's important to point out that the Council meetings are a public meeting as well. And this is the Council Chamber. And when we talk about the successes of just this past week, for example, we just cut the ribbon on one of Councilor Caraviello's greatest accomplishments as a Councilor, the library, which has a beautiful new community space. We look across the parking lot, we do see the Senior Center, which has a beautiful room in there that we've been able to use in the past. Back this way, we see the Shabbat auditorium. We get in the car and drive up the street, we see the little theater. So there are a number of spaces in this community that can host live gatherings. Again, this is more of an efficiency standpoint for the council and the ability for us to put it on the agenda. So with that being said, I don't think we need to beat the host to death, but there are some valid arguments for and against Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Michael was a mentor and a dear friend to me for a number of years, and I wouldn't be sitting here this evening if it weren't for the guidance that he gave me as a young man. He's someone that dedicated his life to public service, a Vietnam veteran, a governor's Councilor. 48-year state employee, commissioner of racing, chairman of the Medford Consumer Advisory Commission, founder of the Medford Consumer Advisory Commission, and most notably, Mr. President, famous in Medford folklore for saving Wrights Pond from being developed into condominiums in the late 70s and early 80s. And if you go up to Wrights Pond to this day, you'll see a memorial there in Michael's honor, recognizing the work that he did in protecting one of Medford's most beautiful natural resources. Michael was someone that served this community, this country, and this commonwealth with dedication and passion. He's someone that would be the life of the party if he walked in the door, you'd know he was here. He was someone that wore his hat and his sleeve and would give you the shirt off his back. And he's someone that's certainly greatly missed, Mr. President. He's someone that made a big impact in my life and someone who I think of often. And annually on this day, I bring this metaphor to Juan and my friend Michael, and I ask my council colleagues to join me in doing the same.
[Adam Knight]: I think this is a rather self explanatory resolution. We do have a problem in this community with gap with gas leaks, you look at these figures. These aren't figures that I made up the figures that I got right from the Department of Public Utilities. The research shows that there are typically 1.5 to 3 times more leaks than reported. It's not something I made up. It's something that I got right off the website of the Department of Public Utilities. So we're seeing a situation here in this community where we have a problem and we need to address it. We're seeing a lot of digging being done by our public utilities and we're not holding them accountable. We're not bringing our public utilities back to the table to be sure that they resurface our roadways in a condition that's suitable to the taxpayers in this community. It's something that needs to be addressed, Mr. President. So between the environmental issues that we have with the gas leaks, the safety issues that we have with the gas leaks, and the quality of life issues that we have with the condition of our roadways, I think that this is something that should be a priority. So I'm asking that the administration come up with a plan on how to address it. And I'd like to further amend the paper and ask that this be based on the reports due section of the council agenda for 90 days, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much again this is a paper that we put on annually requesting that the administration provide us with an update as to what the organizational structure is week after week we're seeing new jobs being proposed to this council new positions being proposed positions being upgraded. It's my hope that we can get an organizational chart to show us exactly who's doing what, when, and where. Just last week, I believe we had about $800,000 worth of new positions before us. So I think it's important for us to understand the financial impact of what's going on with the new positions that are being created in this community, both to the tax dollar and also to our grant funds that are coming from the feds. So with that being said, Mr. President, I would ask that this Council resolutions be answered in writing. I do think it's important that our council resolutions be answered in writing. It's great to have a representative from the administration here, but that does not make for my file. And when it comes time for me to pull this out and look at it again later on, it doesn't do me any good. It doesn't do me any help. It's really an issue for me to understand who does what, where our money is being spent, and why it's being spent there. And it also allows us as councillors to know who to pick up the phone and call when we need something to get done so that we don't have to bring it to the council floor and to have constituent work be debated on the council floor. So I think this is an important step moving forward. If we look at our fiscal year's budget, we'll see an organizational chart But we've seen a number of new positions that have been created. We've seen a number of people take on transitionary roles. And right now, those transitionary roles, some people are in 2 hats, some people are in 3. So, I just want to know where we're at. Ultimately, we have a number of positions that were funded in the budget that aren't filled right now, so we're gonna have some surplus funds that may require end of the year transfers. It's really a financial issue. So with that being said, I ask my council colleagues to support this resolution. The more we understand about the organizational structure, where the money's being spent, the better job that we can do for the people that we represent.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. In 2019, I put forward a resolution asking that we do just this, that we expand our cooperative education opportunities in the vocational school to include some of the trades that fall within the public works sector. Ultimately, we have an aging infrastructure and an aging workforce here in the city of Medford, and it would be nice for us to be able to cultivate some homegrown talent to bring them into our public works sphere and our public works sector so that we can continue to fill positions that become vacant. During the Burke administration, I had the opportunity to meet with Chad Fallon, the director of the vocational school, and we had some preliminary discussions about this type of thing and expanding programming over there. We also met with representatives from the Laborers Program and representatives from the Teamsters Union, who represent the DPW here in the city of Medford. And the discussions were great, and the project was looking like it was coming around. And then, you know, the RONA happened, school got shut down and the expansion of opportunities for children wasn't really on the forefront of the agenda. The agenda was making sure that we could educate our children safely, not expand opportunities. And this issue kind of fell by the wayside. And I'd like to make this issue a priority. It's fitting that in January of 2020, they found that this is a absolute priority, the best practice from the Massachusetts Municipal Association, a group that this community is a member of. So I think that this is something that we need to look at, Mr. President, and I might ask that we send it to the school administration and ask them to report back to us within 90 days as to what their findings are and whether or not this is something we can continue to pursue. It's something I think that would require some upfront funding, something that I think would be a worthwhile investment here in this community because we're going to be investing in the education of residents in the city who in turn may someday actually become the Director of Public Works. may actually in turn become the director of uh the superintendent of water um you know individuals that live in the community have a vested interest in the community um i've always been a firm believer in uh in having a department that's beef city residents um you know i don't think it's fair that they get in their car and drive away to where they live and i go to the supermarket and get yelled at for the job but they're not being held accountable i've always said that uh you know i've thought that um department that should be residents in other communities you'll see that as a requirement i'm not saying that's a proposal or anything, but I'm saying if we can take this opportunity to utilize our vocational school to educate students in the public works field and put them to work here in our community, we'll have people that live in this community that have a vested interest in the success of this community, not just the paycheck. And I'm not saying that that's the situation our department has, but you have seen that in other communities. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'd ask my council colleagues to support this resolution.
[Adam Knight]: I just want to say, I share Councilor cables concern and frustration, as the chairman of the ordinance committee that worked long and hard on this. I think that this has gone inordinately too long. This issue should have been addressed long ago. These licenses should have been, you know, vetted in the host community agreement should have been negotiated we're leaving a ton of money on the table. I don't want to hear in eight months that we don't have the money for something that we're looking for when we could have been collected $3.3 billion a year from the licensees of marijuana dispensaries here in the community. You know, the voters voted to have marijuana dispensaries here in Medford. The voters have spoken. It should be implemented. And, you know, for this council to take the steps to properly that the ordinance put the ordinance in place and then properly adopt the local option tax benefits for this community, so that we can see fiscal gain and still not see those fruits of our labor is frustrating, Mr. President, so I might do share the council's concern I look forward to seeing a license be issued in the near future, hopefully.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe it's important to point out that the ordinance did say that the Cannabis Advisory Commission would convene within 45 days of passage and begin the process. And I don't think that they ended up falling into the compliance windows with the ordinance when it was passed.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Again, this is a perfect example why contracting out city law services is not in the best interest of our community. All right. The administration needs to own this. Okay. Ultimately, when entered into an agreement, and the agreement had a non compete clause in it that said that they would not open up an entertainment venue. We signed this agreement as a city, Bill Blumenreich did not sign it, the city of Medford signed it. Because we signed this mitigation agreement, that led to the city of Medford putting out an RFP for the operations of Chevalier Auditorium, because there was a non-compete in it, which led to us investing money into the auditorium, because we had a non-compete. The operator operates that auditorium on behalf of the city. He doesn't own it, he operates it on behalf of the city, right? So if the agreement's been violated, or if the terms of the agreements are being stretched, it should be owned by the administration. because the administration's the one that signed the mitigation agreement. Bill Blumenreich did not sign that mitigation agreement. The city of Medford signed it. So the city of Medford should own this issue. All right, we shouldn't say, oh, sorry, Bill, you're on your own. And we certainly shouldn't say, here's 2,500 bucks, because that's not going to get you very far. All right, you're going against Wynn Casino, where's 2,500 bucks going to get you? They'll give you a free toaster after you go down there and put it in the slot machines. On Sunday, they'll call you down, have you stand in line and give you a free price. I mean, that's not going to get us very far, 2,500. 5,000 isn't going to get us very far. All right, so I can understand the need and the desire to partner with somebody that has deep pockets in Mr. Blumenreich. And I understand that he has a vested interest in what's happening here. But I think we need to take a step back and look at this from a little bit of a different perspective. But for the mitigation agreement, we never would have put out the RFP. And if we never put out the RFP, then Blumenreich never would have been there. And then he never would have been in the situation he's in. So I think that we really need to take a bigger role and a bigger responsibility in this than just a joint partnership. You know, this is something that we've been championing as elected officials as politicians as people behind this rail we've been championing. Shavia is everyone's greatest success story. Everyone's everybody. I built it on my back. He built it on his back. You brought the air conditioner. You brought the chairs. I mean, every time anybody gets a chance to talk about Shavia, we're over here, we're giving ourselves the biggest pat on the back. Let's own the issue because now's the time to put our money where our mouth is. Now's the time. That's going to be the catalyst for our downtown. We shouldn't be pattering up with anybody. We should be taking the bull by the horns and we should be driving the truck. And I think that we're seeing a lot of that because we're subcontracting on services. We don't have that institutional knowledge anymore. We're gonna end up moving backwards, not forwards. The biggest and greatest success story of Medford Square in the past 15 years has been Chevalier Auditorium. We can't let this slip through our hands. And a payment of $5,000 or a partnership with the operator, I don't think is gonna cut it. I think we need to get our state delegation involved. I also think we need to approach this regionally. I think Councilor Caraviello made up some great, great suggestions. I mean, the gaming commission has to be on board with this and we have to address it regionally. There's only a number of communities that are eligible to receive funds through the mitigation agreement. We happen to be one of them. We happen to be very fortunate to be one of them. We should be capitalizing on that and we should be doing it today, not tomorrow, not later on. And certainly not in partnership and certainly not in second seat. because this city signed the agreement, nobody else. So let's own the issue. I look forward to talking about this issue further. I think that this is something that we need to address. I appreciate Victor's office. I know that Victor's been on top of a lot of the things that are happening in this community when it comes to economic development. This is a very big concern for me, a very big concern for me. If Chevalier fails, the square fails. And quite frankly, it's only hanging on by a thread right now we haven't seen too much going on down here. The mayor announced a big plan at her State of the Union inauguration the other day about putting out an RFI for what we can do to this downtown to redevelop it. The linchpin of the redevelopment of this downtown is that auditorium. And we need to do all that we can and invest whatever resources we have and pursue whatever funding possibilities are available to us to make sure that it remains successful. Thank you very much, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilor Caraviello for bringing this issue forward. Thank you, Councilor Knight. President Morell.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Yes, I echo Councilor Caraviello's sentiments. I had the opportunity to meet Nina over the years, and she was a wonderful person, a joy to be around, and she always lit up the room. You wouldn't know it, but she had quite the sense of humor. My condolences to Stephen and Stephanie, and Brian, Ryan, and Brie. It's a tough time, and just know that we're thinking of you.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, I echo, again, Councilor Caraviello's sentiments. I, too, had the pleasure of meeting Barbara on a number of occasions throughout my tenure in service, and she was a great person, someone who certainly put her community first, someone who gave a lot to the City of Metroton and the City of Somerville as the matriarch of the Sloan family in Century Bank. If you look at and the beautiful job that they did out in front of Century Bank, the old Century Bank location used to be Papageno's. You'll see that that's dedicated to her and it's just a beautiful testament to that person that she was and what was important to her community. So with that being said, my condolences also go out to the Sloan family during that time of need.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, yes I'd like to take an opportunity to extend my condolences and ask my council colleagues to do the same to the family of Eugene McKinney. Many of us behind this rail have been involved in the challenge of baseball tournament. And that was the product of the McKinney-Falasca family. The McKinneys and the Falascas have done a great job in this community, dedicating themselves, helping run the Challenger League for the last 25 years, raising countless funds for the Challenger League, and making sure that it was able to continue for the better part of 30 years, Mr. President. So with that being said, they recently lost their father, and I'd like to extend this offer of condolences to the family during that time.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. This started out as a council priority for the council to receive independent legal counsel. And that proposal and priority arose from the fact that there were an inordinate number of requests for opinions, the draft pieces of legislation this council makes that we don't receive, for whatever reason, that may be. When the budget was debated, a motion was made to reduce the contracted legal services line item by about 50,000 bucks. And the reason that that motion was made was because of a dissatisfaction with the level of service that we were being provided as a governmental body. And as part of that discussion, Councilor Caraviello was authorized to go negotiate with the mayor in terms of an agreement. Now, the council wanted its own lawyer. The council wanted its own person that they could go to, an assistant city solicitor to the city council. And that was taken off the table immediately. And what the council got was the ability to get permission from the city solicitor to talk to a third party vendor for legal services. And that's not what we were asking for. That's not what we were looking for. And that's not something I'm going to support tonight. All right. Um, the narrative is false. It's a false narrative. You know, um, sometimes the press release sounds a lot better than the real story. And the real story is the council has been begging for legal counsel. Since we've gotten that one time we've gotten legal counsel that's been my proposal. We've moved this community 15 years forward in six months. Since we've gotten our own legal counsel. This is an issue I'm not willing to budge on Mr. President. We haven't been able to negotiate terms of an agreement that were agreeable to the previous council. So what happened. The first meeting with a new council, the appropriation paper comes on the table. and two Councilors that don't have the institutional knowledge of the background of this issue that happened are gonna be put on the spot to take a vote for a $50,000 appropriation on their first day of work. That's not right, that's not fair, number one. Number two, we still haven't addressed the overall issue that this council has relative to its ability to retain and attain efficient, effective, and immediate legal services. So with that being said, this is a paper I cannot support tonight. We're seeing paper after paper come before this body. Let's look at the ad to $190 million budget, the largest budget in the city's history. And every week we're getting hit with papers saying, give us more, give us more, give us more. Where's the financial plan? What's going on in this community? We can't just spend, spend, spend because that sounds like a good idea and see what sticks to the wall. That's not how you run government. That's not how you run government. So with that being said, Mr. President, this is an item that I cannot support this evening. I thank Councilor Capiello for giving it a great effort, but the negotiations moved nowhere in terms of what the administration offered at the beginning, what the council wanted, and where we ended up. There was no moving of the needle. This is what I'm gonna give you. Take it or leave it. Leave it. I'm gonna put out the press release saying that this is what I did, even though it's not what I did, and you guys can go and try to explain that. Right, and they have two new freshman Councilors that are here that are gonna have to go out there and explain how come you don't want the city to have a lawyer. How come you don't want, how come you don't want to spend $50,000 for the city to have legal counsel and you're just talking about the supplier auditorium and what's going on. We're going to give the Shavaya auditorium 2500 bucks. We're going to come here and increase the budget by $50,000 to pay KP law, a third party vendor can't represent us in this in this big issue that we're just talking about tonight. This doesn't make sense to me Mr. President, this doesn't make sense to me. That's where I stand on the issue I certainly would love to hear what my council colleagues have to say about it. But I'm telling you, I don't see this item coming up for a vote tonight.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Point of information just on when we speak about the downscaling of government, one of those things, you know, coming from the labor movement, one of those big things that we're very concerned about in the downscaling government is the privatization of services and the lack of institutional knowledge, right? So when we're talking about the downsizing of government, the downscaling of government, we're talking about the race to the bottom, right? It's the race to the bottom, right? We're going to take this job that someone was getting a good pay, a good health benefit, and a good pension benefit, and we're going to take it out of government's hands. We're going to subcontract it to somebody else. We're going to pay them less money. give them less benefits, right? And not give them a solid retirement opportunities, right? But we're gonna be able to reap the rewards of that business decision. That's not equitable, in my opinion. Like you're saying, it's a race to the bottom. It's a race to the bottom.
[Adam Knight]: we had Jonathan Silverman from KP law here before us. And he was posed the question. We do not work. Do you work for us? No, we do not work for you. We work for the mayor. We don't work for you. We work for the mayor that came right out of his mouth on that TV screen and on that TV screen, right in these chambers.
[Adam Knight]: So on that point, Mr. President, when you think about all the things that KP law touched during the past term, 5g nightmare, marijuana nightmare, the only thing we got done was the clothing collection bins, I think, right? At the end of the day, right?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng, is that support stuff you refer to the city solicitor.
[Adam Knight]: If chief of staff would like to present the paper or if there's a council night, let's have a question on them and be, I think the paper was before us for the last 90 days.
[Adam Knight]: All right.
[Adam Knight]: The Finance Director Auditor position was upgraded relatively recently, was it not? Under the previous administration, I believe. I don't know.
[Adam Knight]: Chief of Staff doesn't have that answer. My recommendation would be to hold off until we get this classification study complete. It seems like every week we get the new position that we wanna upgrade, we wanna upgrade, we wanna upgrade. We don't have the ability to look at the total picture right now. We're not looking at the big picture. We're handling things in a piecemeal approach. I don't think it's gonna work. I don't think it's fiscally responsible. So tonight we had a paper before us that asked to increase the city's budget by 50,000 or so dollars. We also have a paper before us that's asking to increase the salary, which is going to have a budgetary impact. A couple weeks ago, we got another paper that was upgrading another position. So we're seeing these job classifications that people are sitting in being upgraded, people getting raises in the salaries are causing the budget to go up. At some point, we need to take a look at what's going on. Our budget right now is already over 80% salary in benefits, right? So let's look at our spending a little bit before we move forward. If we have a grant for a classification study, and one of the most important positions that we have in the community would be the chief financial officer and auditor, I think we should probably let the study take place so that the experts can tell us exactly where that position needs to fall. The reason I say that is because If we keep doing what we're doing, they're not going to have anything to study because we're going through every single position that we have here and we're creating caps and classifications for them. And I feel as though, you know, we're kind of putting the cat before the horse. We're talking about a grant. We're talking about having the call and set to come in and do a classification study. Let them do it. Let's not move people to where we think they should be and then have them come in and do it. Let's get our back for our buck. Let's let the grant work these issues out. because I'd be much more inclined to support a comprehensive review that has a report attached to it saying this is where our deficiencies are, this is where we can do better than coming at a piecemeal week by week and saying this is the position we want this week, this is the position next week we want to do. I understand the administration said that they're going to be bringing positions forward and that they're also going to be doing the classification study. I don't think that's the right way to do it. That's just my opinion. I think if we have the grant to do a classification study, let's utilize the grant. That's what it's for. Let's let these experts in the field come back and give us a work product so that we can make an informed decision. That's where I'm coming from on this.
[Adam Knight]: With all due respect, Mr. President, I don't think that $5,000 a year is gonna make us go from getting nobody to get Warren Buffett to walk through the door and start managing the city of Medford's finances, first of all, all right? I think that the issue might not be the salary, it might be the culture in the office. It's a very small, small group of people that perform municipal management, municipal financial management. They're a very small network of people. Maybe that's one of the reasons why we can't get applicants to want to work here. When you look at these positions, you look at this human resources director's position, the incumbent in the position in a 12-month period got a 61% pay raise without council approval. 61% pay raise. I don't know anybody in the world that gets a 61% pay raise in a year. Anybody in the world that gets a 61% pay raise in a year. I know that certainly flies in the face of a lot of the issues that have been raised by some of my colleagues when it comes to being able to have a living wage, having people pay their fair way, equity, and the like. A 61% salary increase. is something I've never heard of in my life. I represented union employees across the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and negotiated countless collective bargaining agreements. I've never seen a 61% pay increase in a 12-month period. The spending plan needs to be looked at. The classification study needs to be performed before we start spending taxpayer dollars without a plan. Thank you. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Is there a motion? Is there a motion on the floor? Motion to approve.
[Adam Knight]: Motion by President Morell to approve, seconded by Councilor Collins. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll for first reading.
[Adam Knight]: I thought that we tabled the positions that weren't filled so that we could have a committee of the whole of them to discuss the entire spending plan if I'm not mistaken, but it could be crazy, but that was in the motion.
[Adam Knight]: Chair is that the matters were not tabled for any particular reason. They were just tabled so that we wouldn't have to vote on them last time. Correct. Okay. Sounds like efficient government to me. They must've been waiting to get rid of a couple of guys.
[Adam Knight]: So tonight, I'm trying to I'm just wrecking my brain tournament so this was the one way like we had the $, new jobs that were being created right. Yes, and then we have the, we have like 49 million in our for money. We spent 8.5 to balance the budget. Then we got these new, these $800,000 worth of jobs that came before us to be filled that are outside the budget that we're going to use APA money to fund, right? I believe so. And then we're going to try to fund these positions, I think, for the next four years, right? Or three years? Three years. That's like another $2.4 million. So we had like $49 million of APA money and we spent $8.5 already. And then this is another 2.4 that we're going to spend on that Apple money.
[Adam Knight]: We've spent like 25% of our Apple money already. It looks like I'd go more with 20.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much, and through you to Mr. Van der Kloot. Paulette, thank you very much for your service. Thank you to your family for allowing us the opportunity to have you for all these years. You've done a great job, and you know, the proof is in the pudding, the results are there. So I really want to wish you the best of luck in your retirement, and we hope to see you around the community as a very active participant engaged in the ongoings of what's happening in Medford moving forward. I remember you being the first progressive. As a young kid getting involved in politics Paulette was considered the first progressive and mentioned if I remember correctly, and I wish you all the best of luck Paulette so thank you very much for all you've done for us.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. In terms of how we're going to do this, Mr. President, what will we be doing will be going through each amendment will go for each one each member separate, are we going to discuss these amendments or just go.
[Adam Knight]: The only concern I have is which positions are presently filled, which positions are filled and will be expiring for kids, after the Kids Act funding expires, which positions will go unfunded. For example, is amendment not funded? Is that a concern?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, to be- Let's stick to the clean answers just to get through this.
[Adam Knight]: It's a yes or no question. Is the position vacant? We don't need to go into- Is the position vacant? No, that's the question.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, in regards to the amendment, I think Chief of Staff, please tell us whether or not these positions are vacant or if they are filled with an incumbent.
[Adam Knight]: What's the point three full time employee.
[Adam Knight]: So, Vice President Knight, could Director O'Connor please clarify again when the grant expires on these greenfield positions?
[Adam Knight]: And for data analysts?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, Vice President Knight, this project's been something that's been going on for what seems like now three administrations. We've seen some progress be made. Is there any indication as to how far along we are, what phase we're in, in terms of seeing this Trail comes to reality, number one. Number two, I know we've expended some money for remediation in the area due to some soil contamination. And there was also been some concerns relative to the abutters that needed to be addressed as the planning stages were going on. So I'm wondering if the director of that office with way too many words can tell us exactly what's going on with this project and where we stand.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I move for approval of the paper and request that the DCR hold the pre-construction meeting with the Butters after securing the necessary permitting to move forward with the project. Ms.
[Adam Knight]: Come up and wish his mother a happy birthday. Maybe the state rep can walk him up, if we can. State Representative Donato can walk him up. State Representative Donato, can you walk him up? State Representative Donato, can you walk him up?
[Adam Knight]: Hello, Johnny. It's been a good run, brother. I first met John playing basketball at St. Francis in the CYO when he and his cousin Peter were coaching the team of misfits over there that he put in the back of his minivan and would drive around from church to church in the greater Boston region, helping us kids stay busy and stay off the streets as a teenager. And since that time I've always been very fond of john through our work in politics we've been able to develop a great friendship and it's something that I'm very thankful for john it's been great working with you it's a pleasure. I feel like every year that I sit here on the council and serve as the term goes by. We lose another friend. First, it was Paul Camuso, then it was Freddie Dello Russo, and now I'm seeing you go. And it's this transition in government and this progress that we're seeing in this community that's great. But, you know, at the same time, we're losing a lot of great people with institutional knowledge. And you're going to be sadly missed. I always had a great pleasure working with you and a great time with you. A lot of laughs and a lot of fun. You know, we didn't agree all the time. And when we didn't agree, we sure got at it. But when we did agree, we did a lot of great work together. So with that being said, John, congratulations on 12 years of great service to this community. And thank you to your wife and family for allowing us the opportunity to have you as well. You know, it's been a long run. It's been a great run. And I'm sure that this is the last we're going to see you in the field of politics.
[Adam Knight]: It's only been eight years, huh, Michael? And it feels like eight minutes underwater. No, I'll joke it aside, Michael. I can honestly say that I owe you a debt of gratitude for making me a better Councilor, because I knew every day that I came into these chambers, I had to be on my A game, because you were prepared, you were ready, and most importantly, you held your colleagues accountable. And that's something I always respected you for. You hold your colleagues accountable. You said what you meant, you did what you were going to say. It's commendable. There aren't too many politicians around anymore these days that are what they are and do what they do and say what they say. And you walk the walk and you talk the talk. And it's really been great working with you. I've learned a lot from you. But like I said, you know, I've always looked forward to those Tuesday nights, when Parker Musa was sitting in that chair and you were sitting here and I was sitting here and Bob Penta was sitting there and Freddie was here and Brianna was here. You'd see fireworks. Some nights on issues that we didn't agree on. And then on nights, and the things that we did agree on and we were clicking. What great work we were able to accomplish, and over the last couple of years, you know, As I matured in my role I've come to agree with you in a lot more things than I did when I first started and I think that that comes with the experience of the job. And it also comes with having that open line of communication and being able to respect each other as colleagues and professionals, and I always have had that respect for you. And I want to thank you for all the service that you provided this community it's been a long run, it's been a long run. You know, we shared a great story today when you said that my father had sent you an email relative to the service that you provided to this community, and I think that that just goes to show you how. highly we hold you in our household, although we don't necessarily agree all the time, we've always been able to move past that for the greater good which is this community and I'm very grateful to have had the opportunity to serve with you, and I look forward to being able to serve with you in some capacity in the future, whatever it may be. You're really someone that has a vision is someone that wants to execute that vision and is someone that's always cared about the city more than you've cared about anything else. With that being said, Mike, congratulations. It's been a great run. Uh, you know, you've been here for a very long time. I can remember the first time I met you, um, when I was, you know, just out of college working for Senator Shannon and you were running for a city council and, uh, Billy Wood was giving me, uh, the business file holding science with Paul Camuso because I was coming out of the Senator's office. Um, and that was, uh, how many years ago, geez, you know? Um, so Mike, it's just, it's been a great, great run. I could go on and on and on and not pat you on the back, but, uh, I think you know what you've accomplished. I've always been someone that's been putting results before the rhetoric and someone who's always been able to walk the walk and hold his head proud because he's been able to look at the mirror every morning and nobody's believed is right. So thank you for that. Thank you. Congratulations.
[Adam Knight]: Hey, Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And Ellen, thank you for being here this evening. You always do a great job. So in reading the packet here, and I apologize for not being able to make the meeting earlier. The breakeven point looks like it's 705,000 give or take so that would be the assessed value of your home at 705,000 would be the breaking point, the breakeven point, which means that if your home was assessed over that amount that you, even though you would be an owner occupied policy wouldn't be eligible to receive. the exemption, because when you receive the exemption but the shift would still come back to you so you'd actually see an increase in your tax bill if your property was assessed over that figure.
[Adam Knight]: And then based upon your assessments here it looks like there would be about almost 14,000 eligible parcels.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. And it almost looks like half of those would be above the break even point.
[Adam Knight]: And then of that 50% almost a third of that would be senior citizen population.
[Adam Knight]: Excellent. Thank you. I appreciate it.
[Adam Knight]: Vice president night. Mister president, thank you very much. I think the sponsor this resolution for bringing the matter forward. I do believe this is something that this council discussed a couple years back when the casino first opened. As part of mass thoughts plans with the opening of the casino. I believe that they took out of the street and they made the left hand lane going towards the middle of all left him turn only. And that's what's created a bunch of congestion in the neighborhood, Mr. President. And I second Councilor Falco's resolution. I think this is something that needs to be addressed. It's been going on for far too long. And the left-hand turn only lane has created quite a bit of disruption in the neighborhood, and it's something that needs to be addressed.
[Adam Knight]: Mister president Mister president I will say this it's not uncommon for this council to have granted the administration the authority to enter into a contract. Outside of the maximum 36 month as outlined in state law. We did it previously when we implemented the parking program and I certainly don't see any reason why we should do it now I certainly would support this measure this evening. Some are all.
[Adam Knight]: And so, Vice President night traffic policies established the traffic commission not the administration so the traffic policies already been established.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much Mister president. You know the way look at that that this whole situation is this ultimately. I think everybody by in this real wants parking enforcement in this community we've all called for it at one point or another saying we need parking enforcement in this community. 8 years ago when there was no contract we all called for parking enforcement we said we want a parking enforcement. I think we all continue to want parking enforcement. I think we all agree. Oh, you can, I'm sorry. I don't want to poison anybody to death over here with all these new rules they're making up. I think we can all agree that we need vehicles to conduct the parking enforcement. I think we can all agree that we also need financial data management systems to conduct parking enforcement. So the real question before us is whether or not, if we're gonna conduct parking enforcement, whether or not we're gonna allow a contract to be three years or five years. If we're doing parking enforcement for one year, two years, three years, or five years, we're still going to need these mechanisms in place to conduct this performance. We're still going to need vehicles to do it, we're still going to need data management systems to do it. So if that's the case, and we can get more bang for our buck in a five-year contract, I think that that's something we should support. You know, when it comes down to the rollout of the plan and how the plan's supposed to work, I mean, that's a function of the administration, right? That's the executive branch's duty and job, to roll out the plan appropriately with the legislative body. And the state legislature and the state law calls for us to take a vote to authorize the administration as to whether or not we should allow them to enter on a contract that exceeds three years. That's really the only issue that's before us today, right? Do we want parking enforcement for the next 3 years and look at extending a contract again at that point in time, or do we want to see if we can get more bang for our buck for a parking enforcement contract that lasts 5 years? That's the way that I'm looking at this, and I think that ultimately I want parking enforcement for the next 50 years, and if we can enter into a contract that saves the city money, then I think that's something we should do. So I support the paper this evening, and I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: I just think it's also important to look at this from the other side of the glass. And why are we assuming this is going to be a failure? You know, why are we assuming that us taking this in-house, which is what we cried for, is not going to work? And if we're going to share in the failures, then I'm assuming we'd also share in the successes. It's our community. That's what we're here for. You know, we had to, we had to improve the lives of the residents in the city. And, you know, one of the things that we talked about was taking parking in house. And if we're going to take parking in house, there are certain steps of protocols that we need to take. This is one of them that's been recommended by someone who's worked in the industry who explains that this is industry standard. That's something that someone I've worked with in government 20 years ago, when I remember fondly, You know, I don't think that this is a situation where we're walking into the rollout of the first parking management plan that the city of Medford has ever seen in the middle of the winter, seven years ago. You know, we've come a long way since that. Our residents in this community have become accustomed to certain aspects of parking enforcement. I wanna see them continue. I know you do too. You've been the strongest advocate in this council for parking enforcement for the past 15 years, Mike. I'm not trying to take anything away from you from that. I just think in looking at this and us moving forward. This is could be a very successful program. This could be a very successful program. So let's put the tools in the toolbox. Let's give them the tools that they need to build the foundation to make it be successful. Because I feel as though If we look at this from the glass being half full, it's something that we can also share in all the successes that come with it as well. I'm not nervous about this program failing and people blaming me for it because, again, the scope of the vote before us as to whether or not you want to allow the mayor to enter into a contract that's three years or five years. I don't think the 24 months makes a big difference when we have a cable contract that goes for 10, we have a trash contract that goes for 10, and we had a previous contract with parking administration that went for seven plus three. So that's where I'm coming from. And I can understand you're passionate about the issue. And quite frankly, if I'm more educated on it than me, and if I'm more invested in this parking issue than me, you served on the first parking commission, you made recommendations, you worked with this commission. So I understand where you're coming from, I really do.
[Adam Knight]: That's a wicked long point of information.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, I think that's a budgetary issue, not an issue for the CAF, right?
[Adam Knight]: Amendment B. Well, I have a question on the differential, Rick. So is that differential included in the 52,356.20 max, or is that in addition to?
[Adam Knight]: And so, to be clear, through the acting chief of staff, with the approval of M&A, the ordinance, which also showed that the 10% differential for employees after 6.30 p.m. would be included in the ordinance, correct?
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, I mean, it's a non-union employee, so they're not represented by a collective bargaining agreement or contract. So this would be a fringe benefit to their employment. So it's something that I believe should be included in the ordinance if it's passed this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I certainly don't have a problem creating the positions, but we're gonna have a serious, significant discussion, I think, when it comes time asking for money to fund them. I mean, we're looking at a department that was funded at $350,000 as a placeholder, as Councilor Marks noted, $250,000 in salaries, $100,000 in expenses. Based upon what I'm hearing this evening, we're gonna have about 12 employees in this department, which is nine more than we budgeted for. There's gonna be a significant increase on the bottom line, which is gonna require a supplemental appropriation from this council, which is also gonna require us to amend a $192 million budget. So that's something that we're gonna have to really think long and hard about. I certainly don't have a problem creating the positions. Like I said, if this is what we need to be successful to take this in-house, let's take a look at it. But, you know, have a parking enforcement director and three parking enforcement officers in the budget, and now to hear that we're gonna be having a department of 12 people plus a director, it's... But half a million dollars.
[Adam Knight]: It's not 12. Well, there's four full-time parking control specialists, right? Right. Then they said there were gonna be six
[Adam Knight]: And one lead parking meter person. Yeah. Okay, so six more, not nine.
[Adam Knight]: Quick question, Mr. President, if I may. Has a revolving account been established?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to refer all ARPA funded positions to a committee of the whole. Some of these aren't ARPA. Some of them aren't, some of them are. Which ones are ARPA positions? I think it's F and then I through O. Just some additional information for the city council's consideration.
[Adam Knight]: And there's items, Mr. President, the amendments F and then I through O.
[Adam Knight]: Is there an N and an O? The one paper that was.
[Adam Knight]: I certainly have no issue with Amendment G in my understanding is the same as yours Alicia, because it's paid out of a grant. There was really no need for a cap because the grant defined what the compensation rate was going to be. Taxpayers dollars weren't being used to pay. It was being awarded to us from the feds. In terms of the staff planner in the economic development planner, these positions are not funded in the budget presently, correct?
[Adam Knight]: Right. Okay. Were they last year?
[Adam Knight]: You said 17 through 20, so forget about the fiscal years.
[Adam Knight]: All right, because I guess my question is, if we have no incumbent in the position, and there's no hiring plan to
[Adam Knight]: Okay, so these are similar to the other titles that got brought forward that are ARPA funded. Or is amendment F and G both ARPA funded? I'm sorry, in my reading of this. The following ARPA funded position. 13 doesn't talk about ARPA money anywhere.
[Adam Knight]: So meet on two, I don't think this is- Mr. President, I offered the amendment for the reason that there's no WAPA spending plan. So, you know, if we get $39 million- Ask these questions.
[Adam Knight]: We took the vote, we'll figure it out.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. McNeely. The subject matter is contrary to law and reason.
[Adam Knight]: It's clear, Mr. President, the gentleman's here to do nothing other than cause disruption. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the reason I ask for the rooms to be suspended is to invite Stephen South from Local 25 up to the podium. He's here this evening to join us with a special announcement, I do believe. I was contacted by his office earlier in the week, and he asked that he be extended this courtesy this evening as the official bargaining agent for a number of units here in the community. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I do believe I do believe Mr. South has had the opportunity to organize several bargaining units here in the community, maybe you could tell us a little bit about that I know we were able to recently approve the contract for our inspectors and recreation department.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. President, just one more item Mr. President, before I wrap up, just one more item. It's also been brought to my attention was the self that you've been able to organize. a private entity that provides transportation services to our students here in the community?
[Adam Knight]: And you're in the process of negotiating a contract now?
[Adam Knight]: I thank you all for your time. Have a nice evening. Thank you very much. Mr. President, I do believe that this council has asked this question in the past. This was something that I put forward a number of months ago, requesting that the administration disclose to us if there's any type of investigation going on. I believe this was something that got brought up maybe in, oh, May or June, if I'm not mistaken. With that being said, maybe it would be possible for the city clerk to provide us with a copy of that paper and the other response that the administration gave, and then we can forward that to Mr. Self as well.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Just this past week, we had a very monumental transfer of ownership of Century Bank over to Eastern Bank. And seeing this happen, it brought some sadness, whereas I've had the ability and fortunate responsibility to work with the Sloan family now, going back to when I first got involved in government in the late 90s. The Sloan family have been great, great, great advocates, great participants in our community, great benefactors, very generous people that have really helped make Medfed a better place. They've invested not only their money, but also their time, their energy, and their efforts here to create jobs, to run a successful business, to build and develop, and help grow our community, but they've also been very philanthropic in nature. And because of that, Mr. President, I offer this resolution and I thank you for co-sponsoring it with me. And I'd ask my council colleagues if we could be so kind as to extend the slightest bit of gratitude to the Sloan family based upon their 40 plus years of dedication and commitment to this community.
[Adam Knight]: How are they being paid.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Mr. President, I do think it's also important to point out that we have a board of registrar voters. And I think that, you know, they've been left out of this process for pretty, pretty open to the point where they two of the three members resigned during the election process this year. So I think there's a, you know, something that's definitely worth discussing, Mr. President, and I support Council Marx's resolution and I will move to second it this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Vice President Knight. I noticed, Ms. Brady, that you said we. Are you here representing a group or an organization, or are you here as a citizen?
[Adam Knight]: Do you mean like as a volunteer in general may do this practice?
[Adam Knight]: So you're speaking as an individual today.
[Adam Knight]: I understand that there's some emotions running high, but to keep insinuating, is there a criminal investigation? Is there a criminal investigation? I'm just thinking that, you know, the narrative is getting a little skewed here. You know what I mean? Let's keep it to the facts, please. That's all I'm saying. Is there a criminal investigation? I mean, come on.
[Adam Knight]: So I was like, this is- Wait, Mr. President, it was brought to my attention after having a conversation with the elections coordinator that because of the inordinate number of requests that the office was getting relative to the provision of certain documents that they sought advice from the Secretary of State's office as to how to handle it. And then the Secretary of State's office said these requests can be handled as Freedom of Information Act requests.
[Adam Knight]: The Medford City Council doesn't perform election oversight duties. That's what the board of registrars vote as far as, and that's what the secretary of state's office as well.
[Adam Knight]: quite frankly, I don't pay much attention to the functions of the office that falls under the purview of the administration that has a department head and a board that's required to make sure that they're in compliance with what's going on.
[Adam Knight]: It's also the board of registrars of voters.
[Adam Knight]: Are you insinuating that the city clerk is conducting some sort of bad behavior or something like that? Because if that's the case, we're really going down a slippery slope here.
[Adam Knight]: And I just want to be clear. So you did say that the Secretary of State's office did say to put these inactive voters back onto the active voters.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. The city clerk's office isn't the keeper of the records. The city solicitor's office is the keeper of the records. So the provision of the records would come out of the legal office.
[Adam Knight]: Anyone? We don't have the authority to recall an election that's been certified by the Secretary of State's office.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Yes, Mr. President. When I think of Brian Kerins, I first got the chance to meet him when he was with the then MDC. And then he had a brief stint here in the city of Medford, where he worked with Paul Gere, someone who he couldn't have been more different than. And when Brian came back, you'd see Brian with dirty boots, yellow reflective vest on walkie talkie always in his hand. He wasn't afraid to go out in the field to get in the hole, to be out there and working with his people. He did a great job. Someone that's going to be sadly missed. I do think I brought a wealth of knowledge to our community in terms of the operations of how public works is supposed to be done. And he's over the years gained a great deal of institutional knowledge that we're never going to be able to replace. And we're seeing that more and more with these department heads that are leaving. You know, we're losing a lot of institutional knowledge here in the community. And, you know, that's leading to certain situations. But it's my hope that we move forward and we find a replacement for Brian that will be able to fill the big shoes that he's left behind. And I wish him all the best in his future endeavors. So with that being said, Mr. President, I second the council's motion.
[Adam Knight]: Can we just repeat it back, Mr. President, as to what it is we're looking for, if it's, we're looking for an explanation or we are looking for, you know, a review. It was the amendment, that's why I asked.
[Adam Knight]: And we can't burn them. Sorry, we're not allowed to burn them. Don't be able to burn in your leaves people.
[Adam Knight]: I too would request the same consideration as offered by Councilor Falco, Mr. President. So will you both be tabled?
[Adam Knight]: I can't be sponsored, Ricky.
[Adam Knight]: I can't be sponsored. You can't be sponsored, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: Council to the thirty-fifth regular meeting of the Medford City Council, November 9th, 2021. Will the city clerk please call the roll?
[Adam Knight]: seven.
[Adam Knight]: So present zero.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to order is a resolution to 1610 water by President Gabrielle, the result of it that city council come in to congratulate you, Frank Hilbert you for 23 years of 23 years as chief and 39 years in the play department when it's upcoming your time.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Councilor Scarpelli.
[Adam Knight]: If I may, from the chair, Chief Gilberti has become someone I've grown to admire. I've always been very impressed with the way that he's handled the budget. And I think that in his retirement he should hold classes for the current department heads on how to answer questions at a budget session. Chief Gilberti I think has the most direct responses out of any of our department heads here in the community. Three words or less usually most of his answers are yes, no, maybe, I don't know. He's been great. He's been great to work with. And he's going to be sorely missed. He brings a lot of institutional knowledge to the table. His expertise in financing and firefighting is something that's unparalleled. And I do wish him the best of luck in his retirement here in Massachusetts and down in sunny Florida. And I also know with great faith that the city of Medford's in good hands with John Friedman behind the helm. So with that being said, on the motion of Councilor Caraviello, seconded by. Second. As amended by Councilor Caraviello. All those in favor. Aye. Opposed. The eyes have it. Show it's a motion. Motion by council this take papers in the hands of the clerk. Second, because the cover yellow. All those in favor. I opposed. I just have it under suspension in Council November 9 2021 Council paper 21615 on set by offered by Councilor. Caraviello, be it resolved the Medford City Council receive an answer regarding the paving of South Street and Prescott Street Council Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Council Members.
[Adam Knight]: Probably in the chimney.
[Adam Knight]: Yes. And, um, you know, if you look at like the big, big, for example, you know, they had performance standards, right? Where they said, if you don't meet these benchmarks, then you're going to pay us money. Um, I think it might be time for us to start looking at the contracts that we're offering and, uh, seeing if that's an option.
[Adam Knight]: Right.
[Adam Knight]: On the motion by Councilor Caraviello, as amended by Councilor Caraviello, Councilor Falco, Councilor Scarpelli, and Councilor Bears. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? The ayes have it. Council paper 21613 offered by Councilor Marks, be it resolved that a moment of silence be held to lifelong resident Robert Amari on his recent passing. Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, yes, thank you very much. Just this past week, Ralph and Loretta celebrated their 60th wedding anniversary. Many of us know Ralph and Loretta from being around the community, raising two lovely daughters, Lisa Evangelista and Julia Evangelista. Many of us know Lisa from her work in the mayor's office and from her work up in the public schools. She's been dedicated to our community for close to 40 years. But that is nothing compared to the dedication that Ralph and Loretta have shown each other for the past 60, Mr. President. They're the cutest couple you'll ever see, two peas in a pod that you'll see go everywhere together. And it's great to see that they've been able to celebrate this momentous occasion. So with that being said, I'd ask my council colleagues to join me in congratulating them. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. As we're all aware, this Thursday is Veterans Day, 11-11. And it's also the, I believe, 246th birthday of the United States Marine Corps, if I'm not mistaken. But with that being said, Mr. President, Medford has a very strong veterans population. There's almost 2,000 veterans that reside in this community that at one point in their lives signed the dotted line and said, I'm going to do more for my country. I'm going to do more. And these individuals sacrifice they spent time away from their family they put themselves in harm's way. And some of them are fortunate to come back. And those are the people that we honor here on Veterans Day, Mr. President, all those who have served. So with that being said, I'd ask my council colleagues to support me in this resolution. I'd also like to offer that I've had conversations with Michael Durham. down the veterans office I bumped into him just the other day at the Mets donuts where he was making a purchase of 300 donuts to distribute to veterans mentioned veterans on Veterans Day. So with that being said was the president that for those veterans that are interested that please visit the veterans services website for more information but it will be a celebration Thursday coming out of the veterans service office on Iraq veterans with donuts from the Mets.
[Adam Knight]: In common custom, we've always invited the newly elected councils to come down and sit in the well behind the rail to observe as we lead into
[Adam Knight]: What if vice president, I'm hearing the city engineer say that we have somebody that's on site that works for the city. Why is the DPW commissioner walking it if we have somebody that's on site that's supposed to be doing this anyway? We have somebody on site that's saying that's supposed to be overseeing the project and we have the highway superintendent, the DPW commissioner saying that's not up to specs.
[Adam Knight]: They are saying apples I'm saying oranges, what I'm saying I guess is why is it gotten to this point if we have somebody that's there. That's supposed to be overseeing the project anyway. And, you know, if in your expert opinion and in this gentleman's expert opinion, it doesn't cut the mustard. We have somebody that we've appointed and put in a position to be overseeing this project. Why is it getting to this point.
[Adam Knight]: I guess the question, who is responsible for the oversight of the project?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, who is that?
[Adam Knight]: They were hired before I started so it's not it's so it's not a it's not a person that works in this community that's assigned to do that it's a consultant or a contractor it's it's an outside source that's responsible for doing the oversight oversight it's not it's not like we have George Connie in the engineer's office that's responsible for it we've had some outside entity that we've contracted.
[Adam Knight]: Okay, so we have AI engineering, who's the city's contract for the oversight of the project. How often do they report back to the engineer's office with the specs and the like on progress of the project?
[Adam Knight]: And then, did I understand you correct when you said that it's not part of the city's MOU or method standards to include regrading in this type of contract. Correct.
[Adam Knight]: I should tell my you and I have a number of conversations and I think we share some of the same concerns but I mean ultimately, if the community is going through years and years of inconvenience to get these type of projects, taking care of. There should be some sort of measurable mitigation that we can receive. would make sense to if they're going to be tearing up our streets in entirety to when they resurface them, resurface them at a gradient that's smooth, right? I mean, I think that that would only make sense to be included as part of the MOU and the specs. But with that being said, you know, I appreciate the fact that we do have a field engineer, but I think that the work that is being conducted needs to be looked at a little bit harder and it needs to be inspected a little bit stronger. And the field engineer needs to be a little bit more calm.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Mr. President, thank you very much. If they've done 22 days of blasting, Sounds like that breaks down to about five blasts a year, because this project has been going on for as long as I can remember. All right, I mean, four years that we've seen this rock wall with a fence around it over there on winter street with no progress. And I think that the frustration is the fact that we've gone such an inordinate time. with this parcel looking awful, they clear-cut all the trees, they started blasting, and then they just stopped. They stopped everything, Mr. President. And now all of a sudden, they start back up, but nobody knows what's going on. Nobody knows why the project stopped and what brought us back to blasting today. And I think that that's really what the frustration is. I live in the neighborhood. I live across the street. The blasting doesn't particularly bother me, Mr. President, not as much as the unsightly awful looking curb appeal that that parcel brings to the community after what it was previously. That was a beautiful lot that had hundreds of trees on it. Those trees were all ripped down, taken down. Now we have a rock wall and we've had a rock wall for four years. I think this is a perfect example of some of the reasoning why we need to streamline our permitting processes, Mr. President. and some of the reasons why we need to have better communication. And as I've said in the past, abutters advisory committees that can bring up the issues that affect the abutters in the neighborhood, the projects and where the projects exist. An abutters advisory committee in an instance like this would be perfect. would be perfect, Mr. President. So with that being said, I would re-introduce my call for about his advisory committees from the administration. However, that would be out of order because I had offered- I mean, in that form of amendments? And I had offered it previously, it would be out of order, Mr. President. I rest my case. However, I do think that there's a great deal of frustration based upon the inordinate amount of time that it's taken to get this project to be done. The condition of the site prior to the clear cutting of the trees versus the condition of it now, and the need for us to move forward redevelop the parcel at this point, because what we have there right now is unacceptable. Thank you, Vice President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to waive the reading and adopt the map as presented, copies of which can be provided through the city clerk's office.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President that a copy of the legal boundary descriptions be included as part of the record.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to thank Councilor Falco for putting this agenda item on this evening, Mr. President, I think it's very important for us to really take a look at the financial impact relative to personal injury and property damage that surrounds our lack of investment in infrastructure, and our inability to provide reliable consistent delivery of basic city services like the maintenance of Iraq keeps roads and parks. So I think consulate faculty put in this agenda item on the, the agenda this evening Mr. President, I'm looking forward to seeing those figures. being an individual who spoke a little bit about his property damage claim a couple of weeks ago driving down Mystic Avenue, that there have been close to 70, maybe 80 claims for tires alone relative to portals on Mystic Avenue. So this would be an interesting figure to take a look at, Mr. President. I thank the council for putting it forward.
[Adam Knight]: I think it's important to point out that the vote that came before this council when parking enforcement was implemented here in the city of Medford was nothing more than a vote to allow the administration to negotiate a contract in excess of 36 months. That was the only authority we gave the administration. It was to negotiate a contract in excess of 36 months to create a parking program for parking enforcement here in this community. That's the authority we gave. That's the program that they came up with.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if I could just further amend that. It would be great to have the parking committee there, but if we're gonna be talking about what this program is gonna look like via fans, what's, how's, and the like, I think it's also very important that we have representatives from the Chamber of Commerce and our Disability Commission there as well.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Mr. President, on that point, I think it's important to point out, we shouldn't be sitting here talking about how are we going to find investments in Hormel Stadium, when we have a Hormel Commission that's very capable and does a very good job, working on setting policy and establishing policy for our Hormel Stadium field. The Hormel Commission has the opportunity to generate revenues, Mr. President, when the stadiums open. We probably have the ability to generate. Oh, it's probably say anywhere between three to $5,000 per week council Scarpelli might be able to correct me if I'm wrong to rental fees of the one third field alone. A lot more money, so a lot more so so how much council Scott probably per week you think we'd be able to. So between $7,500 and $10,000 per week, per week, when the stadium's open. And we've established a revolving account, Mr. President, so that the stadium has funds available so that it will become self-sufficient. And in this last budget, what we saw was a self-sufficient Hormel Commission, a self-sufficient athletic department that was booking the fields and generating quite a bit of money weekly. The administration thought it would be a good idea to create a new job, $70,000 a year, and use revolving funds to pay for it. When we had somebody, the athletic director, that was doing it for free. When you talk about investment in the community, Mr. President, when you talk about investment in the community, we had someone doing the job. We created a job, duplicative spending, $70,000. That $70,000 could have gone back into the field, could have gone to the press box, could have gone to ADA accessibility at the field. When we talk about fiscal responsibility and elimination of wasteful and duplicative spending, this is something we have to look at, Mr. President. We had someone doing the job for free. We created a new job for $70,000. It doesn't make sense. It doesn't make sense. It would have made sense if Hormel wasn't performing, but Hormel was performing. The money was coming in, Mr. President. Not only were the revenues coming in, but there was a community need that was being met on behalf of our youth groups and organizations. I'm very concerned about what's going on with home health. I'm very concerned about what's going on with LeConte Skating Rink. I'm very scared about the future and whether or not we see privatization come and take over these two facilities. I'm very concerned about it, Mr. President. I thank Councilor Falco for putting the matter on the agenda.
[Adam Knight]: But point of information, Mr. President, I do believe that we have a revolving fund at the field of dreams as well. You're correct. And at the field of dreams, we have two fields. So according to Councilor Scott Tully's figures, if managed correctly, then that would bring us close to somewhere between $15,000 and $20,000 a week in season.
[Adam Knight]: If I could just amend the paper, Mr. President, to request that we get a copy of the debt service schedule for the Field of Dreams to be sure that all of our bonded indebtedness has been paid off at that location. Good question.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight, I think there's a bigger concern that we have here. We're all sitting here with masks on our face, right? We're being told to wash our hands 2,550 times a day. When we use the facilities, we're supposed to wash our hands when we're done. When we're going into a locker room and you have no ability to properly wash your hands, I think Mr. President, we might have a concern relative to the state sanitary code. The pool is secluded in possible off area to the pool open to the public during certain hours and the rest of the school is not. If I'm using the pool and I need to use the restroom, am I supposed to wander around Medford High School to find a bathroom that has hot water so that I can wash my hands? think you'll find them mostly closed. Exactly, exactly. And the one that is open is no hot water. So I'd like to just request Mr. President, the Board of Health takes a visit up there to be sure that we're in compliance with the state sanitary code. I know this is not something that's new to the years of the school administration. This is something that they've heard about before the summer. something that should have been addressed. Now, here we are in 40 degree weather, and it's still not something that's been fixed.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. For many years the McDevitt family have been very good to me family that I consider very close friends. Jack was my favorite teacher at Medford High School. Michael and I are very close friends. I've had the opportunity to hear all of Jack's stories about Huey, Dewey, Louie, and Penelope, as he used to call them, when we were in first period law class my senior year in high school. And since that time as the president, through the friendship that we've been able to develop through recent involvement in various public service organizations. But with that being said, very recently, Mr. McDevitt lost his wife Jane. She battled with a long public illness and was infirm for a number of years. And she had recently been put on hospice and was no longer able to keep up the fight. And she will be sadly missed, Mr. President. She was a woman of great faith, an educator like her husband. someone who was very involved in the St. Joseph's Parish, and someone who will be certainly missed. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'd ask my council colleagues to join in and extend the condolences to the McDevitt family during their time of loss. If you know the McDevitts, you know them to be people that put Medford first, the people that have public service in their veins. Michael was just appointed American Legion post five member of the year. Jack McDevitt has a list of students for the last 40 years at Medford High School that called him one of the most inspirational, motivational, and favorite teachers that I've ever had. And Jane did such a great job working with the students that she had in the city of Boston and beyond. So with that being said, Mr. President, I would like to extend these condolences to the family.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Billy Butts was a one of a kind, as they'd say, started out a career in public service, working in government, if I do remember correctly, and went on to become a police officer, Mr. President, and he was one of those police officers that wasn't afraid to get out of the car, that did the job the right way, that put the community first. He was a proud parent. I had the opportunity to meet his sons socially on a number of occasions, and someone who really loved this community and loved serving the public as a police officer. And just earlier last week, he suddenly passed away. And it was much to the dismay and sadness of many of us here in this community who had the opportunity to call him a friend, and who had the opportunity to see Billy in action and see him help so many people as a police officer here in the city of Medford. So with that being said, Mr. President, I would defer to you for further comment, but he will be sadly missed. And, you know, times like this are very difficult. The gentleman, I don't think was retired from more than a year. as a member of the Metro Police Department for three decades plus. So when you hear that happen to somebody, it's very sad. And when it happens so suddenly, the impact that it has on the family is tremendous. So with that being said, Mr. President, thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Gotta mix that in. On that note, Mr. President, I would like to send a personal thank you down to Baird Haley. and Mrs. Joyce down in the elections office who have been a big help throughout this whole entire process with all the paperwork and everything else that's necessary for being filed and the like. They're a great staff down there in the elections office and I want to make sure the clerk has me say this to him today before the election.
[Adam Knight]: We know what the options are in front of us.
[Adam Knight]: It wasn't the presentation that was questioned. Motion to adopt this plan that makes no changes, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. If you recall, Some years ago, probably, maybe two and a half years ago, this council had passed a resolution requesting that the operators, not only Asian Taste, but the operators in that stretch of buildings, refrain from parking on the sidewalk. What was happening is people were using the handicap ramp as a driveway and driving up on the sidewalk because the sidewalk has a lot of width and a lot of space. The council had requested that bolus be put in and the bolus were put in. However, they will put him wide enough where vehicles could still drive up the handicap accessible ramp onto the sidewalk. So I just want to reiterate to the gentleman, I certainly have no problem with the license transfer. That's an enforcement issue that should be handled through enforcement. It's really a function of the city administration, not this council, to ensure the vehicles don't park on the sidewalk. But with that being said, with the license being transferred, I want to reiterate this council's position that that type of behavior is not something that we'd like to see there at that location, and we've taken steps and voted affirmatively on a number of occasions to install safety measures to prevent it from happening. So I'm hoping that, you know, as we move forward, Mr. President, that the representative for the business entity can convey the Council's concern relative to the parking circumstances and situations at that location and make sure that they refrain from parking on the sidewalk in that spot.
[Adam Knight]: On the motion by Councilor Bears, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. Chair recognizes Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: On the motion by Councilor Behr, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? The ayes have it. Council paper 21593, offered by President Caraviello. Be it resolved, the Medford City Council have the DPW and administration replace the sidewalks from Brook Street, on the Brook Street from Harvard Street to Irving, replace the sidewalks on Brook Street from High Street to Irving Street. We're looking at comes to go. Thank you in the interest of public safety. My apologies for butchering that to death. The chair recognizes Councilor Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: They want to speak on that this evening. Absolutely and if I may miss the copy of the law in the morning it is a very difficult street to drive down because that's the way I take my kids to school and that's very difficult to be able to pass the same time going up and down the street. Before we just recognize, is there any Councilors have any comments that they'd like to add? We open it up to the general public.
[Adam Knight]: Name and address the record, please, ma'am.
[Adam Knight]: Name and address for the record, please, ma'am.
[Adam Knight]: Is it what you see in residents in the neighborhood that live in these houses, or is this? Yes, yes. Is it also commuters, or?
[Adam Knight]: I'm going to recognize a few of the councils that have some commentary that they'd like to say, and I'm more than happy to give you another opportunity to speak. The chair recognizes Councilor Scott Peller.
[Adam Knight]: The chair recognizes Councilor Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, chair recognizes Council this.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. President. Commitment to investing in delivery of city and school services. Absolutely. The chair recognizes Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Caraviello is the president who will be scheduling the meeting, so I think that is good. And we can get that emergency order over there to the DPW tomorrow. I think that's a good cause of action as well. Did I hear that Councilor Scott Bailey had a point of information? Councilor Falco, I do believe you're still on the floor.
[Adam Knight]: I do think it's an enforcement issue. So traffic and parking should be there. Absolutely. We do have a new traffic, uh, manager of a new in-house parking. Program so she started yesterday they Morrison. So they welcome aboard is the second day of the job and we have some work to do. So with that being said I believe that everybody here in the audience said the opportunity to speak once it's wanted to is there anybody on the computer I just want to say that anybody in the computer that has not the opportunity to speak first. I see my friend Jake I'm asking on the computer doesn't want to speak. I think we have a couple of people here. Not just everybody had an opportunity to go once. I just want to say, please step right up and name and address for the record. If you haven't had a chance to speak yet.
[Adam Knight]: I want to ask, I mean, call the police and I'm ready to take it.
[Adam Knight]: I drive the street every morning taking my kids to school. I know exactly what you're talking about. It's a battle.
[Adam Knight]: Name and address for the record.
[Adam Knight]: Understood. Okay. On the motion of Councilor Caraviello, as amended by Councilor Scarpelli for a site visit, COW, as further amended by Councilor Caraviello for the DPW to take immediate emergency action. All those in favor. Aye. All those opposed. The ayes have it.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, everyone. Thank you. Paper 21594 offered by Councilor Falco. Be it resolved, the Parks Commission be invited to participate in the car park revitalization meetings. The chair recognizes Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. That's an excellent recommendation. Councilor Falco and it's my hope also that we get a response from the administration in short order relative to our request for an advisor's advisory committee relative to that project as well. On the motion by Councilor Falco, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? The ayes have it. Chair awaits a motion to take papers in the hands of the clerk. Motion to take papers. Second. Papers in the hands of the clerk, Council Paper 21597, offered by Council President Caraviello. Be it resolved, the Medford City Council have the construction firm doing the work on Prescott Street, remove the trailer and backhoe equipment from the sidewalk on the corner of Alston Street in the interest of public safety. The chair recognizes Councilor Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: And I do believe Councilor Caraviello, as you stated yesterday when we were discussing this, that it does pose a public safety risk to the residents of 22 Alston Street. The question of whether or not fire apparatus and emergency equipment can traverse the lane with the way that the equipment is positioned is certainly concerning. Chair recognizes Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recommends Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: On the motion by Councilor Cairo-Viello, seconded by Councilor Falco. All those in favour? Aye. All those opposed? The ayes have it. That's the longest thing on the paper, now you're going to make me read this thing. You can't read it, it's mine, it's mine.
[Adam Knight]: I do think it might make sense if we're gonna do a robocall, that we do a robocall across the whole city and tell everybody where they vote. I mean, if we have the capability and capacity to do it, it might make sense, right? Saying, Hey, you know, Adam heard of these would do one new vote at the firefighters club. Just something to throw out there.
[Adam Knight]: I would make the suggestion that citywide then.
[Adam Knight]: Yes. And approve, right? I mean, approve the polling locations and do the robocall.
[Adam Knight]: brief explanation of the paper, Mr. President. Mr. Clerk, do you have the original paper?
[Adam Knight]: I don't think we need to do that, Mr. President, but if I remember correctly, I think this is the paper that creates the caps for the station manager. Yes. For the Department of Parking. Yeah. Yes. And a couple of those are the ones.
[Adam Knight]: Minutes.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Mr. Clerk, will we be able to conduct that meeting on Tuesday evening with early voting?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: To our existing billboard before us this evening it was tabled for a couple weeks and I'm hoping we can pick that matter up.
[Adam Knight]: It was a night. I'm very familiar with this parcel of land. I'm very familiar with the billboard agreement that the city has with clear channel. It's not something that's negotiated by the city council the terms of the agreement of the terms of the agreement. I think really the issue that's before us this evening is whether or not we're going to reverse the sign denial because of the denial that was issued by the building commissioner because it falls out of the scope of our sign ordinance. This billboard has always fallen outside the scope of our signed ordinance because it was part of a program that was negotiated with the state. In order to allow the property owner to get the necessary relief that he needs to make his parcel more accessible and more developable, I think it makes sense for us to approve this measure this evening, Mr. President. The way that I look at this is we're addressing an environmental concern relative to the runoff and leakage and drainage problems that we have at the gentleman's parcel, and we're also getting upgrades to the existing billboard to make it more environmentally friendly. The transfer, it's going to help us out with light pollution and the like. So I think that this is a measure, Mr. President, that's a win-win for all. It allows the property owner to get the necessary relief that he needs. It allows Clear Channel the opportunity to upgrade their existing equipment, and it allows us here in the city of Medford to have some of the best, state-of-the-art, most up-to-date equipment to utilize through public service programs that they have. So I, for one, certainly feel as though this is a measure that the council should be approving, and I will move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. As we're all aware, if we've been paying attention to what's going on in this community, as of recent, the issue of 5G technology was certainly a concern.
[Adam Knight]: Which was 0 Goley Road. No, no. Oh, he skipped. Oh, he skipped. I'm sorry. We can jump back to it. Mr. President, why don't we get council Scarpelli's items out of the way.
[Adam Knight]: Ultimately, Mr. President, the issue of 5g facilities in this community has been a topic of discussion and concern. There are many individuals in this community. that have expressed some concern about 5G technology and the placement thereof. Recently, the city's ad hoc small cell committee has approved 17 5G towers to be located in the city of Medford. And I just want to be sure that the residents that are going to be abutting these 5G towers are notified of the circumstance that the approval has been awarded and whether or not there are any appeals processes for these abutters should they wish to pursue them. So that's the resolution in a nutshell, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: So, as you mentioned, that is what information vice president night, I do believe that would give us the capacity, though, to see growth of city population upwards of 38,000 people over the next 10 years without having to worry about having to do this again. So it seems like an option. See, you know, in fact, the voter had to be moved this time. Once it's done, it's done because we've been able to address the future population growth to such an extent capacity. I don't see it having to change again.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. As you read off those names, I'm sure many of us see many familiar faces, hear many familiar faces that had the opportunity to run in the Boston Marathon just the other day. You know, when you think about all the counsel Scarpelli's going through over the recent months to understand that his wife ran the Boston Marathon on Tuesday and then was there to support her family through this time of need. Tuesday evenings is something that's amazing. It's just such a sign of what a strong woman she is. And that goes for all of these athletes that participated in the Boston Marathon, Mr. President, because it takes a certain type of person to be able to run 26.1 miles consecutively with nobody chasing you. So with that being said, Mr. President, I think it's beautiful that these individuals were able to get out there and get back on the track. and follow the lead of Medford's own David McGilvery, race director, and enjoying yet another successful Boston Marathon. So with that being said, Mr. President, it's quite a celebration, a full year's worth of training goes into this, and for these individuals to have the opportunity to participate in the fashion and way that they did, something that's truly beautiful, and it's certainly what athletics is all about. So with that being said, Mr. President, I want to extend my condolences, my sincere Congratulations to these individuals for participating in the Boston Marathon. I'm sure it would feel like a condolence the day after the marathon, but the accomplishment of completing it, Mr. President, is something nonetheless.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Mr. President, thank you very much. I certainly agree with Councilor Marks in some aspects of this discussion that it does warrant further discussion, but In terms of the matter that's before us this evening, I think it's something that we should sit down with the city solicitor and the city assessor. talk about what it is we need to do to use the appropriate language to further enhance this local option. It does warrant a bit of further discussion, and the reason I think it warrants a bit of further discussion is because I want to make sure that we do it right, so that these individuals that do become eligible for this deferment can apply for it and the council can do it procedurally properly. When you look at the deferment, it's a deferment. It's not an exemption. The individual is going to have to pay it back. So really what this does is it provides somebody with a housing stability option. It expands access to a safety net program, Mr. President, and it gives us another tool, the toolbox that we can use to help people here in this community. Councilmax makes very valid points. Very, very valid points. But ultimately, right now, with this matter before us, we have a piece of paper that allows us to exercise a local option that's within our scope, purview, and discretion of this council to act. And I think it you know, highlights the value of deferment when we talk about all these issues that are going on in this community and the push and pull of people, a feeling when it comes to the pocketbook. So for those reasons, Mr. President, I certainly support the measure. I think it's a great idea, Councilor Morell. I wonder where you got it. And And I'm hoping that we can meet on it in a committee of the whole with the assessor and the city solicitor to further discuss it because I do think it provides value to the community, Mr. President. What it does is it says if somebody has a difficult time paying, they can come to the city and if they meet the income guidelines and the qualifications, they can defer those payments. I don't think that there's anything scary or wrong with that. I think that's a service that we could provide here. And I think that it's something that would be beneficial to not many, but some. And if we're helping somebody, then we're doing good. So for those reasons, I support the paper, Mr. President, and I'd suggest that we meet the committee of the whole.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. I think it's important to point out, Mr. President, when we set the tax rate this past year at $9.43 per thousand dollars of valuation for residential properties, One thing that we did discuss was the residential property tax exemption. And when we went through this exercise in determining whether or not that would be something that was good for the community, I believe what was established was a break-even point of $727,000. So any home that was valued over $727,000 that was owner-occupied would not see an increase in the tax bill of the percentage that we so chose to apply. In fact, what they'd see would be an increase in their tax bill above and beyond what their regular taxation would be without an owner-occupied exemption. So there are over 4,000 homes in this community, Mr. President, that are over the $727,000 breakeven point, and over 1,300 of those homes are occupied by individuals that are senior citizens. So that is why the Metro City Council, when we set the tax rate, did not adopt the residential exemption, if I remember correctly, Mr. President. But I just want to get that out there, because I know Mr. Castagnetti asked why that wasn't adopted. And that's why, because there are 4,000 homes that are owner-occupied in this community that would see an increase in the tax bill, not a decrease in the tax bill. and with the breakeven of $727,000 a few. We're an owner-occupied home owner, say, in East Ford, at a two-family home. It sounds like you may actually be above and beyond that breakeven point. You could actually probably see an increase in your taxes, not that owner-occupied exemption. So that's why the council did not adopt it in the past, historically speaking, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Well, Mr. President, if anything happened to me at the barbershop the other day, as I drove down Main Street and merged onto Mystic Avenue, then was right in front of Exploit Towing. The pavement gets a little milled, a little rocky. There's some construction going on. And there's a number of castings, Mr. President, along that stretch and further down where they're doing this work that aren't clearly marked. And I got two flat tires. driving down Mr. Cab the other day, Mr. President, on Wednesday night, because the casting wasn't clearly marked and I nailed it. And as I was commiserating over my experience at the coffee shop just the other day with Tom Tedford from Export Towing, he started laughing and told me that he does between 15 and 20 tires a week right at that location, Mr. President. So something's wrong there. Something needs to be done to protect those that are traveling by motor vehicle, uh, down Mr. Gavin new during this construction season. Um, you know, we're all anxious and looking forward to seeing Mr. Gap be fully resurfaced. But in the meantime, um, the 15 to 20 tires a week to get torn up, that's 15 to 20 taxpayers in this community, uh, that are going to be put through an inordinate inconvenience. And, um, also what we're going to see, Mr. President is a rising claims, the property damage against the city. If in fact, we don't take the appropriate steps to properly mock these castings. So with that being said, I ask everybody to feel bad for me because they have two flat tires in my car and also move approval on the paper so that we can get the area or at Mystic Gap a little bit safer during this construction period, Mr. President. That's a moral.
[Adam Knight]: I'm a desk geek. I don't know what the best practices are or what they use out there in the construction field, but I'm sure that they get something better than my idea out there.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. After having a whole summer off the first day of school, the city decided that it would be a good day to start a water main project on the roads abutting being Prescott Street, which I'm pretty sure you're familiar with. And over the course of time as the presidents in school, open those some six or seven weeks ago, what we're seeing is on various days certain roads are closed, no vehicular access during drop off period that coupled with the fact that we have, you know, gigantic dumpster construction materials and debris. in construction equipment parked along Prescott Street and along other side streets that are above the school, creating a situation that makes it difficult to pass, number one. Oddly, number two, and a concern for the children, number three, Mr. President, there in the area. It's a request to ask that the city engineer restrict the hours of construction for this project until such time as the students are in school. School starts about 8.30 in the morning, Mr. President. The construction crews like to get out there at 7 a.m. or so. and that hour-and-a-half window is creating a certain situation down at the school in terms of traffic gridlock, inconvenience to drop off of parents and the like. Yeah, coupled with the fact that if you used to go in a certain way, Mr. President, you'd drive down, say, Old Canal Street, and you'd take a left-hand turn onto Prescott, and then it says Prescott Street's closed. What's your option? You gotta go over the train tracks, turn all the way around, come back. It's just a really inconvenient situation. It doesn't really, It's not conducive to the free flow of traffic or a safe drive off to children down there in the area, Mr. President. So I just ask that the city engineer revisit the practices and hopefully come up with a plan that's a little safer.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, as Councilor Falco has added me to his resolution, I defer to him first.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. Yes, Mary was someone who always loved watching the city council meetings. And I remember quite frequently talking with her daughter and granddaughter about the goings on in town. And every once in a while, we'd get a request from Mary's daughter or granddaughter asking for a congratulations or a birthday shout out to Mary. And she really got a kick out of it. She was a great person. She raised a great family. And she's going to be sadly missed. So to Lauren Feldstrong and you and to the O'Sullivan family.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Mr. President, thank you very much. As most of you know, I have a background in organized labor, and when it comes to someone that was a fiery advocate for his membership, you couldn't find anybody better than Joe. When you talk to the current firefighters that have been around for a long time, that can share some of those old stories about what it was like negotiating contracts and going into the war room and fighting for what you need. They said that Joe was just quite a leader, Mr. President, someone whose actions spoke louder than his words, someone who wasn't afraid to fight the good fight. He's going to be sadly missed, his efforts, energies, and certainly his commitment to Local 1032 will not go unnoticed. Everybody I've talked to has only had fond things to say about it. And everybody I've talked to has said what a legend that this gentleman was in terms of advocating and fighting for his members.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Mister president on that point, I know that I believe it was Council of faculty with all the turnover and stuff. I'm not sure we asked at this point, I think it might have been either Dave Rodriguez when he was here or at least not only when she was here. If we could get a copy of the organizational chart after the passage of this last budget, we saw a couple of new departments get created, a couple of new positions get created, Mr. President. And there was a lot of talk and discussion about what this organizational chart was going to look like. before all the turnover in the corner office occurred. I was wondering, I know we've asked for it, I don't think we've received it, so I wonder if we could just reiterate that request, Mr. President, to get a copy of the organizational chart.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Mr. President, on that note, actually, here we are now where about a quarter of the way is in. Next week, I will be putting forward my request for an update on the city's financial health. That was a request that this council have put forward a resolution this council passed asking for quarterly updates from our CFO. But right now, I don't believe we have a CFO. So I think it's very important that we have this financial update ASAP. So I'm asking, Mr. President, that you get in advance of me putting this on the agenda. Rob, make sure you reach out to the administration and let them know that that's coming so that we can possibly have some- You can send me an email on that tomorrow, what you want, and I will take care of that.
[Adam Knight]: I'll roll, please.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: What are we voting on? Suspending the vote to take the intervention. Under suspension. Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. These two lovebirds met back at Medford High School some many years ago and have forged a beautiful relationship and have raised a beautiful family. They've become grandparents, still reside in the South Medford neighborhood of this great city, Mr. President. Just this past weekend, surrounded by friends and family, they were surprised at their daughter-in-law's house for a 50th wedding anniversary, Mr. President, and for all accounts, From what I understand, it was a great success. Michael and Marie were both very, very surprised. They had no idea that it was happening. And if you know Michael and Marie, you'll know that they're two people that are just great individuals. If you're looking for them, you can probably find them down at La Conte Skating Rink, because between their kids and their grandkids, that's where they spend the majority of their time. But they're great family people, pictures in the self-benefit neighborhood, as I said, Mr. President, and they've been able to tolerate each other for 50 years with love, bliss, and kindness. And it's something that I look forward to celebrating someday with my wife. So I'm very proud of them and very happy for them, and I wish them all the best.
[Adam Knight]: of vice president night. It's my understanding and when these applications come before us and we read through the application, um, and we, Oh, what are these councils behind this rail last every time? What are the hours of this project? What are the hours of construction? We'll do the hours of construction. We'll do construction whenever the city tells us to, whenever the city engineer, whenever the mayor's office tells us to, that's when we'll do it. That's when we'll do it. So I think what you're getting Nate, quite frankly, is, um, what's that song by blues traveler, the runaround. You know, very much so. I mean, everyone's pointing, you know, which way, which way the police chief, you know, at the end of the day, the administration determines when the construction is going to be authorized and allowed. It's outlined on the permit, the permits issued through the engineering office.
[Adam Knight]: That's a street opening permit, so the police would have to be there for the detail. The police get the detail. Sure. So any road opening has to have the detail there. The city engineer signs off on any type of construction. The city engineer has to sign off. Chief, a police can't say, yeah, go open the street and do construction.
[Adam Knight]: A level one gas leak is an emergency. Understood. A level one gas leak is an emergency. There's no question about that. A level one gas leak is an emergency. To take two weeks to fix it is a little crazy to me because if it's such an emergency, then shut the street down all day, get it done in a day. You know what I mean? That's the way I'd look at it. But you know, I don't sit over there. I sit over here. Um, you know, so that's really not, you know, something that, that, that we can control or, or, or, or impact at the time. You know what I mean? It's just mismanagement.
[Adam Knight]: I understand the situation and the circumstances and why individuals are here tonight. I find the timing of it curious, but at the same time, I also find the context and subject matter and what people have to go through not fair. My mother always told me, don't put something on the internet because it's going to be there forever. Right? You have to be careful what you say and you have to guide your remarks. And the reason you have to do that is because they can be taken out of context, but at the end of the day, they're going to last forever and they're going to be on the internet forever. I certainly don't feel as though this website adds any value to this community whatsoever. I don't think it does anything to move this community forward. in terms of race relations, or having that conversation that we hear so much about. However, we also have to think about this, Mr. President, as to when's it going to stop? When's the Metro City Council going to stop? I mean, there has to be a point where we say, look, yeah, there's a website out there. Y'all mentioned on the website. The city has nothing to do with it. The city council has nothing to do with it. It's a civil matter. It's a matter that should be taken up in a court of law. So we're going to denounce, we're going to take a vote tonight to denounce this. When does it stop? Is my question. When do we stop taking votes, denouncing what somebody said on the internet? When do we stop taking votes, denouncing statements that people said? All right. It's not my job. It's not until the night has the floor. It's not our job. We're the legislative body over here. We're the legislative body. All right. We're the legislative body. So, You know, I think it's vile. I don't think that that's, you know, the way to go about business, putting people on a website anonymously. I mean, I've always been a firm believer of if you got a problem, I'm right here. Come talk to me face to face. I don't understand this, you know, behind the scenes trolling or whatever they call it, the young whippersnappers these days call it. But, you know, at the end of the day, Mr. President, we have to think about when's it going to stop? When is the council going to stop entertaining issues that don't fall within our scope and purview? We can't be the Facebook police. We can't be the internet police. We have a lot of important things to take care of. Like councilor Mark says, we have a lot of important things that are on this table that needs to be addressed. But week after week, I feel like we're spending more and more time talking about issues and items that are outside of scope and outside of our purview. So, well, you know, probably the most important piece of legislation lays before the city council right now. The recodification of our zoning. We've spent more hours talking about things that don't fall on our table, that aren't within our purview, Mr. President. So we need to take a longer look at what direction we want to go in moving forward. I certainly have no problem with public participation. Come on up, voice your concerns, say what you have to say. But there has to be some point where this council says, look it, sorry to hear that, but that's outside the council's purview. and for us to take actions out of order. And I, for one, Mr. President, don't want to be sitting here every week having this person say, oh, this person said this about me on the internet. Come down and denounce this. This person said this about me on the internet. Come denounce that. You know, it's getting to be crazy, Mr. President, with the influence that social media is having on the operations of government in this community and the direction that we're going. You know, it seems to me like it's government by press release and Facebook post correct government by press release and Facebook post. And the problem is. Social media is not real life. And we are very reactionary to what we see on the internet because it's very personal to a lot of people. Someone attacks you, you're going to take it personally. More so if they do it anonymously or they do it behind a keyboard where they're not in front of you and you can't sit there and have that dialogue and that conversation that human beings have during times where adults want to interact and iron out their differences. But the question I put forward, Mr. President, is when does it stop? When do we stop acting like we're the First Amendment police? Because we're not. This is a matter that should be before the courts. It's a matter that should be before the courts. It's liable. It's slander. It's a civil issue. It's not an issue for the Medford City Council. I feel terrible. I feel terrible for the individuals that are mentioned on the website. Many of them I know well. Many of them I know well. Growing up with them, going to school with them, know their children, have coffee with them, the Met's donuts. Many of the statements that are on that site I don't find to be true. That's my perception based upon my experiences with these individuals in this community. But Mr. President, we cannot be the Facebook police. We cannot be the social media police. If that's what we're going to turn into, we're going to waste a lot of time focusing on efforts and endeavors that don't move the city in the right direction. There's a lot of good things that are going on in this community, but if you watch our meetings, you'd think Medford is falling apart. Medford is not falling apart. Medford's not falling apart. There are a lot of good things going on in this community. We need to straighten the ship out. We need to straighten the ship, Mr. President. But ultimately, at the end of the day, in order to straighten the ship, we've got to focus on the issues that are important to move this community forward. And I don't think that us policing the Internet and posts, private posts on the Internet, are where we should be. That's just my personal opinion. Again, I feel very, very sorry, very badly, for individuals that are named on that website. No family should be put through that. As public officials, we know what we sign up for. We sign up for the abuse. Individual private citizens don't. All right. So I'm very, very, very sorry that you have to go through that. And I hope that you get the recourse that you need to reach. But the Medford City Council isn't the vessel, the vehicle for you to get that accord. The court of law is where you're going to get that. It's a civil matter. Thank you. Councilor Morell.
[Adam Knight]: And the motion was the president will move to amend the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: If they sponsor the resolution would be so willing to amend the resolve to excuse me. Thank you. The sponsor of the resolve would be so willing to amend the resolution to put a period after the word racist of Medford and strike the remaining. language in the resolve. I will be happy to co-sponsor it. I'll second it rather.
[Adam Knight]: Council Vice President, it looks like eight feet doesn't look like it's much of a project. This seems like it's something that would probably take about a half of a day or a day to complete. Is that correct? Well, a few hours or less. A few hours. Move approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Last week, there was a meeting relative to the revitalization of Carr Park and the design and construction thereof. Several weeks before that, this council, I believe, did appropriate some money from the Community Preservation Act to authorize this project to move forward. And when this meeting was scheduled, I did receive a number of phone calls from area residents who expressed some concern about the final design and what the final design was going to look like and the impact that it was going to have on their property. So with that being said, Mr. President, I thought it would make sense for us to request that the mayor put together an abutters advisory committee. So it'll be a group of abutters that live beside the project site, maybe one or two from each street that abuts. And what happens is they can kind of act as the point person for the residents on their street to discuss the neighborhood concerns that are coming up relative to design plans. I know that there's some discussion about putting walking trails, for example, in between the buffer strip. between the park and the neighborhood. So I know that some residents have expressed some concern about that. I know there's been some discussion about what type of equipment is going to be installed in the playground and whether or not there's going to have adaptive equipment there for children with special needs and disabilities. I know that there's been a lot of discussion about what the final walking track is going to look like around the track and whether or not they're going to be able to loom and see the whole field and so forth, Mr. President. So I think it would make sense for us to have some partners that are part of an advisory group that can sit there and work with the administration as well as the design team and our friends on the community preservation committee to ensure that the neighborhood concerns are getting addressed as this project moves forward. I think it's a great project for the neighborhood, it's a great project for the community, but we need to protect the neighborhood and the residents as well. So with that being said, Mr. President, we do have a resident from Harrison Street, Harris Street rather, and Mr. Marino that wants to talk a little bit about his experience at the meeting last week. I'd obviously defer to my Councilors to see if they have anything I'd like to add, but this is Mr. Marino here as well to join us to discuss this issue.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I just want to be clear. I think the conversations that Mr. Marino and I had concerning this project, it's not that there's an opposition to the project, but anybody in the neighborhood wants to stand in the way of it. What they want to do is be sure that the project comes out in a fashion that delivers the best benefit for the community, but also protects the residents in the neighborhood. You know, so this committee could be tasked with the function of determining what types of plants are going to be used as the buffer zone. Are they going to have thorn bushes and tall trees or are they going to have this type of tree or that type of tree to keep people away from the properties? Can we talk about where the path is going to go, how far away from the properties it can be, so on and so forth. We ran into a situation with the Clippership Connector where the residents felt as though they didn't have a voice, Mr. President, and I think that this right here will allow us to get ahead of that and not see some of the same mistakes repeat themselves that have in the past on projects of this sort.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I certainly will second the motion, but this sounds very familiar to me. We did bring this up in the past. I do believe you did make this request.
[Adam Knight]: You raised the issue when the administration wasn't aware of the money that was associated with the billboard agreement at that time. Correct. And then we need to expend, I think, those funds before the close of the fiscal year, if I'm not mistaken. Correct.
[Adam Knight]: By 630, okay. I mean, that's what it was at. So, very interesting. Yeah, I appreciate you bringing this up again, Councilor Falco, and I certainly look forward to the results of the administration's response.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: I grew up in the West Metro part of the city and I went to St. Joseph's Parish, that was my parish, and about, you know, I guess 25 years ago or so, a group of friends and I decided we were going to try out for a basketball team up at St. Francis. And there's a gentleman sitting across from me who didn't cut me, Coach Falco, kept me on the team. And that was the first time I had the opportunity to meet now City Councilor John Falco at St. Francis, Mr. President. But one thing I realized coming from such a strong parish at St. Joseph's and going up out of St. Francis and playing basketball at St. Francis was the great sense of community that they have up there and the great strength of that parish. It wasn't a Sunday that you'd drive by the parking lot and think for a second that you'd be able to find a spot. It was a very, very active parish, very active parishioners, a great Mother's Club, if I remember correctly, as well. I, too, want to join my council colleagues in extending a deep congratulations to St. Francis of Assisi Church. I wish the school was still there, but it's quite an accomplishment for a church to last that long, especially in this region when we're seeing so many Catholic churches close down. So congratulations to the St. Moritzes.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. In our packets this evening, you'll see that we have received correspondence from the mayor relative to the mayor's ad hoc small cell committee. And in that packet, we will see that the committee found that 17 5G facilities have been approved here in the community of Medford. Zero Goley Road, zero West Street, 24 Pearl Street, 26 Royal Street, 48 Clock Street, 40 Ashland Street, 12 Fulton Street, 43 Woodrow Ave, 123 Grant Ave, Zero Logan Ave. Zero Brookside Parkway. 83 Washington Street. 39 Charnwood Road. 163 and 199 Forest Street, 59 Jerome Street and zero Yale Street. So, Mr. President, those 70 plus applications that were before us before the city for quite some time and we're nearing the subject of litigation have been addressed and it appears that the Mayor's Ad Hoc Committee has granted 17 of the initial applications. I know that this was an issue of concern out there in the community. So I'd just like to ask that the city administration do a robocall to the residents on those streets to inform them that these 5G towers have been approved.
[Adam Knight]: In memory of Lily Scott-Pelly, I believe, this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Proposed hours of operation. I'm sorry, what are the proposed hours of operation?
[Adam Knight]: Your hours of operation.
[Adam Knight]: Will there be any alcohol served on the premises, or is there an application for a license to serve any alcohol?
[Adam Knight]: A license to serve any alcohol?
[Adam Knight]: Is there a dining option, or is this exclusively takeout?
[Adam Knight]: One last item, Mr. President. 21561 on the suspension item offered by President Caraviello relative to Vernon Street construction.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. Chair recognizes Councilor Farquhar.
[Adam Knight]: You're offering that in the form of a motion, Councilor?
[Adam Knight]: Amendment, please.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor. Is there anybody from the public that would like to speak on this issue? Come right up, please. Name and address for the record, please, sir.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, sir. Chair recognizes Chancellor Caraviello. Chair recognizes Sharon Kennedy on Zoom.
[Adam Knight]: Resident storyteller sharing.
[Adam Knight]: You can.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Sharon. Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Christopher Leary on Zoom.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Leary, if I may, can I just ask that you leave your address for the record with the clerk, please?
[Adam Knight]: He didn't give his address, I'm sure.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, 40 Vernon. Mr. President. Chair recognizes Councilor Bears.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Councilor Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: I think Chair and Kennedy gave a good explanation of what goes on at that park. Not only kids go sledding up there, right? Might be guilty of sledding up there in the last snowstorm as well with my children. On the motion by Council car below as amended by Councilor Morell asking how often they switch out design specifications in the contract further amended by Council Mac marks asking for the job specifications versus the final product. And whether or not this grant will be temporary this concrete will be temporary until granted is installed and what's the difference in price regarding the approved work order versus the current construction materials. And we have a motion by Councilor Caraviello to ask that the construction stop until these questions be answered in granite curbing be acquired and installed, not to start to start but on the domestic street at the street, and Vernon not be paid.
[Adam Knight]: So you're asking the reservicing aspects of the project. Yeah, just the reservicing aspects. Once we service, you're not going to be able to take those curbs out.
[Adam Knight]: Well put councilor. Mr. President, the chair recognizes John Anderson on zoom.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, John. Appreciate it. Motion for approval, Mr. President. On the motion by Councilor Caraviello, as amended by Councilors Morell, Councilor Marks, and Councilor Caraviello. Seconded by Councilor Marks. On the motion. All those in favor? Aye. Roll call vote, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Yes. Six in the affirmative, zero in the negative, one absent. The motion passes. Chair relinquishes the gavel to Councilor Caraviello. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This was a topic at last week's meeting. We certainly discussed it at length. resulting in this Council calling for a special emergency meeting on Saturday to discuss the staffing levels in our veteran service office and what's going on down there. I think we're all well aware of the circumstances and the situation that gave rise to this resolution. I don't think we need to recreate history or beat a dead horse, Mr. President. What we need to do is get Mike Durham back to work. So with that being said, I offer this resolution this evening. I ask my Council colleagues to support it, to reinstate Mike Durham to the position of veteran service officer. Thank you. That's my Council colleagues to support the measure and I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Questions?
[Adam Knight]: One information, Vice President Knight, on that point, not only are they doing a disservice to the veterans in this community, they're doing a disservice to Mike Durham, the human being, a husband, a father, someone who served this country. They're doing a disservice to him too, leaving him hanging out there like this, using him as a political pawn because they don't like the pressure he's putting on him. Enough's enough with this, Mr. President. It's time he gets back to work. They're playing with a man's life. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Has the administration answered the question as to how Mr. Chimaya is getting paid?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and I appreciate you co-sponsoring this resolution with me. Paul McGillivray. born and raised on Marion Street in South Medford, son of Harold McGilvery senior, a very, very, very recognized cop that served in the city of Medford on the NBC was injured in the line of duty and actually passed away very recently from the injuries that he sustained on that fateful night. Following in his father's footsteps, Paul became a Metro Police Officer some 25 years ago, Mr. President. And during that 25 years, Paul was so happy to say when I spoke to him the other day with a smile on his face that he had an unblemished record. In 25 years of service as a Metro Police Officer, he had a perfect record, an unblemished record. And for 25 years, he served his community. But a number of years ago, he moved up to the town of Wilmington, where he and his wife, Andrea, began to raise their wonderful family. And Paul had a great opportunity. to transfer departments and to now work in the town that he lives in. So born and raised in Medford, he had the opportunity to do 25 years here in the city of Medford, protecting the residents. And now he's gonna have the opportunity to do that up in Wilmington, the town that he lives in. So I wish Paul the best of luck to his health, to his safety, and most importantly, to his happiness, to have the opportunity to be close to his family, to be in his neighborhood and to work in his hometown is something that's great. It's something that we all relish. So I congratulate him and I wish him the best of luck moving forward. He's a great individual, just a great person to be around. A lot of fun, a lot of knowledge. A cop's cop, as they like to say. He gets out of the car, he does his job, he does the work. He's someone that's gonna be sadly missed, and they're gonna have a big pair of boots to fill down there at Medford Police Department. With Paul McGilvray leaving, Mr. President. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: I certainly disagree with that. Diane McLeod did yeoman's work on this when it came to diversity and disability issues, especially. Um, I mean, she would, she'd be in her office with blueprints on restaurants being made and making sure that there were accessible pathways for individuals. Um, and it was a diversity and disability office. Um, we've seen the focus of the office change. Um, we've seen the office actually be proposed to be eliminated. And that was the priority that this council made, to keep the diversity office alive, because that office was going to be gone entirely. Entirely. It was just going to be the office of human resources. There was not going to be an office of diversity inclusion anymore. It was going to be gone. And that was the stand this council took. We said, there's going to be a circumstance or a situation that comes up where the director of human resources is sitting on an interview panel, say, and an individual that's interviewed feels as though There was some miss miss malfeasance or what we're giving a fair shake the civil rights of violate whatever it was, who do they go to the human resource officer to just sat on the panel just told them they don't get the job. That was the conflict that we were talking about. That was the first sign that we really saw that we need to make a commitment to this. We can talk all we want to talk. But at the end of the day, where do we put the money? We put the money into the diversity office. We made it a council priority to keep that diversity office alive. And that's what happened. I mean, I think when we look at the steps the administration's taken, we're seeing a lot of press releases. We're seeing a lot of press releases. We're seeing a lot of Facebook posts. But we're seeing a lack of communication. We're seeing a lack of communication. We have a communications director that does a great job. She has a great job. She puts a great press. But we need to get in the same room and sit down and talk about some of these things. And it's not just related to issues of race and equity. It's related to fiscal responsibility. It's related to service delivery. There's a real breakdown in communication. My father was a great athlete. He was the athletic director over at the city of Somerville for, I can't tell you, 25 years. He always talked about athletes. And he said that an athlete's number one ability is their availability. If they're not available they can't play, right, if the mayor is not available to take these conversations with us and to come to our meetings when we ask her to be here to address issues of inequity, then how are we supposed to move forward. How are we supposed to move forward? We can all stand behind the rail, and we can bang the table, and we can give the good speeches, and we can talk for 20 and 30 and 40 minutes at a time. Listen, everybody behind this rail can talk, and we can talk the dog off a meat wagon, every single one of us. You've seen it before, and you'll see it again, right? But at the end of the day, it's all smoke. It's all smoke, unless, like Councilor Falco says, someone takes that document. That's the mayor's roadmap. That's what it says right on the top of it. That's who's in charge of that document. The mayor's in charge of that document. That's the mayor's roadmap. The mayor's roadmap, not the council's, not Neil Osborne's, not anybody else's. That's the mayor's roadmap. And that's who should be owning this.
[Adam Knight]: In terms of the implementation of public policy and implementation of public policy.
[Adam Knight]: We're not going to talk about all the service to the community, the housing authority, the city council, United States of America as a veteran, 75 years in this wonderful city, a West Medford guy over here. Come on. We got to give him a little bit of kudos on his birthday, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Both Ms. General Lasky and Ms. Murray have served on the Board of Registrars for an extended period of time, as long as I can remember. They've both served this city diligently. They've done a great job working with our election staff to ensure that our elections roll out smoothly, to ensure that our elections policy is fair and equitable, and to be sure that We get the job done when it comes down to one of the most important functions of city government, which is conducting municipal and state elections. So both members of the board have sought retirement after this recent primary election. And I think that it's only warranted. So I bring forward this resolution, Mr. President, congratulating them for their service and dedication to the community and ask them to council colleagues support the resolve. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Thanks. President Knight. Mr. President, I see this as nothing more than a betterment, and I move for approval. Okay.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, this is commonplace. Blond Me has been there now for, I think, seven consecutive years. That is correct. The Brooks FallFest has been a very successful event in the community. Move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to refer to Committee of the Whole, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Okay, there you go. Thank you. Are all these positions filled?
[Adam Knight]: Have these positions been filled during the current administration and they've become vacant, or are these new positions that you're trying to create?
[Adam Knight]: And lastly, the caps that are presented to us this evening. Is that the rate of pay that they would produce positions with previously paid? Or are there any adjustments that have been taking place with the offerings that have been made this evening?
[Adam Knight]: So, we don't know if the positions that you're bringing before us this evening are upgrading the salaries of the titles.
[Adam Knight]: Is this district appropriately zoned for multifamily housing?
[Adam Knight]: Excellent. Application, Mr. President, I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Mr. President, thank you very much. I, too, stand by the comments that I made at the budget hearings. Mike Durham, when it comes to department heads, is top of the list here in the city of Medford. But he's more than just a department head, you know, he's a person, he's a husband, he's a father, he's a veteran, he's someone that's served the public diligently for his whole professional career. And for this personnel matter to be played out publicly like it is, as really nothing more than what I can see as a tool for politics in the real smoke and mirrors game. I think it's sad, Mr. President, and I'm afraid we're going to lose him. I'm afraid we're going to lose him because we're not showing the respect that he deserves. And that's the bottom line. Everybody behind this rail does a lot of good. Every day. Mike Durham does far more than we do. He's touched the lives of hundreds of thousands of people here in this community and beyond through his service and through his work on behalf of veterans. I've never seen such an outpour of support. for an individual department head going through such a situation in my 20-plus years in government. And it's a testament to the work that he does and the person that he is. And quite frankly, I stand with Mrs. Durham. I think he should be reinstated. There's no reason why this is playing out the way it is. I can't see any way that this is the appropriate course of action that's going on right now. Mike should be working, just like he has been. But Mike should be working just like he has been every single day. And, um, you know, I think that one of the things that people forget is that as a public servant, Mike goes to work every day to help people. And now it's time for us to help him. I certainly have no problem requesting that the administration reinstate Mike Durham to the position of director of veteran services post haste. And I offer that in the form of a motion.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe it's state law that veteran service officers have to be veterans. So, unless the chief of staff is a veteran, the veteran service officer work should be performed by the veteran veteran service officer, a member of the veterans organization. I mean, if I'm correct, and you look at the state law, I believe the state law says that no one can serve as a VSO that's not a veteran.
[Adam Knight]: because it's a violation of the open meeting law and also to find a vote will be a bad vote the council can get find the council has established rules the rules indicate that you know it just doesn't.
[Adam Knight]: I mean you got a portion of the law got to play the game by the rules.
[Adam Knight]: We can't suspend the rules. We're only the Medford City Council. We can't suspend the state law.
[Adam Knight]: We have a rule in place that says that you can't bring items under suspension because it's a violation of the open.
[Adam Knight]: We can't suspend the state law. We can't suspend the state law. Correct. Right. That's correct. And it will be on the agenda because we put it on there already tonight. One meeting, please.
[Adam Knight]: It's not our decision to make.
[Adam Knight]: I think he's a great employee, but we're not That's the point.
[Adam Knight]: Ms. Lister? Yes. And the mayor is the appointing authority, right? So if the employees agree, he has... Okay, so what I'm hearing is this would have to go to court.
[Adam Knight]: I have the Attorney General's open meeting log guide here.
[Adam Knight]: What are the requirements for posting notice of meetings? Except in cases of emergency, a public body must provide the public with 48 hours notice.
[Adam Knight]: Um, so, um, yes, we're looking at assistant purchasing agent CAF 11,
[Adam Knight]: And that compensation rate is the existing compensation rate for the incumbent in the position of the incumbent that was in the position before it became vacant?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, and that goes the same for the land use planner?
[Adam Knight]: The MCM station manager and the MCM production coordinator?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight, are there any employees being compensated outside of their CAF?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. What information vice president night? We don't want to get run over while we're out there either.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. My dear friend Lenny Gliona and my dear friend Jeannie Gliona just celebrated 50 years of wedded bliss. Many of us know Lenny from being around the hockey rinks and the political circles here in the city of Medford, and many of us know Jeannie. for her work in the Metro Public Schools for over 30 years. 30 years in the public schools and 50 years married to Lenny. The woman's a saint. But with that being said, Mr. President, I do wish them the best of luck, and I hope that they have another 50 years of happy, healthy, wedded bliss. Thank you. Councilor Morell.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. For those of us who went to Medford High back in pre-2010 years, we would know Jack McDevitt as a law teacher. And he was one of the most influential teachers that I had in my career as a student in the Medford Public Schools. And recently, Jack celebrated his 85th birthday. Mr. McDevitt is a proud graduate of St. Clements High School. And upon his service in the United States military, he went to Boston College. where every first period law class he got to tell us about how Boston College was the greatest university in the history of man. I think the city clerk agrees with us there. I just always asked him if it was because he couldn't get into Merrimack, but he never thought that was very funny. But with that being said, Mr. President, Jack's a great guy. He's someone that had touched the lives and the hearts of many high school students across his time and tenure as a teacher at Medford Public Schools for over 40 years. He's someone that certainly impacted my life, and I wish him a happy 85th birthday. I'm glad to see him enjoying his retirement and getting many, many years out of it. Thank you. Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Yes, Mr. President, Mr. Bates passed away recently after a long battle with illness. We all know the Bates family here in the city of Medford, Dapa, Michelle. Sean and Mikey have been fixtures in the hockey rinks and Little League fields across this community for a number of years. A very large family, the Bateses, the Howes, the Rileys, all very dedicated. The Medfordians with the blue and white running through their veins, but no more so than Big Dan. Mr. President, he will be sadly missed. He was a dear friend, a consummate family man. And when he wasn't working, you could find him cutting his kids around the hockey rinks or sitting in the outfield watching the league games. One of the greatest human beings I've had the pleasure to meet and call a friend and I'm sad to see him go. So my condolences to the family and I ask my council colleagues to join me in extending these wishes.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Yes, Mr. President, thank you very much. South Medford lost one of the greats, Stella McPolland, mother to my dear friend Joe McPolland, also known as Norton, in the South Medford area. We all see Norton working down at Delarusso's funeral home as one of the ushers there. Just a great guy. He works with Freddie during the day and also for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts at night in the Department of Revenue. And Stella is part of that Stearns Ave crew of Insabi's that live down on Stearns Ave. And she recently passed away after a long struggle, and she will be sorely missed. Just a beautiful woman. She raised a great family and we're sad to see her go. So with that being said, Mr. President, I ask my council colleagues in supporting the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. It seems like it's been a tough summer for South Medford because Jack Moulton was also a South Medford legend. He's been taken from us too soon. He's the husband of one of our elections officers, Mrs. Moulton, father to John and Kim, two of my close friends. Passed away after a long public struggle with illness, Mr. President, and I was sad to see him go. So I'd just like to extend condolences to the family in this time of need and ask my council colleagues to support the result.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I find this to be a rather self-explanatory resolution, very similar to the concerns that we have on West Street and Cotting Street and North Street. We also share the concerns here at Central Avenue and Park Street. As we're all aware, those are two very long straight roadways that intersect with one another, and over years in time, they've turned into somewhat of a small raceway. There is a need for some traffic calming measures and some mitigation there, and I ask my council colleagues to support the resolution. Thank you. Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Congratulations to Dominic and Mario on 30 years of successful business. I feel like it was just yesterday when I was a 12-year-old kid walking into Amici's when they first opened, getting a slice of pizza. Since that time, every Friday night for the last 30 years, I've gone there. It's been an institution in my family. I can't tell you, you know, Amici's is just the place we go every Friday night for pizza, Friday night's pizza night. My little brother spent countless, countless hours in Amici's, 10 years my younger. So it's just so funny now when I go in there, Mr. President, with my children and Ryan and Brendan run behind the counter. And Mario's given him quarters to put in the machine just like he was when I was a kid, I think it's just the coolest thing. So, you know, I'm very thankful to have been able to develop such a 30 year friendship with Mario and Dominic down at amici's but also. very thankful that they put out such a great product for such a long time that they've made West Medford Square a destination location for the best pizza in Medford. And that's according to Boston Pizza Wars, not according to Adam Knight. But with that being said, Mr. President, I just want to congratulate Dominic and Mario and the rest of the family on such a successful 30 years in business. And I'd like to give them a citation at some point, if possible.
[Adam Knight]: concur with everything you've said. I think when you look at these two individuals, I read in the paper, I think it was over 70 years of law enforcement experience here in the city of Medford. I wish them both the best. We got very familiar with Lieutenant Rudolph during the budget process when he came up here to speak about the police dispatches. And I've been very familiar with Captain Conway because he lives down the street from me and he has the most meticulous yard and the coolest looking fence out in front of his house that you'll ever see. quite quite quite a outdoorsman, Mr. President, when it comes to maintaining his property. So I look forward to seeing him out there more often when he has more time on his hands now that he's a retiree. So with that being said, I second your motion.
[Adam Knight]: Mister President, thank you very much. Linda Pittorino is one of the unsung heroes of City Hall. Works down in the Metro Consumer Commission, helping out consumers file complaints against unscrupulous scammers and the like, Mr. President. But with that being said, just recently, Linda and John celebrated their 50th wedding anniversary. Over the years, I've gotten to know both John and Linda very well. They're a great couple. They're two little lovebirds. You can't miss them. You'll see them at the Little League Field watching little Johnny play t-ball. And I had the pleasure of playing against their grandson this year a couple of times. And to see them there cheering on their grandson is really something else, Mr. President. I've really come full circle for them, and I wish them all the best. But Linda and John are two great people, and they found each other 50 years of wedded bliss, and I wish them 50 more.
[Adam Knight]: Absolutely.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, Mr. President. That would be my concern. to pay Paul and we're going to say give us the Silver Line but we don't want a one seat, one ride express buses and that's a concern for me. I think anybody in this community that wants to take public transit would much rather get on the bus in Medford and take a express bus right down to Haymarket than to get on the Silver Line and take that Sullivan Station or Wellington Station and then get on a train and then take the train to Haymarket. That's just my opinion being a the former commuter into Boston. It wasn't necessarily always the prettiest ride when you took the train. That one seat, one ride was very much more enticing than to have to do the switch. That's why, you know, Express Bus Commuter Rail always seem to be great options for us here in the community and it hate to implement this this silver line project that would eliminate the one seat, one ride options that we hamper our ability to restore them back to the level that they were at previously. I'm certainly aware that we do need to have many more transit options here in the city of Medford for our community based upon our close proximity to the city, the congestion that we have here in the community as well. certainly would warrant additional resources from the MBTA in terms of service provision. The question is, are we robbing Peter to pay Paul to get it? You know, we're getting the green line and as the green lines coming to fruition, we're seeing our express buses get eliminated. Now, if we petition for the silver line and we get the silver line, what is going to be that opposite and exact reaction to that action? I guess that's the question because it's all driven by ridership.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. I think it would also be important where, you know, the disease of addiction has plagued our community now for the better part of a decade. It's not something that... anybody's immune from it's not something that we haven't been afraid to talk about. It's something that we put on the forefront, and we have an office of prevention we have pennies office up there that's doing a great job and you know if we have a situation where someone's battling addiction is in need of help. I think that, you know, Turning it into a police issue is one thing, but we have resources that are available as well. And I don't think this is something that should necessarily be turned into a police issue to quality of life issue. Correct definitely quality of life issue but I don't think it needs to be a police issue per se. If someone is in the community struggling and needs help and we have the resources available I think that they should also be brought to the table. So with that being said, I just asked that our Office of Prevention. maybe Officer Lockowitz be included in the discussions moving forward because they do a great job up there and they've helped a lot of people. And that's what we're all here to do, right? We're here to help people. So, you know, I think that that's probably a good recommendation, Mr. President, to have friends from the prevention office be a part of this discussion.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Mike's not doing outreach. Start doing outreach in that area because we know it's a problem area. They don't need to come to one of the meetings. They're going to hear the same thing we've told them time and time again, right? I mean, I think ultimately, you know, we need to ask them to go out to these hotspot areas and start performing outreach work.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. The packing program first rolled out some 10 years ago. One of the biggest criticisms that we received as a community was what's wrong with you rolling out this program in the middle of the winter. Exactly. And now here we are rolling out the program again, 10 years later in a January, the month of January. We have to learn from our mistakes at some point, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: It's going to look like a gone show right now. It's going to look like a gone show. We don't have the capability at this point in time with the funding that was in my budget. So what close to half a million bucks, I believe.
[Adam Knight]: It's not going to cut the mustard. It's not going to cut the mustard. And that's your personnel cost. Good luck getting a director for that salary, Joe. And the idea is that this is going to be a self-sustaining department that's going to have a revolving fund, where the revenue that they bring in is going to make it so self-sustaining that we're not going to have to ask the taxpayers to chip in. I don't think that's going to be the case at all. I think that we're going to end up seeing numbers that are worse than the numbers that we see right now with Republicans. just because Republic has the expertise and knowing how to do it. Right now, we're starting off like the bad news bears.
[Adam Knight]: I think one of the things that we need to look at that we haven't looked at in recent years that we did look at previously was the water table. The level of the water in the lakes, using the locks to control the water table so that we have the ability to sustain significant rain. You know, I think it's one of the detriments to losing, you know, such a high level of institutional knowledge over such a short period of time. As we've seen, you know, a lot of people, a lot of turnover, we lose that institutional knowledge. And then when we start relying on, you know, planning agencies and outside entities to come in and do the planning for this community without that institutional knowledge, it creates a situation for us. So when we look at the project on High Street, for example, where the resident was told that the catch basin was going to get tied in for 15 years. The catch basin never gets tied in. Now they do this project and the resident gets six feet of rainwater in their basement because the lack of institutional knowledge, lack of follow-up and institutional knowledge. I think it's important, Mr. President, that we, you know, the employees that we value that have this institutional knowledge, we need to keep around. I think it's very important. One of the things that I really think we do need to look at is the water table and the level that we keep the lakes at. It's always been historically something that, you know, I remember as a kid did always lower the level of the lakes in the rainy season and always let it come back up in the summer. I think it's something that needs to be looked at.
[Adam Knight]: That's Falco.
[Adam Knight]: The representative from the administration might want to explain what's going on with this, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, maybe we can have a representative from this newly organized employee group come up and explain to us what this is all about. I know that this is something that's been long awaited. We've been waiting for a long time for this contract to come before us. So maybe someone can be here to fill us in.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President says, be it further ordained, the positions outlined herein will be removed from their current classifications as they appear in the current classification and compensation plan. So it looks like we're passing it, and then it looks like we're eliminating it. Be it ordained that the following classification plan is adopted, we're adopting it. And then it says, be it resolved that the positions outlined herein be removed.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, where we have waited 19 months, 20 months for this contract to come to fruition, something that started during the previous administration and was negotiated almost to the end of the current administration, I would offer the motion that the additional readings be waived and the employees before us this evening be afforded their cost of living increase ASAP. This would be a retroactive increase to January 1st, 2021. So that's about seven months of benefits that these employees would be able to receive should we waive these additional readings. Second.
[Adam Knight]: That'll be a motion, Mr. President, to waive the additional readings on the passage of the ordinance.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. I do believe as part of this paper, we did request some information from the administration concerning some documentation and documents that this council asked an amendment, establishing term limits.
[Adam Knight]: if I may, from the chair, Councilor Falco. Tim, has this plan been reviewed to ensure that it's compliant with the ADA?
[Adam Knight]: and probably our ADA compliance officer. So the ADA compliance officer hasn't had an opportunity to review any of this yet.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Chair recognizes Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: I certainly think it's a step in the right direction. And I think that this is something the council's called for in the past, is for the monetization of the use of public spaces in the storage and, you know, scaffolding of equipment and stuff like that. So I think it's a step in the right direction. I'd like to see we're making an effort to do it. You know what I said.
[Adam Knight]: You ready, Mike? It's all you, baby. Councilor Marksley. The chair recognizes Councilor Marksley.
[Adam Knight]: What's the going rate? What's the going rate of public space?
[Adam Knight]: I mean, I think it might make sense for us for approval, even to sit down with the assessor to, you know, define the parameters of what we're getting into. And I don't think it, you know, it's commercial property. We have a commercial tax rate. We have 108 feet of land. So I think that's not going to be a formula that's going to be too difficult for us to put together. But I think it's something that we should know.
[Adam Knight]: On the motion of Councilor Scarpelli to refer the matter to a committee of the whole with the city assessor, seconded by Councilor Falco, Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: The chair recognizes Christopher Schultz on behalf of the petitioner.
[Adam Knight]: And name and address for the record please Mr. Schultz.
[Adam Knight]: Did you happen to hear Councilor Marks's question?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Bisbon, would you like to add anything? I don't think we can hear you. You're unmuted, but we have no volume for you.
[Adam Knight]: So noted. Chair recognizes Amir Salam from Citizens Bank. As soon as I can find how to unmute him. There we are.
[Adam Knight]: How are you? Name and address for the record. Good. How are you? Very good.
[Adam Knight]: I think that's a question for legal counsel to answer, not the engineer.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to offer that in the form of a question to the solicitor or to the engineer for follow-up.
[Adam Knight]: or anybody from the public that has anything they'd like to add? Oh, I'm sorry. The chair recognizes Councilor Morell.
[Adam Knight]: Chair, what's the motion? So be a table or a committee of the whole with the assessor or?
[Adam Knight]: Does the body feel that warrants a committee of the whole or does the body feel that warrants something we could do on regular meeting? Regular meeting? Right. Motion to table until the questions are answered by the administration.
[Adam Knight]: On the motion by Councilor Scott Peli, seconded by Councilor Caraviello, as amended by Councilors Caraviello, sorry, Councilor Scott Peli and Marx. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? The ayes have it, the matter is tabled. Council paper, I'm sorry, motions, orders, and resolutions. Council paper 21441 offered by President Caraviello. In light of the recent tragedy in Florida, be it so resolved, the building commissioner report back to the council the protocol for expecting buildings over four stories in the city of Medford.
[Adam Knight]: A motion by Councilor Caraviello, seconded by Councilor Marks. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? The ayes have it. Council Paper 21442 offered by Councilor Bears. Be it so resolved, the Medford City Council congratulate Medford High School teacher Andrew Milney on his retirement after 22 years of service to our community. Councilor Bears.
[Adam Knight]: Council Paper 21443 offered by Councilor Falco. Be it resolved the Medford City Council congratulate Aleesha Nunley Benjamin on her recent appointment as finance director for the town of Littleton and thank her for her many years of service to the city of Medford. Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Chair recognizes Councilor Morell.
[Adam Knight]: Vice president Knight. Mr. President, if I may, I too would like to take an opportunity to thank Alicia for her service to the city of Medford over the course of the last what must be now Four years, four and a half years. I'm fortunate enough to say that I've developed a strong friendship with her and I think she's someone that's been a great asset to this community and she's going to be sorely missed. With that being said, although our loss is another town's gain, I think we have to wish her the best of luck in her new endeavor and thank her for all her service here in this community. She's certainly been an asset and she will be sadly missed. So with that being said, I thank the council for putting this resolution on. Thank you, Mr. Vice President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Recently, Mr. Buckland passed away very suddenly. And for those of us who don't know who Ray Buckland is, he's probably one of the greatest athletes to come out of high school and one of the greatest people to ever come out of the city of Medford. Ray had a very exceptional basketball career at Medford High School. He went on to play basketball at the Division 3 University of Massachusetts at Boston, where he went on to become a three-time Division 3 All-American. It's an unheard of accolade. After his graduation as the president, he went on to play professional basketball all over in Europe, but he always remained true to his roots here in Medford. And he could always be seen coming back to Medford to visit friends and family alike. He was someone that had the blue and white in his veins, who carried himself with pride and was a great friend to many. I recall stories of Mr. Buckland often coming down to Bradshaw Street to visit Mr. Bates, and the stories that they tell about Ray could go on and on and on. But he was a great gentleman, a great person, a great friend, Mr. President. He was a loving husband, a loving father. His son had a very successful baseball career up at St. Mary's in Lynn and Salem State. And when you talk to Ray, that was one of the proudest things that he had to talk about was his son and the success that his son had in athletics. Ray had a great career in public service as the president. a worker at the Lynn Housing Authority for a number of years, and he just recently retired and celebrated his retirement after 30 plus years of service to the community. So after his unexpected death, his family has certainly gone through a lot of trial and tribulation, and it's my hope that this council will join me and Councilor Scarpelli in sending our condolences and support during this trying time. So I thank you all for allowing me the opportunity to present this resolution on behalf of the Buckland family.
[Adam Knight]: If you look at Ray's obituary, there's a line in what you just said made me think of it, but I believe at the end of Ray's obituary, it said, heroes never die, but legends live forever. And those are certainly words that represent Mr. Buckland.
[Adam Knight]: I can't believe that it was 20 years ago that Jason sissy or opened up chromatic tattoo. It seems like it was just yesterday that. Prior councils were discussing the merits of the House of Payne tattoo application and the Painted Bird tattoo application and Chromatic Tattoos tattoo application. And here we are 20 years later, Mr. President, and he's been operating very successfully in the area, in the region, without a glitch, no problems, no issues, no concerns. Mr. President, a very successful business, very highly rated on Yelp. He's got quite a cult following, but more importantly, Jason's a great guy. contributing member to our society, contributing member to our community. He's very concerned about the cleanliness in front of his shop and the cleanliness along that stretch at Sammy Petrella Corner by Bella Ravioli, an Oasis restaurant. And he's someone who's not afraid to put his money where his mouth is. And anytime you drive by the shop, you can see Jason out there picking up cigarette butts and making sure the trash is emptied and making sure that the garden beds are weeded. But he's also running a very successful business, putting in hours and making sure that the residents of this community are provided a service. So with that being said, Mr. President, I ask my council colleagues in supporting me and approving this resolution, move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. There aren't too many people in the history of this community that have their own day annually. And Brian rabbit is one of those people. Brian was a longtime employee of our public works department. He worked in the water department And some people said he might have been the hottest working man in show business. There wasn't a time that you didn't see Brian where he didn't have his work boots on, dirt in his hands, and he was ready to climb in or climb out of a hole. And Brian was also someone that would have gave you the shirt off his back, the last dollar in his pocket if you needed it. And that's why when Brian got sick, so many people came out to support him and to thank him for the type of person that he is and for all the contributions that he's made to our community. And in an effort to recognize Brian, Mayor Burke at the time established Brian Rabbit Day, July 20th, 2019 was the first Brian Rabbit Day. And it's been celebrated annually since then, Mr. President. And I don't want this to be something that gets forgotten with the change of administration. So with that being said, I'm bringing this matter forward and I'm asking my council colleagues to support it. We can have a moment of silence and recognition of Brian Rabbit, someone who's been loved in this community, who dedicated his whole entire life to working in this community. And hopefully moving forward, Mr. President, we can have more celebrations like this in memory of Brian and his life.
[Adam Knight]: I believe that the Cannabis Advisory Commission was supposed to define those parameters. Okay.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe that public hearings dictated by state law. And the guidelines and requirements dictated by state law are pretty clear. They're outlined in, you know, I think 44A section 5 about public hearings. But I think that that's the parameters that they're going by.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I just think it's important to point out that the salary for these two positions would be $100,928.70 annual per position. Say that again. $103,928.70 per position annually. On CAF 17. Is that correct? That is correct. Okay, any further questions on this one before we move on? Okay, amendment B, new and amended positions.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I just think it's important to point out that this position of parking enforcement officer in recreations facilities coordinator would bring a salary of $64,666 and 68 cents number one. Number two, I'd like to ask why the position of parking clerk is being proposed to be eliminated. Number three, recreational facilities coordinator is nothing more than pork. Nothing more than pork, Mr. President. $65,000 to pay somebody to do a job that somebody was already doing as part of their salary. There's no need for the position. That should be a program coordinator's position. That should be a program coordinator's position. That should be someone that's delivering programming for the youth of this community, programming to the recreation department, not scheduling fields for $65,000 a year when we had somebody that was already doing that. All right, so I don't understand the reasoning or the motive behind creating this position, other than the fact that it seems like it's a nice new job to create for somebody. But at the end of the day, someone was doing it, Mr. President, for $65,000 a year. We had somebody doing it for $0 a year as part of their salary. So I don't understand why we're bringing this position forward. Quite frankly, I don't think we need it. and I'm not gonna be able to support it this evening, the creation of the recreational facilities coordinator position. Also, Mr. President, looking at this, I don't see a need to eliminate. the title of parking clerk. We can keep it in the CAF as well. We can have a parking clerk and we can have a parking enforcement officer. I don't see a need to eliminate the parking clerk title because we're gonna need a parking clerk if we're gonna have in-house parking programming. So with that being said, my recommendation would be to strike the position of recreational facilities coordinator from the document and to keep parking clerk in the document.
[Adam Knight]: And I'll put that in the form of a motion.
[Adam Knight]: So the program coordinator position, we're just gonna call it a facilities coordinator position. So I guess they're not going to be doing the duties that they're assigned. Oh, they are. I'm confused. But, um, in terms of the, um, year round programming at La Conte rink, um, it's been brought to my attention. There's been a lot of discussion about privatizing La Conte rink and, um, a longterm lease agreement with the Boston Imperials to allow them to use this as their home rink. Is there any truth to that?
[Adam Knight]: So I'm talking about privatization of rank operations, whether it be the Boston Imperials or anybody else, has there been a discussion about privatizing the rank operations?
[Adam Knight]: I would like to offer that in the form of a motion, Mr. President. So your motion was to strike the position recreation facilities coordinator. The mayor just said, it's really going to be a program coordinator's position anyway. We already have a title for that.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, it's not a maintenance position. I don't know what improvements they're gonna be doing down the rink. I don't think they're gonna be painting and fixing benches and sweeping and cleaning. But like I said, we had the athletic director that was, since we've taken over all the fields in the rink, he was doing it as part of his salary. This is $65,000 of expenditures that I don't think we need to make. So that's why I offer the amendment.
[Adam Knight]: One information, I'm not saying don't put a fourth person in recreation, I'm just saying make it a program coordinator. We don't need to hire a $65,000 scheduler when we had someone doing it for free. I want the department to grow. I want them to have more personnel. I just want the personnel to be utilized in a position where we're delivering a service to the public.
[Adam Knight]: Good evening.
[Adam Knight]: So are they gonna have supervisory responsibility?
[Adam Knight]: The recreation coordinator is going to be responsible for the scheduling. of the facilities and also the staffing of the part-time employees and the oversight of the part-time employees?
[Adam Knight]: And presently, do you oversee the staff at Hormel and La Conte?
[Adam Knight]: Presently, you oversee the staff at Hormel and La Conte?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Separate them if you want, Mr. President, then I'm sure people don't care about the parking clerk job.
[Adam Knight]: And keep the clerk.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I just, I just had a question. So we have the chief people officer. So the people that he'd be the chief of would be the staff, right? The staff in the building.
[Adam Knight]: He's the chief people officer. The people that he's the officer of is the staff, right? So he's the chief of staff. We already have one of those, don't we?
[Adam Knight]: So why don't we just call the human resource director.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Vice President, I certainly have no problem with the title. It's the rate of compensation that I question.
[Adam Knight]: In the process, if I could. Vice President Knight, has the work that Mr. Durham has done been reflected in his compensation? Has he been made whole?
[Adam Knight]: Yes. So he's not owed from 2-120 to 7-920?
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. And also, I think it's important to point out, Mr. President, when the administration first presented the idea or the theory to merge diversity and human resources in January of 2020, this council opposed it. We asked, we said, is this a conflict of interest? The city solicitor came back with an opinion that said it is, but it isn't, but it is, but it isn't. So then we said, we're opposed to that. And we sat down and we made our council priorities. And when we made our council priorities, we said we wanted a standalone diversity director. And then we got a budget and the budget didn't have that. The budget didn't have that. on June 30, the last day of the fiscal year, we were presented a budget and the budget bifurcated the position said, Hey, we gave you what you wanted vote for it now. This was something that was a year and a half in the making. It shouldn't have been done in the 11th hour.
[Adam Knight]: That comparable CAF 21 position was the Director of Budget and Personnel, that was Richard Lee. So he handled all the budget direction and all the personnel direction in this community. Now we have three people that do that to the tune of $307,000. We had one person that did it for 90.
[Adam Knight]: Discussion on Amendment D. Mr. President. Vice President Knight. Again, I see no reason to eliminate the position Assistant City Solicitor slash Hearings Officer. I'd like to further amend that to add Assistant City Solicitor Hearing Officer, Assistant City Solicitor City Council.
[Adam Knight]: Assistant City Solicitor, City Council.
[Adam Knight]: I move for approval of that and the elections coordinated position. So there will be four positions in CAF 11? We created CAF 11 for Assistant City Solicitor for the City Council.
[Adam Knight]: So we're going to amend the title Assistant City Solicitor. We're going to create or create another one assistant city solicitor slash hearings office so we could have assistant city solicitor slash city council.
[Adam Knight]: But those negotiations haven't happened.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President. I don't have a problem. I don't have a problem laying that on the table for a future date. or even withdrawing the motion.
[Adam Knight]: Council Bess.
[Adam Knight]: If we went that way, Mr. President, we never would have had a director of substance abuse and prevention. This council sat down and we created the position director of substance abuse and prevention, and then we pressured the administration to fund it, and then we go. Prior to that, we didn't.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, that's fine. So, any further-
[Adam Knight]: What information? Budget passed with the salary that's attached to this calf, right?
[Adam Knight]: The grant dried up. That's the question. When the grant dried up, the job dried up. We're creating a new position now.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if I may, through you to the administration, the mayor has no problem voluntarily allowing this position to join a union should they wish to, correct? Say they wanted to join the clerical union, that wouldn't be a problem, right?
[Adam Knight]: I guess the question would be what would be your objection?
[Adam Knight]: And I mean, cause I don't think that this job has any confidential responsibilities in terms of personnel.
[Adam Knight]: Do the duties and responsibilities reflect a situation that would preclude them from being able to join a union?
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, I think that they might be, should be a better fit for the contract we just passed tonight.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Mr. President? I see no reason to schedule a committee of the whole on these if we're not gonna have the other titles before us that we might wanna have a committee of the whole on as well.
[Adam Knight]: Pat, I'm going to be very sad to see you go. We've had a lot of laughs over the past couple of years, and I'm very grateful that you came and took over TV3. It's been quite a run for you, brother. You've put in a ton of hours, overworked and underpaid, and I'm very sad to see you go. You've done an excellent job for us here at MedFed, and you've really helped bring us to the 21st century, so thank you very much for all you've done. I wish you the best of luck over in Everett, and I hope you don't recommend them to steal anybody else from us over here.
[Adam Knight]: A motion to suspend the rules to take several papers out of order, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Motion passes. Paper 21431, Mr. President, a common victuals license. Which one was it? 21431.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President, a couple things. First of all, Mr. President review of the application. It appears that this entity has the ability to employ over 100 full of part time employees. So this seems like this will be something that's a great addition to our community. However, in looking at the application, the petition does seek hours from six a.m. to one a.m. And that would, I believe, require them to petition this council at a later date for an extended hours permit.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Layton. This was a paper that was tabled a couple of weeks ago at my request as I was seeking a double pole to be removed from Burgadave. This paper was requesting a grant location to access the Greenland extension to provide certain services from Verizon. Double pole has been removed and I'd like to thank my friends at Verizon and their Comcast for the work that they did in making sure that that happened expediently. Last week, I forgot to take this off the table. The president put it up for a vote. So I'd ask my colleagues to stay in the paper this evening. I do believe we have Karen Levesque that's going to be joining us from Verizon on the call.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, this is the paper that would provide access to the Greenland extension for certain public utility services. There's a lot of work that's going on in that area right now. I do believe resurfacing plans are on file with the city engineer's office, and I certainly have no problem with the petition and move for approval of the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And through you to Mr. Rogers and the rest of the security officer staff, thank you for the work you do. I have no problem supporting this matter before us this evening. I do feel as though a strong contract negotiated in good faith between the administration and the union does make this community stronger. And I thank you for your service.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I would move for approval and I would also second Councilor Markswell's amendment.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, Rick Sweeney was a gentleman who worked a long career in the Metropolitan County. He had recently retired. as evident in many that work in public safety, especially by a service, very shortly after retirement, he had succumbed to health issues. Rick was a great person, and Rick was one of those people that, you know, a lot of people would say, if you had a problem with Rick, it was probably something that was wrong with you, because Rick was a great guy. I got the pleasure of meeting Rick when he became a member of the Elks. He was a great participant in a number of charitable organizations and charitable efforts that the Elks have put forward, and he's someone who will be sorely missed, Mr. President, so I offer this resolution. and recognition of the work that he did in this community, and recognition of the fact that for over 30 years, he put his life on the line as a firefighter here for the residents of the community, and he's someone that should be remembered. So with that being said, I ask my council colleagues to support this.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Kavanaugh, Mr. President, was a gentleman who was also a member of the Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk's Elk picked up the torch where he left off in her efforts in volunteering in the community. We all know Carrie from Channel 25. She hosted last year's mayoral debate as a matter of fact, two years ago, the mayoral debate as a matter of fact. But Paul was just a great person. His wife was a school teacher and they met through public schools for a number of years, and they're really some people that have given a lot to this community. And Paul had a very public battle with cancer and he succumbed to the effects thereof, and he'll be sorely missed, Mr. President. So with that being said, I asked my council colleagues to support the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. One thing that's always amazed me about Teresa was The passion that she had for the job, she never lost that passion and love for the job, even after, you know, four and a half decades of teaching, she was still coming up there advocating for the students when the easy thing to do after four and a half decades of teaching would be to say, oh, the next generation is going to take care of it. She's someone that certainly led by example, put her money where her mouth is, and was always out here working on behalf of the children in the community. So it's something that I think is very grateful, that I'm very grateful for Mr. President, the effort and energy that she put forth, how she went above and beyond to do some of the things that she did. And I want her to enjoy her retirement as best as she possibly can in the lovely neighborhood of East Method.
[Adam Knight]: All right. We seem to be back. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you very much. So with that being said, in closing, I just would like to make sure that Teresa enjoys her retirement or golden years and other 45 years in the beautiful neighborhood of East Medford with her lovely husband, Mr. Piatel, that they enjoy their time together during her golden years.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor Palacio. And if I may, from the chair, Mr. President, I'd just like to also extend a great congratulations to Cheryl. I echo the sentiments of my council colleagues, and I do look forward to seeing her this summer by the pool at her nephew's house, and her niece's house. With that being said, the chair recognizes the gentleman at the podium, Mr. Gallo.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much. Great testament on the motion by Councilor Marks, seconded by Councilor Caraviello. All those in favor? Aye. As amended, Mr. President. All those in favor? All those opposed? The ayes have it. The motion passed. Council paper 21428 offered by Councilor Marks. Be it resolved, the city council asks the city solicitor for a ruling on whether the council, through city ordinance, can craft the process for the naming of any municipal or school building or facility. The chair recognizes Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: The way that I'm reading this is no more than the councilor asking a question as to whether or not the Medford city council is a legal authority to establish and define a process to be used. It's not in from what I can read a motion or an attempt to preclude any elected body from exercising their rights, what it's doing is establishing, requesting more or less an opinion as to whether or not a universal and standardized process can be crafted so that that can be utilized across all realms of government when it comes to the renaming of any type of facility of the like. I don't really think we need to split hairs over this. It's not like we're trying to step on anybody's toes. All we're doing is asking the question, can we establish a process? And if we do establish that process, is it good for the school department as well as the city? I don't see what's scary about that. If in fact, it comes back with the answer that's a yes, then that's a whole different story. But until we get there, I think that there's no harm in asking the question as presented.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I found this to be an appropriate expenditure of the community preservation funds, and I would second the approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, nice. I certainly can appreciate the measure in terms of when it comes to cost savings. I don't think that that's necessarily a bad thing to talk about. I do have concern over the process and when we make this determination. if there's 15 candidates today, but there's 27 tomorrow, you know, where do we draw the line? I guess the question that I have, you know what I mean? Do we wait till the papers close? How much time do we need to get this legislation to get passed before we have to, can we do it after the paper deadline closes, but still have enough time to pass the normal petition? You know, those are some of the questions that are from an operational standpoint that come up. And I think that because of those questions in the past, we haven't really acted on a measure like this. that couple with the fact that the city charter defines how we're supposed to move, leaves this up to be really a philosophical argument. I certainly can support the idea of about $50,000 worth of cost savings, number one, and the uncertainty surrounding the ability to get the mail-in voting approved prior to the election. So those are things that would certainly warrant some consideration. And if this Home Rule petition is something that does come up, Those will be the items that I'm thinking about. I certainly don't have a problem putting the question before this body, having us deliberate that to a full extent. I think that's kind of like the intent of this paper. The council has put this paper forward to have a conversation. I certainly don't have a problem having a conversation. I don't even have a problem having the whole petition drafted. and having us have the opportunity to discuss and debate about the process. Um, you know, so with that being said, I can support the paper this evening if we're asking for a future beating for some defined parameters on how we're going to figure this out. But, you know, at the same time, a child does call for preliminary election. Uh, you know, there's 15 candidates in the race. Um, so it is what it is.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. This is an exercise that we usually go through every year right around this time at the end of the year. We close out our books, balance the budget, make sure that all the accounts have a zero balance at the end of the year. Normally, when we go through this exercise, our finance director is available to provide a little bit of a background and give a presentation. I'm wondering if Ms. Nunley is available. Yes, she is available. Mr. Clerk, can you unmute that?
[Adam Knight]: Great, thank you. Any further discussion on transfers? With this transfer, Mr. President, are we in compliance with municipal finance law?
[Adam Knight]: So is it safe to say, Alicia, that we have a $12 million structural deficit?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, and then what is the structural deficit presently if the budget were to pass this evening?
[Adam Knight]: Right, and last year we used about $5.5 million in reserves to balance the budget, right?
[Adam Knight]: So how much money in reserves are we using this year to balance the budget?
[Adam Knight]: Except for this grant money, right? This grant money dries up.
[Adam Knight]: So this is non-recurring revenue after the next four years?
[Adam Knight]: So. if by 2024 we don't realize this $12.34 million annually, we're going to be in a situation after this.
[Adam Knight]: recover, then we're looking at a situation where we might have.
[Adam Knight]: So what's the plan in terms of between now and then to bolster our reserve in case we don't recover?
[Adam Knight]: I have one more question, Mr. President. This looks like it's a two questions. It says one, will you create the AFA grant account two, will you appropriate the money? Is that correct?
[Adam Knight]: Will we need to take two votes?
[Adam Knight]: I think one's a spending paper.
[Adam Knight]: I think one requires five and one requires four.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President. Vice President Mayne. This council did make a request that line item 10153502 be reduced in the amount of $81,600 and that fund be reappropriated to part-time or full-time salaries in the law department. I do not believe we received an answer to that question. Is there anybody available that could give us an answer to that question as to whether or not this recommendation would be taken up?
[Adam Knight]: This is surrounding contract and legal services for the city council.
[Adam Knight]: It was a request, a recommendation to your office to make. We made a recommendation to your office. We were wondering if that recommendation would be something that would be taken up. There was no response and that wasn't included in the correspondence that your office forwarded to us.
[Adam Knight]: My concern at this point is with the legal office. I know that we got a correspondence about the other stuff, but the question that I have pertains just to this particular request. The request was that we recommend that the line be reduced and that the administration reallocate those funds voluntarily to the full-time or part-time salaries in the office, so that we would have an assistant city solicitor in the office. That was the question that was asked. We recommended that the administration do this voluntarily, and we didn't receive a response. If the response from the administration has now reduced the line item, then I'll offer that motion right now. To reduce the line item.
[Adam Knight]: It's very encouraging that we now hear that we have the ability to talk to Copeland and Page. We've been asking for two years for draft ordinances to be sent to us, and they've taken an inordinate amount of time.
[Adam Knight]: I'll just use an example of the short-term lodging ordinance that we asked for in January of 2020, and we still haven't received. So we had to use Mr. Boborowski, our outside counsel, to provide that documentation to us. I'm not going to go tip the tab, Mr. President, on this issue. This is something the council's made a priority. We've asked for our own legal counsel. We've not been able to secure that. That's a line item that we've asked for in our budget. I also made a case that we should have an assistant city solicitor in this community um, not outsourced. Um, that's something that I feel very strongly about. Um, so with that being said, I'd make a motion right now for a council vote that contracted legal services line item 010151530200 be reduced in the amount of $81,600 president.
[Adam Knight]: Right, but when Mr. Silverman was here, or Jonathan was here, I forget his last name, we asked him, who do you work for? Do you work for the city council, the city of Metro, the city administration? And he said, we work for the mayor's office. That was his response.
[Adam Knight]: You know, the issue of this conflict of interest can be addressed very, very easily. And it could be addressed very easily by recreating an assistant city solicitor position to the City Council in a part-time role. that provides the council with the direction and advice and guidance that it's looking for in a confidential matter as their client, while also reporting to the city solicitor to be sure that it falls in line with the solicitor's opinions relative to legal questions and the like. So with that being said, that's why I offer the amendment, Mr. President. That's why I offer the amendment. I think it's a race to the bottom and we outsource every type of decision-making process in government. We have no institutional knowledge, no control, no direction. And that's why I offer the amendment. I offer the amendment to reduce the line item so that we can hire an assistant city solicitor in a part-time basis to represent this council on issues like that. And that'll address the issues of conflict of interest because they'll report to the city solicitor. There'll be our legal counsel that will provide us with confidential advice, but at the same time, they will report to the city solicitor and the city solicitor's opinions will control. They won't be able to issue contradictory opinions because there'll be an employee in the solicitor's office. They'll just be assigned the task of working with the council.
[Adam Knight]: Wait, was she Friday?
[Adam Knight]: You did?
[Adam Knight]: So he has the right to provide legal opinions now for the city of Medford?
[Adam Knight]: So I'm just wondering why the solicitor, why we didn't have the solicitor present when we requested their presence.
[Adam Knight]: And I can appreciate I can appreciate them as the president at the end of the day, it's been a four year legislative priority for the council to attain legal counsel for the council. It's been a four year legislative priority. It's been put out as part of our council priorities during that time.
[Adam Knight]: There's a motion on the floor, Mr. President. Why don't we vote on the motion, and then if this passes, the mayor can come back with a plan, and then we can ask for supplemental spending to appropriate the funds. I mean, there's no guarantees that we're going to get anything once we pass this budget. Once we vote on this budget, vote on this money, you know, it's going to go back to the coroner's office. Then either it's going to happen or it's not. If it doesn't, what's our leverage? So you want to vote on it? I'm saying if we say, OK, we'll reduce the budget by this much, come back to us with the plan, ask us for the money to be reappropriated again in a supplemental spending packet, we'll be happy to consider it provided that the council's brothers are met in terms of having a one point person point of contact that we can pick up and call and ask for legal advice that's gonna respond to us. That would be my recommendation.
[Adam Knight]: I made the motion to reduce. I already made the motion to reduce.
[Adam Knight]: What I'm saying is we have $81,000 in the contracted legal services line item. I know that, you know, 20,000 of that's dedicated to labor services. So I didn't be happy with the 60, moving the 60,000 out. and reducing the budget by $60,000 out of the contracted legal services line item until such time as we can negotiate what satisfies us for legal representation here as a council. And once we negotiate that, then you can come back to us for the additional $60,000 in the supplemental spending packet like you did earlier this fiscal year when you asked us to amend the budget. You could again come to us and ask us to amend the budget after we negotiate what's gonna work for us with KP Law and legal counsel. We could reduce the budget now by the 60,000, which is the amount of the KP Law contract We could sit down and we could come up with an agreement that would, you know, satisfy the brothers of this council. And then once we reach that agreement, the administration can present to us a supplemental spending paper that asks us to increase the budget by that money. But at that point, we'll be able to get our legal counsel.
[Adam Knight]: So that would be the request. Reduce the budget right now by the $60,000. Negotiate the idea with KP Law. We're going to reduce it by 60,000 until we have the opportunity to have a legal counsel that's going to meet our needs. It's been a priority for this council for how many years now. I think the mayor is making a commitment now that she's willing to work on that. So why don't we let her get to work on that and then we can appropriate the funds once we have an agreement.
[Adam Knight]: $60,000. I mean, you could print rebel stamps for us too. But at the end of the day, you know what I mean? There's some needs and desires.
[Adam Knight]: vote to reduce the budget and pass the budget this evening. But certainly the mayor could come back to us with a supplemental spending packet that addresses some of the concerns that we have, for example, the caps.
[Adam Knight]: The initial recommendation was to reduce it by the total line item, but I do understand that the line item represents two different types of contracted legal services. One's KPLR in the amount of $60,000 and the other one is labor council service, the remaining I believe was labor council service. So I'd even be satisfied offering the motion to reduce it by 60,000 at this point in time. And now the administration may stand right here. I mean, it's not like this is a secret, right? We've been talking about it for eons now. You know, today's January 29th and maybe we're going to get somewhere. But at the end of the day, if we reduce this line item by 60,000, put it back on the administration to come back to us and give us what we're looking for. So, I mean, I think it's a sticking point for all of us.
[Adam Knight]: Our next meeting's on July 20th. It's 20 days away. We can work this out in two weeks and it'll be over with. I don't think there's gonna be much of a disruption. It's my intention to vote in favor of the supplemental funding provided that the council gets what they're asking for. I think it's everybody's intention to do that if that's the direction we wanna go in. It's not like we're gonna hold this up, but ultimately we've been asking for something up, uh, better part of 24 months. And today's the last day of the fiscal year. And now we're finally getting somewhere, you know, let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the amended motion would be to reduce the contracted legal services line item 0 1 0 1 5 1 5 3 0 2 in the amount of $60,000. then the administration knows what our intent is. They can come back to us with a supplemental spending packet if they're able to work out an agreement between this council. And I'd be happy to let the council president serve as the negotiator for this body to come up with that agreement. Mr. President, so that would be my recommendation on the money, though. $60,000 from 0101515302. Okay. Councilors, a motion to the floor.
[Adam Knight]: For the purpose of? allowing the 20 days of contingency spending?
[Adam Knight]: I'd certainly be willing to reduce the figure to allow them to continue through July in the amount of, what's it, $5,000 retainer per month. I'd be happy to be amenable to that, to let them get through the month of July with their retainer. So $55,000. So it'd be reduced by $55,000, leave $5,000, and they'd have to pay the bills for July.
[Adam Knight]: Um, does the election coordinator position have a cap that's been established by the city council?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, so this is a new position, there is no CAF. You are aware of the opinions the solicitor wrote? Yes. Okay. The chief of staff has come before this body and has explained to this council that it's his legal opinion that if the council passes the budget that contains a position that that automatically amends the CAF ordinance. I don't find that to be the fact because the budget that's before us is a spending paper and the budget that's before us requires us to go through a certain process and an ordinance requires us to go through a much different process. So with that being said, you're asking us to support a paper this evening that doesn't have a classification that's been established or approved by this council, is that correct?
[Adam Knight]: I understand that.
[Adam Knight]: What my concern is is that, you know, if it's the opinion from the administration that we don't have to create a cap, they can create positions and classifications, just put people in them and bypassing the budget, that's a constructive acceptance of the ordinance change. that creates a whole different ball of wax for this document that's in front of me here this evening. A whole different ball of wax. We have a position that came before us. The cap was voted down. Individual still continues to be compensated in that cap. So I think it's problematic. You know what I mean? I really think it's problematic. I think that any position that's included in this document right here that doesn't have a cap should be eliminated from the budget. The administration can come back just like we talked about with the KP law item, with the supplemental spending package, that does it the right way. Take all the personalities out of this, right? Take all the personalities out of this. Let's talk about process, all right? We have an opinion from the city solicitor saying, this is how you're supposed to do it. We have an opinion from the chief of staff saying, no, we should do it this way.
[Adam Knight]: That's very, very encouraging to hear. So at the end of the day, Mr. President, you know, I think that we're putting the, before the horse a lot of times here, and it might be better off for us as a body, in a cleaner, more transparent fashion, for us to have the classifications voted upon, and then the spending associated with those classifications come with us after the fact. And this is something I feel very strongly about, Mr. President. We've always been talking about CAFs and classifications, and doing things the right way, making sure that employees that do jobs that are created and posted have to exist. These jobs have to exist, and they don't exist if we don't update the CAF ordinance to reflect this. So while there may be historical problems with the CAF ordinance, that doesn't mean that the process shouldn't be rectified now for the new jobs that are being created. And that's where I stand on this issue, Mr. President. I support an election-coordinated position. I absolutely do. I want to approve the CAF before I approve the money. I want to create the job before I fund the job that doesn't exist. That's where I am on this issue with all the CAFs, all the classifications in this budget that don't exist by way of ordinance, Mr. President. We're funding money. to a position that doesn't exist.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe I have the floor, Mr. President. And I do believe that if it hasn't been done right in the past, why are we gonna perpetuate that? Ultimately, we have a number of positions that need to be created. So let's go through the process and create All right, let's go through the process and create them properly, and then fund those positions. Let's not throw money and fund them for jobs that don't exist, and then wait. Because we did that once before, and it didn't work out so well for us. It didn't work out so well for us to attune to $700 a week, all right, to an individual employee. So, you know, I'm looking at this, and I'm saying that there's a couple of situations and concerns that raises the concern to me with financial transparency. Number one, financial transparency. The positions haven't, there's been no ask to create the positions, nevermind funding, but there's a request to fund. Why don't we create the positions first, then fund? All right, let's put the horse before the cart. Because there might be disputing about the caps and classifications that employees are being placed in, in these new positions. So I really think it needs to be looked at, and it needs to be looked at a little bit stronger and harder. I don't wanna stand in the way of taking a vote on a budget, Mr. President, but what I do wanna do is vote on a budget that makes sense. and I wanna vote on a budget that complies with the legal advice that we've received from the city solicitor. And I wanna make a vote on a budget that has some financial transparency. And I think that's really what we need right now. So with the creation of all these, because no one's against moving the city forward, no one's against making progress, but we wanna do it the right way. And the right way to do it is to present the CAF to this council first, to change the ordinance, to create a position, just like we did when we created Penny, the Substance Abuse Prevention Office. How do we do that? I remember how we did it, because I sat here and I took a vote on it. What we did was we created the CAF first. We created the line item, we created the CAF, we created the classification. We sent that to the mayor, it came back to us. Then the mayor came back and they funded the position. We can't fund positions that don't exist. It's financially irresponsible.
[Adam Knight]: Once the budget is passed and the money's appropriated, uh, Alicia, once the money's passed, the budget is appropriated.
[Adam Knight]: What if the CAF's never come before us? What happens to that money?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, so it would just fall into free cash or free spending. Or you could use it prior to the year transfers, maybe?
[Adam Knight]: So ultimately we have about $620,000 worth of money that may or may not be on account for where it's going to be spent in the budget if these caps never come before.
[Adam Knight]: What if we never get them in July? I'm saying right now we're being asked to appropriate $620,000, right? Well over half a million dollars to fund positions that don't exist. What if we fund them and then the positions never come before us? What if that money is now spent, right?
[Adam Knight]: Right, right. Things happen though. You know what I mean? That's what I want. That's what I want to be sure. I think that we're going to, how can we spend 650,000 or $620,000 worth of money and not know if we're ever going to get the paper? Why don't we get the paper, approve the paper and then fund the paper for the positions that it's bought? I mean, I just, I think that's what makes sense. I think that's what really makes sense. There's no guarantee we're ever going to get a paper. I know that, you know what I mean? That things happen. You know, she gets, may get struck by lightning tomorrow. You know what I mean? For all we know, we never get the data. You know, but the $620,000, it's quite a chunk of change. So it's not, it's not chump change. And it's not something that I think anybody behind this rail is opposed to discussing. We just want to have the conversation the right way. We want to have the process done the right way. You know, we could reduce the budget by the positions that don't have caps. Take a vote on the budget. You could bring that back to the supplemental spending paper. We can do this thing the right way. It's about the process. It's about the process. Maybe that's really what it's about. Do I have a problem bringing parking in-house? Not particularly. Do I have a problem appropriating $350,000 for jobs that don't exist? Yeah, big time, big time got a problem with that.
[Adam Knight]: But- I don't understand how creating an ordinance that establishes a classification scale for employees is a waste of work. I mean, ultimately- You're gonna cut it. It's transparent, right? So you go and you create the classification, you create the cap, all right? That gets approved by this body. It has to go through three readings just like anything else, right? Okay, it has to happen, right? It has to happen if you're creating a position. So I'm not feeling how this is a waste of time or a waste of anybody's energy or effort in presenting a proposal before us to have it done the right way, all right? The budget's a spending bill. That's a whole different ball of wax. The creation of the position is the creation of the position. There could be things that come into play if you create a position where we don't have any money. We have to eliminate a position. I believe that before I got on the council, you led the charge to do such and take the Assistant Commissioner DPW's position out of the budget because of financial circumstances that have changed, right? So that's always something that's gonna be on the table that this council might exercise its line item veto rights because that's the action that might be necessary to be taken in the best interest of the taxpayers in this community and in the best interest of financial responsibility. So to say that, you know, we're going to put in the budget first and you fund it because we don't want to come before you and then have you not approve the calf is strange to me, get the calf approved and then fund the spending bill. That is an operational manual for the next year. I mean, right now we have $620,000 being thrown against the wall for positions that don't exist. I want to buy the iPhone 25 so that I want it so bad, but it doesn't exist. There is no such thing as the iPhone 25, you know? So it's just from a standpoint of financial responsibility as stewards of money in this community, as stewards of money in this community, how do we expend $620,000 for positions that don't exist? It's very, very, very hard for me to swallow, all right? It's $620,000 positions that don't exist. They've never been created. We have a commitment from the administration saying it's going to happen. When it happens is a whole different story. We're going to fund this budget with all these positions that don't exist for a full 12-month period, for a full fiscal year. For a full fiscal year, we're going to fund the position, but we never know when we're going to get the paper. We're saying you get some of them in July, then we're going to do a review. Let's make this easy. Let's take them out, put it back on the administration to put the paper together, to come with us and do it the right way. I think we all want it. There's some good things in this budget. There's a lot of good things in this budget, Mr. President. A lot of good things in this budget. But I, in my right mind, cannot sit here and support spending $620,000 on things that don't exist. They're figments right now. They're just ideas. They're just ideas. Until we pass those classifications, they're just ideas.
[Adam Knight]: It's been pretty clarified what the level of respect is with this body.
[Adam Knight]: Excuse me. I mean, quite frankly, the argument wouldn't be the opposite, Mr. President, because we have a proven track record and the record doesn't lie. The record shows we've always done the cap before we do the money. All right, we've always done the cap before we do the money. Last year, this whole director of HR position, yeah, that was a mistake. We never should have done that. We never should have done it. We never should have done it, Mr. President. But I remember amending the caps under the Burke administration and under the McGlynn administration well prior to being requested to funnel, well prior to being requested to funnel. And quite frankly, the argument wouldn't be the opposite because the record speaks for itself. The history is there. The history is there.
[Adam Knight]: It's about me at all. It's about the taxpayers and the taxpayer at all. That's all this is about. It's not personal at all. And then that that's, that's what I'm not saying it's first I'm a little taken back by some comments, because not not by you, but in general, it's not personal at all. It's about being a financial steward and a fiscal steward in this community, and making sure that you know, having been involved in government for 20 years we know how things work right and we want to make sure that we do things the right way. And that's all this is about Mr. Mr. President and for you guys. Ultimately, I think, no offense, you having a different opinion, a difference of opinion on this if you take a fence when you know it becomes personal. And this isn't personal between you and me at all.
[Adam Knight]: And this issue of spending is a personal matter, and I want that to be very clear.
[Adam Knight]: I have no problem doing that because I can't, in my right mind, support a budget that spends $620,000 of funds that necessarily going to a defined purpose without at least attempting, Mr. President, to offer a motion. So the way I'd like to offer this motion, because I have all the line items, I have all the amounts and everything else, I'll offer the motion in a general format. If we have to go back and address it, that's fine. But my motion would be to reduce the city budget in the dollar amount equivalent to that appropriated in the proposed fiscal year budget for the caps that don't exist. It comes to $216,000 in exchange, Mr. President. I'm sorry, what was the amount? 617,390. I'll offer that motion. If we need to go to the line items after the fact, I'll be happy to pull those out. It seems to me that there is not much of an appetite for this council to move in that direction. However, I'd be happy to offer the motion.
[Adam Knight]: There's a motion on the floor, Mr. President. I appreciate everybody's commentary and their willingness to act in good faith. I just would like to say that there is no guarantee that if this money gets appropriated, it's ever going to be used for what we're spending it for, number one. And number two, you know, it is $617,390 that we're appropriating that right now has no defined purpose. The jobs don't exist. They go to a place that doesn't exist. So with that being said, that's my argument. for this matter, right?
[Adam Knight]: Have you received the grant to conduct this study or is this a grant that we will have to apply for and competitively bid for?
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: I have one question, Mr. President. I do believe we asked a question from the city solicitor relative to putting several other boards and commissions under the scope and purview of the Office of Community Development. Our Office of Community Development was established by the acts in 1974, chapter 839. And we discussed that during the budget hearing. made a request to the city solicitor as to whether or not this administration, not this administration, but the community is acting in accordance with the general law. When we adopted that local option, it said that any type of order commission that falls under that office has to be voted on. So I was wondering if we haven't received a response from the solicitor on that. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Okay. So if I may, Mr. President, I too find many positives in this budget and I do have some very, very loud concerns that I've made very vocal this evening. Ultimately, Mr. President, this isn't an issue about personalities. It's an issue about moving the city of Medford forward, what direction we want to go in. I, for one, have spent a lot of time and energy and effort this year focusing on being financially accountable and fiscally transparent. And I don't think I'll be able to support the budget this evening because of that $620,000 appropriation that's in there. It's not here for anything. I also have some concerns about the investment that we're making in our highway department. We only have 16 members of our highway department, up zero from last year. So these are some concerns I think that, you know, when we talk about what we need to do to provide for our community and show that our tax dollars are going to the delivery of services, we need to invest in certain areas, Mr. President. I feel as though we're moving away from some of the areas that are necessary and being invested in, very basic areas. So with that being said, I will not be supporting this paper this evening. I do agree with Councilman Chalko. I think that the school budget increases are something that are very positive in this community. I do believe there are very good things in this budget. There are some very good things in this budget, Mr. President, but I can't, in my right mind as a fiscal steward in this community, appropriate, you know, close to $620,000 for funds that I don't know where that would go.
[Adam Knight]: That Mr. President, coupled with Council priority is being, you know, having a line item for legal counsel. I think it's very important for us, you know, moving forward and being able to address the concerns that are brought to us and presented to us. So with that being said, Mr. President, for those reasons, I will be voting against the budget this week.
[Adam Knight]: May I be so bold as to suggest Mr. President, whereas it seems as though we have a commitment to be able to possibly retain our own legal counsel going forward with this commitment to the administration, maybe we let the item lay on the table and we move forward discussing our options with our own legal counsel, should that be necessary? If I may, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. So would it be the solicitor's recommendation to go into executive session at this point in time, or would it be your recommendation to follow some sort of notification process? I noticed that, you know, there's nine other reasons why we could go in and maybe she could shed some light on whether or not this would fall into one of those other buckets of, appropriate authority.
[Adam Knight]: The motion by Councilor Marks, seconded by— So, in essence, then, what we're doing is tonight we're going to vote to go into executive session. We have to wait 48 hours before we do that because of the individual rights?
[Adam Knight]: I mean, if the recommendations that we go into executive session, but that executive session happens, I'm just, I want to be in compliance with the law. And I don't want to turn this into an issue where there's an open meeting law complaint filed against the council when the nature and substance of the materials that the council received was so significant and important. Um, I don't want the, the underlying issue as to why we're trying to meet to be you know, taken away from, to be distracted by an open meeting law complaint that may or may not be sufficient. I know we've had our fair share of frivolous complaints in the past, but, you know, where it involves employee rights, I think we need to earn the side of caution. If that's the case, that's the case. But, you know, based on the fact that we did receive materials, that were before us, can the solicitor maybe provide us with a little bit of guidance as to how we can discuss this information while still protecting the individual rights of the subjects of the complaint? I mean, is there a way we can even talk about it without invoking individual rights?
[Adam Knight]: So, um, vice president, I don't think that this is that is saying we can't meet. I think what the solicitor is saying is that we can need, we just have to wait 48 hours to notify the- So respectfully, when did we ask for this meeting?
[Adam Knight]: So what would the notification requirements be if we were to notify? Does that be certified mail, certified letter? Does it have to be hand-delivered? What would the process service requirement be?
[Adam Knight]: So ultimately the purpose of us to go into this executive session will be to discuss the complaint that we received and the individuals mentioned into it, right? That's the purpose of the meeting. In order for us to do that, because individuals are mentioned into it, individual rights would kick in. So because of that, we have to give 48 hours notice. for us to meet, and we have to notify those individuals that they're going to be discussed and give them the right to attend the meeting?
[Adam Knight]: Do we have to give them the right to participate in the meeting?
[Adam Knight]: Hold it in an open session if they so choose. Okay. So, going forward, right, I think we're all, we all want to do something. We all want to have the meeting, right? We have the city solicitor here saying that there's a process that we need to follow, so why don't we just follow the process and get to it. So the earliest we could meet will be Friday. That sound correct?
[Adam Knight]: Well, I think the first thing we do would be we have the meeting to discuss the complaint and the individuals mentioned in it. The city solicitor will be there to provide us with what our obligations are now that we are informed of that. And if that means seek legal counsel on the outside, then that's what we'd be taking up the vote on that day, whether or not that's the direction we want to go in.
[Adam Knight]: So then that might be right. That might be the vote that we have to take that on that Saturday on that at that meeting. Right. You know what I mean? What's that? What are our obligations now that we have this?
[Adam Knight]: I mean, I think that's what we're looking for ultimately, legal guidance.
[Adam Knight]: I think we did. I mean, I'm looking at it as we did get the legal guidance. The legal guidance we got was don't go into executive session because you didn't notify the people because individual rights kicks in.
[Adam Knight]: Right, and guides us with the process to get the meeting so that we can move to that goal of getting the attorney. You know, and we have to go through the process, right?
[Adam Knight]: We seem to be an uncharted waters here yet certain one aspect of the complaints would surround personnel issue. Another aspect of the complaint surrounds financial issue. So The financial issue, I think, is something that certainly warrants investigation. And my request would be, through you, what steps do we have or rights do we have as a council to further investigate that matter where it's not a personnel issue? It's an administration, a government issue.
[Adam Knight]: When an allegation is raised of financial impropriety, and it's brought to the attention of the council, what obligations legally does the council have in terms of action?
[Adam Knight]: I mean, we can't not act, right? So something's been brought to our attention. It's well documented. balls are not going to do something right where they're going to be complicit and the information received and do nothing with it or we're going to look at it right. So how do we do that how do we look at what how do we go about doing that as for this appropriation we're still not going to be able to be in a private session right. I mean it still has to go through the an executive session still needs to go through that individual rights process.
[Adam Knight]: But on that point, Mr. President, I think it's, you know, the complainant's right if they want to pursue it through an outside agency that they can file a complaint there as well. I don't think it's the council's obligation to file a complaint for, you know, you know what I mean? If there's an individual that's mentioned in the complaint, I think, you know, the materials that were before us kind of spoke a little bit about pursuing outside agency investigation. It didn't necessarily indicate that that was the next steps that the individuals were going to take in these complaints. But, you know, I think we're going down, maybe not us, but me, I'm going down a slippery slope with individuals and this and that and the other thing in the complaints. So with that being said, I'm going to rest my case. I certainly would like to convene an executive session to discuss this matter. I certainly feel as though If it takes us – have it to give a 48-hour notice, then that's what we have to do to go forward and continue with this discussion that we need to have. If that's the process, that's the process. It is what it is. That's the world we live in. So I'm certainly open to moving forward in that direction. But I don't know what anybody else feels on this. I don't want to take any action that's going to effectuate impact individual's rights here in the community. I'd rather err on the side of caution. These are public employees that do have rights, and, you know, we have to make sure we respect that. So if it just takes 48 hours and a letter of notification, I don't see what harm that causes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, should the council elect to hire outside legal representation for the purpose of investing a potential criminal matter, what obligations would the administration have to cooperate with this person? I mean, other than providing documents that are under the over-meeting law, what other requirements would they have to participate in any type of investigation where it would be the same as an investigation because we're a public entity in a public body, you know, they're required to participate in this investigation that's been initiated by us. We're with the legislative body.
[Adam Knight]: You know, say the council hired an attorney to go and investigate and the attorney wanted to talk to somebody and the person in the city hall said, I'm not talking to you. No, you have to. No, I don't. I'm not talking to you. They're not compelled. Are they compelled to participate in any way, shape or form?
[Adam Knight]: It's we need to notify you that we're talking about you. If you want to come. Come, if you don't, don't. If you can't be there, you're not there. But I don't see why we'd be beholden to their schedule. We're saying, we're giving you the $40 notices provided in the law. The law says we have to give you the notice. That's all we have to do is give you the notice. If you want to come, come. If you don't, don't. Reach out if you can't make it and tell us you want to reschedule. But I don't think you can just ignore it and just wait for it to go away. I don't think that that's an option.
[Adam Knight]: Well, I mean, the open meeting law is really about notice, right? That's really what it surrounds is what's it's about, you know, what needs to be posted in.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to offer a motion then that when the clerk does provide notification of the meeting, that I notify everybody who's mentioned by name in the documents.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: just to let you know that we're going to be convening in 48 hours time to discuss the matter in an executive session. We're going to be notifying you and your counsel as well as other individuals mentioned in the complaint as to the time and date of the meeting and we hope to see you there.
[Adam Knight]: Do we have any comments? Mr. President, I, for one, am glad to see the storefront finally have somebody suitable to fill it. This is the old Tony's by George location, from what I understand. Tony might still be working there with you a little bit at the time. Or George, rather. George might be there with you. But with that being said, Mr. President, I'm glad to see someone was able to fill the storefront. And I wish him the best of luck. And I move for approval of the paper. Any other questions? Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Nate. Yes, Mr. President, thank you very much. And thank you, Councilor Marks, for putting this resolution on this evening. Brian's someone I've grown to know and respect over the years in public service, and he's someone that's going to be sorely missed. When you go down to the South Medford Fire Station, for example, and you talk about the EMS procurement, you'll see Brian's handiwork right there, where they've set up a whole entire room dedicated to the materials and supplies that they purchase for EMS in first response. Councilor Marks also highlighted Brian's work with the Onagad. And there hasn't been an event in this community that hasn't had the metric fight of Amazon and God participating in one way or another, giving back to the community. So with that being said, Mr. President, I can't thank Brian enough for his four decades of service. He's going to certainly be missed. And I wish him all the best of luck in his retirement. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, at this time, I will defer to Councilor Knight. Vice President Knight. Councilor Marks, thank you very much. And Mr. President, thank you. Just this past week, Bella Scarpelli celebrated their 50th anniversary. And Maria Ryan-Essar is someone that I've known for a very long time, a high school classmate of mine, who's been a very successful business owner in this city now for a decade and a half. And I think that warrants a little bit of recognition, Mr. President. My wife has used their services, a number of occasions and she comes back looking more and more beautiful each time. And I can't thank Maria and her staff enough for the work that they do down there. So, with that being said, Mr. President, I would yield my time to Councilor Marks but congratulations to Maria and her staff.
[Adam Knight]: by me, seconded by Councilor Falco. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Ayes have it. Paper 21416 offered by President Caraviello. Be it so resolved that the Medford City Council amend the current parking ordinance pertaining to private ways to allow resident only parking and allow the police to enforce it. Councilor Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Councilor Morell.
[Adam Knight]: Do you recognize Councilor Bears?
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: I believe there was some towing that went on a couple of weeks ago because of that.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Mr. D'Antonio from Yale Street. Name and address for the record, please, sir.
[Adam Knight]: Name and address for the record, please.
[Adam Knight]: Name and address for the record, please, sir.
[Adam Knight]: On the motion of Councilor Caraviello, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli, as amended by Councilors Caraviello, Scarpelli, Falco, Morell, Bears, Mox, Scarpelli, Caraviello, Falco, Scarpelli. All those in favor?
[Adam Knight]: All those opposed? Hearing none, the motion passes. Paper 21417, offered by Councilors Bears and Morell. be it resolved by the Medford City Council that the city administration work with the Medford Public Schools to issue a communication regarding the expanded child tax credit that will provide a maximum of $300 per month for each child under the age of six and $250 per month for each child between the ages of six and 17, for which I have two, Councilor Bears.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Vice President Knight. Why are we making a supplemental appropriation if this is something that's included in the fiscal 2022 budget and we're in the process of deliberating the fiscal year 2022 budget? the supplemental appropriation would be to carry us through the remainder of this fiscal year, I would assume, because it would be a supplemental appropriation supplementing the FY20.
[Adam Knight]: And if I may, Mr. President, this paper is the paper which we usually expend funds from our perpetual care accounts, retained revenue accounts for the funding of physicians in the cemetery, if I'm not mistaken. Is that correct?
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight, it's my understanding, Alicia, maybe you can correct me if I'm wrong, but at no time, we need to do a minimum of 10% into each one of these buckets, correct, annually?
[Adam Knight]: So we have to appropriate this money in order to comply with the Community Preservation Act?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Motions, orders, and resolutions. Paper 21404, offered by President Caraviello. Be it so resolved, the Medford City Council discuss the report submitted by the traffic engineer in regard to High Street. Be it further resolved, the traffic engineer and the city engineer be available to address this issue. a council Scarpelli offered an amendment requesting that the MBTA be contacted for answers and that the MBTA representatives meet with the council and committee of the whole for further discussion. Be Councilor bears off an amendment that the 710 bus be included in discussions at this meeting.
[Adam Knight]: There are no objections. Paper 21407, be it so resolved, the Medford City Council go on record as informing the city administration as being opposed to the new island installation of High Street, Rubin Street, and Hastings Lane for it directly affects the public safety of the immediate area residents, bus, truck, and public safety equipment, especially in times of an emergency and extreme inclement weather. Be it further resolved, the new intersection island at the Woburn Street intersection of High Street exposes the City of Medford to potential lawsuits from any such accidents from the installation, and as such, we, the City Council, respectfully put the City Administration on notice for being opposed for making our city exposed for liability. Thank you, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Councilor Morell.
[Adam Knight]: I can't answer that question because the council president's computer shut off.
[Adam Knight]: I do not see the traffic engineer on the call. Nope, sitting in there, the traffic engineer. Any other councilors have anything they'd like to say?
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Councilor Morocco.
[Adam Knight]: Do you offer that as an amendment or as a B paper?
[Adam Knight]: Chair, wait a second. Seconded by Councilor Scarpelli.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Mr. Penter at the podium.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Couldn't agree with you more, Councilman Max. Chair recognizes Jared Powell. Clerk, will the clerk please unmute Jared Powell.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. Powell. share recognizes Mr. Penta.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Marksley, notice your microphone's on. You all set? I'm good. All right. On the motion by Councilor Caraviello. seconded by councilor Scarpelli as amended by councilor Biaza seconded by councilor Scarpelli as further amended by councilor Morell as seconded by councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor, please say aye. Wow, that was great. All those in opposition, please say aye. Hearing none, seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative, the motion passes. Council paper 21406 offered by Councilor Marks. Be it resolved that the Medford Chess Club Outdoor Riverside Avenue Park Sunday Club meetings be discussed. A, Councilor Scarpelli offered an amendment requesting that the administration ask the Director of Recreation to reach out to this organization. B, Councilor Falco offered an amendment requesting the DPW look into the water spigots in the park to ensure they're working properly. C, Councilor Falco offered an amendment requesting the Medford Police Department increase its patrols in the area on Sundays. D, Vice President Knight offered an amendment requesting that the Recreation Department apply for determination of eligibility from the Community Preservation Committee. Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Marks, thank you very much. Councilor Falco, the chair recognizes Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. It's certainly not a problem, Councilor Lococo.
[Adam Knight]: On the motion by Councilor Marks, seconded by Councilor Caraviello. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed. Hearing none, the motion passes. Paper 21408 offered by... Paper 21408 withdrawn by Councilor Caraviello. Paper 21409 offered by Councilor Morell. Be it so revolved that the city council receive an update on the Greenland extension project from our Greenland extension community working group representatives. Councilor Morell.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. I will let Clark please unmute Jim Silva.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And I thank you, Councilor Falco, for partnering with me on this resolution. When we think about the dangers, this is really a public safety and a public health issue, Mr. President. 200 residents, 200 of our most vulnerable residents in this community, senior citizens and disabled on fixed incomes living in public housing, who are afforded an amenity, an amenity of air conditioning that the management company is not turning on during a heat wave. It creates a concern. You know, when you go in that building and we've all been in there campaigning, we've all been in there dropping off flyers and shaking hands and meeting people, you see the population that lives in that building, Mr. President. You know, you see the ride pulling up in front and taking people to doctor's appointments. You see greater Lansing services pulling up and taking people to doctor's appointments, Mr. President. So when you look at the population that's serviced there and you look at the action or lack thereof, of our border health and ensuring that these residents are going to be provided with the amenities that are necessary and outlined in the HUD contract. I think that that's very troubling, Mr. President. And I thank Councilor Caraviello. I thank Councilor Farquhar again for partnering with me on this agenda item. And I hope that my council colleagues will support it and move forward and get some questions answered, Mr. President, because ultimately it's a head scratcher to me as to why we know that the air conditioning isn't going to be online, the cooling stations aren't open for the senior citizens that are directly across the street. So with that being said, I asked my council colleagues for the support of this resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor Villescaz. Vice President Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I can't remember a time in my life that Bud Kelly wasn't a part of it. uh, his nephew, David and I were best buddies. We met the first day of school in first grade. And, um, throughout high school, I had the opportunity to work in buddy Kelly's office at this great thing meant that I had, it was called office assignments. And, um, every fifth and sixth period for my junior and senior year, I spent that in Mr. Kelly's office, uh, working with him, putting together the athletic schedules. Not really. Um, it was more or less collecting equipment and making sure it was clean and, uh, you know, counting jock straps and shoulder pads. So it was really what we did, but, um, but it was a great guy and, um, I wouldn't have gotten through high school if it weren't for buddy. Um, I played lacrosse at Medford high and, uh, throughout my four years at Medford high, we had four different coaches and every year they tried to eliminate the program. And, um, I'd always go into buddy's office and I. Begging plead for him not to eliminate the program. So it'll be a keep lacrosse program alive for another year. And, you know, we still have that program today. And it was because of Buddy. Buddy, listen, listen to the kids. Tried to provide a service, but he was a great man. He was a great coach, Baldwin Catholic High School, Hall of Famer, Manfred High School, Hall of Famer. Someone who always spoke about the blue and white, but it was always a little secret that he kept that he was actually a Baldwin Catholic graduate. You know, his sister, Patricia and Brenna Deck, the twins, very close friends of the family. And I just want to offer them my condolences. It was a very tough, tough way to go this evening. And I stand by my council colleagues and in all the time words that they have about Mr. Kelly, because every single one of them is true. Thank you, Mr. President. Senior Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: Questions for the gentleman. Mr. President, I actually had the opportunity of speaking with Mr. Tallman earlier, having some familiarity with the ongoings at Hormel Stadium in the rental of the fields. The history of Ultimate Frisbee in Medford is actually pretty strong and pretty proud. Just a couple of years ago, I do remember the Boston Whitecaps, I think was the name of the team that was competing in the national championship and were actually on ESPN's top 10 at Hormel Stadium. So they certainly do bring some interest to the area and certainly some bodies to the region. And I, for one, have no concerns supporting the Sausage Guys, Sausage Cat down at Hormel Stadium for these dates that have been selected. So with that being said, Mr. President, I certainly would move for approval on item one. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Okay, question to the petitioner. Vice President Knight. I'm not understanding this, so would it be located at the physical location of the store, just outside? Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Do you have an existing drive-through window at this location presently?
[Adam Knight]: So I get the people to go inside the restaurant to go to the drive-thru.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight, I'm somewhat in line with what Councilor Bears is saying. I mean, I just don't like the precedent it sets, and I don't really feel as though it falls in line with the intent of a food truck pilot program. You know, we were talking about food trucks, we were talking about, you know, having the ability to, you know, bring the sausage guy to Hormel Stadium so that someone could have an event. And I really think that, you know, remodeling the business, that's a cost of doing business. And I think that the public safety concerns are going to outweigh, you know, the benefits that they're going to provide to the community, number one. And number two, because it doesn't seem to really fall in line with the intent of our food truck ordinance, I'm going to have a difficult time supporting it this evening. Thank you, Vice President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I find the records in order and move approval.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, I agree. Yeah.
[Adam Knight]: I think we're on.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: by the way.
[Adam Knight]: All right.
[Adam Knight]: I like that.
[Adam Knight]: Forward.
[Adam Knight]: We're not stalling, we're working.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. First of all, Kelly, congratulations. Although I didn't have the opportunity to be on the board of the North Method Little League or watch him play with football in the backyard with your grandfather, I did have the opportunity to watch him coach my son in T-ball last year. And you did a hell of a job. The Orioles were the best t-ball team in Medford Little League last year because of Kelly and her mom. So let me tell you, we did it. We had a great year. We had a great season. But it's very flattering and quite humbling to see someone at such a young age pursue something that they love against all odds and be so successful. And really, Kelly, this is a great achievement that you should be proud of. And I just want to say congratulations. And we hope to have you back on the t-ball field next year coaching.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think we'd be remiss in not pointing out the hard work and dedication that our friends at American Legion Post 45 have put forth year after year to ensure that the city of Medford is in compliance with General Logan's order. This year was the the first time we were able to convene since the pandemic. And this is one of my favorite events that we have every year. And I think it's very important, Mr. President, that we point out the hard work that our friends at The Post do. And also a familiar face that was missing this year, John Granara, someone who has led the charge in ensuring that these graves get decorated annually, was someone that used to run our annual Memorial Day ceremonies. He's had some health issues that have rendered him unable to participate in the way that he used to. When I went out to decorate flags with my family, Mr. President, the first person I saw there working out of the trunk of his car was John Granara with a set of maps. a list of names, who the people were, where they're supposed to go, how many graves they're going to be decorating, how much time it's going to take. He'd have chaperones and proctors there to make sure that the work was getting done correctly. Um, even a small little training, uh, before he allowed people to go out to, uh, to, to put flags on veterans graves, Mr. President. Um, so I think it's very important that we point out the work that our friends, uh, have done over there at post 45, um, anytime that the city of Medford calls on them, they're there to deliver. If we remember back just a couple of years ago, we weren't able to have the local elections at the Lawrence Memorial Hospital. And the first people to step up were our friends at American Legion Post 45. The veterans in this community are very active, and they deserve to be remembered, Mr. President. And in that regard, I invite here this evening our Veterans Service Director, Mike Durham, to say a few words on behalf of the Memorial Day ceremonies and the efforts that went into getting the city prepared and the cemetery prepared. for that event. So, with that being said, Mr. President, I rest my case and thank my council colleagues. I'd ask them to support the resolution and also offer Mr. Durham an opportunity to speak. Thank you, Mr. Vice President. Good evening, Mike. Name and address of the record, please.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Vice President Knight. Mr. President, if we look at our packets this evening under suspension, there's also paper 21405, recognizing June 6th as the anniversary of D-Day and requesting that this evening's meeting be dedicated to the honor of our World War II veterans. And I just ask that these two papers be combined.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information on that, Mr. President as well. Mr. President, when we voted to repurpose Riverside Plaza, one of the things we did was we turned Riverside Plaza into a parkland. And the reason we turned Riverside Plaza into a parkland was so that we had the opportunity to permit it.
[Adam Knight]: So I think this could be something that's as simple as being taken care of with a permit as well.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd like to amend Councilor Caraviello's recommendation also to request that the Recreation Department apply for a determination of eligibility grant from the Community Preservation Committee to see if there's a funding mechanism available there. Every so often, we have the ability to apply to determine if we're eligible for certain projects. And this might be either through the Chess Club or through the Recreation Department or in partnership, file a joint application with the Community Preservation Commission and see if you're eligible for funds through that.
[Adam Knight]: Well, no, I mean, it's just an application to see if the city would perform the project per se, you know what I mean? And you guys could propose the project in partnership with the recreation department. The recreation department would be the one that promotes the plan and then the oversight and stuff would be handled through. whoever the project manager is that gets assigned to the project. I don't think this is going to be something that's overly expensive. I mean, you know, a couple of tables and a tent. I don't think we're looking for rocket science over here to make sure the water works. You know what I mean? So if the funding is a problem, I know we got a lot of money coming in from this ARAPA that they're talking about. Maybe that money can be used for that as well. But I think that, you know, the community preservation grant would be a great opportunity for you to plant a seed and then build upon it, let it grow, water it, because if it works once, it's going to work twice in a different location, work a third time in a fourth location. So I think it might be worth pursuing. So with that being said, I'd just like to add that as an amendment to the council's recommendation.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. For those of us who know Mr. Skoper, he was a retired city employee from the city of Medford, a longtime Medford resident, very active in both our community and in politics, Mr. President, and was a devout supporter of President Emeritus. Robert Amiako, I can remember standing at the Columbus School holding a sign with Mr. Scopa on one of the coldest days. He must have been 80 years old and he was there from the minute the polls opened until the minute the polls closed, Mr. President. An unbelievable campaigner, just an all-around good guy. And he's going to be sadly missed in this community. He was someone who put his money where his mouth and wasn't afraid to go volunteer, was someone that would go out there and get behind the candidate that he loved and supported as opposed to crying and complaining on the internet. He was a throwback to the old days and just a good person, Mr. President, that dedicated a lot of his life to the city. So I ask that he be remembered this evening.
[Adam Knight]: On this piece with the state legislation, are we aware if there's any funding attached to this or if this is going to be an unfunded mandate that will go through the legislature?
[Adam Knight]: May it be so bold as to make the suggestion that we send this to a director of community media to come up with maybe a cost estimate as to what this will cost to retrofit these rooms. If we're really serious about it, we got to know what it costs before we go any further than that. Find out what it costs, put out an RFP or something, you know, but. So you want to amend that? I mean, I think that that's probably the, if we want it to happen, that's probably the way to go about it, in my opinion.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Also, Mr. President, I know that there are certain criteria outlined in the open meeting law relative to remote participation that, you know, may need to be looked at by our boards and commissions should they wish to adopt this measure in the form of probably a training because I know that there are certain steps that need to be taken by the public body in order to authorize such should the state legislation not pass.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Growing up in the area, I grew up on Whitman Road, Essex Street, Winthrop Street, Essex Street, Whitman Road, Woburn Street. There we are, two streets away from Woburn Street, Mr. President. I was looking at the number of signs that go, it almost looks like Yale Street, High Street right now, they got so many signs on it. But ultimately, Mr. President, if I were driving home from Medford Square, and I lived on Hastings Lane, Austin Road, Walcott Street, Well, Mystic Street, how do I get home? I can't take a left turn down any of those streets. So the answer would be, well, go down to the Parkway and then turn up from the Parkway onto the street. But Hastings Lane has restrictions on it. Mystic Streets, you do not enter. You have to go down to Auburn Street. You'd have to go all the way down to Auburn Street, all the way down to the school. Does this make any sense to divert traffic from people that live in the neighborhood to go all the way down to the school, number one. Number two, Mr. President, We are seeing the changes that we made at the South and Main intersection. We are seeing now these changes along High Street. We have a significant problem with Route 16, the light timing, Mr. President. So every single morning, every single morning, the stretch of Winthrop Street between the Parkway and High Street backs up almost all the way to Lawrence Road, sometimes past it. On the other side, it backs up almost all the way to the Woburn Street split, Mr. President. looking at these changes that we're making to traffic patents, we need, we need, we have to study the impact that it has after the fact, because quite frankly, the light changing cycle on route 16 is not fast enough. to, it doesn't happen frequent enough, to promote the steady flow of traffic through that intersection, Mr. President. So what you see is someone driving down Winthrop Street, and they get to the Winthrop Street Rotary, and they say, well, I'm not gonna make the light, but I'm not gonna sit here either, so let me pull up and block the intersection. Or you see someone coming down High Street that doesn't wanna turn down Winthrop Street and keep going Winthrop Street to Tufts University, they wanna go onto Winthrop Street and then turn left onto Route 16 to get on the highway. But what happens is, The current high street blocks the passing traffic lane, so nobody from Winthrop Street can go straight down Winthrop Street. It's a nightmare. It's an absolute traffic nightmare, Mr. President. I don't want to get into the last 10 years of traffic nightmares that the people in this area have had to deal with due to the simple fact that we've had construction going on between the Craddock Bridge, the Winthrop Street replacement, and the other source project. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'm glad we have 12 on the phone because I'd like to see what the plan is in terms of looking at the timing of the light cycles throughout this whole stretch. I mean, ultimately we make these changes, but then there's never any follow-up in terms of what impact it has on the traffic flow as a whole in this community. You know, for a very long time, we've been making knee-jerk reaction responses to the traffic situations in this community, but to put a no left-hand turn sign on the five streets coming up High Street, Those streets, all the people that live on them, it's crazy to me, Mr. President. You're one of them. You're one of them, Mr. President. So with that being said, Doug, maybe you can shed some light on that. I might appreciate it if you could. But I definitely think that we need to perform some type of traffic study to look at the impact that these changes have made, number one. And number two, figure out a way that we can lessen them so that people in the area that have to get places can move down the roadway and not be trapped through an unpassable situation.
[Adam Knight]: So point of no return, which is different than do not enter because we may have Burke put those signs up.
[Adam Knight]: To do not enter is one thing, but the no left turn is another. Because when Mayor Burke erected those resident only signs, there was a lot of discussion about who's considered a resident and who isn't. And that was addressed and discussed. Same thing when it happened up at Jim's Market, when they put those signs up, that was addressed and discussed. And it was residents are residents, residents can go down the street. Now, you can't even take a left turn as a resident on the street. Nevermind a resident in the city, a resident on the street to go home. So I think that that's a problem. And quite frankly, I've spoken with people that live in the neighborhood, not Councilor Caballero actually, but I've spoken with people on Hastings land, I've spoken with people on Austin road, I've spoken with people on Walcott street, and all of them say the same thing. How am I supposed to get home?
[Adam Knight]: What's the solution, I guess is the question. That's all well and good, but what's the solution? None of these residents have been contacted about this. All of a sudden, they're just getting it. So what's the solution? Can the science come down?
[Adam Knight]: So in essence it sounds like we sold our soul for this million dollars and we have no control of what's going to happen on the roadways that we that these residents live on?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if I may, what I see happening is people are going to come up High Street, and they're going to get to the fork in the road. And they're going to say, all right, I can shoot down moving street now, and then I can catch the top half of Walcott, and then I can shoot across High Street. Because going straight across isn't a left turn. So now what we're doing is we're diverting traffic into the residential neighborhood, as opposed to keeping it on the main state controlled trucking route.
[Adam Knight]: What information, Mr. President? What information, Councilor Maitland? Is that considered a reduction in service? The removal of a stop for the DOT, for the MBTA.
[Adam Knight]: I understand that, but does that correlate to what would be considered a reduction in service?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you for your clarification.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President, I just ask that we also simultaneously send this paper to the city solicitor and ask her to provide us with an amendment that would outline the creation or establishment of term limits for members of the Zoning Board of Appeals.
[Adam Knight]: We can do it simultaneously. It's going to come back to us anyway. So I'd like to have a, cause we're going to have to open up a public hearing. So I'd like to have the paperwork from the city solicitor when it's time.
[Adam Knight]: We have the remainder of the reading, whereas we have budget hearing scheduled for Wednesday and Saturday.
[Adam Knight]: And refer the paper to Committee of the Whole. We'll make it a double motion so we only have to vote once.
[Adam Knight]: I think so, yeah.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Vice President Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. Thinking back to when Infinity was before us, I do believe that some neighborhood residents appeared at that meeting and they expressed some concern over the use of an outdoor intercom system that was being used prior to Herb Chambers taking over. And I do believe that this council had placed restrictions on the permit for Infinity, if I'm not mistaken. I'm doing my best to try to dig those up, but I'm hoping that we can apply those same restrictions that were in place that the neighborhood asked for previously. I know that this lot has been vacant for some period of time, but when it was changing hands, a number of residents did come out expressing some concern over the use of the outdoor intercom system to, you know, call people and say, you know, Joe, you got a phone call, come inside and that type of thing. It was very disruptive to the neighborhood, number one. Number two, vehicles stationed on site, or are they stored in another location in Mystic Ave, and are they going to be trucking back and forth to other locations around the possible Mystic Ave, or are they all going to be stored on site?
[Adam Knight]: But yeah, the local residents did want that protection in place when we issued the permit in the past. And I'd ask that those restrictions be applied once again. But we're gonna have to find them first. The meeting minutes.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to offer it as a condition that, you know, the same conditions that were applied by this council when the Xfinity dealership received their class two license be applied to the special permit as well. Okay, on the motion by... Mr. President. I don't know how comfortable people are. We can't see them.
[Adam Knight]: Is that the only I think I think that was the only one we had last time. Let's put it this way. I know I sponsored that one. Yeah. So I know that that was the condition that was the only one I put on it. I don't know if other counts. I think that was the only one that was on there.
[Adam Knight]: So moved.
[Adam Knight]: Thinking back, Mr. President, I do think the other restrictions that we put on it were the license goes with the business and not the address. You know, the usual restriction protections that we usually put in place, but I'm not 100% sure, but I think that that's what it was. The license goes with the business. The license goes with the business, not the address.
[Adam Knight]: So I think I was, I think last time this came up, it was because they had to build it. They hadn't built it yet because they wanted to get the permits to move forward. And then they were going to build it. Then they were going to come and inspect it after it was built. Correct. Maybe John can correct me if I'm wrong, but it's minus thing. There's going to be new construction. it hasn't been constructed yet because we need the permits to build it.
[Adam Knight]: Chair with the motion. Vice President Knight. It seems like these are necessary and incidental licenses for the business license that we just issued. And I would move for approval to pay.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Mr. President, thank you very much. Congratulations. This is certainly a commendation you've earned. And I was speaking with your father earlier, and he said that if you ever want to go for a second Eagle Scout badge, that he'd like you to fix the Winthrop Street situation. That's part of your project. That'll go a long way at the house. Congratulations. I wish you the best of luck in your future endeavors. I think it's great that you've decided to join local 103 and be a part of our union life. I too am a union member and I can just tell you this, be stronger together and the benefits will certainly be there for you in the long run and your brothers and sisters will be there for you too. So congratulations on your work. You've entered a new family now. You've moved on from your Boy Scout family. You've entered the family of organized labor. So congratulations and I wish you the best of luck.
[Adam Knight]: When I saw this on the agenda, it sparked my interest and I did a little bit of snooping around. And what I've been able to determine is the president is that this position been vacant since March of 2020. That's 15 months that this position been vacant. Now let's think back to my last year. O'Connor might be able to do it for us. She gave us a great rundown of what's happened since March of last year. So since March of last year, we have not had a sealer of weights and measures in this community to protect consumers from price gouging, to protect consumers from greed, to protect consumers from operators that aren't doing the right thing. And when you think about what the sealer of weights and measures does, it's not only at the gas station, it's when you put your food on the scale at the supermarket, Mr. President. So this is a serious issue here. This is a very serious issue. This position should have been filled. It's budgeted. It's budgeted. It should have been filled. We have an ordinance for it, but it's being paid by a stipend. To who? Does anybody know? Nobody knows, Mr. President. It's another example of transparency at its finest.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Councilor Knox is exactly right. This is a very important position. It's such an important position that there's actually a state agency that oversees it, the Division of Standards. It's such an important position that sealers of weights and measures are mandated in communities, Mr. President. So this isn't just the job that, you know, the council wants and we can't have, this is something that we need to keep our residents safe and to keep our consumers protected.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, um, March 1st, I reached out to, uh, my superintendent of lights and lines, Mr. Steven Randazzo. And I made a request of him to remove the double pole located at three, five, seven, uh, double pole number three, five, seven, seven located at the corner of Greenleaf Avenue in Burgett Avenue. And, uh, after reviewing the location, Mr. Randazzo reported back to me, there was no city owned utilities that are on that pole that need to be removed. As such, it will be on the utility companies to get this double pole removed, and he referred to both Verizon and National Grid, and he put a request in for that work to be done. To date, this work has not been performed, Mr. President. I would ask that this paper be tabled until such time as the double pole, located on the corner of Burgin Ave and Greenleaf Ave, be removed and replaced. Second.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Mr. President, I would like to offer a motion to refer this matter to a committee of the whole so that the council can be able to properly vet the neighborhood infrastructure and financial impacts and aspects of this loan order. Thank you. Councilor Powell.
[Adam Knight]: If you could, I'm sorry, the council does have a section of the budget where we discussed that service and we could also probably do this in that at the same time with a council to one stone as they say. So if you could have the appropriate questions answered, we appreciate it.
[Adam Knight]: It says referred to KP law. Is there a number? So apparently they don't know, we have to talk to KP Law.
[Adam Knight]: I don't know where it is. So the, the Councilor asked about the 40, the 40 B projects. And we did get a response this evening for that. It says that it's referred to KP law for an update to the city council. So we asked the administration to give us an update and they sent it to outside council. Um, but then I think there's another paper that was also out there and it was how much money we pay an outside council to do the type of work. Correct. And I don't think we've gotten that response either. I think I was confused when you talked about the 40 Bs. I thought you were talking about the 40 Bs, not the other four or five papers that the council had passed requesting how much money that we've been spending.
[Adam Knight]: There's 365 to choose from. Yeah.
[Adam Knight]: On that point, Mr. President. Vice President Knight, This isn't the first time that the councils had to use the tools of the Freedom of Information Act in order to obtain information from the administration. And I find it curious that every time the information that we're looking for surrounds the Kopelman and Page law firm, that we have to go down this road. Just maybe a year or so ago, I put a resolution on asking for copies of the Warren articles each month. We have a big financial responsibility here in this community to approve a budget. Once we approve the budget, are we done with it? No, absolutely not. We should know where that money's being spent. And that's what the Warren article says. It's an actual document that shows us where the money's being spent. We had to fight for that document, Mr. President. And we didn't get it until, I think, January of this year. We got eight months worth of Warren articles. After begging and pleading and crying for it, we didn't get it. We filed the freedom of information request and we got it. I believe then we had some questions concerning payment of claims over $2,500 out of the legal department. And we couldn't get any answers surrounding those questions. So I'm a little confused as to why there's so much secrecy and such a veil of secrecy surrounding KP law and their operations here in the city and the role that they play here in the city. Cause I'm very confused by it. When we asked the city solicitor for opinion, they said they sent it to KP law. That's not what we asked you to do. A city ordinance is very clear. The city solicitor gives the opinion. That's what controls and dictates. She's the only one that has the legal authority to do such, not KP Law. So when KP Law offers an opinion, it's not even worth the paper it's written on because they don't have the statutory authority to write it. So I'm very confused as to what's going on, Mr. President, with the administration in terms of this lack of transparency when it comes to spending and fiscal accountability. Thank you. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: The use variance that the council is talking about to do with the Titan gas station property, not 61 Locust Street Inn. The speaker keeps saying we, we, we, and I'm wondering if who's we, is she an employee of the administration? Is she on a board or a commission for the administration? Or does she practice some sort of official government role?
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight, that's not accurate. This council remedied that misclarification. The city solicitor put out an opinion saying that it was a Scribner's error, that these variances were allowed. And then this council went and took a vote and adopted the city solicitor's opinion and corrected the Scribner's error. And that was well before this administration took place and well before this administration appointed the alternate that made the decision as chairman on the Titans gas station project. Point of information.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I certainly don't have any problem with this petition that's before us this evening. If you drive through that area and that intersection in particular, I do believe there are three projects that are underway. We have the Greenland Extension Project, we have the Cummings Center Project, and I do also believe we have issued a grant of location for underground utility work coming from the train tracks on the southern side or the western side of the intersection of College Avenue and Boston Ave as well. So I certainly have no problem with this, Mr. President. I look forward to the day that the Green Line stations in South Medford Ball Square opens. And I think that in order for that, we need to let them have electricity. So with that being said, I move approval. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Motions, orders, and resolutions. Council paper 21382 offered by President Caraviello. Be it so resolved that the city completely paved the area of new construction from Woburn Street to Auburn Street, rather than just the new intersection. And be it further resolved, the new island on High Street be discussed in the interest of public safety. Councilor Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: I certainly agree with the Mr. President on a motion by Councilor Caraviello seconded by Councilor Scarpelli.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes City Engineer Timothy McGivern.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President? Council Max, just to follow up on that. Is there anything like that? I'm good, thank you, Chair.
[Adam Knight]: On the motion of Councilor Caraviello, requesting a report back from the traffic engineer on the island at Woburn Street and Hastings Lane along High Street. Does the chair have a second? Seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. Final motion, Mr. Clerk. Actually, Councilor Falco, I apologize.
[Adam Knight]: Great, thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Make that a formal motion recognizes customer marks.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes the gentleman from Zero Summit Road, Mr. Penta.
[Adam Knight]: City engineer, Mr. McGibbon, the chair recognizes. City engineer, Timothy McGibbon, the question, gentlemen.
[Adam Knight]: And I do believe that that was the initial motion that was made by Councilor Caraviello and seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. I'm gonna take those steps and report back to the council. Is there anybody else that has any questions relative to the issue at hand? Hearing and seeing none. On the main, let me see here, what do we have? On the motion by, Okay, on the first amendment made by Councilor Caraviello, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli, that striping be considered in the form of thermoplastic materials. So on the motion, on the paper, on the amendment. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. Yes. Yes.
[Adam Knight]: On the amendment for report back from the city engineer in the traffic engineer relative to safety questions concerning the traffic island at the corner of a winter of Hastings on high. The main motion made by Councilor Caraviello seconded by Councilor Scarpelli, will the clerk please call the roll. Yes. Yes.
[Adam Knight]: On the main motion is offered by Councilor Caraviello seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. Yes. Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Paper 21383 offered by Councilor Marks. be it resolved the city administration requests Eversource as part of their underground utility project, install new sidewalk and curbing on the even side of Winthrop Street from Wildwood Road to Placedead Road in the interest of public safety.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And I thank Councilor Marks for giving us a great history on this project. But I think it's important that we also look back and think about what's been going on in this stretch for the better part of a decade now. We had an underground utility project going on there from the MWRA that went up Winthrop Street. That took about three years. And part of that project included some work that went underneath the Winthrop Street Rotary. And when they restored the Rotary, they restored it improperly. So part of the mitigation of this project is actually, Eberstrom is fixing the project, fixing the mistake that the MWI made in the restoration. So for two and a half years, that stretch was under construction. Then once that project, that underground, that water project finished, what happened was this little project over here, they call it the Craddock Bridge project. Three years, Mr. President, where all the traffic that was supposed to go over that bridge was detoured up Winthrop Street to Winthrop Street Rotary. I swear the day the Craddock Bridge project ended, the day, that's when they started this project. This stretch of road has been under construction or under part of a traffic management plan in one way, shape or form for the better part of 10 years. 10 years, Mr. President, that's not right. That's not right. So this should be a project that should have been completed by now when they sold us the bill of goods, when we granted the locations, they said it will be completed by now. So I share Councilor Mack's frustration with the process and with what's going on. I also have a question for the city engineer because it's been brought up that all our roadways are gonna be restored curb to curb and that we're gonna prioritize the curb to curb resurfacing of Mystic Gap, if I understood that correctly. Am I correct with that? That Mystic Gap will be resurfaced curb to curb as well? So they say, I just drove down Mystic Gap and it looks like The paint truck exploded and we have a whole brand new lane painted red all the way down. Mr. Gabb going southbound into the city. So what's going to happen with that? If the roadway is going to be resurfaced curb to curb, and it's going to be restored in time. I'm confused by this. Is there any coordination going on between these projects at all? I mean, can the city engineer answer that question for me, please address that. You know, we just spent an inordinate amount of money that I believe Rep. Barber was able to secure in the state budget for this transportation initiative on Mystic Gap, and they implemented it. But they implemented it without coordinating the resurfacing of the roadway, which is something that I anticipate will happen towards the conclusion of this Eversource project if we don't get our ducks in a row. So I'm hoping the city engineer can speak on that a little bit, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Well, if the goal is to fast track that stretch, then how are they going to be able to gauge whether or not the pilot project works? I mean, if we get the green light to fast track that stretch repaving because that work is done in that roadway, how long are they going to be able to examine the data from this pilot project?
[Adam Knight]: And I just see it as extremely wasteful that they put the paint down on the road, knowing that it's going to be milled and resurfaced. And then who's responsible for restoring it back to the in-kind situation, it will be National Grid, correct?
[Adam Knight]: I do believe Councilor Scott Villanueva offered an amendment as well that wasn't drafted up at the on-site meeting. Would I be happy to second that?
[Adam Knight]: As amended by, Councilor Knight. As I go through my paperwork here, Mr. President, you know, I have a document dated April 30th, 2015, the Mystic to Woburn transmission project. I have a document here, the Mystic to Woburn 115 kilovolt line project, Medford City Council presentation dated May 19th, 2015. I have the same document dated October 20th, 2015. Another presentation, November 14th, 2017, And another presentation is the present February 4th, 2020. I think it's time we bring them back for another presentation as to what's going on. Let's get everybody in the same room here as well as onsite. So that everybody that has something to say can participate and can express their concerns with the president. I'd like to offer that as a formal motion that just as they have previously, I was supposed to pay before the council. Last time they were here was February 4th, 2020.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. I also think it's important to take a look and see if we're contributing the decisions of the administration and contributing to delays by not allowing more crews out on the roadways and not taking some steps to address it dynamically. I mean, obviously we know that this project's been a disaster. It's been going on for about a part of five years. So, you know, the MOU says what it says, but it might be time to go back to the table and really look at what's going on and try to figure out if this traffic management plan is the best and what we can do to get additional crews out there. I always find it interesting when a resolution makes its way into the agenda and then someone from the administration comes and says, actually on Monday, we have three crews out there working now. And that's gonna be the first day it happens. It seems kind of reactionary. And I don't blame the city engineer for this. I know that he has a lot going on and that he only has limited control over certain aspects of this project. But with that being said, Mr. President, is city decision-making contributing a lack of city decision making contributing to the ongoing delays as well. And I think that's important to consider.
[Adam Knight]: Before you go through this, I will be withdrawing this paper this evening. The governor has extended the special pocket outdoor dining regulations. Massachusetts Restaurant Association had worked with the governor's office to extend certain provisions of the emergency order that were lifted. This is one of them. So with that being said, the purpose and intent of this resolution has been addressed and there's no need for further discussion.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. I'm thinking, Mr. President. Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'd answer the councilor's question. For all two hour parking spots, you're allowed three hours. You get an extra hour every whatever the spot says in terms of if it's a one hour spot, you get two hours. If it's two hours, you get three hours according to the police department website. But I wonder, Mr. President, if there's a way that we could implement the mechanism where an individual, if they get a parking, if they get a ticket, This is an automatic mechanism. If it's someone that's over the age of 65, upon payment of the ticket, they're also given an application to apply for the senior citizen parking pass. So, say an individual that's over the age of 65, like yourself, got a parking ticket, oh, say down out in front of a place, maybe, I don't know if it's been there, Magnificent Muffins, you know, and you got a ticket out in front of Magnificent Muffin, when you paid the ticket, then they'd have an automatic mechanism to say, Richard Caraviello paid this ticket, he's a Metro resident, we know what his registration says. Can we send him an application in the mail? that says you're eligible for the 65 plus parking program is the application. They have no problem sending out late notices when people don't pay Mr. President. I think that, you know, in an effort to address some of the issues like Councilor Scarpelli brought up with the amnesty day and stuff like that, this might be a way for us to get in front of some of these issues that are arising. with Park Metro number one. Number two, it seems to me like Park Metro is out the door. We did get a correspondence from the administration relatively recently indicating that their contract was up relatively soon and the administration is having meetings of some sort to discuss the future of parking in the city. I understand that we did have a committee put together to do some examination. I felt the presentation was a little bit focused more so on the Greenland extension sites and a little bit less on citywide efforts and endeavors. But with that being said, Mr. President, I certainly think that an automatic mechanism that notifies seniors that they're available and that they're eligible for this type of service, this type of amenity that the city can provide would be very helpful to the residents in the community. So I'd like to offer that in the form of a motion as to whether or not Park Metro can determine if there is a way that they can offer, extend applications to residents in the community that are 65 years or older, when they pay a ticket that they received. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, on Council Max's point, I think it's also important to point out that the administration had recently asked the council to fund a position called the COVID-19 communication specialist. So I don't see any reason why if Ms. O'Connor is not available, that this other city employee that works in the press office can't appear before the council and provide us with the update. Thank you, Council Max, for bringing it up. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Clerk, can you put that into the record? On that point, Mr. President, because I do believe this council voted and we said, you know, we'd appreciate you coming to give us an update, but we also want it in writing. The reason we want it in writing is so we can keep a record of what's going on so we can have a snapshot in time. So we don't have to go back and watch a meeting from two years ago about the other source construction pipeline per se, when we have paperwork that they gave us on it. So I concur with councilor Falco 100%. You know, we have a very well-funded communications office and we should be getting communications.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think it's also very important when we look at, you know, not only the seniors in that community, not only the administration of government, but you know, what families rely on in the summertime, um, you know, the recreation department, participation limits surrounding summer fun camp, rights, pawn tops pool, um, the recreational programs that are offered to the rec department. They're all right now limited. because of the participation limits, Mr. President. So if you wanted to sign your kid up for the Saturday morning basketball league, it's $145 for five weeks. You get 45 minutes a week, and it's limited to six kids. We have a community of 60,000 people. If you wanted to have your kid play in the recreation department's basketball program, it's limited to six kids. It's less than 1% of the population. Point of information? Point of information, Councilor Scapino.
[Adam Knight]: So when you say there's important, when you say their Councilor, you're referring to the governor, the governor, not the city administration. Correct. Right. Because when I recently checked the recreation website, the participation limits was still at six, six people per event.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Last week, we made inquiry into the status of the negotiations between our recreation department, building department, and the administration. And this week, I'd like to ask for an update on our clerical union. It's my understanding that both of these bargaining units have gone without a contract for an extended period of time, and I personally don't see any reason why. I think that they should be at the table negotiating. If they're at a stalemate, then let the council know. But at this point in time, Mr. President, I'm asking that we get an update. Unfortunately, in our packets this week, you will see that the mayor did respond to last week's resolution. And her response was, we will not comment on ongoing contract negotiations. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'd ask that the resolution be forwarded to the administration. with the anticipation that they see the error in their ways and provide us with the information that we need to make informed decisions moving forward into budget season. If in fact these two collective bargaining agreements are settled, it will have a financial impact on this community. And as the financial watchdog in this community, the Medford City Council, the body responsible for the appropriation of funds, I think it's well within our scope and authority to be informed of these decisions and what's going on. So with that being said, Mr. President, I ask my council colleagues to support this resolution.
[Adam Knight]: If I may, Mr. President. Thank you. I look at this situation with the 40B developments that are going on in this community, Mr. President, and I look at them as missed opportunities. And we have an administration that campaigns on affordable housing and then fights tooth and nail to prevent it. With just one of these projects, we're looking at probably close to $2.5 million in permitting fees, probably $250,000 per month in property taxes. And it seems like it's a frivolous fight when five separate consultants, all independent of each other, say that the city's glam calculations are incorrect. So I really think, Mr. President, that they should have run a friendly 40B. We had Judy Barrett working with us, who's the renowned 40B, friendly 40B expert across the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, who's no longer with us for a variety of reasons, I think, that surround the ongoing litigation, Mr. President. So with that being said, I thank the councilors for bringing this up and I certainly look forward to bringing this solution, this issue to a head because we talk about what's going on in the inner belt of 95 and the need for affordable housing and the need to increase housing production. We have a housing production plan. These projects are mentioned in them, but where are we?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Vice President Knight. Maybe we can get his grandson Michael to come over from Assembly Row and get to work on Medford Square just like his grandfather did. It'd be quite a legacy that he could leave behind if that were the case.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. I think it's also important to point out, Mr. President, this application isn't just for a sign that has movement. The sign is 36 square feet. The ordinance calls for a sign that would be 30 square feet. This sign looks like it's about anywhere between 10 to 15 feet in height. And our ordinance says that signs of this nature should not exceed six feet in height. So I think that this is clearly an issue where the council should not waste its time going through the exercise of futility of sending a two-way subcommittee.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I just want to clarify that a vote, a yes vote is to deny? That is correct. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. As noted in the resolution, May 16th through the 22nd is EMS Awards Week. And our friends at Armstrong Ambulance have been a great partner here in the city of Metro. From the amount of work that they do in community service, reaching out volunteerism, training everybody in CPR, the IEDs that they've, I mean, the IEDs that they've put out at local hockey rinks and parks and the like, Mr. President, Armstrong's just a great partner. And this week is EMS Awards Week. And today there's a celebration actually in Worcester, Massachusetts. It's called the Convoy of Champions. where they're going to be having a small parade and some MedFlight helicopters driving around to celebrate and highlight the work that our EMS professionals do in this community and communities across not only Massachusetts, but the state. This event is established by the Massachusetts Ambulance Association in coordination with its national partner. And Mr. President, if we look back, and we remember just a few years ago, this council congratulated Sean Main from Armstrong Ambulance for receiving the Star of Life Award And this celebration that's going on this week is where the Massachusetts Ambulance Association will award the Stars of Life. Two local individuals are receiving them, a gentleman from Ireland and a gentleman from Saugus this year. No one from Medford isn't going to be a recipient this year. However, I think it's important to point out and highlight the good work that Armstrong Ambulance does. They go above and beyond the call of duty, Mr. President, to be a partner in this community and a part of this community. And with that being said, I ask my council colleagues to support the resolution. Councilor Scarpelli.
[Adam Knight]: On that topic, Vice President Knight. It's not uncommon that the city and the state enter into what's called maintenance agreements. Sleepy Hollow being a perfect example of the Sleepy Hollow stretch along Route 16, leading up to the continent shells underneath the maintenance agreement, so the city methods responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of that area but they really have no control and direction. Other than that. So these maintenance agreements to exist. do we have the ability to stretch our already understaffed and overstretched DPW this much further to start taking on more properties when we quite frankly are doing a bad job handling the properties that we have right now?
[Adam Knight]: Also, Mr. President? I think it's important, Mr. President, that as we look at this whole entire process of the name change, that we don't get overly emotional and start to make this a political issue. It's a political issue and the family should not be subjected to the politics of this process, right? Jean Barry Sutherland was nominated because she was someone that made a great difference in this community. And I think that, you know, going forward, she should be remembered for all the positive things that she did in this community and not be part of a political campaign to discredit her as they move forward in this political process of renaming the school. Because I didn't have the privilege of going to the Dame School. I went to the Brooks, but right around junior high, I got a lot of friends that were over there at the Dame School that had Jean Barry, my friend, David Topper, very, very successful. To this day, he says, it's all because of Jean Barry. She gave them the tools to succeed. So with that being said, you know, I just hope that the people out there in the community realize that Jean Barry has a family. Her family's here this evening. I don't think they're here this evening because the political process has been good to them. And as we move forward, I hope that we can move forward with some sensitivity because Jean's loss is still new and every day these people hurt. So with that being said, Mr. President, I thank you for your indulgence. Well said.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I do think we're losing a little bit. I think we might be losing a little bit of focus here. I mean, ultimately this body is not responsible for the naming of the school, the renaming of the school, the process to rename the school. And I think that's important to point out. The only people that are responsible for the school committee chaired by the mayor, chaired by the mayor, the corner office, the corner office, Mr. President, not this, but this body has no ability to effectuate this change whatsoever. Thank you, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I have no problem with what anybody's saying. My problem is that there's nothing that we can do to fix it, right? I just want to make that clear. I agree a thousand percent. John, someone's got to do something.
[Adam Knight]: This council stated time and time again that this is a school committee issue and it's not something we're gonna interject ourselves to get in the middle of. I mean, we've all said that on numerous occasions since this thing has started. It's a school committee issue, all right? So let me finish, let me finish. The school committee's made their mind up, all right? The horse is out of the bind. It's already running around the track. Okay. It's already running around the track. The horse is out of the back. You're going backwards. You got to focus on moving forward. All right. The name is going to get changed. The school committee already voted for it. You've asked for reconsideration. They said, no, I'm not questioning their scope and their authority. All right. So, I mean, ultimately that's like the school committee coming and telling us every other week, do something different, do something different. You know, we got to let them operate in this, in this sphere, in their world.
[Adam Knight]: You know what I'm saying?
[Adam Knight]: I mean, I don't think I mean, I don't think there's anybody that's going to agree that was a good process. The process was flawed from the start. It's been a disaster. Quite frankly, the city would be in a much better place if this was handled differently. I agree with you 150% and we have 150% this was a disaster. And we appreciate hearing that from you and I know a lot of the other Councilors agree with you. But I mean, I don't
[Adam Knight]: I mean, it's a- With all due respect, I share your frustration. When I think about frustration, I think about a $5 million structural deficit that we have coming up in the next year's fiscal budget. Those are the things that give me anxiety at night. Those are the things that I lose sleep over.
[Adam Knight]: I guess what I'm getting at is in the grand scheme of things, out of all the issues and problems that we have in this community, this is one, but there are bigger ones. There are much bigger ones. There are much larger problems that we have in this community. Like are we meeting our new growth figures so that we can just meet the inflation and the contractual obligations that we have for collective bargaining agreements. These are big questions. These are big questions. Quite frankly, the process surrounding the school renaming did nothing to bring this city together to put us in a better position to answer them.
[Adam Knight]: I'm Nicole and I go way back. We went to high school together. I have a question, because I'm not following. People said something, this, that. I don't pay too much attention to the social media stuff. Well, Adam, you should.
[Adam Knight]: So you have to go on social media to find that. But with that being said, who made these comments? Was it a was it a member of the committee?
[Adam Knight]: The reason why I ask is because if it's a committee member, a person was appointed to the committee, then they consider the city employee or a public employee. So that person would be subject to all the rules, regulations, guidelines, and policies that are in place. So if the school department has a policy for say, social media use, then the members of the committee should be subject to that. If the school department has say a bullying policy for online bullying, the members of the committee should be subject to that.
[Adam Knight]: I, you know, warning was that I hate to see the family be damaged by this issue because it's becoming so political.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. I appreciate it. Thanks for answering my question.
[Adam Knight]: This resolution was filed at the request of a former colleague, Councilor Camuso, who's maintained a very long lasting friendship with Mr. Ercolini. And Paul and I were on the phone just the other day and we were catching up and he explained to me that Mr. Riccolini had just retired after 43 long years working at Filene's and Macy's as an electrician. I know Mr. Riccolini so I had the pleasure and opportunity to go to high school with his son, David. We played in the same basketball team together. And it's great to see somebody, Mr. President, who's dedicated so much time to one company and has been able to reach the golden years of retirement after 43 years. So with that being said, I'd ask my council colleagues to support me. in off-resolution. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I do feel as though this resolution is somewhat self-explanatory. Ultimately, the Building Department and Recreation Department had to do the contract negotiations with the administration, what appears to be over a year ago now at this point. It's my understanding that the contract negotiations had stalled for some period of time. And I'd like to ask for an update as to the status of the ongoing negotiations, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. off of the Fellsway over in that section of the city, Mr. President, I believe in Councilor Scarpelli's old neck of the woods. And she's the mother of Maria Menounos, of local celebrity from entertainment news and the like, Mr. President, the classmate of mine from high school. And she recently lost her mother after a very public battle with brain cancer. And we all know what a great job the Menounos have done in being contributors to the city of Medford. So with that being said, I'd like to offer deepest condolences to the Menounos family.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Vice President Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And thank you, Councilor Marks, for the presentation. I think it's spot on. I had the opportunity to review the mayor's capital plan. And what I was able to do, derived through my analysis was that this capital plan calls for the resurfacing either partially or totally of about two streets a year for the next six years. And the only investment being made is chapter 90 funds, which is about $900,000 annually, Mr. President. In a community of this size, in the condition of the roads that we have, that investment is not enough. It needs to be reprioritized. This capital plan needs to be reprioritized. For the last, 12 months or so, we've been hearing about a pavement management plan. Now, we had the call-in center come in and put together this capital plan that the mayor is using for FY 21 through 26, touting it as the first ever capital plan that's ever been implemented in the city of Medford. Apparently, she doesn't remember, shot the course that the McGlynn administration had put forward. Perhaps she doesn't remember the countless documents that the Burke administration had provided us that looked very similar to this capital plan that came out from the call-in center that the outside contractor provided to us. So with that being said, Mr. President, I thank Councilor Marks for bringing this forward. And I do feel as though the investment needs to be more than what it is right now, two streets a year for the next six years. The roadways and the condition they're in right now are not gonna be able to sustain the next six years without a far more significant investment. So with that being said, I second the council's motion. Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President. In building upon what councilor Marks and councilor Falco said, this isn't just a quality of life issue. This is more than a quality of life issue, Mr. President. This is a safety issue. It's a service delivery issue, but most importantly, it's a pride issue. I mean, do we want to be known as the community when someone's driving into Medford from Winchester, they say, all right, get ready. Here we come entering Medford. When they're coming in from Arlington entering Medford, driving down these terrible streets. I mean, that's not the image, Mr. President, that I think we want to portray to our neighboring communities. We have people in this town that are spending outrageous, outrageous amounts of money to purchase homes. And how long do we think that the residents are going to be able to put up with the lack of service delivery in direct correlation to their tax bills and what they're paying, Mr. President? Because right now it's significantly lacking. The services that we offer are significantly lacking and we need to do better. I'm seeing stumps in this community, and as Councilor Markswell, they've been there so long, they're getting taller. I see stumps in the city that are five feet high now. If you look at the intersection of Winter Street and Lawrence Road, for example, there was a dead tree in front of the house there. The resident asked for the tree to be taken down. The tree never got taken down, Mr. President. Instead, the tree fell down on the resident's house. The resident gets the tree removed from his front yard. He calls the city to remove the stump. The city cuts the stump. The stump's five and a half feet high, and it's starting to grow leaves out of it now it's been there so long. I mean, enough's enough, Mr. President. It's time that we stop putting the boots back on the ground. We reopen City Hall, and we get back to work. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Mayne. I think we'd be remiss in not pointing out the role that Mr. McGilvray had. in professionalizing policing across America through his involvement in organized labor. Mr. McGilvrey was a champion on behalf of his colleagues, police officers across America, across Massachusetts, in fighting for collective bargaining rights and lobbying up at the State House for benefits for police officers in the line of duty, which he was one, Mr. President. And if we think about the nature of the injuries that Mr. McGilvrey sustained and how long he suffered, many would say that he'd still be with us today if it weren't for that fateful night and that accident that occurred. So with that being said, this is a very prestigious honor, and I want to join Councilman Marks in extending my congratulations to the family for their hard work and perseverance in making sure that Mr. McGilvery's name is in fact included in the law enforcement memorial down in Washington, D.C. So with that being said, thank you very much, Councilman Marks.
[Adam Knight]: So from what I'm gathering, Brooke Hoyt has been appointed the COVID communication specialist?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, can we talk a little bit about that?
[Adam Knight]: George, maybe you can clarify. I don't know if you were talking about the communications person or if you were talking about the emergency plan.
[Adam Knight]: I don't know. You tell us, Marianne, but I think what we're trying to find out is who the COVID communication specialist is that we just approved a position for a couple of weeks ago. Has that position been filled? Who's in it?
[Adam Knight]: So what I'm understanding is that the COVID-19 communication coordinator does not work for the Board of Health, the COVID-19 communication coordinator works in the press department, the city's press department?
[Adam Knight]: No, he does not work for the board of health.
[Adam Knight]: We have information on that, Mr. President. So one of the information, Vice President Knight, I'm confused as to how we can have a city ordinance that dictates we have a sealer of weights and measures that's going to be compensated at a certain rate of pay. And then the administration decides that the ordinance doesn't exist and goes and creates a position that's a stipend job and gives it to somebody else.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight, did you want the floor? I just, sometimes I scratch my head and wonder why we have ordinances, Mr. President, if we're not going to go by them. We also can hope to uphold the ordinances of the community. And then it seems to me like a lot of the time, you know, the ordinances are only read when it's convenient to the person that's reasonable.
[Adam Knight]: You are correct. Vice President Knight. The way that I'm looking at this vote, Mr. President, is that we're eliminating the office of diversity and inclusion and we're merging those functions with the human resource office. And I think this council has been loud and clear that that's not what we want. That's correct. We're going to, we want to see a president to diversity. So with that being said, I certainly have no problem voting against this amendment.
[Adam Knight]: Any further discussion? Mr. President, if I may. Vice President Knight. Seems to me like the city administration's committed to creating a lot of new jobs and a budget during this hiring freeze that you talked about Thursday night, I believe. You know, when we look at this position in particular, this isn't something that just came out of the blue. This isn't something that just came out of the blue. On January 1st, 2020, this council passed a resolution questioning the merger of this position. That's some 17 months ago, Mr. President. This council was on record questioning whether or not this was a good idea. And we've maintained consistency and we've been steadfast in our position on this. So when the city administration responded to it and said they don't feel as though it's a conflict of interest when the diversity director would also sit on the hiring panel And if someone who didn't get a position felt as though they were discriminated against or had an issue, they'd have to go to the diversity director who's a member of the hiring panel. Who is that person servicing? Is he servicing the hiring panel and the administration as a member of the hiring panel? Or is he working as a director of diversity to address the issues that the person is bringing to them? I think councilor Falco hit the nail on the head. The city of Medford is one of the largest employers in the city of Medford. We have a ton of employees. We need to make a commitment to this. So when we look at the history of the position and we see the council speaking out against it in January of 2020, the city administration initiating a personnel action form in January of 2020, the city administration initiating another personnel action form on 3-23-2020 with another pay increase, and then the city administration implementing another personnel action form on 10-22-2020 with another pay increase, It seems as though no one's listening to what this council is saying. So with that being said, I'm going to stand with my council colleagues, Mr. President. The commitment to diversity has to be real. It can be spun any way you want to spin it. But at the end of the day, the council has been speaking about this for 17 months. And we've been saying this isn't something we want.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Yes, Mr. President, you know, Councilor Marks started talking about the capital improvement plan earlier and being a big government nerd got me all excited and got me reading this capital improvement plan over the weekend. And when you look at the capital improvement plan, what you'll see in it, is that over the next six years, it's the administration's intention to spend upwards of $18 million on water and sewer infrastructure. The capital improvement plan also says the investment strategy calls for all water and sewer projects to be funded from enterprise revenues. And the meters, Mr. President, are not a part of this capital improvement plan. So let's just get that out there right now. you know, the meat is not part of the strategy or the school improvement plan that they're discussing. So the administration may be looking at it, but it seems to me that that started probably about 14 days ago when the speaker was up at the podium. So with that being said, Mr. President, I certainly think it's important that we provide rate relief to the tax, to the rate payers, and I'll be supporting this paper this evening. But, you know, ultimately what we're doing is really developing this structural deficit. Every year we're going to have to appropriate these funds, because if we don't, then as the finance director said, the rate payers are gonna see sticker shots because their rate's gonna go up, you know, somewhere around 5%. So with that being said, I will put the paper this evening. However, I would like to point out the inconsistencies between the capital improvement plan and what's going on. Any further questions?
[Adam Knight]: Brady, if I may interrupt you for just a moment and ask that you put your mask on due to the guidelines that the board of health has put out.
[Adam Knight]: Brady, I'm not the one that creates the guideline. I'm just going to ask you to comply with it. Can you please comply with it?
[Adam Knight]: I'm asking you to comply with the guideline, Ms. Brady. I don't want to have to go down this road.
[Adam Knight]: And I'm asking you to please put your mask on.
[Adam Knight]: I appreciate it.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. President. Vice President Knight. I don't think we need to get into what he said. She said at this point, the speaker was able to articulate her thoughts and the gentleman was able to rebut. It may be appropriate for us to move on. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Doherty.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Vice President May. If you refer to our packet that we received this evening, we'll look at paper 21329, and that was a response from the mayor. We were seeking guidance on how the money would be spent. says it'll be coming midway pursuant to conversations the administration said with the Division of Local Services. And the mayor's response goes on to further, this was the mayor's response to a council resolution. Guidance on how the money AARP will be coming by mid-May says BLS. So far, we only know we can spend it on lost revenue in water, sewer, and broadband infrastructure. I will refer this to Ms. Menley for response to the projected revenues on 42721, signed mail-on. So this council has taken those steps, Councilor Penta. We have asked for the meeting. We have asked where the funds are going to be spent. The question is whether or not we're going to get the meeting. I didn't see that paper.
[Adam Knight]: The gentleman has a right to free speech. No one's going to stop him from standing on the front of the stairs of City Hall and screaming at the top of his lungs whatever he wants to talk about. This is also a city council meeting and there are some parameters that surround it. So I can certainly respect the gentleman has something to say and I'd like him to finish. But the same thing being said, you can't just come up here and just start saying whatever you want, whatever you want. All right, there has to be some parameters and they have to be deployed. Mr. President, I respectfully disagree.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. I just think it would be important to point out that the city council does not set the bottom line dollar amount for the budget. That bottom line dollar amount for the budget is set by the mayor. And the mayor is also the one that would dictate how much money she would intend to spend on the school department and how much money she would intend to spend here on the city side. I believe last year we did a 60-40 split, if I'm not mistaken, or maybe 50-50. But with that being said, Mr. President, I can certainly appreciate what you're saying. Mrs. Rowan and I have spoken in the past on this very same topic. It is a school committee policy issue, and it's my hope that the school committee takes the appropriate steps to comply with federal law Thank you, Vice President Haynes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, Vice President Knight, on that topic, I mean, ultimately, you know, I don't think the Medford City Council's gonna take up the role of being the Facebook police or the social media police of the city of Medford. Okay. Um, I just don't think that that's what we're here for. And I don't think that that's, you know, uh, really falls into the line of things that move mentioned forward. Um, so with that being said, I can appreciate the speakers feeling uncomfortable about online bullying. And, um, you know, it's something that we see every day from kids on up to adults, apparently. Um, but with that being said, Mr. President, I personally don't think that, um, the Medford city council is the appropriate forum, uh, to air your grievances regarding what people said about you on Facebook and how they said it.
[Adam Knight]: I would recommend calling Mary in the DPW office, and she'll be able to help coordinate the trash pickup. But if they missed the whole street.
[Adam Knight]: That's why, if it was just me, I would call the number, but you look up and down. Give a call to the DPW, and I'm sure that we can make that phone call in the morning. We can direct the city clerk to do such to have them be sure that they inform the mayor's office through the DPW and Mayor Menezes that trash pickup on Riverside Ave was skipped on Monday. And I will offer that in the form of a motion.
[Adam Knight]: Present. Vice President Knight. Present. Councilor Marks. Councilor Marks is absent. Absent at the moment. Councilor Morell. Present. Councilor Scarpelli. Councilor Scarpelli is going to be late I believe. Yes. President Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears? Yes. Councilor Falco?
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight?
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Marks is absent, Councilor Morell? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli is absent, President Caraviello?
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. Maryann, when you were last here, we spoke a lot about how busy your office was. And at that time, you indicated that your office was working about 12 hours a day, seven days a week, and you had about between nine and 11 employees. Is that still the case?
[Adam Knight]: as was required earlier. Loosen the restrictions on outdoor gatherings. What impact does that have on the rental of our public facilities here in the city of Metro?
[Adam Knight]: as really with the fields, because the fields are a revenue generating entity that we have here in this community. And when we were last here, we discussed a little bit about how the permitting process has changed. You know, ultimately those fields do about $215,000 a season each. So, you know, we're approaching close to $700,000 in the rental of those fields. They're a revenue generating entity. And my concern is that we're not missing out on applicants that are seeking to rent our fields when there are vacancies because of bureaucracy and bureaucratic delays.
[Adam Knight]: I don't know. So I've spoken with a number of entities that have requested to use field space that have said, you know, on a Thursday afternoon, they find out that there's a vacancy at Medford and then they ask them to use the field space and then they never get a response and then they don't get to use the field space that weekend. Oh, I don't know who they're asking. I can't speak to that. A very popular ultimate Frisbee group, the Whitecaps actually, if you remember back a few years ago, the city of Medford was, actually featured on ESPN's top 10 moments when someone at Hormel stadium made an amazing ultimate Frisbee catch. I don't really know what that means, but, um, there was somebody that made, you know, a great play and they were on ESPN. Um, that was recorded at Hormel stadium and that group, the whitecaps, um, which historically used the field, um, in my experience, they've never had a problem until recently. Um, do we know, um, so in terms of applications that come in per week, how many applications are you looking at?
[Adam Knight]: And how does it work now? So an application will go into where?
[Adam Knight]: Sure, it goes to the mayor's office. What's the mayor's office do to send it to your office?
[Adam Knight]: The field administrator handled that for a hundred years. Usually the way it would work would be that the application would go into the field administrator, the field administrator would check for availability. If the availability was there, they'd secure the field for the applicant. The applicant would then fill out the paperwork. If the paperwork wasn't completed and the payment wasn't attached, then the applicant wouldn't get to use the field. It seems like it was a little bit more streamlined and it was a little bit more of a guarantee that we were getting some money in our coffers. My disappointment with the process is well known and well publicized, Madam Director, and I'm hoping that with the restrictions that are being loosened by the administration at the state level that they will also be loosened at this level.
[Adam Knight]: It could be micromanaging as well, but I just think that it's a really, you know, over bureaucratic and unnecessary stuff.
[Adam Knight]: I don't think anybody hasn't.
[Adam Knight]: To revert to the regular order of business. To revert back to the regular order of business. Councilor Bears. Yes. Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Yes. Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Morell. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli is absent, President Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight, I think it might make sense that we just give a brief breakdown. I have the paper in front of me, actually, of the agency that's applied for the funding and the recommendation for the upcoming CDBG fiscal year block grant that's being made by the Office of Community Development to the administration. That recommendation would go to the mayor, and then the mayor would have the opportunity to either say, I like the recommendation or she can use our executive authority to change that recommendation, Mr. President. But in looking at this, I think it's important that we do inform the general public about what it is exactly that's being appropriated. So if we look at Bread of Life, they'd be recommended for the fiscal year, $2,603. For Community Tasks Incorporated, $5,045. For Community Family Inc., $5,000. For the Medford Council on Aging, $34,200. For Housing Families Incorporated, $13,000. For the Immigrant Learning Center, $6,200. For the Medford Consumer Advisory Commission, $15,000, Mr. President. For the Medford Public Schools, $10,000. For the YMCA and Mystic Community Market Boys and Girls Club, $10,000. For the Mystic Valley Urban Services, $5,000. For SCM Transportation, $105,000. And for the West Medford Community Center, $21,000, Mr. President. We have a total award for FY 21-22 of $1,546,988 with a 15% cap waived, allowing the public service entities to be afforded $232,048. Thank you. Alicia Hunt, you had your hand up.
[Adam Knight]: Speaking as a citizen out of 9200 Rubin Street, I'd like to see an increase in the funding for the metric consumer commissions. I think we have an opportunity here to really build upon some of the successes that we've made and the strides that we've made over the past years. And this represents a reduction in benefits and an award from last year. And I think that that's something that should be looked at a little bit further. The individuals that are employed in the Medford Consumer Commission work right here out of City Hall. They provide a valuable service to many of the residents here in this community, especially our senior citizens who have been falling victim to many of these COVID-19 scams, Social Security scams, and the like. So with that being said, Mr. President, I would like to speak out in opposition of the current protocols that are – the current recommendations that are in there and request that the Consumer Commission be afforded additional funds in line with at least last year's award.
[Adam Knight]: On that point, Mr. President, what's the purpose of us having a public hearing, then, if the people that come here and make comments in favor or opposition aren't counted towards the decision-making process?
[Adam Knight]: That's what I'm concerned about. I spoke as a citizen in opposition and asked for an increase in this funding in this line item. Now, if my, voice isn't gonna be heard or recorded. I haven't talked about that.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears? Yes. Councilor Falco? Yes. Vice President Knight? Yes. Councilor Marks?
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Morell? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli is absent. President Caraviello?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. As you can see, one might guess that opening day for Medford Little League has happened and I've been spending a lot of time down the fields and also a lot of time in our various neighborhoods in our community. And through my travels, I have been approached by a variety of our residents here in the community requesting service requests. Some of these requests, I did direct the citizenry to go on to C-Click Fix. Some of them I didn't, but you'll see some of these on C-Click Fix right now, Mr. President. Sidewalk hole, you know, majority of them are public safety issues, trip hazards. The bicycle frame attached to the pole on Bradley Road is something that I think should be addressed immediately. It's been there for about, oh, month and a half, Mr. President, it's been stripped down now to just the bicycle frame, no tires, no seat, no pedals. It's just literally a frame of a bike attached to a pole, and it's been there for an extended period of time. So I'm asking that these items be addressed by IDPW or the appropriate department to rectify the situation. Sidewalk Hole in front of Highland Development is a trip hazard, Deep Pothole and 3rd Street in Bradbury across from Harris Park is a trip hazard as well as the trip hazards on Riverside Avenue and Walter Street. Riverside Avenue and Walter Street are the result of tree roots, Mr. President, uplifting the sidewalk. So I'd ask my council colleagues to support these measures and request that the DPW or the appropriate department take necessary impromptu action to rectify the situation.
[Adam Knight]: Yes. Councilor Falco. Yes. Vice president Knight. Yes. Councilor Marks. Councilor Morell. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli is absent, president Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Rita Lennox is a lifelong Medford resident. She resides in West Medford with her husband, Peter. And there was one point in time when it could be argued that Rita was the person to call if you wanted to get anything done in the city of Medford. If you called Rita Lennox and you put Rita Lennox on it, you better believe that Mike McGlynn was getting a phone call every single hour until it got taken care of. Rita's been a great person. She's been someone who's been committed to her community, to her family, and most certainly committed to service, Mr. President. She's been a lifelong resident in this community and because of her methods without a place. And I just like to take this opportunity to wish her a happy 90th birthday on this momentous occasion. She was surrounded by friends and family and was able to celebrate it wonderfully. And I hope she has 90 moments. I'd ask my council colleagues to join me in supporting this resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears. Yes. Councilor Falco. Yes. Vice President Knight. Yes. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Morell. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli-Thompson, President Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Happy birthday to Nancy. Nancy White has been a long-time resident of Medford, very involved in the the Massachusetts Democratic Party, the Medford Wooden City Committee. But she was also a wonderful educator, Mr. President, worked in the Medford public schools for a number of years and touched the lives of many students, mine included. So with that being said, Mr. President, Nancy White's someone that's really been a asset to our community, someone that has provided troubled youth with guidance. She's been willing to dedicate her time for progressive values that we all share. And she's someone that has truly made a difference in the city of Medford, Mr. President. So with that being said, I'd ask my council colleagues to support this resolution, wishing Nancy a happy 80th birthday, and hope she had a great day.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears. Yes. Councilor Tocco? Yes. Vice President Knight? Yes. Councilor Marks? Councilor Morell? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli is absent, President Caraviello?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This was a resolution that was derivative of the conversations that we recently had over the employee classifications to Committee of the Whole as we've had the past two weeks on Tuesday nights. I'm asking that the administration provide us with copies of the letters of appointment for the incumbents holding the titles of City Solicitor, Director of Human Resources and Diversity, and Director of Community Development, and I guess that would be Energy and the Environment. the administration in our earlier meeting and the meeting last week has indicated that they have these letters available. They're a public document that I'm asking now that the council be provided them so that we can include them in our records, Mr. President. As we begin our discussions for the budget, I think it'll be very interesting to see where these go with these positions. But with that being said, it's something that I think is necessary for us if we're gonna move forward to be sure that we have all the documents in front of us to make a fully vetted and viable decision.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears. Yes. Councilor Falco. Yes. Vice-president Knight. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Morell. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli. Is absent. President Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears? Yes. Councilor Tocco? Yes. Vice President Knight? Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Morell? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli is absent, President Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Whereas I'm gonna ask that this matter be placed on the table till Councilor Scarpelli's arrival. I spoke to him earlier in the day after the agenda came out. He's requested that if he wasn't able to make it here in time when it came up that I table it for an hour. to give him an opportunity to speak on this matter. Councilor Scarpelli this evening is at the National Armed Society dinner, where his son, John, who's the president of the Medford National Sahana Society, he's giving the commencement speech. So I think he's on his way to the council chambers as we speak, Mr. President. So I'm asking to be laid on the table until such time as Councilor Scarpelli is able to join us.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears. Yes. Councilor Falco. Yes. Vice President Knight, Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Morell. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli is absent, President Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I certainly second Councilor Mark's motion and also his thoughts. I don't know Richard personally, but anybody that's served on the Massachusetts State Police for 34 years and has rose to the rank of lieutenant is someone that's a by the book type of person. who understands fairness, who understands what it means to be a public servant. You don't last 34 years in the Massachusetts State Police and rise to the rank of lieutenant, unless you have that type of character and that type of integrity. I just wanted to echo Councilor Marks' sentiments and second the motion, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears. Yes. Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Morell. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli has just arrived. Councilor Scarpelli, do you want to vote on this commendation for Lieutenant Mahoney? Yes. Thank you. President Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Yes. Councilor Falco. Yes. Vice President Knight. Yes. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Morell. Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President night, I think Councilor Penta did make some good points when he spoke last week. When he got to around the year 2015 or 16. I think we started a little far back in time and then it made our way into the present day. You know, but one of those things that he was speaking about that I was concerned about, really concerned about, was the inflow and infiltration. And I think Consul Max has been an advocate for this for a long time. I mean, he's been speaking on it for years now at this point. I mean, decades. I think it's been a decade at least that he's been speaking on this. And it's something that I think does warrant some discussion, or at least recommend some commentary from the Chairman of our Water and Sewer Commission, just to see what's going on. So I wholeheartedly support this resolution. I thank the Council for bringing it up. You know, I think sometimes Councilor Penta does a great job giving us information and providing us with initiatives in the community. And you know, sometimes I don't think that, but in this one, I do think that this is something that we need to take a look at. And I certainly think that it's a worthy cause, so I support the measure wholeheartedly, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. I kind of think that Councilor Marks and Director Nunley are saying the wrong thing. I mean, the same thing, not the wrong thing, the same thing. I think that Director Nunley's saying that we have the ability to reduce by department, but not necessarily line it. So when I read her email and I look at the general block, I think what you're, what she's referring to is exactly what counsel Knox is saying. And it's just really an interpretation issue. Um, you know, my understanding was that we didn't have the right to do line items, vetoes, and that's from the division of local services where because our budget is presented to us by department for ordinary and personnel expenses, we have the right to cut the department saying we want to cut ordinary expenses by X or personnel expenses by Y and take that from the bottom line out of that department. And I think that the division of local services language, if you look at their briefer on it, it would say that the reason that they do that is because that would leave the If you didn't do it by department, it would leave the authority up to the mayor to determine where to make the cuts, and the council would, in essence, just be reducing the bottom line of the budget, but not focusing on the department. And I think if we're going to take that steps, the way that we would have to do it is the way that was done in the past when it came to the assistant director at DPW's position. That was the proper and appropriate way to do it. So when it comes to the line item veto, I think that the finance director understands it the same way that we understand it, but she's just saying it differently. I may be saying it in a way that we're not necessarily interpreting it to be the same, but my discussions with her over the week seem to be in line right with what Councilor Marksley said. So I'd be interested to have a committee of the whole as well, Councilor, President Caraviello, because I think that this is something that needs to be done.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears. Yes. Councilor Falco. Yes. Vice President Knight? Yes. Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Morell? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President. On that, Mr. President, how long has Mystic Street been in public parking?
[Adam Knight]: Sorry, Jim. Thank you. Uh, council Scarpelli. Um, the reason I bring it up is because I'm thinking back now we've got a lot of construction going on high street right now. And it wasn't too long ago that, uh, several members of this council stood up and tried to secure some parking spots along that stretch of high street. when this construction project was going in. And the response that we got from the administration was that the traffic engineer did a dashboard survey and feels as though there's adequate parking in that area for the residents, and that this would cause no disruption whatsoever. Now we're seeing the construction started, what, last Monday? And now Park Metro is in the neighborhood tagging all the secondary streets off of High Street, which leads me to believe that Maybe the dashboard survey that was conducted might not have been the most accurate assessment of the parking needs of the neighborhood. But that horse is out of the barn, Mr. President. That project is underway. We've accepted the funding, a million dollars from the state, and that project is underway. A little bit about the project. With the Eversource project that's going on along Winter Street, and the High Street project that's going on along High Street, Every street in between Winthrop and Hyde that run parallel to each other looks like a loading yard for a construction group, whether it be the Eversource project or the High Street project. There's just trucks parked all over every single neighborhood. I mean, I drove down a street today, Mystic Street, the street that Councilor Scarpelli is talking about, up on Mystic in front of Tile Park. And there was like a rig that took up 19 parking spots, you know what I mean? All heavy equipment that was there all day long. There has to be a better way, Mr. President. You know, if we wanna put these improvements in, that's one thing, but can we do it in a way that's maybe a little bit less detrimental to the neighborhood? Maybe a little bit, you know, kinder to the eye, because right now, it seems like that winter street stretch, these residents are getting croaked. I mean, it's between the rotary, the Ebbersworth project, the water pipe replacement project, They've been under construction now for eight years. Eight years. So there has to be some relief in sight, Mr. President. I thank the council for bringing it up. And I'm hoping that the administration, as she said, hears it loud and clear. She hears the council loud and clear when we talk. So I'm hoping that this makes it to the corner office. that, you know, we need to come up with a better plan when it comes to engineering and permitting, ground opening and construction projects that we need to come up with a better plan that doesn't impact the neighborhood so much. Because what I feel like is happening in this community is someone gets a permit from the engineering department, and then they can do whatever they want. They can dig wherever they want, park wherever they want, leave their equipment, their debris, their materials, wherever they want. And it's starting to take an effect, Mr. President. The weather's getting nicer. People are opening their windows. People are spending more time outside. This is what they want to see in their community. I'm sure with that being said, I think the council will bring the measure forward. I support all of it. Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. On that point, Mr. President, thank you. I do believe when the council at first met with representatives from the city administration in ever so us at the suggestion of Council of marks. One of the items that came up was that as a condition of permitting, they not leave equipment materials, or use city property for state. and that they agreed that they were going to take everything at the end of the day and get it out of there. The trucks weren't going to travel alone if they weren't a licensed vehicle. The backhoes and excavators were going to be escorted with a truck in front of it and behind it so that no one would get hurt because we remember what happened in Mississippi and Doreen and one of our crossing guys as well I believe right down in West Medford Square where they got hit. during a construction project, when they were doing some work down there, I believe it was the Complete Streets Project, Mr. President of the Brooks School, where two residents were struck by construction vehicles because they didn't have proper safety protocols in place. So then I believe the Eversource project was put out to bid, and I think Feeney Construction got it, right? The Feeney brother construction firm got it? McCourt. And then Feeney backed out of the bid, and then it ended up getting awarded to McCourt. But the discussions that we had initially I think we're all with Feeney brothers. And I'm wondering if those restrictions and requirements that the council asked me to put in place on the permits carried over when the entity that was performing the work had changed.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears? Yes. Councilor Falco? Yes. Vice President Knight? Yes. Councilor Marks? Yes. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli.
[Adam Knight]: President Caraviello. Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears. Yes. Councilor Falco. Vice-president.
[Adam Knight]: I'm sorry? I have it all highlighted out so I can read it for you if you'd like.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. So what this paper is, is it's a request. for the city council to adopt a local auction provided by the Massachusetts state legislature to establish a youth commission. And I wouldn't expect the council to adopt the provisions of chapter 40, section 80 this evening. I'd be happy to send this to a committee in the hall to be further discussed with the city solicitor. However, Mr. President, the intent of this is to give the youth in our community a voice. We have commissions for everything, but we don't have a commission for probably the most valuable asset in this community, our youth. So with that being said, I think this is a step in the right direction, Mr. President. I'm looking at the language that you just read. I appreciate you going through that. Ultimately, what this would do is establish a commission from not less than three and not more than 21 persons that serve for a term of three years, appointed by the mayor subject to the provisions of the charter. The city council can also create an ordinance that will go along with that, that would outline the defined parameters as to who's eligible to serve, similar to many of the other ordinances this council has passed. relative to the creation or establishment of boards and commissions. So with that being said, Mr. President, this will be a statutory commission. It's something that I think is necessary in this community, especially based on the high levels of isolation that you have seen across Medford over the past year. Just finally, we're finally getting out to the ball fields. We're finally getting out of the house with the vaccination moving along in the right direction. But I think it's important, Mr. President, that we create a mechanism for us to actually hear directly from our youth and don't let them be a voice. We've seen what great work the CCSR has done up at the high school. Great work it's done in getting youth engaged in the government processing and getting them to be civically responsible. And I think that this is just adding to that, Mr. President, to step in the right direction for us to continue to build upon the many successes that we've already had in engaging our youth and getting them to be involved civically. So in looking at this, Mr. President, I think it's a great opportunity for us to move forward and create something that could make a difference here in the city of Michigan. So with that being said, Mr. President, I rest my case. I asked my council colleagues to support this. The motion will be to send it to a committee of the whole for further review and discussion and for us to also ask the city solicitor to be present so that if it is the council's intent to move forward with this, she can draft a ordinance that would support it. With that being said, I would arrest my case, Mr. President referred to before the councilor, Scarpelli. Councilor Scarpelli.
[Adam Knight]: I just wanted to point out there's some differences between this commission and the commissions that were mentioned. This commission is statutory in nature. So this will be adopting a local option that's been provided to us by the state legislature. And because it's statutory in nature, there is a defined framework and parameters that are already in place that we have to work with. quite frankly, this might be one of the easiest things we've ever had to do in our life, because the law pretty much says what's required in the ordinance and at the local level. So when we're talking about the Gender Equity Commission, which started out as, I believe, a Women's Commission, and then turned into a Gender Equity Commission with investigatory authority and all this other stuff, quite frankly, I think that during that discussion about the gender equity stuff, I think a lot of the message got lost in the process, Mr. President, what it was we were trying to accomplish. We got, I think, a little bit too involved with the minutiae and the details, bringing it down to the lowest possible level when we could have been able to put a framework together in a much more timely fashion. So I can certainly appreciate the frustration that Councilor Morell has expressed. However, this is a little bit different than that situation, because this is something that's statutory in nature. By adopting the enabling language, we already have the defined parameters and frameworks that's necessary for us to move forward. So with that being said, I do thank my council colleagues for their kind words, and I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears. Yes. Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Nights. Yes. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Morell. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli.
[Adam Knight]: President Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears. Yes. Councilor Falco. Yes. Vice President Knight. Yes. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Morell. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli.
[Adam Knight]: President Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears. Yes. Councilor Lococo. Yes. Vice President Knight. Yes. Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Morell. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli.
[Adam Knight]: President Caraviello. Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, El Tecuba, Cochina and Tequila Bar is probably one of the most frequent questions I get asked when I go through Medford. When is this place opening? When is this place opening? When is this place opening? I know we've had a tough year, Mr. President, in terms of the economy, the shutdown, the pandemic, and the like. But with that being said, from what I can see, they have a building permit on the windowsill, the windowsill wrapped up like there's some construction going on inside. And I'm hoping that we could just shoot off a correspondence by authorizing the city clerk to do such, asking for an update on the status of their expansion from Tanaka to Alta Cuba, Kachina, and Tequila Bar, Mr. President. I know that a lot of that business plan was contingent upon the reopening of Shibahia Auditorium. And from what I heard this morning, or earlier in the meeting, I should say, from the Director of the Board of Health was, it seems very promising that we're going to have events there at some point in time in the near future. So with that being said, hopefully we can kind of get a little update as to what's going on with El Tecuba and also with what's going on at Shibahia Auditorium, Mr. President. So I'd asked the city clerk to send off an email provided that my council colleagues support this resolution to reach out to the business owner and just ask what's the status. This was a license that was granted by the council and it was placed on a list for a 90 day review, 90 days after opening. The 90 days, the summer of 2020 maybe, June of 2020. Yeah, it's been a while. So it's been a bit of time and you know, that's okay. But I'm just more curious than anything else, Mr. President, as to what the status is. If nothing, then maybe this is something that we refer up to a new Director of Economic Development. If in fact there are some hurdles or some problems that this business faces in expanding because there's so much community excitement for it, there might actually be a resource there in City Hall that can help them cut through some of the red tape or find some creative ways to meet some of the needs that they have. I think that was, you know, the whole goal and purpose of us creating the position of Director of Economic Development. So with that being said, Mr. President, maybe this can be the first project that he gets assigned, and now we can see if Delta Cuba can open.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears. Yes. Councilor Falco. Yes. Vice President Knight. Yes. Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Morell. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli. Yes. President Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears. Yes. Councilor Falco. Yes. Vice President Knight. Yes. Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Morell. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli. Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears? Yes. Councilor Falco? Yes. Vice President Knight? Yes. Councilor Marks?
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Morell? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. President Caraviello?
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears. Yes. Councilor Falco. Yes. Vice president Knight. Yes. Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Morell. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli. Yes. President Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears? Yes. Councilor Falco? Yes. Vice President Knight? Yes. Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Morell? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. President Caraviello?
[Adam Knight]: Vice President, bye. Mr. President, thank you very much. I was contacted with some concern that the sidewalk snow removal processes would be something that would be privatized or subcontracted. Is that the intention or the desire of the direction that the committee is going in? I had brief conversations with Councilor Marks. He seemed rather indifferent. He doesn't care who does it as long as it gets done. But I didn't know if this was something where we were looking at get a private group that will go out and do it or if this is something that you would try to adopt in-house. I know this council in the past voted multiple times for us to purchase a bombardier to go and clear our sidewalk. So I was just wondering if there was any focus on having this done privately or having this done as a government contractor, as part of the normal and regular DPW operations.
[Adam Knight]: Whether or not it's all up in the air for discussion. I think that's the question I got a call from Steve South who had some questions about how this was going to play out. And I'm just hoping I can get some answers.
[Adam Knight]: Excellent. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Peers. Yes. Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Yes. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Morell.
[Adam Knight]: Yes. Councilor Keohokalole. Yes. Vice President Knight. Yes. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Morell. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli. Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears. Yes. Councilor Falco. Yes. Vice President Knight. Yes. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Morell. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli. Yes. President Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears. Yes. Councilor Falco. Yes. Vice President Knight. Yes. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Morell. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli. Yes. President Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Mr. President, I certainly would support that motion. The paper that was provided to us was an 80 page document. And I think it would be uh, most appropriate if we had an opportunity to review it and then we could ask him phone questions that it could be able to answer. I don't think that's a bad idea. Um, in preparation for a committee of the whole, that's the direction of this council. So chooses to move. Um, I also think it would be proper that we get a copies of all the documents that are related to all the public documents that are related to the meetings that took up, you know, the copies of the minutes, the meeting minutes, so that we can kind of, uh, put into context what the report says. And, uh, we can look at that chronological history of, uh, how we got to this 80 page document. So I think that's very important. Um, Mr. President asked that that be provided by the membership at the committee of the whole meeting as well. Thank you, Mr. Vice President. Councilor Morell, then I'll offer the second to the motion as well. Okay.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. Councilor, I'd want to read it to the record. Mr. President, yes. Correspondence from Nathan Stackhouse, General Manager of Park Medford. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Please see Republic Parking's response to the Park Mobile data breach below. Republic has learned that Park Mobile recently reported a data incident related to Park Mobile's mobile payment app. This was not a Republic data incident. Nonetheless, Republic has contacted ParkMobile for information. Republic has learned that ParkMobile is in the process of directly contacting those users who would like to use the ParkMobile app, and Republic has received a copy of that ParkMobile email to users, a copy of which is included below. Republic will continue to monitor developments related to ParkMobile's incident and will update the city as we learn additional and relevant information. The email is as follows, important security update, In March, Mark Mobile became aware of a cybersecurity incident linked to a vulnerability in a third-party software that we use. In response, we immediately launched an investigation with the assistance of a leading cybersecurity firm to address the incident. We quickly eliminated the third-party vulnerability, and we continue to maintain our security and monitor our systems. Out of an abundance of caution, we also notified the appropriate law enforcement authorities. We recently concluded our investigation, and are now updating our uses of the findings. Below are the key points. One, the investigation confirmed that no credit card information was accessed. Two, no data related to a user's parking transaction history was accessed. Three, only basic user information was accessed. This includes license plate numbers, as well as email addresses, phone numbers, and vehicle nicknames, if provided by the user. In a small percentage of cases, mailing addresses were also affected. Encrypted passwords were accessed, not the encryption keys required to read them. We protect user passwords by encrypting them with advanced hashing consulting technologies. We do not collect social security numbers, driver's license numbers, or dates of birth. We take extensive measures to protect our user passwords. However, as an added precaution, users can change their password in the settings section of the ParkMobile app or on the web by clicking this link. We recommend always using unique passwords for different online accounts. As the largest parking application in the United States, the trust of our users is our top priority. Please rest assured we take our responsible seriously and safeguard the security of our users' information. Thank you. That's from the third party vendor, Mr. President. Thank you, Mr. Vice President.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knighton. I believe Republic Parking is the parking enforcement agent that is acting as Park Medford. It uses ParkMobile as the application to allow individuals to purchase parking electronically. And the data breach affected that third party vendor, who is the largest in the United States of America. So it seems to me like Metro residents have been impacted because they have been notified.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. One of the best kept mysteries in the city of Medford is how to get a brick down at Tufts Park at the Gone Too Soon Memorial. This issue has been brought to my attention a number of times. I've tried to reach out to individuals that are associated with the project. And that's, it's really been a non fruitful search. However, I think that this going to some soon Memorial in Tufts Park is something that needs a little bit of love and attention, Mr. President needs a little bit more involvement from our city and our parks commission. And I think the application process also needs to be opened up. Since the last time applications were accepted, we've lost a number of individuals in this community factor. I don't think anybody will ever agree that somebody's gone on time. Everybody's gone too soon. And self-benefit is a great neighborhood filled with a lot of people that have pride from the area that they come from. And I've heard a number of individuals that are seeking applications for this purpose. So I'm asking that the Parks Commission reopen the application process and maybe this summer we can install some bricks down at Tufts Park. Also, Mr. President, because we have the Community Preservation Act, I thought that this might be an opportunity to see if we are eligible to receive CPA funding for this project to offset the cost for the families that are seeking to put bricks in. So with that being said, I asked my council colleagues to support the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: May I be so bold to suggest Mr. President that we send the paper to the administration and have them mark it up for us to reflect what existing practices and then we can build upon that document as opposed to us trying to go through that 60 year old piece of paper and figure out what it is.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah. Existing ordinance to reflect for the current ordinance to reflect existing practice.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, first and foremost, I'd like to congratulate Senator Russo on her service as the former president, the outgoing president. She did a great job over the last several years. But recently, Mr. Pauli Camuso was elected as president of the Method Youth Hockey Association. Mr. President, I was wondering what was going on with Paul and I kept seeing him show up at these meetings and the city council on TV every once in a while calling in and I didn't know if he was getting the bug again and he was gonna be seeking electoral office. But I guess he is seeking electoral office, a subtle electoral office, but it was at the local level on the board of directors for Medford Youth Hockey, where he spends a lot of his time with his son, James. So with that being said, Mr. President, it's great to see Paul continue to stay involved in the community after so many years serving on this council and in the school committee and I just wanted reach out and congratulate Paul for making another foray into elected politics and keeping his undefeated streak alive. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: As amended by Council Falco Council night, just one further amendment Mr. President, to make this the most amended paper in the history of the city council. I just like to ask that we request a copy of the maintenance schedule for the spring for the city of med on the DCR as well.
[Adam Knight]: Is it tabled for next week or tabled for next week? It's tabled for next week. Who seconded it, sir? By Councilor Scarpelli. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: City Council 16th regular meeting April 20th, 2021 broadcast live on channel 22 Comcast the channel 43 Verizon pursuant to Governor Baker's March 12th, 2020 order suspending certain provisions of the open meeting lot. and the governor's March 15th, 2020 order imposing strict limitation on the number of people that may gather in one space. This meeting of the Medford City Council will be conducted via remote participation to the greatest extent possible. Specific information in the general guidelines for remote participation by members of the public and or parties with a right and or requirement to attend this meeting can be found on the Medford City website. For this meeting, members of the public who wish to listen or watch the meeting may do so by accessing the meeting link contained herein. No in-person attendance or members of the public will be permitted, but every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings in real time via technological means. In the event that we are unable to do so, despite best efforts, we will post on the city of Medford or community media website and audio or video recording transcript or other comprehensive record of the proceedings as soon as possible thereafter. Motions, orders and resolutions, paper number 21325, offered by President Caraviello. Be it resolved, the Medford City Council be presented a library update. Councilor Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Present.
[Adam Knight]: flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears.
[Adam Knight]: Where Councilor Falco and Mr. McDougal were very close friends in high school, I'd ask that this matter be tabled for next week with Councilor Oakley participating.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears. Yes. Councilor Falco is absent. Vice President Knight. Yes. Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Morell. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli. Yes. President Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, he is.
[Adam Knight]: Yes. President Caraviello?
[Adam Knight]: Anybody? Still waiting for them to reconnect. Here they are.
[Adam Knight]: All right. It's just to receive and place on file.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears. Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Okay, so you amended by Councilor Scarpelli.
[Adam Knight]: Yes. Vice President Knight? Yes. Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Morell? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. President Caraviello?
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears. Yes. Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And thank you for my two colleagues that preceded me on this topic. I'm going to try to keep it short. But ultimately, Mr. President, bottom line is people should have the right to know what health risks are associated with devices that are being affixed to poles outside the house by government entity. I mean, that just It's ludicrous to me to think that the federal government would not recognize health risk as a basis for denial of an application. It's shameful. But Mr. President, I think the understatement of the year was made this evening when Councilor Marks made his opening remarks. The city of Medford was ill-prepared, ill-prepared for the 3/31 meeting. Going back to April of 2019, That's when the first 5G site meeting was scheduled. April, 2019, two years ago, and it was canceled. In August of 2019, then Mayor Burke came to us with this small cell ad hoc committee, and the council supported that. In November, residents were notified of a site placement hearing, and that meeting was canceled. In January of 2020, An info session was held with Verizon and the members of this community here in this room. That was a total and absolute failure. Round tables, no question and answers. It was more like a high school science fair than it was any type of symposium for residents to get questions or answers to their concern. Which brings us to January of 2020 yet again, when this council passed a resolution unanimously with, I believe, a councilor that was sitting here. No, no, she wasn't sitting here anymore. Now she was across the hall. We passed it unanimously asking the city call for a symposium where residents from this community could come and meet with the ad hoc small cell committee representatives from Verizon and the administration to talk about their concerns in the rollout of this project. That never happened. The very next week, Councilor Marks put forward a resolution because we haven't seen any movement that the small cell advisory committee implements stricter standards on their application process to make it a little bit more difficult to walk into our community and do whatever they want. So this is January 2020, February 2020, nothing. March 2020, there was a 5G site meeting that was scheduled and canceled. April, May, June, July, August, September, radio silence, nothing. No movement, no activity, nothing. November of 2020, the city administration calls for an executive session with this council to discuss a potential lawsuit from Verizon to the cities in action on the applications. November of 2020. December of 2020, nothing. January of 2021, nothing. February of 2021, a correspondence from the mayor's chief of staff indicating that they're going to move forward with the site hearing for 5G with the Ad Hoc Small Cell Committee. March of 2021. Scheduled, canceled, and rescheduled. March 31st, the meeting was held. We are two years, two years from the initial date that these applications became an issue in this community. Two for 24 months. And we are no further ahead today than we were on August 28th, 2019. No further ahead. I commend my colleague to doing his homework for raising the questions and bringing these issues forward, Mr. President. They're serious issues, serious issues. And to think that one of us behind this rail is gonna take a vote not knowing if one of those devices can cause cancer to just one person in this community is insane, is insane to think that we're gonna take that risk. We're going to take that risk, and it's shameful for the federal government to put us in that position. I'll stay with my colleagues all day on this one. I'm not taking a vote that's going to hurt people and put the health at risk if we don't know. If we don't know, we shouldn't be taking the vote. And I stand with my colleagues on this, and I thank you both for bringing this forward.
[Adam Knight]: My name is Anthony D'Antonio. I live at 24 Hicks Avenue.
[Adam Knight]: brutal.
[Adam Knight]: This is to consolidate all the papers and amendments. Yes. Councilor Bears? Yes. Councilor Falco? Yes. Vice President Nights? Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Morell? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? President Caraviello?
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears? Yes. Councilor Falco? Yes. Vice President Knight?
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears?
[Adam Knight]: It seems like we're talking a little bit more about national politics and state politics than we are about local stuff.
[Adam Knight]: Having worked in the legislature for a number of years, I've witnessed firsthand the fact that nothing ever comes out the way it goes in.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I share Councilor Falco's concerns wholeheartedly. As a matter of fact, this is a topic that I've brought up in the past as well. And when we look at this month's Warren article, this previous month's Warren articles, we'll see that we've received seven bills of $5,000 to the tune of 30K, Mr. President, for what is labeled as, I'm sorry, six, I'm sorry, six, 30K. Monthly legal retainer, it says, monthly legal retainer. So six months, monthly legal retainer. And this is being paid, Mr. President, out of the professional services legal line item. Now, if we go to the previous year's budget, We'll see in the previous year's budget, underneath the law department, if we look for professional and technical services, other, that line item was funded at $1,500. Now my assumption, Mr. President, is that this line item was not approved in the next year's budget at an amount that would be four or 500 times that amount. So with that being said, it appears to me that they're doing some deficit spending and come the end of the year, there are gonna be some little fuzzy math transfers that we're gonna be doing over here to figure out how we're gonna pay for this, Mr. President, because quite frankly, I don't see that it's being paid for out of an account that's funded to the level that it's being built. So with that being said, I thank my council colleague and I support his resolution and I second it.
[Adam Knight]: We're not going down that road.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Name and address of the record, please. Tony Pujol, I'm in Tanger Street. Thank you for listening to me. Thank you all for being in this beautiful chambers tonight to hear us. I'm not going to beat up a dead horse.
[Adam Knight]: That's okay, you've been waiting long enough.
[Adam Knight]: I also believe that because it's a 40B project, there's some sort of contingency that would say that all the units that are developed can be considered underneath the safe harbor, as opposed to just the affordable units.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: He was a dear friend. He was very committed to American Legion Post 45 and the fundraising efforts and the volunteer and charity work that they do up there. He was a Verizon employee that worked at Verizon for a number of years. But most importantly, Mr. President, he was one of those guys that would sweat blue and white.
[Adam Knight]: So Mr. President, I'm asking that my council colleagues join in and expressing their deep and sincere condolences to the family of McDougal, of Alan McDougal. He was someone that certainly made a difference here in this community, certainly someone that touched the lives of many youth in this community, and certainly someone that has a legacy that deserves to be remembered. So with that being said, Mr. President, I rest my case and ask my council colleagues to support the resolve.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Bears?
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Pears. Yes. Councilor Tocco. Yes. Vice President Nights. Yes. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Morell. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli. Yes. President Caraviello. Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Marianne, it sure sounds like there's a lot going on in your office. You're pretty busy, isn't that correct? A little bit. So how many I guess you're putting in on average, you and your staff.
[Adam Knight]: So 12 hours a day, seven days a week.
[Adam Knight]: And then how many how many members do you have in your staff up there?
[Adam Knight]: Plus this new permitting thing, huh? With LaConti and home.
[Adam Knight]: So you think your office has the capacity based upon the number of hours that everybody's putting in right now to do these? pre-screenings of applications for people that are looking to rent the Hormel Stadium on the Coffey Rink? We've been doing that. We've been doing that since the beginning. No, it was never a pre-screening before you could apply or get placement. It should have been. It should have been.
[Adam Knight]: So so how's this going to work now can you just explain to me based upon you know the fact that your office is going to be handling the majority of these requests how this permitting is going to work for home Ellen my look on it.
[Adam Knight]: The fact that we got an email this morning saying that they've made. a number of changes to the way that two of our revenue-generating properties that we have here in the community are gonna be conducted. Now, previously the way it worked would be that the applicant would seek placement at La Conte O'Hamel, they'd be provided placement, they'd be put in the schedule, they'd then have to go through a screening process. And now it looks like that process is backwards or different, it seems like, from what I understood from this email that I got from Mayor Ungo, that she's taking control of some of the authority that the O'Hamel Commission has. relative to how they're supposed to be, you know, scheduling and booking events. And where these are two revenue generating facilities that we have here in the community. And quite frankly, they're very successful. If it ain't broken, don't try to fix it.
[Adam Knight]: Is that what happened with Ellington Catholic? Yes. Yes.
[Adam Knight]: It makes sense, though. I mean, if they have a plan that's in place, I mean, the CDC guidelines are going to be controlling it. You know, we're really... They weren't following the guidelines. That was the problem.
[Adam Knight]: Let me tell you what, every single event that took place down there. So I'm pretty sure, you know, they may or may not have. I think that that's a blood accusation. In any organization that hasn't followed the CDC guidelines, I'm sure that your office has taken the appropriate steps to find them and document such, right?
[Adam Knight]: Wouldn't it make it more sense from a number one, a consistency of government standpoint, number two, an operational standpoint that- No, not in a pandemic, I'm sorry.
[Adam Knight]: I'm done talking, Rick. I'm done. I'm not going to be able to finish, Mr. President, so I'll just stop right now. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'm just taking a look at the zoning use chart. And I certainly don't have any issue with Millett Automotive taking over this Fantasia Automotive location. I live in West Medford. I know Mr. Millett, I see the type of business he's done down there for a number of years. He's done a great job over there. He keeps his lot clean. He is a good neighbor. So I have no issue or concern whatsoever about his ability or whether or not he'll be a good neighbor at the Fantasia site. But in looking at the zoning use chart, it says that under use 27, the accessory storage conducted entirely with an enclosed structure, the sale of rental motor vehicles, exclusive abuse car sales in a C1 district would be required for a special permit of the council, but it would also be required to be referred to the community development board first for review, Mr. President. I certainly don't have any issue approving this license this evening, However, if there is a requirement that it has to go before the CD board for hearing of some sort, I do want to make sure that the council is in compliance. So I guess the question would lie as to whether or not Mr. Moki designates this application as a use 27 on the principal use chart. So we'll refer it to, if there's an issue, we'll refer it over to Mike and step out and call him even Mr. President, because I don't want to hold Mr. Mullet up. This is more of a technicality and formality than anything.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Yes, the Lawrence Memorial Hospital was kind enough to forward all the correspondence this morning. The correspondence would provide us with an update as to the status of the ongoing construction of the ambulatory care center. This email goes on to read that beginning on Monday, March 22nd, we will begin planting trees and plants in the parking lot, islands, and surrounding buildings. This work should be completed by Friday, March 26th. So that looks like that was last week, Mr. President. Landscaping work will be taking place on the corner of Governor's Avenue and Lawrence Road. and crews will be placing loom to prep for seating. Following the completion of the landscaping work, the repaving of the parking lot is scheduled to take place during the week of April 5th. All work is weather dependent. Mr. President, also in their correspondence, if you bear with me for one moment where I can find the other section of it, I will tell you that at 5.30 PM, the caffeine inside lobby lights will be reduced to 30%. At 7 PM daily, the exterior bulbs and canopy lights will shut off. And at 8 p.m. the ambulatory surgical care centers lights will shut off as well as the PACU, which faces the lot. Also the landscaping work was what the major activity was on the corner of Governor's Avenue, Winthrop Street, that was such a concern. I'm not Winthrop by Governor's Avenue and Lawrence Road, which was such a concern, Mr. President. So that's the latest update from the Lawrence Memorial Hospital based upon the correspondence that they were so kind to forward to us.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, that'd be 90 days after it opens, correct?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, thank you. Vice President Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I remember this bus line is how all the kids from the Heights got the public skating when we were kids growing up and Kenny Phillips would be driving the bus and bringing everybody up and down the hill and putting up with kids to watch around. But no, in all seriousness, it's not just kids. It's not just seniors. It's not just commuters that are using this bus. This is really one of the, only bus lines that we have here in the community that connects certain portions of Fulton Heights to the rest of the city. You know, the MBTA talks about how they wanna restore service to pre-pandemic levels, but they're not gonna. The MBTA talks about how they want to see increases in ridership as the Metropolitan Area Planning Council has all the communities surrounding us stop more and more people into high rise luxury condominiums. The MBTA continues to cut service, cut lines, You know, with the 326, the 325, the 710 commuter rail hours are being cut back. The service that's being provided to this community, Mr. President, in my opinion, does not add up to the amount of money that we're paying on our assessment. And quite frankly, I feel like Medford is somewhat always the heel because of where we are geographically located between that crux of rail service and bus service. We get beat up on both ends. You know, we look at the issues that we've had over time with the Salem Street car bond, and other facilities here in the community. And when we raise concern, they fall on deaf ears. But when the MBTA wants to come in and cut service, it's pat on the back and, you know, take your lumps kid. It's getting kind of old, Mr. President, quite frankly, and I'm tired of the attacks that we're seeing the MBTA take on our community. The MBTA raises that green flag, the Green Line extension, and they say, well, we're giving you the Green Line. Well, I'm going to tell you right now, I know a lot of people in the Fulton Heights that are never going to see that Green Line extension, they're never going to step foot on it. But I'll tell you what, the 710 bus does a lot. So I thank you and I thank Councilor Falco for putting this resolution forward. It does bring back some great memories of taking that bus as a child being from West Metro. And there was no other way to get up to the heights. I certainly wasn't walking that hill. That's for sure. And as a child, Cow Park was one of the most active parks in the city. There was no other park where you could find a better pickup basketball game besides Carr Park and Duggar Park. Two parks that always had kids playing, Harris Park. The three parks that always had kids playing, all geographically located in the community that are real far apart from each other, Mr. President. So this connectivity is important. We talk about wanting to take cars off the road. We're putting bike lanes in, bus lanes in, and everything else. How can we put bus lanes on Mystic Avenue and then take away a bus in the community? Don't we want to promote bus use? So with that being said, I thank you both for putting this resolution on. I just ask that it also be sent copies to our state delegation so that they're aware of this correspondence going out.
[Adam Knight]: I do think it's important to point out, Mr. President, that when this matter came before the council, The vote that the council was asked to take was to whether or not they were going to allow the administration to enter into a contract that exceeds 36 months. Pursuant to state law, a municipality can only enter into a contract with a maximum term of 36 months. So the issue that was before the council wasn't whether or not we wanted to have pocket meters or no pocket meters, have pocket enforcement officers, but not have pocket enforcement officers. The issue before the council at the time was whether or not we wanted to authorize the administration the opportunity to negotiate a contract that exceeded three years. So that was the matter that was before us. I certainly have the same concerns that I had Um, for previously when it comes to Republic packing and the accounting methodology that's being used with the president. Um, but that's neither here nor there. The administration is the entity that's responsible for the chief negotiation of the contract. And these three air extensions are going to be incumbent upon her purview, not us.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And to Marie, I know you're probably at home watching, embarrassed because of all these kind words that the council is saying about you. but every one of them is true. I always picture Marie Cassidy as a person that never has a bad day. Every time you see her, she's always smiling, full of energy, full of life. But most importantly, she's always focused on the end goal, focused on the mission, focused on the prize, which is furthering the Medford Family Network and its interests and objectives here in the community. And she's done a great job doing that, Mr. President, as evident by the number of awards that you so eloquently spoke of earlier in the evening. So with that being said, Mr. President, before Marie turns 71, I'd like to wish her a happy 70th birthday. So I join my council colleagues in extending these well wishes to her, and I wish her the best. Thank you. Council Member Rao.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd second the approval, Mr. President. I wish Ms. Campanoni the best of luck in her new endeavor, and hopefully things work out. But I certainly see no problem with this. It's an existing use. I think it's a wash vault now. Yes.
[Adam Knight]: I just reviewed chapter 91, section 10A, and it says that the permitting authority would be the Harbormaster, not the council. I don't recall previously approving this in the past when they were in.
[Adam Knight]: So I mean, I just want to make sure we pass the smell test that we're doing it right, Mr. President. If the statute says we need to have the harbor masturbation permit, the harbor masturbation permit, not us. That's the only thing that I was concerned about.
[Adam Knight]: Either way, I think that the council would need to issue a special permit on it, regardless of whether or not the harbormaster does, because it's a recreational use. It's a private entity. public consumption. So the council needs to issue a special permit on anyway. I just wanted to be sure that the Habermas, because all the appeals and the statutes say that the appeal of the Habermas decision to the state and the state makes a ruling on the Habermas decision. I certainly have no problem with, you know, the kayaks down there. I live in the neighborhood. It's not something that I utilize actually.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Mr. President. Should legislative action have been enacted to appoint somebody other than the harbormaster to do it, where the city's had a harbormaster for, I can't tell you how many years. I don't think there's any legislative action that exists that would have been taken to authorize that authority to anybody else under the city ordinance.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, I was just wondering what the term of the permit was in terms of from when to when?
[Adam Knight]: So do soccer clubs have to get a fee to go to the park so they pay guys who run an operating game pool business with no permitting fee?
[Adam Knight]: That's not on land either, right? Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: I don't know. I appreciate it. Yeah. In essence, we could be given them a nine month or a 10 month permit to operate, right. It's probably probably four or five months, six months. I don't know. It could be, but yeah. You know, we don't define the parameters.
[Adam Knight]: If you can get us the perimeter of what the season is, then yeah.
[Adam Knight]: I personally, I think they provide a benefit to the community, the service they provide. I'd like to see a little bit back to the community based upon what they're earning. But at the same time, I know it's something that people love and it's something that I don't have a problem having in the community.
[Adam Knight]: Just a point of clarification for the 5G, is that the digit five or the word five?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Marks, thank you very much for your very thorough presentation. Just in follow-up, we have nine amendments. The first amendment would be none of these hearings start before 6 p.m. The second amendment would be that the notification radius be expanded to 500 feet. The third amendment would be that the city handles issuance of the notice, not the applicant. Number four is that all notices do have the applicant's contact info on it. Number five is a question as to what the minimum setbacks are. Number six is what safeguards are in place to protect our city's employees from radio frequency exposure. Number seven is, has the ADA officer reviewed the proposed locations? Number eight is, can the city present a list of the poll locations on the city website? And number nine is, why are residential districts omitted from the review criteria on certain applications? Does that sound correct, councilor?
[Adam Knight]: Excellent. Thank you very much. Council Max, the chair recognizes Councilor Scarpelli.
[Adam Knight]: The chair recognizes Councilor Bears.
[Adam Knight]: I certainly agree with you, Councilor Bears, and when a council has legal representation, I think that's a great thing that we should start to pursue. Touche. Anybody else have any questions? Move the question. On approval of the question, motions to approve made by Councilor Caraviello, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli, as amended by Councilor Marks, nine times, as noted earlier in the meeting. Will the city clerk please call the roll.
[Adam Knight]: President Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative. The paper passes. Council paper 21195 offered by President Caraviello. Be it so resolved, the Medford City Council receive a report on if there is a plan to reopen the Medford Senior Center in any capacity. Councilor Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Excellent. Is there anybody from the administration would like to chime in or would you like to file a report to the council? Seeing no hands, I think we'll take that as then we'll file a report with the council. Does any of the other councilors have anything to add? Councilor Marks, the chair recognizes Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Marks, Chair recognizes Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: We've built that Bocce court for a reason. You know, when I think of some of the services and programming that come out of the senior center, one of the big ones is help with the tax preparation. This time of year is tax time. And we always had somebody down there helping out with the taxes. So with that being said, I'm on the motion made by Councilor Scarpelli, seconded by Councilor Marks as amended by Councilor Falco. And will the clerk please call the roll?
[Adam Knight]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative. The motion passes as amended. Paper 21196 offered by Councilor Bears. Be it so resolved by the Medford City Council that we stand in solidarity with the Asian-Americans in Medford and across the country in opposing the increase in anti-Asian bigotry, violence, and hate crimes that is being fueled by white supremacist groups and rhetoric. Councilor Bears.
[Adam Knight]: I certainly couldn't agree with you more, Councilor Bears, on the motion.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President. I see you there, Councilor. Just a second emotion. Council of this seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. The chair recognizes Councilor Morell.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President. The chair recognizes Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: Excellent, just if I may from the chair, I'd like to take this opportunity to also recognize the work that Tufts University did recently with the elimination of the Confucius Institute. Institute funded by the Chinese government that has had a very spotty history. here at Tufts University and across the world. So with that being said, on the motion by Councilor Scarpelli, seconded, I'm sorry, on the motion by Councilor, oh, Councilor Caraviello, the Chair recognizes Councilor Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: On the motion of Councilor Bears, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli as amended by Councilor Falco. Will the clerk please call the roll?
[Adam Knight]: Oh, I'm sorry, Councilor Marksley. Chair recognizes Councilor Marksley.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Thank you, Excellency. The chair recognizes Councilor Scarapelli.
[Adam Knight]: On the motion of Councilor Bears, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli, as amended by Councilor Falco. Chair, please call the roll. Mr. President. Councilor Morell.
[Adam Knight]: What he's doing?
[Adam Knight]: There's something all right. Hello. There we go. He's back. He's in action. Mr. Castagnetti name and address for the record.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. Castagetti. On the motion of Councilor Bears, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli, as amended by Councilor Falco, will the clerk please call the roll.
[Adam Knight]: Yes. Yes. Did you have a couple of papers in the hands of the clerk. One more. Paper 21197 offered by Councilor Bears. Be it resolved the Medford City Council congratulate Finance Director Aleesha Nunley Benjamin and the city administration on winning the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award from the Government Finance Officers Association for the updated format of the city's FY 2021 budget. Councilor Bears.
[Adam Knight]: Second, Mr. President. On the motion of Councilor Bears, seconded by Councilor Caraviello, will the clerk please call the roll?
[Adam Knight]: Motion by Councilor Scarpelli, seconded by Councilor Bears to take papers in the hands of the clerk. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Adam Knight]: Vice-President Nightingale? Yes. Paper 21-204, be it offered by President Caraviello and Councilor Scarpelli. Be it so resolved, the Medford City Council send its deepest and sincerest condolences to the family of James McKinnon on his recent passing. President Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recommends Councilor Felkel.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recommends Councilor Bears.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Mr. Castagnetti.
[Adam Knight]: I believe you had your hand raised, sir.
[Adam Knight]: as amended by Councilor Scarpelli, seconded by Councilor Caraviello. Paper 21204, be it resolved that the Medford City Council send its deepest and sincere condolences to the family of James McKinnon in his passing. Will the clerk please call the roll?
[Adam Knight]: Please rise for a moment of silence. Paper 21-203 offered by President Caraviello. Be it resolved, the Medford City Council acknowledge March 21st, 2021 as being World Down Syndrome Day, a day dedicated to raising awareness about Down syndrome and celebrating individuals around the world living with a genetic condition. Councilor Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Councilor Caraviello. On the motion by Councilor Caraviello, seconded by Councilor Scott Peller, the Chair recognizes Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. On the motion. Uh and the chair recognizes Chief of Staff David Rodriguez.
[Adam Knight]: Excellent thing. I just saw your hand up there. I'm sorry if you weren't.
[Adam Knight]: We'll learn it up here in the big seat. On the motion by Councilor Caraviello, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli, will the clerk please call the roll?
[Adam Knight]: Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative. The motion passes.
[Adam Knight]: Gotten a report back from them in compliance with the ordinance. I think there was some housekeeping here before. One six.
[Adam Knight]: The report indicates that there are about 1,456 on-campus undergraduate residents in the city of Medford, 21 graduate students on campus in the city of Medford. Off-campus, we're looking at about 820 off-campus undergraduate students and 533 graduate students for a total of 1,353 off-campus undergraduate or graduate students. I've had the opportunity to review the report before it looks as though it's in order and I'd move for a receipt and place on file, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This resolution has been put on the agenda on behalf of the Massachusetts Motorcycle Association. The Massachusetts Motorcycle Association is the premier organization that lobbies for motorcycle safety. Many of us around town will see the signs on their coordinated campaigns across the state. Motorcycles are everywhere. Big yellow signs with black writing. I think look twice and save lives. Mr. President, the Massachusetts Motorcycle Association has been at the forefront of motorcycle safety initiatives for as long as I can remember. Tonight we have with us Mr. Paul Cote from the Massachusetts Motorcycle Association, who I met some 15 years ago while he was lobbying up the statehouse for motorcycle safety initiatives. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'm offering this resolution on behalf of the Massachusetts Motorcycle Association and the motorcycle community here in the city of Medford to promote safety. It's an unfortunate and tragic fact that Medford was the site of a motorcycle fatality last year. A Malden resident was killed in an accident. And it's initiatives like this that help us bring awareness to the safety on the roadways and what's necessary and to be sure that we share them with the motorcycles, Mr. President. So with that being said, I'd like to ask Mr. Cote.
[Adam Knight]: It's just... Mr. President, all we have to do is put the paper from last week on the agenda.
[Adam Knight]: We'll take care.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Mr. President? Point of information, Vice President Knight. Are those totals cumulative or are they annual?
[Adam Knight]: So are you saying that in 2015, there was 300,000 now in 2016, there's 300,000 plus an additional 300,000? Yeah. Are you saying that there's just $300,000?
[Adam Knight]: I question the account.
[Adam Knight]: When this is a public participation item, I believe the proper procedure would be that the council would take it up and place it on the agenda next week. It will be correct.
[Adam Knight]: So, uh, because this is public participation, we changed the rules. last year we said that public participation doesn't get a board number it doesn't need to be voted on by the council any councillor wants to address an issue in front of a public participation don't do so on the next week's agenda as a sponsor of the resolution thank you thank you i didn't hear what do you say thanks i didn't hear because i like as you explain that it's up to one of us to offer next week next week one of us can offer it they can do it now no not under the rules that we have there
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Vice President Knight, this current program's being offered under the governor's executive order, is that correct?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Mary's a long time resident over on Grove Street. She's the proud grandmother of Preston Holt, one of Medford's finest firefighters, Mr. President. And just recently, she celebrated her 93rd birthday. And if you know Mary, you know she's someone who's full of life, who enjoys her time down the beach in Cape Cod. But more importantly, she's someone that enjoys her family and loves the city of Medford.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, it's with great anticipation that many of us await the opening of our schools for in-person learning on a full-time basis. And with that being said, we're going to see an influx of vehicles driving to middle schools and schools. I mean, you look at Freedom Way and the condition that the roadway is in, I think it's an area that needs some attention, Mr. President, before the schools open back up. So I'm asking that DPW go down there and take a look and do some patchwork to ensure that when school does open, that it's safe and also If I can just amend the resolution, also take a look at the crosswalks to be sure that they're properly striped and not school districts.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Ghost Kitchens are an interesting new business model that's been popping up around the city, and it's something that's sparked my curiosity more than anything else. You know, I've noticed we have Kiki's Barbecue. We have Mr. Beast Burger. We have Guy Fiori's Flavortown Kitchen, all ghost kitchens that are operating out of the city of Metchen. I was just wondering what the regulatory criteria was, whether or not the Board of Health had some sort of filing process that was necessary, Mr. President. The reason that I ask is because, God forbid, somebody ordered delivery from one of these places and got sick and then wanted to call the establishment or reach out to the establishment for whatever reason they may have to. They won't be able to find them. So I just wanted to be sure, Mr. President, that there was some sort of process or what that process wants in place right now. So I'm just asking the question from our Director of the Board of Health and the city administration as to what the process is for applying for a ghost kitchen, if there even is one. It's as simple as that.
[Adam Knight]: I certainly wouldn't have a problem with that.
[Adam Knight]: In essence, it's the subletting of your license, right? I'm sorry? In essence, it's subleasing your existing license.
[Adam Knight]: I'm not opposed to it, Mr. President, quite frankly, I think it brings a lot of options and opportunity to the community. I just want to be sure that we're doing it right and we're protected. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah.
[Adam Knight]: With the pandemic guidelines and restrictions that are in place, I don't think we're going to get a true picture.
[Adam Knight]: to do, right? I mean, she's the only way I know the worst.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Vice President Knight. I think it's important to point out, and I understand what the council is saying, and I don't want to interrupt them, but I think it's important to point out that this base fee is something that's implemented by the administration. It's not a vote that was taken by the council, does not require council approval. It's under the purview of the Water and Sewer Commission. They meet monthly to discuss these type of items. And that the accounting that's being done should be done in accord with the GAA, the Government Accounting Office, the General Accepted Accounting Principles, Mr. President. And looking at what the gentleman's saying, I do have some agreement with what he's saying, but there's also some items that we need to clarify. And the first item we need to clarify is this is the doing of the council. This is the doing of the administration of the Water and Sewer Commission.
[Adam Knight]: I didn't say you didn't have legitimate concerns, Councilor Penta. What I said was that it needs to be pointed out that the Medford City Council isn't the one that implemented these fees, and Medford City Council isn't the one that has the purview to remove them.
[Adam Knight]: But the matter is never going to come before us for us to vote up or down because it is not within our purview. It is within the purview of the Water and Sewer Commission. So the beef is not here in the Alden Chambers. It should be in room 201 with the Water and Sewer Commission.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. When I learned that the existing council appointment, Mr. Guayona was not interested in reapplying for the position, I became very concerned about how we were going to fill this position and what quality of candidates we've received. And when I saw the email of one, Mr. Brian Collins and his interest in serving on the position, it certainly set my fears at ease. I've had the ability and the good fortune of having to work with Brian for a number of years. I also grew up in West Medford. Don't let him fool you, he's a West Medford legend. Everybody who grew up in West Medford knows Brian Collins, knows who Brian and Mark are. He's a great guy and he's someone that puts his money where his mouth is, Mr. President, has a great proven track record of bringing successful programming to our community and also thinking outside the box. And watching what he's done down in the center, it's unbelievable to see the amount of program and the amount of effort and hard work that he's put in there. How the center's evolved over the last 12 years since he's been involved is amazing. So with that being said, Mr. President, I certainly feel very confident in the application of Brian Collins to serve on the whole mail commission. And I for one would move for approval of appointment. Thank you. Council Bis.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I was going to put a resolution on next week to thank him. I would have had to do that now that you went out of my sales here.
[Adam Knight]: Here in the city of Medford, we have about 140 miles of roadway. And if we look at the capital plan that was released last week, I had the opportunity to watch the meeting on local access television. Pat Gordon did a good job delivering that TV program to us last week. If you look at the capital plan, you'll see that over a six-year period, it calls for the resurfacing of about 11 roads, Mr. President. Now, we're a community that has 145 miles of roadway, and I don't think there's one street in this community at this point in time that's pristinely paved from curb to curb with no potholes, no markings, no proper markings and signage, proper crosswalks and the like. Everybody in this community uses roads to get from point A to point B, whether it be school buses, fire engines, plows, police cars, you and me, bicycles, pedestrians, everybody uses the streets, Mr. President. And the condition of our roadways at this point in time are subpar. When you look at surrounding communities, you can tell when you get there. because the pavement changes. When you drive from Bedford into Malden, all of a sudden the ride gets a little less bumpy. The same thing when you go into Arlington or Somerville or Winchester. So Mr. President, we have a capital plan. We've heard a lot about this pavement inventory that was going to be taken by the administration. Ultimately at this point in time, you know, the curb appeal in this community isn't what it once was. And we need to start investing money back in our infrastructure so that our curb appeal can be something that's enticing, so that a curb appeal can be something that when a taxpayer looks out their window, they can be proud of. Instead of having to call C-Click fix, they can smile and tell their friends, why don't you come over and take a look at what a great job they did. I will say this, the plowing that's been done in the community over the past year or so has been excellent, Mr. President. But with that being said, the toll that's taken on our roads is beginning to show. So with that being said, I'm requesting that the administration adjust the capital plan to take into consideration our aging infrastructure and roadways. With 10 miles a year, it would still take us 14 years to resurface each roadway in the community. So it's an ambitious goal, Mr. President, but I feel as though we need to do something more ambitious than 12 streets over six years. That coupled with the fact that we've been talking about ways to generate revenue in this community, to generate new growth, to address the $5 to $8 million budget deficit. We've been discussing the revitalization of Method Square now since the 100-year parade when I was in the fifth grade. And we had a great opportunity to address some concerns along Mystic Gap. And I think that that's kind of fallen by the wayside after all the work that the Metropolitan Area Planning Council has done. I'm very happy of the work that we've been able to do with Mr. Barbrowski. And once we get this recodification process completed, I look forward to moving forward and hopefully securing the zoning consultant for further review of our zoning ordinances. But with that being said, Mr. President, I asked my council colleagues to support this resolution. I feel as though it's a capital plan that needs to invest in things that matter. And one thing that everybody in this community uses is our roads. So with that being said, I'd ask my council colleagues to support the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: The way I look at it, Mr. President, is this. The plan's been released. The plan is the plan. The mayor didn't involve us in the planning procedure, in the planning process. This council, week in and week out, sends the administration requests in the form of resolutions, making requests and recommendations as to where money should be invested. This proposal right here falls in line with the votes that the council's taken in the past. I understand where he's coming from, but I respectfully decline. I'd like to have the paper be voted on, Mr. President. I'd like to see the capital plan addressed. I've had enough of the condition of these roadways. I've been banging on this table since I got elected, talking about public utilities coming in this community, tearing up our streets, about what we're gonna do to come up with a plan. And we're not getting anywhere. Now we have a capital investment plan, Mr. President. We have a CIP and it doesn't address our streets. So if the council is taking these votes and we're serious about the votes we've taken, And there are many other items that are going to be priorities. I certainly don't feel as though that's an incorrect statement to make. And I certainly understand that Councilor Marks has some priorities that he's fighting for as does Councilor Scarpelli and so Councilor Falco. But with that being said, Mr. President, the paper that's before us is to ask that the capital plan be adjusted to call for these things as year one priorities. Any further putting it off is going to put us into year two. There won't be year one priorities. So with that being said, I'd ask my colleagues to support the paper. It is what it is, Mr. President. The mayor released the plan. We asked for an opportunity to have involvement. That opportunity wasn't afforded or awarded to us. So now we gotta do what we gotta do to get in there what we think is important for our constituents in this community. This is the approach I'd like to take in doing it, Mr. President. I'd like to be put on record knowing that I support resurfacing of our roadways. Again, it's something that everybody in this community uses. It's something that everybody in this community needs. And the quality there right now is awful. So with that being said, I respectfully decline the gentleman's request at this point in time, I feel.
[Adam Knight]: That's why I asked. Council paper 21078 offered by President Caraviello. Be it resolved that the Medford City Council requests that we reach out to one of the owners of the 630 Fellsway Plaza, Kimco Corporation to meet with the city council on the placement of collection bins on their property. Councilor Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Second. On the motion of Councilor Caraviello, seconded by Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Yes. Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative, the motion passes. Mr. President. I'll wait for the president to get up there before we switch seats.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This is a resolution that I raised last year prior to the pandemic, and then the pandemic struck, and we were faced with a lot of fiscal uncertainty. It's apparent that that fiscal uncertainty still lingers over our head now, and I don't think that those circumstances are going to change. But Mr. President, what I'm asking the mayor to do is to put forward a zero-based budget. Instead of continuing the trend of using last year as a reference point, to have each department start with zero and build a budget from the ground up, a budget that will be based upon measurables and goals, and will have every expense justified based upon its funding mechanism, its impact, and its prioritization to the community, Mr. President. I think we're at a point now where we're still working off McGlynn One budget that's been traditionally budgeted as a reference point year in and year out now for the better part of three decades. And it's time, Mr. President, that we take a look at our priorities, our spending in the way that we budget. and change the way we do it, Mr. President. I think that this is something that needs to be looked at and the traditional way of budgeting where we use last year as a reference point and build upon that without measuring whether or not we've attained the goals that we've set our sights upon, whether or not we're seeing that the money that we've invested is giving us the most bang for the buck and whether or not we're meeting the measurables that are defined the previous year, I think is very important, Mr. President. And in zero-based budgeting, every year you have to show that your expenses were justified, that you've made an impact, and that your prioritizations remained in line. So with that being said, I ask my council colleagues to support this measure. We're gonna be facing very uncertain fiscal times, and I, as one member of this board, do not feel comfortable relying on more than 80% of our reserves, using more than 80% of our reserves to balance next year's fiscal budget. So with that being said, Mr. President, I ask my council colleagues for support. Thank you, Mr. Vice President. Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. We had a great presentation last week from the administration relative to their vision for a C-Click Fixed Program here in the community, something I'm very excited about. I think it's about time that we started using data to drive our decision-making when it comes to delivering services here in this community. And when you look at what this council's done over the past term, in terms of getting data and getting information, it's necessary for us to make good decisions. You know, we've moved to require that the administration provides us with monthly warrant articles, so we know where money's being spent. We're requiring the administration to present before us quarterly updates on the financials, so we know what fiscal condition we're in. And quarterly updates on C-Click fixed data, I think, Mr. President, goes hand in hand with those two items. what exactly it is, the types and levels of service that the people out there in the community are seeking right now. It also highlights what we're good at and what we're bad at, Mr. President. Now, if we were a multi-million dollar for profit corporation, I'd say that our goal is to make profits, but we're not. Our goal as a government entity is to deliver services. And I think it's safe to say the city of Medford is not great at delivering services. We lag behind our neighboring communities when it comes to that. I think that putting our money where our mouth is is important. In order for us to do that, we need the appropriate data and information before us to make well-informed decisions. And I think that quarterly updates, quarterly data reports from C-Click Fix will allow us the opportunity to have more information in front of us when it comes down to making those difficult financial decisions. So with that being said, I ask my council colleagues to support this measure. It falls in line with the practice of open and transparent checkbook that we've supported all term long. and I'd ask my council colleagues to support.
[Adam Knight]: I as one member of this body could care less as long as we get it. I think the person that we really need to ask that question to sits across the hall as to when they're willing, able and ready to provide us with this information, some of which we fight tooth and nail to receive.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I've moved to amend the paper to insert the following language, on a schedule sufficient to councilor Falco's liking. I like it. Councilor Scarpelli.
[Adam Knight]: We can get a monthly too. I think it's a click of a button from the way they made it sound. It was going to be very easy reporting techniques. So we get the Warren articles monthly. I don't see why we couldn't get this report monthly as well.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I, too, go way back with the Wells family, Peter and Mary. Peter is Herbie's brother and I We've been close friends for a long time. His niece and nephew, Brian and Julie, and I are very close as well growing up. And I had the pleasure and luck of having Mr. Wells as my sixth grade teacher at Brooks Arms Elementary School, Mr. President. And I'll just tell you what a gentleman he was, a great teacher, great person. He was someone that was willing to pull you aside and teach you the values of life. Someone that wasn't just a classroom teacher, but went a little bit above and beyond. Someone that, you know, was really a mentor and someone that could help out someone that was on the wrong path. So with that being said, Mr. President, he'll certainly be missed. You know, one thing I think that everybody who ever worked with Mr. Wells would say is that he was a hard worker. I think when he retired, he might have had, what, one or two days absent in his whole career as a teacher in the public schools. Never missed a day of school. Never missed a day of school. He came in every day and he did it because it was for the kids. And he was just a great person. He died very unexpectedly in his golden years down in Florida, Mr. President, while he was enjoying his retirement. as a snowbird. So that being said, I support the resolution and your commentary as well.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'm just thinking about this, and as Councilor Scarpelli is making his presentation, I'm picturing in my head, you know, where this would work. And, you know, having worked at La Conte Skating Rink for a while, and, you know, having been able to whip the Zamboni around the ice down there a little bit back in my heyday, one of the things that always amazed me was how much it costs to operate these facilities. You know, the electrical bill at La Conte Rink is like $30,000 a month. Imagine if we were able to put these solar carports in, between La Conte and Homel and generate enough electricity to pay the electric bill at La Conte and for the lights at Homel. It's a win-win. It's a win-win, Mr. President. So, you know, I thank Councilor Scarpelli for bringing this on, for putting this on, and I'm put in support of it wholeheartedly this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Vice President. Mr. President, I can remember the charter school debate being raised when I worked on Beacon Hill with Senator Shannon, when they first came around. And this has always been an ongoing back and forth charter schools public schools yes charter schools and public schools, how come they're not funded. The same way that public schools are funded then how come an assessment is levied upon the community, which participates. I appreciate Council based measure and I move approval. I think it's a great idea Mr. President to reach out to our state delegation and let them know this is something that's really negatively impacting our budget, and the way that we operate. I don't think it's fair that you know. We have to cut, cut, cut, cut, cut, but the assessment continues to go down, down, down, down. I'm sorry, the assessment continues to rise. There has to be some sort of balance and some sort of permanent solution. This has been a discussion and debate that's been going on for now, it's been about 20 years. And our legislature still hasn't been able to solve the problem. So with that being said, a whole harmless provision is something that's necessary at this point in time, Mr. President, to support the measure. Thank you, Mr. Vice President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you. You know, six of one doesn't the other. I took an opportunity to read over the state legislation that was offered. A couple of things, you know, it's the bill, the legislative session just started a month ago. The bill was just filed. It doesn't even have a bill number yet. Normally in my experience, I haven't worked in the legislature. Nothing comes out the way it goes in. So I don't know if the council wants to monitor the progress of the legislation. There's going to be assignment to a committee, testimony, so on and so forth, Mr. President. A letter like this is great, but if we really want to do something, why wouldn't we monitor it? And then send letters when the time is right, when testimony is being solicited from the public, so on and so forth. I get a little wary of having the mentioned city council sign on to pieces of state legislation every other week. With that being said, I have no problem supporting the paper this evening, but I think it's a little early in the game when we're looking at this, Mr. President, to have bills that don't even have bill numbers yet, docket numbers that haven't been introduced to a subcommittee yet in the state legislature for us to be jumping on. We have a representative democracy. We elect representatives in the state house to represent us. Let's give them an opportunity to do that, give them a little bit of breathing room, maybe pick up the phone and call them, see if they'll sign on. before taking such a public action. But with that being said, Mr. President, this evening, based upon the paper that's before us, I really see it as a whole harmless provision if we support it or don't. I'm sure I'll support it this evening, but moving forward, it's something that I would be wary of.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. Vice President Knight. Yes, it's always been my understanding that local elected bodies were exempt from the governor's executive order and that we were always warranted the ability to meet in person, provided that we work within the guidelines, number one. Number two, I do think it's important to point out that since this body has begun to meet in person, we've been very productive, more so than we were when we were working in a telecommuting fashion. So I thank Councilor Scapelli for putting a resolution on it. Being a frontline worker, Mr. President, I welcome anybody who wants to come in here. I'm here to do the people's business. I'm here for the people, not for the cause. So that means that we have to be here. We have to be here. So I have no problem with that. And I thank Councilor Scott Feller for bringing it up. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. That information that the Councilor speaks of is a direct result of the work that this Council has done in ensuring that Eversource is brought to the table. The administration had nothing to do with ensuring that we got bi-monthly and bi-weekly updates during the construction project. That was something this Council did. I can remember when this project was first introduced back, I think it was in 2015, and Councilor Marks, way ahead of the curve on this one, was demanding that Eversource come down to the city council meetings. I believe they brought, Mr. Bill Zamparelli was here before us on multiple occasions, before they even got a grant of location or a permit to put a shovel in the ground, Mr. President. And they had a gentleman by the name of Sean Shortell was his name. And Sean is the community outreach liaison who is working on the project. And I believe the last update that we received from him was right around in between Christmas and between Halloween and Thanksgiving, Mr. President, that said that the work would resume in the spring. And that was it. But I think Councilor Scott is probably on the right track. We haven't heard in a long time. It's time to come back to the table and tell us exactly what's going on, provide us with the construction schedule, and let's get this project moving so that we can go back to some sense of normalcy. That coupled with the fact that we have a commitment from have a source when this project's done to resurface our roadways from curb to curb, to fix the Winter Tree Rotary and the mess that was left behind when the water pipeline project was done there. I think we're gonna see a lot more construction in that area before it's over, but the final product will be something that is well worth the wait. So with that being said, Mr. President, I look forward to seeing another source here in this room. I share many of the concerns that not only my colleagues, but most importantly, my neighbors share, and I look forward to having the opportunity to have them addressed. Thank you, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Clark I to recuse myself as a member of the commission.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Just recently, friend Spike Law was passed away. Any of us that knew Spike knew what a great gentleman he was. Cambridge firefighter retired established an organization to provide support among fellow firefighters for post-traumatic stress syndrome for Tragedies seen in the line of duty well before mental health was something that was talked about, Mr. President, a pioneer in the field of mental health and counseling. Mr. Lawless would be a fixture at St. Rayfield's Parish, West Medford Hillside, Little League, or bopping around town, down in West Medford Square, getting his Dunkin' Donuts. Um, and just recently we lost him. He's gone on to a better place, but he will be sadly missing Mr. President. He was a great father, a great friend, and he's someone that really give a lot to this community. And as we've all said before, um, each week we have condolences on the agenda. And each week it's a person that gave so much of themselves to making Medford a great place. And there's such a concern about when that next generation and next crop is going to come up and fill their shoes. And if anybody is going to try to fill the shoes of Spike Lawless, they've got some pretty big shoes to fill, Mr. President. So I'd ask my colleagues to support this resolution in offering condolences to the family during this difficult time. Thank you, Vice President.
[Adam Knight]: Any further questions? I'd like to amend the paper to request that a copy be forwarded to Massport and CAC reps, so that they're aware of the council action. As amended.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. Sure come a long way from playing street hockey at Playstead Park, huh? Wow. Sean Bates, Joe Sacco, David Sacco, Keith Tkachuk, Mike Morrison. I don't know of any famous pickleball players, Mr. President, but maybe Medford will be on the forefront of that as well. I've always been a strong supporter of expanding our recreational opportunities. And I've always been a strong supporter in providing various opportunities. And I don't understand why we can't make The majority of our courts in this community are multifunctional, Mr. President, between tennis, badminton, street hockey, pickleball, or whatever it's called here, basketball, adjustable rims, that type of stuff, Mr. President. We have a plethora of parkland in this community, more so than our neighboring towns. And that provides us with a unique opportunity to really expand our recreational programming I'm very happy with the work that the Recreation Department has been doing, Mr. President. I would like to see maybe a adult basketball league, night league in the summer, a few things like that that I think could be real low-hanging fruit. If you look at the success that they had over in Somerville with their Trump Field basketball league that they had over there for 40 years, the park was packed every single night. And I think that these are initiatives that we can pursue, and pickleball is one of them. So I thank my colleagues for putting this on. You know, I apologize to my street hockey playing friends that are going to be bumped off, bumped off our tennis courts, but this is something I support a lot of me. I thank my colleagues. Thank you, Vice President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor, Vice President Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. This matter has been before our body on several occasions. We took a look at it and we had some concern as to whether or not the city council should be approving an application for a permit where the entity would be doing business on school property. And we asked the school committee take a look through the application report back to us, whether or not it falls within their fundraising policy criteria. And looking at the applicant that's before us personally, I'm not too crazy about the idea of doing business with them, but I don't wanna stand in the way of the PTO getting the fundraiser under their belt. I wouldn't necessarily call this a fundraiser, Mr. President. I would call it the food truck provider jacking up their prices 16% and that 16% of sales being donated back to the school. I don't think that that's quite in the spirit of philanthropy. However, as I stated, I don't want to get in the way of the PTO conducting a fundraiser or an event to bring excitement about the return to their school and to raise much-needed funds. So, Mr. President, my concern now lies on the fact that we have an entity coming into the community. They've asked for permits in the past. We've denied them permitting in the past. They're now pursuing permitting through our PTOs in our public schools, through our children. My concern is that this PTO fundraiser is no more than a data mining initiative. where they're going to be able to get people's personal information, emails, and the like, and then use that to begin a marketing campaign in the community, Mr. President. So I certainly have no problem approving this paper this evening for the simple fact that it's for the kids. However, I would like there to be requirements that no personal information or data be retained by the applicants following the conclusion of the event. Once they get paid, the party's over. And they're not going to be taking email addresses and emailing individuals in the community saying, do you want to be an ambassador? Do you want to have a food truck on your street? Use that as a form of solicitation, Mr. President. You know, to jack your prices up 18% and call that philanthropy and donation, I don't quite see it. In my world, when you give, you give. Sometimes that comes right off the top. You know, jack your prices up and then pass off your jacked up profits. They call that fundraising. So with that being said, Mr. President, I would move that the paper be approved with the following conditions, that no personal data be utilized or retained by the applicant following the conclusion of the event. Thank you, Vice President. Councilor Scarpelli.
[Adam Knight]: I appreciate you reading this into the record. Very recently, I received an email with a post indicating that the Benford Historic Commission was seeking applicants to fill a vacancy. And at first glance, I looked at it and I said, That's no big deal. And then I went on to read the requirements of the application. And I have some talking points on this. The historic commission is calling for letters of intent for interested parties to join their commission. Applicants should have an interest knowledge and experience in fields related to historic preservation and method history. And they may contact the commission for further information. Candidates may be contacted by the commission for an interview and the commission shall then present a list of nominees to the mayor for final selection and appointment. And this struck me as odd, Mr. President. The way the boards and commissions are filled usually doesn't operate in this fashion. The composition, appointment, powers, and duties of the commission are outlined by statute, by general law, chapter 40, section 8D. And nowhere in that legislative act, does it provide the commission with human resource authority or selection power? That power is the exclusive purview of the mayor, Mr. President. So when I look at the commission seeking to attain letters of intent to then screen applicants to then send it to the mayor for who's going to be appointed, it becomes concerning to me. It's a clear overreach of the authority that's outlined in the statute, Mr. President. And it's problematic from a human resource perspective. A member of a board of commission, once appointed, becomes a city employee. And that opens a city up to certain liabilities. When you're applying for a position on a board or a commission, the process should be open, transparent, but you should also be very cognizant of workers' rights and the applicants' rights, Mr. President. I don't think that the board of commission has the technical expertise to ensure that the city's liabilities aren't going to be at risk. Further, when a board of commission is the screening entity to select members of its own board of commission, creates the impression that this becomes a good old boys club, a network where you have to be a friend of the board in order to participate. The mayor was the person that was vested with this authority through statute for a reason. It's so that we can have a diverse board that represents various aspects and walks of life in our community that have concern and interest over our historic preservation So I thought that that was very concerning, Mr. President. And the biggest, most concerning part of it is that, you know, certain applications will never reach the mayor's desk. The commission will interview individuals and then they will send to the mayor who they feel should be appointed after their screening process. So that raises some concerns relative to record retention and the like that surround the municipal government, Mr. President. So with that being said, I'm asking that the, the administration report to us what their hiring practices, what their policy is, and take a look into this issue that's going on with the historic commission because I feel as though number one, it's a extreme overreach of the statutory authority, number one, and number two, opens the city up to liabilities related to the human resource world and also records retention and other criteria that behest upon a professional administration related to the implementation of human resource policies. So with that being said, Mr. President, I ask my council colleagues to support this measure. Um, you know, and looking at it, I feel as though it's somewhat odd that a border commission would try to handpick the members that they're going to serve with and the members that they're going to work with. I think that that's problematic and I don't think that that was the intent of the state statute that was passed when it was enacted here in the city of Medford to establish a historic commission. Thank you, Mr. Vice President.
[Adam Knight]: I certainly have no problem with that, Mr. President. I do believe we look back in our package four weeks, four and a half weeks, five weeks ago, I believe we did get a copy of the list of the boards of commission, but I have no problem asking for that again.
[Adam Knight]: Chief of Staff Rodriguez.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, through you to the gentleman. Thank you, Vice President Knight. Through you to the gentleman, Mr. President, that was our case in point when we were speaking about some of our appointments that the council has authority for. We requested that the administration provide us with any applicants that expressed interest in the Mel commission, for example, because I was under the impression that they had a policy. So this is just something I want to make sure that I'm able without a rise across it. It's a slippery slope. And I appreciate the chief of staff for his willingness to investigate. Thank you. Councilor Belco.
[Adam Knight]: Withdrawn the paper, Mr. President, the administration not provided that information prior to the meeting.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, the administration has established the Cannabis Advisory Commission meetings. They kicked off just last week, I believe.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, that was related to the Board of Health, and the administration has put out a couple of new hotline numbers related to COVID vaccine response and coronavirus response. I did have a difficult time reaching the individual on the phone there last week, I called over 30 times and did not get a live operator. But it appears that the administration's cognizant of the high volume of calls that are going through the office and have taken appropriate steps to address it. So I have no issue here.
[Adam Knight]: Council paper 21063 offered by President Caraviello. Be it resolved, the Medford City Council receive a report from the MWRA on what is the plan to return Memorial Field's fondant shelf in the Auburn Street side of the parkland back to its original condition or better. and be it further resolved that while Memorial Field is being used by the MWRA, now would be the time to discuss changing the lighting at the field and possibly with some assistance from the MWRA.
[Adam Knight]: On the amendment, does the chair have a second? Second. Seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. Councilor Scarpelli.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor Scapello. Chair, would you second on Councilor Scapello's motion? Second. Seconded by Councilor Caraviello. see that we have Tim McGivern on the call. If any of the council is one of anything else they'd like to add, maybe we can ask Tim if you can give us an update on the status of the construction location. Tim.
[Adam Knight]: May the City Clerk please call the roll.
[Adam Knight]: President Caraviello? Yes. With seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative, the motion passes.
[Adam Knight]: Be it resolved, the Medford City Council send a birthday wish to Anna Ekpenyong on the celebration of her 96th birthday. Councilor Caraviello?
[Adam Knight]: Congratulations, Joanna.
[Adam Knight]: on the motion of cuts look Harvey a little seconded by Councilor Falco. The city clerk, please call the roll.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. This has been an ongoing issue in our community for a number of years, so much so that this council took the initiative to implement, just last meeting, a donation box ordinance that would give the building commissioner enhanced powers and responsibilities, as well as the city some control over the regulation of these types of businesses located in our community. One of the largest violators, biggest offenders of overflowing donation boxes would be the Fellsway Plaza, Mr. President. And a number of years ago, a resident had brought their concerns to my attention. And it was something I think that we needed to take a look at, we needed to act on. And many numbers behind this rail have also taken a position that this is something that needs to be addressed, so much so that the council was able to pass an ordinance, seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative, moving this initiative through first reading. But currently, Mr. President, the ordinance has not passed and we need some relief in the neighborhoods related to Fellsway Plaza and the location of some of the drop boxes that they placed there. So I bring this paper forward requesting that the code enforcement officer through the building commissioner's office take the necessary steps to have these donation bins relocated to a spot where there will not be a budding residential parcel, Mr. President. I ask my council colleagues to support this measure.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. As I had stated earlier in the meeting, the Cannabis Advisory Commission has been meeting. You know, today at 530, we met and we talked about the financial circumstances surrounding our community. We're looking at anywhere between a five and a half and $8 million structural deficit. And we need to come up with ways to generate revenues. And one of those ways that we can generate these revenues, Mr. President, is by enacting the voter approved marijuana dispensaries here in the city of Medford. And on the 11th, I did understand there was a meeting. I logged into the meeting and I watched a portion of it, and it did raise some concerns. This council, when it met and crafted the ordinance for the Cannabis Advisory Commission, did so in a fashion that was very cognizant of number one, the mayor's reported conflict of interest. Number two, keeping politics out of the selection process. And number three, ensuring that through the screening and application process, the entities that are going to be responsible for regulating these type of businesses in the community would have a large say in who gets to get a good score going forward to negotiate a host community agreement with the administration. The administration seemed to have quite a hands-on role in the last meeting. It's a little bit concerning to me because the legislative intent was to keep the administration separate. And the reason the council structured it that way was because the administration is going to be responsible for negotiating the host community agreement. So the administration was kind enough to provide us with the materials that were presented at the 2-11 meeting. The 2-11 meeting wasn't called by the commission, it was called by the mayor's office. That's like us calling a school committee meeting. We're the city council, we're not the school committee, we can't call a school committee meeting. The Cannabis Advisory Council has an outline responsibility in the ordinance, it's a duty. that they have to follow through with, Mr. President. And in looking at the materials that have been submitted, I haven't had a chance to give it a good glance because it was sitting on my desk when I got in here this evening. But it appears that they have put forward a proposed scoring system that adds weight to certain criteria more so than others. And I think that's really determination that the Canvas Advisory Commission should be making. Um, so I'm a little concerned about how this is going. But with that being said, Mr. President, I think the biggest concern that everybody has in here is that the mayor has this conflict of interest that she's expressed time and time again when it comes down to the issue of implementing the will of the voters and creating legislation that would authorize the marijuana dispensaries here in the community. Um, so at this point in time, Mr. President, I'd just like to ask the administration to disclose their conflict of interest to provide the council with a copy of the conflict of interest opinion. Um, that's a public documents, public record. Um, so that maybe some of these concerns could be set to rest because, uh, one of the biggest things that we want to ensure Mr. President is that we do this the right way. And the last thing we want is people in orange jumpsuits when this is all done. Um, so with that being said, you know, I want to make sure that everything's done about bar, um, and that, you know, every individual gets a fair shake. It does apply investment application. And understanding what this conflict of interest is, I think will be very helpful in us in alleviating some of our fears and concerns moving forward. The administration has made quite a pledge to transparency throughout many press releases and campaign pledges that have been made. And I see that that transparency pledge should apply here. It should be looked at. So with that being said, Mr. President, I ask my council colleagues to approve the measure. Thank you, Mr. Vice President. Councilor Bears.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah. Mr. President, I too, as the alternate to the gaming commission, will be joining you in a recusal.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, before we move on, I'd just like to take an opportunity to recognize the work of traffic engineer Todd Blake and his assistants in getting a couple of signs on the corner of Winthrop Street and South Street removed at the request of a constituent last week. He and I have been going back and forth for a few weeks trying to get this done. And I just wanted to thank him for his hard work and his effort in making sure that it became a reality. So I wanted to point out a job well done by our traffic engineer in response to a constituent concern, Mr. President. Thank you, Mr. Vice President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I just want to take an opportunity to recognize the work that this council has done on this ordinance. This came to us some time ago when there were some concerns over the composition thereof. document that was creating a commission that was comprised of mainly individuals that didn't have a reflection or an involvement with our public schools, with our local experts in public health coming out of the Lawrence Memorial Hospital Hallmark Health Area or Tufts University. And through a number of meetings, a number of hours of deliberation, discussion, and debate, we were able to come up with this document that I think is reflective of the needs of the behavioral health concerns in our community. I think it's going to put us in a better place than we are today with this passage, and I support it wholeheartedly. I'd just like to take this opportunity to recognize the work of the council. I think we had over 10 meetings on this one document that's before us here this evening. I don't want individuals to think that it's being rushed through. This is something that we took a long and hard look at and took a long time vetting, and it's something that I support wholeheartedly. I'm very grateful that we were able to get it completed, and I ask my council colleagues to support it this evening. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. This is an item that had come up for a number of years. This is something that this council has been working on for more than one term. I know in the past I have sponsored resolutions to address it. You've sponsored resolutions to address it. Councilor Marks has as well, if my memory serves me correctly. I do believe Councilor Falco and Scarpelli have also sponsored amendments or resolutions going forward to address the unattended donation collection bins in our community. All of us have been contacted by residents that live over by Fellsway Plaza, live over by the mall, and other areas where these donation bins are located. And in some circumstances, they can become rather unsightly, Mr. President. The ordinance was a well thought out ordinance. It allows us to continue our textile recycling programs that our school PTOs be using for fundraising efforts. It allows us to properly address quality of life issues in the neighborhood with proper call numbers and information provided to residents when they have a complaint or a concern who's occupying or operating the donation collection bin and the like, Mr. President. So this is a great ordinance that provides safeguards to our community. And it's something I'm very proud of. I thank my council colleagues for the hard work that they've put on it, and I'm glad to see this finally come to fruition.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think it's very important to point out that what this road and control ordinance does is it requires that there's an individual pest management program for permittees that are receiving permits for dumpsters, permits for food establishments. Permits for transfer and recycling facilities, keeping animals. Also permits for public property, individuals that are coming in our community to open our streets and provide construction services. Also, individuals that are composting in their backyards, and that's something that we've heard a lot about, Mr. President. Individuals that have seen rodent problems due to composting and the way that composting has been handled. And this puts some regulations in here that allow us to continue composting in the community, but put some safeguards in. And that's something that I'm very glad that the council supported. So with that being said, I do thank them for supporting that amendment that I added, and I move approval as well. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. This paper was passed by the state legislature and signed by the governor into law. And it has a requirement that says that MBTA communities must have a high density zoning district within close proximity to their MBTA station, one MBTA station in their community. I believe that it's 15 units per one acre is the defined basis. So I'd just like to ask this question to the city solicitor as to whether or not we're in compliance. The reason I ask the question is because this council is going through a rigorous process of recodifying our zoning right now. Earlier this evening, we talked about housing production plan that the administration is working on with private consultants. And I think it's important, Mr. President, that we take into consideration perspective all of the new changes that have happened at the state level to ensure that we're in compliance and that we're not spending money on consultants and studies and doing so not complying with the law. So with that being said, it's just a request for information to ensure that as we move forward as a council in addressing our zoning here in the community, that we're doing so with the proper legal guidance and information necessary to make informed and wise decisions.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Councilor Scarpelli is also a co-sponsor of this resolution. Many of us know the Mosher family from the fine meals that we've all received when we cross the border over into Bar Square and go to Victor's Deli. And I'm sure many of us have had the world famous chicken a la Rosa, or famous beef stew, or famous escarole soup, world famous calzones, steak and cheese, chicken pie, and the list goes on, Mr. President. Rosa Mosher opened a restaurant with her husband Victor called Victor's Deli over in Somerville some years ago. And these longtime residents treated everybody like family. That restaurant was their kitchen, and that restaurant was their home, and everyone was allowed to eat around their dinner table. And Rosa recently passed due to some complications with her health. And having recently retired from Victor's and passing the business on to her son Michael, who has expanded it to the Ball Square Cafe. He's been taking up some of Rosa's recipes and delivering them to the public over there. But Rosa recently passed, and she's someone that's touched so many people's lives, Mr. President. I've been going to Victor's Deli for as long as I can remember. Every Saturday morning in high school, we'd go down there and get chicken parm subs. Rosa would greet us with a big smile, and she'd put the order in before we even walked through the door. When you're short a couple of bucks, she was the first person to look the other way and tell you to get out the door before her husband caught you. She was a very, very kind person, a very warm soul, and she was someone that I was very lucky to have been able to forge a friendship with through patronizing her business, Mr. President. Long time Medford resident, I've had the opportunity of becoming great friends with her son, Michael, and her daughter, Nancy, over the years, all through the restaurant, Mr. President. So it's just amazing what a small business in the community can do to bring so many people together. And Victor's Deli was really one of those types of places where, whether you're from Medford or Somerville, the door was always open and people were always there gathering, meeting, having a laugh, sharing a sandwich, and, you know, just really getting to know each other. It's a place that we had a great sense of community, and that was because of the way that Rosa ran her business and the type of person that she was. Her business was no different than her home. The door was always open. And she's someone, Mr. President, that's touched me over the years greatly with her humor and her kindness. And she's going to be sadly missed, Mr. President. At the risk of babbling on any further, I will rest my case. But it's something that I certainly believe deserves some recognition this evening, is the service that Rose has done to the community in Victor's Deli. all that they've done for people here in the city of Medford, so I'd ask that the council support this resolution. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. In recent weeks we've seen our Colleagues in government on the school committee's broadcasts providing closed captioning services. Our human rights commission has discussed the city council's potential to expand the way that we communicate with people, whether it be through translation services, closed captioning services, and the like. I think, Mr. President, this is a rather self-explanatory resolution. It's to ask that our director of community media provide us with a cost estimate for closed captioning services. So that once we get that back, we can take the appropriate and necessary steps to ensure that it is provided during our broadcast. I yield the floor to Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: This council has We've been requesting the city's vaccination plan since December 15th. Since before Christmas, we've been asking what the vaccination plan is and what direction we're going to go in. It's unfortunate that at our state level of government, we have been unable to get this together. I think it's sad, Mr. President, I really do. We look at a congressperson being elevated to one of the more powerful positions in the US House. I call on the mayor to reach out to our colleagues in government that represent us here in Medford. Because if we're 44th in the country in the distribution of vaccinations, but we are, as Councilor Mark said, the premier provider of health institutions in the world, there's something wrong. There's something wrong, Mr. President. And every day that goes by, someone else dies. Every day that goes by, someone else dies. I really don't want weekly updates about what we're going to be doing. I want a vaccination plan in place where we're actually have boots on the ground, needles going in arms and people getting vaccinated, Mr. President. Did we not know that there was going to be a vaccination at some point in time? I think we all knew there was going to be a vaccination. I think we maybe focused a little bit too much on testing and a little bit less on a solution to the problem, Mr. President. And here we are now, almost two months later from our initial request for a vaccination plan, and we still don't have one. And that's problematic, Mr. President, because if the council is asking for the vaccination plan, it's because we know it's a pressing need in this community because we've all heard it. So I support my council colleagues in figuring out what's going on, because we need to get the appropriate and sufficient amount of doses to address our high need community. And as Councilor Marks has stated a number of times in the past, Medford has a high number of senior citizens that reside in this community, higher than the state average. So with that being said, we should be a priority community, Mr. President. looking at the number of individuals that we have that would fall into the high risk categories. So with that being said, I support, I support my colleagues and moving forward. I don't want updates. I want action. I want a vaccination plan. But you know, I think that the public needs to be informed in a better fashion. And I do have all the faith in the world and Jackie Peaks and her ability in the communication office to put together a comprehensive communication strategy that will meet that goal.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I also echo Councilor Falco's sentiments concerning City Solicitor Scanlon. I've known City Solicitor Scanlon now going back what feels like 100 years. We went to high school together. She's a very capable person. I know her very well personally and professionally, and I think she's doing an excellent job. This item came up. last year is one of our council priorities. And in the committee of the whole that we have, the administration talked about this great new contract that they were going to be executing with a firm called KP Law, who based upon the bills I've received from the administration, we still haven't paid, or been billed for. But one of the biggest things, I think, Mr. President, to promote a successful relationship between an attorney and a client is trust. And KP Law came before us and we asked them the question. Who's your boss? Are you working for the city council right now, or are you working for the administration? They said, we're working for the administration. We're just giving the city council advice. I don't think that trust is there with KP Law, with this group, with this council in KP Law. I just don't think we have that trust. And quite frankly, we're a very productive council, Mr. President. As Councilor Falco pointed out, we pumped out three ordinances tonight for first reading, but we didn't just pump them out. Those took years, I mean literal years, for us to finally get to this point. And I think we'd be able to enhance our levels of productivity if we had the necessary technical expertise and support on issues like zoning, the open meeting law. The drafting of ordinances, the compliance with Chapter 40A, the crafting of requests for information from the administration. Because sometimes I feel like we spend more time asking for information that we're entitled to than we do about actually working on the work. And more importantly, Mr. President, we'll have somebody here that will help us ensure compliance with the law. Everybody on this board took an oath. that to the best of their abilities they were going to uphold the laws of the Constitution of the United States, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and the ordinances in this community. By having legal counsel available handily to provide us with that technical expertise and support will be beneficial and will only make us a more productive body, number one. Number two, it will make us a more productive body, Mr. President. This is something that I feel is a necessary priority for inclusion in the next fiscal year's budget. As we see an increasing number of matters coming before us, I think it's necessary for us to ensure that we have the tools to do the job appropriately and properly. And that's why I'm going to support this resolution this evening, Mr. President. And that's why I'm going to be very concerned if when we start our pre-budget meetings, which are coming up relatively shortly, which were also a council priority from last year, if this isn't included in some of those discussions, I'm going to have a very difficult time moving forward and supporting a budget that doesn't adequately support the city council in the work and time and efforts that it puts in to meet our obligations. So with that being said, I second the motion of Councilor Falco. Thank you, Vice President Knight.
[Adam Knight]: I second the amendment, Mr. President. Any further questions? Mr. President. I also, Mr. President, would like to add a B paper or a further amendment. Must be 60 days ago, 75 days ago now, we requested from the administration a breakdown of the claims over accounts 5761 and 5762 outlined in our Warren articles. We had a discussion relative to the fact that claims over a certain dollar figure, I believe it was $2,500, were required to come by this council if there were settlements and not legal judgments. So with that being said, Mr. President, we still have not received that report as to what the breakdown of these claims over consists of and whether or not any of these payments were judgments or settlements that were voluntarily entered into. If we want to talk about transparency, then let's talk about where the money's at. Let's follow the buck and let's see what's going on. I'm not sure what the secret is, but I'm interested in getting to the bottom of an itemized breakdown of those two accounts so that I can better understand the inordinate number of expenditures that have gone out of that account. Now, I'm not saying there's any wrongdoing going on, but what I am saying is that based upon the dollar figures that have been expended from those accounts, that's a lot of $2,400 settlements. that don't have to come before this council. So that's information, I think, that's very necessary for us, Mr. President, moving forward. So with that being said, I would also like to add that as an amendment for- Well, a B paper is an amendment. A B paper is fine. It would be a further request. Actually, I'll offer it as an amendment. I don't think it's an issue that we've ever voted against in the past, and I don't anticipate we'll vote against it again. We're looking for financial accountability and transparency. So I don't think any member of this board is going to vote against that, because every member of this board speaks on that. They're for that. We represent that, Mr. President. So with that being said, I'll offer it as an amendment, and I will ask for, again, a second time, an itemized breakdown of accounts numbers 5761 and 5762 claims over. Thank you. Councilor Belko.
[Adam Knight]: At the date. We also, I believe, funded a solicitor's position and an assistant city solicitor's position. So we funded two positions, one of which has gone vacant for a year. That's correct.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I didn't know if you wanted to speak on this. I'll let you speak and then I'll come back. I was just going to say that the Hormel Commission's appointment has, the council's appointment to the Hormel Commission has expired for quite some time. And the council, when the administration changed Mayor Lungo-Koehn, has been soliciting applications. for the past year for individuals seeking to serve on a board or commission. So I just ask that we would make the request from the city administration to provide us with a copy of any of the letters of intent or interest that her office has received during this year-long process of collecting and soliciting applications for our boards and commissions and provide them with the council so that we can take those applications and give them the proper review in executive session or committee of the whole or whatever process that we decide to undertake to vet them and appoint.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. To that point, Mr. President, if I may, vice president, I can appreciate what Councilor Marks coming from. Um, and I think it's important to point out that because the Hormel commission was, um, something that was established by way of a statute through a home rule petition when we did the land transfer to get the land over there. The way that the commission is structured is statutory through the home rule petition. And the mayor has two appointments and the council has one. So while the mayor may not have received any applicants for individuals that wanted to serve as the council appointee, she may have received applicants for individuals that wanted to serve in the mayoral appointee positions that remain filled still within the term limit. So that's why I thought it might make sense for us to get those applications as well.
[Adam Knight]: And amended by me to get the mayor's... And as amended by Councilor Knight to get any applications from the mayor.
[Adam Knight]: Second the Councilor's motion to refer to the subcommittee, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Constable. Vice President Knight. Mr. President, yes, as I read through this, you know, it sounds like the intent of the ordinance is to replace gas powered leaf blowers. or eliminate the use of leaf blowers entirely in our community. When you look at the resolution, commercial grade gas leaf blowers can operate at high decibel levels, harmful to the hearing. Well, Councilor Scott probably has presented us with some data to that effect. But also, wouldn't an electric blower perform the same exact impact if, you know, we have data that says that it's only a WISPA. Number two, commercial grade glass leaf blowers launch particulates and hazardous materials into the air at a rate of over 150 miles an hour. And the councilor went through a list of those things. I think- What information- Sorry to interrupt you.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President, that's what I was getting at, was that I think gas and electric blowers are going to have the same effect and the same impact when it comes to the blowing of particulates and the decibel levels of noise. But the question I ask, I guess, is that the intent to eliminate just gas-powered leaf blowers or all leaf blowers in our community? Number one. Number two, I think it's important to point out the people that are using these gas blowers are working too. So while someone might be trying to work from home because they're fortunate enough to have a desk job, there's an individual that's out there, a blue collar worker that's using a leaf blower, and I don't think they're using it for their health. They're using it as a means to provide for their family. So I guess the question is, is the intent to eliminate leaf blowers entirely? Is the intent to eliminate just gas leaf blowers? Or is the intent to study the issue?
[Adam Knight]: I'm not finished, Mr. President. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: I was just asking a question while I had the floor, right?
[Adam Knight]: No, I was just asking what the intent was from the sponsor.
[Adam Knight]: She did. I have further questions. I would, Mr. President, I think maybe if the intent is to study the issue, then that's what the paper should say. Because by voting for this, it looks like the council is saying, we're going to eliminate the use of all leaf blowers in the city, and let's send it to the city solicitor to draft an ordinance.
[Adam Knight]: Be it so resolved, the city council requests that the city solicitor draft language to establish an ordinance around commercial grade leaf blowers. Kind of sounds like it to me. Yes. Yes. But anyway. Same thing about private law team. Right. Right. So I think it's important, Mr. President, that maybe we strike the language and replace it with, be it so resolved, that the subcommittee on energy study the issue of the use of leaf blowers in the community and report back to the council its findings at a committee of the whole. Councilor Morell. I'd offer that in the form of an amendment to the paper. As amended. Councilor Morell. As a strike and replace.
[Adam Knight]: So in response, Mr. President, I think it's important. We should be asking for what we want, right? We want the issue to be studied. We're saying the issue needs to be studied. We don't know whether or not creating a draft ordinance or draft language around commercial grade leaf blower use is in the best interest of this community because it hasn't been studied. And we talk about due diligence and we talk about vetting quite a bit when we are being critical of the person that sits in the corner office across the hall. And I think that if we're going to be that critical of others, we should be holding ourselves to the same standard, Mr. President. You know, so with that being said, I mean, I don't think it makes sense for us to draft an ordinance that we haven't studied yet.
[Adam Knight]: strike and replace with be it so resolved by the Subcommittee of Energy.
[Adam Knight]: Point of amendment. I made an amendment. She can't say, no, you can't make an amendment. I made an amendment to get seconded.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe that the gentleman is reinforcing our argument that this issue needs to be further studied and examined. He did state that this is something that needs to be looked at because there's a lot of science involved. It needs to be studied to understand the science. That's all this council is asking for. I don't think we need to go into the demographic makeup of the landscapers and the landscaping crews at this point in time, Mr. President. What this is was a call for the council to study the issue that's before it. We didn't vote it down. We didn't say, no, get rid of this. We said, if you want to draft an ordinance, it needs to be studied first. And the study report needs to be submitted to the council for further review and discussion. Bottom line, that was all it was. This isn't like the thing is dead on the vine and it's over. What it's saying is it's not ripe for the drafting of an ordinance. And we need further information in order for this council to build consensus. And the way that we can do that is by having a study.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I appreciate you bearing with me and going through all of that. I apologize for the length of my resolution. However, I think it's a very important issue, and I think it's very important that we take a look at this. It's evident that during government shutdown, Mr. President, we've all become more and more reliant upon e-commerce options. But while e-commerce certainly has its many benefits, the adverse impacts that it's had during the pandemic upon Main Street USA is something many of the businesses here in Medford are never going to recover from. And the expansion of Amazon in particular is negatively impacting the well-being of our community and our local economy. Mr. President, there were just a number of reported concerns that Amazon's lowering the bar concerning safety standards, misclassifying of employees, failing to pay a living wage, provide health insurance, or secure retirement prospects for their employees. And quite frankly, our community's lost jobs to this mega corporation. And as one of the most profitable corporations in the world, Amazon has a social responsibility to its consumers. the environment of the communities that they service, and most importantly, its workers, to replace jobs lost in our community during this pandemic with opportunities that meet our current community standards and raise the bar, not lower it. And that's not what we're receiving right now, Mr. President. The Medford City Council's called upon Amazon to appear before us in the past to address the concerns that we have regarding their operational practices, the way their drivers park and drive down the street, the way their drivers aren't properly quarry checked, the size of the vehicles that they're distributing across our neighborhoods, Mr. President, much to the chagrin of many of the residents and the quality of life of us here in Medford. So with that being said, Mr. President, I ask that my council colleagues support this resolution in calling Amazon to the carpet to address a number of concerns that we have here in the community and raising standards for living people and for working people here in the community, Mr. President. So I'd ask my council colleagues to support the resolution. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Any further questions. One more thing, Mr. President, I think it's very important to point out that, you know, when we talk about community standards and what we expect here in Medford for employers to do and what it takes to be a good employer, or what it takes to support the rights of workers in the community, we have to also look at the fact that this resolution does speak to asking that Local 25 be involved. And when you look at local 25 the teamsters union and the work they've done related to individuals in the trucking industry and professionals in the trucking industry. When we talk about community standards, local 25 help set that bar, Mr. President, when it comes down to a fair living wage when it comes down to. providing health benefits and providing secure retirement prospects for the community, we have to look at the organizations that are in this community that provide people with jobs. And Local 25 is a large employer in the city of Medford. We look at the work that Sean O'Brien does as president of Local 25, a Medford resident, a Medford high school grad, someone that maintains pride in his community, someone that has the blue and white running through his veins. You know, We have to respect the work that these individuals have done for Medford in the past. And that's why I asked Local 25 to be involved in this process as we go forward, Mr. President. I thank President O'Brien for his leadership in the region. And when I say the region, I don't mean eastern Massachusetts. Eastern United States of America, because he's really helping set the tone and set the bar and raise standards across the country. So I want to take an opportunity to also thank Sean O'Brien and the work that he's doing on behalf of the residents in Medford and also across America. Thank you very much to Sean.
[Adam Knight]: If I may, Mr. President? Vice President Knight. This is just one piece in a regional approach that Local 25 is taking and working with the community stakeholders to raise the bar across the region where Amazon is looking to expand. So the next steps would be that, you know, we're going to get community support from communities surrounding Medford. Somerville had a resolution on very recently. The city of Boston has as well. The next step, and what my intention would be, would be to coordinate with representatives, the sponsors of those pieces of legislation, as well as the legislative arm of Local 25 to begin putting pressure on a dialogue with him. So that's the next steps that I'd like to take, Mr. President, and the next steps that have been coordinated through the political arm of Local 25.
[Adam Knight]: And I mean some of the things that we can look at Mr. President would be establishing no truck zones, working with the Amazon to be sure that they understand what on resident access only means not using streets or cutthroats then also those other community standards issues that we're discussing where you know we want. The delivery driver that's coming to Medford is also going to Malden and Winchester and Melrose. So we want to make sure that person's properly quarry checked, properly licensed, and properly trained in the safety standards that are acceptable to us in the region. And the only way that we're going to be able to do that is by coordinating locally. And then I'm taking the next steps that the stakeholders are able to establish for what they think will work in their individual community and also regionally.
[Adam Knight]: right for the discussion. Council President Gabriela I understand that and again, like I said, the jobs that were replacing in the community should not be lowering the bar that should be raising the bar so we're taking jobs away from truck drivers we should be bringing jobs back in truck drivers that met those same community standards. You know, high-tech jobs are high-tech jobs. When we're talking about blue-collar working people that need to get paid a living wage in order to survive in this community, in order to be able to live in this community, in order to have discretionary dollars that they can spend in the local economy here so that we can all rise together, I think it's very important that we focus on those jobs as well. I thank my council colleague, Councilor Scarpelli, as a co-sponsor.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you for that point. Vice President night for about the last seven weeks now I've been working with the city traffic set the city's traffic engineer to get a couple of signs removed on the corner of South Street, and went for up and these signs are located on that recent complete streets project that was performed. It's a cut out or a bump out right in front of the first house on the corner. And the city in the, their approach to trying to mitigate traffic along South Street, put two signs up one that says 93 and the other one that says 16 right on the corner of South Street and Winthrop Street, probably arm's length distance from the If you were standing on the front porch of the gentleman's home that lives on the corner, he could reach off the front porch and touch the science Mr. President, I've made multiple attempts to ask that these signs be relocated or removed in my conversations with the city traffic engineer. He said it's going to happen. I'd like to see it happen but in an inordinate amount of time has passed Mr. President. for these signs to still remain in place. So I'd just like to ask Councilor Bears, if he doesn't mind that I offer a B paper, requesting that these signs be relocated as agreed to by the traffic engineer as well.
[Adam Knight]: This passage of this ordinance is something that this council and previous councils have worked on now dating back to the McGlynn administration. The voters of this community have passed their will, they passed their desire that they'd want to see medicinal recreational marijuana dispensaries legalized in the city of Medford. The council did its due diligence and put together a work product. and that work product was properly vetted. It addressed numerous safeguards for our community and our neighborhoods, and it was sent to the administration. And the administration was confined to a certain deadline as to when this process and procedure was supposed to be implemented and take place, Mr. President. We're leaving millions and millions and millions of dollars on the table during a time when our community is facing financial crisis. And it's concerning to me that the administration is not acting on the will of the council and also in the best interest of the community and the will of the voters. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'd like to have the community, the Cannabis Advisory Commission appear before us next week to provide us with an update as to where we are in the process, as to what exactly is going on with this. You know, I know that the Chief of Police is very busy. I know that the Director of Health is very busy. I know that the Building Commissioner is very busy, but I think we're all very busy, Mr. President. We're all very busy because we're dedicated public servants. Now the question comes upon being dedicated public servants. It's our duty and responsibility to comply with the timelines and guidelines that are outlined in these ordinances. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'd like to see where we are in this whole entire process, because I feel as though once we reach a certain point, the city will begin to see an influx of much needed funds that we can use for necessary program that all of us have talked so much about previously. I'd ask my council colleagues to support the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: that my assumption is that the commission's formed by legislative action, but I'm a little concerned about whether or not the commission has established these guidelines within the 90 day time period and again, accepting applications as outlined in the ordinance. Got it.
[Adam Knight]: Who's they, Mr. President? Is they the Cannabis Advisory Commission, or is they the mayor's office?
[Adam Knight]: There's this, this council Mr. President during the debate discussion and deliberation of the ordinance before us was very concerned about this mysterious conflict of interest that may or may not exist that the mayor received a conflict of interest opinion from an outside attorney that she hasn't shared with anybody. relative to some sort of conflict of interest surrounding the application of this ordinance. We talked about it at length in the subcommittee meetings, we talked about it at length in the committee of the whole meetings, but we were crafting this ordinance. So it's concerning to me, Mr. President, when we have a mysterious, never seen before conflict of interest opinion from a private attorney, which really holds no water because it's not an opinion from the city solicitor who by ordinance is the only person that can give a legal opinion to the mayor or the city council in the city of Medford. Number one. Number two, Mr. President, in fact, a conflict does exist. The Transparency Administration should be telling us what this conflict is and where it exists. Number two, if in fact the ordinance says that the Cannabis Advisory Commission is the entity and body that's supposed to establish this process and procedure, The reason it was structured like that was to keep the administration out of it, because the administration has to come back and negotiate the host community agreement after the recommendations are made from the Cannabis Advisory Commission. So it seems to me, for an ordinance surrounding an issue where the mayor has this expressive, mysterious conflict of interest, she sure has a lot of interest in what goes on with it. And it's very concerning to me, Mr. President. I think we need to look at this a little bit harder than we have. So with that being said, I ask my council call.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Again, thank you for entertaining the length of this resolution. I want it to be very specific and outline what it was I was talking about, because I don't want this to be portrayed as Councilor Knight wants to allow commercial vehicles to park on residential streets, because that's not what this is. What this is, Mr. President, is an opportunity for us to look at a situation, a certain very specific situation, and see if we can provide relief. Now, I was contacted by a constituent who lives in the neighborhood. And he lives in a very nice neighborhood, a neighborhood of homes that exceed values of $800,000. And he got a building permit to perform some construction on his home. And as part of this building permit, he also went and he got a dumpster permit. And we all know in the city of Medford, there are two types of dumpster permits that you can get in the city of Medford. You can get an in driveway permit, or you can get an on street permit. And this homeowner opted to select an in driveway permit. And the reason he opted to select the in driveway permit was, as he felt as though it was more considerate for his neighbors. They have 800, $900,000 homes. They don't want to look out their window every day and see a dumpster sitting in the middle of the street, taking up two parking spots that could be very well utilized during the day if the dumpster wasn't there. So what's been happening, Mr. President, is because the dumpster is taking up the parking spots in the driveway, and the gentleman is a contractor, an electrician who performs contracting services, and he runs his business out of his home, home and parks his commercial vehicle at his home overnight. He's run into a situation where he's getting tickets for having a commercial vehicle parked on the street overnight, but the reason that the driveway is not open is because he's taken out a permit to perform work on his residential structure, which in the end is going to be beneficial to the neighborhood and to the community, because we're going to be able to capture new growth on the value of the improvements in the in the property, plus the quality of life and public safety issues that are addressed by having the dumpster in the driveway as opposed to on the street. So it's a very unique set of circumstances, Mr. President, that I'm hoping the Traffic Commission can take a look at and include as part of their study. in the recommendations that are going to be made by our other little traffic advisory group there that's been established by the mayor. So with that being said, I'm just asking my council colleagues to ask that the traffic commission look at whether or not this is something that they feel would be possible, whether it's not something they feel would be able to be properly administered even. It might not be feasible at all, but I did want to make sure that I outlined a very specific subset of criteria and also neighborhood safeguards that could be in place should they wish to pursue it or should they wish to find it feasible. So with that being said, Mr. President, it's nothing more than asking the Traffic Commission a question as to whether or not they feel as though this is a policy that they'd like to adopt or something that might be good for the city of Medford. I'd ask my council colleagues to support it.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if I may, this is in no way, shape, or form a critique or criticism of the work that this parking commission is doing, ultimately, where the traffic commission is the ultimate policymaking authority, and the traffic commission is doing their diligence anyway. The reason that I asked the traffic commission to examine it would be because this is a council action, so the council would send it to the official government body, the official commission to do the examination. I certainly have every belief that the parking enforcement committee that's been established is going to take the proper necessary steps to examine certain aspects of parking in our community. And this is no way, shape or form of a way to be critical of what they're trying to do. However, it's a very specific ask that, you know, that I'm placing on the traffic commission based upon a very stringent set of circumstances and rare criteria that doesn't normally happen here in the community.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the only issue I have with that is that where the council is not the policymaking authority to establish parking policy in the community, the vetting that we're going to conduct would have no implement on the outcome. The traffic commissions the policymaking authority, the council so we could do all the vetting in the world and we can make all the recommendations in the world but What's gonna come out is what comes out of their policymaking authority that's enacted by statute, I believe. So, you know, we can look at it and say, you know, is there a possibility to enable, to establish a temporary parking permit for commercial vehicles who are conducting home maintenance in an owner-occupied home and let them come up with the safeguards that they want, or we can make recommendations of safeguards, but we're not the policymaking authority. You know, how much time, energy, and effort do we wanna put into vetting something that's not under our scope and purview when we have so much more on our plate to already chew?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, in the spirit of compromise and to not waste time on an issue that's really asking for an advisory opinion, what I'll do is withdraw the paper and write the traffic commission's chairman under separate cover as an individual, not as a member of the body, asking that they take a look at this and they can take it up or they can not take it up as an individual, as opposed to as a member of the public body. And maybe that's something that can get them to take a look at it and still address some of the concerns that the councilors have. But at this time, Mr. President, I'd withdraw the paper, whereas it's not ready for prime time. We can take another look at it at a later date once we get some more information on it.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. McGregor, how are you? Through you, Mr. President, to Mr. McGregor, thank you for being here this evening. I do have 100% support of voting for this paper that's before us this evening. I wanna preface that before I ask you a series of questions, because I don't want you to get nervous or worried. But one of the things that the council's been doing is taking a look at what we require when people come before us, in terms of what materials and documentation we're requiring, We're looking at special permits and what's required of special permit applicants. Now, sometimes we get some reports that when you apply for a common victuals license, it's quite an inordinately long process. Can you just tell me a little bit about your application process? When you first submitted your application, how long it took you to get your approvals after you had your packets submitted and all that stuff?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, and so from start to finish, what are you talking, three months, four months?
[Adam Knight]: And do you have your final inspection scheduled with the Board of Health? Has that already occurred?
[Adam Knight]: And everything was all set? Awesome. Thank you very much. I appreciate both your time and answering the questions.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. So what I'm hearing is this sounds more like a commissary location where the food's prepared, packaged, and then you use that as a delivery hub where you get everything ready and packed up at that location. And then you go and take it out and deliver it to the community just like you'd be a delivery driver based on basically fulfilling the orders that you had received previously that morning. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. Okay. And how many trucks do you operate out of this location?
[Adam Knight]: Two. Okay. And do you have any employees?
[Adam Knight]: Five at the moment. And I'm just because I'm going over your application and I'm looking at, you know, and I think it's a great concept and it's something that I'll support. It says that you don't carry any workers' compensation insurance.
[Adam Knight]: Okay, so you understand your obligations then? once you have employees. Okay. And lastly, similar to the question that I asked the previous individuals that were before us, from start to finish, how long did it take for you to get the permitting application and all that stuff put together? And once you submitted your permit, how long did it take for you to get to this point where you're at tonight?
[Adam Knight]: I don't think you have anything to be nervous about. Well, I'm glad that the process worked out well for you. Thank you very much for sharing your experience and you have my support this evening.
[Adam Knight]: One at a time. Practice has always been one at a time.
[Adam Knight]: Danielle is, there she is.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, Councilor Marksley is 100% right. If you look at the City of Medford's ordinances, you'll see Section 6 The book commission is still exercise all the duties assigned under Massachusetts general laws, chapter 45. And it also says that the public city losing council or maybe used or known. With that being said, Mr. President, I'm not so comfortable. given up and making an appropriation of any funds without at first going through the proper channels outlined by city ordinance.
[Adam Knight]: I think we're also going down a slippery slope and we're relying on the legal opinion of the CPC representative from the Pax Commission to make a determination, the solicitor. And, you know, we have a outside council that the city has been relying upon so much. We apparently have ample legal minds to address a concern or a question like this. So maybe we should get that answer before we move forward.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Mr. President. Point of information, Vice President Knight. The response we received back from the administration wasn't necessarily reflective of the policy that was adopted by the school committee in the prior years. I know the opinion is what it is and what came from the school department is what it is. But I think that if we go back and take a longer how to look at what was actually said at those meetings when they were talking about donations, that a policy was enacted. So look, you know, the question was, we want to take a look at that policy and see what it is. But I for one, don't feel comfortable appropriating any money unless we're sure we're doing it legally. I mean, that doesn't make any sense. Why don't we get the confirmations that we need to properly vet the issue and make a vote that's rooted in the basis of, you know.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. I do believe that the council does have the prerogative to either appropriate the requested sum or reduce the requested sum. And maybe we could reduce the requested sum by the amount that the excavation will cost and allow the applicant to come back to us at a later date once we get our questions answered, number one. Number two, I keep hearing that the wall's called Pop's Wall, right? That's the name of the wall? So why do we keep calling it the Slave Wall? Why don't we call it what the wall's named? Why do we keep referring to it as Slave Wall? Slave Wall, Slave Wall. If it's Pop's Wall, why aren't we calling it Pop's Wall? You know what I mean? Why is that the message that we wanna deliver in Drill Home, that it's Slave Wall when it's Pop's Wall? It's called Pop's Wall. And it has a history behind it. And I think that, you know, the history that's behind it, that, you know, might be a little bit more interesting to people if they say Pop's Wall, why is it called that? Let's learn about it. As opposed to the thing being called Slave Wall, especially, based upon the tenor of what's going on in America and Massachusetts and in the area these days, Mr. President. So I'd just like to put that out there as a non sequitur. But with that being said, I wouldn't be opposed to appropriating the funds that are necessary to repair the wall and withhold the funds that are necessary to perform the excavation, if that's a direction that we wanna go in. So I'd offer that out there for my councils to discuss and debate so that we can move on to some of the next items on the list.
[Adam Knight]: I'd prefer, Mr. President, that if we're gonna proceed, we earn the side of caution and make sure that we take a vote that's confident and rooted in the legal basis. And if in fact we're moving, I mean, can we even do that? Can we even take a vote that says that it's contingent upon something else happening somewhere else once we appropriate the money? Are we ever gonna get it back? Are they gonna, you know what I mean? And I'm not too confident that the administration is gonna adhere. to the contingencies that we're putting in place based upon some of the conversations that we've already had earlier in the night.
[Adam Knight]: And I mean, my recommendation would be to table the matter until approval from the Park Commission is garnered or the city solicitor provides us with an opinion saying that this project isn't subject to their approval.
[Adam Knight]: Or the city solicitor determines that this type of project isn't subject to their purview. Or the city solicitor.
[Adam Knight]: Certainly not, Mr. President. And, you know, the reason there is the issue is because, you know, we're the fiduciary, you know, we're the ones that are responsible for the... And, you know, I just really think it's important that, you know, at all... of all the jobs and responsibilities that we have as a council. This is the most significant, you know, spending a taxpayer's dollars. It's the spending of taxpayer dollars that's above and beyond the assessment of the property tax. So I really think it's important that we do it the right way and that we get the question answered once and for all so we don't run into these circumstances again in the future.
[Adam Knight]: motion to table this is for a date certain after the park board meeting after the park board meetings commission meeting right yeah that would be my recommendation if my Councilors agree you know getting the opinion from the solicitor i think is important so that um next year or next round when this question comes up again we don't have the same discussion we have the document right before us thank you
[Adam Knight]: Seems like my connection is unstable.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, so he said it looks like I was shaken out there. I do have some concern, Mr. President, and it's not going to stand in my way of supporting this paper this evening because, quite frankly, we don't have an entity that provides this type of service, servicing the residents of our community right now. But when you review the appropriations that we're making to Action for Boston Community Development and the homelessness prevention initiatives that we're supporting, we're seeing that the eligibility requirements and the people that are calling for services, about 70% of those people are being turned away because they're not eligible for services because they don't reside in the city of Medford. And I think a lot of that has to do with the fact, Mr. President, that ABCD is Action for Boston Community Development. And while they are filling a void in this community, I think more people in this community would be inclined to call the Medford Housing Authority for assistance or the Medford Housing Authority for help. with Director Driscoll over there about potentially expanding their programming and their services to deliver this type of service that we're seeing here through ABCD. So that's something I'm very excited about, Mr. President. Also, in looking at the type of service that we're seeing ABCD perform in this community, we are seeing a duplication of efforts because we do have our, The office, the Metro Consumer Advisory Commission, located in City Hall on the first floor, is also handling certain aspects of eviction and raft application implementation with the raft program. So I think it's very important, Mr. President, as we move forward and begin to further disperse funds related to affordable housing and housing in general, that we take a look at possibly expanding our relationship with the Medford Housing Authority to develop a much more city-specific program that really works for us, where 70% of the people that are calling aren't being turned away because the resources are not meeting the eligibility requirements. You know, when you think about a housing need or someone that's looking for help regarding housing, the first place they call is the housing authority. So I think that that might be a great spot for us to really start focusing our efforts and expanding this type of programming. So with that being said, Mr. President, I just wanted to add my two cents and put forward a B paper requesting that the housing authority and the Medford Consumer Advisory Commission report back to the council what steps and efforts they've taken in expanding their rental assistance and eviction assistance programming that they have here in the community.
[Adam Knight]: The housing security concerns in the programming that we're funding through the Community Preservation Act and whether or not they'd be willing to expand their role based on the conversations I've had with Director Driscoll. I have said that, but we'd like to get it back in formal fashion, if that's not too much to ask.
[Adam Knight]: Um, public participation. Mr. President, if I could make a, take a moment to make a brief announcement. Vice President Knight. And I think that this is really, I don't know if Councilor Marks got a chance to see this, but I know this is going to make his day. Just a couple of weeks ago, we put on a resolution for Brian Branson. Councilor Marks was the lead sponsor of that resolution. And I was going through my packet this evening. And you know, as part of that resolution, we amended the paper and requested that we send it to Mr. Maloney in the athletic department to discuss doing something and Brian's on it to reflect and recognize all the work that he's done. on behalf of the youth in our community. And in our paper in our packet. This week, Mr. President, we have a paper before us, relative to Council Resolution 20682 offered by Councilor Marks, and I think it's really great so I just wanted to share this with the council. Councilor Marks's resolution to recognize Brian Branson. Thank you very much. Hank Morse and I have had a great opportunity of being Brian's teammates on both the Medford Babe Ruth Red Sox in Medford High School 1984 baseball team. I will be creating the annual Brian Branson Memorial Award. which will be given out at the annual Medford High School M Club Club Banquet. Councilor Marks' comments will be included in the award. Decades of unselfish volunteerism and commitment to Medford High School student athletes programs. Thank you, stay safe. Sincerely, Robert Maloney, Director of Athletics, Medford School Department. Mr. President, I just wanted to take an opportunity to read that in the record and congratulate Councilor Marks on a job well done and on, you know, great effort in recognizing someone in the community who's done such great things and is going through a tough time.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President? Any questions? Would the gentleman be so kind, Mr. President, to explain to us how much of that $300,000 is for the architectural dig services?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the other question I do have is, is there any documentation that the council can review concerning the parcel that was on that property? It's my understanding that there was a home that might've been located there and that there was a consultant that was hired that did some type of review or study and reported that there of the opinion there may be artifacts there, and I'm wondering if the council can get a report, take a look at the report at some point in time.
[Adam Knight]: And Mr. President, through you to the gentleman, when they talk about artifacts, what type of artifacts would come out of a location like this? I believe it was the Brooks setup, that was like vacation homes for the Brooks family, if I'm not mistaken. What type of artifacts would you expect to find or consider finding if you did such type work?
[Adam Knight]: Correct, which would lead me to my next question. If they did find something, would there be a request for further or future appropriation relative to further or future excavation of the site? If something was found, would this $50,000 cover everything?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. Carr.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe that if this parcel of land is dedicated park land, then it would fall into the control and jurisdiction of the Parks Commission. because it's a park, and that's what the Park Commission is there for, to govern parks.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Before the approval of the construction plans for the ambulatory surgical care center, this council engaged with our friends from Circle Health to conduct a series of monthly meetings to keep the neighborhood and the community informed as to the progress and status of that project. After the passage of the paperwork that was before this council, construction started, and we had made a commitment to the neighborhood and to this community that we would periodically have Circle Health back in before us to provide us with further and future updates. And this paper before us this evening is just that, Mr. President. I'd ask that we turn the floor over to the co-sponsors, and then after that, the representative from Hallmark Health, Mr. Trubilski. Thank you. Council Marks, co-sponsor.
[Adam Knight]: First of all, I'd like to thank Mr. Fuller and Sam and the rest of the team for coming out this evening to provide us with an update. Secondly, I'm hoping that they can provide us with a little bit of information of how they've done in securing some I don't want to call them clients, but doctors to fill these rooms that they're going to be creating there. I know that was one of the concerns that we had was what type of treatment modalities were going to be coming out of there through the ambulatory care center in the medical village. So maybe Mr. Fuller can tell us some of the highlights of how far they've come along in getting some doctors, recruiting doctors and other practices to the area. All right.
[Adam Knight]: And if you could just speak a little bit to the status of the urgent care office, the current and ongoing status at the future of the urgent care office may be.
[Adam Knight]: And the last question, Mr. Fuller, I know recently the state legislature passed a law requiring the proper demarking of a emergency room. And I know that we had some concerns over the signage on the highway, directing people to a hospital, and some of the signage at the hospital. I know that the city was able to, through the work of the council, write to Mass Highway and have them take down some of the highway signs that guided people to the LMH site as an existing hospital. Is there any issues or concerns with the hospital being in compliance with this law at this point in time?
[Adam Knight]: Excellent. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. I was just going to make the motion, Mr. President. Then we bring Mr. Fuller back in 60 days time for a future update.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President. Thank you very much. It's my understanding after a brief conversation with you over the weekend that you have put together a series of Committee of the Whole meetings, and this is one of the items that I'm going to discuss.
[Adam Knight]: As such, I withdraw the motion before the council.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if I may, this paper 2 shall be withdrawn. I have to speak to this because this is an item that you have marked up for a committee of the whole. Thank you very much. Okay.
[Adam Knight]: I'm moving forward. To move forward.
[Adam Knight]: Vice President Knight. Mr. President, I'm just wondering where this item is something. Well, let me start with, if we look back several years ago, the school department, I do believe, through their school committee, established a policy on accepting donations and also a policy on the use of school facilities and grounds. And before this matter comes before the council, my question to the administration would be, has the school committee approved the proposed use? I cannot answer that, Mr. Vice President. The second concern I have, Mr. President, when you're looking at the application, if you see the application that's before us, we have Food Truck Festivals of America, 50C3 status, no, a for-profit organization. Then if you turn to page two of the application, Mr. President, you'll see we add 16% to each meal's costs. Families pre-order a meal and welcome the opportunity to also support the school's PTO as well. So it seems to me like this is just a surcharge on a meal that then gets passed along to the PTO. Those are some concerns that I have based on my first and initial view at this application, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I'm satisfied with your looking into it. I mean, it's a function of government that has to go through the process, right? So if the school committee hasn't voted on it, then why don't we just table it, and when they do, we'll come back and revisit the situation? That would be my recommendation, Mr. President. Ms. Hsu, do you want to speak on this? I have no problem hearing what Ms. Hsu has to say, but in terms of, it has to go through a process. And I'd feel more comfortable if that process was approved before we approve this.
[Adam Knight]: Or took even consideration on deliberation.
[Adam Knight]: Point of clarification, we approved it once. Yes. They held zero events. They came back for another permit. We denied that permit. Right. Because there was no dates or times. Well, because we didn't want to also harm our brick and mortar restaurants in the community during the middle of the COVID pandemic. And then Ms. Anger, I think her name is, Ms. Angry, she left and we voted it down and then their application was withdrawn. And now this is the... That wasn't a fundraiser. That was to go into the neighborhoods. Yeah. So this was never before the council before to be on school premises or, um, or to be, um, some sort of donation, um, have some sort of donation mechanism, both of which need to be approved by the school committee if it's going to be on their grounds and if those funds are going to go to the PTO.
[Adam Knight]: Um, yeah, I can understand what Councilor Marks coming from and, you know, in the interest of supporting our PTO locally, um, I will go along with that tonight. However, to see a for-profit organization gouge the community for 16%, in my opinion, this is in no way, shape, or form an effort to give to our community. This is an effort for them to open the door to get into our community. You know what I mean? This isn't like a brick and mortar store that wants to give back to the population that's made them successful. This is an entity that wants to come into Medford and wants to bring food trucks up and down our streets and compete with our brick and mortar stores who have always been there for us. So that's my concern. I don't see this as necessarily a business that's coming to Medford that wants to do well. I think that this is a business that's coming to Medford that just got a permit denied, and now because they got a permit denied, now they're saying, well, what can we do to butter up the city council to get further access to more permits? But I will go along this evening with what Councilor Marks has proposed, and I will second his motion.
[Adam Knight]: And I do also want to point out that we can't control when, how, and if the school committee even takes this matter up.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I'd like to thank Councilor Marks for bringing this paper forward. I believe it was two and a half years ago that this council voted to reduce the interest rate on payments that were in arrears from, I think it was from 18 down to 14 or 15 as Councilor Marks noted. And that was in an effort to assist with individuals that needed some relief, the individuals that weren't able to meet their obligations here underneath these certain times. So with that being said, I'd like to thank Councilor Marks for bringing the paper up. Ultimately, there's a lot of discussion about housing in the community, and a lot's being asked of the residential property owner here in the city of Medford, Mr. President. You know, the community only has so many ways that it can raise money, and residential property taxes shares the brunt of the burden. So anything that we can do to help our residential property owners, I think, would make sense, Mr. President, and I support the matter wholeheartedly. Look forward to hearing from our state delegation.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Building on what Councilor Scarpelli said, those are two pair of very big shoes to fill if young officers want to fill these shoes. Officer Kelly and Officer Butts have been long time fixtures in our police department for a number of years. Individuals that earn the respect of the community because of their efforts and actions, Mr. President. Not because they wore a badge and a uniform, but because of what they did while wearing that badge and uniform. I've met Officer Kelly a number of times. Had the opportunity to develop a decent friendship with Officer Butts over the years. And he's someone that really has quite a great outlook on the way things work, great outlook on life. And I know that his compatriot, Officer Kelly, shares that same outlook, Mr. President. To have the opportunity to have a professional career in law enforcement and be able to work for over three decades. And at the end of that career, have the opportunity to stand in front of your colleagues and retire. And safely go home to your family for that last call is something that really deserves to be recognized. These two officers have put their life on the line for the residents in this community, and that should be recognized. I thank Councilor Marks for bringing this matter forward, and I wish them both the best of luck in their golden years, Mr. President. It's been well deserved, and I hope that they are able to pursue all their dreams and wishes in retirement. Because it's all too often that we hear the statistics of individuals in police and that when they retire, they usually don't retire in good health. And I understand that both Mr. Kelly and Mr. Butts have a lot of good life left in them and they're going to be able to collect that pension money for a long time and enjoy it and spend it. So with that being said, Mr. President, I echo my council colleague's sentiments and congratulate them both. Thank you, Councilor. Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: Isn't everyone going to be vaccinated by then?
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I was saying, I think that this was something that we asked Councilor Falco to do last term. But then with the pandemic and everybody wanting to work from home continuously still to this day, makes it a little bit difficult sometimes to get everybody in the same room, Mr. President. But I really think it's important that we look at this. And for the last several years, this has been a discussion and a topic at this council. The format and presentation of the budget, what's required by the administration per law versus what's requested of the administration by the council so that we can make informed decisions. And I think one of the most important things that we need to do. is to make data-driven decisions, Mr. President. And that goes right into what Councilor March was saying about utilizing the 311 of the see, click, fix information that we have at hand to see where our needs are and doing this needs assessment and looking at service delivery. We could talk all day about why the diversity director shouldn't be merged with the HR director and eliminated. But at the end of the day, the services that the people in this community want to see is their streets paved. They want to be able to pick up the phone and call the DPW and get a tree taken down and not have a stump there for the next 11 years. And then when the stump comes down, they want to make sure the sidewalk gets fixed. They don't have to wait another five years for that, so it's not a 25 year plan. That's what the people want to see in this community, Mr. President. They want to see services delivered and they want to see a return on their investment of their tax dollars. So I think it's very important that we start talking about this. And I personally feel as though the most vital department that we need to start this conversation with is with our public works department. Everybody wants to pick up the phone and be able to call the DPW and get a result. And right now, you can't get that. You get put on a list and it takes a year or two or three years. For 11, 12 months now, we've heard about a pavement management plan. I'm still dying to see what that looks like. I'm very excited to see what this pavement management plan looks like because we have about $7.5 million in 2016 money worth of emergency arteries. that could be replaced tomorrow, because the condition of our roadways is subpar, Mr. President. So there's a lot of work that needs to be done, but it all comes down to the mighty buck, the mighty dollar. And unless we're all sitting in the same room, working together towards a common goal, we're never going to get there. We're never going to get there. So with that being said, I think Councilor Marks bringing this matter forward. I support them. I mean, I constantly Falco for bringing the matter forward. I support this resolution wholeheartedly and I look forward to working with you, Mr. President, to put a schedule together for us to conduct these pre-budget hearings. Thank you. Councilor Morell.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor. On that point, Mr. President, I disagree. I really disagree. It should be mandatory. Councilor Knight. I disagree. It should be mandatory that they come and appear before this body if they're going to be talking about how we're spending taxpayer dollars. As long as we can do it safely and within the guidelines that have been put out by the CDC and the Board of Health, we should have our department heads in here. It's going to be seven city councils, the city clerk, and one other individual. We could find a room big enough to fit all those people in here if need be. We have the personal protective equipment available. We put up these Sneeze gods, I guess you want to call them, Mr. President. But I disagree, you know what I mean? I think that we can do this, and we can do it safely, and we can do it in one place. The department heads are coming to work every day. This is part of their job. This is part of their work. And they should be willing to meet with us as a body. So with that being said, it's neither here nor there. I want to get the meeting started. It's not going to be something that's going to affect my vote this evening. But I disagree. I think that we've got to roll our sleeves up. When we're talking about something as serious as the finances in this community, how we're spending taxpayer dollars, we should all be in the same room doing it.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight has it in front of him. I think, I'm looking for it. See, click, fix.
[Adam Knight]: I believe it came in at 10 past 1 today, January 19th. And what it says is, Dear President Caraviello and Councilors, I wanted to reach out and give you an update on C-Click Fix. Over the last several months, Lisa and Daria have been getting trained on the system we had in place and have been working to update our system by meeting with department heads and City Hall staff. They have customized it to fit Medford and our needs. Trainings have started and we will continue throughout the next 30 days. I actually received a training today and then a pothole email request came in and I was able to log it through C-Click Fix quite easily. We plan to publicly launch the newly updated system in February. Our hope is that all city-related requests can be logged in through C-Click Fix and we ask that you use it as well. Daria and Lisa can meet with you anytime to train you. I have CC'd them both so you can easily set up an appointment. Brianna.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I just want to thank Councilor Falco for bringing this up. C-Click fix has been a, I guess we'll call it a bee in my bonnet for quite a bit of time. Ever since it's been rolled out, I've requested a lot of data because I'd like to make those data driven decisions when it comes down to what our needs are. And for some reason, the information that gets put into see click fix always seem to be, you know, the fruit from the poisonous tree that no one was ever allowed to touch. And if we ever saw it, you know what I mean? We'd have to sign on old, the secrecy or something. So I thank councilor Falco for bringing this up and I welcome the opportunity to sit down and see where we are with the open requests, the requests that remain outstanding and the requests that have also been addressed. Mr. President. I know, Some of the concerns that have been raised over time, like Councilor Marks would always say, that's not a city road, so it's not our problem. Call your state delegation. Well, that's not giving a taxpayer a service. So, you know, I think Councilor Falco hit the nail on the head when we talked about the see, click, fix system and ways that we can improve it. It's something that we all want to see be successful here. And I think we all have opinions on how it could work. So I welcome the opportunity to meet with the administration and talk with them a little bit about our vision for how this all works. It wasn't too long ago that Mayor Lungo sat right here and she expressed some of the same concerns that we're expressing right now. So I look forward to this meeting. Thank you. Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe that the chair The co-chairs expressed that the purview of their analysis did not extend to paid for park. Okay. So it was not extending to the business districts or to the parking meter situation. Okay. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, they can be ready to come, but I think the parking related questions that they're going to be ready to answer is why aren't you focusing on this when this sounds like a bigger need in the community than what you're looking at? That's my concern, but I just don't want to lose focus of the meeting.
[Adam Knight]: Who are we sending this condemnation to?
[Adam Knight]: I'm pretty sure they didn't like what was going on.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information. Mr. President, on December 15th, this council passed paper 20677, which is virtually identical to the paper, the council of bears is put on this evening. So, The chief of staff says he needs a paper to cross his desk. He's got to look back in his calendar about three weeks, because he's already got it.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. In usual form, any legal settlement over $2,500 would have to come before the City Council if that settlement was voluntary and not a judgment by a judge. And when we got a copy of the Warren articles that we fought for for so long, I had the opportunity to review them. And when I got to the legal expenses line items under accounts numbers 5761 and 5762, I saw a number of expenditures that exceeded $2,500. Which led me to believe that there were legal settlements that were made that the appropriations were not passed through the council. So I'm asking for a detailed line item breakdown of those two accounts to do a review and conduct due diligence to make sure that we're in compliance with municipal finance law and to make sure that the matters that are supposed to appear before the council due to those, what's that word that everybody likes to use? John, what's that word?
[Adam Knight]: Transparency, that's the word. So that we can be as transparent as possible, but also so that we can be in compliance with municipal finance law. So in the past, we've seen people that have come and have tripped on a sidewalk. broken an arm, come before the council and the council has had to approve their settlement. Um, we've had vehicles damaged by a fire engine. Those individuals been damaged in car accidents by a fire engine and a DPW truck. Those settlements have had to come before the council. Um, so I'd just like to see an accounting of a five, seven, six, one and five, seven, six, two, um, because it stuck out. it didn't look right to me and I want to make sure that we're doing things the right way. Um, as the fiduciary in this community, the city council has a strong responsibility financially. Um, and if we're expending money without the appropriate approvals, that's a concern. Um, so I'd ask that the, uh, finance director provide us with this breakdown, um, in conjunction with the city solicitor, um, to be sure that we protect everybody's rights. If it's something that needs to be addressed in an executive session, so be it. I would happily welcome that opinion from the city councilor, I mean the city solicitor. But I really think it's something we need to take a look at, Mr. President. There's a lot of talk about legal settlements that are occurring in this community, but some of those have to come before us. And I'd like to make sure that we are being provided with the opportunity to do the work that we've been elected to do.
[Adam Knight]: I have no problem amending the paper. I just think it's important to point out that there's a difference between a settlement and a judgment. If there was a judgment by a judge, then it automatically gets paid. But if there was a settlement that was entered into voluntarily by the parties, then that voluntary expenditure. has to come through the council. The council has to approve that money because it wasn't ordered by a judge, where if it's ordered by a judge, we can't say no to it anyway. So I think that that's the issue.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Gene McGillicuddy, as many of us behind this rail know, was a fixture in the city of Medford for a long time. Any given summer afternoon from probably 1985 to 1995, you could have found him down at Santoro Field coaching Foodmaster. I'll tell you, he wasn't a great pitching coach. Mr. President, because I moved to lacrosse after Little League, after playing for Coach McGillicuddy on Foodmaster for a number of years. Maybe too many. I probably should have got moved up to the minors, out of the minors by the time I turned 15, but that didn't happen. But with that being said, Mr. McGillicuddy and I go way back. He was a dear friend of mine personally. I had the opportunity to play for him as a child. My mother actually worked with Mr. McGillicuddy in the same office for a number of years. And then I had the opportunity of being a neighbor of his very recently, Mr. President. I had the opportunity to go to school with Kathleen, grew up with his daughter, Kathleen. I've become very friendly with his son-in-law, John, over the years. And let me tell you, Gene McGillicuddy was just a great guy, someone that was always willing to help out, someone that was always willing to volunteer, someone that wore his heart on his sleeve. He was a quiet man that carried a big stick. When he spoke, he made sense. He didn't talk often, but when he did speak, it was because he had something to say and it was important. And he was someone that I admired, someone that I enjoyed growing up around, learning some of the lessons of life through Mr. McGillicuddy's dry sense of humor and interesting way of approaching things was always something I enjoyed. So I had the opportunity of, like I said, living next door to Mr. McGillicuddy for a number of years. And he and Maureen were just great people. And he's going to be sorely missed. He was certainly someone that contributed to the fabric of this community. He's put in years and years and years in the city of Medford, grew up living on Hugh Mav, right behind the Dame School. Mr. McGillicuddy was a fixture in that neighborhood, taking care of his neighbors. His house was always open to the kids in the neighborhood. And when he moved and downsized to the condos over at 190 High Street, he was someone that was always willing to give his time as a member of the board of trustees. So Gene's volunteerism is second to none. that probably donated 50 years of his life to the city of Medford, to his neighbors, and to his friends. He's someone that should be admired, someone that should be recognized, but first of all, most importantly, someone that should be remembered. So I ask that my council colleagues join me in extending a deep and sincere condolences to the McGillicuddy family in their time of need.
[Adam Knight]: I had the pleasure of working with Karen for a number of years while she was here as our health director. And to echo Councilor Marksley's sentiments, She was firm, but very fair and very compassionate. And when Karen was here as a Director of Health and Elder Services, as Councilor Scarpelli mentioned, she was also a very devoted daughter. Karen played the role of caregiver to her father when her father was very ill. And that never got in the way of the work or the job that she did here. And I can't think of a better person to be selected. for Mystic Valley Elder Services to serve as the vice president at the Karen Rose. A true professional, a great department head, someone that I sorely miss seeing around the building and seeing around the community. I haven't seen her as much as I used to because of everything that's going on. But I'll tell you this, I feel better knowing that Karen Rose is on the board of directors and that she's a vice president over there where I have two aging parents that are in this community and I know that there's somebody over there that's making decisions that's going to be sure that they put people first, not the dollar. And Karen Rose is that person. So thank you very much to my council colleagues for putting this on and congratulations to Karen because she's a great person. And this is truly nothing more than a reflections of all the hard work, dedication, dedication and action that she's put in over the past 30 years as a nurse.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. During the process of transition from the Lawrence Memorial Hospital to the ambulatory surgical care center that we're presently working with, this council initiated a series of meetings where Hallmark Health would have the opportunity, or Circle Health would have the opportunity to come down and present to us where they are in the stages of the plan, what the neighborhood mitigation plans have been, and so forth. And I think it's time that we bring these meetings back to the forefront, Mr. President. We've seen construction at the hospital go fairly well. Some signage has been erected. We've seen some shovels in the ground, some construction equipment, and some mitigation issues arise that we've been able to take care of concerning fences and pathways and the like. But I think it's important, Mr. President, that as we near the finish line, that we begin the dialogue and the engagement once again. So I ask that my council colleagues support this measure and move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'm hoping that I'm, I'd like to actually, I'm not hoping to like to make a motion. I am making a motion now that we have a committee of the whole on this, um, on both positions. Um, I do have a couple of questions and concerns. Uh, I do believe back in January or February of last year, uh, this council asked for a legal opinion from the city solicitor, um, relative to whether or not it would pose a conflict of interest that a diversity director was also acting as a human resources coordinator. Um, so I'd like to just take the opportunity to go through those, those, uh, responses and files, Mr. President, before we take affirmative action on this paper that's before us. So I'd ask that the paper be scheduled for a committee of the whole.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe it's a reappointment, correct, Mr. President?
[Adam Knight]: Also Tuesday evening, Mr. President, I do believe is the traffic commission meeting relative to Southern Maine. I'm sorry? relative to South and Main Street. So again, check the city website for more information on how to log on via Zoom for the traffic committee commission meeting relative to South Street and Main Street. Thank you, Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Clerk, thank you very much. And to my colleagues, I'd like to thank you for your support. Councilor Marks and Councilor Scarpelli for the nomination. I look forward to working with council president Scarpelli and the rest of the membership to move this city forward in a direction that's going to be good for all of its residents. So thank you very much. I appreciate it. I accept the challenge.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. In common form, in practice, as done normally in the past, we've transferred all papers over from one session to the next. This paper does just that, and I do it for approval and ask my council colleagues for support.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, yes, once again, another procedural item that's been done in the past and will hopefully continue in the future to keep all our standing rules and our existing papers alive. So I'd ask my council colleagues to vote in favor of this and I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Layton. Mr. President, thank you very much. I, for one, don't have a problem with this. As Attorney Abruzzese has noted in the past, this is something that we've done as a past practice with export towing. We don't see export towing looking like a used car lot. As Attorney Abruzzese has stated, this is nothing more than merely a certification so a paper transaction can take place. That coupled with the fact that Stevens Towing has been in business now for as long as I can remember here in the city of Medford. And they've been a great neighbor. They've been a great contributor to our community, and they're a valuable asset. They provide jobs, they pay a living wage here in the city of Medford. And if we can help a business during these times, I think we should do it, Mr. President. So I'm wholeheartedly in favor of this paper, and I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. This is something that came up through some discussions with residents in the community based upon the fact that the majority of the station is going to be located in the City of Medford. The majority of the pedestrian paths and access roads are going to be located in the City of Medford, but yet the City of Medford is not getting any recognition or credit. with delivering the Green Line to the city of Medford, or extending the Green Line and the Green Line Extension Project, I should say, Mr. President. So with that being said, I thought this might be something that we could do to boost some community pride and also bring some recognition to the South Medford neighborhood that's been neglected for a number of years.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, well, many of us were glad to see 2020 pass us by in the rear view mirror. There are still many of us, I'm not talking about my wife, I swear to God, that wants to keep the Christmas tree up a little longer than January 11th. So I'm hoping that we can petition the administration to extend Christmas tree pickup for one additional week so that the week of the 11th and the week of the 18th, Christmas tree pickup can be conducted.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. For those of you who don't know Michael Callahan, Michael Callahan was a resident of Medford lifelong. Born and raised in the Fulton Heights on Saunders Street. He was someone who worked in government tirelessly for his whole career. Senator Bullock, Senator McKenna as the Special Assistant to the Commissioner of Racing, the Chief Steward of the National Association of Government Employees. In 1978, he became the founding member of the Medford Consumer Commission, a commission that still exists in this community today that we fund through a line item in our budget every year. Michael Callahan was elected to the Governor's Council. He served 12 years as our Governor's Councilor representing the City of Medford. Upon the conclusion of Michael's 12th year, he passed away on the day that his successor was sworn in. Michael never got an opportunity or a chance to enjoy his retirement. But I think what Michael really enjoyed more than anything was the 50 years of public service that he was able to put in to the residents of this community. He was a Vietnam veteran. He was the author of the Veterans Buyback Bill, which allowed public servants in the police and fire department to buy back military time to put it towards a creditable service. He was someone that was a forward thinker. And most importantly, he is the man that saved Wrights Pond from development. Local legends would say that back in the early 80s, A developer came in looking to purchase large portions of land around Wrights Pond to build condominium developments and Michael Callahan led the charge to start that development and here we are some years later and we still have Wrights Pond as a beautiful natural asset to the residents here in this community. If you go up to Wrights Pond tomorrow, you'll see the Michael Callahan monument up there that's been kept in great shape. by our staff at the DPW. And annually, I take the time to remember my friend, Michael, a mentor of mine, someone who I sadly miss. So with that being said, I ask my council colleagues to support me in remembering Michael and the fine work that he did for the people of the city of Medford.
[Adam Knight]: Paper 21008 offered by Councilor Caraviello. Be it resolved that the Medford City Council have MassDOT return to Mystic Avenue in the spring to repaint and re-stripe the areas that are already in place and wearing off. Councilor Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. Do I see Councilor Marks' light on? Is that a reflection?
[Adam Knight]: No. On the motion of Councilor Caraviello, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. Will the clerk please call the roll. I got to call you last.
[Adam Knight]: 009 offered by Councilor Caraviello. Be it resolved the Medford City Council have the administration report back to the council the status of the 40B developments currently on appeal and the current cost for legal action. Councilor Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Do I hear a second? Second. Second by Councilor Scott Pell.
[Adam Knight]: Have anybody that's, Councilor Marks appears. The Chair recognizes Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: On the motion. As amended by Councilor Falco, seconded by Councilor Scott Peli, further amended by Councilor Scott Peli, and seconded by Councilor Falco. May the clerk please call the roll. We never had a second.
[Adam Knight]: And many more.
[Adam Knight]: 7 in the affirmative, zero in the negative, the motion passes. Council paper 20010 offered by Councilor Caraviello. Be it resolved the Medford City Council requests an update from the city administration on the status of procurement of the cleaning service for the new police station. Councilor Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Councilor Marks. President Felk, John, you good? The chair recognizes Councilor Felk. I can't see a microphone, that's why. I can't see if the red light's on or not.
[Adam Knight]: On the motion by Councilor Falco for a copy of the RFP, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. Is there anybody that would like to add to the conversation this evening on this item? Hearing and seeing none. On the motion by Councilor Caraviello, amended by Councilor Falco, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli, and further seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. Will the clerk please call the roll?
[Adam Knight]: The chair relinquishes the chair back to the president.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: All right, the roll is suspended.
[Adam Knight]: The motion of Councilor Caraviello. Second. Second by Councilor Falco. Councilor Markswell.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Councilor Scott Felly.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: I too echo the sentiments of my council colleagues. On the motion by Councilor Scarpelli, I mean Councilor Caraviello, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. Will the clerk please call the roll.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to revert back to regular business. On the motion to revert back to the regular order of business by Councilor Caraviello, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli, will the clerk please call the roll.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. I believe the council did request some information on that, right? I believe the council did request some information on it, though.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to adjourn.
[Adam Knight]: Does the petitioner have a rendering that would indicate how close to the nearest driveway apron this poll will be located?
[Adam Knight]: Okay. So this is an additional poll, like at the end of the line per se, say the street ended and this is going to be a poll at the end of the street. Yes. Further provide electricity to our, uh, I guess it'd be electric and phone services. Yes. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: There's one, Mr. President. Upon approval, when will the construction commence and how long will it take?
[Adam Knight]: Less than a full day. All right, excellent. Thank you very much, Mr. President. I'm satisfied. I have no problem supporting this paper this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I didn't realize that we had a copy of the rendering in our package as I went through it. I bypassed that. And in looking at the rendering, if we look at number 93 Mitchell Avenue, on each side of the property line, there is a existing, there will be a telephone pole, and then we'll be putting a new pole in. Now, unless that house doesn't have a driveway, or the driveway goes right down the middle of the property, it looks like this pole is going to be very close to the driveway at 93 Mitchell Avenue, should they have one. And I'd hate to get into a situation where we approve a pole to go up in a location where if we move it five or six feet in one direction or the other, we would improve someone's access to their drive. Is the city engineer on the call by any chance, Mr. President?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And I'd like to take this opportunity to congratulate and thank Patrick for all he's done. I echo the sentiments of my colleagues. I think when we talk about Patrick Gordon, we know that he's good at and loves what he does. And I think that the most embarrassing part of this whole thing is that we're actually putting Patrick in the limelight right now, because he's usually the man behind the scenes operating like a cat in the dock, someone that's always bouncing around from meeting room to meeting room, making sure the Zoom calls are set up, making sure that Zoom call's set up. And he's done an amazing job, not only with bringing these meetings to the public, but also with the efforts and the work that he's done with our public schools through the Metro Community Media Lab. Over the past 10 months or so when we've been in this crazy world, I've had the opportunity to get to know Patrick very well. And I consider him TV royalty, access television royalty, the count of TV three. He does an unbelievable job and he's someone that I really respect and thank for all the work that he's done. And I'm glad that he received this award because it's a reflection of the hard work and dedication that he's put forward to his position, to the pride he takes in his job, and to his commitment to this community. So I'm very grateful to call Patrick Gordon a friend. The Council TV3 in the City of Medford does an unbelievable job, Mr. President, so congratulations, Patrick.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. As you're well aware, and my council colleagues are, the Warren articles are actually a copy of the bills that we pay at the end of every month. And when we talk about transparency in government, one of the things we always hear is, follow the dollar, follow the dollar. And I think it's very important, Mr. President, if we are going to be a transparent community financially with an open checkbook, that this council is made aware of where the money is being spent and when it's being spent. For example, our vendors that are providing testing for COVID-19. have to get paid? Are they being paid? Do they have a balance? How much money have we invested in COVID testing? Is this money reimbursable through the CARES Act or the HEROES Act? This is good information for us, Mr. President, to have to make solid, strong financial decisions moving forward. So absent the fact that multiple requests have gone unanswered, I do think that this is a good legislative in action, because it will provide us the opportunity to receive this information on a monthly basis required by ordinance. And then after that, we will have that information at our fingertips to disperse and spread to those people that have questions, to maybe possibly adopt a council record, a council rule where we read it into the record at the beginning of every month, what we spent money on the previous month. So there's that fiscal and financial transparency here in the community, Mr. President, that we hear so much about. So with that being said I'd ask my council colleagues to support this measure and ask that the city solicitor draft an ordinance for us to review to peruse and debate and in the meantime she can also send across a freedom of information request for us to get those Warren articles that we've been waiting for for an extended period of time so that we can begin to examine those as well.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. In recent months, we've had a number of meetings, public hearings related to special permits. But more importantly, we've had a lot of discussion relative to the codification of our existing ordinance and the potential to expand the special permit granting authority to various bodies in this community. You know, one of those bodies is the city council. And from what I understand, a lot of the proposals that are going to be coming back to us relative to the codification of our zoning are going to require some city council special permit issuance, some changes to the issuance of permits and the governing authority of the special permit granting authority, I should say. So with that being said, Mr. President, I thought it would make sense for us to take a look at the existing requirements that are currently filed with the city clerk's office as required by city ordinance. Review them to see if they're up to date and up to par with the information and materials that we need to make informed decisions. So I think that this is an opportunity for us to review the way that we do business, the way that we conduct business, the type of materials, maps, and other type of information that we require as we deliberate and discuss creating special permits in this community. I think it will provide us with an opportunity to be more informed, better informed, and also for an opportunity for us to review and update the existing requirements. For example, we have a lot of talk about special permits and our ability to require the developer to conduct a traffic study or pay for a traffic study. But our existing requirements might not necessarily speak to that. So I think that there's an opportunity for us to review these and to strengthen them to put us in a better place to address issues that require special permit granting authority, Mr. President. So I ask my council colleagues to support this quest for review of information and hopefully an opportunity to improve the way that we do business and do things a little bit better than we are.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Earlier this evening when our meeting opened up, we started off with a public hearing relative to a grant of location on Mitchell Ave. And the procedure was we call the public hearing to order, we read it into the record, and then we ask if people are opposed to or in favor of the project that's before us. Then we close the public hearing. Then we allow the petitioner to provide us with a presentation as to what the project's going to be. Over the years serving as a Councilor, one of the things that's frustrated me is the process and the way that our public hearings are conducted. because we're asking people whether or not they're in favor or opposed to a project that they haven't seen a presentation on yet. A lot of times, individuals in this community get their local news through the city council, and the first time that they see an issue on the agenda is at this public hearing. So what happens is the council's having a public hearing, people are offering opinions as to whether they're in favor or opposed to it, then we're closing the public hearing. Then we're turning the floor over to the developer, or the applicant, I should say, And the applicant gives a presentation, the council asks questions, and then we vote on it. I think it might make more sense for us, Mr. President, to have the petitioner give a presentation as to what the application is before the body. So that individuals that may not know if they're opposed or in favor of the project have an opportunity to understand what it's about. before they're asked to come up and speak on it. Secondly, what this proposal would do, and I really don't care what the language in terms of where it goes. It's something that's going to have to be hashed out. This isn't something that is at the end of the line discussion. This is just a launching pad. But when the public hearings closed, the council then usually votes on the matter immediately thereafter. And there's no waiting period. So the public hearing closes, and then they said, OK, now on the petition. Is everybody in favor? But OK, sure, we'll grant it. Because people don't necessarily read the council agenda and see what's on it, and there are individuals in the community that might get their news and understanding from community access, from the great work that Patrick Gordon is doing on account of community media. It might make sense for us, Mr. President, to allow a six day comment period for individuals to express whether or not they're in favor or opposed after the close of the public hearing. before we take the matter up for a vote. It's just a pet peeve of mine as to the way that things operate and I'm hoping that maybe we can take some steps to correct the way that we do it and improve the way that we do it so that individuals are more informed when they're speaking at public hearings whether they're in favor or opposed to them and so that residents in the community after hearing the presentation from the administration get the I mean the applicant get the opportunity to chew on it for a couple of days and then decide whether or not they are in favor or against it, and send that information to us so that we can read it. Food for thought, as we say, Mr. President. So with that being said, this is something that, you know, I'm not too concerned about it passing right now. It can go to subcommittee, it can go to committee of the whole, whatever it may be. I'm comfortable with the language, but I wrote it, and this is the first time most people have seen it. So, you know, I certainly have no problem with this going through its diligent process. So with that being said, Mr. President, I ask my council colleagues to support the matter, to be referred either to the rules committee or committee of the whole for further discussion, debate, and deliberation.
[Adam Knight]: I just asked that when the subcommittee does meet that they invite the city assessor. We recently had a report back from the city assessor that we have a high volume of homes in this community that are owner occupied, whether they're single family residences or multi-family residences, Mr. President. And we also have people that are homeowners that are taxpayers that are hurting, Mr. President. People that own a home that are also suffering from the same effects that COVID-19 is putting on people that are renters. And the question comes as to what relief are these homeowners being provided if they're unable to pay their tax bill to the community? We're assessing, what, 18% penalties for individuals that are unable to pay their tax bills on time at this point in time, Mr. President? I think it's 18%. So if we're going to look at a relief package, I think we have to have some equity. It's not just about evictions. It's not just about people that are renters. There are homeowners in this community that are suffering too, homeowners in this community that are struggling, that have to pay a property tax bill. And there's an area where we could also help. So I'd ask that the city assessor be invited to the housing subcommittee meeting for her input in that regard.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, before we start public participation, I'd like to make a motion to cancel next week's meeting in the interest of holiday celebrations with our families.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. Some maybe four years ago, the DPW implemented a practice where they would use asphalt to replace sidewalk panels with the intention of coming back at a later date and replacing them with concrete when concrete crews are out performing the type of work. But what I'm seeing is that it's becoming few and far between that these asphalt replacement panels are actually replacement panels, Mr. President. They stand there, I think, far past their shelf life, and they're degrading at a rate that would be much faster than that of our concrete sidewalks. Plus, they don't necessarily have the same curb appeal. And just not as aesthetically pleasing, Mr. President. So we've seen issues across the community where asphalt sidewalks have been put in front of the Morris Memorial Hospital, for example, and other places where the neighborhood really hasn't liked the look of it, hasn't wanted that to be the standard that's acceptable in our community. And I really don't think it is an acceptable standard, Mr. President. So with that being said, I'm asking that the DPW discontinue the use of using asphalt sidewalk replacement panels and revert back to using concrete. or some other semi-pervious material, Mr. President, that has a little bit more curb appeal than that of a black asphalt.
[Adam Knight]: To me, the continuity of aesthetics, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: To remain, to have some continuity in the aesthetics.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I feel as though this is a rather self-explanatory resolve. I'm just asking to know what it is, what approach it is that the city administration intends to take when vaccinations become available in our community, what the sites are going to be, what the locations are going to be, who the priority individuals to receive the vaccination will be. So with that being said, Mr. President, I ask that this paper be forwarded to the administration for a written response.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to table, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: One week, yeah.
[Adam Knight]: Whatever, we can always take it off the table if it doesn't have a date on it, but yeah, that's fine, next week is great.
[Adam Knight]: Just put it on next week. Next week.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, I do believe this paper was before the council previously and the council said we have no problem with entertaining the idea provided that they provide us with the dates and locations as to when these food trucks are going to be operating in our community.
[Adam Knight]: I don't recall voting in favor of this. Councilor Knight. I don't recall voting in favor of this paper, Mr. President, previously.
[Adam Knight]: It was contingent upon them submitting the dates to us for further review to dates and locations for further review. But it wasn't something that we said, yeah, okay, do it. Just go five locations anytime you want. We still wanted to know the dates and times and locations.
[Adam Knight]: I'm not here for a TV show.
[Adam Knight]: So, Mr. President, ultimately, I believe the food truck licensing process was established as a pilot program, if I'm not mistaken, well before my time on the council. And I guess my question is, has this application process change now? I mean, are we doing things differently than we were previously based upon the nature of the applications? And if so, maybe that's something we need to talk about because the council has prioritized the food truck ordinance as something that we want to look at moving forward on through the ordinance subcommittee, Mr. President. So if there's any changes to the application process that's going on, it might be nice for us to know about that as well so that as we further discussions on the food truck ordinance, we can have some of the input that the administration's had based upon the applications and the nature of requests that they've seen over the course of the last year or so.
[Adam Knight]: I certainly appreciate their willingness and desire to want to work with the community. We have a number of great establishments in Medford, like Roswell's Restaurant, for example, does great work here in the community. This councilor just recognized Richie for the work he does in his philanthropy here in the community. So, you know, we have a number of businesses that want to do good things for the people that live here that are based here in this community as well. I did hear that the way this is is they want a blanket permit and then they want to come back to the council to tell us when they're coming. Well, that's pretty much the way it works right now. If you want to come, you just tell us what the date is and the time is and you come before the council with your application and we'll hear it. So, I'm a little confused as to why we're changing the process when the processes seem to work pretty well in the past and if, you know, it's like not like they're going to come. If they don't know, there are people here that are going to buy it. It sounds like it's pretty much just, does your neighborhood want to do delivery from this pizza place today? Because this pizza place will come to your neighborhood with the truck and bring you the food. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'm looking at this and I'm kind of saying, we're changing the process now. It seems like the process that we've had in place previously is a process that would work just fine. They have a date, a time, and a location. If they want to go to a neighborhood, come before us, petition us, and we'll vote on it. But a blanket permit and the changing of the, material application of the food truck pilot program, which shouldn't be called the pilot program anymore because it's been in place for like nine years, you know, is ultimately problematic to me. And this is a paper that, you know, I don't think we need to deviate from the way we've been doing things, Mr. President. I don't think this makes it any better for the community, any more protections for our business community? Just based upon what I'm hearing right now, maybe my mind can be changed and I can be swayed. But I just kind of, I'm starting to get the feeling that it's like. It doesn't matter what the rules say. We're just doing anything, however we feel like doing it right now. And then when anybody says anything about it, it's coronavirus. So I'm a little confused by the way the application process has changed and the way that the criteria has changed. With that being said, I'm not opposed to food trucks in our community. I think we should have an ordinance, and I think we should allow them. But I think it needs to be tightened up a little bit more than what we have here presently. The proposed ordinance is far more restrictive than what's been outlined. this document right here, for example, the proposed ordinance would say that if you are going to be located within 200 yards of a brick and mortar establishment, you have to get their permission to locate them. So there are some things I think that, you know what I mean, safeguards that we can put into the community, and that's what we've been working on through the ordinance. So, you know, when I look at this, it's not something that I'm comfortable supporting this evening right now, I'll tell you that.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: So on that B paper, seconded by... I have a couple of concerns about it, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I think it needs to be reviewed by legal counsel. And the reason I think that, Mr. President, is because we can't request that an entity or an organization waive their rights under federal law as a condition of permitting, right? So I think that that's something that might need legal review from Solicitor Scanlon. But I would like to offer a C paper, Mr. President, requesting that Monogram Foods and the administration meet with Boston Building Trades. to discuss the potential for a project-specific labor agreement at this house, at this location for the build-out. And that gentleman would be Francis X. Callahan. He's the Chairman of the Building Trades at this point in time. I'd offer that as a C paper, Mr. President, if this is approved and moving forward.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Layton. I'm going to tap it on my zoning book here. Section 94-145, hours of operation of retail or wholesale store, factory, or manufacturing plant. A, no retail or wholesale store, factory, or manufacturing plant shall conduct business or operate in a single family general residence, apartment, commercial, or industrial zone between the hours of 11 p.m. and 7 a.m. A special permit to extend those hours of operation between 11 and 7 may be granted by the council provided in section 9481. So it appears that the extended hours permit would be applicable in this instance.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Mr. President? Point of information, Councilman Knight. It appears that this project would be subject to linkage fees. Would the administration be willing to dedicate the linkage fees that are generated through this project for improvements to Middlesex Avenue for partnering with the state in making those improvements?
[Adam Knight]: Yes, linkage fees apply, and yes, we'll be willing to do it, and no, we won't. You know what I mean? That's as simple as I'm looking at you, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Okay, why would linkage fees not apply at this location?
[Adam Knight]: Renovation over a certain size. Right. A substantial reservation in excess of 50% of the structure that's 10,000 square feet, which is what this project is, I believe, based upon what was presented.
[Adam Knight]: Right. But we can't partner with the state, just like we've seen neighbors in Malden do, for example, when they partially funded a study for the reconfiguration of the Highland Avenue-Fells Way intersection there. And the city put up some money to do the traffic study. And once the traffic study was complete, the state kicked up the money to do the repairs.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And Mr. Monica, I want to thank you for your patience in going through this process. I know it's quite an initiation to the Medford City Council that you've taken over the past couple of weeks. And I as one council want to say, number one, it's great to see that your company wants to invest here. Ultimately, there is zero jobs at this location now. And with the approval of this TIF, we have the ability to bring 250 jobs to our community, plus the construction jobs that are going to be related to it, plus we're going to be able to redevelop an underutilized site. And from my discussions with the city assessor, If nothing happens at this property, then we don't lose anything, right? I mean, right now, it is what it is based upon the way the tip is structured. In order for us to move forward on this, we're going to be in a much better place than we are today. So why is one councilor uncomfortable supporting this? I think we've raised a lot of issues, A paper, B paper, C paper, D paper at this point, Mr. President, and they're all valid, valid concerns. more focused, not necessarily on the merits of the organization or the business that's going to be done, but the application in the seamless transition. to a renovation of a site that's located in the neighborhood and our ability to make sure that those that are responsible and accountable to make sure that certain aspects of this job go right do. So when we talk about linkage and we talk about the solar ordinance, we're talking about items that we want the applicant to know about and know what they're getting into. So with that being said, Mr. President, This evening, I'm very comfortable voting to support this TIF. I think we've done a good job vetting it. We've taken the opportunity to open our eyes and our ears to the neighborhood and the neighbor's concerns, while also examining the economic benefits that it's going to bring to the city. So I, as one councilor, will be supporting this paper this evening, and I would move forward for approval.
[Adam Knight]: I think it might make sense for us to outline what votes we took in the subcommittee meeting earlier in the evening so that the people understand what it is that they are either opposed or against. Right now it's, are you opposed to a paper that would determine a residential factor? I don't think that that's really a very indicative of what exactly on the table. I think it might be better off set if you know, we had a little breakdown as to what each of these four items meant and what the council voted on in the subcommittee meeting so that we could move forward in that regard.
[Adam Knight]: I think, I mean, ultimately the council voted in subcommittee to determine that we would adopt the lowest residential factor, right? So the issue before us is whether or not we want to, people are in favor of us adopting the lowest residential factor by having a single tax rate, right? And I mean, I think that's as simple as the explanation goes. I know when we get into the residential exemption and the small commercial exemption, the explanation might be a little bit further than that. But a brief synopsis, I think, would be warranted. We don't need to get into the law books on it.
[Adam Knight]: So maybe we go through the votes that we took, the council voted to do this. That's fine. And then Ellen can explain what that means. OK.
[Adam Knight]: Okay.
[Adam Knight]: Sounds good to me, Mr. President. Okay, thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe it was not recommended by the administration to adopt such at this point in time.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Motion to adopt the lowest residential factor to be used for FY 2021, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to adopt an open space discount.
[Adam Knight]: And just on Councilor Marks' point, Mr. President, looking at the math and the numbers that were put before us this evening, that 4,000 households looks like it represents about almost a quarter of the community. So that would be one in four paying more, even though they're owner-occupied. And I think that's very important to point out. So, you know, I think that, you know, garbage in, garbage out, right? You can only make good decisions with good data. And that's what we need to focus on.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to adopt a small commercial exemption. Second.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Mr. LaRusso, thank you for coming this evening. I'd first like to start off by saying that your abilities nor is your character in question this evening. I got a phone call from a dear friend of mine, Chris Murphy, raving about your character and the type of person that you are. And his opinion that you'd be a great fit in Medford, and that goes a long way with me. You know, personal relationships that I have with individuals in the community and their opinion mean a lot. I'm certainly no prude, I have tattoos. Not too happy that I got them when I was a young kid, but I got to live with them. They're forever. And I think that you're well aware of the concern that some people in the neighborhood have and some people in the parish have relative to the location of the studio and the aesthetics that may or may not be present there upon opening. And I do have a specific request, and I'm hoping to be willing to entertain it, would be that you conduct a community meeting with the neighbors and with the residents in the parish. To explain to them exactly what it is you're trying to do down there, and what direction you're looking to go in. I certainly have no issue with the tattoo shop in West Medford Square. I voted for one just a couple weeks ago, maybe a couple months ago, Mr. President. I'm no prude by any means. But there are certain concerns that have been raised by my neighbors. I live in the neighborhood. I live within walking distance. I've heard about this application before I knew about it when it was coming across our table. And it's been an issue of concern for some of the residents that live down there. So I'm asking. with the hope that you'll be willing to conduct a community meeting or an open house of some sort to allow people to come down so you can explain to them what it is you're doing, what it is you're trying to do in the neighborhood, and address some of the concerns that may have arisen. Ultimately, because this is a special permit that's before the council, we do have the ability and the right to attach special conditions upon it, so on and so forth. I'm not thinking this is going to be a tattoo parlor that has vulgar pictures hanging in the windows right across the street from a church that just doesn't fly anymore. The days of those type of tattoos are over. This type of art form has transformed from bikers, veterans, and people in jail to everybody. The barista at the Starbucks has a tattoo now. The Reverend in Sanctuary Church has a tattoo, everybody has tattoos. They're commonplace, they're normal. But that doesn't alleviate some of the issues that have been brought up to me. So I'm asking that you do that. I'm on your own, I have no problem supporting this this evening. However, I would ask that you at some point in time prior to opening, conduct just a small meeting with the residents and the neighbors and members of the parish to tell them what you're doing and to kind of explain to them what your aesthetics are going to be like so they don't have any fears as to any type of Imagery that may be offensive to the practice of their faith.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I just asked that we put a 90-day review on it, just to be sure that the meeting happens and if any issues pop up, we can bring them back in and sit down and talk about what we can do to resolve them. It's not a mechanism or a vehicle for us to come and yank your license away from you after three months or anything like that, Adam. I don't want you worrying about that. I appreciate that. Thank you. What it is is it's a mechanism for us to address some of the concerns that may come up during the first months of operation so that we can come up with a plan so that you can live harmoniously with the residents.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the notes I have say, I said, why don't we move to have a committee of the whole with the MWRA and National Grid over the project and mitigation? I mean, ultimately, National Grid wouldn't even be here if it wasn't because MWRA asked them to. And as I looked at the heat map just a couple weeks ago, the map that allows us to take a look at the gas leaks in the area, we've had a significant number of gas leaks along that street. That we're going to remain on that street is gas leaks. National Grid admittedly had no intention of coming down there and repairing any of those unless they really had to, unless they were grade one gas leaks. You know, so I'm looking at this project and I'm saying to myself, you know, National Grid was never going to come here unless MWRA asked them to. Now that they're coming here, they are going to make repairs. Okay, that's all well and good. But this isn't about the project. This is about mitigation to the residents in the neighborhood that are going to be forced to put up with the construction that's going on down there, right? So the one question I do have would be for the city engineer and it's, you know, is there a code relative to a safety code or a building code or a construction code relative to sidewalk and curving height in relation to the street. And if there is, when we're allowing these public utilities to come in our community and restore them to equal or better condition, we're really letting them come in and establish something that's not up to code. I mean, if someone were to come into this building, when we built the new police station, we had to make sure that it met the seismic requirements that were necessary for a building of that nature. We had to take into consideration the floodplain and all these different other items when we were building a new building. When we renovate buildings, we talked about the renovation of certain homes in the community. And we have to bring those homes up to code when they're given a building permit. So I guess my question is, is there a code relative to sidewalk height in relation to the street? And why are we allowing public utilities to come into our community and restore them to the condition they were in and not up to code if there is in fact a code? Which there probably isn't, that's why we're letting them do it.
[Adam Knight]: And in terms of the gorilla in the room, the elephant in the room, whatever you want to call it, MWRA, have you sat down with MWRA and discussed the further criteria of the mitigation agreement or the requests and recommendations that your office has related to their project when they come on board? Or is this still a little premature for that?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think at this point, I'm very comfortable echoing the sentiments of Councilor Scarpelli and Councilor Caraviello that The city engineer just said it. These three parties haven't even been in the same room. So I would suggest an offer in the way of a motion that we have a committee of the whole with the MWRA National Grid, as well as representatives from the administration to discuss this permit and mitigation.
[Adam Knight]: Just a couple of weeks ago, Mr. President, a similar item came upon the agenda and we discussed that. It's very important when we get updates from bodies, boards, commissions, the administration, that these updates are provided to us in writing so that we have that snapshot in time so that when the item comes up again at a later date, we have something to compare it to, Mr. President. And I'd hope that that still stands.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I don't know if it's the result of flushing or whatnot, maybe some underground utility work. But for about nine to 11 days over the past two weeks or so, there's been a tremendous amount of brown water in South Medford neighborhoods. Sometimes actually stretching all the way up to the back end of High Street, over by the river, near Mari's restaurant actually, up the street more or less though towards the barbershop and the jewelry store, Rollins and VIP. So with that being said, Mr. President, I've gotten a number of complaints stretching from Main Street. all the way back to the square. So I'm asking the DPW Water Department to provide us with an update as to what's going on, why there was so much brown water in the area for such an extended period of time. You know, a lot of people were a little upset when they were trying to make the mashed potatoes and they ran the water and it was brown on Thanksgiving. So I'm just hoping we can get some clarification and address some concerns, Mr. President, as to what's going on.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, didn't we vote on a paper that was very similar to this, asking the mayor to appear before us and she agreed to appear before us periodically to give updates?
[Adam Knight]: I think she said Perry. I think the mayor's response is out. It was periodically. I don't think it came out monthly. It came out periodically. But it's my understanding that the statistics data and the like are all compiled on Wednesdays, and they have their powwows on Wednesdays relative to this stuff. So we'd be getting the week before's information if we did that on a Tuesday night. But whatever direction we go when we go, and Mr. President, I just again request that we get this in writing. I feel like our meetings are turning into more like television shows and less like meetings.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight? What's this, a motion to table the rest of the agenda? Absolutely not. It's to suspend the rules.
[Adam Knight]: You know he's on the floor. No.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Are these parking spots right now, are they business only, Mr. President? I think just regular parking. Just regular parking?
[Adam Knight]: They're not marked.
[Adam Knight]: Is it the sponsor's intention to reserve these spaces just for business permits? No.
[Adam Knight]: People can't park, so they need lines?
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, I vote in favor of this.
[Adam Knight]: Approval is amended.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes. Vice President Ferriero? Yes. Seven in the affirmative. Motion passes. We're under suspension, Mr. President. The records?
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to offer a B paper, Mr. President, on this. I mean, it builds right upon what Councilor Bears is talking about. It's the narrative and the spin that's put on certain issues. I'm offering a B paper asking what the criteria is for a robocall. Over this past week, we all got robocalls concerning certain business establishments in this community. That was the only robocall I ever got about a business establishment. I've never heard about any other establishments ever in this community that have ever had any type of outbreak or any type of contract tracing. So it's very concerning to me, Mr. President, especially based upon the current circumstances in the economy. where one out of five is unemployed, where we're seeing a lot of small businesses closing. I think sometimes taking a deep breath and thinking a little bit before speaking makes a lot of sense. I know I'm certainly guilty of not doing that a lot of the time. But ultimately, I'd like to know what the criteria that's being used is for a robocall. notification to the community relative to COVID clusters. Is there a policy or a protocol? Is it just, you know, when I feel like doing it, I'm going to do it or what? I mean, because I think that, you know, every action has a reaction and the reaction that the community has can be very damaging to small businesses if our ducks aren't in a row and our facts are not accurate.
[Adam Knight]: I don't want to remember this, I want to forget it.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President. Councilor Knight. I think during these trying times, placing more restrictions and more burdens on businesses and eating establishments is the last thing we should be doing. If I go to Carol's restaurant and I sit down and I want to have something to eat and I say, no, Mari, keep the silverware. I don't want the silverware, I want the plastic. Or I can, plastic by request, I just don't understand it, Mr. President, if they send out a delivery to a house or a work establishment, then they get a phone call, there are no forks and knives, can you bring them back? I mean, it puts an impact on the business. When it comes to cost-saving measures and cost-cutting measures, businesses do a pretty good job policing themselves and regulating themselves. And if this is something that they want to implement, they should. But I just don't think at this point in time, further regulating and further burdening businesses, especially, mostly these are small businesses that do take up business, is the right thing to do at this point in time, Mr. President. So for that reason, I'll be voting no.
[Adam Knight]: I was just going to ask if Mr. Costas was still on the call from the Chamber of Commerce, Mr. President, but I think he goes to bed at 930.
[Adam Knight]: I have the floor, Sir. So there was there was a couple of a couple of amendments that were put forth.
[Adam Knight]: We can put it on file. You just take a vote on it. Either way.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Marks, I'll answer that. The reason I offered the motion was because in 2017, in 2019, in 2020, we've tasked the city solicitor with drafting an ordinance relative to short-term rentals in the community. Between 2017 and 2019, there was a series of litigation events and other regulatory parameters that were established that created a criteria that would now allow a community to do this. So I know I've sent the solicitor's office at least 50 pages worth of documentation, a white page report on best practices on how to regulate short-term rentals and the like. And in the last discussion that we had with the city solicitor, it was that she was working on a draft, still to date, I do believe. And the reason to send this to her would be to have her review it and contrast it with what she has already worked on to see if there's any items in here that might be left out and then present it back to the council for us to review.
[Adam Knight]: The ordinance subcommittee just met, what was it, last month and we prioritized several papers that were in there. The first paper I believe was, we had food trucks, we had sick leave bank, we had short term rentals, we had small cell wireless towers were the four top items that we discussed. There might have been one other in there out of the five, but you know, right there at the top of the iceberg from important items that the subcommittee was going to be working on to put out as a work product to this committee of the whole as well. So with that being said, maybe we send it to the subcommittee that's working on that as well. And we could take some of the ideas that are in this and contrast it with what the city solicitor gives us when she does.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe when the paper was initially introduced in January, Mr. President, and the clerk may be able to take a look in the records if he hasn't before him, the prior paper was joined to it.
[Adam Knight]: The prior paper was joined.
[Adam Knight]: The paper from the previous session that we were working on.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah. The paper from the previous session was joined to it. And now the paper from the previous session still remains in the subcommittee. And it's never been reported out of the subcommittee. And the reason it hasn't been reported out of the subcommittee is because we're waiting for the information from the city solicitor's office.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to table subcommittee reports for the next meeting, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I think, and I don't want to speak for my colleague, but I think what he was asking was if the paper for $740,000 was amended or the police supervisor position was sliced out, I don't think you'd get much pushback from this council. I think we all understand that there's a need for that, Um, the question is whether or not we want to support a supplemental budget for 740 K. Um, and there are some items in there that, um, some of us have concern over and some items in there that some of us, um, uh, some items that aren't in there that some of us have, um, but I think all of us behind this rail would be supportive of a standalone paper to amend the supplemental budget. Um, so that we didn't have to go through the process of using the existing funds in the police budget. so that we can use those funds to hire the dispatchers that we so need. We want to hire this police dispatch supervisor, a dispatch center supervisor, so that they can perform in-house training. If we can't get the training done at the state level, we need to get it done somewhere. They need to keep their continuing ed certifications up. We've heard from Lieutenant Rudolph saying that, you know, there's really no one that's in either department that's qualified to perform the functions of training. So I'm just trying to clarify, Zach, I think that's what you were getting at, right? Is that if you give us a paper that's for the, you know, whatever it is, $100,000 or whatever that line item was, I don't think the council will stand in the way of that. Um, that still leaves the argument relative to the other items that the council has been discussing and the other items that are on that paper. Um, however, you know, I think it'll address the issue of the nine one one call center supervisor, uh, in relatively short order.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. The mayor said something relative to the supplemental budget and how if it's not passed this evening, then it dies and the money would revert to free cash come the next fiscal year. Is there anybody from the administration that can speak to the impact that this will have on our levy limit, our new growth? for the upcoming fiscal year?
[Adam Knight]: So it wouldn't apply to the levy limit for the next fiscal year?
[Adam Knight]: And is any of this money applying to new growth for the next fiscal year?
[Adam Knight]: and the benefit of increasing the city budget is because it would allow you to have an increased levy limit next fiscal year?
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Mr. President. Just one second, Michael, if I can. But what I'm saying is if the budget is amended, the levy limit is based upon the previous year's budget, correct?
[Adam Knight]: How much money we were able to generate? How much money we spent?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: I just have one quick question before you pass it off, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I just heard if Monogram Foods comes here as opposed to is Monogram Foods coming here or is it contingent upon whether or not we give them this tax incremented financing? I mean I'd hate to see us pass it and have them shopping around from city to city to city and then say wherever they get the best deal they're gonna go but we're making a commitment to them is there a commitment back you know I mean that this is where they want to be or is this a shopping spree?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. It appears to me that this would be what's classified as a bakery wholesaler. Am I correct in making that assumption?
[Adam Knight]: And in this Commonwealth of Massachusetts, I do believe that. Because you'd be considered a bakery wholesaler and you'd be subject to USDA approval and inspection, you wouldn't be subject to the authority of the local board of health, is that correct?
[Adam Knight]: Okay. And we talked a little bit about the jobs that Monogram's going to bring. And I'm relatively familiar with Monogram Foods from my day job working in the insurance industry. And I understand a lot of these positions are packaging jobs and manufacturing almost type jobs? Yes. And then you'd have also a smaller array of positions that were mid to upper level management and then you'd have some drivers?
[Adam Knight]: And is there any local hiring preference that's part of the TIF? I'm sorry, any local- Local hiring, if you're located in Medford and you have two applicants, and one of them's from Medford and one of them's from Everett. Does the Medford person get the job? Is there a local hiring preference?
[Adam Knight]: There is. Awesome. Awesome. Great. Thanks, Dave. It's in there. OK. Well. I personally have supported tips in the past. I think that it's a great way to jumpstart our economy and bring jobs to the community. The jobs that pay $20 an hour, the jobs that pay $800 a week. Those aren't necessarily the jobs I'm crazy about. I'd like to see jobs that pay a living wage so the people that work here can live here. And that hiring preference isn't going to go too far if the people working there are going to make 800 bucks a week. With that being said, there are other positions and other jobs and other benefits that come with having an employer of this size in the community. But I would agree with Councilor Marks. In the past when we've done this, we've taken a slow and deliberate approach to be sure that we don't all arise cross LRTs and also listen to the concerns that the residents have. In looking at the location of this facility, it's, I believe, located in an industrially zoned district. a wholesale bakery can be stationed there by right. The option, the ability for the council to bring this entity to the table right now is purely based around this TIF. So I think it would be a good exercise for us to allow the opportunity to entertain Councilor Mark's motion, and I would second it or support it if he offers it. And move from there, but this is something that historically I've supported, and I certainly see no problem with it based upon the preliminary presentation that's been made, but I would like to hear from the residents as well.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Over the course of what's been about two summers now, two and a half years now, I've been working with National Grid to get the level two gas leaks repaired. They would be right on Boston Ave, right around the corner of Harvard Canal, right in that stretch. And I've been getting a lot of complaints, Mr. President, from residents in the neighborhood when I'm out down the park walking and the like, that the condition of the roadway is so poor, Coupled with the gas leaks, the people are very concerned. Their houses are shaking when trucks are coming down off Route 16, down Boston Ave to Route 60. And I'm hoping that we can provide these residents with some relief from the heavy trucking and the noise and impact that it's having on their quality of life and the foundations of their homes. Through no fault of their own, but for the fault of the fact that our public utilities repair our roadways terrible. and that street maintenance is not the greatest, Mr. President. So with that being said, I'm asking that my council colleagues support this resolution to request that no trucking be posted or implemented along that stretch of the roadway until such times as these infrastructure and public utility problems can be addressed.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, this was brought to my attention through a very famous resident on Mystic Street, one of Councilor Caraviello's neighbors, a gentleman who's very involved in a number of issues in the community, whether it be the Chevalier Organ Society, or Trees for Medford, or the Shepard Brooks Estates, and the like, Mr. President. But Mr. Krause sent an email out identifying this tool that Google's put out, allowing communities to use Google's mapping technology to determine what areas in their community could benefit from more tree cover and tree canopy to address the issues of urban heat and the like. So with that being said, Mr. President, I thought it was a very good idea and a very good opportunity for the city of Medford to implement some technology that we haven't had in the past and for us to move forward in addressing some of these concerns that we have over the degradation of our tree canopy. So with that being said, I'd ask my council colleagues to support the paper and move approved.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I will withdraw paper 20652 as the matter is scheduled for a committee of the whole tomorrow evening. Mr. President, I will withdraw paper 20653 as the paper is scheduled for a committee of the whole tomorrow evening.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I believe it's the sponsor.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. I'd just ask that Lieutenant Rudolph be invited to the meeting as well. I thought he did a great job. when it came down to explaining the need for the position. He talked a lot about cost savings measures in terms of internal training and the like. I thought his presentation was great. I thought his presentation was far better than the emails that I've received over the course of the week since that presentation closed, Mr. President. This is a position I support. I think it's a position we all support. And I'm a firm believer that there's a couple ways we can go about this. We can go about carving this piece right out. If that's the case, if it's such a public safety emergency, they can carve this piece out of the paper that's before us and on the table and present it to us separately, individually. When we think about the paper that's before us for $740,000 and you look at it, $200,000 of those dollars is money for a facility's operations account. And $300,000 of those dollars are to fund union contracts. So that's more than three-quarters of the payable that are made up of funds that aren't funding positions, but funding things, Mr. President. Not people, but things. So with that being said, I certainly understand the need to get this done before we set the tax rate. And I certainly feel as though there is room for compromise. I think that the chief of staff made a decent attempt at it, but without the buy-in from his boss, it was very difficult for him to commit to it. And I certainly would support moving forward in that regard, where we reduce the facility's management account by $100,000 and set that money aside to fund an elections coordinator position. I also said last meeting that I'm not too crazy about Robin Peter to pay Paul. And that the administrative assessor, the facilities management positions are positions that we've asked for. This council's requested in the past, and we're getting something we're looking for. So with that being said, Mr. President, I certainly would move forward and support the resolution to have a meeting discussing the public safety concerns down there. But I'd ask that Lieutenant Rudolph be invited to attend as well, because he gave such a great presentation last time that I don't want that to get lost.
[Adam Knight]: Well, the paper says to invite the two chiefs of police and I'd like to add him. So that's making that request.
[Adam Knight]: But to Councilor Bears' point, if in fact, you know, we have the paper, the paper's been tabled, right?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I echo my colleague's statements and sentiments to understand how important this is to the city of Medford and the region is amazing. To have our congressperson as the assistant speaker of the house means that we're going to have direct access to a variety of funds and resources that the federal government is able to provide. And we're going to be able to do so through our congressperson because we all understand how important seniority and leadership roles play in the United States House of Representatives. So with that being said, it's very good to see Catherine Clark be nominated to such a position. She earned it on her merits. She's done a great job since she's been elected, replacing Senator Markey at the time, I believe, right? And since that time, she's done an excellent job. So with that being said, Mr. President, I echo my council colleagues' sentiments and I move for approval of the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, before the vote is called. Councilor Knight. If we could send correspondence to the Congressperson recognizing that we recognize her achievement.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. Now this is the same facility that when COVID-19 broke out, we had an inordinate number of deaths at, correct?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, so it doesn't apply. They own both of them. So it seems to me like, you know, we have a... this facility in our community that's designed to help people when they're sick. And they're not paying too much attention to that. And actually they're putting our community in danger at this point. They're not paying attention to the COVID-19 guidelines and now they're housing, you know, an inordinate number of sex offenders here in our community. It seems to me like we might want to do a little bit of a review to see if this is someone that we want to be doing business with in this community and whether or not we want to still see them as a permanent entity here in Medford.
[Adam Knight]: It's also often that this council requests updates from the administration and the updates from the administration come in the form of someone appearing before the council, which is all well and good. I don't think any of us have a problem with that. But there's also the black and white response on a piece of paper. Which is very nice to have as well, Mr. President, because if we're asking for updates on certain programs or measurables, we have it in writing. And then we can look at the old update and the new update and see how far we've come. And I think that that's something that's been lacking. So moving forward, I think it will be very important for us when we ask for updates from the administration that we get those updates in writing. First and foremost, if the administration wants to come and appear before the council and be on the big screen here, that's okay, too. But I think that getting it in writing is probably more important than anything else at this point, Mr. President, so that we can have a file on a topic as opposed to going back and watching old meetings. When was that meeting again? Oh, let's go back. How many minutes into it was it? Oh, it was 17 minutes and 22 seconds. Okay, hit start. Let's see where we were from the last time we were here versus the update that we can have in writing and put in the file. So I think that's very important, Mr. President, moving forward. make that request that the administration provide updates to the council in that fashion.
[Adam Knight]: I will make it a B paper.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Jackie.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. On the motion.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, Mr. Vice President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This paper was before us last week, and it's a paper that looks to increase the fiscal year budget by $740,000 to fund union contracts, early retirement incentives, and various other services and positions. Over the course of the last week, as this matter was tabled, we did receive some documentation from the administration, job descriptions and the like. With that being said, I'd like to have the paper brought to the table for a further presentation by the administration, and hopefully a vote for this.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think the chief of staff is looking for 90 days to finalize the job description, have a meaningful conversation, and come to a final point. May it make sense for us, because there are other positions that are associated with this that I feel are important, like the 911 supervisor, Mr. President. I feel like it's a very important position. And I'd hate to see the 911 supervisor position go unfunded for an extended period of time because we're having a dispute. about a position that's not on the paper before us. We all have our thoughts and our concerns about the registrar of voters' recommendation or opinion as to whether or not this position is needed, number one, what their thoughts are on it. Number two, is this position going to be a bargaining unit position? Is this position going to have supervisory authority over the staff in the voter registration office? These are some questions that need to be hashed out. So I'd offer that we give the administration 45 days to finalize the job description, convene with the registrar of voters, and report back to the council. And we can move forward on the paper that's before us this evening. There are some items on the paper before us this evening that I'm not crazy about, Mr. President. I'll be honest with you. But there are some things in the paper before us this evening that I feel are important. And the facilities manager and the administrative assessor and the 911 supervisor are three positions that we have job descriptions for that I think are a critical need in this community. So I think that there's room for compromise and the ability for us to compromise on this. I just don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. because we do have three positions that we do need to fund. And I also don't want to see the money disappear. So with that being said, I rest my case. But I think that, you know, there has to be some middle ground and some compromise that we can reach here in order for us to move the ball forward on the elections coordinated position, but at the same time address some of the needs that this council has requested and voted for in the past. So with that being said, I can appreciate where everybody's coming from. However, I do have concern about that 911 supervisor's position in particular.
[Adam Knight]: No, no, I was just getting ready to call the roll. I'm the third one, you know, so I hit my mic.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to revert back to the regular order of business, Mr. President. Second.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'm very familiar with this portion of the city, this area. Is this gas main going to be connecting to that construction project on Medford Street? Is that what 87 Medford Street is, that big building that they just built there on the border? Yeah. It is. OK. And forgive me if I missed it. How long is the construction going to take for this 532 feet?
[Adam Knight]: Two weeks. And when is the construction going to be performed during the day, during the night?
[Adam Knight]: Tim?
[Adam Knight]: Is it possible we could just have a pre-construction meeting with the abutters on the roadway before the work begins? Yep. Excellent. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. In addition to Leo's role in Democratic politics here in the city of Medford, he was also a great family man, a great husband, lived on Jackson Road for a long time. And I can first remember meeting Leo as a young kid, first getting involved in politics, working for Senator Shannon. And Leo pulled me aside down at the West Medford Spa and talking to me about Various issues going on in the community. So I remember Leo running for office. I remember Leo chairing the Wood Six Democratic City Committee. But most of all, I remember Leo being someone who genuinely cared for people and went out of his way to give a kind word, to help out people in the neighborhood. And just as a young kid, to give me a pat on the back and tell me to keep doing what I was doing. So it was very motivating, Mr. President. He's going to be sorely missed, and I'm sad to see him go. So with that being said, I echo Councilor Caraviello's condolences.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. This was a review of some of the ordinances that we've been. Working on, we went through a number of items on the agenda that were outstanding and have prioritized those items. We will be reconvening next month to go over them. There are a couple of items that we were discussing. Extended illness leave bank for city and school department employees. $15 minimum wage for city and school department employees. Councilor Marks's small cell tower ordinance was something that actually came up in the discussions as well. And I'm missing something here, I'm leaving one out. Councilor Morell, help me.
[Adam Knight]: Short term rentals, that's exactly what it was. She sponsored that so I was throwing it out there. So Mr. President, we made some great progress and we've developed an action plan. We've prioritized the papers and we're going to be moving forward hopefully to a committee of the whole with a work product for us all to review and be proud of.
[Adam Knight]: Long and in order, Mr. President. Move approval. Second.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I offer this paper this evening to suspend the rules so that we can take up paper 20559, paper 20634, and 20635, relative to the finances of the city of Medford and appropriations thereof.
[Adam Knight]: OK, 634, 635.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, this was a paper that the council had kicked around for some time during our budget debates. We talked about how it would be a good idea for us to get quarterly updates as to where we were in terms of our financial stability, our projections, and whether or not we're meeting, exceeding, and the like, Mr. President. So I had the opportunity to speak with our finance director this afternoon, and she is prepared to join us this evening and present us with a presentation where we stand three months into the fiscal year after the passage of our budget at the close of the month of June.
[Adam Knight]: I defer to you, Mr. President. Either way, I'm satisfied with that. I'm very happy with what I'm hearing, Mr. President. So maybe we can move on.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And through you to Ms. Nunley, that was an excellent presentation. And it's very encouraging to hear what we're hearing in terms of the financial picture. So this year's fiscal year budget relies on about a $5.5 million free cash appropriation to balance the budget. And based upon what I'm seeing now, we are achieving about, what, $2.5 million of an increase in state aid from what we budgeted for, if that's correct, Ms. Nunley?
[Adam Knight]: So that takes up about half of that structural deficit that we budgeted with the $5.5 million for free cash appropriation?
[Adam Knight]: OK. And looking at moving forward based upon these projections, do you think that we're going to be on pace to eliminate that structural deficit with our receipts?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you. I'd like to just amend the paper and request that we receive a copy of the Warren Articles from January to date and monthly thereafter. The Warren Articles are where we spend our money, the bills, and how we paid for them. So I'd like to add that in the form of an amendment, Mr. President, or a motion to amend the paper if we want to move forward on it. But it sounds like we have an update on the HVAC system and a copy of the Warren articles from January to date and monthly thereafter as amendments to paper 20559. We have a lot of discussion, a lot of talk about the other two papers that are on the table, and those are the money papers, Mr. President. I'm very satisfied with the presentation that we got this evening, so I'm going to be bold and suggest that we take this paper to a vote and we move on to the money papers.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe that document does exist and then recently we also asked for a report on whether or not we're using outside council to negotiate salaries, negotiate contracts. We got a response to that as well, I believe. So we've gotten a couple of responses. I mean, I think it might even warrant a committee of the home, Mr. President, if that's the case, you know what I mean? So we can all get on the same page. I'd certainly be willing to entertain that as well.
[Adam Knight]: Speak to that.
[Adam Knight]: An item of this much severity, I just would like a brief presentation from the finance director, Mr. President. We're taking a vote. We took a $5.5 million vote some months back and we're taking a vote now for 700K. So I think it would make sense to get at least a presentation to bring us full circle.
[Adam Knight]: So this 703,000 represents the $703,000 in new growth that is above and beyond the forecasted estimate at the close of the last fiscal year?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. President. Through you to the Chief of Staff. So if I'm understanding this correctly, We're asking for a $200,000 appropriation to go into the negotiated salaries account.
[Adam Knight]: That funding would or would not be subject to further appropriation after the contract is settled?
[Adam Knight]: Because the past practice has always been that the administration negotiates the contract. They provide us with the opportunity to vote on the compensation package and fund the contract at that time. So this seems to be a little bit different than that. Is that safe to say?
[Adam Knight]: In looking at this, I certainly agree with my colleagues in their positions. I have concerns over the $300,000 in union contracts and only retirement incentives. I also have a concern over the $200,000 in facility maintenance budget. That's $500,000 of a $740,000 paper. But there is one item that I look at, Mr. President, on this list, and that's the 911 supervisor. And this is a position that's my understanding was created out of need and necessity. So I'm wondering if there's anybody available from the administration to talk a little bit about this expense, if a job description does exist for it, so on and so forth. I know that as we've been transitioning from professional to civilian dispatches, we've had some bumps in the road. a need for us to revisit this, then we should. When this council moved to support a move to civilian dispatching, we did so as a cost savings measure. But we don't want those cost savings measures to get in the way of public safety. So with that being said, Mr. President, for a $70,000 appropriation salary expense on this, I'm hoping that the administration has a type of job description. And the reason I say that is because there was somebody that was already doing this work before. It went to civilian dispatch. So if there's anybody available that could speak to this, I think that that might be very helpful for us in preparing. I mean, the paper is going to get laid on the table no matter what. So it's not going to be voted on this evening. But if there's someone here that can provide us with some of that information, I think that'd be very helpful.
[Adam Knight]: I just want to thank you, Lieutenant, for that presentation. I think that that made me feel very confident and comfortable. Moving forward, when I do take a vote on this paper, that that's something that I will be supporting. So thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to waive the reading and reconvene the hearing.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Mr. President? I don't think anybody behind this rail cares how much it costs because once you guys pack up your trucks and put your shovels in your car and you drive away, we're stuck with the mess. So we don't really, I don't think anybody back here cares what it's going to cost National Grid.
[Adam Knight]: What this sounds like to me, Mr. President, is almost, you know, the street opening permit gets issued and the street gets ripped up and there's an obligation to restore the street to its previous condition, right? And if we have one entity that's gonna do that and pay for it, there's two utilities that are involved, MWRA and National Grid. Well, the obligation is to restore it to what it was. So it's almost like a double recovery, right? We're getting paid for the same scope of work twice, but it's only getting done once. So I think that's what the preclusion is. We're getting paid double time. for the work that's being performed because one entity's responsible for it. The person that closes the street's responsible for that. So that money's getting spent by them. And that's going into the community to restore it back to that original condition. Anything above and beyond that, I think, would be like a double recovery on the impact of the mitigation, you know what I mean? On the impact of the assessment above and beyond their obligation. That's what it sounds like to me anyway. But I can understand what Councilor Marks is saying. We were given a paper here that says, approve it with these conditions and these conditions aren't being met. So I guess the question is, does the city engineer want us to approve it with the conditions that he's put forth aren't being met?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. President. So, Mr. President, what I'm hearing here is the city engineer saying Riverside Ave is a mess. Riverside Ave needs a new gas line. It's leaking everywhere and the city has been requested it for some time. I'm hearing Ms. Cuddy saying that this isn't a planned project. This is a project that we have to do. Most likely, they're holding their nose in doing it because the MWRA has an easement. And because of that, they're not willing to expend any extra dollars or resources in our community. That's the way that sounds to me, Mr. President. MWRA wants the work done and they have an easement, so now they're willing to do the work. The city was calling for the replacements of the gas mains due to the leaks, and they weren't willing to do the work. This was not a planned project. So I guess the question is, if the MWRA didn't want to do this work, would National Grid ever even be looking at replacing this gas line?
[Adam Knight]: Right, so we have a street that has multiple level 2 gas leaks on it, that we've all made phone calls on, that National Grid wasn't willing to fix, but now they will fix it because the MWRA needs access to their easement. We are getting some community benefit out of it, in my opinion, Mr. President, because if the project doesn't go forward, the gas main doesn't get fixed, right? So at the very least, we're getting the gas main fixed with the approval of the paper. But I commend the councilor in his position on this because This is something that we have all talked about, but most significantly, Councilor Marks, the level of the pavement on Riverside Ave with the sidewalk is something that, as long as I've been on the council, he's been talking about. And I don't blame him for pursuing. If he sees an opening, pursue it. Try to get through that crack and get that money. So I certainly have no problem with that. And I think that he's doing a great job advocating for the residents in that neighborhood. On the side of things, on the flip of the coin, we are getting 1,500 new feet of gas main that wasn't going to be replaced. And based upon the commentary of the city engineer, that gas main does need to be replaced. And it's full of leaks. And the city's been asking for it to be replaced. So it's a catch-22. It's a conundrum, Mr. President. That coupled with the fact that the grant of location for MWRA has already been issued. And they have an easement. They're replacing their pipes in the same location that they're granted to exist. So they're not going to have to come before this body again. But the people that are going to have to come before us are the National Grid. So I can see exactly why National Grid is on the hook for some of this. I'm of the inclination to support the paper just based upon the simple fact that the gas line wasn't going to be done ever in the foreseeable future. The city engineer has indicated that it's one that does need to be done. So that's going to be a benefit to the community. However, I will support my council colleague. this evening if he's looking for more information or the like. Just from my view of it, Mr. President, it feels as though this is a forced project, a project that's being forced on national grants. So they're not really willing to discuss anything because they don't have to. They have to move it. And then MWRA is coming in and MWRA already has the grant. So they're not really over a barrel.
[Adam Knight]: This question is for Ms. Cuddy, Mr. President, through you. Based upon what I've heard, it sounds like National Grids not willing to do anything extra because they don't have any rate payers to pass the cost off onto.
[Adam Knight]: Once we give you the permit, what leverage do we have to get everything?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, through you to Ms. Cuddy, does National Grid have a charitable division?
[Adam Knight]: Certainly, in lieu of this language, the city would be very willing and welcoming a donation equivalent to the amount of money that it would have cost for us to have that portion of the street resurfaced. And then those funds can be placed in the general fund and then appropriated whichever way we'd like to see them appropriated. So there is opportunity and options, it sounds like.
[Adam Knight]: When we built the park right across the street over here, National Grid gave us five grand.
[Adam Knight]: No. We asked, can you give us a donation to build a park? And they said, yep, here you go. Crystal Campbell Peace Garden, here's five grand. So now we're asking for a donation to build some sidewalks.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. So as I understand this, Mr. President, this is going to come straight across the street from my parking lot, cut a little bit through our parking lot underneath some bushes and trees, and then go right to the Harvard Vanguard building.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Would any of those items that the engineer needs to look at and discuss with the commissioner result in potentially further recommendations for conditions of approval?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Thank you. Perfect. Thanks Tim.
[Adam Knight]: Move approval, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if I may offer a B paper in relation to this, it's also related to sidewalk panels. Only this B paper is related to the sidewalk panels that would be located outside of the former Lawrence Memorial Hospital. Just this past week, we had a bit of work being done along that stretch of Lawrence Road between, let's say, Governor's Ave and Lawrence Road, right to the entrance, the old entrance to the emergency room, Mr. President. And they ripped up the sidewalk panels, and they did some work, and then they put sidewalk panels packed down. And we used to have nice gray concrete sidewalk panels, and now this asphalt cold patch. So I'd like to ask the question. to our friends at Lawrence Memorial Hospital as to whether or not this is a temporary or permanent patching. Because I certainly do not find it acceptable that they take out the concrete sidewalking, which quite frankly, there was nothing wrong with, and replace it with this asphalt sidewalking, Mr. President, that doesn't fit in with the character of the neighborhood. Well, actually, it does fit in with the character of the neighborhood. Actually, it doesn't, Mr. President. The reason it doesn't is because if you look directly across the street, At the bottom of Summit Road, you'll see seven sidewalk panels that are gone, that haven't been there for five months. All right, so on one side of the street, we're tearing up the entire side of the street that has a nice concrete sidewalk, and we're replacing it with black asphalt. And across the street, where we have a stump that needs to be taken down, the stump's been there for, I don't know, I think it was 11. Now the sidewalk's been ripped up, but the sidewalk hasn't been replaced. So on one side of the street, we're tearing it up and we're replacing it with an inferior product. But on the other side of the street, it's just being ignored, Mr. President. So I believe that's something that needs to be addressed in post haste. And I'd offer that in the form of a B paper, and I thank the council for bringing this measure forward.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the reason I offer the table is because Councilor Marks made a number of amendments when we took this paper up and those amendments still have not been integrated into the document.
[Adam Knight]: Are they referring to when Officer Brooks did traffic counsel there for the Thanksgiving weekend a couple of years ago, maybe?
[Adam Knight]: Is that the same process that they use, Councilor Marks, to put up all those pylons all around the city and what they did down in Tufts Square?
[Adam Knight]: 28th doesn't work for me, Mr. President, but I'd just like to ask that a robocall be made to all the residents of the streets for whatever date you do decide. The 28th is right after Thanksgiving. I'll be traveling.
[Adam Knight]: We're going to have neighborhood residents. We don't want to wake them up at six in the morning.
[Adam Knight]: Let's meet right in that area. I prefer to be right in that area. I think we might want to meet at John's house and he'll have b-boys for us.
[Adam Knight]: I think we have to be cautious. I think we have to be cautious. Um, if we have so many people from the traffic commission, then they'll reach a quorum.
[Adam Knight]: He's the head of the traffic commission.
[Adam Knight]: It's in the ordinance in the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Murray Hill.
[Adam Knight]: Twice, and it doesn't have Rockwell.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I thank the council for bringing this forward and there's another contributing factor to the dangerous intersection and that's our MBTA buses. at that location. And what happens is we'll have MBTA buses that come down. That's the terminus. That's the loop. So that's where now the route ends and starts right in front of the cemetery. And we'll see buses that come down and they stop on Winthrop Street right at the end of Place that Road, making it very difficult for cars. to come out of place that road, take a left or a left-hand turn to go down Route 38 into Winchester. So what you're seeing is a lot of cat and mouse. And we're also seeing a lot of these buses that sit there for 10, 15, 20 minutes idling. abutting the woods. So, you know, I think that's also a problem. And in the past, we've passed council resolutions asking them to not put the buses there, to move the buses to a different location, to line them up along, place that road if they're making the loop, but those have fallen on deaf ears, Mr. President. So that's not the contributing factor. So I'd like to ask that we ask the traffic commission to review the location where the bus stop is and make recommendations to see if that's something we should move. Okay.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Layton. Mr. President, much like the airplane noise, they're not going to listen to us. They need to listen to the residents. So with that being said, I got two words for you. Robocall. I think it might make sense for us to ask the administration to do a robocall alerting residents of this meeting. I know a lot of us have transitioned from working in the city and relying on public transit to working at home. But there's going to be a day where we all have to go back, and when we do have to go back, I think that we should have a quality service, the service that our assessments reflect. So with that being said, I'd ask that a robo-call be made as part of this paper.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor Ferris. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I certainly support the paper. However, if we think back to, oh, was it about a year ago where this council stood up and fought to ensure that Tufts University and the related construction crews were not staging materials on the field behind Nolwood Road in College Ave. That was a big point of contention when they wanted to create a whole staging area for the whole entire construction project over there. And as a compromise, Tufts University agreed to set up the staging areas where they have down closer to the end of College Avenue at the intersection of Boston Avenue, if I'm not mistaken, Mr. President. So I just want to be clear that a yes vote for this paper in no way, shape, or form changes my position that that field should not be used for a staging area. And I don't think that that's the will of this council either. I just want that to be very clear that the council isn't saying, hey, listen, I know you have all this land back there, so use it. Because we've specifically asked them in the past not to.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to take papers in the hands of the clerk.
[Adam Knight]: I know mine if you want me to read it off.
[Adam Knight]: It's offered by Councilor Marks and I, Mr. President. Okay. It's offered by Councilor Marks and I. It's a congratulatory resolution and it reads, be it herefore resolved the Medford City Council extend its deep and sincere congratulations on the momentous occasion of their 50th wedding anniversary to Ronald and Joanne Crotty of Playstead Road, Mr. President. And I'll defer to Councilor Marks for commentary as he's the senior member in both age and service.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Marks, that's a great presentation. Growing up in West Medford, you know, the Crotty's house was one of those houses as a kid you knew you could always go to. If you needed a drink of water, you were hungry, you had to go to the bathroom, you were late to go home, and you needed to use the phone to call your parents, the Crotty's had an open door policy. I remember fondly the days of playing stickball down at the Gleason School, and Mr. Crotty coming down, making sure we're all set, bringing us extra tennis balls and waters. Just a great family and I had the great privilege and pleasure of growing up with Jason and Janelle. I spent a lot of time in that house as a child. And to think back now, when I was ten years old, running around in that house some 30 years ago, they were married for 20 years. It's just amazing to me, Mr. President. think about now that I'm here married ten years. And they were already married 20 before I could even think about it. It's amazing. So I just want to wish Mr. and Mrs. Crotty the best of luck. Congratulate them on 50 years and wish them 50 more. And like Councilman Locke said, Marianne Howell is Mrs. Crotty's twin sister. They all go together. We lost her husband Tom a few years back and this council paid tribute. But with that being said, Mr. President, congratulations to Ron and Joanne on 50 years.
[Adam Knight]: Have a good night. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. I think it's also important to point out, Mr. President, that a lot of these people that drive these trucks are actually still in the trucks when they're parked. They're sleeping. They're sleeping. So they're long haul truckers that are delivering foodstuff and products across America. And when they find a nice place to park, they're going to park, and they're going to sleep, and they're going to catch their rest. And we want them all to be well rested, but at the same time, not at a detriment to the quality of life in our community. What Councilor Caraviello is saying is absolutely correct. We've seen an increase, an inordinate increase in the number of trucks that are parked on our public roadways, and it's something that needs to be addressed. Councilor Marks has always had a great idea, and that idea was the trucking unit with the police department. The command of the weight and the size of the trucks that are riding on our public streets, as well as do some enforcement issues like that. So I think that's something that we should revisit, but I thank the council for bringing this forward.
[Adam Knight]: Present.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if I may. I think it's important that we point out the good work that the Medford Mall, the 915 Elks does here in the community. When the city hall was being renovated, they donated their parking lot. Every flag day, they have a flag day celebration. Every Memorial Day, they help decorate the graves down at the cemetery. They do a great job decorating our war memorials here throughout the community as well. And the Elks actually gives out more scholarships nationwide than the federal government does, Mr. President. They're the largest private organization that issues college scholarships in the United States of America. But the Medford Mall and Elks have always been a great partner here in the city of Medford, and I thank them for the work that they do, and I will support this paper wholeheartedly.
[Adam Knight]: I also think it's important to point out, Mr. President, that this will allow the Elks to begin their function hall business again where they're not allowing entities to come into function halls and do buffets and stuff like that. The Elks will have the opportunity to begin renting out their function halls based upon the capacity requirements that have been established by the Board of Health and then offer their own food stuff there instead of having an outside entity come in to do that. So I think this is something that will help them with their business and their revenues during these trying times.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to waive the remainder of the reading. I believe the purpose section gave a good outline as to what this ordinance will do.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, a motion to adopt the additional comments for review as amendments to the paper. Second.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, is this a change of use or is this just a new business going in with the same use that's already existing?
[Adam Knight]: So you will not be doing the same type of work that Libby's Auto was doing?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, so yeah, just you're going to be, you're still selling pizzas, you're just selling it under a different name, right? Yes, yes, exactly. I have no problem with it, Mr. President, we'll approve.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I think it's important to point out that National Grid did submit this application in August. And we're just getting it now. Is there a plan to maintain any construction material or equipment along the public way during this project?
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, it's awful. We just had a project on High Street in Woburn where every weekend there were 50 or 60 cardboard boxes filled with yellow pipes sitting on the traffic island that one of the neighbors spends a lot of time maintaining. There was a bulldozer in front of a historic home in a historic district on the corner of Route 60 and Woburn Street, which is a difficult intersection, number one, and also a highly traveled thoroughfare. In the past, I've asked the city engineer if, in fact, materials or equipment were going to be stored in a public way that a community mitigation agreement be entered into with the provider in the city. So if you're parking a bulldozer in front of my house for six weeks, and I need a new sidewalk panel in my house, and you're doing asphalt work, why don't you replace that sidewalk panel in front of my house too? Mitigation issues. And as I look through this, grant a location application. conditions that are surrounding it. A lot of these, I think, are more focused on infrastructure stuff and less focused with community mitigation and community impacts that affect the neighborhood and quality of life. So I'd ask that no equipment or materials be stored on the public way. There's plenty of industrial zoned land down between Hall and Linden in that area that's privately owned that I believe that the public utility can secure to use as a layover or a layoff land. But I don't think we need to be using our public ways and our public roads for storage area, for materials and equipment, for projects. And I've said this consistently for a number of years. So that would be the request that I make, Mr. President. I certainly have no problem supporting Councilor Mark's resolution. If he has questions that need to be answered, then so be it. So with that being said, I would second his motion.
[Adam Knight]: It's like the price is right.
[Adam Knight]: Absent a community mitigation agreement.
[Adam Knight]: Point of clarification, Councilor, because I don't want to mislead.
[Adam Knight]: It should be noted that National Grid submitted two granted location petitions for the same scope of work with minor differences in routing. However, the two plans are largely the same. The engineering division confirmed with National Grid that the petition dated 8-20-2020 is the correct petition. The other petition received on 9-8-2020 was discarded. So it looks like there might have been some confusion with the plan design as well.
[Adam Knight]: What information council tonight? So as of Thursday, all students grades K through 6 will be returning to school underneath this hybrid model?
[Adam Knight]: So they'll be having two days in and two days out?
[Adam Knight]: Have we done an audit or conducted an assessment to ensure that we are meeting the requirements for hours of education and hours of personalized instruction?
[Adam Knight]: As a parent, Mr. Murphy, and I'm not trying to be critical because I know we're all trying to get through this and learn, but this hybrid model, I feel as though it's significantly lacking. I mean, I'm home with my child, doing the online portion of the education. And when they're on their self-directed learning days, I feel as though we could do more. I am very fortunate to probably have my son and one of the best teachers in the Medford Public Schools classroom, and he's been able to manage. As a parent, I'm very concerned about the direction that we're going in and our ability to provide a high quality education to our students here. Because I feel as though we're really missing the mark with this hybrid model. So the next question would leave me to ask with this hybrid model that we have in place. in these investments that we're making to our high school and our other schools. Moving forward, if the schools do open, the hybrid model is what we're going to see. We're not going to see full in-person learning from our students this year. Is that safe to say?
[Adam Knight]: And the public health guidance that we're working under versus, say, St. Raphael's or St. Joseph's is different?
[Adam Knight]: So based upon your presentation, I mean, listen, none of us know except for Councilor Marks, I think, because he went to the vocational school and he's a lot handier than I am. based upon my recent electrocution when I was trying to change a light bulb. With that being said, this assessment's going on. I don't think many of us here are too interested in seeing how many particles per minute are being pushed through a room. I think what we all want to know is when a school's going to open so that the high school kids can get back to the high school, so that we can have a full complement of learning in person for our students K through 12.
[Adam Knight]: We don't have a date certain. Do we have a goal, maybe, Mr. President? Is there a goal date or a defined period of time we're hoping to complete these assessments? A lot depends on these answers. A lot of people's lives are affected by these answers. A lot of people have child care issues that they need to resolve. A lot of people are paying money out of pocket that they weren't paying before for child care. So these are real life issues that affect people. So we're looking at the high school. It sounds like the high school is the biggest issue, right? The high school is the oldest building in the district. The high school is the building that needs the most work. Let's take the high school off the table. Let's look at the middle school. We have K-6 now, so we're looking at 7th and 8th grade to be the next age bracket that will be, I guess we'd say, let back in to school buildings.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. In terms of the two small grants, I have no problem with that. In terms of the $125,000 appropriation for rental assistance, this is something that I've supported in the past, but I think it was important to point out that initially this council didn't support this paper when it was first brought before us. And the reason this council didn't support this paper when it was first brought before us was because these funds were not going to be maintained exclusively in our community. Community Preservation Act funds are generated through an assessment on a property tax. And when this program was first presented to us, people were going to be eligible from all across the state, not just Medford only. And this council worked with ABCD to ensure that only Medford residents were going to be able to receive these funds. And because of that, if you look at the data that they've given us, you'll see that 35 applications have been approved. The aggregate amount requested is $101,679,000, the $102,000 that Councilor Morell was referring to. In reading this paper, you'll also see that 35 applications have been approved for residents that live in the city. 49 applications were rejected because those people were outside the service area. They didn't live in the community. So these restrictions that we put on this to keep these dollars in our community are paying off, Mr. President. They're allowing us to service more Medford residents in the community. and keep that money here. If we looked at the number of applications that came in and the number of applications that were kicked out because they weren't residents of the city of Medford, we'd see that this money would have been spent far faster. And these money, these are monies that are generated through property taxes. So these are monies that should maintain a space right here in this community and go no further than the walls of Medford or the borders of Medford, Mr. President. I think it's very important that we point that out, that the council did its due diligence the last time this paper was before us, and put some safeguards and protections in. And I would assume that these safeguards and protections would extend to the second appropriation, and I'd like to get that commitment from ABCD. And I'd also like to include that as a condition on the paper, should it be approved this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Excellent. Thank you very much. Music to my ears, as they say. I'm also looking at this report that was given. It says 35 households which have completed active applications. The aggregate amount requested is $101,679. The aggregate amount requested. This amount has been appropriated. Is that correct? It sounded like you confirmed that with Councilor Morell's questions?
[Adam Knight]: So the money's expended, gone, no longer in the bank.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. All right, so yeah, and looking at this, Mr. President, you know, addresses my concerns and my questions. It looks like, you know, the safeguards that we put in place are helping us meet the objectives of the program, and I wholeheartedly support the paper this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Do you want to make that as an amendment? Or a condition of appropriation.
[Adam Knight]: Then I also had a question how much money do we have in the CPA housing reserve presently and I do believe last time the CPA was before us for this paper They were seeking us to appropriate 50% of the total at that point in time, so I'm just seeing where we are in terms of I think last time we were at about 550,000 Yeah, about $500,000 in the CPA trust fund when they came for the $250,000 appropriation. We took that $250,000 appropriation and we turned it into $125,000 appropriation. So I guess the question is how much money remains in that? Roberta, would you be able to answer that question?
[Adam Knight]: Hold on. Let me start with that because that confused me for a second. So there's $250,000 in the housing reserve that's planned to be used for housing. All the money in the housing reserve is used for housing, right?
[Adam Knight]: I think what you were saying is we have $250,000 there. There's more money that we can put towards housing through other vehicles.
[Adam Knight]: And that money was transferred from the general fund, right?
[Adam Knight]: Whoa, whoa, whoa.
[Adam Knight]: That money that got transferred into the housing reserve was money from the general bucket that we... Yes, from the general bucket.
[Adam Knight]: How much money do we have in the bucket, in the affordable housing bucket?
[Adam Knight]: Category, bucket, account, whatever you want to call it.
[Adam Knight]: And- And then those buckets don't get appropriate, those buckets don't get filled until the council makes the appropriation to spread the money out across them, correct? Do we do that annually usually? for compliance purposes. OK. All right. So there's $375,000 in there right now. Of that $375,000, 2 thirds of it is dedicated to housing. Or is it?
[Adam Knight]: Right. And 2 thirds of that is, I'm sorry, 1 third of that is dedicated to this project. this program as of right now.
[Adam Knight]: Pretty sure 125 Is a third of 375, but we're not going to get into a math dispute over here. All right, so ultimately, we have some money in the account still. Six and one half a dozen, the other one, me, Mr. President, I think the program's doing well. Like Councilor Mark said, I'm not looking to hold a nickel back from this project. or this program, I think it's doing well. I can support it tonight in its full funding, or I can support it tonight in half funding. If the intent is to maintain a close and watchful eye on the funds as the board of directors of this community, then so be it. I'll support the resolution as amended that Councilor Marks put forward, if that's the direction that we want to go in. Like I said, Mr. President, they're going to come back before us again. They're going to put another report before us. The report's either going to show that they're making strides or they're not. at which time we can reassess the situation. So I see no harm in erring on the side of caution.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. Through these Community Preservation Act funds, do we not fund a Community Preservation Act administrator to perform these administrative functions?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. It's a bird.
[Adam Knight]: I don't want to go off on a tangent, but so what I'm hearing is when the council takes a vote to appropriate funds, those funds don't get appropriated until all at once. Or is this a situation where it's a monitoring of the grant agreement to ensure that there's compliance?
[Adam Knight]: And you can just say the first or the latter, the former or the latter. I mean, I'm not looking for a dissertation, but from the way I just heard it was that the council takes a vote, they vote to expend $125,000, then it goes into an office and the office only gives them 50 or 80 or 70. That's not what the council voted for. I'm assuming that the reason why all the money's not released is because you wanted to monitor the grant for compliance, but that's not really what I heard. So I just wanted a confirmation on that.
[Adam Knight]: By way of prior deliberation on a similar matter, we've always voted for each item individually for a CPA grant request. If you recall, there was an item before us where they wanted to fund a master plan for the DCR with no commitment for further construction. So we were going to put the upfront cost up to do the design and study for some sort of walking and there was no commitment from the state thereafter. So we said, why are we putting our money up for a plan that we don't know if we're going to get funding for? So we've approved a bunch of appropriations out of the CPA, but we didn't approve that one. So we've always taken them up as well.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Last week we received a correspondence from the administration relative to a complaint that was filed concerning the public bid for our zoning consultant. And I took an opportunity to read that document and it said that it was a dynamic and ongoing process and that the administration was doing their best to stay ahead of it and to keep the parties informed as to what was going on. in terms of the nature of the complaint, so on and so forth, and the investigating authority. With that being said, Mr. President, I think it would make sense for this council to meet to be provided with an update from the administration relative to the nature of the complaint, as well as what steps are being taken to ensure that the council is protected, and what impact this may have on our ability to continue working with Mr. Bobrowski.
[Adam Knight]: And- I think that would be helpful, because we need to have the administration give us the update.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, I don't want to, I don't know who's working on it. We have 27 lawyers from KP Law that represent us now. They might want to bring somebody in. I don't know who's going to be handling it. My preference would be the chief of staff and the city solicitor, Mr. President. However, the administration is the one that's going to be running point on this. So I would hope that they provide us with the appropriate person that can answer the right questions.
[Adam Knight]: Second the motion.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Last week, we had a paper before us requesting appropriations from ride share revenues that the city has generated. And these ride share revenues are used to improve markings and signage in the community. If you look at Winthrop Street at Memorial Park between the hat shell right by the community gardens. and the field, you'll see that there's a crosswalk there. And there's been a number of years of discussion concerning the Winthrop Street-South Street intersection and the ability to cross Winthrop Street at that location. And studies have shown that because of the sight lines and the gradient, that that's not a place where they can put a working crosswalk with a red light, Mr. President. But I don't think anything would preclude us from being able to put some flashing beacons that would say that there is a crosswalk ahead and for people to be aware of pedestrians crossing the street in the area. So with that being said, I'd ask for approval of the paper, and I'd ask my council colleagues to support it.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. I'm sorry, Mr. President. And the associated cost of something like this, based upon the paper that was before us, is less than $3,000. Councilor Bears.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Leif. Mr. President, thank you very much. I'm hoping the councilor wouldn't mind me amending this paper to add a tree stump to it. And this is a tree stump that is on Lawrence Road, located between Summit and Terrace. It's directly across from the old entrance to the Lawrence Memorial Hospital's emergency room, Mr. President. And this tree stump is enormous. But what's troubling is that the city has removed five sidewalk panels and not replaced them for a period of about four months now. So while the residents are waiting for the stump grinder or stump dumper or whatever you want to call them to get out there and get rid of the stump, the sidewalk has been torn up and the sidewalk has not been replaced. So that sidewalk, a stretch of about four sidewalk panels, Mr. President, which would be about. I think each sidewalk panel is three feet long. So we're looking at anywhere between 12 feet of sidewalk that's just asphalt. Not even asphalt, just dirt, all broken up. So with that being said, I'd just like to amend the paper to include that as a priority stump to be removed and sidewalk replaced.
[Adam Knight]: I just like to amend the paper, Mr. President, to add a couple of items. Councilor Caraviello is absolutely right. That traffic island that was recently installed has been damaged. And if we take a ride further down, the street, and we come to Placelet Road and High Street, we'll see that we have a number of reflector beacons that cross the train tracks and provide warning that the train tracks are there that are damaged, Mr. President. So the reflector beacons at the railroad crossing between Placelet Road and Harvard, as well as the reflector beacons at the railroad crossing at Prescott and Canal need to be repaired. And I'd like to add this to that paper, provided my council colleague has no issue.
[Adam Knight]: High street between place that in Harvard and canal between Prescott and the railroad crossing.
[Adam Knight]: I just want to commend Councilor Bears on conducting a great meeting. I was very impressed at the way he held the meeting, how he handled it. But I'm also more impressed with the fact that he actually had representatives from the DPW here present in the council chambers to address some of the concerns. I've always been a firm believer that if we're going to get things done, we have to get in the same room and roll up our sleeves. And I was very impressed that Councilor Bears took the steps to allow these individuals here in the community to come before the council subcommittee and address some of their concerns and help out. So I'd like to thank him for that and move approval of the paper.
[Adam Knight]: City employees. City Hall is open to city employees, right?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And I'd like to extend my condolences to the Tinello family as well. Mrs. Tinello, 95 years young at the day of her passing. a great mother, role model, grandmother. I've had the good fortune of being friendly with her grandson, Jeffrey, and granddaughter, Alicia, for a number of years. Over the years, I've also gotten to meet her sons, Mark and Joe. We all know Ellen Tonello from the library. The Tonellos are very involved in the city of Medford. I believe they've lived here since prior to 1930. The family goes back to prior to 1930 in the city of Medford, Mr. President. Grew up on Linden Street, lived right down on Linden Street near the old drive-in. And a little funny family story was that they lived so close to the drive-in movie theater that the drive-in gave them one of the radios. cause they could see all the movies from their kitchen. So they had one of the radios, they could actually listen to the movies too in their house. But, you know, Mrs. Tonello was a aunt to my good friend, Frank and Jack DePaola. Frankie and Jackie share that story all the time and she's going to be greatly missed. To Mark and Joe and the rest of the family, my deepest condolences and I hope my council colleagues can join us.
[Adam Knight]: far more important. It's Councilor Scott Peli's birthday. And we forgot until the 11th hour, right before it was almost over.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. As we're all aware, I think that it's safe to say the streets in the city of Medford are in some pretty bad condition, probably the worst we've seen in a bit of time. And with that being said, we have to start somewhere, Mr. President, to determine how we're going to address the road surfaces in this community, the streets, the roads. And in looking at certain areas in the community, I feel as though there are thoroughfares that are labeled emergency thoroughfares. I think the meeting before this, they talked a lot about priority sidewalks and emergency roadways and connectivity. And I think it's very important, Mr. President, that we look at our emergency arteries as the main roadways here in the community. The stretch of Boston Avenue being one of those emergency arteries. And looking at what it's going to cost and what we need to do to begin to get a roadway resurfacing plan in place, Mr. President. So I bring this paper forward to start a discussion. about what it's going to take and what it's going to cost for us to start providing services in the form of local services, like sidewalks, streets, stumps, tree removal, and the like, Mr. President. So with that being said, I offer this resolution. I ask my council colleagues to support it.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to adopt. the provisions of general law chapter 64 and section three and impose a local excise tax on the sale or transfer of marijuana products for adult use to anyone other than a marijuana establishment at a rate of 3%, Mr. President. Second.
[Adam Knight]: I did, Mr. President. I do believe that this council during budget time requested that we'd have a quarterly meeting relative to where we were with forecasts and receipts. And then the council did vote on a resolution asking that this meeting take place relative to the state of the city's finances for the second Tuesday in October. That never happened. And here we are this evening with a request for appropriation before us, Mr. President. So, you know, I know that these funds are through the surcharges around those Uber and Lyft rides that originate in the community. And looking at the appendix that's attached, I certainly see no issue with the appropriations. I'd like to see them maybe distributed a little bit more equitably across the community. However, I feel as though it's important, Mr. President, that we sit down and schedule a time for us to talk about the state of our finances here in this community. During the budget, we were talking about a fiscal crisis. We took $5.5 million from our reserves and we appropriated that much money from our reserves to balance the budget. The question is, are we doing better now? Do we have the ability to restore some of those funds back to our reserves if our forecasts are showing that our receipts are up well above anticipated returns? So Mr. President, it was very important. discussion that took place during the budget, and this was one of the items that came out of that, was that we'd meet quarterly to determine what the current and ongoing state of fiscal affairs is in this community. And that needs to happen, Mr. President. And we have a paper before us asking us to appropriate $136,000, but we still haven't had that meeting to recap the last quarter. So that's concerning to me, Mr. President, and I'm hoping that the finance director would be able to coordinate with you. to determine a time where we'll be able to do that before the next quarter is over. So with that being said, here we are almost one month into the next quarter, Mr. President. So we're going to get a skewed perspective of what's going on if we don't meet as close to the close of the quarter as possible. So I'd ask that that meeting be scheduled.
[Adam Knight]: I did want it during the regular session, yes, Mr. President. If this was a free cash appropriation, I'd be much more concerned about taking a vote this evening on it, but where it's coming from a dedicated accountant that has a dedicated purpose, that's another thing. So that being said, Mr. President, this will be the last money paper I vote on until we have that quarterly meeting. So with that being said, Mr. President, I rest my case.
[Adam Knight]: Move approval, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. It's with a heavy heart that I offer this resolution this evening, offering condolences to the family of William J. Gay on his recent passing. Mr. Gay was a long time resident down on Elmhurst Street. World War II veteran and a proud father, grandfather, and husband, Mr. President. And he was recently called to his maker. And I'd like to extend my deep and sincere condolences to the Gay family. And I'd like to ask my council colleagues to join me in offering such.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President. Noah started this, and you gotta keep in mind now, Noah's what, 20 years old?
[Adam Knight]: Three, four years ago, he started this mission where he began collecting World War II artifacts, World War II uniforms and the like. And that morphed into this veteran's preservation project where Noah goes, all across Massachusetts, all across New England, showing off his wares at various town hall meetings, veterans meetings. Along with the artifacts that he has, he also has many stories that go along with it. And it's just very impressive, Mr. President, that a kid at such a young age has shown such a commitment. to furthering the memory of veterans here in Massachusetts, in Medford, and beyond. So with that being said, Mr. President, I do think it might make sense for us to invite Noah down and honor him with a citation based upon the success of the Veterans Preservation Project. And I'd offer that in full of a motion.
[Adam Knight]: Can the petitioner please, Mr. President, describe how many employees he's going to have working for him?
[Adam Knight]: You'll have to carry insurance if you're going to be having employees. And I find it hard to believe you wouldn't have any employees if you were going to be open 15 hours a day.
[Adam Knight]: I missed that.
[Adam Knight]: It's required, and if he doesn't, he's going to be subject to fine.
[Adam Knight]: No, on the grounds he doesn't have insurance, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President, I do believe it was three or four weeks ago that this council passed a resolution. And that resolution was to request that the Director of Finance appear before this body to meet with us to talk about the first quarter and what our revenues look like and future projections, Mr. President. And these papers are of similar matter in content and subject matter, and I was wondering if the Finance Director was available with us this evening.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like you to appear before the council to talk to us about the projections and the revenue forecasts and where we are in terms of this time last year and what our financial picture looks like, Mr. President. This was something we talked about where we requested that you appear before us quarterly back when the budget was going on. That was a part of the budget papers. When we discussed and deliberated the budget, we requested that we get quarterly updates on the revenue projections. The first quarter has ended and it's time.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to waive the reading for a brief synopsis. This matter has been on the agenda now for three consecutive weeks.
[Adam Knight]: Second.
[Adam Knight]: Certainly, Mr. President. The paper before us this evening- We can vote on it.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. This is a companion paper to the zoning amendment that the council just passed recently. What it is is it's a paper that would establish a selection committee for applicants for marijuana licenses in the city of Medford as required by state law and by the will of the voters here in the community. This document would allow by right marijuana establishments to be located in commercial to or industrially zoned districts by way of a special permit, Mr. President. It outlines a selection committee that's chaired by the chief of police and has five members which would rank and interview the applicants and make recommendations to the mayor who would have the power to enter into a host community agreement to issue a license to one of the applicants, Mr. President. So this is a paper that has been before us for a number of years, about five years, half a decade. I'm glad to see that it's finally come to the finish line, Mr. President, and I would move for approval. There was some discussion and some concern about the 3% local option tax that would be included in this paper, and at the advice of our city solicitor, Kimberly Scanlon, she has provided us with the legal opinion that we can do that by way of adopting a local option. I'd ask that that local option be placed on the agenda next week, Mr. President. so that we can vote on that. It doesn't have to be done this evening according to what our legal counsel tells us. I'm very glad that we asked Solicitor Scanlon this question because we were waiting for Kopelman and Page to give us an answer now for at least five weeks on it, and we didn't get that. So I'd like to thank Solicitor Scanlon personally for the work that she's done in allowing us to bring this as far as we have. So with that being said, Mr. President, that's the brief synopsis of the paper that's before us, and I'd move for approval of the paper. Second.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I am a self-identifying amazon.com addict. I have boxes delivered to my house constantly. And as we go through the coronavirus, COVID-19 pandemic, I think we've all become far more reliant on delivery services like this. But with that being said, Mr. President, while Amazon does provide a great value and a great service to those of us in this community, the driving practices of their delivery drivers aren't exactly up to par. I don't think Mr. Jotis or Mr. Bruno gave them a training course on how to drive here in Medford. A lot of times what we'll see, Mr. President, is an Amazon truck that's making a delivery, drive down, say, a small side street like Billings Avenue in South Medford. And they come up to the house and they say, this is a good spot to stop. right in the middle of the street. And they park their car, and they get out, and they make a delivery, Mr. President. It's creating safety issues. It's creating quality of life issues. It's creating traffic issues in the community. I know that amazon.com is a good neighbor, a good creator of jobs here in the community, with good paying jobs. And we appreciate the work they do. And I know that if we have the opportunity to speak with them, I think that they'll be willing to work with us in assuming a partnership that allows us to address this issue. So with that being said, I rest my case. Move the floor to my council colleague and co-sponsor of the resolution, Councilor Scott Peli.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, it's becoming quite frequent that the parties' meetings start at 5.30 and end after midnight. And that raises the question as to if a meeting is posted for Tuesday evening between 7 and 10 p.m. and it's going to be broadcast on Zoom and it goes past the posted hours, and then further on into the next day, whether or not that would create the potential for an open meeting law violation. I know there are many concerned citizens in Medford that have raised some issues about open meeting law in the past. So as we move forward and work towards full and total compliance with the open meeting law and do our best to do such, I ask the question to the city solicitor, Mr. President. So I move for approval and ask my council colleagues in support to pay it up.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Park Medford's opening at, I guess we'd call, modified hours at this point in time, 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. daily, and it creates a little bit of a hardship for individuals in this community that work, that might want to pick up the phone and call over there to ask some questions, to appeal a ticket over the phone. So I'm asking that the administration take a look at the negotiation that they did with Park Medford and the contract that they have in place to allow them to modify their hours and see if we can have one night a week with their open late, maybe the same night, like Wednesday nights that coincides with city halls late. But just the night so that people know that they can take care of city business and all city offices are going to be open and available.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I support this paper wholeheartedly, and I'd like to add a amendment or a B paper. Just several weeks ago, I believe we talked about accessibility, and there's one aspect of accessibility, which is design and construction. And there's another aspect of accessibility, which is government-created accessibility issues through permitting. And I know a number of us behind this rail spoke about some concerns that they had with Snappy Patty's location in the sidewalk there, and we had requested an update from our ADA compliance officer, the director of diversity. And I don't believe that paper has been forthcoming, Mr. President. So I'd like to, again, reiterate that request.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, I have a couple of questions concerning the applications for vote by mail. It's my understanding that this whole process was handled in-house, is that correct?
[Adam Knight]: Last Tuesday night, when we were here at the meeting, I had to use the restroom and I went out and I heard the postage machine going. And I went in there and one of our representatives of our building department was running ballots through the postage machine. And that got me to thinking, why is it that we're mailing these with a first class stamp on them, if we could send it to a mail house and do an enhanced carrier route line of travel, we'd probably be able to cut down the cost of the actual mailing for the applications to vote by mail. So I didn't know if there was some sort of requirement that these had to be mailed by first class, or if we could have done an enhanced carrier route line of travel bulk mailing to deliver these ballots and save some money.
[Adam Knight]: And do we know what the cost difference is? I mean, it's $0.55 for a first class letter. I mean, I think you can get it down to $0.13 per piece.
[Adam Knight]: And then I know that you've done a great job, Adam, and I'm not being critical. We have had some fair share of problems with ballots going to the wrong district. Is that correct?
[Adam Knight]: And that's why I make the recommendation that it might be better that we handle this through a mail house, where the mail house can put together the mailing labels, where they're supposed to go, the district, so on and so forth. People that do this for a living, that just have the expertise. So we'd have less margin of error, and then we'd also have the cost savings capability. If it takes a couple more days, it takes a couple more days. We'll just have to start earlier, I guess. But that would be my suggestion and recommendation going forward. But I would not offer that in the form of an amendment or a motion, Mr. President. I can bring that up at the registrar's meeting, the next registrar's meeting.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, 70 in the affirmative, 0 in the negative, the motion passes. Mr. President, motion to take papers 19342, 19526, and 19623, receive in place on file. They're all from last term. Second.
[Adam Knight]: The ones that I wanted to, well, it's unfinished business. We have to take it from the table. They're not taped, are they? Well, I guess they are. It's, yeah.
[Adam Knight]: Why don't we just take all the papers off the table?
[Adam Knight]: The motion is going to be received and placed on file.
[Adam Knight]: I'd be happy to take 2-0-4-2-1, Mr. President. Okay, 2-0-4-2-1 on the motion of Council Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, this is a resolution I put forward at the June 23rd meeting. I think we went past 12 o'clock that evening and we didn't get to it. It's been tabled since that time. This was a request for our animal control officer to review our existing ordinances to provide us with any recommended updates or best practices that we could implement so that we could strengthen and improve the animal control ordinances that we have here in the community. I'd ask that my council colleagues approve the paper and ask that the paper be forwarded to the city solicitor once the animal control officer provides us with his recommendations for drafting. So at this point in time, just to the animal control officer for him to review and report back.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, paper 20423.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, yes. Back in June, the Belmont Chinese Society had reached out to me and asked if the city of Medford would be willing to accept a donation of 5,000 surgical masks at the beginning of the outbreak of the COVID-19 virus. This Donation was facilitated by representative Donato and back in June, we were able to present the police and fire department with these masks. So I just wanted to reach out and make the appropriate, appropriate gratitude to the Belmont Chinese society for their generosity and donation.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to leave on the table, Mr. President. Not take off the table, I guess. I'd request to not take it off the table. They haven't opened yet.
[Adam Knight]: So- We'll leave it on the table until the second review passes.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to accept the minutes of the previous meeting, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to revert back to the regular order of business to take care of paper 20-476.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to table the next regular meeting. City solicitor was requested to put some language together last week. She's not in receipt of that quite yet, so she needs another week to put that together. I'd move for approval to a date certain next regular meeting. Second.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if I may?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I just want to take an opportunity to thank Sue and her team from Melrose Wakefield Hospital, the Newton name that they're going by now. But they've done a great job in responding to the council's inquiries, the council's concerns, and always being ready and available to come here to address this body when we have issues. So I do want to thank them and commend them for the work that they've done. And I look forward to working through some of the design issues that we have and the construction issues that we're having in the neighborhood between now and our next meeting.
[Adam Knight]: You read the update, didn't you?
[Adam Knight]: Do these phase three, part two updates that you just gave us relative to capacity extend to the Medford City Council Chambers?
[Adam Knight]: So there's no limit on the capacity of people, it's just we're exempt from that, you said?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, so we could have more than 125 people in the council chambers provided that we could maintain safe space?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Ms. O'Connor, based upon the statements that you've made tonight, what is the position of the administration on sending our children back to school, number one, and what role has your office played in determining safe air quality standards in our public school buildings?
[Adam Knight]: They're well aware of them. Are you aware if the school department is using the recommendations of any medical professional in terms of their moving forward with the air quality examinations and the determination of safe standards?
[Adam Knight]: And what is the position of the administration relative to returning our students back to school?
[Adam Knight]: In your professional opinion, do you feel as though the school will be held in an in-person fashion at all this year, or do you think it will be hybrid and remote?
[Adam Knight]: You obviously don't have a child at home.
[Adam Knight]: All right. So as of right now, we really don't know.
[Adam Knight]: And Mr. President, I'd like to also offer a C paper because Councilor Caraviello beat me to the punch on the B paper. But this C paper would be an ordinance, Mr. President, an emergency ordinance that would say that any school department or city employee who is required to quarantine due to occupational exposure to COVID-19 be placed on paid administrative leave. as opposed to having to use their sick time or their vacation time or their recruiting time, Mr. President. It's an occupational exposure. It's something that's happened because they're trying to perform the duties of their job. And if that case happens, I don't think it's fair that these individuals should be punished by having to use their sick or vacation time in order to quarantine during these periods of time. So I'd ask that that C paper be forwarded to the city solicitor for her to draft up.
[Adam Knight]: No. Any school department or city employee required to quarantine due to occupational exposure to COVID-19? Okay, hang on.
[Adam Knight]: Seems like it's a public policy initiative that's generally accepted by the administration, Mr. President, so I see no harm in memorializing that by way of an emergency ordinance.
[Adam Knight]: Just administrative leave doesn't have to be rather than anything else. Okay.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd like that to go to the city solicit of a legal review and drafting, you know.
[Adam Knight]: That does it for me, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: The thing that's taking place- The information that the speaker is requesting is not under our scope and purview, so we don't have the ability to provide that. The information that the speaker is requesting is not under the scope and purview of the council. That information is under the scope and purview of the school department. And I know that the teachers union has a lot of concerns and a lot of questions. And maybe it would be more appropriate for the union to meet with the director of health in a side meeting on this, because I think- So Adam, I hear what you're saying.
[Adam Knight]: Councilman, are you all done? That was it, Mr. President. I just thought we were kind of going off a little away from a council meeting and a little bit more into negotiation at that point in time.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to receive and place on file. Second. Actually, Mr. President, I'm sorry. Motion to report the questions out, receive the paper, and place on file. Still second.
[Adam Knight]: Yes. Mr. President, can I ask the petitioner, the council that made the motion to explain the reasoning for the reason to sever?
[Adam Knight]: I'm looking at Chapter 48, Section 51 right now, and it looks to read the same to me under Amendment 1.
[Adam Knight]: We want to table the issue so the gentleman can take a look at the legislation, Mr. President? The current zoning ordinance?
[Adam Knight]: Is that necessary? I mean, you made the motion. I'm comfortable with the motion as is.
[Adam Knight]: It looks to me, Mr. President, like actually- It looks to me like it actually takes away the mapping requirements as outlined in the establishment of the district under 4851A. This is only an amendment to- Bounded as respectively shown on the map entitled versus under the authority of 40C, the following districts bounded respectively in which are on file in the city clerk's office. and made part of this article reference to hereby established. It takes away the mapped district.
[Adam Knight]: It takes out the word map entitled. I'd be happy to re-insert them. So you want to re-insert the same language that's in the existing ordinance to separate? I don't have a problem with that. So we're going to strike Amendment 1 and replace it with the existing language in 48-51a. Is that the motion?
[Adam Knight]: And the map entitled the hillside historic Avenue district and the mom Simmons historic district.
[Adam Knight]: It's because I didn't understand it. I didn't understand why we needed the motion to sever the two. However, Mr. President, I'll rest my case. I'll just vote no.
[Adam Knight]: I don't think he's the city solicitor, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Can I just ask them to repeat that? They want what? Over the building?
[Adam Knight]: Is it the role of the Historic Commission or the Historic District Commission to establish historic districts?
[Adam Knight]: So why would Mr. Haywood be the expert on these questions?
[Adam Knight]: Is the gentleman a structural engineer?
[Adam Knight]: And the architects have the... professional knowledge and expertise to determine whether or not a structure is salvageable based on the building code and the like?
[Adam Knight]: So, Mr. President, so- Counts on eight. Mr. Haywood was present at the walkthrough as the chairman of the Medford Historic Commission. The issue that was before us was whether or not October or something was going to come and go and a demolition permit was going to be issued. From what I understand, based upon the history that we've all discussed ad nauseum at this point concerning this project, was that he applied for a demolition permit. He got his property deemed preferentially preserved. He had his engineer come and say the place can't be salvaged. Where in the process does this design review come into play for the historic commission? And if the gentleman said, hey, look it, my engineers say the place can't be salvaged. Why did the historic commission wait 17 months to send this to historic district commission? And then Mr. Haywood from the historic commission is the one that made a representation that I believe if we look at the committee report that this shouldn't be deemed a historic district and the compromise would be satisfactory and that would be the direction that they would move it. Now, last night, they go before the historic district commission to have the plans looked at. I'm totally confused by this process, Mr. President. It's an absolute mess. It's an absolute mess, in my opinion. So I'm a little confused as to The historic district commission doesn't have any design review authority until it becomes a historic district. And by statute, the historic commission has no design review authority. And we discussed that at the committee of the whole and the chairman of the committee, the commission acknowledged that they don't have design review. They're not enabled, those powers on the ordinance that they're operating under. So I'm very confused as to how this is working. It seems to me like it's somewhat being weaponized against the developer or against the builder because he didn't agree that the building could be saved and present plans for them to look at during a 17 month period where there's no real statutory authority for them to have design review.
[Adam Knight]: The part that's confusing me is why is it before your board if it's not a historic district commission yet? Why is it at the Medford Historic District Commission? Why is he going to a meeting there presenting plans when it's not a historic district commission? And the negotiations took place between the historic commission, not the historic district commission.
[Adam Knight]: Is the administration going to offer that paper to the council? Because the paper that's before us is the paper that the mayor gave us on September 3rd.
[Adam Knight]: Paper 20541 is the paper before us offered by Mayor Lungo-Curran to the Medford City Council September 3rd, 2020. Correct. 33 days ago.
[Adam Knight]: So I'm confused by this. So the historic commission sent their paperwork to the historic district commission to establish a single home historic district at 16 Foster court and August 28th. The historic district commission took a vote at that August 28th meeting that passed three to zero to move forward with the creation of the district. Correct?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, so then the mayor sends to us this language on September 3rd? Yes.
[Adam Knight]: You guys only passed it August 28th, that's pretty good if you ask me. You guys passed it August 28th, the mayor sent it to us September 3rd. I don't think that's too bad, five days. Now, the language that the mayor sent us is the language that you guys never looked at. Is that what I'm understanding? So you voted for the principle, but you didn't vote for the language.
[Adam Knight]: As to what it is that you seek? Okay.
[Adam Knight]: But until this 16 foster court is deemed a local historic single home district, what authority does the Medford Historical District Commission have over it?
[Adam Knight]: In theory, then, Mr. Goldschneider had no obligation whatsoever to appear before the Historic District Commission.
[Adam Knight]: Where he really should have been would be before the Medford Historic Commission, because that's where the rub lies, right? I mean, that's what it sounds to me.
[Adam Knight]: So, I mean, absent... So for 17 months, the applicant sat saying, you know, my engineers say it's a total teardown. My structural engineer says that, you know, there's nothing I can do. I have to rip it up. I have to pull it down. My structural engineer, my expert, who I hired and has paid the money, told me that this is what's going on. So he has an expert opinion.
[Adam Knight]: OK. So at that point in time, when he notified the historic commission of that. Don't you think it would have made sense that maybe then you moved it forward to the historic district commission instead of dragging it out for 17 months?
[Adam Knight]: Right. I mean, I feel like it's being weaponized. Do what we say or else we're going to cost you a ton of money.
[Adam Knight]: Sorry to hear that. Can you just tell me what the terms of service are for all the members?
[Adam Knight]: No, in terms of how long they've served. I'm you. I know that your term is three years, but you've probably been on there for 12.
[Adam Knight]: So how many years have you served on the commission?
[Adam Knight]: 18. All right, how many years has the next most senior member served?
[Adam Knight]: You're 11?
[Adam Knight]: because that raises some concern, too, when the representative from the historic commission says, well, no one has been paying attention to this for 20 years. And then we look at the terms of service of the members that are on the board, and we look at the council resolution from 2014, which asked that single home historic districts be sought after and be proactively identified prior to the request for a demolition permit. And that was something that...
[Adam Knight]: It happened at the budget when you were there asking for money.
[Adam Knight]: So we were given the money. So that was six years ago. Can you tell me how many single home historic districts you've identified in the past six years, absent the demolition permit or a request from the MCD?
[Adam Knight]: So in 6 years there's been one. Well, this wasn't proactively identified. This was as a result of a demolition permit being pulled and then well, that was this was.
[Adam Knight]: By what?
[Adam Knight]: I know it's hard to sell a building if nobody knows about it. All right, thank you.
[Adam Knight]: They own it, aren't they allowed to?
[Adam Knight]: I think that's something we'd all appreciate, Mr. President, through you to Mr. Bader. Mr. President, I do have a last question, and I'll rest my case at this. At the council meeting when this issue was brought up and at the subsequent subcommittee meeting, I did ask a question to the city solicitor as to whether or not the criteria the circumstances of this particular property could constitute a regulatory taking, opening up the city of Medford to financial or other liabilities. And I'm wondering if you've received a response, or the city clerk maybe has received a response relative to that question of law that we asked the city solicitor.
[Adam Knight]: The consensus by the four members of the Historical District Commission, the consensus of a land court judge, the consensus of whom?
[Adam Knight]: You said it was the consensus that this is not a regulatory taking.
[Adam Knight]: So the district commission conducted a three-prong test to determine whether or not it was a taking?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. So I think that opinion might be important, Mr. President. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: I think I believe that the last meeting I asked for a copy of the letters that was sent to Mr. Goldschneider, inviting him to these 17 consecutive meetings that had him on the agenda that said we're asking you to come and present. Because the way that I see their agenda is that everything that they have going on, they just throw on the agenda and put it out every week and whatever comes up, comes up. So although it might have been on the agenda for 17 months, I don't believe that the gentleman was invited to appear to any of these meetings over that period of time but for one or two.
[Adam Knight]: Can the gentleman please provide me with the information that he just received and what expert provided it to him? A multi-million dollar contract, a multi-million dollar project, a multi-million dollar property? I think that that's not what I said.
[Adam Knight]: Could the clerk provide a record of such communication? Adopted by the city council in the form of minutes and forwarded to the proper authorities, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Did it happen? That's obviously not.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. That sounds an awful lot like deliberation to me, Mr. President, absent a public meeting notice. And I think that that's something that we better be very careful of. Individual members of a board of commission passing private notes to the chairman of the commission to be passed on to another board of commission that reflects their opinion, that's done behind closed doors, not in the open sunset of day, I think is a problem, Mr. President. And I think that that might rise to the level of violation. And as public employees, we need to be very careful in that regard.
[Adam Knight]: Did anybody from the Historical Commission appear before the Historic District Commission and give an opinion as to what they felt?
[Adam Knight]: Was that opinion reflective of the board or the individual?
[Adam Knight]: A member, a chair, same thing. There's deliberation that's going on behind closed doors, Mr. President, that's a problem.
[Adam Knight]: OK. Mr. President, with all due respect to the councilor, the gentleman's going to have to seek legal advice if he's willing to make that type of commitment. All right, that's fine.
[Adam Knight]: I did, Mr. President. Is Mr. Moki available?
[Adam Knight]: He's not available. Is the city solicitor available?
[Adam Knight]: All right. So I guess my question's to this. Number one, say that a rendering, say the rendering that we looked at tonight was suitable to both commissions. And they said, move forward and do what you got to do. The gentleman would still be subject to site plan review. through our office of community development, which is an open notorious process. During that site plan review process, because his parcel is an apartment two zone district, and there's a single family home there right now, or a two family home right there right now, it's being underutilized land use, number one. Number two, because it's a site plan review project, he's gonna be responsible to pay linkage, Mr. President, on top of going through the site plan review. He's also gonna have to pay linkage to the community. So we're looking at a parcel that's being underutilized, all right? If an apartment building gets built there, which is it's zoned use, The tax revenues are going to increase, we're going to be able to get linkage, and we still have two more processes in the review of the design that the city has the ability to take a bite at the apple on. I think that the gentleman has, taken a lot of wax in terms of this whole entire process. And he's maintained his cool a lot better than I would have been able to with the level of frustration that I think he's met. But ultimately, Mr. President, I don't think any of us behind this rail got in the business to hurt people. And the gentleman's being hurt by the process. The gentleman's being hurt by the process. And regardless of whether or not the process is what it is, it's not a good process. It needs to be fixed. All right? We took a bad vote when we changed the demolition delay from six months to 18 months, in my opinion. I think it was a bad vote. I really do. I also think it was a bad vote when we changed it to any building that was built in the last 75 years. I think it was a bad vote, Mr. President, because I feel like what we're doing is not really looking at historic preservation, but what we're looking at doing is a board that's trying to flex its muscles right now. All right, we see a board that's trying to increase its level of influence and power in the community because the corner office, we don't have the strongest leader right now. So I think, Mr. President, looking at this, you know what I mean, and the way that it's going, there's two more opportunities for design review. The parcel's a strange shaped parcel. It's going to have to go before the zoning board. It's already been noted in the meetings and noted in the discussions, and based upon the plan that's been presented, it's been determined. So this is nothing more, I think, than a power play at this point, Mr. President. And I certainly thank the Council if I'm moving it to a vote, and I'll be happy to vote against it this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, if I could just offer an amendment to that paper, a re-paper to that amendment, that the administration provide us with a list of whether or not these contracts are being negotiated by internal counsel or external counsel, and the amount of money that they've spent on external counsel, if they have to do such.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. And that can be in the form of a B paper. Is that correct? It can be in the form of a B paper or an amendment based upon the preference of the sponsor or the person.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the snow and ice account is the only account that we can run a deficit in here in the city of Medford and across the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. We heard Marsha this morning, it feels like this morning, earlier in the evening when we were talking about the Lawrence Mural Hospital and she gave us a figure of 20% of the community residents are senior citizens. I know, I just realized. I'm maybe a little high, but close. You know, the city in the past has had a practice of removing the snow in our business districts. We've had a bombardier that's gone down the street and down the sidewalks and removed the snow in front of St. Joseph's all the way down into Medford Square. And that's a practice that we've Had in the past, and it's a practice that should continue, when we look at the Department of Conservation and Recreation and we see the roadways that are under their control, they have a bombardier that comes out and clears their sidewalks. The Department of Conservation and Recreation, a state agency, Mr. President, goes out and does all of their property. I see no reason why the city of Medford should take steps to hold their citizens to a higher standard than that of their DPW and the contractors that they're hiring to pave the streets. We can either pass an ordinance that's going to require the citizens to perform the DPW's job, or we can focus on the delivery of services here in the community for the residents and the taxpayers. And the way that we do that is by investing in our DPW, Mr. President. And that's an area that we've historically not invested in. We say, buy this piece of equipment because you're not going to have the manpower. We're getting to the point now, Mr. President, where we've got more pieces of equipment than we do people. All right, so we're not going to be able to get anything done if we don't look at what's going on, reallocate funds, and refocus what our priorities are. Because our DPW is failing right now, and they're failing because of one reason, manpower. Manpower, Mr. President, manpower. We can have over 100 police officers, over 100 firefighters, but not even 50% of that is part of our DPW? That's a problem, Mr. President, and I don't think that penalizing residents and homeowners because we're making poor decisions in terms of how we allocate funds is going to be the answer. So moving forward, Mr. President, I think it's very important that we look at the reasoning behind why fines for commercial properties have doubled. When we look at commercial properties, they pay a higher tax rate than residential properties here in the community, as do industrial properties, because we have a bifurcated tax rate. And we have that tax rate for a reason, to keep residential property taxes low. But at the same time, snow removal, snow removal. Why are we punishing a commercial property owner double what we'd be punishing a industrial property owner or a residential property owner? I don't understand what the importance of singling out a commercial property for double fines is, when the commercial properties are the ones that actually bring jobs to this community. They actually allow people to go to work, who live in Medford, can work in Medford, can play in Medford, can spend their ancillary money in the circular floor of our local economy, Mr. President. So I think it's very important we recognize the role that commercial properties play in our community, and we shouldn't be singling them out. Every time we talk about zoning, we talk about the fact that we're losing commercial properties left and right. We're down to 7 or 8% of the total number of parcels in our community is going to be commercial industrial. Well, if we keep doing stuff like this and penalizing properties for being commercial when instances arise, then we're going to be in a situation where we're going to see less and less of that, Mr. President. So I think that the fine should be uniform and across the board. It shouldn't matter what type of parcel you own. The fines should be the same. That coupled with the fact that I really feel as though we should be investing our efforts and our energies in delivering services as a city and as a community, in addressing some of the issues that Councilor Marks brought up about prioritizing our sidewalks and our roadways and ensuring connectivity. But at the same time, not doing it in a punitive fashion so that our residents are being penalized. So with that being said, Mr. President, I do think this needs a lot of work, and the paper remains in the subcommittee. So we could take a vote on this, or we could just say call the subcommittee. I mean, the paper's in the subcommittee already from last term. It is what it is, but I'd move for approval on the paper and the amendments, and I'd like to ask that they be consolidated so that we can vote once.
[Adam Knight]: I don't know if there's one in public works or public safety. It was in public works.
[Adam Knight]: If this is really a priority, Mr. President, last week we asked the city clerk to post three meetings, second Tuesday in October, November, and December, for the purpose of the city solicitor appearing before us to talk about ordinances in the ordinance subcommittee. This is an ordinance, this is also a venue that we could take it up in. I know Councilor Beals wants to maintain control of it, so he probably wants it in the committee that he chairs. I don't want to speak for him, but you know what I mean, it is what it is. So either way is fine with me, Mr. President, but those meetings are already going to be posted. The clerk's already been directed to do such. So if we want to talk about existing ordinances, then that's a committee that can be referred to as well.
[Adam Knight]: I don't have a horse in the game, Mr. President, one way or the other. It's going to have to go to a committee of the whole before it comes to the council floor, pursuant to council rules anyway.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Mr. President, just before we start. I'm sorry, point of information, Councilor Knight. It's 20 past 11 at this point in time. We have about 17, 18 other items left on the agenda. This matter is going to subcommittee to be vetted. It's going to go to committee of the whole to be vetted further, and then it's going to come back to the council floor. Yes. We're all going to vote in favor to send this thing to the subcommittee to be discussed. We've already all spoke on it, and we've already all said that. So with that being said, Mr. President, there'll be ample opportunity for individuals to provide public participation on the topic that's before us here. They're going to have a subcommittee meeting or multiple subcommittee meetings, a committee of the whole meeting, and then it's going to come back to the council floor. Right now, the vote we're taking is only to send it to subcommittee. I know there are individuals in the community that support this piece of legislation. But I think in the interest of time, Mr. President, it might make sense for us to say, OK, we're going to send it to subcommittee. The subcommittee is going to be scheduled, and the matter is going to be deliberated. And then it's going to go to the committee of the whole. It's going to be scheduled, deliberated again. Then it's going to be put on the council agenda, and going to move forward again. So everybody's going to have an ample opportunity to speak. We would have been done by now.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. In review of the common practice of the council, it's always been that the special permit for extended hours would be granted to the business and not the property. And the business is changing hands, which would require an application for a second An application for a permit for extended hours, if I'm not mistaken. So I guess, can the city clerk clarify or confirm whether or not when this initial permit was issued, it was issued to the property or to the business? And if it was issued to the business, then I believe they'd be required to come back before us for extended hours permit for any operation before 7 a.m. or after 11 p.m., right?
[Adam Knight]: And I don't want to hold it up, Mr. President, so I have no problem moving for approval, provided that the clerk gives us the information that we're requesting. And if an extended hours permit is necessary, he contacts the business owner prior to their opening and informs them of the process that they need to go through to obtain an extended hours permit.
[Adam Knight]: It's an operation of government. I mean, if the permit was issued, what they're asking for right now, they can't get if they're not grandfathered in. If they are grandfathered in, they can get it.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, let's confirm what's going on. We'll move for approval. The license is going to be, I'm under the impression it's going to be 7 to 11, unless otherwise with the restrictions. And if not, then the clerk will notify them and have them come back before us.
[Adam Knight]: Along with the review, Mr. President, I'd like to ask that the permit go with the business entity and not the address. If in fact we need to address the extended hours permit going forward, whether or not there's a way that we can put a mechanism in place so that it now goes with the business and doesn't stay with the process, whether that requires a rescinding of a vote, previous vote or not, but to protect the neighborhood.
[Adam Knight]: I am all set, Mr. President. So does this mean they're not going to change the direction of South Street like they were talking about three years ago? We're going to get the speed bumps instead? One phone call, Councilor Marks. Great job. No, Mr. President, you know, I think it's important also that because this is an issue of funding coming from partners in state government that we make sure that Representative Donato's informed every step of the way on what efforts we're making as a council. This money didn't get released or given to us because we're good people and we're a nice community. They got released because we were sending them letters once every two months asking them to look at it. We were bringing our chief of police down there and we were telling them do something. We were looking at statistics. So I think it's very important, Mr. President, that in order to keep the momentum going, that we have our partners in government at the state level involved in this. And Representative Donato's been a champion on this issue. He's been very outspoken in his support for it. So I just ask that any time a correspondence goes out relative to the furtherance of this initiative that Representative Donato's offered. He's in a very powerful position, Mr. President, so I think that it's important that he be involved in these conversations as well. As the assistant majority leader, he's going to have the ability to control some purse strings and get us some money, and he's done a great job of that in the past, and I'm sure he'll continue to do so. So I'd ask that he be involved.
[Adam Knight]: Again, Mr. President, the way that things have gone down with the Historical Commission in the past, oh, eight, nine months would lead me to believe that I don't want them to do anything other than what they were doing before what they were doing the last eight or nine months ago. So with that being said, I'm opposed to Councilor Caraviello's measure this evening. I feel as though the Historical Commission is exceeding their authority underneath the statute and the efforts and endeavors that they've undertaken in recent months. And for that reason, I will be opposing this this evening.
[Adam Knight]: One more information, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: It's problematic, Mr. President, when everybody that you talk to says they're having some sort of problem getting a permit, some sort of problem getting a permit, unless they know somebody. They call a city councilor and then they get, oh yeah, it's no problem, I'll get you in a half an hour. If they don't know somebody, though, they're held up for 17 months. All right, that's a problem, Mr. President. I feel as though that's a very big problem. I also think it's a problem that, you know, there's no guidance from the administration as to how this process is supposed to work. So now Paul Moky's supposed to notify someone or the building commissioner, right? The building department's supposed to notify residents which have had their buildings permit. permits reviewed by the historical commission within 72 hours after the review has been completed of the decision. Nothing prompts the historical commission to notify the building commissioner within a defined period of time when they get the application or after they make their decision to tell the building commissioner when it is that they can pull the trigger on this. This is a flawed process from the start. The changes that have been implemented over the last year, Mr. President, are detrimental to the growth in this community.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, if your application is before a board or a commission and they vote on it, the board of commission should be the one telling you what's going on. You know what I mean?
[Adam Knight]: There needs to be, someone needs to define who's responsible for issuing a building permit in the community. I think that's the building commissioner. It always has been in the past, just like he's always been the person responsible for zoning, right? So I think that although the council feels as though I'm comparing apples to oranges, I don't think that's necessarily the case. I feel as though I'm comparing overstep and overstep based upon the statutory guidelines and the ordinance that's in place. Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, but again, the mechanism is when is the building department getting notified when the determination is being made? And is there a criteria or a timeline for when that determination needs to be made from the ancillary secondary body? So can I get a building permit and go give it to Paul Moki and he says, OK, yeah, this has to go to Historic. He gives it to Historic. Historic has a meeting on it. Neva tells him about it. Or Historic doesn't have a meeting on it. It has a meeting on it in 45 days. Are there any defined parameters or timelines? That's the concern, Mr. President. There's a breakdown.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Mr. President, I think it's been made clear by the council is that as long as you know a Councilor and pick up the phone, there is no breakdown. But if you don't know a Councilor and you can't pick up the phone, then there is.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to receive and place on file. It's a move point, Mr. President. We took the vote.
[Adam Knight]: Is there a committee report?
[Adam Knight]: Is there one?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to take papers in the hands of the clerk. No, we have two more.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. This is a very important paper to the membership of American Legion Post 45. And in full disclosure, I've been a Sal in the past, a son of the American Legion member there. And what this paper does is it allows them to operate underneath the governor's guidelines. The post has been shut down now since about St. Patrick's Day. And they haven't had the ability to generate any income whatsoever. And that coupled with the fact that this veteran's organization does provide great support services for young and old veterans here in the community of Medford and beyond. That coupled with the fact that the American Legion Post 45 and its membership are always the first ones to step up when the city of Medford needs something, Mr. President. If you look to election day on September 1st. When the Lawrence Memorial Hospital was unable to host us for our election proceedings, the first people to step up to the plate were Richard Mott and Bobby Miller in American Legion Post 45. And when we celebrate our Memorial Day ceremonies, Mr. President, and we all go down to Oak Grove Cemetery and we sit there and we listen to the beautiful presentations put on by our veterans organizations and as we sit there we see those flags all across the cemetery. American Legion Post 45 is the group that coordinates. The placing of those flags on our veterans' grave markers. So it's very important, Mr. President, that we recognize the work and the partnership that the American Legion has provided the citizens and the residents in the city of Medford. And I think it's very important for us to adopt and embrace this opportunity for them to get a common victuals license so that they have the opportunity to reopen and generate some revenues. And also allow the membership, the opportunity to come back in and to continue their mutual support relationship that they have. When we look at the agenda later on this evening, we have a paper talking about substance abuse and addiction recovery services and the ability to have meetings. And veterans organizations, although they don't necessarily hold meetings per se, are a great spot for veterans to congregate, to get together, and to talk about their shared mutual experiences and how to go through some of the struggles that they're having. So with that being said, Mr. President, this is a paper that I support wholeheartedly, and I'd ask my council colleagues to also join me in supporting it.
[Adam Knight]: Okay, why don't we try that?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, at the end of our packet, there's a letter by Mr. Paris, and I think it's a very good explanation of what's going on. Dear members of the city council, regarding our sign request for Liv's Juice and a Kai bar located at 56 Stations Landing, my understanding is that we're allowed two feet of projection. Since our 24 inch sign is circular, the total square foot is just 3.16 square feet, as opposed to the total four square foot sign that's allowed by the ordinance. The mounting of the sign is flush to the building and would look very funny. And as a result, we're asking for four additional inches of projection for the standoffs to make it fit within the neighborhood and uphold the great look there. Mr. President, I personally find a circular sign more aesthetically pleasing than a big square or rectangular sign sticking off the side of a building. I think Mr. Paris has given us a great explanation, and although it doesn't present a significant hardship, it certainly does present some curb appeal issues that this council has discussed in the past, and I support this paper wholeheartedly.
[Adam Knight]: I know our ordinance speaks to the signs not being illuminated after 10 p.m. Anyhow, what are the hours of the gentleman's operations?
[Adam Knight]: But whatever the practices at stations landing, I mean, I'm not opposed to the measure at all, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: I thank Councilor Marks for raising the issue.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, again, at the end of this application, there's also a letter dated March 3rd, 2020 from Mr. DeSilva at the time. I guess March 3rd is when he requested his appeal. And it reads, the purpose of these proposed awnings is to provide protection from the environment, enhance the appeal of the car wash, and instruct customers of free vacuum services in an attractive way. Despite the weather conditions, customers will be comfortable vacuuming their vehicles under the shade and shelter of the awning. And the awnings are not only to benefit the customer's comfort, but also create a more attractive facade. Finally, the awnings instruct the customers where the free vacuums are located and create a clear space to park. So Mr. President, it seems like they're seeking 13 awnings, one over each vacuum that look like to be canvas awnings that aren't internally illuminated. But I do believe that they would have certain public safety benefit instructing where the free vacuums are in a location like that. I believe this is the old Randy's Car Wash on Middlesex Ave, if I'm not mistaken. They've always done a pretty good job over there at Randy's, and I don't think that the new operator would be any less successful. And I can certainly support a reversal on the sign denial, but is 13 really the number that we want to approve, I guess is the question.
[Adam Knight]: Second. I would second that motion, Mr. President. For it's often in the form of a I guess it would be a restriction correct counsel, right?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. It says that these signs would be internally illuminated. Does any of these internally illuminated signs face a residential structure?
[Adam Knight]: Right, because you got the old margaritas on one side, the other hotel, right? So they're not facing any of the, because they're pretty big, 150 foot square feet. All right, sounds good. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, in the past, if I may.
[Adam Knight]: In the past, Mr. President, when a circumstance like this has arose, what we've done is put a 30, 60, or 90 day review on it. I don't know if that's something we wanna do in this situation or circumstances. I haven't gotten any complaints from anybody regarding the sign at 75 stations landing to date. So I don't find it to be a big issue. However, if it does become an issue because of the action of this council, I think that we should absolutely have the ability to give it a review to make sure that we're not disrupting anybody's quality of life that resides in the community. Well, at the same time, still supporting the application of the Fairfield Marriott Hotels. We all understand the benefits that having an additional hotel in our community is going to bring to us financially. And historically, they've been a good partner. Our other two hotels have been great partners here in the city of Medford. So I don't want to, you know. I don't want to claim nefarious intent, but at the same time, I think it's important that we protect the residents. So I would offer a 30 and 60 day review on the paper and move for approval. For the sign only facing 75 stations only.
[Adam Knight]: I'm sorry, I don't know if 75 is the address, but the north facing sign abutting the residential property.
[Adam Knight]: So Mr. President, just to be clear, this application before us is just for the permit to reverse the sign denial. And any type of relief sought by the applicant relative to hours of operation outside of the ordinance and its 7 AM to 10 PM requirements would have to be sought under a different cover. That's not going to be covered under the aspect of the vote that we're taking this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, through you, I was wondering if the petitioner could tell me on what side of the retaining wall on Broadway is this trench going to be dug? Is it going to be on the northern side of the retaining wall or on the southern side? If you're familiar with the area and you're driving up from Winter Hill and Somerville along Broadway, you'll come to the intersection of Medford Street. There at that intersection, by way of history, is Paul Revere Park, which is the smallest park in the United States of America. But I digress, Mr. President, as you go past Paul Revere Park, Broadway splits in two, and you can go up Broadway and travel along the Medford border. Some of that is Medford. Or you can stay on Broadway proper and go straight. So I was wondering exactly where this trench was going to be dug, because there is a Broadway in Medford. And it's the roadway that runs parallel to Broadway in Somerville, right where that split is, where it goes up and over the ridge and comes back down and brings you out where the old Salvation Army used to be. right at Winter Hill. So I was wondering if the applicant could tell us where the trench is actually going to be dug. Is it going to be dug on Broadway proper or is it going to be dug on that one-way access road?
[Adam Knight]: So do we know which side of that retaining wall it's going to be on, I guess, is the question.
[Adam Knight]: Nor do I. So if you're looking at Medford Street at the intersection, you see that little park?
[Adam Knight]: Right? If you go past the little park, There's a line with a little square. And that line with a little square, I think that's a street that comes right through there. So I just don't know what side of the wall that proposed gas main is going to be on. Is it going to be on Broadway proper, or is it going to be on the access road?
[Adam Knight]: I would much rather prefer it to be on Somerville. I'm not in Medford, personally.
[Adam Knight]: My colleagues are following me with what I'm talking about, right? You guys know what I'm saying?
[Adam Knight]: Dexter Street is Big Bundle.
[Adam Knight]: I'm sorry, Mr. President. That's Main Street, the little park, not Medford Street.
[Adam Knight]: Main Street and Medford Street split. Main Street goes further to the, I guess it would be east, and Medford Street goes up past those parks. So I was confused. I had, because Dexter Street threw me off, because Dexter's Dexter runs through Maine to Medford, so this is further down. Creative Science is on the corner here of Dexter and- You are correct. So this will be going, there is no retaining wall, so this is all going in front of- Trump Field. The pizza place, Dacos Tavern, the Chinese food restaurant coming around the corner. Okay, yep, I second the motion to approve.
[Adam Knight]: This is a service call. I know that there's some discussion in here about an SOP. So SOP means that the applicant would provide the city with the funds to then go and perform, no, that's a street opening permit. That's a different program. I guess the question is, is the 60 feet of roadway that's being torn up in Medford going to be replaced curb to curb? Where this is creation of new service, we're tearing up a couple of roadways 60 feet. Are we going to be able to get curb to curb restoration?
[Adam Knight]: Yes, I see it there. Okay.
[Adam Knight]: Yep.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. From my brief calculations, it looks like this application seeks for about a half a mile of a ground opening permit. Does that sound correct, sir?
[Adam Knight]: That sounds about right, yes. 2600 feet or something like that? Yes. And it goes right through our central business district, Mr. President, one that we've been talking about for as long as I can remember in terms of what we're going to do to revitalize it. The lack of commitment to revitalize Medford Square coupled with the impacts of the Kranich Bridge closure for such an extended period of time, along with the COVID-19 situation that's happened. We have a number of restaurants and places that provide food services along this stretch, and the impact that they've The financial impact that they've had to put up with through a variety of different reasons over the course of the last five years is troublesome, Mr. President. So I guess this is a long way of asking a question, and the question is, how long will this construction take?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, so you think you guys can do 100 feet a day? More than 100 feet a day?
[Adam Knight]: Easily. OK. What are the plans in terms of the storage of equipment and materials during the construction period?
[Adam Knight]: Is everybody at home getting this in case they have a problem during the construction?
[Adam Knight]: Will the public way be used for the overnight storage of equipment and materials? No. Can we put that as a condition?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, excellent. So I'd like to offer that in the form of an amendment number 18, Mr. President, as a condition that there'll be no storage of any equipment or materials on the public way. Second. With that being said, I rest my case. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I personally couldn't agree with Councilor Bears more. I'm very glad to see the property owner and the historic commission sitting down trying to make compromise. We have ample opportunity and time to still address this matter. We have another meeting before the deadline. I'd ask that the matter be tabled to a date certain to allow the homeowner and the historical commission to continue their deliberations and discussions. But with that being said, Mr. President, we do have, I believe, representatives here from the owner that have been working on a plan or are ready to make some commitments to a plan. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'd ask that the property owner be given an opportunity to speak.
[Adam Knight]: I got a question if you're ready to give it to me. I have no problem.
[Adam Knight]: I'm sorry, provided it passes.
[Adam Knight]: But if, okay.
[Adam Knight]: Is the city solicitor available as requested by the president from the meeting yesterday?
[Adam Knight]: I'm just looking at the committee report from last night where President Falco said that the council needs the city solicitor present. And then the next sentence says Mr. Howard suggested holding off on a historic district. So that's what I'm referring to is the conversation we had last night.
[Adam Knight]: No. But with all due respect, Mr. President, I had a conversation with the solicitor as well. And from what the solicitor told me in my conversation with her was that The issuance of the demolition permit is told when the paper is advertised. So it doesn't matter if 18 months pass after the paper is advertised. And there's case law on this. And she and I spoke about it at length today. I did too. So I'm not sure if the information that you're getting from her and the information that I'm getting from her are the same. But I'm pretty confident in the conversation that I had with her where she said, you're absolutely right, Adam. I don't know why this is so hard to understand. First reading happens, then it gets advertised, and then advertisement controls. If advertisement goes out, the demolition permit can't get issued, regardless of whether or not October 8th comes and goes. So second reading is the advertisement. And that is what tolls the demolition delay. And we can toll the demolition delay on October 7th if need be. So I don't understand the need to take this to a vote right now when you yourself had suggested that the city solicitor needs to be present in order for us to make this vote properly, number one. And number two, when the representative of the historic commission who was with us at the meeting suggested we hold off on it.
[Adam Knight]: The Herald runs every day. The Globe costs $1,500. Pay it. The House is so important. Why don't we want to spend the money to advertise for it? I mean, more people read the Globe than the transcript. I can't tell you a person that ever bought the Medford transcript in the last 15 years. I don't know one person. I buy it. I get it every week. God bless you.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Between 7 o'clock last night and this morning?
[Adam Knight]: I'm glad Ryan gave you approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, before we table the matter, there is a committee of the whole report that's before us that's going to have to get put into the agenda for next week's meeting for us to vote on. But last night at the site visit, we did vote on a motion to ask a question of the city solicitor. And that question that we asked to the city solicitor was, can this process constitute a regulatory taking, opening up the city to financial or other liabilities? And I'd like to offer that question to the city solicitor as a B paper this evening, so that we can get that to her for an answer as well before next week.
[Adam Knight]: Opening the city up to financial or other liabilities.
[Adam Knight]: October 6th, right?
[Adam Knight]: Sounds right to me, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to revert back to regular order of business.
[Adam Knight]: Should I be asked to withdraw my motion? I'd be happy to.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Certainly.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if the legislation doesn't pass by the close of the end of the legislative session, then the bill needs to be reintroduced for the next legislative session. Thank you, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: The question would come as to whether or not we need to pass another home rule petition to reintroduce the bill in the next legislative session. And that I can't answer.
[Adam Knight]: Is that a question you'd like to ask the solicitor?
[Adam Knight]: I, for one, will not be supporting this paper this evening, Mr. President. We're in the middle of a global pandemic. We had a meeting for two hours today talking about how we're unable to conduct regular city council business right now. One out of five adults in Massachusetts are unemployed. We have a 20% unemployment rate. We're seeing the worst economic time since the Great Depression. People are restricted in their ability to get about the community, to speak with people, to talk to people. It's going to impact the ability to run a grassroots campaign. and inform the residents in this community what's going on, number one. Number two, in times of uncertainty, we need stability. In times of uncertainty, we need stability. We should be focusing on getting our kids back to school. We should be focusing on getting our economy locally back up and running. I think that's what our priority should be right now during this global pandemic, things that actually make the community and the city run, the services that we deliver. You know, I've stated and I've been opposed to this process in the past, doing it with the homework petition. I feel as though this is something that should come from the voters, that should come from the ground up. And now is not the time to promote a ground up effort when the activities of people are so hamstrung. And where our government is operating under such stringent restrictions. So for those reasons, I'll be voting against the paper this evening, Mr. President. I rest my case.
[Adam Knight]: I do think it's also important to point out, for those that are so supportive of the measure, that if it goes forward tonight, you get two bites at the apple. because if it doesn't pass by January, then it gets refiled again. And if it does get passed before January, then you get charter commission. But I don't support the paper, but from an operational standpoint, if it got held until the end of the year or or tabled or whatever it may be, and it can't come back up for 90 days, so be it. The next session's in session. So you can send the paper to legislation now. If it doesn't get taken up for a vote, it doesn't get taken up for a vote. Then you want to do it again in January anyway when the circumstances change, you get another bite at the apple with a new legislature. So that's something to think about. But either way, I'm not going to support it this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'm glad that we're finally getting to the finish line on this proposal. It's been long overdue. I can remember filing the initial resolution asking Mayor Burke's staff to craft an ordinance some three and a half years ago, I believe. And in looking at the final product that we have here before us, I think it looks great. I do have concern, and one of the concerns, the only concern I have about it is the enforceability of the seven barrels and the ambiguity of the seven barrels. In the Seawind District, breweries operating with seven barrels or under would be allowed by right, and breweries operating with more than seven barrels would be allowable by special permit of the Board of Appeals. Well, who's the barrel police and what's the parameter? Is it seven barrels a day, seven barrels a week, seven barrels a month, seven barrels a year? I guess is my question. It's not going to prevent me from voting on the ordinance this evening, Mr. President, but I certainly think it's food for thought. I don't think that we're going to have somebody out there that's going to be the barrel police that's measuring liquid to see who serves seven barrels versus seven and a quarter or seven and a half or eight. And I just don't see how that aspect of the ordinance is enforceable and what precludes somebody from applying for a special permit by right at seven barrels, but then going over the seven barrel. limit how are we going to know, how are we going to enforce, what's the parameters and standards that are going to be put in place. That's the only issue that I have, Mr. President. But this is taking too long for us to come to this point. So with that being said, if it does pose a problem, we can always take it up at a later date. But I do think that that's a deficiency in our ordinance here this evening.
[Adam Knight]: I certainly can appreciate the gentleman seeing through the trees to see the forest. It was about taxation and how we were going to recuperate money. And I'm confident that we'll be all right moving forward with the languages here. So with that being said, but it was more about how we're going to be able to monitor it because it's a revenue generating issue as well. So his astute business mind picked up on that relatively quickly.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, a motion to sever the CAC ordinance from the zoning ordinance.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: In review of the selection committee ordinance, I see that our esteemed counsel from KP Law has failed to include the local 3% tax option language that was requested of him on multiple occasions. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'd make a motion to amend the CAC ordinance to have the city solicitor, not KP Law, as previously asked multiple times, but our city solicitor, to draft language to include the local 3% tax option to generate revenues for the city as an impact. Second.
[Adam Knight]: As previously directed to KP law on multiple occasions and it never got in there. Yes, that's correct.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, can I be so bold as to offer a motion to waive the reading of the paper?
[Adam Knight]: Ultimately, Mr. President, just a brief synopsis on this paper authorizes marijuana dispensaries to be located in industrial and commercial two districts. It adopts the state statutory buffer zones and has a number of requirements and restrictions in place relative to border health, fire, police, security, safety, and the like, Mr. President. So with that being said, I think we've all talked this thing to death at this point, and I'd move for approval of the paper. Second.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Here we are, what, ten months into the year, and we have a number of ordinances that we've requested drafts of. We've gotten some back, we haven't gotten others. With the craziness that's going around with how government operates these days, with City Hall being half open and half closed, with the council being half open and half closed, I thought this would be a good opportunity for us to keep some of the items that this council's concerned about on the forefront, Mr. President. I know in the past, we've had situations where Papers get filed and then they kick around for quite a bit of time. For example, the marijuana ordinance that we just talked about that took five years to come to fruition. So with that being said, this is an effort as the chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. President, to get our work product out and get it out in an expedient fashion. I think ten months to wait is plenty of time for us to request an update. And if we can sit down with the city solicitor and go over where we are and the progress that we've made on some of these items, I think we'll be able to put out even a better work product. This council's shown that it's been able to put out ordinances and has quite a vision for what the legislative body should be doing and for what legislative process should look like. And I just want to make sure, Mr. President, as the chairman of the subcommittee, that we're living up to the expectations of the residents here in the community. So with that being said, I'd ask my council colleagues to support this measure. It would be three meetings, October, November, December, and the second Tuesday of each of those months for us to get a better handle on where we're at in the draft ordinance process. I've had the opportunity to speak with Solicitor Scanlon, and she's started to do legwork for some of this stuff. It's no reflection on the work of her office or that of the clerk. What it is, it's a reflection on this body and our willingness and desire to put out a favorable work product to the residents in this community. So with that being said, I ask my council colleagues to support the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Layton. Mr. President, thank you very much. Since the C-Click Fix program has been implemented, I have offered this resolution annually. I feel as though it's very important that the council be provided with a breakdown of what types of requests are being made by our citizenry and whether or not they're being brought to a resolve that meets their satisfaction and expectation. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'm requesting this data because data drive decision making. And when we can take a look at these C-Click fix requests, we might also be able to identify where our deficiencies lie in the deliverance of services here in the city. And then when the budget process rolls around, we have a better idea as to where we need to invest our funds to be sure that the taxpayers are receiving the level of services that they're so duly. So with that being said, Mr. President, I ask that my council colleagues support the measure. What it is, is it's a tool for us to gather data to be more informed. So when the budget process starts, we can have the opportunity to reallocate funds to those areas where we feel as though we can do better.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, on that, I remember sitting back and we were talking about C-Click fix. And I believe it was a request that was made on DCR-owned property. been two previous administrations ago, maybe a previous administration ago. And the discussion was issue resolved, and the response was, that's state property, call the DCR. And that's the issue isn't resolved, the buck was passed. And I remember Councilman Marks bringing that up, because he got a call from a resident that wasn't too satisfied with the answer that they got. And it was mocked as resolved, but it really wasn't resolved, it was closed. So I certainly share your position on this, Council.
[Adam Knight]: And I'll be happy to amend the paper any which way that meets that objective.
[Adam Knight]: I don't, I thank Councilor Marks for bringing up the point there.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. The condition that our public utility providers and others that are offered street opening permits leave our streets in is something that's been a topic of conversation before this board for a number of years. Earlier this evening, for example, we had several grants of location and some of the things that we talked about were curb to curb. Paving, how long the project's going to take, where the project's going to be located. But I think, Mr. President, a lot of these times when we issue a street opening permit, and maybe it's not for a half a mile of roadway like we issued earlier today. Maybe it's only for 50 linear feet. It gets forgotten about. And that final restoration never happens. And we've seen places all over the community where we see trenches and patches and road work that's just fallen apart that our public utilities have performed. We've done a great job holding them accountable when they're coming before us for grants of location and things that are in our scope and our authority. But I think we can step it up a notch, Mr. President, and begin to look at the street opening permits when they're issued and what the follow-up protocols are to be sure that the taxpayers in the community and the residents in the community are afforded the opportunity to have their streets restored to the same condition that they were in prior to these construction and ground opening permits. When these ground opening permits are issued, it's usually for the purpose of underground utility work and underground utility upgrades. And these underground utility upgrades allow the city to generate the ability to assess a personal property tax on the underground infrastructure that's being placed. But this underground infrastructure that's being placed along with the personal property tax that the city can get also provides the utility provider with the ability to have more efficient operations and in turn increase their profits. So when we talk a lot about what's going on in the community and community benefits, we look at public utility providers that are very protected and very insulated through state law. That aren't leaving our streets and our roadways in a condition that a lot of us feel would be suitable and satisfactory. And this is an effort to make sure that this stays in the forefront, Mr. President, with the monthly report letting us know what roadways have been ripped up, when the construction took place, when the construction was completed, and what the plans are in the future. After six months, when they're going to get out there and get it done if they have to go there and do it. It also allows us the opportunity to monitor the list and make sure that after the six months is up that these roadways get restored. So with that being said, I ask my council colleagues to support the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I've gotten a number of calls surrounding accounting, billing, and collections practices in the Treasurer-Collector's office. When we sit there and we look at what's going on, we have no assistant Treasurer-Collector. We have a temporary Treasurer-Collector, a part-time Treasurer-Collector that's a retiree that's been brought back. So in the interest of financial transparency, Mr. President, and to address some of the concerns that have been raised by those in the community, I'd request that an audit be conducted for the first 10 months of the year. When we look at where we were this time a year ago, we had very, very, very aggressive collections under the previous administration. A lot of money came in through the collections process, Mr. President, and I just want to make sure that we're doing the best that we can to ensure that these dollars are being captured and spent wisely.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd be happy to amend the paper to get three years of the last three years of the audits in that department to take a look at that. And then if there's any concern, I can pursue this paper at a future time. I'd ask the Councilor if that would satisfy his question and maybe allow him the opportunity to support this paper with that amendment. So often as a motion to amend Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Last three years of the auditor's reports to the Treasurer-Collector's Office.
[Adam Knight]: I don't want this to turn into a referendum on the qualifications or the abilities of Mr. Pompeo, but Mr. Pompeo is also limited to the number of hours that he can work as a retiree. So as a retiree in the public pension system, he's limited to 960 hours a year. If there's no assistant, then he's limited to 960 hours a year. That's why I raised the concern, Mr. President. But it's not a reflection of the duties or the work that he does down there. It's a reflection of the staffing levels down there and the level of productivity. But with that being said, I've amended the paper. I just don't want this to be turned into a referendum on Mr. Pompeo because that wasn't my intention in any way, shape, or form.
[Adam Knight]: Big picture of Mr. President would be the way that I'd like to look at it. Three years, 12 months in a packet, you know what I mean, is the way that I'd prefer it.
[Adam Knight]: Then we can take a look at those monthlies afterwards and see, you know.
[Adam Knight]: I'd be happy to support that amendment, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Councilor Caraviello, thank you as well. And Richie, thank you for everything that you do to the City of Medford, for the City of Medford, in the City of Medford. Richard has been a great business owner. He's the type of business that we want to have here in the City of Medford. When the pandemic hit, you saw what he did. He put out jersey barriers, he put out a tent, he has live entertainment. He's trying to keep the sense of community going here. He does a great job, as Councilor Caraviello said, the countless, countless, countless deliveries of food to people's homes when their loved ones pass away, unsolicited, unwanted. In some instances, Mr. President, Richie goes above and beyond. And not just in terms of being a business owner, but in terms of being a community partner and someone that really loves the city of Medford, cares for the city of Medford, and wants to make it a better place. So with that being said, through you to Richie and to his staff, Peter and Jason and everybody else. Thank you very much for all you do.
[Adam Knight]: Again, I defer to the senior member, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Yeah, as Councilor Caraviello mentioned, Teresa was the wife of former city manager John Glioni. And when John was here running the city, Teresa was running the show. As they always say, behind every good man is a better woman, and this is no different. What a great family the Glioni's raised. My dear friend, Janine McGonigal, Teresa was her mother. And she will be sadly missed. I'd just like to offer my condolences to the family and ask that my council colleagues join Councilor Caraviello and I in doing the same.
[Adam Knight]: Relatively self-explanatory, Mr. President, in the September 8th packet, we did receive a draft ordinance that we requested. I believe it was at the direction of Councilor Caraviello, and based off a previous paper that was issued in the previous session, Mr. President. But with that being said, the solicitor's office has put out a work product for us to review. And I'd ask that a COW be scheduled so that we can have the opportunity to do such.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. The Knight Early Education Academy over on Woburn Street has been up and running now for almost a week. And it's a trying experience, to say the least. But with that being said, Mr. President, One thing I'm noticing is that there's a need for us to be sure that those that don't have the same opportunities as others are still being provided the access to a quality public education. And truancy is one of those. one of those situations that's something that needs to be addressed. And our surrounding communities, some of them have multiple full-time truancy offices. I believe at one point the city of Somerville had three full-time truancy offices. I'm not saying or alluding to the fact that truancy is a problem in the city of Medford. But what I am saying is that based upon the new times that are before us and the expectations that have been expressed through our school committee and through that of DESE. the direction of the superintendent, ultimately our goal is to get kids back in school. But until then, we're going to be relying on remote learning or hybrid learning. And my concern is that certain subsects of our population are going to slip through the cracks and not be provided with the same opportunities that others are being provided during this time, Mr. President. So as the parent of a first grader and understanding that during these formidable years, the importance that education plays in the long-term development of an academic student raises concerns. So I'd ask that the school committee just provide us with a report as to what their plans are and how to address truancy during the pandemic and during the hybrid learning, during from home learning, Mr. President. I think it's very important that we understand what's going on so that we can ensure that all the students across the board are being provided with an ample opportunity to be educated properly. I'd like to further amend the paper to Mr. President and request a report from the school department indicating how many students we've lost to private schools between last year and this year due to the school closures. So with that being said, I'd ask my council colleagues to support the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, although the committee does not report to the council in terms of policy, the buck does stop here. The buck stops here. So if we're seeing a problem with truancy and we have one part-time truancy officer here in the community, maybe the council says it's time to kick it up a notch. Maybe you gotta hire a couple more people. And if you don't, then maybe we're going to have to hold back some funding over here until you do that. So there's an opportunity in a way for us, Mr. President, very similar to the way that we were able to broker a deal with the historical commission and the property owner to promote and push for certain aspects of a better quality public education. And where the council controls the purse strings, and truancy is a concern, and there's a school department policy and a city policy. I do believe that surrounds some of this stuff. I think it's important that we know. I guess my question is this. Why don't we want to know what their policy is on truancy? And why wouldn't we expect them to have one? It's not so much that we want to force something down their throat. All we're doing is asking them to report back to the council with a report on what its plans are to address truancy. It's not a request to tell them to make a plan. It's not a request to tell them how to do it, where to do it, or when to do it. It's a request to fill us in and give us information as to what you're doing to make sure that this situation doesn't happen. I can certainly appreciate the council's position. However, knowledge is power and the more knowledge we have, the better off we're going to be and the better job we're going to be able to do for the people and especially the students. As a parent, Mr. President, this is very concerning to me. Two young children at home, a six year old and a four year old. The day before school was supposed to start, my four year old lost his daycare. So people are struggling through this, and the more information that we have, the better. And the other thing that's important, Mr. President, is if we do see a truancy problem, usually the truancy problem isn't necessarily rooted in anything other than things going on at home. And while the school committee does have certain authority, the city has far more resources. when it comes down to family issues. So that's another opportunity, Mr. President, for us to gain some more information and then maybe modify or amend the types of services that we deliver to the residents here based upon the data that we're receiving to see what makes sense to be sure that the taxpayers are getting the level of services that they so deserve.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I do remember, maybe, was it five weeks ago? You sent an email out to the administration talking about $250,000 that was part of our agreement with cable, our cable agreement.
[Adam Knight]: And I don't believe we ever got a response as to whether or not those funds were going to be appropriated or how they were going to be utilized, did we? It was a form letter. Similar to a form letter, if I'm not mistaken.
[Adam Knight]: May I be so bold to suggest, Mr. President, that a portion of the $250,000 from the cable agreement be allotted for the purpose of hiring an election coordinator for the November general election? And can I be so bold as to suggest that in the form of a amendment? Second.
[Adam Knight]: I don't want to steal your thunder. You're the guy that found the money, John, but let's spend it.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. The idea was raised as part of a committee report during our budget discussions, something I brought up when we were looking at the projections during the COVID-19 circumstance and the budget deliberations relative to the anticipated forecasted revenues that were going to be coming in through the various departments that are revenue generating. the building department and their building permits, for example. And when we sat down with the finance director and we saw what the trends were and what the projections were, we took a vote. And that vote was to have quarterly meetings. with the finance director to update us on where we are currently in terms of collections and where our projections are. And this is a follow-up to that recommendation that was made during the budget hearings back in June. I'd ask my council colleagues to support it as the first quarter was July, August, and September. And September is going to be closing at the end of the week. Our next meeting is October. Sixth is it? You are correct. And the meeting after that I'd ask that the finance director be prepared to appear before the council at a council meeting and give us an update as to where we are on forecast and projected revenues.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I thank the councilors for bringing this resolution forward. I'd also, I think it's very important that we recognize the work of our Substance Abuse and Prevention Office and where they've come in such a short time since being created. The office has only been in effect now for maybe what, five years, six years? And the strides that they've made in this community in terms of education and outreach have been enumerable compared to where we were before to where we are today, the level of services that we offer as a city. But I think it's also important, Mr. President, to recognize that in the spirit of National Recovery Month, that this is a resolution that we must support this evening. And I wholeheartedly will vote entirely in favor of it this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to table the committee reports.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, on the records of August 25th, I'd like to move for approval. If we table these, any further 30 days will pass. The open meeting law says that it's best practice to have them approved within 30 days of passage, of completion of the meeting. So I'd move for approval of the August 25th- Second. You have 15 minutes.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight? I do believe Councilor Caballero was the moving party taken off the table, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: OK, on the motion of Councilor. Is John McLaughlin available, the facilities director?
[Adam Knight]: She's John's boss, so she should probably be.
[Adam Knight]: I do. I'd just like to give us a breakdown as to where funds are going to be expended. That was the reason why we tabled it last week.
[Adam Knight]: I believe.
[Adam Knight]: Excellent. Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Vincent. I appreciate you being here. Now, these funds, this $800 and somewhat thousand dollars, these funds are for capital improvements, correct? They're not for any personnel. They can't bring reading specialists back into the classroom or anything like that, right? These are just for capital expenses?
[Adam Knight]: Right, but so the council's tabling of this item did not prevent the school department from bringing any teachers or any classroom teachers back, is that correct? That is correct. Excellent, thank you. Because sometimes there's a lot of misinformation that travels around the community, and that was something that was going around. So I just wanted to be sure, Dr. Vincent, that we were all clear. that the funds here that were tabled by the council at the last meeting were for capital funds only. But the council did last meeting, I believe, increase the school department's budget by $1.08 million that would allow for those positions to be restored. Is that correct?
[Adam Knight]: Excellent. And after last week's meeting, I did have the opportunity to pick up the phone and make a telephone call to John McLaughlin. And I spoke with John at length and he explained to me the situation at the high school especially. relative to the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning system. He also explained to me that there were some air quality tests that were conducted that came back. And for the most part, all of our schools came back with very good reviews, with the exception of one. And I think we all know what school that is, Medford High School. So with that being said, Dr. Vincent, could you tell us a little bit about the scope of work that you're looking to spend this $800 and some odd thousand dollars on, please?
[Adam Knight]: And in terms of total cost for us to bring our HVAC system at Medford High School into compliance and I guess efficient and effective working order. Is this $816 enough money to do that or will there be a request for a supplemental appropriation at a later date going forward?
[Adam Knight]: And is it still the wishes of the committee to have this account be exclusive to Medford High School only and to the other schools?
[Adam Knight]: The reason I raise the question is because the way that the paper was drafted was that it would be reprogramming the funds to an account exclusive to Medford High School. And I know maybe Alicia's on the call, maybe Alicia can elaborate a little bit on that. But I do believe that when it was presented that those funds were restricted exclusively to Medford High School and were not going to be allowed to be used in other schools in the district. If I'm mistaken, please correct me. But maybe Ms. Nunley can help us out with that.
[Adam Knight]: So it's the committee's, the school department's wishes to keep the paper as is and not amend it and allow it for just MHS only because it's only $800,000 and you can spend that all up at the high school, no problem.
[Adam Knight]: It's certainly not a problem for me. The paper came from the administration, so maybe Aleesha Nunley, my finance director, can talk a little bit about that.
[Adam Knight]: So we'd have to amend the paper? Mr. President, I would offer that in the form of a motion to amend the paper to reflect that these funds can be used across the school district, not just exclusive to Medford High School. Second.
[Adam Knight]: That is correct.
[Adam Knight]: That's it for me, sir. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I don't have much to say about the paper, but I did want to Welcome aboard, Assistant Superintendent Murphy, and thank him for going through his initiation this evening as his first appearance before the Medford City Council. I do look forward to meeting him in a less formal setting, and I wish him all the best in his new endeavor.
[Adam Knight]: On the motion, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Morell.
[Adam Knight]: I will second it.
[Adam Knight]: They were co-sponsors of the amendment and I moved to second them all.
[Adam Knight]: We're under suspension, Mr. President. Paper 20517, the companion paper to the paper that was just on the table. Move for approval. Second.
[Adam Knight]: So we took seven first? We took seven first. Yeah. Well, let's give them the big money now. Still second.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, why don't we transfer all the amendments from the past paper to this paper?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think this is a rather self-explanatory resolution. However, the reason that it's being filed is not so self-explanatory. Here in our community now, I've never served on the council at a time where I've gotten more calls. about permits being delayed, demolition delays, and the like, Mr. President. And I'd like to take a review of the annual reports as required by the Historical Commission to be filed with the administration to take a look at what's going on. My brief research on this topic has shown me, Mr. President, that since 2009, There have been over 50 plus cases where demolition delay has been implemented in the community, but only four homes have not been demolished during this time. Four buildings, I should say, not even homes, buildings. Four buildings have not been demolished. the success rate is minimal, is minimal at this point in time. So I have a number of questions like, have these four homes been restored or did they just not get demolished? Were they restored to a historic state or were they left there to just be the same way that they were before they were deemed to be historically significant or preferentially preserved? Do these 50 plus cases include applicants who are delayed and withdrew their appeal? the 18 month or the six month period was up at the time, Mr. President. I'm getting a lot of pushback and a lot of phone calls about people who feel as though the demolition delay is being used as a weapon against them for not complying with certain requirements and certain things that are being demanded of them. And it's starting to become very problematic, Mr. President. And the reason I say it's problematic is because when we look at what's going on in this community right now, when we look at our financial situation here in this community, If we don't embrace development in the very near future, I'm going to say we don't have the ability to meet our payroll next year. For the past five years, we've generated at least $1.5 million in new growth in this community. And that $1.5 million is necessary for us to just meet the contractual obligations of our payroll. This fiscal year, we've estimated our new growth to be at $1 million, not $1.5 million as it has been for the past five years. This coupled with the fact that we have certain sectors of our economy that we need to bring back, like the restaurant industry and the hotel industry. Because those sectors allow us to raise additional revenues here for the community, Mr. President. So I think we've done a great job in expanding the offerings that we have for outdoor dining in the community. And we need to do that because the meals tax is a benefit. that we get when our restaurants do well. And the same goes for our hotels. If hotels are being turned over, we get a tax on that, Mr. President. And right now, with one in five adults out of work, 20% unemployment across the commonwealth, I think it's important for us to look down the line a little bit at what the financial situation is going to be in this community. And unless we start embracing development, generating permitting fees and new growth, we're not going to be in a strong financial position come this time next year. And a lot of this, I think, surrounds some of the work that's being done relative to demolition delay. And now the next layer of that, which is going to be if you want a permit for basic repairs or modifications to your home, you're also going to have to go before that other layer of bureaucracy and potentially be subject to an 18 month delay in the issuance of your permit. And I think that's a problem, Mr. President. So I raise this issue because we've asked for a committee of the whole on this months and months ago. It hasn't happened. We've asked for reports. We haven't gotten them. We haven't gotten them. So here I am looking at this saying, what can we do in this community to help dig us out of this economic crisis? Well, one of those things we can do is develop wisely. Another thing we can do is generate permitting fees through development that's going to bolster. When we sat down and we talked about the budget, the biggest thing we talked about was the $2.4 million deficit in forecasted permitting fees out of the building department. And how are we going to climb out of this hole? Well, I can tell you by making people who want to invest in our community jump through hoops for 18 months. That's not going to do anything to jumpstart our economics, that's not going to do anything to generate more permitting fees, and that's not going to do anything to put us in a better economic and financial situation here in the community. Preserving historic homes is important, but I think we're going a bit too far at this point now, Mr. President. I think we're going a bit too far, and I think we really need to look at it, because quite frankly, If you have someone that wants to do a development in this community and they're subject to the demolition delay, the next thing that happens is the historical commission presents itself as a design review board. That says, well, show us your designs and if we like them, then we'll let you move forward. But nothing's to say that the designs that they show the historic commission are going to be approved by the ZBA. So we have a situation where we have someone that's looking to invest money in this community. who could be held up for 18 months at historic and then have to go through the whole process of the ZBA where they may or may not ever, ever get an approval for any design that they're seeking to implement in this community if variance is needed. I just think that it's very unfair, Mr. President, and rule number one in government for me has always been do no harm. Do no harm, rule number one in government. We had to help people, not hurt people. And when someone comes into the community and buys a parcel and wants to knock it down, And when they buy the parcel, the home's just a junky home. And when they want to knock it down, it becomes historically significant. And they've invested $750,000, $600,000, their life savings into these parcels. It's a life changing decision that's being made by a board or a commission that can harm these individuals. And I think it's very important, Mr. President, that we revisit the criteria, the circumstances, and the processes that we have in place when it comes down to the demolition delay or portions thereof. We spoke about it several weeks ago. And we called for a need for a committee of the whole on this. And I ask that it be scheduled sooner rather than later. And the reason I ask is because people are being hurt. People are being hurt financially in their pocket. When one in five adults in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts are unemployed and people are coming to Medford looking to invest money. I think we should embrace them and work with them, not against them, Mr. President. So with that being said, I ask for these reports to be issued and furnished to the council so that I can review them further and prepare myself for a committee of the whole, which is going to be scheduled. I have faith and confidence that it's going to get done, Mr. President. I know we're working under very strange circumstances these days. I feel like I'm at the zoo right now. Zoo, circus, the case could be made for either. But with that being said, Mr. President, I ask my council colleagues to support this resolution to get this information so that when we do have this further discussion and this further dialogue, we're all well informed as to what goes on, what the process is, and what the pros and cons of our ordinance is right now and how it affects people. So with that being said, I ask my council colleagues to support the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Both equally important issues, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: And I'm not talking about developers, Mr. President, like Locust Street or like Moderna or Mill Creek. I'm talking about the local builder. I'm talking about someone that wants to come in and make an investment in the community, someone that's going to maybe renovate a home. Maybe come in and do an addition to a house. Maybe someone that's going to come in and knock down a parcel that's a single family home in an apartment two district and create a tax base for us with an apartment there that complies with the existing zoning. That's what I'm talking about, Mr. President. I'm not talking about these big wig developers that are coming in here from Boston that are just going to throw millions and millions of dollars away. I'm talking about builders that have a very small margin. And if they're tied up for eight, nine, or ten months and it costs them $80,000 to $100,000, they have a very difficult time surviving. And when you look at these small builders, you also have to understand that they probably employ between 50 and 60 people. 50 and 60 people that are going to be doing a job in this community, that are going to have the opportunity to spend their money in our local business districts for lunch. in our gas stations to gas up their cars, in our local hardware stores to pick up supplies. So it all goes to the circular flow of our economy, Mr. President. But I think it's very important that we look at this, and I know that we have a number of items on the agenda, and I don't want to go any longer than I already have. So thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Not a scare tactic, a fact. There were 50 plus homes that have gone through the demolition delay and only four were saved. That's not a scare tactic. That's the truth. That's the facts that were included in the packet that were given to us by the Medford Historic District Commission. And it came in the packet this evening, even though we've asked for it, I can't tell you how many months ago. And the packet that it came in this evening is unrelated to the council request that came back previously. Not a scare tactic, Mr. President, just a fact.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. I certainly support the councilor's position to accelerate the process. Maybe that's why we need to look at whether or not an 18-month delay is appropriate or whether it should be reverted back to six.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: She'll make a motion for the chair to make a ruling.
[Adam Knight]: I am, Mr. President. Just a request for information.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I do believe statutorily, underneath the Department of Revenue, we are required to do real valuation every, I believe it's eight years, a defined period of eight years, every eight years we do a It's 05 is it now? I think I might have changed it. So we actually do have a team that goes out into the community and does assessments, real assessments based upon appraisals as required by the Department of Revenue and in compliance thereof.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. It's with deep sadness that I offer this resolution this evening. Eddie Terrence was a kid, I grew up with him, West Medford. A West Medford fixture, a West Medford legend. Had the opportunity of going to elementary school with Eddie, high school with Eddie, and always hanging out with him down the park. Whether it be placed in a park or dug a park, playing basketball, everywhere in between, causing havoc, riding our bikes and the such, Mr. President. But Eddie passed away unexpectedly just over the last couple of weeks with a little heart problem, a little heart trouble. And he's no longer with us. And Eddie was the type of kid that made everybody around him just better. When Eddie was there, he put you in a better mood. He had a smile that could light up a room and a personality that could make the shyest person the most friendly person in the world. A long time husband to Donna Doherty, CJ Doherty and Chuck Doherty's daughter and sister. And just an all around great kid, Mr. President. And I'm very sad to see him go and it's one of those. situations where when someone's gone, you wish you had the opportunity to spend more time with them. And Eddie was one of those kids, and I don't think there's anybody that knows Eddie that could say right now that they wish they didn't spend more time with him now that he's gone. So with that being said, Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to join me in offering an offerings of condolences. It's very unfortunate turn of events. I was on social media the other day and someone posted a picture. And it was a picture right across the hall in the mayor's office. And it was Eddie sitting down in Mayor McGlynn's chair with Mayor McGlynn next to him. There was a kid named Cedric Taylor sitting next to Eddie, who's no longer with us as well, and Justin Springer. And if we think back to a couple months ago, this council just recognized Justin Springer for the work that he's done in the city of Boston, doing outreach and communications work with the less fortunate. So it's very sad, Mr. President, when you reach a certain age and you see a picture like that of kids you grew up with in elementary school and in junior high and in high school, and two out of three of them are gone, they're no longer with us. So it just saddens me to see that he's gone, because like I said, he's a great person. And I'd ask my council colleagues to join me in supporting the family and offering this condolence to the family in this time of need.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. We've all been around Gail Armstrong, Richie Raymond, Sean Mangan at one point or another being involved in this community. And the outreach work that Armstrong Ambulance does and the give backs that they give to this community are innumerable. Just recently, about a month ago, Armstrong Ambulance was tasked with the responsibility of helping do COVID testing for the MHS families up at Medford High School. And to say that that was a momentous task is an understatement. But through their efforts and that of our friends in the Board of Health, they were able to pull it off. When you look at the testing that's been done in our community versus surrounding communities, you'll see that Medford's probably, at the time that this was done, about 1,000 tests ahead of the nearest community. I think the only community around here was Lynn that had tested more people than the city of Medford. So it goes to say and it goes to show that The strength of community partnerships can go a long way in all aspects of public life, but especially public health here. We've seen the community rise up and come together during this coronavirus situation. And I think that the efforts in the work of Gail, Richie, and Sean shouldn't go unnoticed, Mr. President. Not only in this endeavor, but in all that they do. Whether it comes to the free CPI training that they give to our coaches or the IADs that they've donated to our community. Armstrong does a lot, and I think it's important that we recognize what they do and the work that they do. So with that being said, I'm asking my council colleagues to support me in this agenda item this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And I know Councilor Marks has a similar paper on the agenda this evening. I bring this paper forward.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and thank you to Councilor Marks for allowing me to proceed first. I bring this paper forward, Mr. President, in light of a recent string of troubling events that have been brought to my attention. Home break-ins in the West Medford neighborhood, home invasions in the heights in South Medford, in the West Medford neighborhood. We have a crime analyst, Mr. President, that we budgeted, and the crime analyst does an excellent job. And I know that our decision makers in the police department are using that data to make good policy recommendations and good policing recommendations. But I think it's also important, Mr. President, that we have the opportunity to review this data to see what type of crime is happening in our community, whether it's violent crime, whether it's crime of personal property, whether it's domestic violence, whether it is. any number of identifiable trends or patents that will allow us to be dynamic and flexible in our response to it, Mr. President. I'm more than happy to sit down and discuss supplemental funding. I'm more than happy to sit down and discuss providing. any department in this community with the tools that they need to succeed. And I think it's very important for us to have a good understanding as to what the trends are and what the patents are in this community, so that we can get ahead of it and invest money in certain areas that we need to invest money in. For example, we have Harold McGilvery, he's our dog officer. He's an awesome dog officer, he does a great job. Maybe based upon the crime statistic and crime trends, we need two dog officers. We have a traffic division. We have a traffic division comprised of so many officers. Maybe based upon the crime statistics and the accident statistics, it shows that we should be having more officers in the traffic division and less officers in another division. Operational questions, Mr. President, certainly stuff that comes under the purview and scope of the Chief of Police. But that's something that's contingent and reliant upon funding. And if we're going to be spending the money, I want to make sure we're spending it in the right place to make the most impact and the most bang for our buck. And with the uptick in violent crime in this community, I think this is something that we really need to look at. And I shouldn't even say it's an uptick, because I don't know, because I haven't seen the stats. I should say with the public reporting of violent crime of recent in the community, I'm wondering if this is something that we need to be worried about. So with that being said, I'm going to defer to Councilor Marks, Mr. President, but thank you very much for indulging me.
[Adam Knight]: I do not believe we had a crime analyst going back that far. I think a crime analyst was something that I believe in your first term, Councilor Scott-Pelly's first term was something that we had put into the budget. So while I think that the data exists in terms of paper records and paper files, there wasn't someone there that was actually working as a crime analyst compiling that stuff and looking at trends and patterns and the such. So I'd ask that it be offered in the B papers to not hold up the underlying paper that's been offered on top of it.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. That's on from the beginning.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I find this ironic. I find it ironic that the MBTA cuts the express bus service that people take. because The other modes of transit that the t office is so inefficient and unreliable. I mean, ultimately, you take the bus, you take the 325. Councilor Marks takes the 325. You take the 325 because you don't want to take a bus to a train station and miss the bus or wait for a bus that's late to get to the train station to be packed in like a sardine or miss the first two trains when you get there because there's no room for you to get on the train. So it's nonsensical to me in a way, Mr. President. It's like they created these express lanes because people, Needed to get to work and couldn't rely on the existing modalities that the MBTA was offering, right? So here we are now, going back, and they're going to cut these from our community, which is fine. They're going to cut them, okay, that's what you want to do. I'm assuming that there's going to be a corresponding cut in our assessment, because our assessment's based on the level of service that we receive. And if they're cutting our services, then they should also be cutting our assessments. So my question would be also, what impact does this have on the MBTA's assessment to the community of Medford, where they're cutting service for the bus line. The assessments for our bus service should be cut as well. So I'd ask that question as to what the correlating assessment reduction with the reduction in these bus lines. I'd offer that in the form of an amendment.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and through to the city clerk and his team. Babe, Janice Haley, the registrars of voters, they didn't have an easy task. And they really didn't know what was going on until the last minute. And I think that the state didn't help us out in allowing us ample opportunity to plan properly. And because of that, we met some bumps in the road and snafus. But I think it's important to point out. the hours of work that these employees put in during early voting, vote by mail, and the like, Mr. President. And it expands further than just the clerk's office and the registrar's office. So the countless volunteers that were up here hour after hour, day after day during early voting. So I think it's important to point out that mistakes will happen and mistakes do happen. And as long as we identify that a mistake happened, we own it, which is one of Clerk Hurtubise's favorite things to do when a mistake happens. Provide corrective action, we're all going to be in a better place. And I think that the clerk has the team around him that's going to allow him to do that. All right, so with that being said, Mr. President, I know there were some bumps in the road, and I know that it could have been handled a little bit smoother. And I have all the confidence in the world and the team that's down there now that this won't happen again. But getting back to operations, and from an operational standpoint, Would it make sense for us, because of COVID, to condense the number of polling locations? Just a question to put out there, Mr. President. Do we need 15 polling locations when we have early voting and vote by mail, and then a lower turnout at the polls because of this? It's a question to chew on. It's a policy question that's going to have to go through the Board of Registrars of Voters. I know that it would probably require a homeward petition, because state law does mandate that I think there's, what, 4,000 voters per precinct, something like that. So it would take some work, Mr. President. But I don't know if it's an effort worth exploring or not. For the simple fact that it will reduce the cost of elections. There's ample opportunity and time for people to come in and early vote, vote by mail, and absentee vote. And we can consolidate the locations. We won't need as much personnel, so the margin of error might be smaller, is all I'm saying. So it's something to talk about, something to think about, Mr. President, that I look forward to discussing at a future committee of the whole, if possible.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I second the motion.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I just want to say this. Now, we've been doing this Zoom thing now for what, since St. Patty's Day?
[Adam Knight]: All right, so that's going back to March 16th. March 17th, we've been doing the Zoom. Almost six months. I don't like Zoom at all. I think it's awful. I have a terrible setup for it in my home. I got two young kids. I can't put them on lockdown for seven and eight and nine hour long meetings and tell them, don't say a word in the house, guys. I got a Zoom meeting going on. All right, it doesn't work for me. But I will say this, and I don't think anybody can shake a stick at it. The last two meetings that we've had in this chambers have been the best run meetings that we've had since St. Patrick's Day. And I'll be happy to say that, Mr. President. The reason why is because we're in these chambers and we're doing business where business is supposed to be done. And that's why when the governor issued his executive order, bodies public were exempt.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Clark That is correct amend the paper to amend the council rules to mandate masks behind the rail
[Adam Knight]: Okay. Mr. President, when do you plan on meeting with the Board of Health?
[Adam Knight]: So you'd be meeting with just the Board of Health and the solicitor yourself behind closed doors and then coming up with a plan?
[Adam Knight]: Because where it's, as a result of a council resolution, you might want to be careful meeting behind closed doors.
[Adam Knight]: From an operational standpoint, through you, through the author of the amendment, so does this feel like a standing COVID-19 updated every single council meeting by someone from the administration? I mean, I'm just concerned about posting, you know, I mean, we've talked about suspension of the rules. We've talked about how we're not bringing items under suspension of the rules. We have posting requirements through the open meeting law. So would this be like a standing invitation? Is it the first meeting of every month? Is it whenever the administration feels fit or is this gonna be one of those things where every month we say, okay, is anybody here from the administration that wants to come and give us an update on Corona? Okay, no, all right, moving on.
[Adam Knight]: So it wouldn't be that they're necessarily appearing before the council and are on the agenda. The request would be that they give us a weekly report as to the status.
[Adam Knight]: Under council purview or just in general?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Is that an amendment?
[Adam Knight]: So we're going to strike the language at each forthcoming regular council meeting?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to refer to a committee of the whole for a presentation by the Historic District Commission, the owner of the property, before the City Council.
[Adam Knight]: Is that OK? Yes. From the Historic District Commission, I think, would be the ones that are imposing this, presenting this. So the Historic District Commission can present it. We'll have the owner of the property there, as well as a representative from the mayor's office, Mr. President. Today, I had the opportunity to speak with Mayor Lungo on a number of issues. And this topic came up. And she suggested that we meet in the Committee of the Whole, and she'll have a representative from her staff available. To sit down with us and go over the paper as well as representatives from the Historic District Commission there, okay?
[Adam Knight]: And on to that point, Mr. President, I spoke with the mayor and she said that she would make someone available next week. She said she'd be willing to do that, but it would have to happen next week.
[Adam Knight]: No less than 10 days.
[Adam Knight]: I'll second that amendment, Mr. President. To meet within 10 days.
[Adam Knight]: Alright.
[Adam Knight]: Mueller?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'd like to recommend maybe a committee of the whole on this paper so that we can go over it in further detail. There are certainly some great aspects to it and some questions and concerns that I have relative to whether it applies to dumpster permits as well, whether or not we could extend this maybe to cover some compost files or some requirements around composting as well, Mr. President. So with that being said, I'd offer the motion that we convene in the committee of the whole to go over this ordinance. I'll second that.
[Adam Knight]: It would be the motions to just have a committee of the whole. So I don't know if it has to be a B paper. I'm not amending it in any way.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And building on what Councilor Marks had to say, I think it makes great sense. You know, government's constructed to help people. Government's constructed to deliver services. It shouldn't be an us versus them situation. When someone calls and says they have an infestation problem in the neighborhood, that's a serious issue and a serious problem. You know, it's gross, quite frankly. I mean, government should be reaching out and doing all they can to help. And the property line should not be the determining factor as to whether or not individuals are going to be receiving government services, especially here at the local level. You know, I think that moving forward, enforcement is going to be an issue, but also our Board of Health reaching out and helping residents when they run into this situation, circumstance and helping them bait and coming up with a road and abatement plan for them. And maybe having some of these funds from the revolving account used to go back into the community to help people who are facing infestations, being able to fund some extermination services. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'm looking forward to meeting on this.
[Adam Knight]: Sandy hasn't seen anyone. I can read his lips.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: This is a resolution that is not intended to present another undue burden on our already struggling businesses that are facing the coronavirus epidemic. However, I do think we can do a better job in presenting some curb appeal when we're doing some of these outdoor dining license and outdoor dining establishments, Mr. President. For example, we've seen what they've done down at Bistro 5. They put some lattice work up, they put a tent up, they put some lights up, and it looks nice. But then you go to other places in the community and you see the concrete Jersey barrier taken up five parking spots, and that's all it is. So I'm hoping that maybe we can implement some minimum beautification standards on the outdoor dining license, Mr. President, so that when we do have areas that need to be protected with Jersey barriers and the like, we also have some requirements and standards to maintain, keep, and improve our curb appeal. So that's the intention behind this resolution and I ask my council colleagues to support it.
[Adam Knight]: I would like to commend the administration, Mr. President, on getting the emergency outdoor dining licenses up and running in relatively fast order. When the governor issued his executive order allowing outdoor dining licenses to be issued under the emergency order, the administration embraced it and ran with it. So, you know, it's not to be critical of the job that they've done at all because they've done a great job. It's just a suggestion as to how we can improve. So I appreciate the work that they've done.
[Adam Knight]: Rick looks like he's on the beach. He's got the picture of the beach with the rocks in the ocean. I got him.
[Adam Knight]: With all due respect to the commentary around ADA compliance, that's the standard. That should be happening regardless of what's going on in our community. I think that it might be important for us if we do have some locations or sites in the city that we ask our ADA compliance officer, the director of diversity to go down there and check it out. You know, it certainly won't take anything away from the resolution, so I have no problem with you putting it in there. But the sole principle and purpose was for us to, you know, create some standards and beautification standards. ADA compliance is always an issue. It's always something that we need to do. It's always something that we should be focused on. So I have no problem amending the paper to reflect that. However, I don't want it to detract from the principal goal and objective.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Accessory use dwelling is a self-contained apartment in a single family homeless owner occupied attached or in a separate structure on the same lot of land. Many times these are referred to as in-law apartments or granny flats is another term that I've seen raised. But what accessory dwelling units will allow us to do is to create more affordable housing stock in our community and more housing stock in our community. We hear a lot about people that are being overhoused, people that are single living in a two, three or four bedroom home. But because there's a lack of stock and a lack of affordable stock, especially, there are many downsides. So Mr. President, looking at what's going on in our community, the cry for more affordable housing and more housing stock in the greater Boston area, and the fact that studies would show that by allowing accessory dwelling units, assessments go up anywhere between 25 to 34% in communities that allow accessory dwelling units in terms of property taxes. I think it's something that's very worthy of review, examination and debate. Previously, the city of Medford did allow accessory dwelling units and they allowed them well before any of our time, well before Mr. Moki's time through what was called the restrictive covenant. And that restrictive covenant was filed at the registry of deeds saying that when this parcel changed hands, that the accessory dwelling unit, which would have a kitchen and a bathroom in it, the kitchen would be removed. It would not be sold as a multifamily dwelling. So that's something we can also take a look at, Mr. President. Obviously, the restrictive covenant became something that became difficult to enforce, and that's why it fell by the wayside. So that may not be the best way to move about it, but it is an option for us. So with that being said, I think that it would make sense for the building commissioner and the city solicitor to provide us with a draft for us to debate, deliberate, and hopefully discuss with Mr. Bob Roski. I've had the opportunity of speaking with Andrew a little about this from our community development board at great lengths. Andrew is an expert in smart growth and accessory dwelling, accessory use dwellings. So, you know, he provides us with a vast array of expertise and knowledge in this area. And I think that this is something that the community development board would be excited to work with us on. So with that being said, I asked my council colleagues to support the measure. And, you know, when we talk about accessories dwellings, an apartment above a garage, Mr. President, or a small home in a backyard, you know, with the setbacks and zoning allows for it. So I think that that's, you know, a backyard cottage, something like that, a basement apartment. But just the housing options for people, you know, you know, someone who has aging parents, you know, I think that an accessory dwelling unit will be great for someone in my situation where I have a wife, young kids and an aging father who has his independence, but I would like to have him closer to me. You know, so those are just some things that we need to talk about and discuss, especially when we look at the city of Medford, the desire for us all to age in place and the opportunities and options that are out there and the limits that are surrounding them at this point in time, I think make this a good measure to pursue and to take a look at Mr. President. So with that being said, I rest my case and I'll ask my council colleagues to support the endeavor.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President in light of, um, in light of the events that have transpired over the past, uh, since January now, eight months, nine months, the number of ordinances that we've requested to be drafted and the number of ordinances that have come back. I think it might be worthwhile for us to schedule a committee of the whole with representatives from the solicitor's office and the city solicitor to get an update. I filed the resolution maybe 90 days ago seeking for monthly updates as to where we are in the status of the requested draft ordinances. And that's something that I think that we should pursue, Mr. President. We haven't gotten an update on the status of any of our draft ordinances. So it might make sense for us to call a committee of the whole so we can be brought up to speed as to where we are. That's the council work product. I certainly support Councilor Behr's resolution, but I think that it might make more sense for us instead of to get a report back, but to actually have a meeting and get all get in the same room where we can talk about it. So that would be the only request that I make is that he just changed the language in his amendment to require a committee of the whole as opposed to report back from the administration.
[Adam Knight]: Um, no, no, no, no. I said that there was a restricted covenant on prior prior permitting of these was allowed through a restrictive covenant. And when the property changed hands, the kitchen would have to be taken out.
[Adam Knight]: Well, I mean, the basic economic principle of supply and demand would drive the housing costs down. So, you know, it may not be an affordable housing unit per se by the definition of, you know, an affordable housing unit under Department of Housing and Community Development guidelines, but what it would do is make housing more affordable because our stock would increase. So if the supply exceeds the demand, the cost goes down. If the demand exceeds the supply, the cost goes up. So just the basic economic principle of supply and demand, the more housing units we have on the market, the cheaper that those units are going to be.
[Adam Knight]: The principle of the accessory use dwelling unit is it's usually a single-family owner-occupied home, right, defined by Massachusetts General Law, a single-family owner-occupied home. So it's not, you know, this isn't something where it's going to be, you know, I'm just throwing apartments up all over the place so tough kids can live there. You know what I mean? This is to meet a need and a demand in the community.
[Adam Knight]: This is in no way, shape, or form was a proposal to have these as inclusionary zoning housing units. It was just to allow for The ability to permit for an accessory unit to create more housing stock in the community. And when I think we're all getting hung up on this affordable affordable affordable. This isn't the proposal that's going to be required to be affordable housing, the affordability is going to lie in the supply and demand with the increase in supply. we're gonna be able to drive the cost of housing down. That's where the affordability comes in. Making it more affordable would probably be the best way to put it, but not affordable housing, making housing more affordable, as opposed to increasing our affordable housing stock. These accessory dwelling units in the stock that's going to come with them are not going to be attributable to our 10% threshold under the Department of Housing and Community Development. So I want that to be very clear. The affordability aspect comes into it by increasing the number of units in your community. We're going to hopefully catch up and then at some point meet or exceed our demand so that this cost will continue to drive down. So I don't want us to get hung up on this affordable housing, affordable housing, like it's something that's gonna go towards a safe habit threshold, because that's not the intention of this. The intention of this is to allow people the opportunity to pursue an ability to create in-law apartments and owner-occupied dwellings that are single-family. So that's where this is coming from. I want that to be very clear.
[Adam Knight]: approval on the motion of vice president caviello's second of i that's what bears consulate night uh mr president we could just have an explanation from somebody in the administration as to where these funds are going to go when they are re-injected into our school department's budget i'd appreciate that um i know that you know When we were going through the budget process, there were a number of decisions that were not filled. There was the hope that we would be going to be able to recall, I think another 30 or 40 employees. So I think an update would be worthwhile and sufficient at this point in time as to how these funds are going to be expended in the spirit of Council of Business Resolution. I know we have some representatives from the administration here, as well as some representatives from the teachers union that are here this evening as well.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. So is it safe to say at this point in time that the school committee is waiting for us to give them their money so that they can figure out how they want to spend it?
[Adam Knight]: Sounds good. More for approval, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Um, so we have two papers before us this evening. The one that we're speaking of right now is for the $703,000. Correct. Correct. So that is what would have been the savings on the science lab projects through our, um, uh, bond or a bond dissipation notes or whatever it was. However, we were able to save money on that project.
[Adam Knight]: And now what we're doing is we're gonna take that $703,000 and because we had appropriated that previously for school department capital improvements, we're going to repurpose these for continued school department capital improvements?
[Adam Knight]: And then of this $703,000, 112,000 of that is going to be directed towards the HEAC improvements? Yes. Or is that above and beyond?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, so what was the total surplus? Was it?
[Adam Knight]: Okay. So now when we're looking at the money that's come in over the past couple of weeks, we have about $1.9 million in funds that have been injected into our unrestricted government and chapter 70 money.
[Adam Knight]: And we had a $5.5 million deficit right around January 30th, June 30th. Correct. That brings us to about $3.6 million in deficit, restructural deficit right now. Then we have these two papers that's about another million dollars that we're going to be able to invest it back into our school system. So we're looking at having a deficit of about $2.6 million as of right now, compared to where we were June 30th. Correct. We've almost cut the deficit in half over the past 45 days.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
[Adam Knight]: I got it. Councilor Knight. Just a couple of questions for the finance director, through you, Mr. President. If we fail to reprogram these funds, what happens? Does it just revert back to the general fund?
[Adam Knight]: they just sit back in the capital project account. And by us repurposing or reprogramming these funds, would they be subject to appropriation in the future? Or is this a blank check? We're giving a $900,000 blank check to the school department for the capital fund without them having to come back to us and request appropriation.
[Adam Knight]: and what's the purpose that we'd be voting now?
[Adam Knight]: It's the Medford High School Improvements Project. So what we're doing right now is making a commitment of about $900,000 to invest in improvements just to Medford High School through the passage of this?
[Adam Knight]: If we do this, it would not be subject to appropriation? Correct. And if we don't do it, it would sit in the same account that it's in and would be able to appropriate that money at a later date? Yes, I request. Okay, so really, really what this is almost was setting up a revolving account almost for Medford High School school improvements. That's going to be funded through the surplus that we saved on these bonds.
[Adam Knight]: And do we know how we're going to prioritize. I think this is similar to what Councilor Scarpelli and Max are talking about, but what are we going to prioritize in terms of where the spending is going to go? I think that's very important. Without appropriation, then, you know, where that spending goes is going to be very important.
[Adam Knight]: All right, thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you and through you to the finance director. Also, what I heard was that the funds would have to be used only for Medford High School if we appropriated these funds and put them in this account?
[Adam Knight]: So as it's written right now, if the money stayed in the accounts that they were in, they were subject to appropriation, those funds could be used district wide? versus just at that exclusive school?
[Adam Knight]: Wouldn't it make more sense for the school committee to come and talk to us when they want us to spend the money versus us giving them the money and then saying, tell us where you're going to spend it later on. That's just food for thought, but I'm going to thank you. I appreciate you clarifying that.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. I think it's also important to ask the question, how long have these surplus funds remained in that account? Because if I recollect, I'm thinking that the science labs were probably completed in 2014 or 15.
[Adam Knight]: So were those funds in that account since that time?
[Adam Knight]: And this isn't a critique of the job you're doing, because I think you're doing a wonderful job, Miss Nunley. But you know, as the check and balance on The corner office is the check and balance on spending here in the community. And as the body responsible to make fiscally responsible decisions, I think it's important that we have an understanding where these funds are going to be spent and when they're going to be spent. And I'm a little uncomfortable writing a blank check and not knowing where those funds are going to be going. So for that reason, I would support Councilor Mark's motion that we lay these matters on the table until such time as we can receive correspondence from the school committee as to where they intend to spend these funds. I have all the confidence and faith in the world and John McLaughlin, I think he's done an excellent job since he's been appointed the facilities managers for the school department. And I know that these monies will not be wasted. However, we have a job to do here as well. And that's, you know, provide a check and balance on the spending and the buck stops here. And I don't think it's appropriate for us to write a check for 800 and some $1,000 and not know where that money is going. So for those reasons, I'll be supporting Councilor Mark's resolution to amend the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: apparently. Councilor Marks, you said- It was a motion that was made and seconded and debate continued, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Just to be clear, the councilor's motion is to ask for the chairman to make a ruling as to whether or not this paper is out of order?
[Adam Knight]: So am I- The original paper that we sent to the administration was to get an opinion as to what the policy was, wasn't it? That's correct.
[Adam Knight]: So are you making the ruling on the motion now, or are you reading the paper into the record?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, so then what we'll do is read the paper into the record and then we'll address the council's motion.
[Adam Knight]: So what about the Councilor's point of order? Councilor Caraviello made a point of order. He asked for a ruling on the decorum and appropriateness of the paper.
[Adam Knight]: So you're making a ruling and determining that the paper is not out of order and that it's appropriate?
[Adam Knight]: I question the ruling of the Chair.
[Adam Knight]: So they, so they, so that the calendar wrote, um, yeah, so the papers were a lot of water and, uh, that's it, right?
[Adam Knight]: I certainly can appreciate the spirit of the resolution that's been brought forward. However, based upon my background in organized labor and representing police unions in the past, this is something that may strike a concern relative to collective bargaining rights, collective bargaining agreements and the like, Mr. President. So with that being said, I'll be voting in opposition of this resolution this evening, just because I don't have enough knowledge understanding as to what the collective bargaining agreement says between the Metro Police Performance Association in the city relative to construction details and the like. I certainly believe that public safety comes first and public safety is our number one job. But with that being said, I also don't want to tread on water that's something that's outside our purview and subject to the mandatory requirements of collective bargaining. So for those reasons, I'll be voting against this paper.
[Adam Knight]: I might be more comfortable supporting it after I hear from him then, Mr. President, but thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: So from what I'm taking back from this, Mr. McGilvrey, through the president to you, is that this would require legislative action by the city council to pass a home rule petition and then get that up to Beacon Hill in order for this to become a reality?
[Adam Knight]: Like a million bucks, I can hear you perfectly fine.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. Okay, so.
[Adam Knight]: Okay, but it would require some, Bargaining at some I mean if the home rule petition passes it would supersede to collect a bargaining agreement But right now your contract would only allow for sworn officers to perform details correct, we would Yeah, correct, we would we would It wouldn't supersede our CBA.
[Adam Knight]: I meant to get Yeah, okay and Right now, when details go unfilled, are there any other entities or bodies that are eligible to participate if a traffic detail's not filled? Do surrounding communities come and help out in MedFed? Does the Sheriff's Department come and help out in MedFed? Are there other entities that are helping out now that, you know, help them perform some of these tasks and duties?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much. Mr. President, if I could amend the paper to request that the city administration provide us with a draft copy of the homework petition that's been presented, I think that would be helpful in us as we start to kick off this discussion because it does sound like a win-win if the collective bargaining agreement in the union's willing to be flexible and work with the community to provide this service, then I'm all for it. I'd like to offer that in the form of an amendment that the draft homework petition be provided to the council.
[Adam Knight]: I do think it's important to point out, Mr. President, there's a lot of talk about the library and about whether or not we needed a library and whether or not we needed a library that was this much money. If we were going to refurbish the existing library that we had, it would probably cost us more money than we're spending on what we have to raise and what we have to appropriate through taxation. With the grant, and the money that we have to appropriate, we're getting a library that's going to be state of the art. And I'm so excited about this and I'm very happy to see that Mr. Bloomberg was able and willing to step forward and donate some of his hard-earned money back to his hometown for our library. And I think it's also important that, you know, we recognize the work that Councilor Caraviello and his colleagues on the library fundraising committee have done. Um, this has been something that didn't happen overnight. It's something that happened, you know, over years and years and years of hard work. Um, you know, the City Council, uh, fought to be sure that our library was funded at an appropriate level that would make us eligible for this grant. And, uh, Councilor Caraviello has shown great leadership on this issue and this is going to be a long-lasting legacy, uh, for him and his family long after he's gone when they get to look at that building and see it up there and know that he had such, uh, such an instrumental role in making it happen. So Rick, thank you for everything you've done and thank you to your team because it's a really exciting time.
[Adam Knight]: We're in the corner, you know, we're coming close to the finish line and there's been a lot of questions about the financial uncertainty in the library and this announcement really sets me at ease and it makes me hopeful that we'll be able to raise, if not enough to fund the rest of it, but even more for maybe a preventative maintenance account. So with that being said, with Ryu, Mr. President, the Vice President and his team over at the library, thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: I also think it's important, Mr. President, I did forget to reference the hard work that our state delegation has put into also being sure that we're getting this grant and making sure that the grant remains funded and stays online. You know, Representative Donato continues to deliver week in and week out for the city of Medford and Representative Bob has done the same. especially when it comes to this library. So I think we're very fortunate to have them as well, Representative Gobley and all the work that they've done in maintaining a commitment to ensure that we maintain the funding level that this grant you know, the grand commitment was at the beginning before the COVID-19 and the fiscal crisis that struck us. So I think it's also important that we look at the work that our state delegation does. There's a term, it takes a village. And, you know, this is the perfect example of the city and the state government working together to deliver for the taxpayers here in the communities. representative Bob and representative gobbledy, as well as Senator Jalen, and making sure that the funding mechanisms remain in place so that we can continue to thrive and move forward in the project.
[Adam Knight]: I appreciate Councilor Bears bringing this resolution forward. There was a part of it when I read that I was a little concerned about, it was about how we're going to disseminate information relative to how this is going to work. And he provided us with some solutions, a robocall, some social media, stuff like that. I have no problem with this type of outreach, Mr. President, especially based upon the circumstances that are going on at the federal level relative to census count, post office and the like. So with that being said, I support the resolution a lot.
[Adam Knight]: I will second it for approval.
[Adam Knight]: This is a matter of public participation, Mr. President, not a petition, not a resolution, not a resolve. I don't think it's going to be subject to that rule in my personal opinion as the chair.
[Adam Knight]: About 30 days have passed since we made the request, Mr. President. Since 2017, when the demolition delay ordinance was changed, granting an 18-month demolition delay, how many homes have been determined to be historically, culturally, or politically significant and have been restored? We still haven't gotten that information, so I'd like to reiterate that request, Mr. President. But you know what, this is a public participation paper, and I don't want to get into open meeting law violations. I won't offer that in the form of a motion. What I'll do is I'll put it on the agenda for the next meeting, provided that my council colleagues have no problem with that. It's an update item, it's an update issue, and we haven't received an update on it. So I'll revisit this, Mr. President, when appropriate, but I do feel as though this is information that we need. I also think it's going to be very important for us to take a look at the, they have an annual report. The historic commission has to file an annual report with the administration, with the mayor, pursuant to, I believe, chapter 48 of our local ordinances. And I'd be very interested to see what those documents say. Mr. President may be going back to 2017 or 2016 when we made the ordinance change. And I'd also like to see those maybe published on the internet so that we have an open and transparent process for individuals to have the opportunity to look at. I know that those words were very big during the campaign for mayor, and I hope that they still hold true to this day. So with that being said, Mr. President, I do rest my case. I share a lot of the concerns that Ms. Catalo has brought up. I share a lot of concerns about what's going on when it comes to development here in the community and when it comes to, you know, boards and commissions. exceeding their authority. Um, so with that being said, I think this is an issue that does need further investigation. That's why I voted for it previously. Um, but I can certainly understand where Ms. Catalo is coming from. And I think it's also important to point out, um, the reliance that the city has on the issuance of building permits, new growth in the community. Those are two very important items that come into play when it comes to municipal finance and our ability to be sustainable and to meet our financial obligations going forward. So those are things that we need to think about, Mr. President. With that being said, I rest my case and I thank the petitioner for bringing the matter forward this evening.
[Adam Knight]: That's not the role of the historical commission. The role of the historical commission is to determine whether or not a property has political, cultural, or historical significance in the community. That's what their role is. The building department's job is to stop abuses. Yes, that's right. And we brought it to their attention and now they're doing that. Councilor, I agree with you 100%. It's my understanding that the building department is responding to changes that the Historical Commission has made to their procedures and processes.
[Adam Knight]: Relative to the adoption of some standard relative to the National Wildlife Service or something like that.
[Adam Knight]: That is not actually correct at all. That's the conversation that we had last meeting, and that was what seemed to be affirmed by both Mr. Mulkey and the chairman of the commission. Which standard did you say the commission put in front of those? Some wildlife thing about log cabins in the woods for national parks or something like that. No, Councilor, you're just inaccurate. That's factually inaccurate. You know, that was what was portrayed to us anyway at the last meeting. But with that being said, Mr. President, this is a petition for public participation. It doesn't warrant a vote, receiving a place on file or anything else. The petitioners made their case, so with that being I certainly have nothing to add further and I look forward to a committee of the whole.
[Adam Knight]: I do hope that the gentleman is not saying that I'm lying when surrounding the term truth. I just wanted that to be very clear that I'm representing what I heard at the last meeting, I'm not making anything up. And I think that when I heard the term truth, it kind of broke up there, but I wanted to be sure that I wasn't being called someone that was portraying facts that were different than what happened at the last meeting. So with that being said, Mr. President, I trust that the council wasn't attacking me personally on that or calling me a liar. And I think it might make sense for all of us to be in the same room to discuss this issue as we voted on last meeting.
[Adam Knight]: This is a public hearing in favor or against. It should be ended. We have 35 items on the agenda. If we allow the dialogue to continue for four or five minutes on every item on the agenda this evening, we're going to be here until tomorrow morning. I appreciate what Mr. Anderson has to say and I agree with him. I'm not going to be supporting the zoning amendment this evening. I'm going to vote to reject it. for the reasons that I stated when it was introduced. However, in the interest of getting through the agenda, Mr. President, I think it might be important for us to maybe limit the time of public participation this evening. We have 35 items on the agenda.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to close the public air.
[Adam Knight]: Was that opposed, Mr. President?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to reject the zoning amendment, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, so I'm following a meeting of the Committee of the Whole.
[Adam Knight]: I would assume that can be done between now and our next regularly scheduled meeting, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Or representative thereof, whoever wants to go over these changes, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I would move to name the date as the next regularly scheduled city council meeting, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Or you can add it as part of the main motion, so we don't have to vote on it twice.
[Adam Knight]: As amended by Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, this is the public hearing portion. It's either opposed or against, right?
[Adam Knight]: This is a public hearing. It's either we're in opposition or we're in favor of the project. We go, again, I understand we're coming from Marion, but we have 35 items on the agenda. If we continue down this road, we're going to be here all evening. The common practice that's always been with the council has been public hearing in favor or opposed. When we've had people come to the podium in the council meetings, we've told them, Stop, public hearing in favor or opposed.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I do believe granted locations and personal property tax are attached to any type of grant location in the underground infrastructure that they put in through the assessor's office. And I do believe that that itemization is determined after they complete the work and construct what it is that they need to construct so that we can tax it appropriately.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I do believe Councilor Scarpelli has a question.
[Adam Knight]: He's muted.
[Adam Knight]: Good luck.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I do think it's important to point out that this measure has been recommended by the city engineer. And as part of the Eversource project, I do believe that that area will be resurfaced curb to curb on the completion of the Eversource project. So I think that's something that's important to point out. If in fact there is any disruption or trenching that's done in that area, come completion of the Eversource project, it will be resurfaced curb to curb. I can certainly confidently vote for this paper this evening in approval. However, I would defer to the rest of the council as to what direction they want to take, whether they want to receive them at a table of matter or a table of matter until the applicant comes back is fine with me. That's been a normal practice in the past, but I'm comfortable voting on it this evening. I wish you good luck.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I find this is a rather self-explanatory resolution. What I'm asking for is a committee of the whole meeting with the administration and representatives of the fire department and the fire union to discuss the future of our fire headquarters, fire training tower, and the like, Mr. President. We've had many discussions over the past three or four years relative to these projects, and many commitments were made. And I just would like to see where we stand in this process. I know we face very trying and scary financial times right now, the picture isn't beautiful. However, I think it's important that we maintain some of the commitments that we made, and at the very least communicate with friends of the fire department as to where we stand, what's going on, and what commitments still remain on the table moving forward. So with that being said, I'd ask my council colleagues to support the resolution. This is really just an effort to get more information, to find out where we are from a capital planning standpoint related to fire safety services, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, this is just a resolution providing a directive to the city clerk to forward us certain informations that come to his office. All too often, as a city councilor, you know, when you're down at CB Scoops getting an ice cream, someone will come up to you and say, hey, what's going on at this address or this location? You say, what are you talking about? I have no idea. And they say, well, there's doing construction over there. What's the story? Well, I've never received a paper on that. Pursuant to the way that projects are filed through site plan review, they have to be submitted to the clerk's office, Mr. President. So what this is is just directing the city clerk when any item that's subject to site plan review comes across his desk to include it in our council packets so that we're aware of it and then we can do our due diligence to be well informed about the certain projects that are going on. So what this is is asking the city clerk to provide us with information The city clerk was never directed to do this in the past, so what we're doing is just taking a step to ensure that we receive this information. I think Adam's doing a great job. This is no reflection on the work that he's doing. This is a new responsibility that we're tasking upon him, like we do probably every other week. We give him something else to do. I think pretty soon we'll have to look at giving this guy a raise or some more vacation time, Mr. President, if he's able to take it. being said, this is just an opportunity for us to gain information and gain certain documents related to projects that are being performed in our community that are subject to the site plan review. Those are the same projects that are also subject to our inclusionary housing ordinance. So I think it's very important, Mr. President, that we're aware of that before the shovel goes in the ground.
[Adam Knight]: Resolution does nothing to change the existing ordinances. It does nothing to change the approval process. All it does is allow us to be informed with documentation. It's really a request for public records that's an ongoing request for public records that when they come into the clerk's office, we get a copy of it, but it's not doing anything to change the existing ordinance or the existing approval process. That's not the intent of this piece of legislation, and it's not something I'm willing to amend to reach that fire at this point in time.
[Adam Knight]: I'd offer a motion to sever.
[Adam Knight]: I don't want it to be any paper, but the councilor is adding it. So I'm asking that it be severed.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, it's been brought to my attention. I think it's been brought to all of our attention. All of us in the community are well aware that a series of unfortunate events occurred on the night of July 4th down along Willis and Conger Street, I do believe, Mr. President, where there was an assault on police officers, shooting of fireworks, throwing of M-80s, quarter sticks of dynamite at our police officers under their cars. Just a scene of unrest. in violence, Mr. President, against our police department, against members of our public safety community. Our fire department, our police department, we're on the scene. So I'd just like to get a report, Mr. President, because unlike some people in this community that feel as though Facebook is the gospel of news, I don't. I feel as though if we're going to find out what's going on in this community, we should get official reports from the people in the department heads that are responsible for that. So with that being said, I'm bringing this initiative forward so I can have a better understanding of what happened down there, Mr. President, because I really don't know. The information that I've received about this has all been from media outlets and fake news outlets. So with that being said, I'm hoping that we can get a report directly from our chief of police.
[Adam Knight]: But as of right now, the issue that's before this council is the issues and events that happened on the evening of July 4th. And I would move for approval on that paper, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. For those of us that have been around the community, we're all well aware of the Honeycutt family and the contributions that they've made to MedFed. We look at Bill Honeycutt and the work that he does with John Brewer's Tavern and the volunteerism and the donations that he makes to the community. We look at Steve Honeycutt and the work that he did on the Disability Commission before his passing. And here we have Mrs. Honeycutt, who recently passed away, who's done such a great job raising children that had such a focus on community and such a focus on giving back. It's just very sad to see her leave. She was an integral part of this community. She did great work raising her children, and she's raised them to be great participants in social capital and the social fabric I mentioned, Mr. President, and she will surely be missed. So with that being said, I'd ask my council colleagues to join me in expressing deepest condolences and sincere condolences to the Honeycutt family in their time of loss.
[Adam Knight]: I second the motion, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I second the motion.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, it's my understanding that this issue has been resolved, that Arlington Catholic has decided to take their business elsewhere. However, I do find it quite unfortunate the series of events and circumstances that led up to Arlington Catholic having to go somewhere else to hold their graduation. The O'Melle Commission granted a permit, Arlington Catholic wrote a check, and they were unable to hold their graduation due to concerns around COVID-19. However, at the same time, Medford High School, who has a class that's twice the size, is holding graduation ceremonies at Homel Stadium. So for the interest of just fairness, Mr. President, I don't understand why this happened or how this happened. I just find it unfortunate that the number of children that graduated from Island and Catholic that have Medford roots or are Medford residents are probably up to 30% or 40% of the senior class. And to have them want to hold their ceremonies here in Medford This shows what a great relationship we have with Huntington Catholic and the amount of people in this community that believe in faith-based education and that send their children to Huntington Catholic but also remain members of our community that contribute quite a bit. So I just found that unfortunate, Mr. President. It's about the kids. And I'd like to get a report back from the city, but after filing this resolution and after the agenda was published, I did receive a lengthy response from the chief of staff that I admittedly glanced over and haven't had the opportunity to really get into and to read, Mr. President. So I will be offering to receive and place this paper on file until I can perform my due diligence and read the report that Chief of Staff Rodriguez forwarded to my email account and all of ours earlier in the week. But with that being said, I do find it unfortunate that, you know, things had to turn out this way. And I think that, you know, as the months and days go by, we need to come to grips with what's going on in the world, but also what's going on in this community and how we can continue to better provide services under whatever they want to call this new normal or whatever it is. I don't think there's anything normal about it, Mr. President. I think it's craziness. You can go into Target, but you can't go into City Hall. You got to wait in line to go in City Hall, but you can't go into Target. It's getting nutty. I think that it's time that we figure out what course we're going to take, what direction we're going to go in. get a game plan together and let's stick to it. I know that there's a lot of uncertainty, there's a lot of dynamic pieces and moving pieces and moving parts, Mr. President, but for us to not be able to provide for those families and those kids a graduation ceremony after all that they've had to put up with since St. Patrick's Day is a little bit unfortunate and I would have liked to see it handled a little bit differently. But with that being said, Mr. President, I will take the time So with that being said, Mr. President, I will offer to receive and place this item on file. However, there was a lot of concern about it that was brought up over the last several weeks. So I felt it was warranted to place it on the agenda this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Will the resurfacing be done in a curb-to-curb fashion, or is this going to be grounded inlay in a trench?
[Adam Knight]: The chief of state will have a comment on that as to what the street restoration plan would be for this. Dave, do you have any idea around Mr. Rodriguez?
[Adam Knight]: Excellent, thank you. No, it's just, it's always been a common question we've always asked about, you know, ground opening permits and restoration. And when, you know, our roads get reopened, what happens is we get a trench and the trench ends up being garbage in 18 months. And you know, the contractor is supposed to come back and let it sit for six months and replace it, then it'll be good as new, but that never happens. So we've been pushing for curb to curb restoration on projects like this.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, Mr. Fleming, I'm just, I'm explaining to the Comcast petitioner. and why I ask, you know, but I understand, you know, the need for the project. I don't like why they ask this here. And I apologize for interrupting, but I just figured it would be easier to ask the question while it was on the table, as opposed to going back to it after you're finished voting. So thank you.
[Adam Knight]: I just would recommend, Mr. President, that if night work is going to be discussed, we take the appropriate steps. We do have two senior buildings right across the street from that location, and we don't want to disrupt. that elderly population that live in our senior buildings, if in fact we can avoid that. So I certainly appreciate Councilor Mark's position on this and I too will support the paper this evening and await the report of the city engineer relative to the curb-to-curb repayment.
[Adam Knight]: It is pretty much curb to curb because it's going across the street.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Rodriguez, that's plenty. I'm no engineer. So any other information you give me that you want me to read, I'm not going to understand anyway.
[Adam Knight]: Sounds good. Excellent. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
[Adam Knight]: But I think just a few years ago, the only changes that we made to the demolition delay ordinance was homes that were constructed within 75 years and expanding the demolition delay from six months to 18 months. But the legislative body made no other changes other than that. So that's what I think is making this confusing to us. You know, when we made those changes to the demolition delay ordinance, that was it. It was just those two items. It wasn't this broad sweep to say, you know, start changing the way that you practice. I think that that's what the issue is. But I just wanted to correct what you said there, that when we changed the demolition delay ordinance, all we did was change from houses built before 1900 to houses built within the last 75 years. expanding the demolition delay period from six months to 18 months. So I think that's very important that we point that out. There's been no passage of an ordinance that changed anything that we did here, other than the amount of time that the demolition delay was in place and the age of the home that was subject to demolition delay.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. So it's my understanding that under the current application that the historic commission is using for a demolition delay. If someone wanted to change the windows out on their home, maybe move them six inches to the left, six inches to the right, they'd have to go before the historical commission in order to get an approval to do that?
[Adam Knight]: Let me ask you, if someone came today to your office and said, I want a permit to not take these windows out, blow them out and put a huge picture window in, would they be allowed to get that permit or would they have to go to the historical commission?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Moki, through the president, Mr. Moki. Underneath the new standards that are trying to be implemented now, interior work would also have to be, certain interior work would also need to have to be approved by the historic commission. Am I understanding that correctly?
[Adam Knight]: So in essence, if somebody wanted to make their house handicap accessible after a tragic event that happened in their family, they'd have to go before the historic commission to make the house handicap accessible as well? A circumstance could arise in that? It could potentially arise, yes. Somebody wanted to rip down a deck and put a ramp in, move a door so that they can meet the requirements of making a wheelchair pass through, they'd have to be subject to these requirements?
[Adam Knight]: And is this commonplace in other communities that the Historical Commission goes this far and gets this far involved in building and development?
[Adam Knight]: And also, Mr. Mochi, can you answer, or maybe we'll offer this as a B paper? I know you can't answer off the top of your head, but can we get a report back from the administration? Since amending the demolition delay ordinance, how many homes that have been subject to demolition delay have actually been restored to the historic state? Because I mean, we have an operative ordinance in there, but if it's not meeting the objectives, and now it's turning into this second layer of a building department, I don't know if that's good public policy, Mr. President. If we haven't saved any houses or restored any houses, and all this is doing is creating another layer of bureaucracy and another layer of government, the government within a government, for individuals to get permitting to make home improvements on the largest purchase that they make in their life, their kingdom, their castle, their home. I think this might have to be looked at. This certainly doesn't fall within the scope that I feel as though would be the intent of the legislation at the time it was passed or at the time that it was amended. So I'd like to offer that as a B paper. If we can find out how many homes since amending the resolution have actually been saved and restored, as opposed to how many wanted to demolish an old and decrepit building like Pacelli's and do something that might add some substantial community gain and also some tax revenue to the community. You know, how many of those projects just went to the wayside, and the building's still the building that it was, and the demolition delay, all it did was kill the sale, or kill the redevelopment or repurposing of a property. I think that's important to look at, Mr. President, because, you know, if the goal is to restore historic homes, and our demolition delay ordinance isn't meeting that goal, then why do we have it?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And through you to Mr. Mochi, and I apologize if you mentioned this earlier. Is there some sort of standard that the commission is referring to or using or utilizing that would put them in a position to expand the application of the Demolition Delay Ordinance this far? Is there a federal document, a state document, some sort of guideline that they're going by? Or is this just kind of willy-nilly, you're going to figure it out as we go along type of stuff?
[Adam Knight]: Yes, that's right. Don't you think that would be more applicable to log cabins in the woods than it would be about an urban environment with 60,000 people?
[Adam Knight]: And since, you know, you've been around for quite a bit of time, Mr. Mochi, and you've seen, you know, how this process works. I mean, is demolition delay being used as a tool to preserve housing or is demolition delay being used as a tool to control development in the community? I mean, do you feel as though the application is appropriate? Do you feel as though, you know, we're really going down a street that we're looking at preserving historic houses? Or do you really think that we're going down the street saying, oh my God, this guy wants to do something. Why are we letting this happen? Let's go make it historic. Because I feel like everything we're doing is reactionary, Mr. President. I don't feel like there's any proactive work on establishing what houses in this community would be historic until the day they get an application that they want to knock it down. And I think that that's problematic, you know, if we're going to create historic districts and historic commissions, I got a phone call today from somebody who had purchased a home that I applied for a demolition delay permit. And, you know, they deemed the home historically significant, and they're moving to create it as a single home historic district. So now here we have a person that invested a ton of money in a home, you know, he was ready to move in one direction. as it goes down that street, the game changes. So I don't think it's fair to people, Mr. President, quite frankly. You know, I don't mind having people come into the community and make investments in our community and play by the rules. But I think it's unfair to people that are trying to invest and improve our community to have to be scratching their head and wondering what the certainty and uncertainty is going to be. That coupled with the impacts this has on our homeowners, you know, I'm having a very difficult time with this. And I think, you know, be inclined to support Councilor Mack's amendment to the existing ordinance, you know, should this thing not be worked out appropriately.
[Adam Knight]: So this is a reactionary response to lack of enforcement as opposed to a necessity?
[Adam Knight]: Correct. So there really is no need to change the existing protocols. There is a need to invest in more rigorous enforcement.
[Adam Knight]: I don't know. That doesn't sound like it really aligns with the legislative intent, Mr. President, when it was passed or amended. But again, I will let the chips fall where they may and see where this leads us after Mr. Mulkey provides us with his comprehensive report. I don't know. It gives me a bad taste in my mouth, Mr. President. It doesn't feel right to me that someone can invest eight, nine million dollars in a home. and then be bound by so many restrictions and levels of bureaucracy. You know, especially with all the discussion that we're having about how government operates and the problems that we've seen in Medford relative to its housing and reports that have come out. You know, I think that sometimes less government is better than more government. And if in fact, you know, there is this, you know, belief that there's, you know, systemic racism that's going on in Medford, then maybe we should have less bureaucracy, not more, right? Because if government's the problem, then why is government gonna be all over everything? So with that being said, Mr. President, I rest my case. I support Councilor Marks' commentary. And I thank Mr. Mochi and Ms. Kena for being here this evening to explain. As the legislative body, these things come to us and we're asked what the intent was when it was passed and what are we trying to accomplish? preserving and restoring historic homes is what we're trying to accomplish. And if we're not doing that, then we need to take a better how to look at this. So thank you very much. I appreciate it. I rest my case.
[Adam Knight]: make a mistake, Mr. President, and through to Mr. Mulkey, that this was no criticism on the work that your office does. Quite frankly, I think you're probably the best run office that we have in the city of Medford. And quite frankly, you're also overburdened as it is right now. And like Councilor Mack said, to add another layer of you know, duties and responsibilities and bureaucracy that you're going to be responsible for, you know, might not make sense. But I want to be clear that this was no reflection on the job that you do or your office does. I think you guys do a wonderful job. And I've always said that you're my favorite department in the city because you guys are unbelievable responsive to the things that come up. So please, I hope you didn't take that the wrong way.
[Adam Knight]: Historic commission, yes.
[Adam Knight]: What do banks do when you want to get financing for a project and you go into a community that has an 18-month demolition delay? What's it like to get financing on a project?
[Adam Knight]: That's my opinion. And Mr. President, through you to the gentleman, as a small business owner, can you tell us a little bit about the business you're doing, how many employees you employ?
[Adam Knight]: And again, Mr. President, through you to the gentleman, so you're saying that you probably create on one gut renovation, 20 jobs, 10 jobs? Let's see, I was at 15 or more. 15 or more, okay. And these jobs all pay a living wage, I would assume?
[Adam Knight]: I wish I did. Thank you very much. I appreciate you taking the time, sir. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: This isn't necessarily particularly about one project, the Park Street project, number one. Number two, Somerville also wants to charge a person that's selling their home, I think, a 2% surcharge to move out of the community. So if we're using Somerville as a reference point as to what to do here in Medford, I think we're really going to be in big trouble. So with that being said, Mr. President, I appreciate the speaker, but I did want to clarify that. Some of the methodologies that they practice in the city of Somerville come from outer space.
[Adam Knight]: How many homes that were subject to demolition delay were restored?
[Adam Knight]: Was it last week or the week before, maybe, that the city administration announced a pilot program? And this pilot program, I believe, was called the Shared Streets Initiative, Mr. President. And the Shared Streets Initiative, the goal was to close certain streets to vehicular access, except for those that require local access only, to allow for some relief during the COVID-19 crisis to ensure that people can participate in recreational activities while also remaining socially distanced. If we look at where Pine Ridge Road is located, it's right along the Mystic Valley Parkway by the lake. This is a recreational area and a recreational destination spot. So it might make sense, Mr. President, for us to look at Pine Ridge Road as one of those streets that we limit to local access only so that the residents in the neighborhood can partake in recreational activities while also being safe and also protecting the neighborhood. We see a lot of out-of-towners and a lot of people come to Medford to utilize the many amenities and resources that we have. And one of the best resources that we have are the Mystic Lakes, a ton of open space, a ton of protected land that our surrounding communities don't necessarily have. So people come here as a destination to partake in these amenities. But in the process of that, we are seeing an impact in our neighborhoods. So I think that expanding the shared street or piloting the shared street program along Pine Ridge Road is something that would be worthy of exploring, Mr. President, and I'd ask the administration to do such in the form of an amendment.
[Adam Knight]: I know Councilor Caraviello mentions in his paper that Pine Ridge Road could potentially be a private way. It is a private way. It is a private way. I know in the past the council had requested a paper from Ben City Solicitor Rumley relative to private ways. And I do think that document will be very helpful. So I'd like to point out that the council is going down the right track and trying to come up with a solution, I think. I do believe that the residents of the private way do have the right to implement certain controls, like we've seen in other areas, Momola Way comes to mind. So with that being said, Mr. President, thank you very much. I just wanted to clarify that. So thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, this has been an ongoing problem for Gene, let me see. I think I started working with Charlie Shannon in 1999, and this was a problem then, and it's been an ongoing problem since. And working with Representative Donato over the last several years and looking at this issue, I think one of the major hurdles that we're facing is the DCR and their engineering division feels as though The gradient in the sight lines at this location by Wright's Pond are inappropriate for a crosswalk. They don't meet the standards that have been established. So while it'll create some pedestrian safety for crossing, I guess it creates some other problems relative to traffic flow and safety of stopping and the like. So this is an issue that's been ongoing for a number of years. I thank the Council for bringing it up and I also want to recognize the fact that you know this is something that Mr. Donato has been working on for quite a bit of time. It's something that needs to be addressed. The DCR has, you know, done a mismatch of enforcement applications up along the Elm Street area, whether it comes to parking along the fog line and the like for homes that don't have driveways and some other material movements to, you know, keep the pond safer, keep the area around the pond safer, and also address traffic infrastructure needs. But right now we're seeing some changes down at the Highland Ave intersection, Mr. President, along the Fellsway, which is right down the street as well. And I think these traffic improvements should help our case in moving forward. If they can get a traffic study done over in the city of Malden and address some of the concerns that they have over there, right down the street from us in an area that's not abutting one of our most popular recreational centers, then I think it's important that we pursue this. I think Councilor Marks was on the right track when he spoke about a traffic study and the need for a traffic study over in the Glenwood area or Medford over in Mr. Serino's house and the like. And I don't think we're going to be able to accomplish the goals that we want to accomplish in this area without our own. So I'd like to amend the paper and request that our traffic engineer conduct an independent traffic study or conduct an informal traffic study on behalf of the city of Medford to begin to formalize arguments against the state's rejection that's been well publicized in the past. So with that being said, I offer that in the form of an amendment, Mr. President, and I thank the sponsors for bringing this matter forward.
[Adam Knight]: Is there a policy in place that the administration abides by or goes by relative to the signing of the hanging of signs and banners on City Hall?
[Adam Knight]: I just, I support, you know, what Councilor Bears is saying. I say, you know, black lives do matter. I have no problem saying that. But I do have a concern when what happens when the next group comes down and says we want to hang our sign on City Hall too. What are the parameters? What are the guidelines? What are the criteria that the administration is going to put into play? Ultimately, we're not the body that's in charge or control of hanging anything on any city building. We're the legislative body. We're responsible for money and zoning. ordinances. So in looking at how this is going to play out and going forward, so what are we doing? We're telling the mayor, hang the sign, and the mayor's going to go, well, I have a policy that says I will. I have a policy that says I won't. There is no policy. We're working on a policy. I think it's important to know what the rules of the game are.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, you know, it's not the subject matter of the sign that's the issue. It's whether or not the City Council wants to be the repository for all the requests of what signs you want to hang on City Hall absent the policy, right? So, like I said, when's it going to stop? If it's this today, you know, I'm telling you right now, We're going to have the police here in a week saying that they want to, uh, police lives matter, sign up there. And a week after that, they're going to be another organization that says that they want to sign up there. Um, you know, so it's a slippery slope to go down, Mr. President, you know, um, his city hall is a beautiful historic building. Uh, what we should be focusing on beautifying it. You know what I mean? Not hanging abandons from it. In my opinion, um, black lives matter. I have no problem saying it. Um, but Mr. President, you know, we're a government organization. We're a government entity and we have to operate like one. I personally don't wanna sit here every week and debate the merits of what sign they're gonna hang up next on City Hall. That's a function of the administration and there should be a policy that goes to that effect. So with that being said, I support the motion made by Councilor Mux. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: The city of Medford will hang a banner reading Black Lives Matter on the front of Medford City Hall.
[Adam Knight]: Zach, would you be willing to amend that?
[Adam Knight]: I do believe the informal policy of previous administration was only city-sponsored events. if I'm not mistaken, but that might need to be clarified, but I think that was the ad hoc policy that was adopted by the previous administration.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, we do have 15 additional items on the agenda as well.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe it would be pertinent if we allowed everybody who hasn't had an opportunity to speak once to speak before we allow people to speak twice on the same issue. We're now at 11.30 and we still have 15 items left on our agenda to go through, one of which is a financial paper.
[Adam Knight]: The chair is the parliamentarian. The chair runs the meeting. None of the members have objected to the way that the point of information was handled. As such, I believe that this is an operational issue, no more, no less. And quite frankly, at this late hour, and based upon the direction that this conversation is going, and very far off course from whether or not we should hang signs on City Hall, it has now really turned into something, I think, a little bit more than that. I think it might be prudent for us to take a deep breath maybe and refocus where we are and move on with a vote.
[Adam Knight]: I'm sure the city clerk has recorded the notes accurately as he does every meeting. Maybe we shall refer to the city clerk as to what order these operations were made in.
[Adam Knight]: The chair is the parliamentarian of the meeting. The chair has relied on the opinion of the city clerk. The city clerk has made that. Now, if the gentleman wants to question the ruling of the chair, then he would have to make that motion and question the ruling of the chair. here on the floor at which time we would vote as a council as to whether or not we support the decision that the city, that the council president made or not.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, this paper has been something that's been a long time in the works. I do believe in 2018, a resolution was filed that I sponsored requesting that we expand recreational opportunities in the community, especially passive recreational opportunities at public parks and playgrounds and other open space. And one of those recommendations that was made was bocce courts. And through the leadership of Mayor Burke at the time, we were able to start a bocce court project. And this funding right here is going to allow us to complete that project, more portions thereof. So with that being said, Mr. President, I move for approval of the paper. This is something that's been long in the works for a number of years, and it's something that I wholeheartedly support.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to table until the administration can provide us with the dates and locations, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, this is a paper that's been two years in the making, two years in the works. It's gone through a very lengthy vetting process. I believe we started this in August of 2019. It went to the Community Development Board. It came back to the Council. The Council failed to act in the specified timeframes that are outlined in Chapter 48 of the General Laws. So as such, this paper is going to be required to be referred back again to the Community Development Board. because I do not believe we completed that task within the requisite 180 days from when the paper was introduced. So with that being said, I respectfully request my colleague withdraw her amendment to the paper that's gone through such a lengthy vetting process, and that we send the paper to the Community Development Board for their review and recommendation, at which time it will be reported back to the council, and then we'll have a public hearing. And that public hearing will take place after which then we'll be able to allow, be allowed to vote on the paper for a third reading. I think that it might be important for us to get the solicitation from the Community Development Board on what they think about this change in the definition. The paper that we were working off of was based upon their previous recommendations. So I think that it's very important, Mr. President, if we want to keep this thing moving through the process, that we do so with post haste. And amending it at this level in the game I don't think is a necessary requirement. Number one. Number two, I think that when you look at the state regulations that define what a restaurant is, the Architectural Access Board has put out regulations that define what a restaurant is. It's 521 CMR 17. Restaurants shall be included, but not limited to cafeterias, lounges, bars, and other places open to the public where food and beverages sold. So I don't think that any place that serves food or beverage in there would be classified otherwise based upon the standard that's been established by the state. And we all know that the state statute would supersede any local ordinance. If we look at chapter 138, which is the liquor laws in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the liquor laws in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts create three definitions for breweries. And those three definitions are a farmer's license, a brewer's license, or a manufacturer's license, Mr. President. So when we're creating, certain definitions. I think that it's important that we, number one, have legal counsel be advising us and helping us draft these items. Number two, that we have the building commissioner present to discuss with us the impact and application. So at this point, I think that it's premature to amend the paper. I think the appropriate step that would be in line with past practice would be to refer to the community development board prior to amendment, and then we have the ability to address it going forward. But that's my position on it. I respectfully request that the councilor make that change, but I understand if she does not want to, and I support her opinion either way. So thank you very much for indulging.
[Adam Knight]: So if we classify breweries as restaurants or brew pubs as restaurants, then they'd fall outside the brewery ordinance because they'd fall under the restaurant ordinance, which looks like it's used number 56 on a table of use chart. which would be retail sales and consumer services. So by right, by right, as a restaurant, in C1, C2, you're allowed. In industrial, it's a special permit by the council. In an office, it's a special permit by the council. In a mixed use, it's allowed. In an apartment, too, it's a special permit by the council. So you're confused as to what the amendment does. I mean, if we're defining that a brew pub is a restaurant, then it would operate outside the scope of the brewery ordinance. Are we amending the brewery ordinance to define brew pubs as restaurants? If we do that, are we amending the table of use chart to require that they fall under the new draft that's been put out, or are we asking that they be addressed under use 56 in our existing zoning use chart? What is it exactly that we're amending here to allow for this to happen? And if in fact we do amend the ordinance and change this definition, are we allowing brew pubs in areas that we've already vetted prior that would require a special permit or require certain restrictions on brewing? In the C-1, for example, there's restrictions on barrels and the number of barrels you can brew without a special permit and by right. But if we look at the use chart for restaurants, there is no restriction. So I'm confused by the amendment probably because I haven't been able to see it in writing and to see what exactly it does mechanically or operationally. So I'm not comfortable supporting it this evening, Mr. President. And I was the sponsor of bringing the brewery on the first paper I filed at the beginning of this term was to give CP out of the brewery ordinance and bring it back to life.
[Adam Knight]: But I mean, I think that if we're going to do it, we got to do it right. And we've gone through a process here that's taken almost a year, 11 months, and we've made great progress. And I am very uncomfortable voting on this at this late with these amendments. I'm just not comfortable doing it because of the questions that I just raised. You know, legal counsel has to vet the language to make sure we're not doing anything contrary to law. If we are, we've got to go back to the drawing board. If we are, you know, we're put in a worse position, Mr. President. So I'd ask that the amendments be introduced after maybe they're referred to legal counsel and then we can introduce them or attach them at a later date.
[Adam Knight]: I just do think it's important to point out, Mr. President, that the unamended paper before us is the paper that the council had reported out favorably and has to be placed on the agenda. The legislative process allows for amendments to be made, but the paper that's before us is the paper that the council voted on. The amendments weren't adopted through the committee of the whole process or the proper vetting process that's been established previously. It's for those reasons that I will be in. The uncertainty as to how this amendment will impact the zoning use chart and the application of the special permit process, for those reasons, I'll be voting against it this evening. I support breweries, I was the sponsor of the resolution, but I didn't understand when I got emails today, I didn't understand what they were talking about. Support the Medford brewing, amendment. I didn't know what that meant. I thought we were making an ordinance for breweries in the city of Medford, and apparently this is an amendment for Medford brewing, which was my misconception. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'll rest my case, Mr. President. I'm not comfortable voting for it this evening for the reasons that I stated, and so be it. But it's definitely a worthy endeavor and just something that, you know, once it gets through the process for a third reading, you know, I'll be happy to vote for it after I understand it a little bit better. But as of right now, I'm not comfortable doing so.
[Adam Knight]: No more than a procedural difference, Mr. President, that's all.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, this isn't a licensure hearing. This isn't a hearing on your licensure. This is a hearing on the ordinance that's before us. We understand what you're trying to accomplish.
[Adam Knight]: Can I ask a question? What in the existing ordinance prevents you from doing that?
[Adam Knight]: What in the existing ordinance prevents you from doing that absent an amendment?
[Adam Knight]: What I'm saying is, what in the existing ordinance prevents you from calling, from opening a brew pub? I mean, I think that there's three type of brewery license that you can get, right? A farmer's, a farmer brewer, a pub brewer, a manufacturer brewer, right? Those are the three types of brewery license that you can receive, and those are all defined by state law. And a restaurant is also defined by state law, right? So underneath the existing ordinance, what is it that you're not able to achieve? What's the district zoned at now that your potential location is in? Is it non-conforming use or is it something like that? That's why you're looking for this amendment? That's what I'm trying to figure out.
[Adam Knight]: He's much more intelligent than I am as well, Nick, not you. He's good. I know Sean for a number of years. He's great.
[Adam Knight]: So ultimately, what we're doing is we're not moving this out of the brewery ordinance. What we're doing is putting a definition into the brewery ordinance that would allow them to also sell bottles of vodka that they don't make on site if they get the proper license for it. Budweiser, Bud Light products if they want to serve those products because those are products that are provided by a distributor and not manufactured on site.
[Adam Knight]: And then the limitations on the production or the sale is capped at 25%. Can you clarify that?
[Adam Knight]: Now we'll come down to what state license you obtain, right?
[Adam Knight]: And I do understand that in the licensing process, you know, like you said, you have to go through the, at the federal level, the, the ATB, the Alcohol Tobacco Firearms Bureau, and at the state level, the Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission. So there is, you know, some levels of bureaucracy, yeah, because you know, the stuff can blow up and everything else. And you know, I mean, it's, it's not easy to make. Okay, I understand this a little bit better now. You know, I still would like legal review. So, you know, this evening I probably will not support it. However, in the future, once I get my clarifications from council and I feel comfortable, I will. So thank you very much for allowing me at this late hour to take up more time than we needed to. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, sir.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: One more paper, one more paper, one more.
[Adam Knight]: The election day stuff.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, after this, can we wrap it up and table everything and go to bed? I got to be up at five for work.
[Adam Knight]: This is ridiculous.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to waive the reading, Mr. President, and allow a representative from the administration please provide us with a brief synopsis, including the dates, times, and locations.
[Adam Knight]: So it's just kind of like peapod, but it doesn't go to your door. You got to run up to the car and pick it up.
[Adam Knight]: So it's pretty much, it's like Grubhub that cooks it in the car on the way to your house?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, I get it. And, you know, so say that the truck is coming to a neighborhood, Does the truck stop and stay there though? You know, I mean, is the truck blocking the street, but you know, do they need street closure permits or anything like that? Is it like a block potty type of deal or like a picnic or something? Or is it more like the thing pulls on the sidewalk and you go up to the ice cream truck?
[Adam Knight]: And they'd only be able to come five times to the city and that's it based upon what this is saying?
[Adam Knight]: All right, so this is almost like a trial program to see if this works?
[Adam Knight]: Oh, it's gone too long?
[Adam Knight]: The motion was to take the National Grid permits, Mr. President, to grant the location.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Going forward, Mr. President, as a practice, I feel as though it might be appropriate for us to not hold public hearings at 1 o'clock in the morning.
[Adam Knight]: And I think that, you know, when looking at the way that things have been going and the length of our meetings as of recent due to this wonderful technological advancement that we're using here to promote transparent government, that, you know, we might have to adopt a rule of some sort or amend our rules, Mr. President, to keep these meetings to be within a reasonable timeframe. You know, I think all the studies that we've ever read will show that meetings aren't productive if they last more than two hours. And we're going on about six now and it's 1.30 in the morning. So with that being said, Mr. President, I have no problem with the paper. I'll move for approval this evening. But it does raise concern that we're having a public hearing at 1 o'clock in the morning that was advertised for 7 o'clock in the evening yesterday.
[Adam Knight]: I'm just saying, as a practice going forward, I think that this might be not the best of them.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: I was just wondering who would be deciding the zoning, if it's separated between what the rules are and what the zoning is, who decides where it goes?
[Adam Knight]: Yes, good evening, Mr. Chairman. For the record, Mark Vaughn with the law firm of Riemer and Braunstein representing the applicant. Can you hear me okay?
[Adam Knight]: Pleasure to be before you this evening and really been watching the board the past several hours and I don't envy the job that you do. You do a wonderful job for this. So I wanted to just spare you a detailed presentation as you're approaching our, what looks like it's our number five, if you're hearing here. I know we had a pretty detailed summary presented at the last meeting. of what the project involves, but we're talking about the BJ's location at 278 Middlesex Avenue, where BJ's is looking to incorporate a gas facility within their existing parking field. There'd be no additional pavement proposed. Everything would be within the existing paved area. This is a surplus parking area that they feel would be ideally used for this use, which they've incorporated. many of their other BJ's locations. Just to remind the board, this would be limited to BJ's customers only. This is not open to the general public. It would be limited to BJ's customers only. And there would not be any service of vehicles or convenience store or anything like that. The kiosk that's there just simply as an attendant in it, and the only commercial activity, if you would, that could take place there would be someone that might be needing to renew a membership card or something like that. So in our first meeting, we obviously spent a lot of time focusing on the project. There was a lot of valuable feedback that we got in terms of things for us to look at as a team and get back to the board on with hopefully some answers and some further analysis. And we feel that we've been able to do that. We did submit a communication today, Mr. Chairman, with a couple of response letters to the city engineering staff responding to a number of comments that were raised previously. We also did submit a response letter to the law firm of Anderson and Krieger that represents the two commercial property owners across the street, the gas station across the street and the car wash and some other Medford residents. So we did respond to that as well and submitted that to the board. Over the past few weeks, we've spent a lot of time having further dialogue with city planning staff, both Alicia and Annie, appreciate the time that it took to meet with us to kind of drill down on a few of these items. and also city engineering staff to talk about some of the traffic and other enhancements that we might be able to do kind of outside of the property limits, if you would. And we did share a couple of concept plans with the board that shows, you know, some, I'm going to turn it over to our traffic engineer, Sean Kelly and Austin Turner, who's with Bowler. rather than my repeating what they're about to say. But I think the focus has been for us to look at some pedestrian enhancements, additional landscaping that we could provide, even though we're already providing a significant amount of new landscaping with their opportunities to provide even more. And then on the traffic front, how we might be able to address some additional pedestrian safety enhancements along Middlesex Ave and some ADA accessibility enhancements. any opportunities to modify that curb opening for the driveway, and further dialogue with MassDOT about the complete streets program and some things that we might be able to explore there. So if I could, I'd like to ask Sean Kelly with Van Assen Associates, our traffic engineer, to maybe speak to one of the exhibit plans. I don't know who might be able to pull that up, but he can speak a little bit more in depth on that. So, thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, I think Mr. Chairman, we really wanted to gain some feedback from the board, whether we were, you know, we feel that we've, done a good job of addressing the comments that we have heard before about how we could make improvements out there that would benefit the public. I think you acknowledge that, look, Middlesex Ave does see a lot of traffic. We're not in a position to kind of fix Middlesex Ave and everything going on with it, but what can we do to provide some meaningful improvements out there, particularly from a pedestrian perspective, which we've really kind of focused in on. But before we finalize any plans with revised drainage or anything like that, we wanted to get your feedback. So that was it, yeah.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Chairman, if I could just say something. Yes. So we certainly appreciate the feedback. I, you know, we do feel that the circulation does work, works well. I think this is consistent with, you know, what a lot of BJ's operations have in terms of the width of the access. And I know that the gentleman from the national spoke, you know, pointed out what he thought was some liabilities, but, you know, didn't point out that they were, you know, three other fueling stations available that really would not necessitate people having to queue where, you know, he was showing those queues. But, you know, we can certainly drill down a little bit further to provide the board more comfort that, you know, we're not going to be creating any type of a traffic hazard or, you know, a bad situation within the site. As far as the other improvements, I mean, maybe taking a more holistic look. I mean, what we really tried to do was provide pedestrian enhancements along Middlesex Avenue to make that a much safer area off of our site for pedestrians, as well as providing a safe pedestrian access route for people to be able to walk to the main store itself. I know there was comment about people living nearby that might want to go to the store, buy a gallon of milk, I mean, you know, probably going to be walking out there with, you know, shopping carts full of things and walking back and forth. But still, there could be a fair number of people that might want to walk to the store. So we are really trying to make a, I would say, a holistic improvement to what's out there. BJ's takes a lot of pride in this location. It's their very first BJ's in their entire portfolio, the first one built. They really are desirous of improving the appearance of it, you know, providing this as an amenity of their customer base. But, you know, we can certainly, you know, look at some other opportunities to, you know, make some improvements, but, you know, we try to do a good job of, you know, with the feedback that we heard to address it, but we'll continue to have a dialogue, so.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, that's not a problem. Whatever we need to do to meet statutory deadlines is fine, yeah.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to suspend the rules, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Papers under suspension.
[Adam Knight]: The only two papers that I filed under suspension this evening, Mr. President. The first being 20461.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I'm sure that this is a topic that's something that could be ruled out of order. I'm sure that you are inclined to do such based upon the late filing of the paper alone. With that being said, Mr. President, this paper does attempt to address a concern that's been raised by the council. And I do think it does warrant further discussion and deliberation. The question remains, Mr. President, is if the paper's ruled out of order, what direction can we go in later on? And if the paper's ruled out of order and that motion stands, then this can't be reintroduced for 90 days. In the interest, Mr. President, I think we're all aware of the situation and the circumstances as to what it is we're looking for here. I'm hoping that we can table this paper until next week, Mr. President. There's a lot of concern about people that haven't had an opportunity to participate, whether it be in the school department meetings or in the city council meetings, and the level of participation and the platform that's being used doesn't work for them. And I can certainly agree that the platform has been difficult. I've had a number of technical difficulties myself with it, and we've talked to a number of people, Mr. President, about this. So with that being said, there is a matter that's before us here, and I think that it's important that it be given the proper consideration. And I'm offering an olive branch here, Mr. President. I'd be willing to table this measure this evening and request that yourself as the Council President, Council Caraviello as the Vice President, meet with representatives from the administration, the Director of the Board of Health, Patrick Gordon, and the mayor, to see if there's a way that we can improve the way that we're doing business here and to improve the virtual platform, the ability for us to have public participation and public input live in some capacity or some way, whether that be a hybrid with Zoom or not, Mr. President. But I'm asking that this matter be tabled this evening with the conditions that, you know, you and Councilor Caraviello meet with those individuals from the administration. You give it one shot, Mr. President. Meet for one hour tomorrow. If we can work something out, that's great. If not, I'd be happy to be bound by the determination that's made by the vice president, the council president, and most parties. But I think, Mr. President, this is a topic that there are a number of people in the community that have expressed a great deal of concern about. There's been a lot of back-and-forth and division in the city of Metro right now about the way that we're conducting business. And I think it warrants another look to see if we can do better. With that being said, Mr. President, I also see that we're under a timeline. There is a crunch that we're facing here. There are a number of procedural concerns that were raised. There are a number of operational concerns that were raised. You know, the Medford City Council is a government body. It's a governmental body, and it has to respect and adhere to certain processes that are going to be in the best interest of the citizenry. That coupled with the fact that, you know, social media isn't a government body. Those platforms do not have to be held to the same criteria and standards when it comes down to us conducting business versus the way that matters are bantered back and forth, Mr. President. I just think that right now it would make more sense for us to put this item on the table, allow the two leaders that we've elected here in the City Council who are on opposite ends of an issue to come together and meet with the administration and try to work out a plan. I'm asking for 60 minutes tomorrow. but the two leaders of this council to meet with those individuals from the administration, Mr. President. And if we can move forward in that fashion and you guys can have one last shot at trying to improve the way that we allow the public to participate, I'll be happy to be bound by any determination or any outcome of that one hour meeting that takes place tomorrow. So, with that being said, Mr. President, I do appreciate you entertaining me with the ability to present my position on this matter and why I brought it forward, ultimately bringing it forward to address some transparency issues that have been brought up, to address some procedural issues that have been brought up, and to allow for a call for more public participation that's live in real time. So with that being said, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think that that's absolutely great and perfectly clear. And if you had met and talked to people about that, and there was no way that we could conduct this plan, and you brought that back to the body, and we sat down and had a meeting, and that was explained to us, I think that that would be great. But that's not what happened. So with that being said, Mr. President, that this isn't an issue that we're trying to create an internal fight and further divide the community on. And I'm not sitting there saying, Zach and Nicole and John are wrong because they showed up at meetings. That's not what I'm doing, Mr. President. And I'd expect my council colleagues to not do the same. What I am saying is that there's a concern here. This concern was brought up, and it came out rapid, very fast. There wasn't much time to address it. And I took a stand, Mr. President, and I stand by that vote that I took. I felt as though it was important that people be provided an opportunity to present live and talk about the concerns that they have. and they don't have the opportunity to come to a school committee meeting and face the people that laid them off, I think that that's a problem. So with that being said, Mr. President, I've offered this proposal in an effort to try to build a bridge between the two positions of where we're at. And I understand the crunch of time that we're on, so I think that that's a great compromise solution that I'm offering, that you and Council Vice President Caraviello meet with those three individuals tomorrow, sit down, try to hash out a plan where there can be more public participation in a live setting in one fashion or another, and we can move on from there, Mr. President. I'd be happy to be bound by the findings of that committee. However, at this point in time, you know, based upon the series of events and circumstances that arose, I didn't feel as though I was informed, I didn't feel as though there was a great good – there was a good deal of communication, and I took a stand, Mr. President. And, you know, if I feel something – if there's something that I think I should stand up for, I will, and that's what I did. And, you know, and I've got to look in the mirror every morning and shave my face before I, you know, before I leave the House, Mr. President. And that's one of the biggest tests for a politician. Can you look in the mirror every day? And I always have been able to, and I will continue to do so as long as I serve. But with that being said, Mr. President, I offer this proposal that we table this, and the Joint Council of Caraviello Meet, for the purpose of conducting a small meeting, one hour in length, with Marian O'Connor, with Mayor Lungo-Koehn. and with Patrick Gordon, the Director of Community Media, to see if there's ways that we can improve the in-person or real-time public participation of our council meetings, especially relative to the budget hearings, Mr. President. I think that's really what my main focus is on, is the budget hearings. Point of information. Through the rest of it.
[Adam Knight]: The motion is to be tabled under the conditions that the Council President and the Council Vice President agreed to take these steps. And I think that that's a good compromise.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Whatever plan that the parties can agree to, Mr. President. I don't think anything, nothing in the proposal that I put forward was to exclude Zoom, Mr. President. It was just to say that that's a platform that might not work and there may be other platforms that are better. Zoom could have been used for the call-in portion of the public participation, for example. So, you know, nothing limited this to Zoom, but my concern was that I wanted to be in the same room with the people that were making the cuts so that I could look them in the eye and ask them the questions that I need to ask, Mr. President. Then there's another layer of concern with the public participation process. It's twofold. But as I've said before, in an effort to move past this issue and to negotiate some sort of compromise that's good for all of us, I offered this compromise proposal. I asked for it to be second so we can move on. Second, Mr. President. Motion to table ends all debate.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Ioannoni. The chair never made a ruling on whether or not the paper was out of order. The paper was introduced, a motion was made before there was a request to have the ruling made on the paper. The motion was the table. Then we had a debate on that, then that debate on the table was seconded. That ends all debate on the topic The council wants to go through the exercise of having the paper ruled out of order, having maybe someone call the question of the chair and then going through that whole process again. I don't see where that's going to get us. Ultimately, Mr. President, we're all on the same page here. We're all going down the same track here that I think we can agree on. So let's not put any more obstacles in front of the way and let's get there.
[Adam Knight]: Ms. Dunley-Benjamin, are you aware when the next set of rates are going to be established by the Water Sewer Commission?
[Adam Knight]: Okay. And do you know what they are offhand?
[Adam Knight]: Okay. And this appropriation is going to be used to offset some of that impact to the residential user by keeping it at the balanced rate and using the reserves to offset it so that we don't have to have a further increase.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much. I support the paper and move approval, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Well, that's very disappointing.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. It's my understanding, based upon my most recent conversation with the Director of the Board of Health, that government bodies were deemed exempt from the 10-person gathering rule, which led me to believe that where we have a budget that's $184 million with a $10 million shortfall, if we were going to be discussing issues of that severity, that we should all be in the same room to address it. Um, so when the council took a vote to say that we should all meet non-virtually to address these budget hearings The non-virtual piece was us being in the same room. The virtual component can be there. That is what it is Um, you know, so ultimately my concern was this the council voted one way It was never brought back to the council to say that that can't happen and this is why Okay, so we had a meeting on tuesday night and on tuesday night we were talking about how you know We need to have these budget hearings in person and we need to schedule them in person All the councils spoke on it, and everyone pretty much was in agreement. Yeah, you're right. We do need to meet in person. Then the budget hearing schedule was published on Wednesday. Ultimately, at the end of the day, you have four councillors here that are the four senior members of the council with over 100 years of combined experience in government that felt that something was wrong. We felt something was wrong. We felt something needed to be looked at a little further, so we took a stand. All right? I acted as an individual when I said I'm not coming to this meeting. Who knew what, when, and we could go on and on and go tit-for-tat with that. You know, I think I told John that I wasn't coming to the meeting. John doesn't think I told him clear enough. We're going back and forth about that. That's not going to accomplish anything. That's not going to move us forward. Me calling John a liar, John calling me a liar, you knew, you didn't know. No, that's not going to do anything to move Medford forward. Ultimately, there are four Councilors that are on the board that saw our problem. We saw our problem. We have 100 years of combined experience working in government, not as elected officials. I mean working in government. I've been working in government for a very long time. That's where I was coming from with this. It wasn't about heeding the advice of the director of the Board of Health because she never really gave us a straight answer. My answer was this. My question was this. Does the city council have the ability to meet non-virtually? Her answer was, no. Not a yes or no answer, it was this, that, and the other thing. Ultimately, government bodies are exempt. That was all that I was looking for. When we found out that government bodies were exempt, then there was an opportunity for us to further pursue in-person meetings or an in-person component for people to participate. As I've stated earlier, I'm happy to be bound by the decision that's made by this working group that we've been able to agree upon earlier this evening. And I look forward to sitting down and discussing the budget. I'm a big procedural geek when it comes to this stuff. I'm a student of the government. I've been working in government for a long time. I studied it. You know, I continue to study it. And it's something that I certainly enjoy doing. It's something that I take great pleasure in being able to do. It's something that I certainly am grateful for the opportunity to have. And I'm glad that the people put me here to fight for them. And that's what I was doing. I was fighting for the people that called me and felt like they didn't have a voice, for the little guy. You know, we hear time and time again that people talk about the vulnerable and marginalized populations that don't have anybody that's there to fight for them and there to talk for them. I was contacted by people that said to me, I can't believe that 111 teachers got laid off and they didn't have an opportunity to go to a meeting and talk about it. That's concerning, and I get it. We'll take the appropriate steps to be sure that we're safe, but ultimately, this is an opportunity for us to discuss about whether or not we can do things better. You know, was there a breakdown in communication? Yes, there was a breakdown in communication. Have we been able to get past that and come up with a plan and a course of action to take so that we can move forward? We have. You know, so I don't want anybody to think that, you know, the actions that I took were rooted in any type of malice or any type of, you know, act of disruption. My concerns were brought to me by my constituents, my constituency that asked. I want to have an opportunity. I want to have a voice, and I want to be there. If someone's going to lay me off, I want to have the opportunity to sit in front of them and look them in the eye and ask them why and make sure that they feel the human aspect of it. So, you know, that's where it's coming from. Mr. Walsh, I certainly understand what you're saying. I'm not a dummy. You know, I get it. You know what I mean? Public health professionals and public health professionals, none of us are in. But based upon the phased-in reopening plan, the social distance guidelines, and what we're seeing, you know, in other communities, as well as across the city of Metro with reopening, I thought it was something that needed to be looked at further. So, you know, I can certainly appreciate where you're coming from, and I'm not going to talk any longer than I already have to. You're next, Brock, don't worry, you're on. But, you know, I just want to, I don't want you to think, you know, because my camera's off, I'm not listening. My camera's off because I have some technical problems. When I have my camera off, my audio is better, so that's something that I'm dealing with personally. Over the weekend, I had my friend Paul Hall's dad come over and he looked at everything and he freaking told me what to do and how to do it to improve my signal, and things are working better today. We all have had to go through some growing pains and some learning pains to make this work. It's not a perfect format. It's not something that everybody's used to. It's not something that I'm particularly comfortable with. But, at the same time, if this is the way that we have to do business, this is the way that we have to do business. This is the best alternative. This is the best alternative. But, I don't think we should stop having that discussion about when is it going to be possible for us to get back to work. So, Brock, thank you very much. I appreciate you giving me the opportunity to blabber on and on about this. I really do. I talk far too long. But that's where I was coming from. I know a lot of people are going to say a lot of the same, and I was going to try to wait until the end, but I also don't want you to ask a question and then hear crickets. So I appreciate you entertaining me, and I do welcome further commentary. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: And I'm not, I'm not, John, I'm not saying you did. And that's not what I'm, you know, I'm saying we could go back and forth and say, who knew what, when, and you told me this and you didn't tell me, what's that going to do? We're not two kids in the school yard. You know what I mean? We've got a $184 million budget to tackle, baby. You know, so, you know, it's just a matter of how we're going to do it. We're going to be comfortable doing it. Correct. We're on the right track.
[Adam Knight]: No problem. Mr. Walsh, I'm sure you can appreciate, I think I might have a couple of emails in my inbox after the last couple of days. So I'm going to have to dig out that email, but what I will do is forward it to the city clerk as well. I appreciate that. They can get it to you if you provide them with your contact information and do it the way you please, because there's nothing to hide.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if I can respond to that. Yes, Councilor Knight. Mr. President, normal practice has been that the mayor would introduce the budget on the council agenda. And if we look back to past practice, this has happened pretty much every year. Last year, it didn't happen, but it should have. Pursuant to chapter 44, section 32, it says the mayor has to introduce the budget. And the normal practice that the council has always gone through would be that the mayor has introduced their budget and this has shown up on the council agenda. It's been given a council paper number and then the budget proceedings have been scheduled. And the reason that this is important to note is because when the budget is introduced, the council is bound by a certain period of time to act. So when we want to see the budget, we want to see the budget introduced. the budget introduced properly, then we can set up the meetings. Then we have 45 days to act by law. We have to either vote a yes or no within 45 days. That's what the law says. So, Mr. President, I think part of the concern is this. I didn't feel as though the budget was introduced properly because I didn't see it show up on the agenda. Now, we've already gotten concerns and questions about whether or not we violated the open meeting law when we put Adams on under suspension. There's been a lot of talk about whether or not this Zoom platform allows us to communicate effectively between all of us. And I have my doubts. I don't think that this is the best method for me to do my job, as I've said this before. But if it's the best that I got, it's the best that I got. I'd much rather be in the same room looking somebody in the eye and working with them, beside them. We're going to play on the same team. We've got to be on the same court. But, in terms of, you know, where's the budget? Where's the budget? Yeah, I wanted the budget, Mr. President, and I still do. I want it to be introduced. And it's my understanding that, you know, the mayor had dropped the budget off into the clerk's office by 6-18, and, you know, there was an error that occurred. There's no other way to put it. There was an error that occurred, a mistake. And I don't hold the clerk's feet to the fire for it, you know what I mean? It's been very difficult and these have been very trying times trying to live our lives through email and through virtual reality. But with that being said, you know, if the budget were on the agenda this evening, and showed up on the agenda this evening, it was introduced, I'd be at the meetings. The question was, we voted to have meetings one way, the budget was never introduced and then the budget hearings were scheduled. So it became a procedural mess and I got very, very concerned and very confused. Matt, coupled with the fact that I've gotten tons of calls about people that wanted to participate live, put me in a position to say, is there a way that we can address some of these concerns that are out there in the community so that it'll work for everyone? There's no malintent, there's no ill will. We're not trying to delay budget hearings. We're not trying to make it so nobody gets to talk. That's just not a reality. That's not the narrative. That's what's being painted, but it's not the reality. Ultimately, at the end of the day, We all work very well together. We've put out great work products in the past, and we're going to continue to do so. All this is is a scheduling issue. It's something that we had concerns about, you know, me personally and colleagues. And they've all said, you know, where they're coming from. There's no ill will. This wasn't some organized attempt to stall the way the government works. You know, it was four Councilors that had a belief, and their individual beliefs led them to take action. And if individual beliefs lead you to take action, I think that that's one of the foundations that public participation is rooted on. I have individual beliefs. I want to take action. So I'm going to go and participate. And we just wanted to make that easier or better for people. Zoom, no Zoom, it is what it is. I'm not crazy about this platform. I don't like it. I'm a people person. I want to be around people. I don't want to be stuck in my kitchen with my kids locked in the cellar and they can't use the internet because my bandwidth is weak and I'm having technical difficulties. I want to be able to roll up my sleeves and get to work. But, the way to do that, you know, because, you know, the city council is a government body. You know, Facebook isn't a government body. Twitter isn't a government body. The city council is a government body, and we need to respect and adhere to certain principles and processes. And I got a concern. A concern, you know, I think it was a significant concern, and it's something that we've been able to work past and address. And I've talked to the city clerk about it a thousand times, and I've talked to the council president about it. I've talked to past council presidents about it. It's something we're going to overcome. There's a picture being painted that there's four Councilors that are going to have pitchforks in their hands, and they're going to run down to Byrne City Hall. That's not the case at all. And that narrative that's being portrayed is absolutely contrary to reality. Procedural concerns, operational concerns, functional concerns, they were all legitimate, legitimate concerns. You might not agree with the reasoning for the stand that somebody took. But you have to appreciate the fact that we believed in something. Individuals believed in something and took a stand for something. That's all this is about. We're going to get past this. We're going to get a fiscal year budget done. We're going to set up a budget hearing schedule in a fashion that's going to work for us, or at least in a fashion where we take another bite at the apple to see if we can do better. That's where I'm coming from, Mr. President. This wasn't an effort to stop things. This was an effort to improve things, to see if we can do better and to address concerns that we were hearing. So I can certainly appreciate where everybody's coming from. But there was no ill will. The reality of the situation is not that the budget wants to be stopped by these four councilors. We're individuals that are acting. And when I said that the four senior members of the council, that wasn't saying that the other members of the council voice was any less important. What I was saying was that there are people that have experience. Experience is important. Experience does matter. That's what I was getting at. The four senior members of the council, and I said senior members just because we have the most It doesn't mean that we're better or worse than anybody else that serves on the board. It just means that we've experienced these situations more frequently. We've had more life experiences dealing with it. When it doesn't pass the smell test before people, then maybe it is something that warrants another look. We could go on and on all night long, you know what I mean, and throw stones and talk what the narrative is on social media and why we're here today because of it. But at the end of the day, we've been able to work out a solution and a plan to move forward. And I hope that as the night progresses, we can do that.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. The question that I asked her was whether or not the public body could meet and deliberate in person. Not whether or not the council chambers would be open to the public, not whether or not public participation would be available. The question that I asked her was whether or not, pursuant to the governor's executive order, there were any restrictions on the government body meeting in person. That answer that she gave versus the question that were asked are a little different. Um, I've been able to secure a copy of the email that, uh, Mr. Walsh spoke of, and I have already forwarded it. I do believe to the city clerk's attention, um, for distribution. Um, it's a little likely I'm not going to go through the time of reading it right now. Um, but you know, I do want to make that very clear. That, um, my question was, is there a restriction on the council meeting in the council chambers and doing these budget hearings in person? That was the first thing. If there is, then we can't do it. Then Zoom is the only alternative. If there's no restriction, then we can meet in person.
[Adam Knight]: That was the ambiguity that I had with it was there was a talk about public participation in the like as well involved in some of that email chain I do believe where it will be open to the general public to come and participate at the meeting in a physical setting, and we know that's not allowed because city halls closed. to the general public, but it's open to city employees. And the members of the Medford City Council are, in fact, city employees. So City Hall is open to us. Now, where we're a government body and we're exempt from the governor's executive order, then the question is, can we meet? And if we can meet, can we do it safely and in a setting where we're all in the same room? I mean, that's the question that was being asked. You know what I mean?
[Adam Knight]: That's fine. That's fine. You know what I mean? If you feel that way, that's your prerogative. And I can't change the way you feel, just like you can't change the way I feel when I took a stand for something I believed in.
[Adam Knight]: That's okay, you know what I mean? And we can agree to move on. I think we have a game plan here for us to address some of these concerns and go forward.
[Adam Knight]: And they're beautiful, let me tell you. But something is to be said when you have the people in the same room working together.
[Adam Knight]: Granted, there are safety protocols that need to be taken. There is a criteria and guideline that's been published. If people are going back to work, why aren't we? That's all I'm saying. If people are going back to work and getting phased in to go back to work, then the city council shouldn't be exempt. We should be going back to work too. Time out, time out, time out. Let me finish. And if we look at the governing rules of the city council, the criteria, the Medford City Council shall meet in the council chambers. That's what the rules say. You know what I mean? So, I'm not trying to split hairs here. You know, what I'm saying is that I prefer it there. I took an oath to do this job to the best of my ability. I know I do it better when I'm working with people in person. There are mitigating factors and circumstances, and we've come up with a proposal that I think will appease all the needs of everybody that's having conflicting viewpoints on this. Come tomorrow at 7 o'clock at night, this issue is going to be over. We're either going to have a new game plan or we're not. And, you have a commitment. from the four Councilors who have had concern about this to say, if, in fact, this body that we've talked about can't get together and come up with a solution, then all right. Game over. You win. We're going to move on. We'll be bound by the determination of the vice president, the council president, the health professional, the community media professional, and the administration. This time tomorrow, this issue is going to be over, and we're going to have a schedule.
[Adam Knight]: You know, as I explained previously in the meeting, there was no nefarious intentions, no nefarious goals. You know, what we wanted to do was open it up. There was a concern that was brought to me, and I felt as though it was inappropriate. I took a stand on that matter. I'm not in anybody's pocket. All right, I don't want to hear that. Let me finish. You had your opportunity that I don't appreciate. Now, you have the right to say what you want to say and you have the right to your opinion, but what I'm not going to stand for as a public employee is to sit here and have my character and reputation tarnished and criticized, okay? So, ultimately, I came out and I told you guys where I was coming from and I said why I did what I did. That might not be good enough for you, but that's where it is. That's where I'm coming from. That's all that it was. There's no more and no less, alright? The council took a vote. to see if we could have the meetings in person. It never came back around to a point that met the majority of the council's satisfaction. A stand was taken. We've been able to get past this stand, and now we're looking to move forward. I don't think that it's conducive to moving forward if we're going to make accusations like that, quite frankly. big personal umbrage to it because I feel as though you're attacking my character and you're attacking my reputation. I know that that's probably not your intention because emotions are running high. And this is an issue that people are very passionate about and I can appreciate that and I can accept it. However, Mr. President, I think that, you know, as the meeting goes forward, you know, every councilor that has taken a stand on the issue has explained what their intent was and it was not nefarious. And to say that it is, is, you know, concerning to me, you know, I'm a big boy, you know, I know what I signed up for when I ran for elected office and when I chose to live a public life and I can take people throwing rocks at me and I can take the heat and I can take the stones. You know, that's not a problem. But I just don't think if you're going to attack my character and call into question my motivations when I've already explained myself, that that's proper. Now, you know, I know it's not Miss Donahue. I know that that's a miss walk. I can appreciate where you're coming from. I really can, um, you know, and I thank you for your comments and I thank you for your passion and for your involvement. But, you know, as I stated before, there's no, I wasn't trying to run down the city hall with pitchforks and light the place on fire. You know, I was trying to create a process that worked better for people that express concern. And I'm sorry if that's not getting through or if the narrative is getting lost in translation, but this isn't, you know, some police unions got me in the pocket. And you know, we're not going to be able to be heard because quite frankly the budget hearings have to happen before we vote on the budget.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Falco, if I may, you know, I'm absolutely positively willing to say that There was a breakdown in communication, and we could have done a better job as a council on this. No doubt in my mind, you know what I mean? There was a breakdown in communication on this. Part of that has to do with the setting of the meetings. But again, I'm bound by whatever it is that this group of people that we've decided can go forward and talk about this comes up with. I'm bound by that. I've already put my – I've already said that. I've given my word to that. You know, so I think that, you know, our intents are our intents. stated out loud in public. It wasn't nefarious. There was no malintent. There was no ill will towards the process, towards our colleagues, or towards anything. It was making sure that we did it right and making sure that the people that had concerns Will listen to and people have concerns right now. I'm listening to you as well. And I I I thank you for that But I think when we're starting to go attack the character of the council is after they've already explained their position and why they did what they did Um is going down a slippery slope with the president.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to speak.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'm going to have to excuse myself for about 10 or 15 minutes because I got to put my kids to bed at this point in time. So I will be back, but I'm not going to be around for the next 10 minutes just so I can take care of this. Councilor Knight, thank you for notifying us. I apologize, but duty calls.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'll be the first to say, business is business. There's nothing personal about this at all. This is business. It's about advocating for what we think is right. And I would never, ever, ever pass judgment upon any one of my councilors for doing the same. I think it's important to point out, as Councilor Falco said, John, how long do we go back? You were my basketball coach at St. Francis when I played CYO when I was in the 10th grade. I've known you a long time. We've had plenty of disagreements from that day forward, and we've always been able to get past it. It has never been personal. I think that that's what's getting lost in translation here as well, Mr. President. There's a narrative that's going on, but there's also a reality that's going on. The reality is that there's not really much infighting going on between this group. There was a disagreement about a process and a procedure. That was it. That doesn't mean that tomorrow we're not going to go back to work and do the things that we're supposed to do. People tend to disagree all the time. That's okay. It's healthy. I mean, I never met two people that ever agreed on everything all the time, and I certainly never met anybody that's right all the time, and that goes for me, too. But, what I am saying, Mr. President, and I think it's important to point out, is there was nothing ever anything personal about this discussion and this situation. It was a matter of a principle and a procedural defect that people felt existed. And, we did what we thought was right, and we've come up with a solution to that. You know, I think that, you know, for the last four hours and nine minutes, we've sat here and we've listened. to the community. Some of the stuff had more to do with other issues and a little bit less to do about our budget schedule and when we're going to schedule it and how we're going to schedule it. And that's okay. But I think that it's time that we move on past the issue, Mr. President, because I think that all the members of the council are all in agreement that we have a, you know, plan of action to take. And once that process is exhausted, then, you know, we'll be right back to work again. And it's not going to be any beef or any sweat if anybody's back. We're here today at the regular council meeting to take care of the business, and we'll continue to do that. This isn't a personal dispute between anybody on the council. It was something that was a disagreement about policy. That's going to happen from time to time. The narrative that we're all fighting and we can't get along and this and that isn't the truth. That isn't factual. I think that, at the end of the day, When this budget season closes and when this legislative session closes, this council is going to put out a lot of good work product. And constituents here in the community and the residents in this community are going to have something to be proud of. And I'm proud to serve with each and every one of you. And I owe no hostilities or animosity towards any of you for making the decisions that you make for what you feel are in the best interest of the community. So with that being said, I thank It says be buck. I missed your first name when I was writing it down. I apologize. Sorry, it's Brian, Brian, Brian. I thank Brian for giving the opportunity to kind of let this thing speak on this issue so that we can get down to the regular order of business. Here we are at 1111. I'm sitting outside my kid's bedroom right now on zoom and they're yelling at me every 30 seconds. So, with that being said, you know, we have a plan of action, we've explained ourselves, and I think it's time for us to move on.
[Adam Knight]: I did not know show a meeting, Mr. President. We've had many discussions over this and we've also had a source of disagreement as to whether or not this notification was communicated to you appropriately and clearly. And that's part of this situation that we're in today. So I think that ultimately, we're at a point now where we're all ready to move on. We have a game plan, Mr. President. So let's do that. I'd ask now if there's nobody else that's willing to talk, but we can close this portion of the meeting and I'll make a motion to table everything that I put on the agenda for later on.
[Adam Knight]: Who's tablet?
[Adam Knight]: Reintroduce the motion to revert back to the regular order of business.
[Adam Knight]: I'll table indefinitely and I can pull it from the agenda if need be, but my intention would be to take it up next week. But if our meeting goes five hours before we start the agenda, then I will not take it up next week. So why don't we just keep it under as unfinished business? So we'll put it on the table and on unfinished business.
[Adam Knight]: Anything with my name on it, I'm tabling that I haven't already withdrawn.
[Adam Knight]: I was going to speak on it, but in the interest of time, Mr. President, I'll second the motion. We can deal with it in subcommittee. All right. Or not committee of the whole rather.
[Adam Knight]: Motion for a committee of the whole for the discussion, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Second.
[Adam Knight]: Good morning. Have a good day, everyone.
[Adam Knight]: I have a comment, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I haven't heard anything for the last 20 minutes. All right, I'm having significant technical difficulties. I'm just sitting here looking at frozen screens. So again, I ask for your leadership moving forward to get us back into council chambers.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'm uncomfortable seconding it, Mr. President, because I missed the whole entire presentation. Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, I think we've taken the wait-and-see approach for quite a bit of time. We have 14 days left before our budget expires, before the close of the fiscal year. We've been very patient. We've been calling for this budget now for the better part of six months. We had a commitment that we were going to get it. We haven't gotten it. I don't understand why. We have a consultant that's given us forecasted revenues. The consultant we're paying money for to do this is the advice that we should be listening to. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'm very disappointed that we haven't been able to get this budget book. I know it's no reflection of your leadership, Mr. President. It's a reflection of the corner office. And I'm very concerned about the direction this community is going in financially. I echo some of the concerns that my colleagues have made relative to the lack of understanding of the school budget process that's going on by some of our elected officials. So with that being said, Mr. President, it's going to be very important that we get in there and sit down in a room where we can all work this out. So with that being said, I echo some of the sentiments of my council colleagues, but we need to get this thing moving. And if the administration doesn't want to participate, that's sad. But we need to start calling department heads in and start talking to them about what their needs are, whether or not the administration's ready to provide us with money or not, numbers or not. It's time, Mr. President. It's time to address the elephant in the room.
[Adam Knight]: The purpose being Mr. President, no, I'm sorry, I didn't know. Go ahead. The purpose being to call paper 20435 and 20436 out of order, financial papers, communications from the mayor.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, we do have our – Danielle Evans from the Office of Community Development here this evening. It might be helpful if she provided us with a breakdown of the paper, but it's my understanding that annually we need to appropriate no less than 10 percent of the total CPA revenues to the appropriate category for which they're dedicated, and I do believe that this paper is The goal of this paper is to comply with that, but I'd like to hear from Danielle from OCD, please.
[Adam Knight]: I actually, Mr. President, I'm having a difficult time, so I just wanted to table papers 2-0-4-2-1, 2-0-4-2-3, and 2-0-4-2-5. Because of my connection, you know, I don't want to present a paper that you guys can hear me or that I can't hear you. So I'd like to table those till next week.
[Adam Knight]: At this moment, Mr. President, I'd like to withdraw paper 20424 and paper 20427. Both questions have been asked and answered by the administration.
[Adam Knight]: As we all know, June 6th is the anniversary of D-Day, where many of the young children of the Greatest Generation stormed beaches over in France and fought against the axis of evil to make a commitment to freedom, Mr. President. So with that being said, I think it's very important that we recognize the sacrifices that were made by the young men and women during the D-Day invasion and during World War II, and also recognize the fact that the Greatest Generation is something that we should emulate and try to model ourselves upon, especially now during these difficult and trying times that we're facing. So with that being said, I asked my council colleagues to support the resolution and offering a moment of silence for those that were involved in the D-Day invasions.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I had the great opportunity of meeting Brian Rabbitt back when I was playing Pop Warner for his father, Jack Rabbitt, and his brother, Jimmy, as my coaches on the A squad as a young kid. And I also had the pleasure of representing him as his business agent and union rep when I worked for the union. And over the years, we've been able to develop a great friendship. And I think it's very important, Mr. President, that we point out, any time that you turn on the water in your house, you should thank Brian Rabbit. Think of Brian Rabbit. Every time that you run the dishwasher, every time that you take a shower, every time that you get a drink of water, you should think of Brian Rabbit. Every time you see a fire department, attach a hose to that fire hydrant outside your house, you should thank Brian Rabbit. because he spent the better part of the last three decades, Mr. President, in the trenches doing the dirty work, the stuff that people don't get credit for. Brian was one hell of a worker, probably the hottest working man in show business when it came to DPW staff. There wasn't never a time that I saw him that he wasn't either going to or coming from work. The guy was constantly working, constantly covered in mud and dust and dirt from being in those trenches. And he's going to be sadly missed, Mr. President. Not only was he a good friend, but he was a great asset and a great public servant. And I offer my condolences to the family.
[Adam Knight]: I think this resolution is rather self-explanatory. What it is is a request for the city clerk to just chronicle who it is that's been appointed to city council appointments, when they were appointed, what their expiration date is, and whether or not we need to move forward with renewals or an open application process to solicit new applicants, or maybe offer some opportunity to create some new voices in the community. So with that being said, Mr. President, I thank you for entertaining this resolution. Again, I do apologize for the technical difficulties. So with that being said, I'd ask for a council colleague to second the motion. I second the motion.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, thank you very much, and I thank Councilor Caraviello for bringing this up. Ultimately, we have a demolition delay ordinance that calls for an 18-month period for demolition delay. And it was a measure that was put forth with good intentions, but I think this is one of the areas that we need to look at going forward, is the negative impact that an 18-month demolition delay will have. Um, if a person buys a property and they have to wait 18 months, uh, to demolish it, then, um, there could be the potential where the circumstances that we're in right now happen where, uh, you know, they let the property fall into disrepair for a period of a year and a half. Um, let that demolition delay window pass and then.
[Adam Knight]: Get deemed as a historically significant building. I mean, the only thing historically significant about Pacelli's is the curtains on the third floor apartment. So I think it's really something that we need to look at, Mr. President. As I sit here and speak and look at the screen, everybody is frozen. It looks like I'm in a museum, so I'm going to rest my case. But thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Yes. Thank you. It's on the consulate consulate copy all those paper. That's correct.
[Adam Knight]: I'm good, I have audio. If I turn on my video, I have no audio. And if I turn on my audio, my video gets messed up. But I find the records in order to move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: We need to face the uncomfortable fact that Medford is not perfect. For those of you who feel you have no voice, we hear you. We are listening. We want you to feel and to be free, to express your opinion and to do so without fear of punishment or reprisal. We recognize the need to be better and we will work with you.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to revert back to regular order of business. Thank you very much Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Consul and I. Mr. President, thank you very much. Socrates, good to see you again this evening, Phil. Good to see you too. A couple questions for you. Now this looks like it's a 200 foot trench. What's it going to be the typical trench that we used to see in a grounded in grounded inlay trench 18 inches right around the gutter the curb right along the curb? Yep. Okay, and is this you said it was for system upgrades for reliability circuit circuit or something?
[Adam Knight]: Okay. And 200 feet grounded inlay, 18 inches from the curb. And then it says also that some of this work is going to be done in a wooded or treed area. Is that on city property?
[Adam Knight]: I can double check. No, it looks like the tree warden's involved, so it looks like it is. Okay, I appreciate you clarifying some of those questions that I have for you. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I am hoping we can add a condition onto the granting of this location that when the work is complete, the street will be swept. We've seen Park Street, as Councilor Mark mentioned, Stearns Avenue, Golden Avenue, where a lot of public utility work has been performed, trenching the length of the street to replace pipes and the like. And what happens is, You know, they dig a 200-foot-long trench, and they have a great system of doing it. I mean, they're very efficient. They take all the stone out of the ground, all the dirt out of the ground. They put it on the street. They do the work that they have to get done while the street's closed. They put all the sand and dirt back in the hole. They seal it up. But there is debris left over, Mr. President. There are rocks and stuff like that that kick up. especially on streets that are highly frequented. You know, if you think about Golden Avenue, you think about Park Street, the amount of cars that drive down the street, kicking up those little rocks do tend to damage vehicles. So that's something that I'd like to ask to be placed on it as a condition that the street be swept the length of the 200 feet for which the trench is being dug.
[Adam Knight]: This petition, Mr. President, I have reviewed it. It does look like it is a J-pole only. And the 200 feet is east of the center line as to where it's located. It's gonna be a 200 foot run overhead from what Socrates said. What I have in front of me looks like it's in line. So in terms of making that a condition on this petition, I'm not so crazy about it, but in the future, I think that that's something that we need to talk about. So I would ask that it be added to the agenda of items that we've discussed in the past relative to French work when we conduct this meeting with the engineer. but at this point I would withdraw the I would withdraw the restriction.
[Adam Knight]: Also, Mr. President, that the special permit goes with the business and not with the address.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. Mr. President, yes. Um, as I've stated in the past, I have a, uh, hostile desire that we get a fiscal year budget completed before the close of the fiscal year. Um, just last week, I believe we met with our paid outside consultant that said that we're, uh, in a difficult financial situation. We have about a $10 million deficit. Um, we have $183 million budget. Um, the consultant says that he feels as though we do have the ability to put out a fiscal year budget. The consultant says that there's no way that we want to get involved in a 1-12 budget. So I'm going to do my best Jerry Maguire here, Mr. President, and ask, where's the budget? Show me the money. Show me the money, Mr. President. Time that we get to the table and start negotiating this budget, debating this budget. It's what, June 9th? The fiscal year closes in 21 days, Mr. President. We've seen nothing, not one financial paper yet. Transparency, where is it? Where is it? Again, come on, Jerry, say it. Show me the money. Show me the money, Jerry. Where is the budget, Mr. President? Where is it? You know, we need to take the bull by the horns, schedule budget debates, invite the administration to come down and participate. And if they don't want to, they don't have to. But we got to do something here. We got to show some leadership that at the end of the day, the residents and the taxpayers in this community know that we're pushing hard to be sure that city services aren't interrupted during these difficult fiscal times. So with that being said, Mr. President, I ask that you work with the administration to publish a schedule as to when we're going to be able to meet in person to conduct budget debates. I think, you know, as we're seeing the phases of government and coronavirus to be allowed to start working again, I'm pretty sure that the seven of us plus the department head and the budget director can sit down in a room, be safe, and work out these very significant, serious issues in this community. So I'll say it again. Show me the money. It's time, Mr. President. That's time, June 9th, June 9th. I've never, ever, ever in my time working in government and working in this community ever seen a goal this long where we haven't had some sort of budget. We have a consultant. The consultant has given us our figures. The consultant has told us they're worth $10 million in the hole. Last time we talked, the plan was to level fund, to borrow money out of our free cash, to take money out of our free cash. But we're still going to have a structural deficit if we do that, Mr. President. So I know there are difficult decisions that need to be made, but that's what we get paid the big bucks to do. So quite frankly, we can't sit down at the table and start talking about issues of concern if we don't have a document in front of us to work off of. So it's very important that we get this budget book and we get it immediately. My frustration level at this point, Mr. President, is over the edge. I feel like I've been talking about this now for six, seven, eight weeks. Um, and we're still no closer to having any understanding as to what the administration's financial plan is to move this community forward. Um, so with that being said, I asked my council colleagues to support the resolution. I asked the council president to publish a series of meetings as to when we're going to be able to sit down and negotiate this budget. I'd ask that it be done in line with the recommendations that our paid outside consultant gave us, which says that we can complete the budget before the close of the fiscal year. So that's what I asked for, Mr. President. And I hope that the administration is willing to work with us and has been doing what they're supposed to be doing and preparing a budget for us based upon the forecast that our private paid consultants have given us. There's no point in having outside consultants if we're not going to listen to the information they've given us and use it to make informed data-driven decisions. So with that being said, I rest my case. I don't know any more lines from the movie Jerry Maguire. So with that being said, Mr. President, I ask my council colleagues to support this paper and I have all the confidence in the world that you'll be able to make this happen, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I do think it's important to point out, Mr. President, that if we were supposed to meet April 1st, that would have been great. And government shutdown happened March 13th. And I do believe the administration had indicated that they had a working budget based upon the forecast at the time for fiscal year 21. And I do believe that we requested that that information be shared with us. And I do believe that the administration has refused to do so. I still haven't received that document that we requested, Mr. President, asking for a copy of the working budget that they had.
[Adam Knight]: I agree with the gentleman wholeheartedly. It's the mayor's responsibility to put a budget forward, and I certainly would love to see one, one that has, based on realistic expectations, like the ones that we paid for from our private consultant, the numbers that he gave us, that the private consultant provided us with, so that we were able to forecast accurately, so that we could put together a realistic budget. You know, Mr. President, I think that it's important for us to look at the circumstances that are before us. We're in a financial crisis. We've been in financial crises before, and we've been able to work our way out of them. But we've had to work to do it. So let's get to work on it. That's all I'm saying.
[Adam Knight]: Alicia, was there a working budget for the city of Medford ever prepared?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, so when the chief of staff said three meetings ago that they had a working budget for fiscal year 21. That wasn't necessarily the case.
[Adam Knight]: Sorry, me too. Yeah, I believe it was represented that the city had a working budget based upon the projections at the time prior to COVID-19. for fiscal year 21. And then Coronavirus hit. And then that's why they pulled on it didn't put it out.
[Adam Knight]: So we do have a pre Coronavirus budget representing each department in this community.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. So there wasn't a working budget that was ready to be looked at and reviewed and debated in the two weeks coming up to April 1st. All right. Thank you very much for that. I appreciate it. You're doing an awful lot of work on the budget. And that's great, we appreciate it. I find it to be very, very intelligent and I've always enjoyed that conversation. But a silent voice in this has always been the budget director. And I don't know if the budget director is on the call. I'm not sure. But it's becoming increasingly frustrating. Do we have a budget director that doesn't come to budget meetings? We have people that, you know, the budget can't happen because certain people around certain people aren't, but we have a budget director that we're paying to coordinate this stuff. So with that being said, Mr. President, you know where I stand, I want a budget. And I want it as soon as we can get it, get as soon as possible so we can get down to work on it. I won't belabor the point. And again, I thank Ms. Nunley for all the work that she does here in the community. I rest my case.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and thank you for indulging me in that very long-winded resolution that I put together. Ultimately, I've been concerned about this for some time, and I scratch my head sometimes and wonder if it's appropriate that we have a personnel director serving as judge, jury, and executioner on all matters related to personnel, disability, and diversity in the community. And the reason I say that, Mr. President, is because when the person that's responsible for personnel in our community wears so many different hats, that becomes a question and a concern as to whether or not he's serving the appropriate master and is in an appropriate role. So with that being said, Mr. President, if in fact we have the director of personnel that's serving on, let's say a hiring panel, and there's an individual in our community that feels as though they've been aggrieved based upon a disability issue or a diversity issue, course of action would be to go and speak with the disability director or the diversity director. Well, that person would also be the personnel director who sat on the panel, which made a determination that may have made you feel uncomfortable and maybe felt as though your rights have been violated. So that's the independent check and balance you go to to determine whether or not your rights are being violated and whether or not you're going to be advocated for. And it puts the personnel director in the precarious position of determining whether or not he's going to be defending the actions of the board he sits on. or advocating for the personnel that have come before him and asked for the assistance and the help. So, you know, it's really a structure of government, the consolidation, the government issue, Mr. President, but with a director of personnel has to wear so many hats and we already have made, you know, the recognition, the realization that there is a marginalized and underrepresented population in this community. The question is whether or not it's a best practice to merge these functions in underneath one umbrella in one person, number one, and number two, if by doing that, it creates a situation where individuals are being denied access to a resource and an independent check and balance that they had previously had that they no longer do. So with that being said, I'd ask my council colleagues to support the measure, to send the question to the city solicitor to see if it poses any conflict. Again, Mr. President, you know, it could be something as simple as an existing employee asking for a reasonable accommodation and the reasonable accommodation not being made. So you go to the personnel director, you ask for a reasonable accommodation, it's not being made. You go to the director of disability and you say, you know, this is my situation, I need someone to advocate for me. If that's the same person, it creates a situation and a circumstance where people might be less likely to come forward, less likely to seek help in advocating for themselves through these offices. So that's why I raised the issue and I'd ask for your support.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, Peter Fuccioni, the man, the myth, the legend, the man responsible for all those wonderful meals that we received down at Raso's Restaurant, day in and day out. One of the hottest working men in show business, Mr. President, just celebrated his 75th birthday, and we wish him 75 more happy and healthy ones. Many of us have gotten to know Peter over the years from his work down at Raso's Restaurant. And before that, in Clarendon Hill at the Genoa. And before that, in Beacon Hill at Primo's Restaurant. Peter's been in the industry for 70 over 75 years, Mr. President, and he's done an excellent job at it, as evident by the product that they're putting out at Razzles Restaurant. So I just wanted to take an opportunity to wish Peter a happy 75th birthday, and to hope that he has a nice, healthy, and happy summer out there, making sure that we have safe spaces to eat, and outdoor dining at Razzles restaurants. He's done a great job. Mr. President's a great guy, a good friend, and I just wish him the best. I ask my council colleagues to join me.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd like to thank Councilor Scarpelli for bringing this result forward. I think it's also important to point out the resilience of the Medford High School class of 2020 senior class, the sacrifices that they had to make, the lost memories and lost opportunities that they've had to deal with as a result of the government shutdown. You know, I think it's very unfortunate that, you know, um, my little buddy, Mikey Nesta, didn't get to have a senior year of baseball. I think it's very unfortunate that, uh, you know, our hockey team didn't get to finish this season and, uh, you know, our lacrosse team didn't get to get out there on the field. Um, you know, those are the sacrifices that these, uh, these, these children made, and these are the memories that they're not going to be able to ever make up. So it's very important, Mr. President, to do the best we can to be sure that we do leave some good memories in their head during this trying time and take extra steps to make sure that they are a special part of this community. So I really think the school department did an excellent job. Lisa Evangelista and her team, you know, Moe Levin and the rest of them are a great group of people. And, you know, they always put Mentored first, and that's what's very important to me, Mr. President, is the type of people that put Mentored first in these roles. And those are two people that, you know, you can't shake a stick at. Mr. DeLave has done an excellent job in his new role. Dr. Vincent's done an excellent job in her new role. So I think at this point, you know, we're adapting to this new set of criteria and circumstances that are gonna be governing our life for the next period of time. But I think it's very important that we recognize the strength and the sacrifices that the senior class has made in order for us to get where we are today.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, it's Mary Ann. You're getting me dizzy over there waving. Mr. President, this question's for Mary Ann. I guess my question is this, what does this do in terms of it is, you know, Jack said it was a symbolic gesture. You know, words on paper. Does this give us any access to any money, I guess, these are a couple questions I have if we declare a public health emergency. Does it open up any avenues for us to get resources, number one. Number two, does it. create any obligations for us legally or establish any mandates that we need to follow that may become unfunded mandates. So, you know, is there gonna be an impact on the bottom line if we make a declaration of a public health emergency? You know, what's the process we have to go through to declare a public health emergency? And then once you do it, is there any unfunded mandates or other obligations that we need to live up to once that's done? And does it allow us to have
[Adam Knight]: I think so. So ultimately, you know, by making this declaration, it's more of just a statement.
[Adam Knight]: That's what I'm saying to it.
[Adam Knight]: In terms of these action plans that the mayor is working on, I'm assuming that some of them are going to require council involvement somewhere along the line, whether it be in terms of passing policy or appropriating funding.
[Adam Knight]: So do you think it might warrant the conversation of us sitting down with the mayor and your office to discuss you know what, what we're really let's put some teeth into this thing if we're going to do it, you know what I mean? symbolic gesture tonight, but you know, I'm, I'm not big on symbolic stuff. I'm more of an action type of guy. You know, when it comes down to business, do you think that maybe it would make sense for us to sit down with you and the mayor, the mayor is going to make this declaration already. Wouldn't it make sense for us all to sit down and kind of craft the declaration and the next steps that would be, you know, suitable and enjoyable for all of us to participate in.
[Adam Knight]: Do you think that that would be the best course of action.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah. Now, June 17 is some sort of meeting I believe that scheduled surround certain parts of this discussion.
[Adam Knight]: I can't find it presently in my email. So I guess the question is, is that the suggested course of action? Do we sit down, meet with the Board of Health, meet with the mayor, the mayor is going to make the declaration, we can join her in putting out a joint statement and actually crafting some next steps and action items? Or do we want to make a symbolic statement and move on to the next speech?
[Adam Knight]: Sounds good to me. I think that that's a great suggestion myself. Mr. President, I rest my case. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I would vote no this evening, and I would like the record to reflect that I feel as though we need to meet with the administration and produce some action items before we move forward.
[Adam Knight]: The paper has been introduced, Mr. President. It's been read into the record, so I believe by the Council rules, I think we have to maybe move on it. But either way, I just think this is a very slippery slope. Now we're writing state law. I don't think that's out of scope and purview to, you know, direct the state legislature to amend bills and pieces of legislation that are before them that are going to be impactful to the 351 cities and towns. We can't even get our affairs in our own house straightened up and we're up there telling people in the statehouse what to put in bills. I don't think that that's really appropriate or within the scope of function of by the city council, Mr. President. Um, so as we move forward, you know, I've asked that the council president, uh, remain cognizant of that and, um, take a position as to whether or not that type of action will be out of order or allowed in the future.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I support this resolution wholeheartedly, and I'd like to further amended and ask that the school committee or the superintendent of schools or whoever it may be that's putting this budget together, probably the assistant superintendent of finance, provide us with a draft copy of that department's budget. As we discussed earlier in the meeting, it's budget time, it's time to get rolling. If the school department has a budget that's been put together, then we need to see it, Mr. President. So if the administration's not willing to give us a whole budget book, then maybe we can seek them out as individual departments so that we can better prepare ourselves for these debates.
[Adam Knight]: Move approval of the paper, Mr. President. I thought the explanation was excellent. Second.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe we tabled an item until the end of the meeting, Mr. President. I hope your eyes are well rested and you're ready to start reading.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to refer the community development board pursuant to chapter 48, section five.
[Adam Knight]: It's a zoning amendment, Mr. President. So the first reading is us introducing this paper tonight, but by law, we have to send it to the CD board. This would enact the public hearing process where once the CD board receives it, the council and the CD board are required to hold a public hearing and the CD board would be required to report back. their findings to the council and the council would be precluded from voting on the measure until the CD board provides us with that information or I think got three weeks past from the close of their public hearing. So this isn't the typical ordinance with three readings because it's a zoning amendment, it has to go through the CD board. So the council wouldn't have, you know, a first reading and advertisement and then a third reading, it would be sent it to the CD board, have a public hearing, CD board has a public hearing provides us with their recommendation, we close our public hearing that have a certain defined period to deliberate.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, but between it takes 40, it's four votes to take off to go to the CD board, but five votes to pass. And you can change the language after the CD board because the idea is they're going to have a public hearing and make a recommendation on language, right?
[Adam Knight]: Not a chance. Table them please, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I was taking a nap.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I will be supporting this paper this evening. It's always good to see shovels in the ground and work getting done. I'm sure that this expenditure is part of the mayor's capital plan. And I'd like to offer an amendment to the paper as well. I'm asking that the mayor provide us with a copy of her capital plan.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'd just like to take a brief opportunity to wish Frank and Dorothy a very happy 40th anniversary. I'd ask my council colleagues to join me in doing such. Frank and Dorothy have been fixtures down at La Conte Skating Rink for 25-30 years, working with Mephidu Paki. They're also great neighbors up there in the Hillside area on Benham Street, Mr. President. Very recently, Frankie battled cancer very publicly. And right now he has a clean bill of health and he's doing very well. And he and his wife were able to celebrate their 40th wedding anniversary. And here's to 40 more. So I'd ask my council colleagues to support this resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I had the opportunity to speak with the finance director earlier in the month, and it's been brought to my attention that we will have a surplus of funds in our videographer's account. And we're looking at bringing on a zoning consultant, and the price of that zoning consultant was a little bit more than we had been allotted in the past. This is an effort for us to identify funding avenues to complete the contract. It's been brought to my attention through a correspondence from the city clerk that we have found funding to fully fund the $47,500 for our zoning consultant. But I'd ask that this request stand, Mr. President, so that if there are any contingency fees or contingency expenses that are related to the implementation of our zoning consultant, we have some flexibility and some funds available. I'd ask my council colleagues to support the resolution. Second, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe we had budgeted for two videographers. One of our videographers took ill and has since resigned from the position or has left from the position. And we had some budgeted funds in the account for that purpose. It was a personnel related expense.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Mike Meehan was a neighborhood kid from down here in West Medford, a place that we like to be called. And I recently passed away. uh... michael was a product of a public schools that he was also a lot of the founding members of the uh... boston people want uh... face book page which has gained some popularity over the past several months with the president dot and uh... michael was just went to rest of this past weekend and uh... there was quite a celebration of life for him down at that point that back uh... where uh... individuals related to that because we've got together and uh... did a one bite smash of pizza in honor of Mike Meehan. But Mike was a gentleman that touched a lot of lives. He was someone that's been taken from us far too soon, Mr. President. And I just like to offer my condolences to his family and ask that my council colleagues do the same.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I appreciate it. And I appreciate Councilor Caraviello for bringing this issue up. It's my understanding that 100% of the units in the 40B proposal would go towards our 10% affordability quota, even though I believe that the number of units in the actual development would be about 25 to 30% affordable. So it's my understanding, Mr. President, because these 40 P projects to bring some affordable housing into the community that the entire development discounted towards that 10% quota. So that's something that we need to take a long hard look at, Mr. President, and quite frankly, you know, I think it's time to negotiate. It's time to call these developers in and sit down with them and work towards coming up with a friendly 40B project that's going to be something that can benefit the community and something that can give us some sort of community impact benefits, Mr. President. So when I look at it, you know, we just lost the safe harbor fight and we've pretty much lost all leverage in negotiation. So now the question comes is, you know, if we're going to get a 40B project, do we want a 40B that's friendly or do we want a 40B that's going to run us over? Are we going to fight them every step of the way? Are we going to bring them to the table and sit down and work with them? And I think that we need to call these developers into the room, Mr. President, and sit down with them and bring them to the table and talk about what concerns we have as a community and what direction we'd like to see them going. I can't thank Councilor Caraviello enough for bringing this issue up. I'd like to amend the paper just to ask if these services are services that are covered under the $60,000 retainer that we've given KP Law, or if they are covered as a la carte services. So I would support the council's resolve this evening and thank you for bringing it forward.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Again, you know, thank you, Councilor Dez and Councilor Morell for looking into this. I too had a conversation with Representative Donato just about this very same issue and I'm so glad to see that the representatives so focused on making sure that the businesses on our main streets can survive because that's what it's about. It's about our downtowns. It's about Main Street, Mr. President. You know, these third party apps don't do anything, but actually take away from the profits of these businesses that are investing in our community. You know, when we sit down and, uh, we have a community event, the first people to step up, uh, CB scoops, uh, a meat cheese pizza, um, you know, uh, Roswell's pizza places like that. It's a minute that anybody picks up the phone and call us. There's other people running there to give us donations. I mean, God, Marty Murphy, when Marty Murphy was in business, I think he gave away more food than he sold. And these third-party apps, Mr. President, they really take away from that intimacy, number one, in the community. But number two, they're taking away from the hard-earned the hard-earned spoils that should go to these businesses that have been so committed to making sure that our community is doing well. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'd like to put a B paper forward requesting that our Chamber of Commerce investigate maybe a Medford app that chronicles all the food in the community that does delivery services and maybe provide an online platform for them to be able to have people audit through, it'll cut out the middleman. So that's just a suggestion, Mr. President, that maybe our Chamber of Commerce can take a look at, but I certainly thank my council colleagues for bringing this resolution forward, and I support it wholeheartedly. And I'd also like to thank Representative Donato once again for his leadership delivering for Main Street and Methodist.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Michael, I thank you for all the work that you do. You're excellent in addition to the city's administration when it comes especially to the emergency services. I'm on the day-to-day operations that we have here in the community as well. And Michael Beachy highlighted the fact that we had a lot of community participation, a lot of community flags at Oak Grove. And I think it's important that we give a shout out to our friends over at the American Legion, 45, Richie Martin, Michael McDevitt, Eliza Boyd, and the crew that organized the flag distribution program this season.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Layton. Yes, Mr. President, please bear with me as I'm going through some technical difficulties. May I make a motion to table this until I can call in the evolution on the phone, Mr. President?
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. It's National DPW, National Public Works Week. The public works have been essential employees since the government shutdown that have been providing great services to the community. So I'd like to, move to recognize their work and their commitment to our city and ask my council colleagues for their support as I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: I second that as a motion, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd certainly second the amendment offered by Councilor Scarpelli. And I think it's safe to say that all members of the council have a concern about Southern Maine all members of the council are aware there have been long standing issues. And all members of the council have ideas about what approach to take to address it. I think Councilor Marks made some very great suggestions. I think Councilor Scarpelli's made great suggestions. So what I'm hearing is that we want to have a roundtable. with the players from the state administration for district four, as well as our state delegation. And also we want to have a committee of the whole meeting with the city administration and the decision makers at the city level. I think they have great ideas, Mr. President. And I'd ask that we move to consolidate all amendments to one amendment. So they require one roll call vote and we move forward on the issue.
[Adam Knight]: I think it's also important to point out, Mr. President, that at the present time, for the majority of the day, South Street remains closed as they do the Eversource underground construction project. And they've implemented some traffic calming measures while construction is going on before the road closure that would be very effective and very cost neutral, to say the least. So I think this is something that we can get done.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I just ask that any type of update like this be given, be given to us in writing. I appreciate the presentation. However, I think it's important for us to have something like this in writing, especially where we've appropriated about 25% of the community preservation funds that we've allotted to the affordable housing bucket to this cause. You know, I think that the presentation from ABCD might be called for rather than members of the CPC. And looking at this, I'm getting a little uncomfortable with the level of involvement that the CPC has on the administration of the grant and the actual application that the grant recipient is having. I mean, we can administer it and monitor it, but I think it's getting very hands-on. And I don't know how comfortable I feel with that from the feedback that I'm getting and the way that I'm hearing that these are working out. But with that being said, Mr. President, I certainly appreciate the mission and the work that we're doing to address some of these community concerns. I just ask that any response to the resolution also be offered to the council in writing so that we can have a snapshot in time for when we ask for a future update later on.
[Adam Knight]: That would be my intention, Mr. President. Yes, and I'd offer that in the form of a motion.
[Adam Knight]: And if I may, Mr. President, this is a motion that I'll make on any paper that requests an update. You know, it's a council paper, the paper will be approved, the update should be received in writing as well as by way of the presentation or we should just get the update in writing, but it should definitely be in writing. So it's not something that's just particular and exclusive to this matter that's before us. I'll continue to ask for these updates in writing for other matters as well.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, it seems like we're on fire with the Community Preservation Commission. So I believe on our agenda this evening, we have a request for appropriation. So I'd ask that that paper be taken up out of order, whereas we have our representatives from the CPC before us on the previous matter.
[Adam Knight]: My question, Mr. President, was just that the second Councilor Caraviello's motion to move for approval. That's what these funds are for. It's a very worthy cause and it's something that we've supported in the past and it's something that I will continue to support in the future.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to revert back to the regular order of business.
[Adam Knight]: I'm just curious, Mr. President, as to what the policy is. Say Janice in the clerk's office comes into the clerk's office and she has a fever. And now because she has a fever, I'm assuming that she'd be required to do a 14 day quarantine before she'd be allowed to return back to work. How is the administration going to approach situations like that where an individual is mandated to report these health concerns so that they don't spread the virus throughout the department, but they're not necessarily ill or sick? Is the administration going to do salary continuation, wage continuation, or are they going to require these employees to utilize earned time or sick time during these 14-day quarantine periods if in fact something does arise?
[Adam Knight]: And this is the policy that's been applied for our essential workers, and it will be the policy that is applied and even handedly to the non-essential workers when they do the rollout to phase them back into work?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much. Appreciate it.
[Adam Knight]: Would properties who are in arrears of payments be eligible to participate.
[Adam Knight]: Let me rephrase the question I guess the question is, would an applicant be eligible to receive the exemption, if they have already hold the city if they already hold the city
[Adam Knight]: So that they could have a lot of bill they could always sue a bill, but they'll still get the prop personal property tax exemption through this.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. And it's safe to say that this is something that will have an effect on the FY 21 bottom line.
[Adam Knight]: And it's similar to the same shift that we discussed when we were talking about the residential property tax exemption.
[Adam Knight]: We still have to collect the same amount of money. It's just a matter of who's going to pay for it.
[Adam Knight]: And do you feel as though this might make sense for us to table this discussion where it is a financial issue that will have an impact on the FY 21 budget and wait until we actually have a copy of the FY 21 budget and start those debates before we start moving towards implementing exemptions? I mean, I'm looking at today's like 528. You know what I mean? June 1 is a few days away. We're way, way, way, way behind in the budget process. And last I heard, you know, we didn't know what our recap sheet was going to say. So I guess is it wise for us to move forward on an exemption at this time when we don't know what the total fiscal picture is for FY 21. We have our paid consultant that has given us a great forecast of worst case scenario. But it seems though the administration has not committed to producing a budget for us for this next fiscal year. So with that being said, if we're adopting abatements for FY 21 when we don't even know what course we're going to take in terms of a budget, whether it's a one-twelfth budget, a quarterly budget, or a 12-month budget, I think is concerning. Can you please talk a little bit about that?
[Adam Knight]: And then okay so it doesn't have an impact on budget per se and I understand that does it, what's the anticipated cost savings for your department if implemented.
[Adam Knight]: Yep. And in terms of your postage account, how is that looking right now at this point? juncture in the fiscal year, you maxed out in your postage do you have any money left in that account.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, ultimately, we want to take your money and put it towards our zoning consultant, if in fact, there's going to be a balance there. And this is going to save them money on postage. So that was my, my thought surrounding it.
[Adam Knight]: Well, we only need 2800 more. So we're close. We're very close to self funding. So with that being said, I do appreciate it. It seems to me like this is something that's relatively de minimis. And you know, benign in terms of application. So, you know, I'd like to hear my other council colleagues have to say, but I'm indefinite on it.
[Adam Knight]: I don't know if you know the answer to this, Madam Assessor, if this is something more appropriate for the solicitor. But if we passed a vote on this this evening, but it had a sunset clause that said that, you know, this vote will remain in effect only for the fiscal the current the future fiscal year and would have to be brought up again at a later date next year for further adoption. Is that something that we could do?
[Adam Knight]: That does it for me, sir.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I do believe at 6 p.m. this evening, we had a meeting concerning the city council's vote on what direction we were gonna go in relative to zoning reform. And the council has had a very public open and deliberate process relative to what direction we want to go in. And right now, I believe we're moving forward with the codification process. So with that being said, I think this council has spoken as to what the next steps are in terms of zoning reform. And I might ask that the administration withdraw the amendment that's before us this evening so that the council can move forward with the zoning consultant and the codification process.
[Adam Knight]: If you look at the tables of use and you look at the language in the proposal, Mr. President, it says that there'll be a 20% commercial for gross floor space, but the allowable 25% is only subject to what's outlined in the table of use charts. And that would be items that don't include biotech. They don't include retail sales. Chief of Staff says that it includes research or biotech, it doesn't. Those are actually excluded in the zoning use chat for an apartment one district. So I just wanted to point that out that that's not accurate.
[Adam Knight]: I certainly have some concern, Mr. President. This paper says that any dwelling, any multiple unit dwelling over three stories, it's located in an apartment one, an apartment two, or an apartment three district. So if we look at the zoning map, Mr. President, here in the community, and we look at our apartment one and apartment two districts, because we don't have any apartment three districts, we'll see high street Riverside Ave, Washington Street, Salem Street, Winthrop Street, Boston Ave, Mystic Ave, the Wellington Mixed-Use District gets put into effect, Middlesex Ave, Fulton Street. This proposal says if you wanna build a multi-dwelling that's less than three stories, that you now have to have 25% commercial. So as I drive down Main Street and I look at a three-story, two-family home, somebody wants to knock that home down and build a new one, They're not going to be able to do that now. They're going to be required to have 25% commercial. And the council isn't going to be bound on the requirements of the special permit to say that they can't issue the special permit unless that 25% commercial is there. This proposal, I don't see how it makes any sense at all. In fact, looking at it, it seems to me as though it's a unilateral implementation of a use variance. We're looking at apartment one and apartment two districts, Mr. President. These are residentially zoned districts. And what we're doing is saying, in these residentially zoned districts, you are now required to have commercial use. So although it's an attempt and it's a noble attempt to increase the commercial tax base, it's not completing the task, Mr. President. This isn't how we do that. This isn't how we increase the commercial tax base by requiring residential property owners to become commercial landlords. That just doesn't make sense. You know, when we're looking at development and growth and increasing a commercial base, maybe we start looking at Locust Street. and Riverside Ave, and Route 16, and we look at the Malden River, and we look at all the open space that we have there along Route 16, and we look at the community path that we have on Route 16, and we look at the fact that we have housing already on Locust Street, we have housing already on Mystic Avenue, and we have a number of underutilized large parcels in between Locust Street and the Fellsway. Maybe that's what we should be focusing our effort if we want to increase our commercial tax base. But for us to unilaterally impose this on residential property owners to turn them into commercial land brokers, I don't think it's fair or right. And I don't think it makes sense. Um, so if you can build an apartment building by right, that's three stories in an apartment, one district, like say off of Salem street on tainter street, which is an apartment, one district. Um, if someone has 6,000 square feet, they're eligible to build a two family home by right. It's three stories high. So now on tainter street, We're going to have a home that's now part home, 25% business. The business use that's allowed there. If we look at the use shot is very limiting. It's not restaurants and bakeries, Mr. President. It's daycares. It's let's see here. I got it written down right here somewhere. Um, it's daycares. It's, um, medical uses. It's nothing that, you know, brings, uh, sustainable jobs to the community. It's nothing that brings jobs to create a living wage. Um, it's private clubs are allowed by right. Um, but nothing, no consumer service industries whatsoever. You can't have a law office. You can't have a tax prep. You can't have a laundry mat. You can't have a convenience store. Um, I just think this is a misguided proposal from the start, Mr. President. Um, but whereas it is a zoning proposal, I'd be happy to send it to the Community Development Board and get their feedback on it. However, I feel as though the presentation that was made, it's not exactly an accurate reflection of what the paper does. And, you know, the allowed uses and special permit uses that are defined are really not conducive to any economic development strategy that would bring a living, a job to provide a living wage to the community.
[Adam Knight]: Actually, my original motion was asking that the administration withdraw the proposal based on the fact that the Council just one hour ago voted to move forward in a certain format and forum for codification of zoning as the first step in zoning reform. I think it's also important to point out, Mr. President, that, you know, I guess I have a few questions for the chief of staff on this as well. Were was there any consultants involved in putting together this plan?
[Adam Knight]: Okay. Was there any community input and putting together this plan?
[Adam Knight]: Yeah. So is there any briefing by the mayor or the OCD direct OCD director on the impact that this is going to have in writing on how it relates to the vision of growth in the community?
[Adam Knight]: Yeah. And is there a zoning consultant that's provided any independent analysis and made this information available on the website prior to the introduction to the legislative proposal?
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, because the reason I ask these questions, Mr. President, is because if we go back to August 12, 2019, there's an opinion piece that says a detailed plan to approach Medford zoning written by the current mayor.
[Adam Knight]: Op Ed has 18 ideas to improve engagement and results in how our city changes. And this article starts off saying that before any type of measure like this would be made, there'd be a review of the zoning map after public input with consultants and a high degree of community input, where they will identify multi-use zones where local businesses would benefit from additional growth and development. It then goes on to say that any legislative proposal, which this is, would include a full briefing by the mayor and the OCD director on the impact with an explanation and writing on how it would relate to the vision of growth in the community. And further, it says it would require a zoning consultant to provide independent analysis and make this information available on the website. So apparently a lot's changed from August 12th, 2019 till today, Mr. President. However, I again reiterate that this is an item that's a zoning amendment. I have no problem forwarding it to the community development board as required by chapter 48, section five. However, when this thing comes back, there's no way in hell I could forget support this thing.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. I missed that. Can you say how you're going to move forward again? What was that? The conference of plan.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to refer to the community development board as required by chapter 48 section 5.
[Adam Knight]: I would certainly be happy to reintroduce my motion to have the administration withdraw the amendment. However, it seems as though they weren't willing to do such based upon the presentation that they gave at the time. So I'll revert to the second motion that I did make, yes, to send it to the CD board.
[Adam Knight]: It's my understanding. We do have a meeting on this tomorrow evening, Mr. President. And the scope of that meeting is just going to be on the zoning amendment portion of this document.
[Adam Knight]: Okay, and then we're gonna complete that task and then move on to the selection committee part. Excellent, thank you very much, I appreciate it.
[Adam Knight]: There's much uncertainty surrounding our financial situation in the city of Medford. And I think the only certainty that we have is that times are bad right now and that we forecast the revenues that aren't meeting our expectations. And when we come into situations like this, there are many ways that we can address the financial crisis. before us, and one of those ways is to offer early retirement incentives to employees that have been working in the City of Medford for an extended period of time, make a good deal of money, top staff. and that sometimes pay—sometimes contribute less into the pension fund based upon, you know, whenever they were hired. So, you know, this 5 percent contribution rate, 7 percent, 9 percent, 9 plus 2 percent. So this is a way, Mr. President, of getting individuals off the rolls that were contributing at a lower rate. which will, in essence, provide us with a cost savings. Through the administration to the retirement board and report be issued back to the city council examining the feasibility of such.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Again, as we look at the fiscal picture that's before CFO Fiscal Year 21, there are many uncertainties. We met with our consultant just a couple weeks ago. We talked about our fixed costs, what they were, knowing what they are. We have made commitments in this community to capital projects and capital needs. One of those projects that's underway right now is the library. And there is going to have to be a appropriation made by the city to complete construction for this project. Then we have also a commitment for construction of a new fire station. So when we look at these capital needs with the fiscal picture that's before us, Mr. President, I think it's important that we understand going forward what it is that we need to do. Some of our colleagues in government have been very vocal in their desires to borrow, spend, and tax their way out of this fiscal crisis. And I don't necessarily think that that's the best practice, Mr. President. So before we start determining what road we have to take, I think we need to get all the information before so that we can make an informed decision. So with that being said, Mr. President, I ask my council colleagues to support this resolution moving forward. I think this information will provide helpful when we develop a budget capital plan.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. In times like this, it's very odd because, you know, when crisis arises, people rely on government more. I think that our Office of Substance Abuse Prevention has done an excellent job over the years in addressing the concerns that we've had in this community. I certainly think that we've made great strides in combating the opioid addiction in the city of Medford and other substance abuse problems that we've seen here. With that being said, Mr. President, with the government shutdown comes a change in our ability to deliver services at the same level. that we were delivering them before. So I just ask that the Office of Substance Abuse and Prevention report back to us what the current trends are, what they're seeing, so that we can be better informed and more aware of what approaches need to be taken to continue to be successful in combating opioid addiction in the city of Manhattan.
[Adam Knight]: Council and I. Yeah, Mr. President, I think as we learn more and more about the coronavirus, one of the things we've been able to really appreciate is the work that our first responders perform, our firefighters, our police officers, our DPW and the like. And it gets me thinking, Mr. President, what happens if, say, there's a coronavirus outbreak among all the members of B group in the fire department? What happens then? Or if one firehouse becomes infected and two or three groups in the same firehouse become infected? What's our emergency response plan? What steps are we taking to be sure that the community is going to be safe and that we're going to be able to deliver the high level of quality public safety services that we've been able to deliver in the past? So I offer this resolution, hoping to learn a little bit more about this, Mr. President, so that we operate to address any type of issue like this in the community. You know, when we pick up the phone and we call 911, these are the people that we rely on. So I think that it only makes sense that we show some concern. as to what's going on in their lives, and be sure that there are plans in place to protect them, number one, and number two, to be sure to deliver the same levels of protection to the citizenry here in the city.
[Adam Knight]: Second that, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I've made my frustrations with this virtual governing well-known Mr. President. I know that we've passed resolutions in the past calling for budget debates to be held in a non-virtual setting. Have you gotten any update from them?
[Adam Knight]: And I think that, you know, looking at what we do has to be a part of the phased rollout that the governor proposed. And I don't think that we'd be able to meet prior to June 1st anyway, based upon the criteria that he's put forward. I sure wish we could. So, you know, I definitely support councilor Caraviello's I think it is a good measure to come up with some sort of outside-the-box solution to allow us to resume businesses normally as possible.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'm glad to have had the privilege and pleasure of working with both Nancy White and Representative Donato. And, you know, I can't tell you the amount of dedication and commitment they put forth to the democratic body in the city of Medford, but also in the community. And when you look at the work that they've done, it's really commendable. You know, you look at Representative Donato and the amount of service that he's provided to the city. Years and years of service, always delivering, year in and year out, bringing home the bacon, Mr. President. You know, making sure that our local aid numbers are hitting the spot, making sure that we're able to provide certain infrastructure improvements in our community. I mean, Representative Donato has done an excellent job up on Beacon Health, and I'm really looking forward to supporting him again this year. When we look at Nancy White and the work that she's done in organizing the community and making sure that people stay active and involved, and want to be a part of the democratic process here in the community, fighting for the shared values that we all can agree upon. It's really commendable. Both of them are excellent, excellent resources, and I hope that they remain involved, remain active, because we certainly need them to be participants in our government, especially during these trying times. They bring years of experience and a wealth of knowledge, Mr. President, and these are people we need to keep in government. So with that being said, I thank them both for their service, and I thank the sponsors of this resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Um, I, as one member of this body, Mr. President also as, um, uh, registered Democrat here in the city of Medford, um, do not share the same concerns that Ms. Paul does. Um, especially when it comes to my colleague here on the council, um, you know, partisan politics are one thing, but, um, you know, to express concern over a Councilor of morale's abilities or qualifications to serve in that capacity, I don't think is appropriate. quite frankly, Mr. President, I think she's been a breath of fresh air on this council. She's someone that I certainly enjoy working with and she has an open mind and brings different viewpoints to the table. So I just want to say that she's a pleasure to work with and I really don't think that hooking at the presentation that Ms. Paul made. And I understand, Joyce, you know what I mean, that you're a representative of the Republican Party. But this is here to congratulate a member of our body on an achievement in not making a personal attack. And I just want to stand beside my colleague and support her and congratulate her. Joyce, I certainly respect your opinion and understand where you're coming from. But, you know, in times like this when There's so much going on in the world. We need to stand together and focus on the positives. And again, the shared values that we have. And I think Councilor Morell comes to the board with an open mind, and she's someone that's going to be able to do just fine in that role. They have big shoes to fill, and I think that they'll be able to fill them.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, to John and Teresa and John and Jared, you know, her son-in-law and grandchildren, child, you know, it's just a tragic, tragic loss that happened so suddenly, you know, regardless of Amelia's role in the community, the role that she played to her family was far, far, far more important. And, you know, having had the opportunity to go to school with Teresa and get to know her over the years through a relationship with her husband, John, I just want to say that they did a great job raising their children and she will be sorely missed. So with that being said, my condolences to the family.
[Adam Knight]: Can I offer that in the way of a motion, Mr. President?
[Adam Knight]: Can I offer that in the way of a motion?
[Adam Knight]: That we meet in the first week in June, if possible?
[Adam Knight]: And if I may, Mr. President, maybe we can extend an invitation to some of our colleagues on the school committee to come and attend this meeting after the first so that they can see what happens on the other side of the. when we're looking at each department here in the community and the competing needs that lay before us. So I'd also offer them the form of a motion that we extend an invitation to the members of the school committee to appear as spectators at this public meeting so that they can hear it firsthand from the consultant at the same time we do.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, you're the chair you can pick what you want so it doesn't matter to me.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. So Tim, as I understand the project that's before us this evening, the only matter that the council really has the purview to vote on this evening would be whether or not we authorize the land taking. Is that correct?
[Adam Knight]: And I did hear in your presentation that a hundred percent of the property owners that are impacted by this have signed off on the project There's there's no actual sign off Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: So, but you've, so have you had, has their personal contact been made with 100% of the people that are going to be impacted by this? Yes, that is correct.
[Adam Knight]: I just, you know, I don't want to see this thing, say we vote on it tonight and then tomorrow someone saying, what the hell are they doing on my front lawn? You know what I mean? I want to make sure that everybody's well aware. Communications have been a strong suit in the city of Medford when it comes to certain aspects of construction projects.
[Adam Knight]: So based on the current financial state at the federal and state level, is that commitment for those funds still there?
[Adam Knight]: OK. And the last question that I have, and I promise it's my last question, would be, what's the estimated cost to the taxpayer for the completion of this project? You said it's about $83,000 in Chapter 90 funds that we're going to be using from our budget that would go to roadway repairs for this project. Is there any other expenditure that would have to come out of the city's coffers in order for us to complete the project?
[Adam Knight]: You know if there's any water valves that need to be replaced we replace them things like that In terms of just the scope of the grant, you know, I mean, I'm not worried about other structure projects that might come along with it I mean if we're planning smartly, I would hope that that's what we do I would hope that if we're gonna up the street that we go on the ground and we fix the underground infrastructure to Yeah, but in terms of the funds Yeah, okay All right, great. But it wouldn't exceed $100,000 is what you're telling me based upon the 83,000 from the Chapter 90 funds and then any ancillary costs.
[Adam Knight]: Right. It's already been That money's out the window already.
[Adam Knight]: Right, okay. All right, so in terms of the overall investment that the city's made in the return on the investment, we're looking at making an investment of maybe somewhere around $150,000 for the total cost to the community, and we're getting a million point two back? Yeah, that's a good way to put it, yep. Okay, excellent. Thank you, Mr. McGiven. I appreciate it. You always do come prepared. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think based upon what I'm hearing from my colleagues that this thing's ready for a vote and I'd move for approval of the paper. Second Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: I'm getting an unstable connection right now, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to receive and place on file.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And I thank you for going through that very long history that was outlined. in the resolution that Councilor Caraviello and I have put together. Ultimately, it was a long resolution because there's a longstanding history of the allowance of a use variance here in our community. And if you look at the history, Mr. President, you'll see that in 2016, an opinion was asked of the solicitor. The solicitor produced an opinion that said use variances were authorized in the city of Medford. In 2017, we had a proposal that was made by a Councilor to deauthorize use variances in the city of Medford. If, in fact, use variances weren't authorized in the city of Medford, there would be no need for a Councilor to file a paper requesting that they be deauthorized in 2017. In 2018, Mr. President, another paper was offered before the council by a Councilor to deauthorize the use variance. Again, this paper failed to pass. If use variances did not exist in the city of Medford, there would be no need for the legislative body to bring a proposal forward to deauthorize the use variance in the city of Medford. Mr. President, then we have a roll call vote that passed by super majority, adopting the city solicitor's opinion of August 12th, 2016, which states that use variances are allowed and authorized in the city of Medford. The solicitor's opinion went on to say that the codified ordinances in the city of Medford do not reflect such. There was a Scribner's error that has been made and that we can correct this Scribner's error by passage of resolution. The council passed paper 18376, which called for adoption of the city solicitor's opinion and amendment to the codified ordinance to reflect such. Allowing the use variance has been a longstanding policy in the city of Medford, Mr. President. It is the public policy established by the council, the legislative arm of this community. It is the job of the boards and commissions in this community not to establish public policy, but to execute it. When applicants before the Zoning Board of Appeals are being told inaccurate information that use variances are prohibited, when they clearly are allowed, as supported by the opinion of the solicitor, the lack of a legal challenge, and the action of the legislative body in the community, this irresponsible action opens up the city to vulnerabilities and liabilities. Applicants before the Zoning Board of Appeals have the right to be heard. The Zoning Board of Appeals has applicants before it that are requesting use variances. The Zoning Board of Appeals is raising the question, Do use variances exist in the city of Medford? That question has been answered. It's been answered and it's been time-tested, Mr. President. The Zoning Board of Appeals is in a position right now to take a look at this issue, to reaffirm the opinion of the city solicitor or to challenge it. But applicants that come before the Zoning Board shouldn't be turned around, turned away when someone makes a statement saying, I don't have the authority to issue use variances. They're not authorized in the city of Medford. when the legislative history clearly indicates that they are. So with that being said, Mr. President, I ask my council colleagues to support this resolution as before.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, ultimately, The city solicitor came up with an opinion. The opinion has gone unchallenged. In 2018, this council by a super majority vote adopted that solicitor's opinion. If we look back at the lawsuit from 2016, one thing I think that we're failing to talk about is the fact that we got thrown out of court by the judge by having no standing. The issue has never been decided. It was never challenged because it was never decided. Ultimately, the question before this council is, have we adopted The city solicited his opinion based upon the research that he performed, which would be the law of the community that says use variances are allowed. This council has adopted that opinion. That is the legislative history. The Zoning Board of Appeals is authorized to move forward on the...
[Adam Knight]: To change that, there's a process to go about changing that. When Papers 17007 and Papers 18354 came before the council, they failed. In 2016, we challenged the local street development, and there was a discussion about use variances. In 2016, the solicitor also put an opinion, and it said use variances are authorized. In 2017, a paper was filed to deauthorize use variances. In 2018, a paper was filed to deauthorize use variances. If use variances didn't exist, there'd be no need to file the papers. In 2018, the council then went on to say, look it, use variances do exist. It is the legislative intent of this body, the legislative body responsible for the implementation of the Zoning Act to clarify that this does exist. And we want to pass this clarification on to the Zoning Board of Appeals. That's what this paper is. You know, use variances are allowed because that's been determined by the city solicitor. And that's the law of the land.
[Adam Knight]: You're the point.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I do believe that I've presented quite a bit of documentation relative to the fact, and that documentation was produced by the administration and produced by the city's lawyer, the city solicitor. Ultimately, I think we need to keep the facts straight. What the council appealed, was whether or not we had standing, not whether or not use variances exist in the city of Medford or anything else. What we appealed was whether or not we had standing. And then we went through that appeal and we negotiated a settlement. Okay. So ultimately the history is there. The legislative history clearly shows what the intent is of this council. And we have a solicitor's opinion that comes well before the council took these votes. So I leave it up to my council colleagues. I move for approval of the question. Mr. President, I don't think that, you know, presenting facts to the Zoning Board of Appeals based upon the legislative history of this body and the opinion of the city solicitor does anything other than reaffirm our position on use variances and let them know where we stand so that moving forward, we're all working in concert with the intent of the Zoning Act.
[Adam Knight]: Actually, to clarify, Mr. President, I'm referring to the council vote that was taken on paper 18376 by roll call, which passed with supermajority. You know, um, the legislation passed, this body passed a resolution, that resolution reaffirmed the solicitor's opinion and corrected the scriveners that were in the codified version of our ordinances. I mean, I don't know how much simpler it has to get than that. Um, that action took place. It hasn't been undone. That action hasn't been undone. So just because there's been turnover on the council. doesn't mean that the action's undone. That's like saying, because we passed an ordinance five years ago and the body's changed, the ordinance doesn't count anymore. That's not the way it works. The body acted, the body passed it. That was the legislative intent at the time, and that should carry through until it's changed.
[Adam Knight]: Because the Zoning Board of Appeals doesn't create public policy, they execute it. The Medford City Council creates and establishes public policy. That policy's been established and the Zoning Board of Appeals is using their discretion. to say, no, you can't bring an application before us when they can't.
[Adam Knight]: Are they a violation?
[Adam Knight]: I think that the Zoning Board of Appeals made an error, an error in judgment that's opened the city up to liabilities by refusing to hear an application for an individual that's applied for a use variance based upon the legislative history and the solicitor's opinion. Yes, I do. I feel as though they made an error. And that's why I put this resolution forward. And that's why I took the time to research the legislative history so that we'd all understand that this is how it went down.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, it clarified the situation. The solicitor gave us an opinion that said that there was a scrivener's error in the codification of the ordinances that happened in 2001. The city solicitor has produced a document from August 12, 2016 that includes history of his research. Part of that history is an email exchange between the solicitor and the MuniCode company that we use to codify our ordinances. And if you go through that email, you can see the history and the back and forth, MuniCode even saying that it's an error, that use variances are allowed and never should have been changed. So there's plenty of documentation backing up the fact that the codified ordinances that were done in 2001 contained a Scribner's error relative to use variances. We asked for clarification, we got it. We've adopted the clarification as law in the community.
[Adam Knight]: I just want to make sure, Mr. Not taken that way at all, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: No, it's not. We've actually moved to correct the language. However, the codification last occurred in 2001. Based upon the meeting that we had just an hour or two ago, the next step that this council is going to take going forward with our zoning reform would be a recodification. At that time, I think that this error would be addressed anyhow. However, in the meantime, we have applicants that are applying for use variances. They're not given their day in court. They deserve the right to a hearing. Whether they get denied or not, they shouldn't be told they can't apply and that they can't present their case. They should be given the opportunity to present their case.
[Adam Knight]: Well, it's up to the Zoning Board of Appeals insofar as whether or not they have the authority to issue the use variance. With the zoning board saying we don't have the authority to issue the use variance if we had the legislative body is saying no you do Because our legislative history and the intent of the acts they should do there's a problem.
[Adam Knight]: By way of the vote on paper 1 8 3 7 6 we addressed it those we addressed those two conflicting sections We adopted the list of his opinion. There's no longer two conflicting sections.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, based upon the conversations that we had last Wednesday evening, the financial picture in this community is grim. I think it's incumbent upon us as city councilors to make sure that we are informed as best we can be when it comes down to the current financial circumstances that are facing this community. We've seen our private outside can help you get revenue forecasts of what to expect for the next fiscal year. One of those things is an $8 million budget shortfall at this point in time. So with that being said, Mr. President, I put several resolutions on this evening on similar subject matter. And what they are is to get information to this council so that we can sit back and begin to craft an informed decision that we need to make on whether or not we're going to pass a budget this year and what that budget is going to include. On top of that, Mr. President, we need to take a look at certain aspects of our service delivery and identify what's important and essential to us. And I think that based upon the circumstances that we've all faced, no one can shake a stick at the fact that our public safety personnel are going above and beyond during these trying times right now. They're essential workers that have been out there on the front lines. So, I'd just like to see what it is our current staffing levels are, our budgeted staffing levels are, and our minimum staffing levels are to ensure that as we move forward and we face these trying fiscal times, that we do our best to secure as many positions as we can in the public safety realm so that moving forward, we know that the residents in this community are protected. I think that, you know, we've all said it before, the number one priority and the number one goal and objective as an elected official in this community is making sure our streets are safe and our community is safe, and we can't do that without public safety personnel. I ask my council colleagues to support the results.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I would say paper 20345, paper 20346, paper 20350, and paper 20351 are all of similar subject matter and can be consolidated.
[Adam Knight]: I'd ask that you wait for read paper 20350 last Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: When we go back to last Wednesday evening's meeting and we met with our private outside consultant responsible for auditing here in the city of Medford, he also provided us with some revenue forecasts. And I was very impressed with the presentation and the level of preparedness that Mr. Roselli brought to the table. Mr. President, one of the things that he said that I took away that evening was that he is confident that we can start a budget discussion by June 1st and have a budget by June 30th. He's given us revenue forecasts that are very conservative. And moving forward, I think it's important that we work as hard as we can to put together an annual fiscal year budget, Mr. President. I know there's been a lot of talk about a one-twelfths budget or a quarterly budget. And I don't think that that's the way to go, Mr. President. In these discussions that we had on Wednesday evening, we talked about what approach we were going to take. And there's a question as to whether or not we want to take a wait-and-see approach Wait and see if we're going to get bailed out by the federal government wait and see if we're going to get bailed out by the state government We have revenue projections from private outside consultants that we're paying money to to give us revenue projections. We have them I feel as though it's important. Mr. President that we take the bull by the horns That we move forward and we control our own destiny and don't wait for a bailout If, in fact, we're going to be facing trying fiscal times, then we need to take the bull by the horns. We need to do things the Medford way, Mr. President. And sitting back and playing the wait and see who's going to bail us out approach is not the Medford way. If that were the Medford way, Mr. President, we wouldn't have been the first community in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to have a transit-oriented smock growth development. If waiting to be bailed out was the method way, Mr. President, then we certainly wouldn't have been able to purchase the grounds where Homel Stadium is for $1 and a land transfer. If waiting to be bailed out was the method way, Mr. President, then we wouldn't have been able to get our applications in early enough to get a 90% reimbursement on the construction of our schools. If waiting to be bailed out was the method way, Mr. President, then we wouldn't have been the first community in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to establish a linkage fee So I think, Mr. President, as we move forward, what we need to do is put together a budget, a 12-month annual budget, where we make hard decisions. God forbid we have to go forward with those projections that have been presented to us. God forbid. Because there's going to be a lot of cuts, and those cuts are going to cut deep. But we have revenue forecasts right now that give us a worst-case scenario. So we should be putting together an annual budget based upon the worst-case scenario. If, in fact, our funding comes back from the feds or the states better than we anticipated, then we have an influx of cash and we'll be able to fill the gaps. On Wednesday night, we did have a significant discussion relative to where the administration is in the preparation of their budget. COVID-19 caused the government shutdown beginning on the 13th of March. We were scheduled to meet the first week in April on the budget, Mr. President. That was two weeks before the government shutdown. I doubt the administration was going to be able to put together an entire budget in two weeks, which would lead us all to believe that there was some work being done in the budget. The city administration has actually confirmed that every single department in the city has presented the administration with their working fiscal year 21 budget. These documents have not been consolidated. There is going to be a need for trimming. Obviously, there are many competing needs in this community. But we're at the spot right now where we have worst case scenario revenue forecasts, and we have a budget based upon the projections prior to COVID-19. I think we all want to deliver services at or better than the level that we're at today. So with that being said, we have a budget that will allow us to do that, that hasn't been consolidated, but East Montgomery has presented that to us. And we have forecasts, what the money is going to be from our private outside consultants. So I think, Mr. President, we're in a position where we can put together a 12-month annual budget for the upcoming fiscal year. It might not be a pretty budget. It's going to be something that might require some tough decisions. But at the end of the day, like Councilor Mack said, a budget's made up of 85% salaries. So cutting a couple of water coolers isn't going to cut the mustard. We have $8 million to fill, and we've got to start doing it now. And sitting back and waiting to be bailed out by the Feds is not the measured way. If it were, we wouldn't have seen the successes that we've seen in the past, and we wouldn't have been able to weather the terrible fiscal times that we've seen in the past, like back in 2008. Quite frankly, here we are 12 years later, we really haven't recovered from the 2008 cuts that have been made. Look at our DPW and the staffing levels there. So with that being said, Mr. President, we need a 12 month budget moving forward for fiscal year 21. And I asked my council colleagues to support this consolidated amendment. And moving forward, I look forward to working with them to solve some of these fiscal concerns that we have here in the community.
[Adam Knight]: I certainly agree with certain aspects of what Councilor Marks said. One of them being we need to see what the administration's working on. And at Wednesday night's meeting, that's why I requested that the administration provide us with the copies of those departmental budgets that they've received thus far, so that we can see how far along in the process they are in establishing a budget. Ultimately, Mr. President, general law would say that the administration is required to present the council with a budget by the 170th day after the organization of government. So if you see that we have an inauguration, Administration, 170 days, budget to the council. That's what the division of local services, state law says surrounding this. So, you know, while the council doesn't necessarily get involved in producing a budget, if in fact we don't receive a budget by the 170th day, by law, we have the right to establish our own budget and put our own budget together. We've never done that before. We've never done that before in the history of the city of Medford. Never done it before, Mr. President. Difficult times call for difficult measures and drastic times call for drastic measures. I'm not recommending that the council put forward its own budget and send it forward. What I am saying is that we need to be on the same page moving forward and then we have to have an expectation. And that expectation should be that we have an annual budget.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, I understand where council of business is coming from because ultimately taxpayers in this community deserve to have services and service delivery is what we're here to perform. But at the same time, borrowing our way out of a financial situation and creating a structural deficit, not only for this upcoming fiscal year, but for fiscal years in the future and establishing a bonded debt for us to pay down for operating costs is That's scary to me. That's really creating a structural deficit and relying on reserves or borrowing in order for us to operate our government. Granted, like you said, 100 years, Great Depression, one out of every five people is unemployed in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Actually, in the nation right now, one in every five. When you look at it, you can't close the door, but we also have to be very cautious. We can't borrow and spend out, borrow and deplete our reserves in order for us to get the situation, the financial situations, the financial situation, the numbers of the numbers. So I commend the Council of thinking of outside the box solutions. However, borrowing our way out of a structural deficit, I think is something that's scary to me. But I rest with that.
[Adam Knight]: No one's asking for a wish list budget from the department heads. What was represented at Wednesday night's meeting last week was that, I believe the quote from the chief of staff was that we have a fiscal year 21 working budget. It's not a wishlist budget. It's a fiscal year 21 working budget based upon the revenue forecast at that time. So, you know, it's not a wishlist budget. Now, this coupled with the fact that, I mean, I can go back now, I've done several budgets and going back to Councilor Penta asking for wishlist budgets every single year is a resolution for a time that I was on the council. I recall these requests have been made in the past. Um, but I'm not asking for a wishlist budget. I'm asking for the budget that was prepared for the working budget that was prepared for FY 15 based upon the government shutdown. So just to clarify that point, I apologize for the family interference.
[Adam Knight]: that he said, I don't think this information will be helpful to you. And as the person that has to make the decision, I think it would be very helpful to me. But again, we never requested a wishlist budget. The question was asked to the mayor, where are you in the process right now? Government shutdown happened on or around 3-13. Two weeks, we've been April 1st. We were scheduled to start our meetings on April 1st. So where are we? And she said, all the departments have submitted their budgets. I haven't had a chance to review them and consolidate them. Okay, fine. I said, so we have a wishlist budget. That was a quote. So we have a wishlist budget for each department. At which time the chief of staff said, no, we do not have a wishlist budget for each department. We have a fiscal year 21 working budget for those departments based upon the forecast prior to COVID-19. So this isn't a request for wishlist budget. This is a request for the budget, the budget that was prepared by the department heads and should COVID-19 not have happened, we would see where we are absent the crisis. Now we have the, so we'll have a budget here that says, you know, in a perfect world without COVID-19, this is what we needed to meet our goals and objectives. Here we are with the revenue forecast. Here's the budget based upon these revenue forecasts. These are the gaps. How are we going to fill them?
[Adam Knight]: I can read it, but I can't move on. Mr. President, there was a motion made to consolidate the papers to one.
[Adam Knight]: With paper 350 controlling. So it would be paper 20-350, and then the other papers underneath it, all financial matters, all requesting information.
[Adam Knight]: Um, I do believe in recent weeks, Mr. President, the council also put forward a paper requesting.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, just a few weeks ago we requested an update relative to the runoff issues in front of Citizens Bank as it related to that project as well and I'd just like to reiterate that request as part of this result.
[Adam Knight]: It doesn't have to be an amendment I just think that you know it's a request that's been made so if we can just send them the previous document that was approved by the council again because we haven't gotten an update that would be helpful.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. First and foremost, I'd like to commend Kevin Bailey and Danny Folk on the work they're doing during these trying times in the recreation department. It's very difficult to establish recreational programming when you can't have anybody in the same place. And they've been doing a great job pursuing various aspects of socially distance and online recreational opportunities for individuals in our community. And I'm hoping that we can make a few suggestions to the gentlemen in the recreation department moving forward to implement for the betterment of our community. I think that, you know, here we are approaching day 60. Many of us are getting stir-crazy with, you know, being trapped in the house and in the backyard. There's not much opportunity for us to go out and pursue recreational opportunities that aren't passive in nature. And we've seen a lot of work. take place to bring some of these services online. And it's been met with a measure of success. It's been met with certainly some enthusiasm in the community, and I'm hoping that we can take this momentum and build upon it. So with that being said, Mr. President, I commend the efforts of the recreation department and the work that they're doing and thinking out of the box to bring services to the residents in this community. And because they're doing it in a virtual setting, they're able to do it in a way that's at a significantly low cost to the taxpayer and the community.
[Adam Knight]: Celebrate a birthday party, birthday but can't have a party. Stuff like that, Mr. President. So I'm hoping that my council colleagues will support.
[Adam Knight]: Once again, right? Once again. I got to call the governor. I want to see if he can lend me his guy, just in case.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I also raise the question, if in fact, you know, we had a 10-year trash contract that was extended for the period of time, when was it that The other condo associations in this community have been contacted relative to whether or not these bulk pickup and recycling services are available. If they refused these services 15 years ago and they haven't been asked again, I think that will be problematic. The taxpaying residents in this community, they should have access to the services that are provided. So just because they've opted out at one point in time, I guess the question is, To what frequency is the city requesting or monitoring this? I mean, the contract's a 10-year contract, so would it be, you know, they don't come back and ask for 10 years?
[Adam Knight]: It's all by request?
[Adam Knight]: So it might make sense then for the DPW to do an outreach if in fact I'm gonna get a Maple Park, which I support wholeheartedly. The question is, you know, do we make sure that everybody understands that they have the option to do this and extend to them the same olive branch that we're extending Maple Park or the same courtesy that we're extending Maple Park to be sure that they're aware that they have access to these services if they've in fact denied them previously.
[Adam Knight]: Also, Mr. President, yesterday, there was a tragic fire on Canal Street in West Medford, and a number of families have been displaced from this fire. So I'd ask that the city administration and the school department report back to the council as to what steps are being taken to help these families out. It's my understanding that we've seen GoFundMe pages that have been created and stuff like that. But in times like this, the community needs to come together. So I'm hoping that if there's an action plan or if there's any resources available to these families that we'd be provided with notice so that we can take the appropriate steps to help out in any way that we can.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think this is a rather self explanatory ordinance. Here we are. two thirds of the way through the second quarter of the calendar year. Within the first five or six meetings that the city council assembled we had requested draft ordinances related to a number of issues that are impacting our community, issues that we need to take a look at. And the council initiated as prerogative to look at these by way of ordinance. And we had a discussion about whether or not the council would have the right and ability to hire its own attorney to work on this stuff. And here we are, some almost five, almost six months later, Mr. President, and we still haven't gotten one draft ordinance back. So, I bring this resolution forward asking that we get monthly progress reports from the administration as to the status of the requested draft ordinances that the council seeks. And I'd ask my council colleagues to support me in this measure.
[Adam Knight]: Council night. Mr. President, I do think it's important that we also get a copy of the contract that was signed with KP Laura I believe we requested that a number of occasions and we still have not received that yet to determine what the scope of services. So moving forward we know what resources are available to us.
[Adam Knight]: I am, Mr. President. It's a resolution that's been offered a number of times in the past and has gone unanswered.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Although technology is wonderful, it's not so wonderful sometimes when we're trying to conduct the efficient operation of government. So with that being said, Mr. President, I think that we're at a point right now where we understand COVID-19 and the coronavirus to ensure that we're protected and meet in a non-virtual setting to address the very important issue of the city's finances in the upcoming budget for the fiscal year. So I'd ask my council colleagues to support this measure. Although virtual meetings are great, I don't think that they have the same.
[Adam Knight]: Ultimately, the way I envisioned it is that we can all be in a room. conducting the business of the city. And if individual residents have questions or concerns, I do believe based upon your leadership, we've been able to enable some video conferencing in certain areas. And I think that could transcend over to the little theater or to other aspects. Our community media center is very successful. Patrick Gordon's done a great job. He's an award-winning producer that we have over here. So I'm sure that if we put our heads together, we'll be able to come up with something. But if we look at the resolution, the resolution is to ask the President and the Mayor to meet and discuss ways that we can do this. So I think we should have everything on the table, Mr. President, and come up with something that works for all.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, yes, thank you very much. I live, I can see that gate to the cemetery from my front stairs, and the amount of volume of people that are going through there is tremendous right now. And when you see the faces, they're not familiar faces. We have a lot of out-of-state license plates parking along, out-of-city license, out-of-city stickers, out-of-city people parking along Placeland Road, utilizing the cemetery for open space because the parks and their communities have been closed down too. You know, we utilize it quite frequently for passive recreation purposes, but it's getting to the point now where I've had discussions with operators of heavy equipment that work in the DPW that have said that they're being approached by people saying, can you not drive the bulldozer down this street? Cause I want my kid to ride the bike down here. You know, they have a job to do as well. So I too echo councilor Caraviello's sentiment statements and I support his resolution wholeheartedly and second it.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if I may?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much. I've gotten to know Mike over the years, and I'll tell you, he's just someone you like to be around. He's a soft-spoken guy, a gentleman, and I really just want to congratulate him on his 32 years of service. and wish him all the best as he pursues his golden years. I think it's important to point out that right around the same time that Lieutenant Endicott retired with 32 years of service, he also turned 65 years of age. So Mr. President, that'll tell you that half of this gentleman's life was spent providing service and public safety to the city of Medford and its residents. So that's something that's certainly commendable, and I wish him all the best moving forward.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I thank Councilor Bears for bringing this measure forward and him bringing up the Courtyard nursing home and the circumstances surrounding that raised further concern and, you know, with everything that's going on in the community and all the discussions and talks and rumors about what's going on, I think it's important that we really take a long, hard look at the circumstances and situation that's been surrounding the courtyard nursing home. You know, from what I understand, I think the Holyoke Soldier's Home has the highest rate of infection for nursing homes in the state, and the courtyard isn't too far behind it. It's, you know, my understanding that various federal and state entities have reached out some help and some planning to prevent the further spread of COVID and were turned away. Rumors, I don't know if there's any truth to it, but we had the chief of staff here. Maybe he can, you know, explain to us a little bit about what circumstances had happened, when and where, who knew what, when and what was happening. The latest I heard was that the Army National Guard had offered its services to help with the circumstances at the courtyard. And then the, volunteerism was refused. Um, and I think that, you know, we really need to take a long hard look at it, but first and foremost, um, you know, I'm not one that usually chases rumors down and we have the cheapest staff this evening with us right now. So hopefully you can put it into that, uh, you know, rumor mill discussion that's been going on around the community, because if that is factual, then it's very concerning to me. Um, so with that being said, Mr. President, I do raise the question, um, you know, what's, what circumstances are going on at the courtyard that the city has been involved in, and what steps have been taken to help them address the issue there. And was any state or federal body extending help that was refused by the administration of the city during this time? Those are the questions that I have. Maybe Dave can help us out with this a little bit.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I thank Mr. Rodriguez for that breakdown. I'd like to propose a B paper requesting that the administration provide us with a timeline of events and a breakdown of those discussions. relative to what services and assistances were offered and which ones were accepted and rendered. And I'd offer that in the form of a B paper, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I certainly agree with Councilman Mox that a level funded budget would be a win. In fact, I think at this point in the game, it's wishful thinking to get a level funded budget for the next fiscal year. And that's the reality of the situation. There's also another reality of the situation, Mr. President, and that reality is that by law, we need to pass a fiscal year budget by July 1st. In order for us to do that, during these trying times, we need to stop meeting now. We can't wait any longer. We were supposed to meet last month. Uncontrollable circumstances have arisen. I understand that. But here we are now, another four weeks behind where we should be. I, as one councilor, am not crazy about the idea of going down the road for a 1-12 budget or an emergency budget. I don't think that's appropriate. I don't think that's the way we should handle a fiscal crisis. I think that's short-term planning, not long-term planning. So I, for one, would like to ask the question, will we have an annual budget as required by the state law for us to debate and vote upon by July 1st? So that's my question, Mr. President. Will we have a budget available for us to vote on at this point in time? And where are we in the process right now in terms of the preparations so that we can better work our schedules around what to expect in the forthcoming weeks when these budget hearings do start. So I offer that the form of a question to the administration. It can be done by way of a mentor, by way of an answer from the gentleman that's here in the audience this evening, I represent the administration.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Cots all night. Mr. President, I request we get that response in writing if possible, just so that we can have it on the record as we move forward and are all prepared so that we're all on the same page when we begin our budget discussions. In terms of Tony Roselli now, his position with the community as outside auditor, is that what it is?
[Adam Knight]: OK. So is it common for an outside auditor to establish new forecast municipalities?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. It is common that the answer is commonplace for outside auditors to provide revenue forecast for municipalities. To assess correct. To assess, okay, thank you.
[Adam Knight]: That does it for me, sir.
[Adam Knight]: I do have one more comment, Mr. President. And I think it goes back to what Councilor Monk said with a level funded budget. And I've stated that I think a level funded budget is going to be wishful thinking based upon the current financial and fiscal situation that we're in. But then we also have to look at the term level funded budget. And what is a level funded budget? A level funded budget is taking the money we gave last year and giving it to them again this year. But something's getting lost in the middle there, Mr. President, and that's a measure of the performance and whether or not the goals and objectives were met or established when we made that funding. So if we're funding a department that says these are our goals and objectives for this term, we give them the money to do that, and they don't meet those goals and objectives, why are we funding them at the same level? It's obvious that they haven't been able to accomplish the job, So I think we might want to look at something what's called zero-based budgeting, which means that instead of level funding a budget every year, the goals and objectives that are set are either retained or they're not. And the money that is appropriated is not a reoccurring appropriation. We need to show that this money in this investment is giving us a return. So I think that that's something that we might want to consider and might want to look at, Mr. President, is going to a zero-based budget at this point in time. You know, we're in very strange financial times, but I think that, you know, with the amount of talent that we have here in the community, we should be able to put together an annual budget.
[Adam Knight]: I have no more, that's really it.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I would just like to add that maybe with this new enlarged donation of PPE that the city has received, that the administration would be willing to set some aside with the intention of being able to provide that when we conduct these in-person budget hearings, if, in fact, it's something we can work out if people don't have access to that stuff, you know what I mean? So that we can use that as part of our ancillary and secondary plan to provide PPE to individuals while we try to meet non-virtually for the important issue of discussing with community scientists.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much. As we are all aware, the school department is one of the largest city departments that we have. It comprises nearly 30% of our budget annually, and it proves to provide one of the most vital services that we can offer as a municipality along with public safety and public works. The challenge that we as a city council face is going to be balancing the many competing needs of the various departments in this community. in being able to deliver a level of services that meets the quality and expectation of our taxpayers. So with that being said, Mr. President, I think there's been a reoccurring theme this evening about the topic of discussion, and that's the budget. It's our city's finances. And that's the underlying theme of this evening's meeting, Mr. President, and these papers that have been brought forward are no different. Councilor Scarpelli and I were I'm very aware of the commentary that took place at the school committee meeting, the emergency school committee meeting last Wednesday. I quite frankly think if we were going to discuss the city's finances in such a large scope, that discussion should have started with the council and not the school committee, because it's really going to come down to all of us working together on, but the council holds the purse strings and the buck stops here. Um, so I really think that this discussion should have started with the council, Mr. President, but we are where we are. Um, so with that being said, there were several resolutions, um, that, that I put forward some by myself, some, um, as co-sponsor with councilor Scarpelli. And then the speech is going to be the same for them all. Mr. President. Um, ultimately, you know, we have a job. Here and that job is to balance the competing needs and the competing interests that the various departments have. and then meeting that objective, delivering those services to the level that our residents and taxpayers expect. So I think this information will be very helpful as we move forward in putting together our budget and preparing for our budget discussions, because we'll have a, you know, historical understanding and a historical perspective of the issue that the school department, again, largest department here in the city has been looking for, where appropriations and expenditures have been made historically, what the trends are, and then maybe we can take a look at, Mr. President, coming up with some solutions to stop the bleeding when our state aid numbers come back. It's my understanding that the new education funding formula doesn't help Medford that much. You know, we're not not much better off than we were under the old education funding formula. So with that being said, I think that it's important that, you know, we take a long, hard look at the finances of our largest departments, first and foremost. If we're going to be moving forward and, you know, looking at hopefully level funding budgets, I think the first place we need to start is public safety and public works in our school time. And then we can go from there, Mr. President. We have many needs right now in the community and many obligations. whether it be debt service, whether it be health insurance, premium inflation, unfunded pension liability, and the like, we are going to have to comply with the state and federal funded and unfunded mandates and pay the assessments on the certain and various services that we receive from our partners in government. So with that being said, this paper that's before us right now, paper 20339, paper 20337, the same goes for all three, and I won't have much to say on those, Mr. President. I'll rest my case with that, with this, that, you know, we need to get this information so that we can move forward and be prepared to address this stuff. I, as one Councilor, am prepared to roll up my sleeves and get to work to put together a 12-month budget for the next fiscal year. I hope the administration shares that goal and that objective. And as we collectively, I think we'll be in a better position to sit down and really talk numbers and talk to her.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor Layton. I raise the issue right forward, and I defer to my colleague, Councilor Scalia,
[Adam Knight]: President, if I could just make a brief announcement. I just was driving down Main Street just this afternoon, as a matter of fact. I also drove down Main Street on Friday. And if you go past Bob's Food Store and you look to the house immediately to the right-hand side of it, it's reminiscent of a Tony Lucci sidewalk sale. is furniture all over the place, a bed, a mattress, a couch, so on and so forth. If we look at the calendar, Mr. President, Friday was the first of the month. So that would lead me to believe that there might have been a little bit of a tenant move out that occurred at that address. And I took the liberty of reaching out to Mr. Bavuso after hearing from Some neighborhood residents expressed some concern relative to it being a trip hazard and a safety hazard, and he will be out there tomorrow. So I just wanted those individuals that have expressed concern to understand that there is some follow-up that's going to occur tomorrow. And the residents of South Medford should no longer have to take a look at that disgraceful, blatant trash that's on the street. And I've expressed to Mr. Bufuso, if in fact it comes down to a circumstance where the city has to move it or there has to be a clean it or lean it situation, that I as one council would certainly support whatever measure that we can take to help appropriate funds to make that necessary. So with that being said, Mr. President, code enforcement officer will be out there tomorrow working on rectifying the situation for neighbors of Billings Avenue.
[Adam Knight]: But so I get the question I have is if this contract was put out to bid contract supposed to be appropriated and funded when signed.
[Adam Knight]: That's it for now, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I think it works better with my camera off, Mr. President. I, as one member of the council, am a firm believer in getting the shovels in the ground. I think we do need to get this sidewalk work done and I think we need to live up to our contractual obligation that we made some time ago. So I certainly have no problem supporting the funding for this paper this evening. I've continuously held true to my position that I do believe we need to focus on eliminating the extensive use of private contractors and really turning this work in-house because I feel as though what we're doing is we're really in a race to the bottom. We're not investing in our own personnel and our own institutional knowledge. We're giving all the control and direction to a private company that we're throwing money at. We've all spoken at length about when a private company gets a public contract, how they feel as though they've hit the lottery. and the work product sometimes isn't as good as we'd like. And we've also seen that there's not much pride in workmanship. When you have an individual that comes to work every day, 365 days a year, like our DPW workers have been doing, especially during these trying times with COVID-19, I think we understand how valuable a resource our DPW is. So, with that being said, I do think we do need to take a long, hard look at continuing to reinvest these privately spent funds, these bonded funds especially. I mean, ultimately, if you look at it, we're going to spend $500,000, we're going to pay it off over 15 years, and we're going to get 200 sidewalks out of the deal. We could save $500,000, and we could hire employees, and we could have them work for us for the next 30 years, the same amount of time we paid off the bond for just these 230 sidewalks. So I do think it's important that we do look at that issue, but this evening I am prepared to vote in favor of funding the contract.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. We all know that the Maturanas are a great Methodist family. They've been around for a long time, whether it be with Pop Warner or right now with our very own licensing commission. Jimmy comes from a great group of people and a great family, and he will be sorely missed. However, Mr. President, I think that I would be remiss in speaking before Councilor Scarpelli on this, especially whereas he and Jimmy grew up together, when Morris and Park played around kids together. So with that being said, I defer to Councilor Scarpelli.
[Adam Knight]: I don't think I could do any justice compared to what Councilor Scarpelli just said, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I believe it's the next item on the agenda, isn't it, Mr. President? Do we need to suspend the rules, too?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President motion to suspend the rules to take communications from the mayor.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. If I do recall properly, I do believe this would be phase three of a three-year plan for sidewalk restoration that we have funded previously, but I may be mistaken. I was hoping maybe there'd be a representative from the administration here to discuss a little bit further as to this loan order.
[Adam Knight]: I'll allow my other council colleagues to type it.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to report the questions out to the administration for an answer so that we can address the people next week.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. Commercial break and after these messages, they'll be right back.
[Adam Knight]: No, I mean the rate on the loan, the $500,000 loan that we're looking to.
[Adam Knight]: And who are our financial advisors, are these the same entities that we've been using in the past, or is this a new entity or a new consultant that's been brought in?
[Adam Knight]: What would the term, of the loan B for the 500,000. I believe 20.
[Adam Knight]: My intention was to take up both papers under suspension when I raised the motion.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, but yeah, community preservation papers.
[Adam Knight]: The first question that I'd have, Mr. President, is whether or not these appropriations and programs that we're funding would service 100% Medford residents. Because community preservation funds are generated through an assessment on our property taxes, I think it's very important that we make sure that these funds stay within the confines of our community. So I ask that question.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, From the presentation, Ms. Cameron referred to limit it. And when you say limit it, limit what? Limit the expenditure of CPA funds or restrict the expenditure of CPA funds under this program?
[Adam Knight]: I certainly can appreciate that, Ms. Cameron. Like I said, my concern is that because these funds are generated from an assessment on property taxes from residents here in the community, These funds really should stay within the confines of our community. I don't see why we should be sending them out. If we were going to be producing housing inside the community, and other people were going to be eligible to have access for it, that's one thing. It's another thing if we're taking money and funding a program that's going to be servicing people that don't live here. And I think that's what my concern is.
[Adam Knight]: So there's no guarantee that this money is going to service Medford residents?
[Adam Knight]: That's the only guarantee we have. If we spend it, there's a guarantee that Medford residents could be left out, and they won't be able to have access to this, and it could go somewhere else outside.
[Adam Knight]: Apparently, Ms. Cameron is going to let other people answer the questions, so that's fine with me, absolutely.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I have two questions. The first one is, I'm not sure who said it in their presentation, but I believe the term was we invited them to apply. And I'm wondering if that is, you know, there's an open enrollment period or an emergency enrollment period and they're saying, look, if these resources are available, please apply. or if this is a, hey, we know a great organization, let's call them and tell them to apply for this money, because this is a program we need, I guess. Is the community and the community-based organizations driving the request for the program, or is the CPC driving the request for applicants?
[Adam Knight]: I don't want to be misunderstood, Mr. President. I certainly understand the work that these organizations do and I appreciate the work that they do. My biggest concern is taking property tax dollars and these monies that are generated through an assessment on a property tax here for a homeowner and them having the opportunity to be used outside of the community. That's my biggest concern. That's my biggest issue. But it seems like a lot of those concerns have been addressed with the presentation. One question I would have for our CPC administrator or CPC staff is, does the council have the right to reduce the appropriation and allow this applicant to come back at a later date for further funding? Councilmarks made a great point. If the need's not there, then these funds could go somewhere else. Why release $250,000 when we could release $75,000 now, $75,000 later, and then $100,000 at the end if that need needs to be met? Is it in our best interest to appropriate 50% of our CPC funds that are in the affordable housing bucket at this time, or should we give less money and allow them the opportunity to come back and ask for more if the need is there?
[Adam Knight]: The last question I have, I think the chief of staff is on the call, if I'm not mistaken. What's the mayor's position on this? Is the mayor supportive of this appropriation, or is this something that the mayor doesn't see as appropriate? Does this fall within our housing needs and use plan that we have in place? Those are the questions I'd have for the administration if they can answer that.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd like to second Councilor Caraviello's motion for a 50% funding and then upon review of the usage statistics, a further conversation on appropriating the additional 50%.
[Adam Knight]: They made the recommendation for the funds of 250. We're just giving them half and saying, come back and ask for more later. They made the recommendation for 250.
[Adam Knight]: We can't. Two separate appropriations, keep in mind.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Many of us know the Miller and family, they've been. fixtures in the city of Medford for as long as I can remember. Very dedicated community advocates in their neighborhood at the West Medford Community Center, in the state working for individuals with developmental disabilities, and also very active in the Democratic Party here in the city of Medford, Mr. President. Henry and Evelyn have become great friends over the years. I first met them working in Charlie Shannon's office when they'd come up and lobby for state funding for certain programs in Madison at that time. I'm very happy to have seen the friendship grow, and I'm very happy to see them have 50 years of wedded bliss under their belt, and I wish them 50 more, and I ask my council colleagues to join me in offering this resolution.
[Adam Knight]: It was an arranged marriage.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I do think it's important that we continue to keep on track with the pre-budget hearings. And the reason I say that is because statutorily, we still have to produce a budget, you know, by the 1st of July. And I do not believe that the governor has extended the period of time in which the municipality can put together its budget. So I think by law, The mayor would have to give us her budget by the last day of next month. So I just hope that we can keep on a tight schedule with this, Mr. President, because there are going to be a lot of tough decisions that need to be made.
[Adam Knight]: Go to the meeting, sir.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I had the opportunity to work with Senator Shannon at a very young age. My first foray into politics at age 19, my first big boy job, working with Senator Shannon up until his passing in 2005. I remember walking into the office on my first day and as an intern and sitting at the desk next to me was Consulate Kaviello's son, Richard. So, you know, I go way back with the Caraviello family. Richie and I were in kindergarten together, and we interned for Senator Shannon together. Councilman Mox worked for Senator Shannon as well for a period of time. But he's someone who I give a lot of credit to for helping me professionally and personally, and he is sadly missed. So I'd ask my council colleagues to join me in offering condolences to a gentleman that offered so much to this community. He served in the state legislature, elected in 1990. passing away in 2005. He had served quite a bit of time for the residents in the city of Medford. He did an excellent job, Mr. President. Senator Shannon was probably one of the best constituent service providers in the state legislature during his time as a state senator. And that is something that is a legacy that you will want to be remembered. So with that being said, I'd ask my council colleagues to join me in supporting this resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, just recently we have lost Paul Brogan. Mr. Brogan loved the city of Medford. He had the blue and white running through his veins as they'd say. The father of our cemetery commissioner, Steven Brogan, grandfather to Haley Brogan in our clerk's office and also grandfather to Stephen Brogan in our DPW, Stephen Brogan Jr. in our DPW. The gentlemen, the Brogan family, Mr. President, has long and deep roots in the city of Medford, a great family made up of public servants, people that'll be willing to give the shirt off your back. But one thing we can always say about Paul Brogan was he loved the city of Medford. He wouldn't be afraid to tell you about it and that he will be sadly missed. So I'd like my council colleagues to join me in supporting this resolution and offering our condolences to the Brogan family who have been involved in the governance in the city of Medford for quite a long time.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I would have to echo my colleague's sentiments relative to Mr. McGonigal. He was a great gentleman. I had the opportunity over the past decade or so to get to know him rather well. And he was a really good guy. He had a great sense of humor, a great sense of wit, and a great understanding of how government is supposed to work. And he wasn't afraid to tell you if he felt as though you were doing a good job. and more so if you were doing a bad job. So with that being said, Joe was a great guy. He was certainly a gentleman who had a great way and a great approach to life. And his memory will live on down in the city clerk's office with his portrait. commemorating the years of service that he had dedicated to the city of Medford. So with that being said, I'd like to join my colleagues in extending my deepest and sincerest condolences to his family and for the gratitude for lending him to us for the better part of five decades.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to suspend the rules to take paper 20314 out of order.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This is something that I've looked into quite a bit since my election to the Medford City Council, and I do understand that there are certain state laws and state parameters that guide public utility companies and what is required of them and what is not. I, earlier in the day, had forwarded an email to the city clerk proposing a B paper amendment to this proposal that's before us, Mr. President. And that B paper amendment would be that, be it resolved, the Medford City Council request the city administration establish a policy requiring that all street opening permits, my phone just shut off, so I lost it. Technology's great. All street opening permits to be accompanied by a neighborhood mitigation agreement that will adequately adequately and reasonably offset the negative impact on the quality of life caused during street opening construction and city neighborhoods. So, Mr. President, what we see here, if you look around the city of Metro right now, Garfield Ave, Sheridan Ave, Golden Ave, Main Street, Central Street, Woburn Street, National Grid or other public utility providers have ripped up our streets. They're storing their equipment on our roadways. They're storing their supplies on our roadways. They're causing detours in neighborhoods. They're putting parking restrictions in for three and four weeks at a time, Mr. President. And that's causing an impact to the quality of life of residents in the neighborhood. But we'll take Golden Ave, for example. Now, I've probably put forward 25 to 30 resolutions asking for Golden Ave to be repaved, resurfaced, potholes fixed over the course of the last four years. Now, just recently, Devereux Corporation, on behalf of National Grid, closed down Golden Ave for a month. I mean, a week, rather. And they did the work that they had to do in the trenches. and did a great job Mr. President they run quite an operation actually they're very efficient, but the potholes on the street is still there there is still broken sidewalk panels on the, on the sidewalks there is still tree stumps that need to be removed. And I think that it might be reasonable for us to request a mitigation agreement to address some of these concerns in the neighborhood to offset some of the quality of life issues that come with these street construction permits. For example, Mr. President, if they're asphalting the whole entire stretch of Golden Ave, is it too much to ask for them to take out a couple of broken sidewalk panels and replace those panels with asphalt until we can get to them with concrete? I don't really think it is, Mr. President. And the mitigation agreement can be reflective to the scope of work that's being done. So if there's a small project that's being done, we can only ask for a little bit. If there's a big project that's being done, we can ask for a lot. But I think that this is something we really need to look at long and hard, Mr. President. We've all been talking now for the better part of a decade about what we can do to hold public utility providers accountable. And I think this is one way we can do it. I commend Councilor Caraviello and Councilor Marks for bringing this resolution forward. And I also thank the city engineer for being here this evening. That's why I motioned for this paper to be taken out of order because I saw that he was here and I really am looking forward to some of the comments that he has to make relative to this proposal. So with that being said, Mr. President, I would make a motion to join that as a B paper. I've already forwarded the language to the city clerk and all the members. So with that being said, I rest.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight? I do believe state law dictates the requirements that are necessary and mandated for these public utility companies. So I think it would be important for us before we take a vote on this to hear further from our city engineer relative to those scope and specifications. But from what I understand, I think I want to say the project is like SWOP or something like that would be the acronym that was used to, I'm going to mush this, get out of here. The acronym that would be used. I'll look it up in the meantime, but I think we should allow the city engineer an opportunity to speak on this before moving further. Okay.
[Adam Knight]: Tim, that process where the public utility contractor, or as Councilor Bears, the quasi-public utility contractor, when they do a temporary patch and then contribute the funds to the city. That's a program that's outlined by state law, correct?
[Adam Knight]: Right.
[Adam Knight]: So in terms of curb to curb, that's one aspect of the proposal. The B paper, when a utility contractor is working on a street like Olden Avenue, You know, there's been a lot of people that have been killed 15 times over the... Sorry, Councilor Knight, you're breaking up.
[Adam Knight]: No, on the paper Mr. President, and speaking with the city engineer. Do you feel as though this is something that's feasible and something that's attainable that you can work out a neighborhood mitigation agreement with these contractors that are seeking a street opening permit.
[Adam Knight]: And I mean, you know, ultimately we have to look at it both ways. The work that they're doing in our community is work to improve our underground infrastructure. Right. I mean, we have gas leaks going on all over the community. We need to have national grid come in and take the steps that they need to prevent these gas leaks from continuing. You know, we've all gone on record saying we don't want any level two and level three gas leaks in the city of Medford. And we want a plan. I'm going to say it out again.
[Adam Knight]: Well, I'm not going to beat the dead horse, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I certainly have no problem with this paper that's before us this evening. I live right down the street. It's a very tough location, and I wish you the best of luck there. Thank you. However, Mr. President, I do feel it will be appropriate for us to put a condition on the special permit that would grant the extended hours to the business, but not to the property address. So in case there is a change. that application. The next business would have to, or the successor business would have to petition the council for extent that it operates as well. So that's the amendment that I'd often misrepresent. It would be a conditional thing that goes with the business, not the property address. Okay.
[Adam Knight]: I was not, but I certainly wouldn't be opposed to it.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I certainly have no problem raising the deferment cap. This is something that we talked about back in 2019, I do believe as well. The question that I do pose is this, is this paper offered in the proper form for us to adopt it this evening, or is there specific length which required per the division of local services that needs to be adopted in order to raise the cap?
[Adam Knight]: Just a question. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This is a good bill, House 4440. It allows us to put our money where our mouth is, Mr. President. We all talk a good game when it comes down to protecting the environment, but this allows us to invest our money in areas like green energy and clean energy as opposed to with fossil fuels. So I think this is a good measure. It allows flexibility for us to exercise our community's values when it comes to the moral and ethical obligation to greenhouse gas pollution. So I commend my fellow colleagues for bringing this issue forward and it's something that I support wholeheartedly.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, I think it's very important to point out that this is nothing more than giving our retirement board flexibility and an option to make a determination as to whether or not we want to divest from fossil fuels in the investment of our public pension funds. Because our public pension investment bodies are Um, autonomous in nature, legislative action will be necessary because the retirement board is telling them they need to get a return of a certain amount, whether it's 7% forecast, 6% forecast. Um, we're not getting that return. We can't tell them what to invest in and then expect them to make a return. So that's why this legislative authority is necessary. This does nothing. It doesn't mandate that we divest. What it does is it gives us the opportunity to pursue it. Um, and if our community has values that, uh, reflect this lack of reliance on fossil fuels and a move towards green energy, a move towards being carbon neutral. I think this is a tool that we want inside our toolbox. So I don't think it's going to hurt us any just to support the legislation, Mr. President, because it's still going to allow our retirement board to make the decisions that they made them in the past, but it's going to give them a little bit more flexibility. So it's something I'd be willing to support.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This paper was offered by way of an amendment to, I believe, a paper that we took up last week. So the matter is moved. It's been sent to the administration already. I move for withdrawal.
[Adam Knight]: Sorry, Mr. President, I'm having what they call technical difficulties. What self explanatory. Aaron's a great person she runs a great business down there in Method Square. She's very involved the arts community allows many, many local artists to display work in her shop. But Mr. Coffee Roses has been around now for 10 years. It's amazing. I remember when it first opened. So time certainly flies when you're having fun. They run a great business and I'd like to congratulate Sharon and her staff on all the success that they've had in the past and for another 10 years of success in the future, Mr. President. I ask my council colleagues to join me in supporting this resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Ultimately, I think this is just a request to share information. I agree with Councilor Marks in that regard, is that the council, from time to time, whatever the issue may be, not just coronavirus, whether it comes to something as simple as street sweeping or road work that's being done in the neighborhood. We want the residents to know what's going on in the community. But I think the most important thing is that we deliver a consistent message across government, between the school committee, the council, the Board of Health, the administration. We need to deliver a consistent message, Mr. President, because if we don't, it's irresponsible. So that's the number one thing. I'm all for sharing information with people. I'm all for doing reverse 911s. I'm looking at it and saying, at $0.21 a postcard to the 20,000 households in the city. I mean, we can get out of this relatively cheap if that's what our intention is to do, is to mail an information sheet to everybody. It's something that's going to be relatively inexpensive, a drop in the bucket. You're looking at $182 million budget, Mr. President. So with that being said, I think that the most important item in this whole entire discussion is that the message is delivered as a consistent message across all levels of government so that the residents in this community understand what's going on. I can't tell you how many calls I got from people saying they didn't think they have to pay their rent on April 1st after last week's meeting, Mr. President. I mean, so it's dangerous when we're delivering a message that's not consistent across the board. is all I'm saying. So I think it is very important moving forward, Mr. President, that the message is consistent and in lockstep with that of the administration in the school.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I will say that it's going to be a very long term for the Medford City Council if we debate every single bill that's filed at the state legislature. In terms of the paper that's before us this evening, I think we've talked this item up quite a bit, and I would move for a vote on the topic.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Mr. President, maybe in the alternative, you can type his question into the chat icon down below and we can read it.
[Adam Knight]: I'm just wondering if the sponsor of the resolution spoke with the administration and asked for clarification prior to filing the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: So the administration has banned the showing of these units or they haven't?
[Adam Knight]: Right, and in the conversations you've had with the administration, did they clarify at all, no? Not yet, no. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: I was asking Councilor Caraviello whether or not they had taken a position on it. Yeah, I just- Talking to another city clerk.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, at this point in time, I think this is where we are beginning to tread into murky and dangerous waters where we're going to start delivering mixed messages. I think it's important that the administration address this issue because the administration is really responsible for the enforcement of the executive order. They're the body of the government that has the tools and the responsibility to execute and implement. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'd be very cautious. going down this line of questioning if we're not all on the same page and have consistent answers because we're going to be giving mixed messages similar to what happened last week. So I just want to be very clear, Mr. President, that I think that we're treading down the wrong path at this point in time. And this might be a topic that needs to be clarified through the city administration very simply with a one-line response to the council, yes or no, it's allowed or it's not allowed. And I think that that will nip this in the bud right now, but when Ms. Catalo, who's a local real estate agent who has a very successful business here in the community, asks the question, do you have a problem with this? Do you have a problem with that? I think that that's going to start bringing us down the line of, well, I think this, I think that, he thinks this, she thinks this. We need a consistent message going forward, Mr. President. That message has to come through the administration through a clarification of their executive order.
[Adam Knight]: And Mr. President, I would ask that this be offered in the form of a motion that the paper be forwarded to the administration for clarification on their executive order as to whether or not rental units are allowed to be shown when the units are unoccupied.
[Adam Knight]: I'm sorry, housing units, not rental units, housing units.
[Adam Knight]: The motion would be to refer the paper to the city administration for clarification on their executive order as to whether or not unoccupied housing units are able to be shown.
[Adam Knight]: That would be a motion, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I second.
[Adam Knight]: It would be a motion to refer the paper to the mayor and ask for clarification on that question.
[Adam Knight]: I missed that whole thing, Mr. President. I fell offline.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, I'm taking a look and I'm just reading this article that the Councilor provided. Um, and it just seems like there's a lot of the stuff that's on the agenda this evening. It's just mirrors what's in this article. It's almost seems like, well, some of all did it, so it's a good idea. So we should do it here too. Um, and I don't necessarily think that cookie cutter approach works. That one size fits all approach does not work. Um, you know, we are a different community that has different needs and different concerns. Um, so in looking at this, um, you know, I understand what, what the council is trying to do and what direction he's trying to go in. Um, But I also, again, feel as though the deliverance of mixed messages and the, you know, I don't want to say inundation, but certainly an extraordinary number of resolutions in the past two weeks relative to COVID-19 have been filed and it's creating confusion.
[Adam Knight]: Well, I'm not saying that again.
[Adam Knight]: Jesus. I guess Mr. President, the bottom line is Medford is that its own unique and individual community and mirroring what they're doing in neighboring communities just because It works there, doesn't necessarily mean it's going to work here. And if we're not going to be delivering a clear and concise message across all levels of government, then it raises concern. So I think that we're in a position where we're almost somewhat overdoing it now when it comes to the coronavirus and the resolutions that are being filed. Mr. President, I think we really need to have a concise message. If we all want to get on the same page, I think that the appropriate course of action might be to sit down and meet with the administration, to meet with our Director of Civil Defense, our emergency management personnel, and figure out what's really going on with this situation here in our community. I don't think we've had that meeting yet. I don't think we've actually met with individuals from the administration and first responders to talk about where we are in Medford, whether or not we're flattening the curve, what we're supposed to expect over the next 14 days. We haven't had that conversation yet, Mr. President, in terms of the public health emergency and what's happening here in our community. The public health emergency, I think, is the number one issue that we're facing. There are secondary issues that come along with that. But at this point in time, I think what we really need to be doing is looking at the impact that the COVID-19 coronavirus is having on our community in terms of the ability to deliver services, number one, and what to expect over the height of this over the next 14 days. We need to have a conversation with the director of the Board of Health, with the Civil Defense Department, with the administration to talk about these issues so that we have a better understanding as to what's going to happen here in Medford, and then we can take an approach that's going to work for Medford and not try to adopt what they're doing in other communities, because that cookie-cutter approach may not work here.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Layton. Mr. President, I think, again, going back to.
[Adam Knight]: Ultimately, Mr. President, we want to deliver a consistent message, and that message has to come from the administration when it comes down to how to proceed and whether or not you're allowed to show units. That's why we're asking for clarification. I think that's the whole motion that's before this council and the whole paper that's before this council. The question is whether or not we want to ask the administration for clarification as to whether or not housing units that are vacant can be shown. I mean, that's the paper that's before us. I don't think it can get any simpler than that.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe one of the frustrations that people always express with government is the slow pace that it moves. However, our forefathers had always thought that creating a process that was slow and deliberate and open and transparent was appropriate. So sometimes experience isn't necessarily the intended or best path. I can certainly understand where Mr. Hughes is coming from. However, just to put something out there as fast as we can just to get it out there so fast isn't necessarily the best path. Government is designed and structured to be slow for a reason. So with that being said, I can certainly appreciate his comments, but I did want to point out that, you know, everybody's very frustrated at the pace that government moves, but government moves slow for a reason. It was designed that way so that it can be open, transparent, and thorough.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. We're right now in a position economically where the city of Medford is not going to be afforded the same level of aid that we've received in the past, in my opinion. We're looking at pretty much virtually every sector of our economy being shut down for a quarter. That's going to have a drastic impact on the amount of funds that are coming into the state coffers and that are going to trickle down into the city of Medford's coffers. I certainly support increasing the subsidy for raft. There's no question about that, Mr. President. But one of the things that I think we really need to look along and hard at, if we're going to be asking our state delegation for money, in asking our state delegation where to invest money when we're going to come down to a situation where there's going to be a lot of belt tightening. I think what we really want to do, Mr. President, is beg for local aid. Beg for local aid. Say we want level-funded local aid. We don't want to see any 9C cuts to our local aid. We rely on our local aid, Mr. President, and without it, we're going to see drastic budget cuts. So in this economic pandemic, these uncertain fiscal times, the amount of financial obligations that the city has related to its debt service, I think it's very important that we balance the requests that we make from the state legislature for money are two issues that are going to actually inflate Medford's coffers. Because we're going to be up against, quite frankly, a situation, Mr. President, where I don't see us getting a budget for the next fiscal year that's going to be anything better than level funded. I don't see us getting a budget for the next fiscal year that's going to fill vacant positions. I think those positions are going to be lost to attrition so that we can present a balanced budget based upon the economic uncertainties and the fiscal times that are facing us right now. So the only thing that I'd say is that, you know, as we continue to make requests from our delegation, that we really look long and hard at what we're asking for. We don't want to ask for too much. You know, they always say you ask for two things and you get one. You ask for the loaf, and you get the loaf. You ask for two loaves, and you get one loaf. So I think that if we're going to be asking the legislature to advocate for certain aspects of funding for our community, that it's funding that actually would inflate the city's coffers. That's my position on this. I certainly support the resolution that the council made. I think it's a great idea. a meritorious effort. So with that being said, I will support the paper this evening. But going forward, Mr. President, as we make requests from our state legislature to fund initiatives and to fund programs, I think, quite frankly, the first place we've got to start is at home. Charity starts at home. We're going to need the funds. We're going to need the money going forward because these because of the economic downturn that we're seeing. We're not seeing the meals tax, we're not seeing the hotel tax, the city's not seeing the income tax. unprecedented amounts of people have been laid off from their jobs. So we're in a situation now, Mr. President, where the money's not gonna be coming into the coffers. So if we're gonna be asking the legislature for anything, it should be money to really inflate what we're doing here so that we can continue to provide at least the same level of services in the community.
[Adam Knight]: Go ahead, John.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think it's very important to point out that when Mayor Lungo was on the council, she was an advocate for the hiring of a consultant. She was very outspoken about it, and I'm very happy to see that her administration is keeping that $40,000 commitment that the previous administration had made to this council. I think that's very important, Mr. President, that the $40,000 commitment for a zoning consultant is carried over from the previous administration to this council.
[Adam Knight]: I do want to point that out, that there is $40,000 of funds that are committed to this endeavor. I would also like to ask the question, Mr. President, this subcommittee meeting was sometime in late February. And at the time, we had asked for a list of all the consultants that had been hired since the change in administration. And I don't believe the council has yet received that documentation. So I'd just like to reiterate that request with the approval of this subcommittee report, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: And offer that in the form of a motion to the administration.
[Adam Knight]: I offer in the form of a motion to the administration for an update on that.
[Adam Knight]: Yes. Yes, Mr. President, as part of that committee report, we did request from the administration a list of all of the consultants that had been hired since the change in administration. It was expressed by the chief of staff at that point in time that he would get that to us relatively speedy. I did bump into him shortly thereafter and that was the beginning of this coronavirus stuff So I just want to make sure that that's something that doesn't fall by the wayside. Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I certainly have no problem with this.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, we can hear you. Thank you, Mr. President. I'd just like to make a motion to add restrictions onto the permit. I certainly have no problem supporting it this evening. However, the special permit should be attached to the business and not the business address. And also if we could place a 90 day review on it, Mr. President, I'd certainly have no problem supporting it this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think Mr. Husenhoff, was it, from Wright Avenue, had the right idea when he said that this is something that could be very restrictive for our ability to develop accessory dwelling uses and also build upon existing conversions. When Mr. Mulkey appeared before the council some time ago to discuss this, I raised this as an issue. I could certainly see the CD board's position, but at this point in time, Mr. President, I don't feel as though any action is warranted. So that's where I will stay on this issue.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to table the next meeting, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I certainly have no problem supporting this measure this evening. However, I would like to put restrictions upon the special permit, that the special permit goes with the business and not with the property address, and also that we conduct a 90-day review. I offer those in the form of an amendment or restriction.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, I believe that they came for a common victorless license before they were open. And because the Board of Health didn't sign off on it, we got some clarification. And they came back with that clarification. We voted to approve the common victorless license. In the interim, I do believe the applicant had gone to the liquor commission to get a liquor license. And now they're back here for extended hours, if I'm not mistaken.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. In similar form to the previous Council before us, relative to special permits, I'd ask that the special permit be attached to the business, not to the property address, as a restriction. And I do have some concern about a 2 a.m. license, Mr. President. Most of our communities have 1 a.m. licenses, and I'd hate to see Medford Square being the destination for last call between 1 o'clock in the morning and 2 o'clock in the morning. I know that in the past we've addressed some of these applications through phasing in of extended hours, similar to what we did at Shanghai Moon. and that's something that we may want to discuss. I do think that a restriction on hours or fading in of hours to 2 a.m. is something that deserves pertinent discussion at this point in time, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: The amendment that I made, Mr. President, was a restriction for restricting it to the property. If we did a 1 a.m. license with a 90-day review, I'd certainly be supportive of that this evening. A 2 a.m. license or a license later than that with no review is something I'd have a difficult time supporting this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Seconded as amended, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Seconded as amended.
[Adam Knight]: I'm motioning to.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Not too long ago, we appropriated some community development block grant funds for the revitalization of Harris Park to improve accessibility and accessible pathways. Shortly thereafter, we also spent some Community Preservation Act funds to create a new playground structure and water park at this location. And with the approval as permitting, we're one step closer to making that a reality. Hopefully, when construction is done, this public van will be lifted and the community will be safe and everyone will be able to utilize it. But at this point in time, Mr. President, this is really putting some of the final nails in the shingles over here so that we can move forward and get this project done. So I'd move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: I said yes, reluctantly, yes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, yes, I'd just also like to ask that a representative from the district attorney's office be invited to the committee meeting.
[Adam Knight]: Representative from the district attorney.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, it would be nice to get a copy of House Docket Number 4935. I think that would be important for us before we take a vote to have an opportunity to read what the actual state legislation does say. I didn't find a copy of that included in our package this week. Also, based upon the fact that we don't have a copy of that, and we've just amended the legislation, I'd ask that maybe we table this matter until a date certain so that we have an opportunity to review it and properly vet it, or in the alternative, refer it to the Housing or the Intergovernmental Relations Subcommittee for further review, Mr. Perkins, and proper vetting.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to get a copy of the House docket number 4935, number one. Number two, Mr. President, I'd like to refer it to either the Housing Subcommittee or the Committee on Intergovernmental Relations. Probably the best bet would be the Subcommittee on Intergovernmental Relations based upon the fact that we're really focusing on state legislation, state law here, and less about what we can do in the city of Medford about amendments and the like. My suggestion, I'd offer that.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor. The paper that's before us is asking actually the state legislature to take an urgent action. So the amount before us is an emergency. The amount before the state legislature is an emergency.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor, you're cutting out. Can you please? I don't feel comfortable voting on something that I haven't had the opportunity.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, without a copy of the legislation here before us, I think it would be irresponsible of us to vote on it without properly vetting it.
[Adam Knight]: The motion is the motion, Mr. President, referred to a subcommittee meeting into government or affairs alike.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, just that this bill hasn't been only assigned a docket number at this point in time, and until it gets assigned to a committee and the like, we're not going to know who to send this to anyway. If we want to send it to the committee chair to get it moving, we're going to send it to a committee chair to get moving. But what I see here, it's just a docket number. It's not even a bill that's been voted on yet. But with that being said, I do believe that the governor's office or the mayor's office had spoken about real estate showings as well. So I did want to talk about that a little bit in conflict with Scarpelli's point. But either way, Mr. President, the motion's on the table, it's been seconded, I move for the vote.
[Adam Knight]: I made a motion to refer the paper to a subcommittee, Mr. President. He's made a motion to further amend the paper for a fifth time, striking all the amendments that he's already made and just bringing it right down to the first sentence of his agenda from the first sentence of the resolution, from what I understand.
[Adam Knight]: I certainly have no problem with the gentleman striking the language and moving I would have a problem with him removing the amendment that was made by a fellow councilor. And I'm sure that you would like an opportunity to discuss that opportunity right now.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. Right now, the matter that's before the council would be be a resolve the Medford City Council expressive support file stock and I'm before the 4935. an act for providing a moratorium on evictions and foreclosures during the COVID-19 emergency?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'm amenable to the amendments that have been made to the resolution and I would withdraw my motion to refer the paper to Intergovernmental Affairs and replace that motion with a motion for approval.
[Adam Knight]: We have resolved that the Board of Health examine the use of- The sponsor of the resolution withdraws the bill that's been addressed by Governor Baker's executive order.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. As we're all aware, many of our public employees still come to work to provide the essential and core services that are necessary in our community. Um, however, um, there are employees in city hall, for example, or in our school departments, for example, that are reporting to every worker into these buildings. Uh, but these buildings have not yet been professionally sanitized. Um, I do know that there are professional sanitizing teams that have been out in the community, um, that have done our fire stations, our police stations and our police cruisers. Um, and I'm hoping that we can extend this program to include our other public buildings where employees are currently stationed, even on skeleton cruiser during public employee, uh, public. lockdowns where they're reporting to work and there are topical services that have seen exposure before this lockdown has taken place. Mr. President, I think it's important that we take every step that's possibly feasible for us to protect the workers here in our community that are providing and delivering these essential services. So I'd ask my council colleagues to support me in asking that all public buildings where employees are currently working be professionally sanitized so the employees working there can receive peace of mind and also the highest degree of safety possible during this time.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you. I'm very amenable to the amendments that have been offered, and I thank Councilor Scarpelli for bringing it forward. I'd also like to further amend the paper and ask that the city administration consider deploying the Park Police to enforce the congregation ban that we're seeing in our public parks. I drove by Barry Park the other day. There were two full-quote basketball games going on. And it's very difficult to play basketball being socially distanced to six feet apart from 10 people on a court. So with that being said, Mr. President, I think there is a need for a little bit more awareness and a little bit more enforcement of some of the implements, some of the tools that have been implemented to prevent the spread and flatten the curve.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. McPherson would be happy to offer that amendment. And I'd like to also thank Jason Law and Annie Law from the Malden Asian Community Center who came yesterday and actually donated 1,000 surgical masks to the police and fire department on that behalf. So I would be happy to offer that amendment. I'd also like to extend the gratitude to the laws for the work that they did in securing 1,000 surgical masks for our public.
[Adam Knight]: I want to be very clear though, Mr. President, and I think it's important to point out that this just isn't about the police and the fire. Our front line is doing a great job keeping us safe. It's also about people in the city clerk's office that are coming to work every day in that building. It's about our school custodians that are showing up to the public school buildings every day and performing maintenance and cleaning work up there. We want to make sure those people are protected too. So I don't want them to get lost in the shuffle. My first responders are doing a great job. Our public safety personnel are doing a great job. Our DPW is doing a great job during this trying time.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah. Mr. President, I saw something on method patch about it. Um, but about the, the, a letter, but then I also heard Ms. Catalo talk about the governor's executive order, allowing them to work. So I'm a little confused by this. Um, I just took an opportunity to try to look up the governor's executive order. And, um, I really wasn't too successful with my endeavors because my computer's up there running and I was trying to do it on my phone. But I think ultimately, Mr. President, this is why it's very important that we have a unified message coming from the administration when it comes to this stuff related to COVID-19 and the pandemic. I think that we can't be sending mixed signals and mixed information, and it has to come from one centralized source. And I think we might be getting a little bit ahead of ourselves here when it comes to some of this stuff. With that being said, Mr. President, I mean, I think all of us are very concerned about what's going to happen to people in terms of their living situation and their housing situation. And we're all well aware of the fact that the role of government is to provide services. And this is going to be a service that's necessary for the residents in our community. So I certainly have no problem setting up a housing stabilization telephone line. Do I think that that's something that we have a department for right now in the city? Not really. It'll probably have to go through the office
[Adam Knight]: Is this better?
[Adam Knight]: Yeah. On my full screen, it goes unstable. So with that being said, Mr. President, I think it's very important that we somewhat get a concise and and pointed message that's in line with the administration going forward when it comes to this coronavirus stuff. But, you know, I support Councilor Kavya. I hope he's uncomfortable with something once another week, and I'd certainly second that measure. I don't think it's gonna be anything that's gonna cure the coronavirus in a week that the Medford City Council is gonna do. So with that being said, the Council needs another week. I certainly support his position.
[Adam Knight]: a young boy, age 19, when I first started my foray into government work. And what a brilliant communications specialist Mr. Rasky was. Rasky Communications and Rasky Berlin were, you know, paramount when it came to consultants in the political business. You know, walking around the halls of the State House, Larry Rasky was always someone that everybody stopped and listened to.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, so in this, what it looks like is we're getting 72%. Is that correct?
[Adam Knight]: 80%, okay. So ultimately we're making an investment of up to about a quarter of the value of these vehicles and we're getting 75% return on this investment?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, sounds like a good deal to me. Move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Actually, can I make a motion under suspension? I might make a motion to suspend the rules, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: about the night. Mr. President, I do believe earlier this evening we had a subcommittee meeting for paper 20-042.
[Adam Knight]: It's almost done.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. Mr. President, I withdraw my motion to suspend the rules.
[Adam Knight]: I'm on? I'm on now, okay. Mr. President, thank you very much. I do know we have representatives from the administration here as well. In my conversation with the mayor earlier this afternoon, it's my understanding that these two amendments would create classifications that are more in line with the functions and responsibilities that these individuals are performing in their office. The first amendment, amendment A, for director of communications, it's my understanding, would be a reflective title of the position that was held by Ms. Devaney. under the previous administration. And it's also my understanding that the Director of Community Affairs position under Amendment B would be reflective of the position that Ms. Fisk held under the previous administration. So what this is, Mr. President, is actually bringing their functional titles to be in line with the duties and responsibilities. But I won't steal Dave's thunder. Let him give us a brief synopsis of what's going on. I'd appreciate it.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, Mr. President, if I may, I spoke with the mayor last Thursday or Friday about the same issue, requested job descriptions. I know she forwarded them to the city clerk's office, and the city clerk had distributed them to the members of the body as well. I, for one, Councilor, I don't see any issue with this paper. I think that the mayor deserves the right to be able to surround herself with her own team for what she feels is going to make her time in the corner office successful. So with that being said, I move for approval of the paper, Mr. President. It is an ordinance, so it's going to have to go through three readings.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And Mr. Bernal, thank you for being here this evening. So what I'm hearing is that ultimately you're coming before us this evening to ask for the tools that you need to necessarily comply with state mandates.
[Adam Knight]: And meet the objectives of the office that have been put forth by the Board of Assessors.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'd like to make a suggestion. This is a PACS project. We are well aware that the PACS department does have a revolving account that's open with modern hardware, I do believe, with a do purchase a lot of their paint supplies. So it might make sense to coordinate with IDPW because I believe we do get some bulk purchasing rates versus regular retail rates. So this $3,000 might actually end up being $4,500 if we spend it the right way with some of our in-house contacts that we have. So I'd suggest that you meet with the PACS Commissioner, Mike Nestor, and speak with him a little bit about whether or not you guys can utilize the account that they have available. And use their bulk purchasing to get some of the supplies that you need to get this done But congratulations, wish you the best of luck.
[Adam Knight]: Retabling the public hearing or retabling the vote on the petition?
[Adam Knight]: He left, no he's not, so that's why. Okay, sounds good to me.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I bring this paper forward in response to the 223-2020 legal opinion of the acting city solicitor, which responded to a question asked by the President that was prompted from an inquiry from a citizen. And the question was, Is a paper offered under suspension, is a resolution offered under suspension a violation of the council rules because it's not on the agenda? And the question was asked in the broadest of terms and the solicitor answered it in the broadest of terms and the response came back yes. Papers that do not show up on the agenda that are brought up under suspension are violations of the open meeting law. Then the solicitor's response went on to go into specific detail about matters that could be reasonably foreseen and matters that could not be reasonably foreseen and emergency matters, Mr. President. So in an effort to allow us to still raise certain issues under suspension and in review of some open meeting law, determinations that I was able to put my hands on, one of them being the Oxbridge decision. I came up with some language that would allow us hopefully to have the ability to still offer papers under suspension, but still comply with the open meeting law. Because based upon the 310-2020 committee of the whole that we just had, there was a lot of discussion surrounding the solicitor's opinion and what could or could not be offered under suspension. So with that being said, this is an attempt to address the solicitor's opinion and still provide us with the flexibility that's necessary based upon some open meeting law determinations that have been issued by the Office of the Attorney General. As we are all aware, the Office of the Attorney General is the authority that's responsible for compliance with the open meeting law. Any complaints that would be filed against this public body deliberating in violation of the open meeting law would be handled by the Office of the Attorney General, Mr. President. What I'd like to do is ask that this paper be sent to the city solicitor for a legal review to see if it complies with her legal opinion. and get a response back, and then potentially take a look at the way that we do business internally to ensure that we have more transparency, but we still also have the ability and availability to bring papers under suspension. The first meeting of this term, Mr. President, I did put a paper forward requesting that we change the night of our meetings from Tuesdays to Wednesdays. And the reason I brought that proposal forward was because, based upon the open meeting law, you need to have 48 hours before your meeting to have the notice posted with the agenda. Because our meetings are on Tuesday, weekends and holidays don't count. So we need to have to get our agenda out on Friday morning or Thursday afternoon, dependent on whether or not we had a Monday holiday. So that would only allow us a very limited amount of time to put items on the agenda. Upon review of items that have been filed on the agenda, it was pretty one in every four, every five matters that this council discussed by way of resolution that was getting put on the agenda, was getting put on under suspension and never being actually placed on the agenda and seen by the general public when the notice was posted. So this prompts me to bring forward another proposal for rule changes to allow us to be a little bit more transparent, to allow us to have some items on the agenda. for discussion and deliberation or to put items on the agenda at a future date for discussion and deliberation that come up under suspension. So I'd ask my council colleagues to support this measure in moving this matter to the city solicitor's office for a legal review. And that's about it, Mr. President. That's the presentation in a box and bow.
[Adam Knight]: This has no impact whatsoever at all on the public participation portion of our meetings. This is really just related to council action. Only a councilor can bring forward a resolution. Only a councilor can make a motion. So this only affects the actual conduct of councilors.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I do believe that pursuant to the council rules, every 90 days you can introduce a paper that's been deliberated on and addressed and deliberated to conclusion. So I'm really not too sure what he's getting at. Ultimately, the city solicitor issued an opinion. That opinion came out on February 23rd, 2020.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This is an attempt to establish an extended illness leave bank by ordinance for all city and school department employees. An extended illness leave bank is a bank where existing employees can donate one of their leave days to a pool. And if one of their co-workers suffers a catastrophic injury or illness, they're able to draw down upon those leave days if they've exhausted all of their own. And there are certain parameters and requirements that are in place to be sure the people that become eligible to draw down these extended illness leave days aren't sick leave abusers. The state has a very similar program, and when I say very similar, I copied the language from Massachusetts General Law Chapter 4, Section 7P. I'm sorry, Chapter 7, Section 4P, to create this ordinance. And then just put in that advisory council language, Mr. President, how we're going to administer this sick leave bank. So what I'd ask is that we obviously have a committee of the whole on a piece of legislation that's this wordy with the city solicitor and the director of personnel. to determine what steps we can take to establish an extended illness leave bank. I said that we should first make a 75 day investment in the bank to get it up and running to allow existing employees that are out on extended leave to begin to draw down on the bank. And then we can establish an extended illness leave bank advisory council that will be able to come up with rules, regulations, monitor the program and The Director of Personnel is the Program Administrator, Mr. President. So this is really an attempt to try to put something in place to do something good for the residents, for the workers here in the city. When you sit back and you think about people that have suffered from catastrophic injury and catastrophic illness here in the city of Medford, you think of people like Richard Lee, fought a very, very public battle with pancreatic cancer and wasn't able to beat it, Mr. President. But had 40 years of service here in this building, but was still out for an extended period of time. And we talk about someone like Joe Conway or Brian Rabbit, who we all stood beside and wished him well wishes when he's going through a very public battle with pancreatic cancer right now, Mr. President. This is something that'll help employees that have been good public servants here in the community, that have given their all to the community. I'm hoping that we can put something in place that provides a protection and a safeguard for these employees, so that if something unforeseen and catastrophic does happen related to their health or their physical well-being, that there's a safety net that's there for them. We value our employees, and I think that we should make steps to show it.
[Adam Knight]: Based upon the language of the ordinance that is proposed, it gives discretionary authority to the extended on this lead bank advisory committee to come up with the regulations to determine what will work for both the workers in the community, what will work for the city in the school department, because we don't want to obviously also have a financial situation. It's pretty much, aside from the 75 days that first get dumped into the pool by the government, after that, it's all donated days. And the parameters would be established by the extended illness leave bank advisory committee. So no parameters has been established on how many days people can put in? No, no. I believe the language says, and it's right in the second paragraph, I think. Any employees completed one day of service may participate by donating to said bank any earned, sick, personal, or vacation leave time in such an amount and with such frequency as said regulations shall permit to maintain a sufficient balance in the bank, but not less frequently than annually.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This is a companion paper to the one relative to the rules that we discussed earlier, 20089. What this paper does is it defines what an order is, what a resolution is, what a petition is, and establishes a process, Mr. President. Now, we've seen, especially around election time, the inordinate number of petitions that get filed at the rail to discuss issues that aren't necessarily something that requires a council vote, a special permit, a signed reversal, grant a location, and the like, Mr. President. So only a Councilor can file a resolution pursuant to our laws. Only a Councilor can file an order or an ordinance pursuant to council resolutions in the law. So what this does is it just defines what a petition is, it defines who's an appropriate petitioner and who isn't. And someone that's not an appropriate petitioner would still have the ability to come up to the council and discuss anything that they want to discuss with the council and appear before the council when the time is right at the meeting, during the public participation portion of the meeting, wherever that may be, because it seems like there's an appetite to move that based upon the discussion that we've had surrounding the rules. in recent days. So with that being said, Mr. President, this is nothing more than an attempt to provide a little bit more order, a little bit more transparency, and streamlining the process for the way that we do things so that we don't run into a situation that we discussed earlier in our committee of the whole meeting, violations of the open meeting law and circus-like atmospheres coming up here at the council meetings. So that's the intent of the resolution. That's why I'm bringing it forward. You know, every order and resolution must be endorsed by a Councilor. Because the council rules also say that any paper that's on the agenda has to be disposed up to a conclusion. If someone files a petition, but they don't have official business before the council that requires the council to vote statutorily, it's in essence the filing of a resolution. So that should be placed in the public participation portion of the agenda. Very similar to the matter that we have on the agenda here this evening, I do believe, under 20099. So with that being said, Mr. President, I ask my council colleagues to support the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Council night. I do believe the term is referred to as bully pulpit, Mr. President, and when you become an elected councilor, you have the right to file any resolution or order that you'd like, and it comes up to the rest of your colleagues to determine whether or not they feel as though that's something that they want to pass on. So with that being said, I thank the gentleman for coming up here and agreeing with me, and I hope we can move forward on the issue.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. I do believe if the gentleman reads down to the next sentence, all of the petitions filed shall be placed on the public participation portion of the agenda and not assigned to council paper number. So anybody that does file a petition that doesn't comply with the statutory mandates that require council action would then be placed on public participation and still have the opportunity to show up on the agenda under public participation, still have the opportunity to appear before this body and speak just like they have in the past. just whether or not they get assigned a council paper number because it's really filing of a resolution if you're getting assigned a paper number because our council rules require us to dispose of all items on the agenda. So that's what my intent was, Mr. President, to clarify and streamline.
[Adam Knight]: If the paper doesn't fall within the parameters of what a petition is defined as, then it would be pushed into public participation. I didn't propose any order of business changes to the council rules. I'd be happy to put something together and offer that next week if you guys want me to. It seems like I'm on fire. But you know it's the plain language reads. You know if it's not something that the council is required to act on by law It's not if we if it's something that you know if we don't act on it's going to be constructively accepted Then it will go to public participation presentations and all of that can go right to public participation unless they're requested by a council of a council at sponsoring someone to come and do a presentation and So Mr. President, I think if the council takes a vote to say we want INSTA to come and do a presentation on the pipeline project, that's one thing. But if someone shows up and says, I want to talk about the Red Sox middle relievers, you know what I mean? That goes to public participation. We're asking someone to come and give us a presentation. That's one thing. If someone wants to discuss with us what's going on, that should happen in public participation.
[Adam Knight]: In just in looking at the rules when I was reviewing the suspension of the rule stuff and then I saw the petition as well and you know no order or resolution should be It can be filed by anybody but a councilor. So once that paper gets filed and it gets a number on it, that's a resolution number. That's a council paper number. That's someone filing an ordinance that's not a member of the board or the body. That's all. You know what I mean? Because we have to dispose of all items on the agenda that are given a board number.
[Adam Knight]: But you have to dispose of all items on the agenda, regardless.
[Adam Knight]: That's one way to do it.
[Adam Knight]: It streamlines our internal operations.
[Adam Knight]: Just as I stated in my presentation, Mr. President, this is more about defining the parameters of what it is that we're trying to do and streamlining the way that we do it so that our meetings don't turn into a circus-like atmosphere and environment. You know, the more that we know, the more that we have it defined, the better off we are, in my opinion. You know, that's where I'm coming from. There's no nefarious intent here, Mr. President. You know what I mean? I'm just trying to make sure that we do things properly and that we streamline things. We've gotten an opinion from the city solicitor that I think should be given a little bit of attention. I think it's, you know, a little bit serious when the solicitor gives us an opinion that says that any time you take something up that's not on the agenda or under suspension, that it's a violation of the open meeting law. then all the talk that surrounded that suspension talk was whether or not people were going to have the opportunity to come up to the podium and speak. We have a dedicated section in our agenda for people to come up to speak on any topic they want, whenever they want, however they want. So I'm not seeing how this is having any impact on anything. All it is is internal controls for the council and how the council operates.
[Adam Knight]: And I don't think, and I'm not taking that away Councilor at all.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. The proposal says that all the petitions filed shall be placed on the public participation portion of the agenda. So I don't understand why we wouldn't be able to deliberate on it. It's still on the council agenda.
[Adam Knight]: It doesn't matter if it has a number or not. If it's on the agenda, it's on the agenda. What I'm saying is that it shouldn't be assigned a number because all papers on the agenda need to be disposed of in one fashion or another. Only a consulate can file an order of resolution. So at the end of the day, if someone files a petition that doesn't comply with the proposed rule change, they get put on the agenda under public participation, the section that it's appropriate for. But as long as it shows up on the agenda, based on the solicitor's opinion, I see no reason why we wouldn't be able to deliberate, discern, or take any further action as a body. Because it's on the agenda.
[Adam Knight]: The city clerk is well aware of the fact that, you know, if someone applies for a grant of location, we're an administrative authority, we're a tribunal. So there's an application that's necessary to be filed in the clerk's office for any of these actions to take place, whether it's a grant of location, a conviction was licensed, a sign reversal, there has to be some sort of application action that takes place in the clerk's office to prompt that to come here from an administrative standpoint in government.
[Adam Knight]: Official business matters. For example, we had a Kino license that sat on the table for a number of days. The Kino license was in our Zoning Act. Because it's in our Zoning Act and we're the special permit granting authority, it falls under Chapter 48, Section 5. There are actions that we need to take and we need to act in a certain amount of time. I believe the amount of time was 90 days. Failure to act within that 90-day period results in a constructive acceptance of the Kino license at that location. If we don't take a vote on it, it's a constructive acceptance. It also opens us up to legal action because it's within our zoning act and we failed to act as a special permit granting authority. So what I'm trying to do, Mr. President, is delineate items that are under council purview and require council action and items that aren't under council purview and that council can't effectuate. in terms of taking a vote and it's happening tomorrow. You're approved, it's done, expect to have it tomorrow. There are certain items that come before this body that we can't do that on. A lot of items we're asking people across the hall to do stuff for us. What I'm saying is if in fact we're going to have a petition that gets filed, the petition should be for something that requires council action by law so that We're aware that this is something that's serious business, that's part of our job, that we're required to take action on. I'm not saying that public participation is something that shouldn't happen, Mr. President. I'm not saying that that section should be eliminated. I'm not saying that people should not be allowed to participate in public at all. What I'm saying is let's streamline the processes. Let's define what a petition is. Let's say this is what a petition is. It's something that requires council action because if we let the ball drop on a petition, we open ourselves up to certain legal ramifications. We have certain obligations based upon the oath that we took, Mr. President. Some of those things are duties and responsibilities that were required to execute. The majority of those duties and responsibilities that come before this council that were required to execute by statute of law comes in the form of a petition by way of an application for action by the council pursuant to some sort of established and enabled legislation, whether it be the granting of locations, the reversal of signs, the issuance of convictual licenses. Right? So all I'm saying is a petition is reserved for those matters that require council action. And if we don't take it, then we're in violation and everything else can go into public participation. If someone wants to come before the council and speak, that's fine. Come before the council and speak. Just do it at the right spot of the meeting.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah. Point of information, Council Knight. Rule 33, order of business, item 10, public participation. It's outlined in the rules. It didn't show up on the agenda because there is no public participation paper on the agenda this evening. but it is outlined in the order of business under rule 33.
[Adam Knight]: And I'm not gonna suggest any, yeah. The filing of petitions. shall be reserved for these matters. All other petitions filed shall be placed in this portion of the agenda.
[Adam Knight]: Right, and how many times do you think people fill out a petition that don't actually have the requirement for council action by law that still file the petition? So someone's going to file a petition, right, and the clerk's going to have it. The clerk's going to look at it and go, yeah, this isn't something that's required by law. Put that on public participation.
[Adam Knight]: The way that I envision this, Mr. President, would be Mr. Krause gets up and he's, you know, filed for to be on the agenda during the public participation portion of the agenda. Mr. Krause gets up and he speaks about something that he cares a lot about, which would be a scoreboard at Playstead Park. All right, let's say, you know, we're trying to push for a scoreboard at Playstead Park. These are the steps we've taken to get the scoreboard at Playstead Park. We're looking for the council help. What can the council do? Mr. President, motion to, uh, make an amendment relative to motion to make a resolution on behalf of Mr. Crouch's speech that the city of Medford take the following steps to affirmatively secure the school board a place to park. Oh, okay. You made a motion. Everybody agree with that? Yep. Okay. It's assigned a paper number. There you go. Follow up. Councilor just took the council just took ownership of that issue, put their name on it, said, this is mine. I'm making this motion. I'm owning this. I'm putting ownership on this issue.
[Adam Knight]: I just wanted to say that I prefaced my comments with Mr. Krause, and I said, say that he had put the paper on for public participation.
[Adam Knight]: We did it in advance, because we all- What if he didn't? Then we can't talk about it, because the city solicitor gave us the opinion already. Regardless of whether or not we change petition or don't change petition, we can't talk about it, because the solicitor already said it'd be a violation of the open meeting law the minute the body deliberates on a matter that's not on the agenda.
[Adam Knight]: It would still be on the agenda. That's right. It's on the agenda. It's going to be in public participation. What's the difference? You know what I mean? It's just a different section of the agenda. So if he's on the agenda under public participation, he has the right to come up and talk. Then a councillor can say, this is my issue and adopt it. And then they can take ownership of the issue. You know, instead of having someone comes up to the podium and we're going to have the seven competing people step over each other to see who's going to do the most with this person when we're all here. You know what I mean? At the meeting. And then it dies. You know what I mean? We can take ownership of the issue. We can say, hey, look. All right. I put this proposal forward on behalf of Mr. Krause to get $15,000. I'm going to get him the answer. As opposed to, oh, that's a great idea. This person was up there. I agree with this person. I agree with that person. Send it forward. You know what I mean? Send it to the mayor. I just think it streamlines the process a little bit.
[Adam Knight]: I think independently. We're a body.
[Adam Knight]: I think I'm an individual. I'm a member of this body, but I think as an individual.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I echo Councilor Caraviello's sentiments regarding Mrs. Moss. I have the good fortune of being very close friends with Hank and Dennis, and they're two of the finest individuals you'll ever meet. And their mom did a great job raising them as a father of two sons, I hope. and pray that when my kids reach adulthood that they are of the same character and integrity that Hank and Dennis have. They're two great individuals and they're a certain and absolute reflection of the work that their parents put in. So with that being said, I just want to join Councilor Caraviello and hopefully my council colleagues in extending a deep and sincere condolence to the Morse family. Priscilla will be sadly missed and she did a lot of good for this community and that good carries on in her children and grandchildren. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'd ask that my council colleagues join me in supporting this measure.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This is a relatively self-explanatory proposal. I'd like to refer this to the city solicitor for validation of form and codification, Mr. President. Where we're going to put it in the ordinance isn't to be sure that it's in proper form. However, in looking at it, ultimately, there's been a fight for 15 across the country. To live in the city of Medford and make less than $15, you're not going to be able to make it. to live in the city of Medford and make $15. You're going to have $15 now. You're going to have a very difficult time trying to make it. This is an opportunity for us to show that we value our employees, that we believe in the work that they do, that we feel as though our public servants provide a high-quality level of service to the community, and they should be compensated accordingly. So with that being said, Mr. President, I raise this measure and bring it forward for further debate and discussion. I'd like to ask that the city solicitor put this in proper form and codification, and then we can, again, reconvene on it upon conclusion of legal review.
[Adam Knight]: Lifeguards. Camp Councilors. Park police. Substitute teachers. These are the people that will be impacted and affected by this, Mr. President. People that provide a very valuable service to the city. We talk about lifeguards, it writes point. pretty happy to say that I haven't heard about any type of situation up at Wright's Pond in a very long time, because we do a great job training our lifeguards up there, and we have full complement to staff, and we want to keep it that way. We talk about the parks police, Mr. President. You know, I can remember a time when I was a child where the parks were crazy. When the sun went down, the parks turned into war zones. And now, as you drive through the city and you see the parks in the summertime and the park police are on board, We're not seeing those same problems that we used to have. So with that being said, Mr. President, I just think it's very important to point out who would be impacted and affected by this. It's only city and school department employees, and it's only ones that make less than $15 an hour. During budget deliberations and over the course of the past term, all of the collective bargaining agreements in both the school department and the city side, at one point or another, reached a conclusion and got wrapped up. all contractual employees were receiving a wage that was above $15 an hour, with the exception of those few that I've just mentioned. So with that being said, I don't think this is gonna be something that's gonna have a major impact on the bottom line, but it will certainly have a major impact on the lives of those individuals that are working here and the employee of the city of Medford, and they're gonna be benefits of a fair wage.
[Adam Knight]: If the Massachusetts minimum wage exceeds $15 an hour, then the employee shall receive the Massachusetts minimum hourly wage. So as the state sets it is how our employees will get it based upon this proposal.
[Adam Knight]: Correct. We're going to let the state dictate and we're going to follow.
[Adam Knight]: Referral to the solicitor.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I find this to be a rather self-explanatory resolution, ordinance change rather. In looking at it for my council colleagues, the language in bold would be the new language being added to the existing section. The remaining language in the section would continue to remain in full force and effect. A few weeks back, we had some discussion about the removal of a number of parking spots along High Street and discussing the issue with residents in the neighborhood that were impacted by it. I thought this might be an interesting compromise, a way that we could address some of the neighborhood concerns, but also move forward with the project, Mr. President. Now with that being said. I would request that this paper be sent to the building commissioner as well as the code enforcement officer for review and recommendation. Where it's a zoning ordinance, it does have further ramifications than just this 94-151 section. I know that there's another section on zoning code that talks about what a suitable parking spot would be and what the parameters of that parking spot would be. had conversation with John Bovuso from the building commissioner's office and he's asked for the opportunity to take a look at this. So I'm requesting that my council colleagues join me in moving forward with sending this to the building commissioner's office for review from the building commissioner and the code enforcement officer for recommendations. And then we can have a future discussion on it after those come back.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. May I be so bold, Mr. President, to amend the paper to request that in the discernment, the building department also look at the green space requirements associated with intercourt parking. And I offer that in the form of an amendment.
[Adam Knight]: That the Building Commissioner's Office also review during the discernment the green space requirements.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. This has been something that we've been kicking around now for what seems like four and a half, maybe five years, where the mayor's taken a public position that she's going to be recusing herself from the issue. We have a zoning subcommittee that's ready, willing, and able to finish up the draft and bring it forward to the committee of the whole for future deliberations and discussion. So I'd ask that the council colleagues support this resolution in moving forward with the issue.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Cruz, Mr. President, I'd like to call the meeting to order.
[Adam Knight]: Aye. Aye. In favor of the paper.
[Adam Knight]: It seems like the gentleman's causing quite a disruption to our citizens.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much and thank you to my council colleagues for entertaining the motion. The reason that I asked to suspend the rules this evening is because we have the Mattarese family here who would like to make a public service announcement relative to Rare Disease Day taking place this Saturday. So at this point in time, Mr. President, I'd like to ask the Mattareses to come on up and provide us with a little information about Rare Disease Day and this public service announcement.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'd just like to take a moment to ask Mrs. Mattarese to come up here and explain to us a little bit about what's going on this weekend and the work that she's been able to put in to raise awareness for this rare disease on Rare Disease Day. There's some pretty cool stuff going on. She's gotten a lot of support from residents here in the community, my colleagues on the school committee, the chief of police, the Boston Celtics, and she's really put a lot of work into it. We just sat down and spoke a little bit before the meeting, and I'd just like her to tell everybody about what she's been doing over the past several weeks to get everybody prepared for this, because it's pretty amazing what you've been able to accomplish in such a short time.
[Adam Knight]: Aye. Excuse me? I'd like to amend the paper just to request that the City Solicitor be available at this meeting.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I defer to the senior member. In age and service. Thank you, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and I certainly echo Councilor Caraviello's sentiments. The Roach family are fixtures in West Medford at this point in time. The store's been open for a decade now, but it feels like they've been around for much longer based upon all the community work that they do, the volunteerism, their efforts and work with the Medford Family Network, for example, donating ice cream every year for the Valentine's Day scoop-off being just one of the many events that they participate in. Hoops to hope. Hoops for Hope, Mr. President, they participated in Hoops for Hope, Medford Community Day, the list goes on and on. Anytime that there's an event that says Medford up front and they need volunteers, Chucky and Ginny are the first people in line to be there. So I want to thank them for all that they do for the community, congratulate them on 10 successful years of business, and wish them 10 successful more years because we really need them in this community and we really need them to continue doing what they've been doing for all this time. So with that being said, I thank Councilor Caraviello for bringing this matter forward with me. And I move for approval of the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much for bringing this matter forward. As many of us have been aware in the community of recent weeks, there's been some picketing over at the police station for work that's being done, an informational picket relative to a sub-bid that was awarded to a contractor that has a work history of shoddy work. The subcontractor, Industry Solutions Company, is performing the mechanical insulation work down at the police station. They have a work history showing that they were at a public work project in the town of Raleigh, where they performed poor workmanship and were thrown off the job, Mr. President, from what I understand. So that raises concern and to me because this is a multi multi-million dollar project it's something that we've been waiting on for a long time and we all know that the Wrapping of mechanical parts in the mechanical insulation process, as evident by the presentation that was given here last year by Jim Lister from Local 6, Mechanical Insulators Union, shows that if these jobs aren't done properly, they're one of the leading causes for increased energy inefficiencies, but also mold, mildew, bacteria buildup inside your systems, Mr. President. With that being said, I think it's very important that we have the city auditor conduct a wage theft analysis as well as a compliance check for our responsible employer ordinance to be sure that we have the appropriate parties that are best trained and have a proven track record of utilizing taxpayer dollars in an efficient fashion working at the police station. And that the building commissioner keeps an eye on the work that's being performed down there just to ensure that we're getting the best bang for our buck, Mr. President. I wouldn't bring this measure forward if this employer didn't have a track record, a track record of doing shoddy work on a public work, very similar to this project that's going on right now. So I ask my council colleagues to support the measure.
[Adam Knight]: There we go. I do believe that the petition, the individual would have the right to bring any matter forward that they'd like to discuss at the public participation portion of the meeting, Mr. President. But as of right now, we're dealing with paper number 2077. I think we're just about ready for a vote on that. So with that being said, Mr. President, maybe we can take a vote on this.
[Adam Knight]: Because I think that the open meeting law concerns come into play, Mr. President, not with the commentary of the individual, but with the deliberation of the council. OK. So we won't be able to deliberate on any of the things that she brings up. And if we choose to do something with it, it would be placed on a future agenda. But the petitioner can't place something on the agenda and then have us act on it under suspension or otherwise, because only a councilor can file a resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Did I call for a roll call, Mr. President?
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. I'm totally confused by this commentary, but are these teenage kids, young kids in the neighborhood? Who are these people that you're referring to? Is it the same group of people? Is it a random individual that keeps doing it? Is it different people in the neighborhood that are performing this?
[Adam Knight]: Is it the same individuals time after time? Or is it different faces that you see in different times?
[Adam Knight]: But it's not just kids being kids in the neighborhood.
[Adam Knight]: That's what I'm getting at. It's not just kids being kids in the neighborhood playing hide and go seek in your backyard or cutting through your yard to get to the park. And you're saying that these are grown adults that have video cameras and that are sitting on people's shoulders and looking in your windows?
[Adam Knight]: OK, thank you.
[Adam Knight]: In order, Mr. President, move approval.
[Adam Knight]: taking up papers and communications from the Mayor.
[Adam Knight]: Move approval.
[Adam Knight]: Move approval.
[Adam Knight]: Move approval.
[Adam Knight]: Move approval.
[Adam Knight]: Move approval. Second.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. It's always good to see the vape depot being replaced by a gym, right? I mean, I think it shows we're coming full circle down there on Salem Street when it comes to this issue. I certainly don't have a problem with the petition. However, where it's a 5 o'clock in the morning application, it does raise some concerns to the quality of life of the residents in the neighborhood. So Mr. President, I certainly have no problem voting in favor of this this evening provided that We amend the application that the permit would go with the business and not the address. And that we put a 90 and a 180 day review on the special permit, Mr. President, to be sure that any issues in the neighborhood can be addressed in a timely fashion. As operations progress and business gets busier and you got half of the city of Medford in there beating down your door wanting to become members at your gym. We just want to make sure that the quality of life issues in the neighborhood are protected. This is common practice, we do this quite a bit where we put a 90 day review or a 180 day review on a special permit application for extended hours. And we also make sure that it goes with your business name as opposed to the address so that if you vacate and another entity comes in, that those extended hours aren't grandfathered in. So just a little explanation as to what the motions were that were made. I certainly wish you all the best of luck and don't have any opposition. To them putting in their personal fitness studio down there. Mr. President. However, we have to protect the interest of the neighborhood as well And I think that this is a good compromise.
[Adam Knight]: Oh, okay.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and I couldn't put it any better than Councilor Marks. Ultimately, we have residents that live in homes that are upwards of $600,000 to $700,000. They pay property taxes in upwards of $7,000 to $8,000 a year, have vehicles, pay excise tax. God forbid they want to have company over the house and you can't park in front of your own house. God forbid you have a landscaper or work being done. Where are they going to park? Where are they going to go, Mr. President? You know, I don't see the need for a path to nowhere, especially when we just spent how many millions of dollars extending a community path one block away at Memorial Park with crosswalk right at Auburn Street, crosswalk right at Winthrop Street that runs actually all the way from Medford Square all the way to the Brooks School, Mr. President. So we actually have a bike path, a community path that's in place now that's been constructed. We all took pictures next to the sign when they did the ribbon cutting. And it's there. It's there. And it's underutilized, Mr. President. But I think that that's a good compromise. I mean, ultimately, we have a community path that's one block away. We have residents in this community that have invested their life savings to purchase these homes, and their quality of life is going to be impacted by it. You know, we talk about zoning and ordinances and taking away inner court parking, Mr. President, inner court parking. You know, you're not allowed to park inside the front, the inner court of your house, but they'll come down and they'll put a bike lane right in front of your house, and then you won't have any place to put your car. So where's it going to go? It's going to go to Mystic Avenue. It's going to go to Mystic Street. It's going to go to Auburn Street. It's going to go to Piedmont Street. It's going to go to... All the ancillary secondary roads that people can't find a place to park their car, they're going to put them in the neighborhoods. Now, just last Wednesday, I had the opportunity to go to the Brooks School for a wonderful winter concert, Mr. President. And I think I'm confident in saying that my kids are never going to win a Grammy. But when I got there, I had to park my car, and it was, there's 100 kids in the Brooks School's kindergarten class this year, and it was the kindergarten concert. So there were a number of families that were there, 100 families. So you can imagine what the parking was like at the Brooks School during a regular school day, Mr. President. I had to park almost in front of Councilor Caraviello's house on Prescott Street. to go to the concert. And that's with the parking on High Street. So as events happen in our schools, as our school population grows, those spots are going to become more and more valuable. So I can't agree more with Councilor Marks. You know, I think we need to take a look at this and figure out a solution that's a compromise that allows the residents to maintain their quality of life while also implementing the Safe Routes to School project. You know, a path that starts here and ends there and doesn't go anywhere. I don't see the benefit, Mr. President. I really don't.
[Adam Knight]: I think the funding sources are relevant at some point when, you know, well the feds are going to give us a million bucks, so let's impact the quality of life of these residents because it's not tax dollars. You know, I mean, the million bucks is the million bucks. They're going to leave it. Tomorrow, we're going to be just as good as we were yesterday without it. You know, things aren't going to change. The only way things are going to change is if we take it, Mr. President. The only way things are going to change is if we take the money. So let's sit down. Excuse me, I have the microphone. So, Mr. President, ultimately, you know what I mean, I agree with Councilor Marks. We need to have a discussion about this, and we need to figure out what we can do to protect people's quality of life. Maybe that's allowing in-accord parking in areas where bike lanes take away parking in front of their home. That's an option, that's a solution, but it's something we need to talk about before we start going. We've already put a bike lane down Winthrop Street, and we have a resident on Winthrop Street that every 90 days is putting an application in before the traffic commission asking them to take it out so we can park in front of his house. So that's the reality of the situation. It sounds great. Yeah, we're making everybody safer. These bike lanes are making everybody safer. No one's ever going to get in a bike accident again. Not the case. Not the case.
[Adam Knight]: I think we've beaten the horse to death, Mr. President, on this one.
[Adam Knight]: I do not cycle.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. As many of us are aware, there was a complete streets project that was started down at Tufts Square. And it doesn't look to me as though this project is finished, but it doesn't look to me as though there's much work going on down there either, Mr. President. The parking area has not been striped. There's no shrubbery or any type of ballast or anything like that that I believe were part of the plan that were going to be put in there. It looks like there's a problem with the gradient and pitch as well, Mr. President. It looks like in a rainstorm the. rain would puddle up quite a bit going down towards the Citizens Bank area of the parking lot over there. So I'm hoping that we can get an update from the city administration, including but not limited to the construction schedule, where we are in the process, what percentage of the project is complete at this point in time. Ultimately, Mr. President, if you think about that little Tufts Square area, and you think about all the businesses that were there, it's a very historic area, very important to the heritage and history of Medford. I was just talking to a friend of mine just the other day on Golden Ave, Michael Price, who showed me a newspaper article of Dolly's Beauty Salon down right there in Tufts Square. And Dolly, his mother, was the youngest hair salon owner ever licensed in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts at age 15. Mr. President, she was a business owner at age 15 right there in Tufts Square. So it's my hope that we can remember the good things of that square and the good businesses and the good legacies that were left behind by honoring them a little bit more with the completion of this construction project, Mr. President, and also when the time is right Hopefully maybe a history board or a story board down there, but at this point in time I would just like to ask for an update from the administration as to what's going on with the tough square project where we are and When it's going to be complete and what the construction schedule looks like Thank You console night console beers I'd just like to amend this paper to ask the administration also if they have any data or information on the impact of the change in
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Thank you, sir, for being here this evening. Did I hear you correctly when you said that the disruption was going to be along the sidewalk and not on the street? Yeah, on the sidewalk, yes, sir. All sidewalk work.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to adopt the conditions requested by the city engineer.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. We've had much discussion about pre-budget meetings that are going to be coming up, much anticipated pre-budget meetings, I may say. The question comes to whether or not we have some vacant positions that are available here in the city. I know the council's been talking about its priorities. We have a priority meeting tomorrow. One of our number one priorities is getting legal counsel for the city council. So in an effort to better understand the financial picture here in the community, and also better prepare ourselves for the budget. I'm requesting that the city administration provide us with a list of vacant positions that they're looking to fill, as well as a list of the transitional roles and responsibilities that are being covered by whatever department head in the present until such time as those vacancies are filled, Mr. President. So it's just an effort to gather information so that we can better prepare ourselves for these pre-budget hearings and also make a better case for ourselves to – a better case in terms of what our financial standing is in order to attain legal counsel here for the city council.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd just also like to amend the paper to request that it be sent to the city engineer and traffic engineer. As we're all well aware, there are various times the state will come to the city to request certain rights away, permits and the like, to get work done. And we can sometimes get mitigation from the contractors that are performing work in our community. And this might be an aspect where we can negotiate mitigation. So I'd request that we make those two entities aware. of the council's request as well, so that in the instance that an opportunity comes up, we can possibly negotiate some mitigation that this can be something that they can ask for.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and thank you, Madam Mayor, and to your team for putting together such a well-thought-out proclamation. Ultimately, the matter before us is comprehensive data-driven collaborative effort that was put together between community stakeholders working together towards a common goal. It's something that I support wholeheartedly today, Mr. President, and it's something that I'll support wholeheartedly in the future when we continue to talk about ways that we can come up with funding mechanisms to continue to fulfill positions of vital need here in the community. So I thank the administration for bringing this resolution and proclamation forward and would move approval on the matter.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I've reviewed the application. The gentleman's a successful business owner in the community already. He's running a very successful similar restaurant in virtually the same location. There's been no problems there. I would anticipate no future problems with his new location. And I move for approval of the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And through you, I'd like to thank also our friends from Eversource that are here this evening. A couple weeks ago, we put forward a resolution asking that we get quarterly updates on the Eversource project. It's going to be a large scale, large scope project that's going to be coming through our community. And I thought that it might be in the best interest, as well as my colleagues did, I believe, to have periodic updates as to what's going on, what to expect, and to be able to address any concerns that may be coming up in the neighborhood. So with that being said, Mr. President, we do have some representatives here from Eversource that I'd like to thank for being here. We have Mr. Shortell, Mr. Zamparelli, and I do believe we have a new community relations liaison here that we're going to be introduced to this evening. So I'd like to turn the floor over to our friends from Eversource, provided my council colleagues have no problem with that. And we can move on with an update from our friends over at Eversource, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I'm going to let them finish their presentation, Mr. President. And then if we have any questions, we can do it. I don't want to ruin the flow.
[Adam Knight]: OK.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'd like to thank you both for being here this evening and thank you for your presentation. You know, Sean's done a great job, I think, of keeping us informed as to what's going on with the project. We've all been receiving periodic updates, there's no question about that. I think it's also safe to say that the Worst is yet to come when it comes to the construction and the impact it's going to have on our community. When you're looking at the project breakdown here, we're about 40% of the total project is in the city of Medford. And what do I see here? 5,800 feet scheduled for completion along Winthrop Street. Another 1,400 feet on south, another 550. So there's a significant amount of construction that's going to take place in the community. And I think really what's going to make this you know, the least painful on everybody in the community is going to be this open dialogue and our ability to sit down with other sources on a periodic basis to get updates from them to address the concerns that we have in the community. They've been very responsive, in my opinion, based upon the concerns that I've had in my neighborhood right in front of the Medford High School project they did. a lot of work out there at the beginning of the school year. It went relatively smooth considering the scope of the construction work that was being done. The area was maintained relatively clean. Access to the park, access to the sidewalks was still there. Traffic was able to flow as best as possible. And I thought that the road construction detours that they made made it passable and livable for the period of time that they were there doing the work. So with that being said, Mr. President, I do appreciate the work that Eversource has done in putting into this. I do appreciate the work that McCourt Contracting has done putting into this because they are paying close attention to some of the community needs and quality of life issues in our neighborhoods. And I'd hope that we can continue this dialogue. One of the great things I thought that we got during the Craddock Bridge project was those three week schedules with the project briefing overviews that said, you know, 83% done with the project. Next week, we're going to be working at these locations on these times. And that's pretty much the emails that we've been getting from Sean anyway throughout the course of the sporadic construction that's been going on. So, Mr. President, I want to thank our friends from Eversource. I think that, you know, there's going to be a lot more time to talk about some of the issues and the impacts that are going to happen along with this project. But as of right now, you know, I think that it's the open dialogue, the understanding as to when the construction is going to happen and the impact that it's going to have on the neighborhood. in the neighbors, in the traffic, in the congestion in the community that really needs to get out there so that we can get ahead of it.
[Adam Knight]: I move to invite our friends from Eversource back next quarter for a future update. I'm sure if anything happens in between then and now, we all have the ability to flip this packet over that they gave us and make a phone call and get the answers that we need. There is a pressing need to bring them in sooner. They've been nothing more than accommodating in the past, so I don't see why we can't put this off till next quarter, have another update when the construction season starts in the spring, and go from there. Do you still like the table till next quarter? Yeah, same thing we did with the Lawrence Memorial.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you for your patience.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Justin Springer is a dear old friend of mine. We went to kindergarten all the way through high school together. A close, close friend of mine. Came to vacations with me and my family. Grew up in West Medford. Spent a lot of great afternoons after school in his house, at his grandmother's house down on Monument Street. And we lost touch over the years, Mr. President. And just recently, we fell back into touch. I was speaking with His stepfather, Mel, not too long ago when he gave me an update that Justin was doing well, and I started paying attention on social media and noticed that Justin was named this community hero by the ABCD. And ABCD is an anti-poverty community development and human service organization, Mr. President. It's the largest non-profit human service agency in New England. And it serves over 100 low-income families in greater Boston through its programs like neighborhood service centers and something we're all familiar with. I'm sure we've all heard of the Head Start programs. Head Start falls under the ABCD as well. So Justin was named a community hero this past year. And I'd just like to read a little bit about what they said about Justin in the brochure. Justin's proven to be a tremendous asset to ABCD by lending his vast branding and marketing skills. Talents and resources to help bridge gaps in how communities assess public health education and engage with various initiatives. His numerous accomplishments in this area include orchestrating a street outreach team every year, conducting social media platforms for many of ABCD Health Service programs, producing major fundraising events for the Take the Test Boston program, which ABCD Health Services is a founding member. And he did this all in his own dime. So with that being said, Mr. President, I always think it's important that we notice and recognize the individuals that were born and raised in this community, whose families still live here, who helped make this community great. And we should point out the good things that they're doing in other places and here in Medford. Justin's someone that's really an inspiration. He's someone that's given his time, his energy, and his effort. I'll free a charge to the city of Boston and to its surrounding communities to help make our lives a better place. Helping service over 100,000 families that are in need. So with that being said, Mr. President, I thought it was important that we point out the great work that Medford residents continue to do on a daily basis, not only here in Medford, but in Massachusetts and across the globe. So with that being said, I'd ask my council colleagues to support me in this resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Can the sponsors of the resolution please explain to me if this is a machine that would come and do this, like, infrared technology right there on the site, if this eliminates the use of manpower and it's a machine that's performing the work?
[Adam Knight]: devices, Mr. President, in various shapes and forms and various places on the internet, which means they must all be awesome, right? Because they're on the internet and they almost work great. But no, it makes sense. I mean, it's a machine that's performing the work. So we're alleviating our exposure to liability for workers getting injured. We're also having the machine perform the work so we know we're going to get the same standard, the same quality, every single time the work gets done. This is something I support wholeheartedly. It's something that we've discussed in the past. with street scan and other types of infrared technologies that we can use to determine what our underground infrastructure looks like, what our streets and roadways look like, what condition they're in without actually having to go and rip them apart. So I support it wholeheartedly and I thank my colleagues for raising the issue.
[Adam Knight]: Oh, and if we buy the machine, we're going to have to save 50% of the costs, plus fuel and manpower on the machine. Maybe it's worth figuring out what the machine costs and buying one, as opposed to contracting out work to an outside entity to perform work we could do in-house.
[Adam Knight]: So, Mr. President, I guess my question is that is the intention to establish a pilot program that would privatize a portion of the work that the DPW is now performing? They're not doing the streets anyways. They're not paving the streets right now.
[Adam Knight]: It's not potholes. It's the whole street. Because that work would fall under the scope of the DPW just because historically they've contracted out doesn't mean that it's not work that would fall under their purview.
[Adam Knight]: I don't recall them having the proper equipment to be able to do it. But it still would fall within the scope of their labor certification for work that they could perform as ME02, maintenance equipment operator.
[Adam Knight]: That's why if we have a machine that can pave streets that does the work of four people, we might be a worthwhile investment.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd like to amend the paper to request that before any pilot program is implemented, that the city administration meet with the collective bargaining
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, many of us that have been involved in local government and local politics over the years have come to know and love John Byers. Many of us who spent a lot of time in Barry Park in the South Medford area of the city would always see Johnny riding his bike down at the basketball courts. Many of us that listen to sports radio on WEI would quite often hear Johnny call in. Many of us that would watch cable access television back in the early and late 90s would see Johnny on his TV shows and as a special guest on a variety of other local celebrities' TV shows. And just this past week, Johnny lost his battle with cancer. Mr. President, Johnny was someone that was a student of government. He loved government. He ran for mayor several times, school committee, I believe, as well. I don't believe he ever ran for city council, but I may be mistaken. But I do recall that he'd run for a number of shots at public office. His father, Phil, is a great guy, a brother of mine from the Elks Club. And his son, or his brother, Phillip, and his father are both very close friends of mine, lifelong Metro residents, Mr. President. Johnny was residing in Walkling Court at the time of his passing. He was surrounded by friends and family when he went, and I just hope that we can all take the time to extend our deep and sincere condolences to the family on their loss. Johnny was a special person in this community. He was someone that we all knew and loved, and he's going to be sadly missed.
[Adam Knight]: Someone that spent so much time in the neighborhood that he grew up in, someone that spent so much time outdoors riding his bike in the parks and stuff like that, someone that was a fixture in the neighborhood is someone that probably would warrant consideration for a corner dedication, Mr. President. I do believe that John grew up in the College Ave area, but I'll have to get the specifics to that before I bring forward a motion that would request such.
[Adam Knight]: May I be so bold to suggest, Mr. President, that we ask the City Clerk to research the paper that we had forwarded previously to Mayor Burke's administration relative to South Street and forward that to the current administration so that they have it fresh and on their desk. And I would offer that in the form of a motion.
[Adam Knight]: We've talked about this topic ad nauseum, Mr. President. It's been going on now for probably the better part of four years. One thing I will say is that nobody knows this issue and this concern better than Councilor Lungo, who is now Mayor Lungo. Her parents live on the road. Her parents live on the street. So for us to think that we're going to talk the talk and it's going to fall on deaf ears, I don't think is the case, Mr. President. She's had a vested interest in performing solutions at this intersection for as long as I can remember, as soon as the issue came up. Councilor Lungo was all over it, now Mayor Lungo I'm sure will be on top of it as well. So with that being said, I don't think there's any reason for us to anticipate or expect or not to act. But I do think that when we're looking at the scope of projects that are going on down there, we have the police station, we have the Eversource project. I think one solution we may have, Mr. President, is to designate that a live construction zone, which may allow us an opportunity to meet with our friends at Area 4 for Massachusetts Highway Department and put some controls in at the bottom of the ramp. Maybe no left turn if you're getting off the highway, because there's no need to get onto Mystic Ave. from the off-ramp. You should only be able to take a left-hand turn if you're coming off the off-ramp right there at South Street, because if you just stay on the road and get off behind the DPW, you can be on Mystic Ave as well. So there are some controls that we can put in place, Mr. President. I think because of the scope of construction that's going on at the police station and the scope of construction with the South Street project, we may have a little bit of leverage here to speak with some of our friends. over at Area 4 and use their engineering expertise to come up with some short-term solutions during this very dangerous construction period, which is going to take place for a couple of years now, Mr. President, to provide some short-term relief and short-term solutions until we can address it more holistically.
[Adam Knight]: That wasn't necessarily my suggestion, Mr. President. My suggestion would be to, if you're coming off the ramp, to make it left turn only so you can't take a right onto Mystic Ave coming off the highway ramp because you can stay on the highway and get off at the road with no name that we were trying to take over there over by the dance studio behind the DPW yard to still put you back out on Mystic Avenue. But to shut that exit down for people that were coming off would actually close down the only access that they had to Medford Square, which is our central business district, and I don't think that that's something that we want to do. We don't want to divert all the traffic off Route 16 and not let them come to our central business district if they're coming that way. So, you know, it's going to take engineers and engineering, Mr. President, but for a short-term solution in the meantime to implement public safety controls, I think that's something that we could consider because it's an active construction site with the police station and the Eversource project.
[Adam Knight]: Also, while we're under suspension, Mr. President, I'd just like to take an opportunity to wish my mother a happy birthday today.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, yes. I'm not going to tell you how old she is. And also, I'd like to announce that tomorrow at 6 p.m. at the Andrews School,
[Adam Knight]: It's the monthly community police meeting.
[Adam Knight]: Present.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I move to take paper 2013 out of order. This was a paper that was before the council previously. We sent it back to the mayor with a request for amendment and it has come back as The council amended it. I'd like to ask a representative from the administration to come up and just give us a brief synopsis of the paper that's before us, and then hopefully move for a vote.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I do believe, Mr. President, that the special revenue fund was a recommendation that was made by the Division of Local Services from the Department of Revenue to establish generally accepted accounting practices on how to spend the funds that come with these host community agreements and community impact agreements. Based upon the language that's been provided to us and the review of the language that's been provided to us previously, it seems as though everything's in order and the recommendations of the council have been adopted by the administration. As such, I'd move for approval of the paper.
[Adam Knight]: On the motion of- No, no, it's actually a home rule petition, it's going to the legislature.
[Adam Knight]: It's a home rule petition, so it will go to the legislature.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, we can. Second.
[Adam Knight]: restricted available funds used to supplement the budget. By definition that's what it is.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to receive and place on file.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Last term when this council did adopt the increase from $20,000 to $40,000, which passed unanimously before the body, we raised a question to the city assessor asking her to conduct a cost analysis and feasibility study of adopting the state maximum. She reported back to us, I believe, right around the time we were setting the tax rate. that she was still working on that document. So I'd just like to add the paper that the council had adopted back in March of 2019, I'm sorry, May of 2019, I believe it was either the 20th or the 28th in that meeting, making that request. And add that to the agenda as part of the discussion, Mr. President, because if we're going to make a decision about this type of issue that's going to have a certain impact on our finances here in the community, then at the very least we need to have a feasibility study or a cost impact analysis done so that we have an understanding of what impact it's going to have on the bottom line in the community.
[Adam Knight]: So my motion would be to join that paper.
[Adam Knight]: To include it as part of the meeting. It doesn't necessarily have to be joined to this paper tonight, but when the meeting is conducted, that it's conducted when we have the cost analysis and feasibility study.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I believe it was early in December that we were up here singing Rosemary praises for her recent achievement being named Medford's 2019 Citizen of the Year. And as such, just recently, at the end of this month, earlier this month, she celebrated a very momentous birthday. So it's been quite a year for Rosemary. She became a citizen of the year and an octogenarian. I'd like to wish her a very happy 80th birthday and ask my council colleagues to join her.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Paper 17321 was introduced in 2017 before the council. It had gone through a subcommittee process and was a paper that was reported out favorably by the subcommittee on ordinances, I do believe, and then was never scheduled for a committee of the whole. And that was a paper that was also designed to regulate drop boxes here in the community of Medford. During the deliberations and discussions of this issue, one thing came up that was very important. We have a textile recycling fundraising program at our elementary schools and our middle schools and facilities exemption was something that was very important at the time, and I'm sure that still holds true. So moving forward, if we're going to regulate donation drop boxes by way of ordinance, I'd just like to request that school and city facilities be excluded from the ordinance.
[Adam Knight]: That would be an amendment to the main paper, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. I think it's important to point out that this council sued the Board of Appeals relative to that decision that they made. We took this case to court and we lost. We were found to not have standing.
[Adam Knight]: The Medford City Council filed suit and was thrown out. And the land court judge had found the city legislative body had zero standing to appeal the issue.
[Adam Knight]: We got thrown out.
[Adam Knight]: We spent $60,000 to be told we didn't have standing. Then the question was, are we going to spend another 60 grand to be told that again? But I rest my case, but I just wanted to point out the factual history of the process and what went down with Locust Street. Thank you, Councilman. We weren't sitting back on our hands saying, oh, Locust Street's going on. That's not what happened. We sued the city. We sued the zoning board.
[Adam Knight]: I believe it was 40, Mr. President. And we weren't, we weren't, we weren't, uh, you know, co-defendants or co-appellants. We were an individual entity that moved forward as a, in a silo, not with the neighborhood, not with anybody else, but we're in the best interest of the community.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I support the resolution wholeheartedly. I do think it's important to point out that if the council does have in fact legal counsel to provide it with legal opinions, the legal opinions relative to ethics and the like would have to come from Statutorily, the city solicitor's office, we can't have our own council giving us opinions related to that, but we can use this person for the very important job of drafting framework ordinances, Mr. President. That's something we need. It's something, you know, just in the very short time that we've been meeting as a council, we've taken, you know, several resolutions that have been filed that we've been asking for draft ordinances to be put together on that have been two and three and four years in the making, not because the city solicitor wasn't able to do it, Capability-wise, it was because he has to run the everyday operations of an entire city, as well as, you know, that he had the requests that this body makes. So with that being said, I think that this is a step in the right direction. It was my number two priority, Mr. President, when we talked about council priorities. Number one, improving the way we deliver services here in this community, making sure that when you pick up the phone and call because your trash barrel wasn't picked up, that someone comes and picks it up for you. When you say there's a pothole in front of your house, it gets fixed. When your sidewalk needs to be repaired, it gets done. Number one priority, service delivery and improving the way we do it. Number two priority, getting counsel for the Medford City Council so that we can put out a better work product at a faster pace, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Do need this. We do really need this. It's not something that we don't really need, Mr. Strehler, it's something that we do really need. You know, when you're looking at the number of draft ordinances that we've requested just since this body's met this term. We're looking at nine, nine draft ordinances. That's more, nine ordinances is more of a work product than we put out in a term, and I can't tell you in how long. If we get those draft ordinances produced to us, I guarantee you we're gonna put out a stronger work product than we have in the past. If we have some council that's working for us, dedicated X amount of hours a week, putting those work products out, I guarantee you we're gonna do more work than we've done in the past.
[Adam Knight]: I think if you look at the ordinances before you, it says that the issue of funding for the City Council to hire an additional legal services line item be discussed. Now, I think it's also important to point out, Mr. President, that Mayor Burke during this fiscal year has already committed to us $40,000 for professional and legal services in the form of a zoning consultant. That money's never actually been transferred into our line item for professional legal services in the city council's budget and the budget of the legislative. It sits in a revolving fund for special services that lays in the auditor's office. So, with that being said, you know, we already have funds that are available to us that have been committed to us and have been budgeted to us for the purposes of legal or professional technical services, Mr. President. I think what we're looking at doing is figuring out a way that we can best capture these funds and start utilizing them so that we can put out a stronger work product.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Everybody that knows me knows I love my amichis. Probably once a week at least, I go down to amichis and get. couple slices of pizza before I make my way up here to the city council meeting. I'll get two slices of cheese with that great, you know, sauce-cheese ratio and the great flop that they have down there at Amici's, Mr. President. But a couple weeks ago when I was getting out of my car to pick up my dinner before I came to the council meeting, I noticed that the drainage issue right in front of Amici's, recently they had a complete streets program down there and they did a bump out in the curb right where Amici's and Paul Revere's is. And that bumped out, but the gradient isn't conducive to proper drainage. So what's going on, Mr. President, is the water's pooling and it's becoming at least five, six, seven inches deep at some point, which renders that parking spot. And that's the parking spot that sits right out in front of, you know, four businesses that specialize in takeout food, Hong Kong Village, CB Scoops, Amici's, and Paul Revere's. So with that being said, Mr. President, it's having a negative impact on the businesses that worked on, that are operating down in West Bedford Square. Also, when they did this complete streets project and they did put the bump out in, they took away a parking spot and a half. So to add, you know, insult to injury, on top of losing a parking spot, now there's another parking spot there that is virtually useless to the business district in times of inclement weather. So I'm asking that the engineering department take the appropriate steps to hold the contractor accountable that did the work and get them back out there to fix it so that the fine people that are trying to get a nice slice of pizza down there in West Medford Square are able to do so, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And Max, it was a pleasure meeting you earlier this evening. I've known your uncle and your dad now for a number of years, and I just want to let you know how proud we are as citizens of the city of Medford. I mean, think about the accomplishment that you and your teammates were able to achieve. Not only do you represent Medford, Massachusetts, you represent the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and you represent the United States of America, and you came back with a gold medal. And that's something you should really be proud of. And I really want to thank you for all your hard work and dedication. making this possible and bringing home the gold to the old 02155. Thank you very much for your work on this and congratulations. It's a great accomplishment. You should be very proud of your goals. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I just want to thank my council colleague, Councilor Marks. I think he gave a very thorough and thoughtful presentation that laid out the issues that are really concerning this community and also presented solutions. So I appreciate his passion for the subject of thoughtfulness and the way that he put this together, and I support it wholeheartedly.
[Adam Knight]: How are you?
[Adam Knight]: Good to see you. I spoke with you the other night. I spoke with your husband as well. Relative to the debris that was left on the front lawn. And I left the city engineer's office on Wednesday evening with the assurances that there was going to be someone down there to clean it up.
[Adam Knight]: It was cleaned up. Excellent. Thank you. And it's my understanding that the pole was installed by National Grid. At that point in time, but they're installing it for future work So this the grid actually put the pole in right the work that's gonna happen is gonna be Verizon But I didn't want to follow up with that to make sure that that happened because when I spoke with your husband last They might have came out a little later in the day than earlier than he expected So that was just my concern I just didn't want to come home and have this I
[Adam Knight]: You are? My dear friend, Mr. President, who would appear before this council as city solicitor, who has gone on to his retirement, would always come before this body and remind us that there is a difference between a public hearing and a public meeting.
[Adam Knight]: And a public hearing would be something that is a creature of statute that is required by law versus a public meeting, which is something that we can call. So I would just like clarification from the council as to whether or not we're looking for a public hearing or a public meeting. I would assume it's a public meeting because the council doesn't really have a vote over whether or not these things can go into play.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think it's also very important to point out that this is the year 10 of the census. This is also the census that will have an impact on the redistricting of our state house and congressional seats. So it's very important that we do complete the census and fill it out so that we give an accurate count to the people that are making up the districts. Because maybe then we can get a rep that represents all of Medford and not just a portion of it.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President. Councilor Knight. Being someone who's 40 years of age and thinking back and saying that my whole entire life, since I've been on this earth, Carol was working in one way or another for the city of Medford is amazing when I think about that, because I feel old. I can just imagine how she feels after putting four decades in to the City of Medford, Mr. President. She was a great worker. She was someone who was pleasant to be around. Like Rick said, small in stature, but really someone that you knew had a presence in the office and had a presence in the room. Did a great job down in the clerk's office. That was the relationship that I was able to develop with her over the short period of time that I've been working here in City of Medford's government. but she will sadly be missed. You have a great team down there, Clerk Hurtubiseest, and she was a key player. As we see time pass and we see Dottie leave, now we see Carol leave, and we see the changing face of the clerk's office. Ed Finn leave and you come in. It's a very interesting time right now, and I just want to have the opportunity to thank Carol for all the work that she did down there and how she helped transform the office into what it is today.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This is an item that came up during the last legislative session in the State House and it was defeated. And then this council, if you recall last term, asked the licensing commission to examine a feasibility as to whether or not it would make sense to implement the NIP ban with the issuance of new licenses or the transfer of licenses among our package stores here in the community. That resolve was filed in direct response to the state legislature not being able to pass the expansion of the bottle bill to NIPS. This piece of legislation was refiled. It's coming up for a hearing right now in the Department of Telecommunications and Energy subcommittee, I do believe, Mr. President. But the intent of this resolution is to have this council go in support in extending the bottle bill to NIP bottles with the hope that that will result in proper disposal and recycling of these plastic bottles that we can find just about anywhere in our community. River Cleanup Day, if we go down there, you'll see thousands of them. You walk through the parking lot down at Anthony's Liquor Store, you see them all over the place. They're everywhere, Mr. President, and it's become an epidemic in our community, so much so that the council thought about taking action on it, and the state delegations thought about taking action on it, and the state legislatures thought about taking action on it. Well, it's time to take action, Mr. President. So I'm asking that this council request that the city clerk be authorized with the power to draft a letter supporting House Bill 2881 and send that to our state delegation and request that they vote in favor of it. and take whatever appropriate steps they can to get favorable recommendations out of subcommittee and make this come to a reality.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Today, Mrs. Roberti was laid to rest, a longtime resident of Leiden Ave. Her husband, Nick, is a very close friend of mine, and it's very sad to see her go. I first met her maybe nine or ten years ago at a community event, and her daughter, and she was just a very wonderful person, very nice lady. Her husband, Nicky, is a great guy as well, and we're really sad to see her go. She was a stalwart in the neighborhood. a friendly face that everybody could come up and say hello to and talk to. She was always willing to open her door and her home to any individual in the neighborhood. So with that being said, she will be sadly missed in the South Medford neighborhood of Lydon Avenue, Mr. President, as we all know, especially up that fire in South Medford and that stretch of South Medford that's a very close-knit community. And everybody down there knows each other, walks into each other's house without knocking the door, and so on and so forth. And this was no different for Mrs. Roberti. So she's certainly someone that will be sadly missed. She was an asset to this community and we're sad to see her go. I'd like to have my council colleagues join me in offering the deepest condolences to her family on her recent passing.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This is an issue that we've discussed as a council and a body for a number of years, and we were moving in the right direction. A lot of our meetings were being scheduled after 6 PM in the night for our boards and commissions. And we've been running into some circumstances with certain boards and commissions, a meeting. At a time of the day that's not conducive to doing business with residents of the general public, people that work for a living and have a concern in the neighborhood can't attend a meeting because they have other obligations. So back several years ago, we requested that Mayor Burke make changes to the meeting structure and the boards and commissions were all meeting after 5 p.m. at night. And that was all well and good for a period of time. And then as time passed, so did the stringency of those requirements, Mr. President. And certain boards and commissions are now meeting at a time that's not really conducive to conducting business in the government sphere for quality of life issues in the neighborhood, such as the traffic commission, for example. So with that being said, Mr. President, we had some discussions in our priority meeting about what direction the council should be going in over this next term. And one of the things that came up was the meeting times of boards and commissions. And while the boards and commissions don't fall under council purview and do have some autonomy, they also do fall under the branch of the executive. And the mayor does have the power and authority to issue an executive directive or an executive order that would say that they're not allowed to meet before 6 p.m. Monday through Friday so that people that live in this community, but also work for a living, will have the ability to come to these meetings and participate in their government. So that's the intent behind this proposal, Mr. President. It's something that Councilor Falco and I spoke about before the meeting this evening, and it's something that I hope my council colleagues will join me in supporting. Thank you. President Falco.
[Adam Knight]: I'm just getting ready for the next one, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Last term, this council put forward a resolution that ultimately turned into an ordinance relative to reporting of gas leaks in our community. Through that discussion and debate, it was brought to this council's attention that we have an inordinate number of level 2 and level 3 gas leaks here in the community. The national grid or the public utility in the city have been working on a case-by-case basis to address these, but there's really no five-year plan that's going to say, over this amount of period of time, we're going to tackle X amount of gas leaks that are in the community. Pursuant to state law, level two gas leaks have to be repaired in a certain amount of time after being reported. And level three gas leaks also have to be repaired in a certain amount of time after being reported, which is a little bit more expedient. But right now, we're seeing that these time frames aren't being hit, Mr. President. We've had a number of issues on Boston Avenue, for example, with a gas leak that's going on there in front of number 81 Boston Ave, resulting in the gentleman's pre-dying, his lawn dying, the bushes in front of his house dying because the natural gas is being leaked into the air and It's really a quality of life issue, but it's also a safety issue, Mr. President. If we're really going to be serious about climate change and moving away from our reliance on fossil fuels, one of the things we can do, I think, is repair the infrastructure that we have in place so that we're not wasting it. So I bring this resolution forward asking the administration to begin discussions, talking with National Grid to develop a five-year plan. I know sitting next to Councilor Lungo for the past six years, this was something that she was very passionate about. So as mayor, I'm certain to see some action there. But I just wanted to let the mayor know that we support this endeavor. and I hope that we can get behind her and get a five-year plan in place so that we can improve our gas infrastructure here in the community.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, this was an item that was brought up in the 2017 term, then again in the 2019 term. Here we are in 2020, so I'm hoping that this is an item that we can act on. I think that Medford is a little bit behind the times, prehistoric, if you may, when it comes to food trucks. This case-by-case basis that we approve one-day food truck licenses I don't think is in the best interest of the community. And I think by adopting the ordinance that we've been discussing, we'll be in better positions to be a little bit more reflective of the times that are before us and the wants and desires of the community relative to food truck needs.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I commend my colleagues for bringing this paper forward. I'd like to amend the paper to add paper 15307 and paper 16705, which are two papers that this council and previous councils had discussed relative to regulating short-term rentals in the community. This is a discussion that we've been having for a number of years and with the acts and resolves, of chapter 337 of 2018, the state legislature had addressed a number of concerns the communities were raising. They addressed the big picture concerns, but left local options available. I think this is the right approach, Mr. President. If we're going to have short-term rentals in our community, and we know that they have an impact on quality of life in neighborhoods, and also an impact on affordable housing stock in our community, I think it makes sense that we regulate them. As Councilor Behr said, we had adopted the local option at the last meeting. of the previous session, which would allow us to capture the revenues that are generated through Airbnbs. And this is just the next logical step in further regulation of the situation. So I commend my colleagues for bringing the issue forward. I ask that the paper be amended to include those other items that have been previously discussed by this body, so that we can wrap them all up in one nice pretty package and put a bow on it.
[Adam Knight]: 16-705. 16-705. And 15-307.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This is something that the Council has talked about in the past as well. I do believe, if it wasn't three short months ago, the same resolution was brought up relative to the same collection boxes. In the past, we've talked about the collection boxes at the former site of Meadow Glen Mall, which is now Wegmans. I think it's time, Mr. President, that we take a long, hard look at whether or not we want to regulate these type of donation drop boxes in the community through a permitting process, just so that we can protect the interest in neighborhoods and the quality of life in neighborhoods. I know Councilor Marks, I don't want to steal his thunder, but he's going to talk about certain communities that have ordinances and regulations that require these drop boxes be manned and staffed. And he's said this a number of occasions in the past. And I think it's a good idea that we take a look at this, Mr. President. So I would also suggest that as we move forward and have our health department and our code enforcement officer go and take a look at the site, that we also take a look at developing some controls by way of regulation to better manage these type of entities in our community.
[Adam Knight]: We already have a paper in committee.
[Adam Knight]: The draft ordinance regulating drop boxes I think was introduced quite a bit of time ago. Yeah, I mean this was probably the 2018 was when that was introduced. He's met with some opposition and is going through the subcommittee process and just failed to move. A lot of it had to do with the donation drop boxes that we have at our public schools for the clothing. Created some opposition to regulating the drop boxes and then the idea didn't make its way back into the final product of ordinance stages, I guess would be the best way to put it. It died on the vine. But there is language that is out there that is available and in committee.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And Ms. Barber, thank you for bringing this up. We appreciate you coming up here this evening, taking time out of your busy schedule. Mr. President, all signage on any roadway needs to be in compliance with the federal standard that's established through the manual and uniform traffic control devices. So I think, first and foremost, what we should do is take a look and make sure that these rapid flashing beacon lights that we have here in the community comply. with the manual. So I'd ask that the paper be referred to the city engineer for a report back as to whether or not these rapid flashing beacons are in compliance with the manual and uniform traffic control devices. If they're not, then we have an answer right there. They're not in compliance, they have to come down.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. The patching Along Golden Ave is no longer effective. This roadway is probably one of the busier thoroughfares in the community. It's a very well known cut through street. If we had a traffic study up on Murray Hill Road that said 28,000 cars a week travel up that street, then I'm going to say that 90,000 travel up Golden Avenue. It's a notorious cut through for Mystic Avenue, Mr. President. We all know everybody goes up Golden Avenue to avoid the lights at Harvard Street. But what's happened is due to the high volume of traffic on the roadway and years and years of neglected mismaintenance on the road, we're now at a spot where any time a snowplow goes up and down the street, the street gets torn to shreds. Then the crew will come in, and the crew will come in and patch it, and the patch will last for a little while. Next snowstorm comes, street gets torn to shreds again. It's very similar to the situation that we saw down on Paris Street a couple of years ago. The rip rock is coming up. When cars drive up the street and this rip rock is exposed, it shoots all over the place. It damages vehicles. It's just time that the roadway be resurfaced, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. The Zamboni at La Conte Rink has been named in memory of my dear friend, I dear friend, the late John Welch. And the Zamboni has seen better days, Mr. President. I might have to put it out there. I might be the only councilor who knows how to drive a Zamboni. I don't know. We'll have to have a contest. But having worked out at the hockey rink, having driven that Zamboni that's down there now, having worked alongside John Welch, it's safe to say that this Zamboni has seen better days. In certain instances, it is inoperational. And when the Zamboni is inoperational, then what the city does is we call the DCR and we beg, can you please send us a Zamboni? The one that we have doesn't work. And if that doesn't work, then we go to neighboring communities and we ask to borrow theirs. I think I saw Councilor Scarpelli driving down Mystic Ave and Somerville Zamboni actually two years ago to drop it off when ours was inoperational. So what I'm thinking, Mr. President, is we make the investment now in a new Zamboni. We keep the old Zamboni and we use that as a spare. And when we come into a circumstance where the current one we're using doesn't work, we have a spare. And if other communities need help, we have one to loan out. I think it's a very minor investment to make but the impact when the Zamboni goes down is devastating you know, everyone knows what hockey is like in the city of Medford and if there's a Cancellation of ice time because the Zamboni is not working I think that that's a problem with us and that's something that we can avoid by making the small investment So I'd ask my council colleagues to support it
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, it's based on hours too, how many hours the machine works.
[Adam Knight]: I think it's also important to point out that these cell batteries that we use in the Zamboni, when they've reached the end of their shelf life, they need to be disposed of properly. They are hazardous material. And as we see the Zamboni age, we are seeing the shelf life of the batteries become shorter and the exposure of these hazardous materials in the ring become a greater increase.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'd like to further amend the paper to request that we have random rush hour directed patrols by the traffic division. I think that Chief Buckley has been a vocal proponent for addressing concerns down in this area. And I think that this is something that his administration over at the police department will support to address some of the speeding vehicles, some of the, what do they call it, skipping or lane skipping across from South Street to Route 16. and the like, some of the traffic control devices that are in place right now that aren't being enforced, I think with enforcement will certainly provide a benefit to the quality of life of the residents in the neighborhood. I also would be remiss if I didn't point out that life on South Street will change. very soon when the Eversource Pipeline project begins. And I'm hoping, Mr. President, that we can coordinate our efforts so that when the construction of the Eversource Pipeline is complete, that our concerns are addressed with the intersection of South and Main as well, so that when the intersection or the roadway opens, It opens up with a nice new road for the residents in the neighborhood and some nice new traffic control devices for the residents in the neighborhood as well. And I think that one of the things that we can use to leverage our ability to get these lights would be the fact that we do have a mitigation agreement in place for the Eversource Pipeline Project. And we may be able to go back in and open that back up and talk about some other items that need to be addressed and put on the table as we move forward.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, a motion to authorize the clerk to write the letter to the chief of police making inquiry.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much, and I thank Councilor Falco for bringing this resolution forward, or this draft ordinance forward. One thing that did stand out in his speech was using inclusionary zoning payments to fund an affordable housing trust, and this is something I cannot support. I know that it's just a basic launch pad right now for the start of a discussion. However, I don't feel as though allowing developers to buy their way out of the inclusionary zoning ordinance that we have in place is the answer. Ultimately, the way that this would work, Mr. President, if we're allowing inclusionary zoning payments to fund our affordable housing trust fund would be that instead of developing the affordable housing on site, they would be making a payment to the affordable housing trust and not creating affordable housing on site. I think that all that does is promote gentrification in these type of developments and I think it really takes the developers off the hook. If we're really serious about creating affordable housing in the community, we can't let the developers buy their way out of it. I thank Councilor Falco for bringing it up, but that's something that I'm very passionate about. I don't feel as though we should allow these developers the opportunity to just pay their way out of their obligation to help us meet our obligations for affordable housing in this community so that the people that made this community a great community can continue to live here.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This is a measure that I've been thinking about for quite some time. Just recently, we saw the change of the name of Dudley Square in Boston, and that was something that was kicked off by the City's Improvement Committee. And after looking into the City's Improvement Committee and the duties and functions that they have, and looking at the City of Medford and the roles and responsibilities that our various departments have, I thought that it might be a good idea for us to start a discussion about creating a City Beautification and Improvement Advisory Commission that can provide us with ideas and revenue requests to figure out ways that we can better our curb appeal for those that are coming to the community and better deliver city services here in the community. So with that being said, Mr. President, I ask my council colleagues to support the measure to send this to the city solicitor for a draft framework for future debate.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This is something that's rather self-explanatory. Councilor Marksley should actually be included as a co-sponsor on this. This is a measure that we discussed in previous session. It's something that's very important to this community, and it's something that I think we should keep on the forefront going forward. We have about a 3.5-mile-long gas pipeline that's going to be stretching down Mystic Gap, down South Street, underneath the Mystic River, through our community garden, up Winthrop Street, down past Medford High School, all the way to the Winchester border, and then continue on into Woburn. It's going to be a very large construction project. It's going to cause a number of disruptions to traffic, to traffic flow, to quality of life for residents in the neighborhood. And I think it's very important, Mr. President, that we keep people informed. We did something very similar with the Lawrence Memorial Hospital. There was a lot of concern about the future of the Lawrence Memorial Hospital, and through the good work of friends from the Lawrence Memorial Hospital that are here this evening, actually, to witness our first meeting with our two new Councilors, we were able to garner some community support for the project, address the number of concerns that came up. and come up with a project that actually worked for everybody. So with that being said, I'm hoping that we can do the same for this Eversource Pipeline project and create an open and transparent line of communication between us and the project managers and project development teams so that we can address some of these quality of life issues that are gonna be inevitable with a project of this size.
[Adam Knight]: A little before August, at the end of Harvard Street at Mystic Avenue, the left-hand lane was turned into a left-turn only lane. And since that time, there's been some changes to the signalization of the lights further down Route 16, but those changes haven't made their way all the way up Harvard Street. So what happens, Mr. President, is if you were coming from, oh, say, St. Clemens Church after your kids' basketball game last Saturday morning at 10 o'clock, and you drove down Harvard Street, and you passed the intersection of Main Street, and then you'd get right past Main Street and be stuck in traffic. And then the light on, Me and Harvard and Willis would change green, but the light on Mystic Ave wouldn't. So the traffic wouldn't go anywhere. The light would turn red, then the light would turn green between Willis and Harvard, I mean Willis and Mystic, and the cars would proceed. So I think it's really just an engineering issue, a signal timing issue that needs to be addressed. Ultimately, I'd like to see that left-hand lane go back to the way that it was originally, where it was a straight or left. But it's my understanding that the state DOT put those restrictions in as a result of some of the construction traffic mitigation that was surrounding the casino project. But based upon the numbers that we've seen at the casino and the underperformance that we've seen at these casinos based upon their estimates versus their actual returns, I think that it might be something that we can look at in changing that back, Mr. President. I don't think any of us have really felt the big impact of traffic since the casinos opened here in the city of Medford. And I think that some of these issues that are, you know, affecting our neighborhood's traffic flow and congestion can really be addressed through an engineering study in the timing of lights. I know we spoke about South Street and Main Street and the smart lights that we might be able to put there and the large cost that comes along with those to create a situation where we have smart lights that go through our squares. I think the price tag was somewhere around $5 million. But I think that engineering study or at least the very least the city engineer taking a look at this doing a traffic count and coming up with a Long-term solution for the residents in the neighborhood would be beneficial.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. Pitt, thank you very much. So with the adoption of this homework petition, what we're saying is that This agreement that we've negotiated on April 11, 2014, the funds would not have to come before the council for appropriation when they're being spent?
[Adam Knight]: And it also says that any other successor agreement after this April 2014 agreement that negotiated between Wynne and the administration?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Well, actually, one more question. Is there a reason why we want to do it that way as opposed to the agreement at a time, why we want to give up blanket authority from now until the end of time?
[Adam Knight]: Or if a second successor agreement is entered into in the future to address community mitigation impacts, the benefits that are negotiated in that agreement would not be subject to appropriation by the council?
[Adam Knight]: Okay. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: And they're in support, thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Councilor Bears. spoke to something that was a concern of mine, which was the term of the agreement and the total dollar figure. At the conclusion of this agreement, it looks like it's going to be somewhere around 40 or 50 million bucks. Ultimately, if we have a community fund payment of $125,000, all it is is a direct cash payment of $125 to a thing called the community fund, which outlines what certain areas you can spend it on?
[Adam Knight]: I mean, my concern is this, is to give blanket authority to the administration for the spending of the upwards of $50 million without council appropriation. And to grant this authority for a period of time that exceeds three decades. That's concerning to me. If we could keep it to the one agreement that we're currently in, I'd feel much more comfortable about it. And the successor agreements would be something that we'd have to take a look at. But I just think that to give blanket authority to spend $50 million without any council appropriation, as long as it falls within the the bucket, if I'm understanding this correct. Transportation hub payment means that, you know, we got $425,000 for transportation related issues. It can be anything that we want to spend it on. Anything transportation related or is it outlined and specified in an agreement or subject to a plan? I mean, I look at these funds and I say these funds are good funds to use for planning purposes. The money that we wouldn't have had otherwise without this agreement. So this is monies that we should be using for planning purposes. If we're looking about transportation, let's figure out transportation planning. Let's use that money to plan. But to have a blanket authority for a period of time of three decades and the ability to spend $50 million without a check and balance from the council is something that does raise a red flag in my opinion.
[Adam Knight]: Well, I mean, I just don't think it's fair to saddle future councilors with this decision that we've made. I have no problem doing it with the body that's here right now, but 10 years or 15 years down the line, this decision's going to have already been made for somebody else. And that's something that I think we might also want to take a look at. But I rest my case. I appreciate you for filling me in and raising my concerns.
[Adam Knight]: ride share fees are subject to appropriation, correct?
[Adam Knight]: So we could actually designate the fund, but still keep everything subject to appropriation.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you council appears Council night mr. President I'd like to make a motion to strike the words without further appropriation from section one of the homework petition that's been proposed and replace it with subject to appropriation I This would allow the flexibility to create the special revenue fund, to let it exist, to allow the monies to be put into the appropriate buckets of the special revenue fund, but when that money gets spent, it comes before the Council for Appropriation. I wouldn't tie the hands of future councilors because any money that's being spent has to come before the Council for Appropriation. It allows the administration to comply with the DOI directives. I think it's a great compromise.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. It was to strike the word in section one that would say without further appropriation and replace that with subject to appropriation. Notwithstanding any provisions of Massachusetts general laws or the provisions of any general law special or regulation to the contrary, the city of Medford through the mayor of the city of Medford may strike without further appropriation, replace with subject to appropriation, utilize and expend all funds received by way of the surrounding community agreement et al.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Again, as we shift gears into a new legislative session, I want to make sure that we keep on the forefront of our minds the brewery ordinance. This was something that we were almost crossing the finish line at at one point in time. We got some Recommendations or requests, I guess, from a local business group in the community that was supposed to report back to us sometime in November about what they felt about this. I don't believe that we've received anything at this point in time.
[Adam Knight]: It's been about 60 days since they said that they were going to report back to us on 11-7, Mr. President. So I'm hoping that we can set this up for a further committee of the whole meeting and move forward on it.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President. Mr. President, thank you very much. Michael Callahan was a lifelong Medford resident, famous across the Fulton Heights area of the city particularly. Grew up on Saunders Street, was a paper boy in the area for a number of years. Moved on to Salem Street and took care of his elderly mother who was suffering from dementia for a number of years. He was a Vietnam veteran, an aide to Senators Bullock and McKenner, both who represented Medford at one portion of the time. Assistant Commissioner of Racing, Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The founder and chairman of the Medford Consumer Advisory Commission. He was elected to the Governor's Council in 1998 and presided over the appointment of over 500 judges and clerks across the Commonwealth, Mr. President. He had 50 years of public service under his belt upon his passing, all during the which time he resided in the city of Medford. If you go up to Wright's Pond, Mr. President, you'll see a monument. dedicated to Councilor Callaghan, or Mikey C as we called him. And legend has it that back in the early 80s when development was booming in the city of Medford and condos were going up all across the city, there were plans to take Wrights Pond and develop Wrights Pond into a condominium complex. And Mike Callaghan led the charge. to save Rights Pond, and back in 2014, fittingly, Mayor McGlynn dedicated a portion of Rights Pond in Michael Callahan's memory for the work that he did in saving Rights Pond and preserving it from overdevelopment. Michael, like I said, was a mentor to me. I learned a lot about government and the way government works from Michael Callahan. He was someone that I spent a great deal of time with. and someone that I was very glad to call a friend, very lucky to have as a friend. And every year since I've been elected to the council, I've brought this up right around the time of his passing to commemorate the service that he's provided to the people of Medford and to be sure that these are remembered. So I'd ask my council colleagues to support this resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Ultimately, what this proposal is, is it's a request to move a meeting night from Tuesday to Wednesday. Currently, pursuant to the open meeting law, absent weekends and holidays, you need 48 hours prior to your meeting to post. Because our meetings are on Tuesday, that requires the city of Medford, city clerk, to post our council meetings on Friday before the close of business at 1230, which means that we need to, as councilors, get our resolutions to the city clerk by Friday morning at 9 a.m. Now, the majority of us in this community that go out on the weekends, take your kids to basketball practice, go down to the coffee shop, take a jog, whatever it may be, run into a lot of people in the community. A lot of people that have requests for services, a lot of people that have questions and concerns about what's going on. What ends up happening a lot of the time, Mr. President, is that those questions and concerns that arise over the weekend before the Tuesday meeting don't make it on the agenda because on Friday we have to get everything by 9 o'clock so that the city clerk can produce the agenda by 1230 on Friday afternoon before the close of business and before his staff leaves. That coupled with the fact, it's my understanding, that because of that short time frame, on Friday morning, the staff is, it's very hectic in the clerk's office on Friday mornings to get this agenda out because of the number of items that are coming in at the 11th hour. You know, if you figure that the council meets on a Tuesday night and we have a very late meeting, it goes till 11. We all wake up the next morning, go to work. We come back to the City Hall for a Committee of the Whole meeting on a Wednesday, and that goes for a couple hours. We work until 8 o'clock. Okay, we all go home. We go to work the next day. It's already Thursday, Mr. President. So it gives us very little time to place items on the agenda. That coupled with the fact that during the last term, nearly one in four resolutions that were filed by councilors were filed under suspension. We're here talking about transparency, the need for transparent government. We're putting cameras in our meeting rooms, but when one-fourth of the items that the council actually discusses aren't showing up on the agenda, are we truly being transparent? And it was my thinking, Mr. President, because I know it's a problem for me sometimes to get items on the agenda based upon the short time frame we have from Tuesday to Friday morning, and then I go out into the community and I participate in community events and family events and the like, and I get inundated with questions, concerns, and calls, and we try to address those things, but sometimes they need to make their way to the agenda. And when they make their way to the agenda, they're doing so under suspension, and they're not showing up on the council agenda. So I thought that this might be a way that we could stem some of the under suspension resolutions that were being filed here at the council. Allow the city clerk's office to have a little bit of breathing room. Allow the council to have a little bit more time to put items on the agenda. Ultimately, Mr. President, I have always said that I can do my homework a lot better if I know what I'm going to be studying. If there's an issue that's on the agenda and I know about it, I can study it. If there's an issue that's not on the agenda that's coming up at the meeting, we're all walking in blind. So I'm hoping that you know with the move of the meetings from Tuesday nights to Wednesday nights It will allow us the opportunity to number one have the building have City Council meetings on nights that City Hall is already open late City Hall is open for business on Wednesday evening. So from a facilities standpoint from a you know environmental standpoint I open in the building up every Tuesday night to turn the heat on for the council meetings where it's already going to be on on a Wednesday night anyway and And the fact that department heads are in the building on Wednesday nights already and will allow us an ease of scheduling if we have committees of the whole or we have matters that are before us here, we can get them here by request on Wednesday nights where they're already here late. So from an operational and functional standpoint of government, Mr. President, I thought it made sense from the side of things where everybody talks about what can we do to get more people involved in the city council meetings and come into the city council chambers. City Hall is open on Wednesdays. People are here paying their tax bill, attending other meetings. Now the council meeting is open too. They're just passing by. They might want to come in and pop in and be curious and explore a little bit more about what the city council has to say here in all the chambers. So it's really something that I put forward for transparency purposes, Mr. President, to ensure that we as councils have ample opportunity to place things on the agenda, that the items that are being placed on the agenda are visible and noticed to the public and to our council colleagues so that we can do our homework. and come prepared to the meeting, or better prepared to the meeting. I know that this isn't going to stop all in the suspension resolutions, but what it is going to do, I think, is give us a little bit of extra time to put items on the agenda to be a little bit more transparent and a little bit more open. So that's where I'm coming from with it, Mr. President. It's six of one, half a dozen of the other. I'm ready to come to work any night. I'm just bringing this forward for the simple purpose that we file an inordinate number of resolutions under suspension. And I think with the move of the meeting from Tuesday to Wednesday will allow us an exceeding period of time for us to file resolutions and get them out there with the same 48 hour notice that's required under the open meeting law.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, ultimately, the fact of the matter is that one out of four resolutions that get filed by the Council are filed under suspension. And if we're truly committed to being a transparent body, then it shouldn't be issue-based. It should be holistic. We should be transparent or we shouldn't be. It doesn't matter. Well, that's only a happy birthday, so we're not going to be transparent about that. But this is a big thing. This is something I care about, so we're going to be transparent about this. I think if we're going to adopt the mantra of being transparent, let's do it. And, you know, ultimately, if we have a Friday agenda and a Saturday and a Sunday and a Monday and a Tuesday morning to review it, that's great. I'll review everything that's on the agenda. But, again, the fact of the matter is 25% of the items that come up aren't on the agenda and you can't review something that's not on it. So that's where I'm coming from. But, again, you know, Mr. President, like I said, six of one, half a dozen of the other. That's my position.
[Adam Knight]: Ultimately, I brought the paper forward, Mr. President, three weeks before the close of the last session to provide ample opportunity for the new members to be involved. It was my thinking that because we're starting a new session in a new term, that we should start it all off with the paper and the agenda and go from there. But like I said, I'm not going to lose sleep over it, one way or the other. You know what I mean? We're going to be coming here to meet one night or another. It's either Tuesdays or Wednesdays. It's not a real big deal.
[Adam Knight]: I've also reviewed the rules. I didn't see anything.
[Adam Knight]: You know, so I think that, you know- The chair would welcome those recommendations, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: It's written in the standing rules, but the thing that we were looking up was whether or not it was a supermajority or a majority vote to change the rules. But it's written in the rules. It's in section one.
[Adam Knight]: It's dictated by the rules, not the chart.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President. Councilor Knight. I believe today is January 7th, 2020. Under unfinished business, we do have paper 19483 establishing the other post-employment benefits trust fund, which is a compliance vote to establish an employee benefits trust with accord with the division of local services from the Department of Revenue. That was something that we had discussed previously and I thought we adopted, but it was adopted through a committee report, but not a formal vote of the council. So as such, we had to advertise this ordinance and go through the proper channels, and it's eligible for third reading this evening and move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Working in government and working in politics, I think it's safe to say that you come across a very diverse array of people, great people. You meet a lot of people out in the street that are just wonderful people. You've developed great, strong working relationships with certain individuals. And Mark Rumley was a person, when I first got involved in government back some 20 years ago, was very generous with his time to me. explaining certain things to me, showing me some of the ropes when I was a young kid working in the Senate. Upon my election to the city council, that relationship grew, and I'm just very lucky to be able to call Mark Rumley a friend. You know, during my term as a councilor, he's always been someone that I've relied on for advice, for wisdom. I always felt as though the opinion that he gave from a legal perspective was a legal opinion. It wasn't politically driven, ever. Mark Rumley really held his title as a lawyer and the oath that he's taken to the law first, and he never compromised his integrity. He's truly a man of the cloth. He's truly someone that I'm really grateful that I've had the opportunity to work with and to be around. And in government, you meet some of those people. You're only going to meet so many working in government and working in a public life. And Mark Brumley is one of those people that I know I'm very lucky to have in my corner. And I know I'm very lucky to have been able to work with him. And I wish him the best of luck in his retirement. And I hope to say, as Councilor Mark said, that this isn't the last we see of him and that there is a role for him here in City Hall in the future, whether it be as a consultant or as someone that comes down and participates in government and provides us with his opinion. because that's something that he's never been shy of doing and I hope that he continues to do it because when he did it, he made us all a better body. So with that being said, Mark, congratulations. Best of luck. I wish you the best in your retirement and I know you're going to enjoy it.
[Adam Knight]: for bringing the books and to please extend my regards to Mr. McGonigal. Let him know I'll be reading the books. I appreciate him bringing them down. But then he kind of started going after me. He gave us the books. But that's what I was going to get at. Sorry to ruin your mojo there. I apologize.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to amend the paper. Because of the scope of the paper and the scope of the project, I believe it's a project that's gonna be subject to site plan review, number one. Number two, I think it might fall under subdivision control. So those are two aspects of our zoning act that are governed by the Office of Community Development. Correct. So I'd like to ask that the director of the Office of Community Development also be involved in the future discussions.
[Adam Knight]: Do you believe we have a meeting on the Community Preservation Act, which would be tomorrow evening? Yes. Okay. Maybe we can get the applicants to come, the reappointment candidates to come to that meeting as they're probably going to be there to present anyway.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Neistat. Mr. President, thank you very much. This is an environmental justice area, so upgrades to our public park in this area I think is going to be valuable to the community. I do have a question though. Would the acceptance of the grant preclude us from expanding our community guidance program at this public park?
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Nice. Mr. President, I support the paper wholeheartedly as amended and move approval.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, in our packet this evening, we do have some papers from the mayor. And if we look at these papers from the mayor, we'll see that the council had voted to create a fire station donation account. The council had voted to create a police and fire donation account. The council had voted to complete a police, fire, and library donation account, Mr. President. The administration has supported this measure that the council has brought forward, and this is what it takes to execute such. So I would move for approval of the paper, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd like to amend the paper and request also that a copy of the RFP that was approved by the school committee, once it is issued, be forwarded forthwith to the council for review as well.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the trade that the council passed was to put a hold on the appropriation of the funds for 45 days so that the council could further investigate financial opportunities to keep this proposal on track. What we've been able to find out is that it's really a $1.1 million problem for EM, Mr. President. We have three years of debt exclusion, I mean, three years of debt and debt service that needs to be paid. And if we can find $1.1 million annually, we can keep this project on track. There's been a lot of discussion about other outside-of-the-box ideas that we can pursue. in order to keep this project on track. And that's the goal of this council, that's the goal of this councilor anyway, I wanna speak for myself. But my goal and my commitment is to keep this on track and to be sure that we have a new police and a new fire station. And if we're not moving forward on anything, then we're never gonna get either one of those things, Mr. President. So what made me move forward on this paper was the stark reality that a financial situation in the community right now doesn't allow for us to maintain based on the use of tax dollars through taxation in our operating budget to keep this project on track. So now we need to come up with some outside-of-the-box ideas to do that. Councilor Scarpelli's come forward with a great idea concerning debt exclusion. I've requested a report from the administration for the disposal of surplus properties to other individuals in the community to put them back on the tax rolls. And I am committed to continue to meet until we can come up with a way to properly fund this project so that it stays on track, Mr. President. So the reason that I have moved forward and said that it's appropriate for us to go forward with the police station is because the 45-day review was concluded. We've examined options. We have options. And I'm looking forward to pursuing those. You know, we have the training tower that we need to focus on, but we also have the big three buildings that we want to get built, the library, the police station, and the fire station. Keeping those on track is my priority, Mr. President. And if we don't move forward and we remain stagnant in one area, then we're never going to move forward So I can certainly understand the frustration. You know, I consider Mr. Buckley a friend. And although, you know, maybe this issue right here is taking a personal turn, you know, I can certainly say that at the end of the day, I will be committed to continuing to work towards the ultimate goal of keeping this project on track. You don't have to be happy with my vote. I already know you're not. But with that being said, that's where I'm coming from. And that's why I'm casting a vote this evening in favor of demolition of the training tower in the police academy building. so that we can move forward and allow the police station to be built based upon the plans that have been put forth and the $2 million that this council's already appropriated. When we look at the plans and the design of the police station, we've seen that the police have made concessions. They've eliminated their gun range as part of the plan so that they can move forward on this project, and I think right now we're at a point in time where we've remained very stagnant with some of our buildings in the community. We've ignored these buildings in our community, and we are not gonna be able to get out of this issue and out of this problem by using our operating funds from our day-to-day operational budget to continue to fix these buildings. We're putting good money after bad money when it comes down to it, so we need to take a long, hard look at what we can do to reconstruct both of these facilities for our public safety personnel. I'm committed to doing that, and I'm committed to keeping this on track, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. We do have a committee of the whole scheduled for tomorrow evening. We can report this paper out tomorrow evening if we feel comfortable with the presentations that are made that evening. I as one councilor do not support taking just one item out of this. I, as one councilor, would support the measure provided that we have a presentation tomorrow in its entirety over the paper that's before us. I don't see a timing issue in this. I think there are also concerns and questions about who's going to manage this money, how they're going to be sure these benchmarks are made, so on and so forth. And I want to hear that from the parties that pick one.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I request that, um, uh, community preservation commission provide us with copies of the applications as well.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, counsel. That's why we're having the meeting, to have the presentation, so that we can determine what we want to fund and what we don't. I personally, as one counsel, wouldn't have any problem making a tentative report of the matters that we reported out favorably and the matters that we keep in committee. And that tentative report can go out to the powers that be, the purchasing department, You know, to get the bid ready and get the bid prepared, tomorrow night, as early as tomorrow night, we can make a committee report together and report out portions of this paper favorably and unfavorably with those recommendations to the administration. They can still move forward and begin to prepare the bids. Then once the money's released, I mean, all we're doing is releasing the funds. They have the money already. So when they get their first bill, then they pay the bill. But I don't think that us not appropriating the money, us appropriating the money absent the committee of the whole that's been scheduled for this absolute distinct purpose, especially in the age of transparency and openness that my council colleagues like to talk about so much, is appropriate. I think that moving forward, we can do this. We can put out a committee report tomorrow. It's a tentative committee report that we all support. and get the powers that be to be aware of it. You know what I mean? This is the tentative committee report. We're going to send it out. It's going to be engrossed by the, it's going to be adopted by the council at the next council meeting. These people will know what's going on and they'll know tomorrow night or the day after.
[Adam Knight]: Said when school's out and the summer's here, there will be a period of time where that school yard, which, as you said, has been used as a playground, will be inaccessible to the individuals in the neighborhood.
[Adam Knight]: So there is a period of time that they will not be able to utilize.
[Adam Knight]: This isn't a punishment at all. This is just a request for transparency and openness, considering that the council president has set an agenda for us, and that agenda includes a committee of the whole, and this appropriation, that's tomorrow. So it's not an attempt to punish anybody, it's an attempt to make sure that we get the sufficient information to move forward.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Very recent. weeks and years this council has taken advantage of the ad hoc committee. And Councilor Marks earlier this evening ironically had spoken a little bit about the amount of time that it's taken us to implement the master plan in Medford Square. So here we are, we have a master plan for Medford Square. We've had meetings, we have a focus group that's met and it's discussed some of the things that they'd like to see happen in Medford Square. We get a presentation from the Massachusetts Area Planning Council that discusses Medford Square and what direction this information and data has driven them. And then it goes quiet. And I think that, Mr. President, one thing that we have all talked about in the past is trying to revitalize our downtown business districts by putting together an ad hoc committee that's made up of representatives of the administration, the council, and the general public. of getting people together at the table to move forward and try to implement something that we've been looking at for the better part of a decade and a half. So with that being said, I think it's a rather self-explanatory resolution, and I'd ask my council colleagues to support it.
[Adam Knight]: The airport navigation system, Mr. President, has been creating so much controversy in our community. But apparently, the good weather has finally come. And as such, many windows in neighborhoods are being opened, and fresh air is being blown in houses, as well as a lot of fresh noise from the airplanes. So, with that being said, Mr. President, I'm requesting that we get a report back from our representatives from Mass Board as to what's going on with the RNAV situation. I am aware that Congressman Capuano has filed an amendment to the congressional budget that would address some of the RNAV concerns, and I'm hoping that we can be brought up to speed on that as well.
[Adam Knight]: Aye.
[Adam Knight]: There's too many people on that.
[Adam Knight]: I withdraw my sponsorship. There's too many people on that resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. What I'm going to do is defer to Councilor Scarpelli on this because he's taken such ownership of it earlier in his passionate plea to the membership of 1032. But ultimately this is an effort for us to further examine the debt exclusion option to maintain that our fire department remains on track and that the commitments that were made are kept.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Layton. Mr. President, thank you very much. This is an issue that's going to need a lot of community input and involvement. I certainly would be happy to commit to putting parameters on this before the matter is addressed to the City Council, before the matter is brought to the City Council floor, whether it's a series of public hearings, public meetings, or so forth. So with that being said, I guess the request would be to get the solicitor to put this together. That doesn't mean that it's going to hit the agenda. We're just going to get a response from the solicitor and we'll have to reintroduce that if we're going to be moving forward. So I want that to be clear that this isn't an attempt for us to take this and put this on the ballot this evening, but what it is is an attempt for us to get the language that's appropriate from the city solicitor. So if it's something that we do want to move forward, we have the matter locked and loaded. But if it does make my colleagues more comfortable, and even if it doesn't, I think that what we need to do is have an open and transparent process where we go and, what do we like, the travel and road show, as they say. Maybe we have to go out to the community and go to a couple of places and talk about this and have some meetings and public hearings and gather public input. I know that my colleagues would support any effort to get out in the community and hear what people have to say about this matter. So with that being said, Mr. President, I just want to make that clear that this isn't something that I'm trying to bring to the floor the next time that the response comes back, but that this is something that we're going to have to use as a tool to go out into the community and to educate people before we bring this to the floor.
[Adam Knight]: And this is a ballot question. So it goes to the ballot for the voters to decide. It's not like we're going to pass this and say, what's the question? And then it's in effect, it has to go to the ballot for the voters to decide.
[Adam Knight]: I move to take paper 18414 off the table, Mr. President. This is a request for the House Bill 3610, commonly known as the Red Flag Bill. Our House Ways and Means Committee is going to be taking this paper up within the week. The Red Flag Bill is aimed at reducing gun violence by establishing another tool for public safety in a way of closing dangerous loopholes related to gun licensure. What it does, Mr. President, it allows a family member, a roommate, or a law enforcement official to petition the court to bar someone from owning a firearm. if their gun ownership presents a significant danger of causing personal injury to self or others. This legislation is supported, Mr. President, by the Massachusetts Police Chiefs Association. The House Committee on Public Safety has endorsed passage of this bill on April 13, 2018. The governor is weighed in on the bill. The Speaker of the House is weighed in on the bill. However, I think that this is something that we need to do to make sure that our community is a safer place, Mr. President. I know some of my colleagues do have concerns about the Second Amendment rights of individuals in this community and whether or not this piece of legislation is something that they're willing to support, and I can wholeheartedly understand that and support that. As an attorney at Law Council, Alongo has taken an oath to uphold the tenets of the federal and state constitutions, and this is something she might not be comfortable supporting, and I understand that, Mr. President. But with that being said, time is of the essence. The legislative session is closing. It is an election year. It's going to be closing relatively soon. The House Ways and Means Committee is set to take this paper up this week, so time is of the essence. It was put on the agenda for the May 8th meeting. It was tabled so that a copy of the actual text of the bill could be provided to my colleagues on the council, because I neglected to do that when filing the resolution. I had forwarded that information to my council colleagues. They've had it for a number of days now, Mr. President, so I'd ask to move forward on the resolution, and I would request my council colleagues' support.
[Adam Knight]: Send a letter of support to a state delegation in the House Ways and Means Committee saying that we support the red flag bill, House Bill 3610.
[Adam Knight]: The committee report contained three provisions. The first provision was that we'd send recommendations to the Special Permit Granting Authority. relative to requests, a requested threshold of inclusionary zoning affordable units and developments. And that was a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Then we had a draft inclusionary zoning ordinance that is requiring legislative legal review by a city solicitor. Then we also had signage notification that was on the paper that was on there. I made the motion to report the paper out. The motion that I made was to keep the inclusionary zoning ordinance in committee and report out the recommendation and report out the signage portion of the committee report.
[Adam Knight]: Motion by Councilor Knight to suspend the rules. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I ask to suspend the rules to take paper 18327 from the table. Loan order $3,466,567 for the Medford Public Library. Eligible for third reading today, April 24th, 2018.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the paper was tabled at my request. I sought a copy of the memorandum of understanding between the parties to show that a certain position had been, in fact, negotiated out of the union. The administration sent that paper to me that evening when I made the motion. I actually had it in my email when I got home that night. It did, in fact, show that the position was appropriately negotiated out of the union as such. I have no further objection.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, may I? Councilor Knight. As a member of the Chamber of Commerce, maybe you can share with us when they're going to be having the ceremony to unveil a new citizen of the year's name in the lobby of City Hall.
[Adam Knight]: The head of the fraternal organization. That's the fraternal organization. Okay, excellent.
[Adam Knight]: Forever and ever. Congratulations, John.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Owes, congratulations. First of all, I grew up in the neighborhood and I was a frequent patron of Jimmy's. They have a great steak and cheese. I hope you keep the recipe. However, there's been a lot of concern, especially in the West Medford neighborhood, about local businesses on Wednesdays closing early so that kids that get out of school on early release day don't have a place to go, really, and it's creating a situation. I have an understanding that you're going to be open 11 a.m. to 10 p.m. on Wednesdays? Yes. Okay. And you have no problem with the student kids in the neighborhood coming into the school? No problem. Great. That's awesome. I really appreciate that. Thank you very much. Congratulations, sir. Thank you. Move approval of the question, Mr. President. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, it's common course for this council to approve food trucks. Councilor Marks has explained in the past the difficulty it is sometimes in securing a food truck for a date like this and without having a date in advance. So it's very important that we take a look at this and take the appropriate steps to ensure that these food trucks are approved. With that being said, Mr. President, I certainly have no problem approving these. And I think that it's about time we revisit whether or not we should establish an ordinance on such. So with that being said, Mr. President, I move for approval on the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President. I think this is a very fitting resolution, considering we just celebrated Earth Day just a couple of days ago. I think we've all gotten some correspondence from individuals in the community expressing concern about the cleanliness of our streets as well. With that being said, Mr. President, I support this resolution wholeheartedly, especially because Councilor Schiappelli is actually asking the administration to come up with a price, what it's going to cost, what the impact. I'd like to amend the paper and ask that for every barrel that we install, that we look at, we also look at installing one of the solar-powered recycling receptacles that we see at our parks, Mr. President. And I'd ask that this be added as either an amendment or a B paper, whichever the sponsor of the resolution prefers, so that we can get prices for that as well, and then how we can move forward on the issue.
[Adam Knight]: Tonight, Mr. President, I'd just like to further amend the paper and request that the members of the Medford Housing Authority Board be copied on anything that goes forward.
[Adam Knight]: I just further amended the paper, Mr. President, asking that any correspondence that comes out of the council would also be sent to the Medford Housing Authority Commission.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Nice. But one, eight, three, seven, six from the table, please. Which one? One, eight, three, seven, six.
[Adam Knight]: From a procedural standpoint, Mr. President last week, this council had a discussion on use variances and whether or not there was a vagueness surrounding the city's ability to apply use variances through their Zoning Board of Appeals. The same question was raised in August of 2016 and was answered by the city solicitor. As such, I made a resolution requesting that we adopt the city solicitor's opinion and direct the city clerk to make the appropriate changes to our codified ordinances, as it was the opinion of the city solicitor that this codification was done in error in 2001 and that use variances in the community of Medford were never precluded or barred. As such, Mr. President, we took a vote to table the matter. That vote failed. From a procedural standpoint, the matter was then section 22, which is a unilateral table. When the matter is unilaterally tabled and comes up the next week, this is next week, I'd move for approval on the request that the Medford City Council adopt the city solicitor's opinion, rendered in paper 16-589, and that we direct the city clerk to take the appropriate action to correct our codified ordinances. Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Adam Knight]: We're going to have a committee of the whole to ask whether or not we should eliminate use variances, but ordinances say that use variances are already precluded. Councilor Lungo-Koehn asked a question as to how this could be. The city solicitor came back and told us that it was an error. Let's correct the error and then we can move forward. But now we're working with a document that's been edited.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I really don't think there's anything to look into. At this point in time, the council has unanimously voted on multiple occasions to upgrade the camera equipment. We have a quote from a community media center manager that tells us what it's going to cost. They've had this quote for an extended period of time. I don't understand what the delay is, Mr. President. So with that being said, I support this resolution wholeheartedly. And I look forward to seeing some fruits of our labor on this topic. I thank the Councilor for raising the issue. Thank you, Councilor. Now, Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: And I apologize for interrupting, Councilor Marks, I'm just hoping that when you're done with the document, we can have copies of it made by the city messenger for a packet this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. On the motion by Councilor Marks. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I'd like to be recorded in opposition to the resolution. The reason being last week the school committee did vote to examine their rental policies and I feel as though they should be provided the opportunity to do that. I certainly respect Councilor Marks for bringing the issue forward, and I can certainly understand why he did. However, I feel as though our school committee has been elected to perform a function, and that's to set policy in our public schools, and this is an issue of public policy. There is an ongoing investigation, as Councilor Lungo had spoke to, and I think we need to let our colleagues on the school committee do their job, Mr. President, so for that reason, it has to be recorded in opposition.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, just in my reading of the resolution, be it resolved the Medford School Committee immediately review and revise the Medford Public Schools rental policy. That's already been voted on. They are going to do that, right? So we'll take that language out. Be it resolved the Medford School Committee immediately only permit school and community sponsored events. That's what it says. That's a directive more than a suggestion to me, Mr. President. With that being said, I have no problem with the gentleman bringing the matter forward. I'm in opposition to it for a theoretical reason, not for any other reason more. The school committee implements policy. The school committee makes policy. The superintendent's in charge of executing that policy, Mr. President. I think we should let the school committee have an opportunity to do their job and do what they need to do. And I rest my case at that.
[Adam Knight]: What if information comes tonight? Quite frankly, it could have been anybody that has access to the school. Anybody that has a key to the school. Anybody that's an employee to the school. It could be anybody. And we don't know. And the council is absolutely correct about that. And that's why there is an investigation that's pending. And when we have the information that we need to proceed, we will. But it's not even we. It's the school committee.
[Adam Knight]: One information, Councilor Knight. Just last week, the council did vote to request that the administration issue an RFP hire an independent security expert to perform an assessment, a safety and security assessment at all our public buildings, which includes our public schools as well. So I can't agree with you more wholeheartedly, Ms. Nuzzo, when you say about needing a holistic approach and not taking a piecemeal approach to it. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I certainly have no problem supporting this paper this evening. I'd like to ask permission from the Council to add a B paper on it, just to get a report back from the administration, maybe in a committee of the whole setting, as to what impact these findings are going to have on the expansion of the Clippership Connector, Mr. President. Ultimately, I think we found out about this pollution through test borings that were done in anticipation of the extension of the Clippership Trail. And I think that that's kind of gotten us to the point where we're at today. So I'd like to have an update, Mr. President, to determine what's going on with that project as well.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: And playing soccer there? That's why Councilor Langel brought the resolution forward for the test. That's her concern.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, just a brief bit on Joe Small. Mr. Small was a lifelong Medford resident, longtime firefighter, very involved in the professional firefighters of Massachusetts, one of the founding members to help bring workplace safety and occupational health initiatives forward as an organization through organized labor. Mr. President, he's going to be sadly missed. He was a good man, a good citizen in the city of Medford, a great grandfather, and someone that put himself before others to ensure their safety in the workplace. So he will be sadly missed, and I offer my condolences. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Can you just have the clerk read it one more time, please?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think Councilor Scarpelli has got great timing. Just a couple of weeks ago, our zoning subcommittee met under the direction of Chairman Falco. And one of the topics that we discussed in that meeting was inclusionary housing and inclusionary zoning ordinance, Mr. President. And I think it's the time right now is to really address the issue that we have here in the city of Medford or affordable housing or the lack thereof. And one of the focuses that we've had is obviously meeting the threshold that's established by the state of 10%, but also retaining and replacing the expiring new stock of affordable housing units in the community. This is something that I wholeheartedly support. I thank Councilor Scarpelli for bringing it forward, and I look forward to working with him towards a finished product.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'd like to amend the paper with a B paper and request that the administration report back to the council. What the process is for permitting fields at this point in time, Mr. President, usually it goes before the parks board. The parks board meets once a month when they have a quorum, and then permits are issued. And I don't think it's the most effective or efficient process. Here we have a recreation department with a budget of $315,000 annually that hopefully will be up and running sometime soon. And the way that we're permitting our fields I don't think is going to be conducive to the best use and the best possible practices that we can do at the municipal level, Mr. President. So I'm asking that the administration conduct a review of the permitting process for their fields and provide recommendations as to how we can improve that to maybe a weekly permitting process as opposed to a monthly permitting process. Thank you, Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Nice. Mr. President, thank you very much. I just want to congratulate Justin on taking over the family business. We've seen his father in there and grandfather Paul before that, one of the great basketball players of Carpark history and Carpark folklore. Justin, same type of business, same type of, just a new name? Just a new name. All right, excellent. Well, I wish you the best of luck and congratulations.
[Adam Knight]: President, I move for adoption of the committee report.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. With a recent school place shooting taking place, Councilor Scarpelli and I were having a conversation about the tragic situations that's happened in America here when it comes to gun control. And one of the questions that came up was, are we doing enough in our public buildings to keep our employees safe? Then this evening when we got here, it's been brought to my attention, Mr. President, that there was a little bit of a situation in our public schools. over the past week or so, month or so, I should say, that's been brought to our attention. So with that being said, Mr. President, I move for approval on the underlying resolution. I'm sure there are many individuals in the audience and they would like to come up and speak on the topic of what happened at our schools today. We can keep them as separate issues and open that up to public participation and move for approval on the paper. And let me-.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and Mr. Belson, thank you for being here. I appreciate your being so candid with the situation and accepting responsibility for what's going on. With that being said, when will the investigation be complete?
[Adam Knight]: Superintendent Belson, now we have the STARS program, and what would the normal reporting process be in the STARS program if a situation like this occurred?
[Adam Knight]: I was there. I was there.
[Adam Knight]: And Mr. Belson, if this incident had occurred when school was in session, what would the response have been?
[Adam Knight]: In terms of identifying failures in the reporting system, I think that this has been opened up as a failure in the reporting structure. And where's the biggest failure that you've identified thus far in terms of the reporting structure? Is it between the cleaning contact crack to giving it to the senior custodian, the senior custodian not reporting it to the principal appropriately?
[Adam Knight]: And I guess the next question is, what are the next steps that we can hear from so that we can be assured that this isn't going to happen again?
[Adam Knight]: Do you have any knowledge as to whether or not the school committee is going to continue to allow rental opportunities to outside organizations in our schools? Is this something they're going to be looking at from a policy standpoint?
[Adam Knight]: No, and I'm not asking for that. I don't want to see a knee-jerk reaction to address an issue in the community that I think needs a long hard look. And I can certainly appreciate how candid you are this evening, and thank you for being here. That does it for my questions. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I just ask that we request, um, upon the conclusion of the investigation, a copy of the investigative report, uh, the findings thereof and any remedial action that may or may not be taken, um, after the, investigation is completed for our review. If that material is not available to us for privacy reasons or whatever, I would ask that a presentation be made to a committee of the whole so that we can go over that and hear what happens at the end. We're at the beginning right now, Mr. President, but I'd like to come full circle on this and see some type of closure. So I'd like to get a better understanding as to what happens once the investigation is over and what steps going forward are going to be taken. Thank you. Councilor Dello Russo.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, this evening the Subcommittee on Ordinances met to discuss an ordinance regulating short-term rentals, also more familiarly known as Airbnb or vacation rental by owner. The subcommittee has put together a group of key priorities that we'd like to see drafted into an ordinance. Copies of these key priorities have been distributed to the membership as well as the city solicitor. Subcommittee had voted to move this paper forward favorably to a committee of the whole With the request that the city solicitor put a draft ordinance together for us to further deliberate and discuss move for approval the committee report Paper 17 542 16 Oh, we, we, we, yeah, the 2016.
[Adam Knight]: We did that already.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I'd like the record to reflect that I recuse myself from voting on this subject matter.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the question that I asked the city solicitor was because we had an existing ordinance in place that exempted private clubs from the public smoking ban, how could the board of health pass a regulation that would be contrary to the ordinance that the legislative body had passed in 2007? So my question was whether or not the process and procedure was appropriate and whether or not the board of health had the authority to make the unilateral heavy handed action that they made and they do not. This issue has to come back to the council. If we want to allow smoking in private clubs right now, it is authorized. If we want to ban that, that is a matter that has to come before the council. It's a legislative affair. It's not something that can be done regulatory, Mr. President. So my concern was that when this was implemented, it was implemented inappropriately. And I think that the city solicitor concurs with my opinion, and I also think that his opinion wasn't requested when the Board of Health went forward and made this action. So, in an effort to make sure that everything was done above bar, Mr. President, to be sure that we were in compliance with the law, I asked the question to the solicitor as to whether or not this process was handled appropriately, and whether or not the Board of Health had the authority to do it, because there was an existing statute in place already.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think it's also important to point out nothing in our ordinance requires private clubs to allow smoking. And the exemption only exempts private clubs from the public smoking ban, but it doesn't say that they don't have the ability to police themselves either. So I certainly understand Firefighter Brennan's, Captain Brennan's position on the issue. I don't particularly care for smoking in places either. However, my concern when I brought the question forward was whether or not it was handled appropriately and whether or not it was done within a fashion that was in the scope of their authority.
[Adam Knight]: That's a knife mr. President. I second the recommendation of the licensing check Jim and it's a family business The gentleman's worked in the family business. That's my understanding. He's taken over for debt So with that being said we all know roses right there right next to the old paint box It's a good establishment has been around a long time, and I wish him the best of luck.
[Adam Knight]: So nice, Mr. President. Thank you very much. I certainly don't think I'd have a very difficult time supporting him being a bag man here in the city of Medford But in order to do that, I think we need to get to work and I'm council Falco made a great suggestion that we refer this to the zoning The I'm sorry the ordinance subcommittee, mr. President But I think that it might make sense for us to request that the city solicitor put a draft together for us in conjunction with our office of energy in the environment so that we can have some place to start. We can have the city solicitor put a draft together for us in the appropriate form with the appropriate legal ask that's necessary, and then we can take it from there, Mr. President. So I'd like to amend Councilor Falco's resolution. I'm just asking that instead of it going to the ordinance subcommittee right away, it goes to the city solicitor for a draft, and then upon receipt of the draft, we can refer it to the ordinance subcommittee to get working. Thank you. Councilman Gauker?
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. 18067, looks like we have a presentation there from the City Clerk and Chief Elections Officer.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I was contacted by the residents residing in 84 Circuit Road. gentleman there had just come back from a surgical procedure and had a lot of time on his hands in the house and one of the things that he noticed while he was in the neighborhood for that week was that the street light across the street from his home never shut off, Mr. President. So he made a call, he asked me to look into it, and I'm asking the Superintendent of Lights and Lines to take the appropriate steps necessary to ensure that it shuts off and turns on simultaneously with the other lights on the street.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President, last week we voted that we would announce that on February 6th we would have a representative here to discuss community outreach initiatives in municipal aggregation and how it worked in neighboring community, Mr. President. So that's going to be on the agenda for next week's meeting.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I have had an opportunity to review the records. I find the records in order and I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Lawrence LaPore.
[Adam Knight]: Lawrence LaPore.
[Adam Knight]: I think eleven maybe early. No way.
[Adam Knight]: Seconded.
[Adam Knight]: Second, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Did Mr. President see the president motion to waive a reading of the paper and have a brief synopsis given by the president?
[Adam Knight]: Do you want to speak?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, so it's my understanding that annually 10% needs to be appropriated to each program area where the CPA was up and running, but our ordinance wasn't in place until a little bit later on in the year. I believe what happened is we were able to address fiscal year 18, but fiscal year 17 money was not appropriated. So it's my understanding that by approving this appropriation will be in compliance with the community preservation.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. We're under suspension, Mr. President. We have paper 18-011 also on the table.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think that the intricacies and the inner workings of the CPA are very interesting, but people, if we're going to be spending $300,000, want to know what that $300,000 is going to go for. In our packet, we have a letter from our economic development planner, Clodagh Stoker-Long, And this is a two-phase project, Mr. President, to rehabilitate Harris Park. And phase one will include new play equipment for children ages two to five and five to 12, a rope climber, a water play area, a nature play area or a swing alley, a community garden, site furnishings, plantings and signage, and accessible parking improvements. Phase two will involve the rehabilitation of the fields to provide a new softball field, space for three junior soccer fields, an area for a farmer's market or a similar community use. It will also include a rain garden, and additional accessibility improvements and streetage improvements and plannings along the edge of Middlesex Avenue. Mr. President says here that the total cost of phase one, including design and construction and construction oversight is estimated at about $817,000. The $300,000 which would be reimbursable through the Land Water Conservation Fund. And it looks like, Mr. President, if in fact this appropriation is made this evening, there'll be a $217,000 balance to complete the requirements of phase one of the project, and the city will continue to seek land and water APOC grants to fund. Phase two of the project. Mr. President seems like it's a quite an endeavor, but having been down Harris Park all fall long My kid being enrolled in soccer for the first time in his life It's a park that needs a little bit of TLC. It needs a little bit of love and it's a I think a highly trafficked park Mr. President actually has a lot more access and a lot more involvement down there than most of the other parks that we see in the community so on this is an endeavor that I think needs to be examined thoroughly, but it's certainly a worthwhile cause, Mr. President. So with that being said, I rest.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I as one member of this body, very excited to see that the CPA is moving forward. I think that when the CPA ballot question was put on, put to the test for the voters, that this is what they envisioned happening. It's what I envisioned happening as well, where the community comes together and they put together a plan and work together to come up with a goal. And I really think this is a great plan. I think it's a bold plan. It's an expensive plant, but I think it's worthwhile, and I think it's a project that deserves to be funded. It has great merit. So for those reasons, Mr. President, I move for approval on the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, just my understanding that this is a food truck that's going to be not open to the public, but just open to the staff of the crew that's working on the film. That is correct. With that being said, I second Councilor Dello Russo's motion.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. number of new personnel that are coming on here in the community and this council's commitment to diversity and to inclusion in the city as well as that of the administration and the hiring of a new director of Diversity I think that it only makes sense for us mr. President to continue building upon the positive progress that we've made in the past When Diane McLeod was the director of the office of diversity she did have annual trainings for our city employees whether it was a training module on the computer or a presentation, Mr. President, but I think it was very beneficial. And I think it's something that doesn't, that should be pushed by the wayside. So I'm asking the administration to take the appropriate steps to provide the council with a cost analysis as to what it costs to provide an annual diversity training for the city employees. And then we can take appropriate steps to determine whether or not we want to codify this as an ordinance. I request that it be done by executive order to ensure that it continues, Mr. President. So I'm asking my council colleagues to support this endeavor. so that we can get a little bit more information about what it costs for us to be able to implement an annual diversity training for our city employees.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, unfortunately the Waze app has found Hastings Lane and there are many vehicles that would come from Winchester and cut right down Woburn Street and follow Woburn Street all the way to the end and then cross over to High Street and go right down Hastings Lane even though it says resident access only between 7 to 9. It's becoming a problem in the neighborhood. There are many young families that live in the neighborhood. It's not an easy street to get up and down. Portions of it are unpaved. Portions of it are paved. Certain portions wouldn't allow two cars to traverse at the same time. And this lack of conscientiousness by certain commuters is causing an issue in the neighborhood, Mr. President. On Christmas Eve, I had the opportunity to visit a family friend over there, like I do every year. And the conversation that I had with every member of the family revolved around the number of cars that are going down the street during the hours that they're not supposed to be going down there, never mind the speed. So I'm asking, Mr. President, for the Traffic Division to do a directed patrol at Hastings Lane, either at the top at High Street or at the bottom down on Parkway, while the restrictions are in place, to see if we can catch some people going through the Do Not Enter sign. If a person goes down a restricted access street like that, when they go down that street, that is a moving violation. It's a surchargeable offense. It goes on your registration. It goes on your insurance, Mr. President. So for individuals that want to save five minutes cutting down a street, they have to realize that that five minutes that they're saving could cost them $700 a year for the next seven years. I think that, you know, there's a lack of conscientiousness and just ignorance, Mr. President, when it comes to some of these signs. And I think we're all guilty of it. We've all gone down a sign that might have said, you know, resident access only before. I know I've done it on rural ave before. We've all done it. But ultimately, it's causing an issue in the neighborhood. It needs to be addressed. And I'm asking for some help from our police department.
[Adam Knight]: I don't know if Waze has a... I would certainly be open to amending the paper as a B paper. I just don't want them to say that we can't contact Waze so we're not going to do the directive patrol. So as long as it's a B paper and they have two separate tasks to move on, I'd be happy to do it, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: The Lawrenceboro Hospital is right down the street from Hastings Lane, so if anybody in Hastings Lane wants to go down to the hospital, let the chief know.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, yes, thank you very much. For any of us from West Medford, we'd all know Dante DeFranco. He'd be the best dressed guy walking around West Medford Square, Mr. President. construction work that was always impeccably dressed and always someone that was willing to sit down and give you a hello and ask how you were doing down in West Medford Square. So with that being said, Mr. President, he suddenly passed away just over the past week and I'd like to have my council colleagues join me in offering my condolences and our condolences to Mrs. DeFranco and Dante Jr. and Danielle and Dean as they go through this difficult time, especially during the holidays, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Michael and I were very close friends. Michael was a mentor to me. He taught me a great deal about how government works. And I think when you look at Michael Callaghan and his career in government, especially as a resident here of Medford who's been credited with the legend of saving Wrights Pond from development, his slogan in the 2005 Senate campaign summed up Michael Callaghan. And Michael Callaghan helped people. He helped people. That's what Michael did, and I sadly miss Mr. President. I'd ask my colleagues to join me in a moment of silence and to dedicate tonight's meeting in his memory. Please rise.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. With the changing face of the old Meadow Glen Mall, I've gotten a number of phone calls from constituents concerned about having an inability to access Wegmans because of a lack of handicapped parking spots out in front of that facility. They'd say down at Marshalls and down at Coles there's ample amount of parking, but over in the center of the plaza they're having a difficult time finding some spots. So I'm asking the Office of Diversity and Inclusion, the new name of the diversity office, to take a look at this, Mr. President, and see if they're in compliance with the city ordinance and if we can take any steps to work with Wegmans to put some more spots in closer. That would be New England Developments? New England Developments.
[Adam Knight]: Well, I think that actually what I want them to do is take a look at actual Wegmans and spots accessing actual Wegmans.
[Adam Knight]: All right, when the development is actually out there, they, well actually all I want right now is for the Office of Diversity to go out there and see whether or not they're in compliance with our ordinances and if they are, they are, if they aren't, they aren't, then we can take the next step.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, looking at the agenda here, we have paper 17590, 17433, 17606. They're all going to be due for their reviews, whether it be a 60-day or a 180-day or a 90-day review for signage, Mr. President. Our December 26th meeting is canceled. I'd ask that we mark these up for this January 9th meeting.
[Adam Knight]: Do you know if these individuals had a willingness to continue to serve in their positions?
[Adam Knight]: Do we know if there are any other individuals in the community that have expressed some interest? I would not know that. If any other individuals are going to make recommendations, maybe we'd want to take a look at everybody.
[Adam Knight]: City Solicitor Rumley has framed this in a pretty basic and outright fashion, that the steps that we need to go through, if we decide to adopt the zoning amendment this evening, that it goes to the Community Development Board for a public hearing. So, in looking at the action that we're taking here as a body tonight, I think we're torn. I mean, we've all sat here and we've all talked about requirements for notice. We want more people to know what's going on in their neighborhood and we don't want to hurt people at the same time, Mr. President. So here we have a proposal that would increase the notification ramifications by about 100 yards and then also add everybody that lives in that jurisdiction to the notification requirements. I think it might be in our best interest to send the paper as authored to the Community Development Board for their input at a public hearing. Get the information and the input that they can secure And when they bring it back to us, then we'll be in a better position to make a determination as to what language changes we would like to see made. I certainly would agree that I think projects requiring site plan review only would be something that I'd be very supportive of, Mr. President, but I don't think that that's going to be something that's going to be a hindrance for me this evening for supporting this measure and sending it to the Community Development Board for a public hearing and for their input.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. President. Councilor Rumley, this question is also for you. If an applicant is in substantial compliance with the state law but fails to comply with the local expanded ordinance and submits their application in compliance with one but not the other, does the clock start ticking on the Zoning Board of Appeals timelines relative to when they have to take the application up for hearing?
[Adam Knight]: So if they put the application in and only just notify abutters of abutters within 300 feet, the time frame starts ticking right away. And the zoning board has no recourse to require them to expand the notification to the city ordinance.
[Adam Knight]: Ultimately it's going to go to the community development board for a public hearing, right? They're going to have a public hearing and they're going to get input from the public and they're going to come back to us and make a recommendation to us. If we're going to be sending them a document and we're going to say we want this amendment and that amendment, I think that it's incumbent upon us to get language together and send them that language, Mr. President. So if we were going to take a vote on this matter this evening and we sent them the proposal as written, that's the language, we send it up to them, it's going to come back to us anyway. In the interim, if we want to put together a site, print and review language, or anything else, we can do that. We can do that because the bill is still going to have to go through its three readings here at this level. But ultimately, what we want to do is get input from the general public as to what they think is going to be good for them. So we're already starting to amend a paper that's an idea. And I think this idea is going to be shaped by the input that happens at the public hearing. So I think it might be a good idea for us, Mr. President, to send this paper forward now. Now, I'm wholeheartedly in support of limiting the scope to site plan review or to something a little bit smaller than Mrs. Jones getting her porch done or Mrs. O'Malley trying to expand her driveway. I don't think that that's... the legislative intent of this proposal. I don't think that that's what Councilor Lungo is trying to accomplish. I think what she's trying to accomplish is expanding notifications in neighborhoods so people feel as though they have a voice, a voice in their neighborhood as to what's going on and what direction things are going in. So why don't we let that process happen, and then when it comes back to us, we'll have the ability and the opportunity to make all the changes to it in the world we need, but we'll have more information and more data to make an informed decision. I second that. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Can you table it and let him write the amendment and then we can take it up next week? I'm not comfortable, Mr. President, sending a paper to the board or a commission asking them to do something if we don't have the language for them to look at it. This is a zoning issue. It's not like we're asking them to fix a pothole on, you know what I mean? Smith Street, you know what I mean? This is a big deal. So I think that if we're going to do it, we have to do it right. And we have to have everything in a nice little box with some Christmas wrapping paper on it and a bow when they get it.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to approve, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I think it's important to point out, Mr. President, that the assessor's office in their presentation noted that the data that they were using to determine how many homes in this community were owner-occupied was certainly outdated. Therefore, all the data that was generated is garbage in, garbage out. So we really don't have an accurate representation. All we know is that based on the materials that we had before us this evening, we weren't ready to go forward. We recognize the fact that the information that we had before us was deficient, and we're asking the administration to go forward and get us the appropriate information so that in the future we can make an informed decision. That is correct.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: The motion that was made was a motion to not adopt, which would mean that the yes vote would be the negative on the question.
[Adam Knight]: Andy, I asked you not to give out any political. This is about the. This is political literature on here. That's old news. It's political literature. It's just about the owner-occupied exemption. It's political literature. Number five. Mr. Clerk, please take those back. It's political literature. You can keep it. Thank you, Brianna. That's political literature, Andy. I asked you not to give it up. No, it's obsolete. It's political literature.
[Adam Knight]: Move the question.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. Vice President. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I missed Councilor Marks when he first started off because I was sending some paperwork that the messenger had, but I'm assuming that was paper 17793 we were just speaking about the committee report? No, we haven't done that one yet. Okay, well, why don't we take the committee reports up, Mr. President, move for approval on both, and then we can have this gentleman get a sign. Yes. All right.
[Adam Knight]: All those in favor? Aye. We already granted them the right to location. We already gave them the grant license. To adopt the committee report.
[Adam Knight]: Motion passes. Mr. President, motion to revert back to the regular order of business.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I had an opportunity to speak with the gentleman. I've taken a look at the sign, and I'm very familiar with the site. I feel as though it's not going to have much impact on the quality of life or beauty of the neighborhood, and it certainly will help out the business owner. So with that being said, I'd move for approval on the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if I may? The Attorney General put out a guideline, and the guideline was relative to the open meeting law and the requirements thereof and the top ten reasons for why a public body can go into executive session. Rule number one is to discuss the reputation of character rather than the professional competence of any individual.
[Adam Knight]: Should we wish to go into executive to discuss the matter, we need to provide the parties that are subject to the discussion with 48 hours notice.
[Adam Knight]: The individual to be discussed in executive session shall be notified in writing by the public body at least 40 hours prior to the proposed executive session, provided, however, the notification may be waived upon written agreement of the parties. I believe that the handout that came across here does indicate that. I might not have read the handout. I just read the materials that he passed out when he came out. I guess I do, because I read the papers that he gave us.
[Adam Knight]: But there are some serious dynamics about what happened that need to be addressed. Point of information to Councilor Scott Powell.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think that this is a matter that's appropriate for further review from our building commissioner. It's my understanding that in our packet here, there is a letter from Mr. Moki to the property owner indicating that the current use is an improper use. It's not in compliance with the Zoning Board decision. And it's also my understanding that there was a process to relocate this tenant, Mr. President. But if we look further in the packet, we'll also see that that process has fallen through. So I think it would be incumbent upon us to figure out where we are in the process from our building commissioner to see what's going on. Ultimately, we've had situations like this in the past. If you recall several years back when they were doing the Winthrop Street drainage project, they were using Apostolon Mystic Ave as a layover yacht, which abutted Sylvia Road, which is a residential street. And many of the same complaints and same concerns came up. you know, working with the building commissioner and the administration, we were able to get them out of there in short order. And I think that this is a project, a similar situation, and I think that you have everybody on the same page. I don't think that anybody in the administration wants these people here disrupting the quality of life, and I'm certainly sure that nobody behind this rail does. So with that being said, I think that the proper steps, Mr. President, would be to refer this to the building commissioner for a response to see what's going on. Ultimately, I think this is something that may have to go through the city solicitor's office at some point in time. But as of right now, it's up to the code enforcement officer to issue the appropriate fines for noncompliance with the Zoning Act and then go from there.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, to clarify the motion that I made, the motion that I was making was to refer the paper to the Building Commissioner Enforcement of the Zoning Act, which would be all-encompassing. It would take into consideration any and all steps that he needs to take to make sure that there's a complying use at this location.
[Adam Knight]: The purpose of enforcing the zoning act is to get a modification
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I just want to say, keep doing what you're doing. You guys are doing an excellent job. This is a group that's been very dedicated to this initiative and endeavor since collecting the signatures for the ballot drive back in 2015. And to date, we've seen some great progress. So I just want to thank you for your efforts. This really is a marathon, not a sprint. And you guys have really been holding government's feet to the fire to make sure that this is done appropriately and in a fashion that's going to be successful. So I want to thank you for your efforts and your hard work. Again, keep doing what you're doing, because I think it's work, and the word's getting out there. People are talking about it, and people are excited to see the fruits of the labor that has been put into this. So thank you very much for your work.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to receive and place on file, Mr. President. Second.
[Adam Knight]: Aye.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. Kearns, can you tell me who the contractor is that's been selected to perform the work, if the money is appropriate?
[Adam Knight]: And in your experiences, do you think that this is a A-plus outfit, B-minus outfit?
[Adam Knight]: Move the question, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I think we're all in agreement that we understand and value the importance of a bus shelter, especially at this location. And the task that's before us here is how are we going to get it put there? And Councilman Scarpelli made a great recommendation to send it to the MBTA. I'd like to amend the paper and also have it sent to the administration, Mr. President. And I'd like to ask the administration to discuss mitigation strategies in relation to the number of mass DOT projects that are going on in the community to help fund this. some impact going on with the erection of the cell phone towers. We have some impact going on with the extension of the Green Line. We have some impact going on with the development of the Craddock Bridge that are all under MassDOT control, Mr. President. And it's not unusual when projects are going on in communities that mitigation of this sort is extended. So I'd also like to ask that the paper be sent to the administration with the request that they discuss mitigation with the MassDOT to provide funding or construction of such.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President. Yes. Also where the MBTA is a quasi public agency underneath the mass dot umbrella. I think it will be appropriate to amend the paper further and ask that this also be sent to a state delegation. So they're aware of the request that the council's making.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. When it comes to municipal aggregation, this is a topic that I think we've been discussing now for over a year. And quite frankly, the ball's in the council's court to determine whether or not this is something that we're going to allow the city to explore. And again, I think the time to move forward on it is now. Ultimately, the question is, do we want to request the department head to dedicate resources to something that hasn't been approved yet by this council. We're asking a department head to say, start creating a list. We may or may not adopt municipal aggregation. And I think we're putting the cart before the horse, Mr. President. If we want to explore municipal aggregation, let's explore municipal aggregation. Let's take the vote and let's allow it to happen. But to dedicate resources to something that may or may not happen, I don't feel comfortable doing that. the Director of Energy and Environment to start to begin to create an opt-out list. So she's going to dedicate resources in her office towards something that we may not adopt. So I think that this might be a little bit counterintuitive at this point in time. Mr. President, I'll have a difficult time supporting it this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Neistat. So this is, Mr. President, when we met with Evisuos, one of the things that Councilor Marks brought up was that there's a memorandum of understanding that was negotiated for mitigation. And that this isn't related to that meeting then. Because one of the requests that Councilor Marks made was that the items that were brought to the table and denied, we wanted to know what those were as well.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah. So this is for the previous meeting, not the meeting that we just had the other day. OK. Sounds good to me.
[Adam Knight]: If I may, Mr. President, I think the best approach would be to send it to Mr. Zamparelli from Eversource, who's the government relations person.
[Adam Knight]: I believe I still have the floor, Mr. President. I'm sorry? I believe I still have the floor. I'm sorry, Mr. President. So we negotiated a memorandum of understanding. And as I understand the process, based upon my discussions, is that the Department of Public Utilities has approved the project's specifications in terms of the cost, the route. the stretch that it's going to go. And the MOU was negotiated between the chief negotiator and the utility company for mitigation. And what comes before us is the grant for access for right away to put the vaults in. If we fail to approve those vaults, then the next step in the process would be that Eversource would appeal to the Department of Public Utilities because they're the ones that approved the project plan. And then the question comes as to whether or not DPU agrees to allow them to proceed. And if they do, then the terms of the MOU, I believe, become null and void. So that's a concern that we have as well. So I think that that's something that we need to ask the city solicitor at the next meeting is whether or not the terms of the MOU become null and void if the grants right away aren't approved and DPU has to step in.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I can certainly agree with my colleagues that there are many needs in this community, and prioritizing these needs are vital. And that's why we get elected. The redevelopment of the Carriage House and the creation of the Shepard Brooks Estates to be a full-fledged function hall was part of the chart the course plan that was presented by Mayor McGlynn. It was the last item that came before this council as part of the chart the course plan, and the council voted it down. After the council voted the plan down, Mr. President, about a year passed and the members of the Medford Brooks Estate Land Trust came to the council and said, the carriage house is the key focal piece of our master plan. Regardless of whether or not the council supports the master plan, the carriage house is the key focus of their master plan and what direction they want to go in. They want to utilize the carriage house in the area that the carriage house is on to make an economic catalyst for the Sheppard Brooks Estates. And they came before us and they asked for this money. And we had a committee of the whole with Paul Mulkey and they had people come in and they had people do an assessment of this carriage house and tell us what it was gonna cost to tie it up. And we had a committee of the whole on that. And that was all we had. And now here we are, a winter's past, another winter's coming. And the individuals at Shepherd Brooks Estates are here before us again this evening asking us for $200,000 to shore up the key piece and the key component of their master plan. Regardless of whether or not we support the master plan, Mr. President, the carriage house is an essential part of the redevelopment of that area. The carriage house is the catalyst. The carriage house is also falling apart. It's a disgrace. I mean, any one of us could go up there and if we look at it, it's not a carriage house. It's a shell of a building that's falling apart. But that shell of a building does have historic significance, Mr. President. Week in, week out, we talk about historic preservation, demolition delay, historic significance, historic districts. This is one of the most historic homes, I should say, because we do have the Royal House, we do have the Peter Tufts House, we do have some very historic properties in the community. But this is by far the most beautiful. It's got 50 acres of land that surround it, and there are many opportunities and options up there. And I think one thing that we need to do is preserve the carriage house, because maybe, although we don't agree with the master plan, I think we can all agree that the Carriage House is a vital component to what's going on up there. There are many options and many opportunities for us. And we might have to go back to the drawing board on this master plan because the council hasn't funded it in the past and they may not fund it again in the future. I don't know. But what I do know is this, the Carriage House is vital to the economic success at that location. And this evening I'm comfortable supporting a $200,000 free cash appropriation based upon the history and based upon the presentation that was given to us in the past, the presentation that was given to us last week. And quite frankly, the vital need that we have in Sheppard Brooks Estates if we're going to turn it into an economic catalyst to maintain the carriage house, Mr. President. So with that being said, um, I'm supportive of the paper this evening and I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I think we're all in agreement that we understand and value the importance of a bus shelter, especially at this location. And the task that's before us here is how are we going to get it put there? I'd like to amend the paper and also have it sent to the administration, Mr. President. And I'd like to ask the administration to discuss mitigation strategies in relation to the number of mass DOT projects that are going on in the community to help fund this. some impact going on with the erection of the cell phone towers. We have some impact going on with the extension of the Green Line. We have some impact going on with the development of the Craddock Bridge that are all under MassDOT control, Mr. President. And it's not unusual when projects are going on in communities that mitigation of this sort is extended. So I'd also like to ask that the paper be sent to the administration with the request that they discuss mitigation with the MassDOT to provide funding or construction of such.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President. Yes. Also where the MBTA is a quasi public agency underneath the mass dot umbrella. I think it will be appropriate to amend the paper further and ask that this also be sent to a state delegation. So they're aware of the request that the council's making.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. When it comes to municipal aggregation, this is a topic that I think we've been discussing now for over a year. And quite frankly, the ball's in the council's court to determine whether or not this is something that we're going to allow the city to explore. And again, I think the time to move forward on it is now. Ultimately, the question is, do we want to request the department head to dedicate resources to something that hasn't been approved yet by this council. We're asking a department head to say, start creating a list. We may or may not adopt municipal aggregation. And I think we're putting the cart before the horse, Mr. President. If we want to explore municipal aggregation, let's explore municipal aggregation. Let's take the vote and let's allow it to happen. But to dedicate resources to something that may or may not happen, I don't feel comfortable doing that. the Director of Energy and Environment to start to begin to create an opt-out list. So she's going to dedicate resources in her office towards something that we may not adopt. So I think that this might be a little bit counterintuitive at this point in time. Mr. President, I'll have a difficult time supporting it this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Dyson. So this is, Mr. President, when we met with Eversource, one of the things that Councilor Marks brought up was that there's a memorandum of understanding that was negotiated for mitigation. Yes. And that this isn't related to that meeting then, because one of the requests that Councilor Marks made was that the items that were brought to the table and denied, we wanted to know what those were as well.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah. So this is for the previous meeting, not the meeting that we just had the other day? Yes. OK, sounds good to me. Move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: If I may, Mr. President, I think the best approach would be to send it to Mr. Zamparelli from Ebersource, who's the government relations person. Oh, yeah, both.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Thank you. On the motion by Councilor Dello Russo. I believe I still have the floor, Mr. President. I'm sorry? I believe I still have the floor. I'm sorry, Mr. President. So we negotiated a memorandum of understanding, and as I understand the process based upon my discussions, is that the Department of Public Utilities has approved the project's specifications in terms of the cost, the route, the stretch that it's going to go. And the MOU was negotiated between the chief negotiator and the utility company for mitigation. And what comes before us is the grant for access for right away to put the vaults in. If we fail to approve those vaults, then the next step in the process would be that Eversource would appeal. to the Department of Public Utilities because they're the ones that approved the project plan. And then the question comes as to whether or not DPU agrees to allow them to proceed. And if they do, then the terms of the MOU, I believe, become null and void. So that's a concern that we have as well. So I think that that's something that we need to ask the city solicitor at the next meeting is whether or not the terms of the MOU become null and void if the grants right away aren't approved and DPU has to step in.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Council. Councilor Knight. Uh, Mr. President, thank you very much. I can certainly agree with my colleagues that there are many needs in this community and prioritizing these needs are vital. And, uh, that's why we get elected. Um, the redevelopment of the carriage house and the creation of the Shepard Brooks estates, um, to be a full fledged function hall was part of the chart. The course plan that was presented by mayor McGlynn. Um, it was the last item that came before this council as part of the chat, the course plan and the council voted it down. After the council voted the plan down, Mr. President, about a year passed, and the members of the Medford Brooks Estate Land Trust came to the council and said, the carriage house is the key focal piece of our master plan. Regardless of whether or not the council supports the master plan, the carriage house is the key focus of their master plan and what direction they want to go in. They want to utilize the carriage house in the area that the carriage house is on to make an economic catalyst for the Sheppard Brooks Estates. And they came before us and they asked for this money. And we had a committee of the whole with Paul Mulkey and they had people come in and they had people do an assessment of this carriage house and tell us what it was gonna cost to tie it up. And we had a committee of the whole on that. And that was all we had. And now here we are, a winter's past, another winter's coming. And the individuals at Shepherd Brooks Estates are here before us again this evening asking us for $200,000 to shore up the key piece and the key component of their master plan. Regardless of whether or not we support the master plan, Mr. President, the Carriage House is an essential part of the redevelopment of that area. The Carriage House is the catalyst. The Carriage House is also falling apart. It's a disgrace. I mean, any one of us could go up there, and if we look at it, it's not a Carriage House. It's a shell of a building that's falling apart. But that shell of a building does have historic significance, Mr. President. Week in, week out, we talk about historic preservation, demolition delay, historic significance, historic districts. This is the most historic — one of the most historic homes, I should say, because we do have the Royal House, we do have the Peter Tufts House, we do have some very historic properties in the community. But this is by far the most beautiful. It's got 50 acres of land that surround it, and there are many opportunities and options up there. And I think one thing that we need to do is preserve the carriage house, because maybe, although we don't agree with the master plan, I think we can all agree that the Carriage House is a vital component to what's going on up there. There are many options and many opportunities for us. And we might have to go back to the drawing board on this master plan because the council hasn't funded it in the past and they may not fund it again in the future. I don't know. But what I do know is this, the Carriage House is vital to the economic success at that location. And this evening I'm comfortable supporting a $200,000 free cash appropriation based upon the history and based upon the presentation that was given to us in the past, the presentation that was given to us last week. And quite frankly, the vital need that we have at Sheppard Brooks Estates, if we're going to turn it into an economic catalyst to maintain the carriage house, Mr. President. So with that being said, um, I'm supportive of the paper this evening and I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'm just hoping I can amend the paper with no objection from the Councilor to get an update also from the fire training tower search committee and where they are in the process as well. Part of the appropriation for the design funds for the police station was also a commitment from the administration as well as the creation of an ad hoc group to go out there and be sure that we have the opportunity and ability to relocate our fire training tower with the construction of a new police station. So I'd just like to ask for an update from our training tower committee as well, Mr. President. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think Mr. Lincoln took the words right out of my mouth. I'd like to amend the paper to request that the public contractor, upon conclusion of the project, conduct a cleanup of the area along Bustle Road as well. Provided the sponsor of the resolve has no problem with that.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President. Thank you very much. This is for any one of you gentlemen. About how much money does the Medford Brooks Estate Land Trust have in its coffers at this point?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Also, Mr. President, are the renovations to the manor finally complete and it's at its final end state?
[Adam Knight]: I know there was a plumbing issue that was going on.
[Adam Knight]: So when we flush the toilets, it still goes into the leaching?
[Adam Knight]: And then we go. So it's the 75th anniversary this year. So what type of programming do we have coming out of there now that we have the? manner renovations near completion, do we have any type of snowshoeing, after school programs for kids, bird watching, anything like that?
[Adam Knight]: Do we have trails mapped out there so people can come and pick up a map?
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, go ahead. And trail maintenance is being done.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I would second Councilor Dello Russo's motion for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Is this yesterday's conversation? Yes, it is. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the Lawrence Memorial Hospital has been an elephant in the room for quite some time now, and as we sit here and scratch our heads and ponder the future of that piece of land, I think it's important that this Council has an understanding as to whether or not there are any deeded restrictions on that parcel. There's much talk about zoning, much talk about development in the community, and if there are no deeded restrictions on that parcel, then we need to take a long, hard look at what's going on up in that area.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I will spare my colleagues and those at home viewing of my rendition of the Mustang Fight Song. However, I'd like to wish the Medford Mustangs the best of luck on Thursday morning, and hopefully we can pull off a victory. So I wish them the best of luck. They've had a great season. They've made us proud, and this is the big one.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Four weeks ago I put forward a paper asking that the engineering division investigate the concerns of the residents at 31 Wildwood Road. Back when the Winthrop Street draining project was done, they used the front of that home as a staging area. And what's happened is the road's sunken in, the nice strip of grass out front's sunken in, and it's creating a puddling and pooling situation out there. So we've asked the engineering division to investigate the matter and get back to us. We haven't had a response yet. It's an item that I'd like to see taken care of before the winter months begin. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'd like to reiterate my concern and ask the DPW Commission to report back what steps have been taken.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, as a B paper, I'd like to propose that the Superintendent of Lights and Lines also provides us with a cost estimate as to what a study would cost. City of Medford and the Traffic Division and the Council pushing to reduce the speed limit from 30 to 25 miles an hour in the community. That does have an absolute effect on the timing of lights and the traffic patterns and the traffic flow in the community. That's why we did it. So we can reduce the speed limit in the community, but if we don't go and look at the timing of the lights across the community, I think we're missing a key component to the purpose of doing it. So I'd like to ask in the form of a B paper that the Superintendent of Lights and Lines provides us with a cost estimate as to what that study would cost.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Looking back in the newspaper over the summer, I think if we all recall a police standoff up in Saugus along Route 1. And what happened was the gentleman had made his way into a Dick's Sporting Goods up in Route 1 and got his hands on some firearms, Mr. President. And this resulted in a police standoff. They closed down Route 1 for a number of hours. Recently in our community, we were very lucky to open up a Dick's Sporting Goods. And this Dick's Sporting Goods is a great, great facility. However, they do sell some questionable material that I don't personally support, which would be firearms, Mr. President. But this is in no way, shape, or form an attempt to push back on people's Second Amendment rights. Mr. President, what it is is an effort to regulate, The safe storage and sale and display of firearms, ammunition, and firearm accessories in the city of Medford. You know, the cat's out of the barn. The horse is out of the barn. We have a facility here in the community that's selling firearms. I think it's incumbent upon us as a council to take all the steps that are necessary to ensure that we maintain that the community remains safe. So, with that being said, Mr. President, I bring this forward as a conversation starter, a spot for us to jump off from a launching pad, if you want to call it that, for us to start this discussion and have this conversation. So with that being said, Mr. President, I ask my council colleagues to support the measure and move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This paper here is paper 17752, which reads, be it resolved the city administration refund taxpayers all convenience fees incurred during the current fiscal year as a result of the online payment of tax bills issued by the city. And be it further resolved that the city administration take the necessary steps to eliminate or assume such fees going forward. Mr. President, I've run into several situations, gotten several phone calls, bumped into people that have attempted to pay their property tax bills online. And when they go in there to pay their property tax bill, they're assessed a convenience fee. The last one that I heard was upwards of close to $50, Mr. President. And that doesn't sound too convenient to me. We're sitting here in the community. We're asking robocalls to go out. We're asking things to get posted on the website. We're asking people to utilize technology more and more. We shouldn't be charging them to do it. We should be encouraging it, not discouraging it, Mr. President. So I'm asking that the administration look into this and to take the appropriate steps to either waive the fee, assume the fee, or eliminate the fee.
[Adam Knight]: I certainly have no problem with that, Mr. President. If we're going to take a vote, I want it to be an informed vote and I want everybody behind the rail to be comfortable with it. With that being said, I'd be happy to even withhold the request until we have the presentation from the treasurer or the financial director, whatever the council feels comfortable with. Again, I just think this is an opportunity for us to get... They can be simultaneous.
[Adam Knight]: We can do that too.
[Adam Knight]: That's fine. I mean, my motion is to have it passed, but you know, go to the administration. But if the council has questions, then I have no problem going along with whatever it is that it will take to make sure that this comes to fruition.
[Adam Knight]: All those in favor? Opposed? Did you amend it, Councilor?
[Adam Knight]: report due here. It looks like the next report for the university accountability ordinance would be due November, Mr. President. Maybe we can mark that up for a... It's come and gone, so maybe we can mark that up to make sure that we get a report back from our code enforcement officer to make sure that there have been no complaints filed. We can, Mr. Clerk.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Uh, Mr. Cairns, how are you?
[Adam Knight]: Good. Are we able to perform the maintenance on this vehicle in-house? The maintenance and upkeep on this vehicle, would it be able to be performed in-house?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the reason I didn't support the paper was because there was no text and no language for an ordinance to be changed. If a paper is going to go to the city solicitor for him to draft one, I have no problem supporting that. I'd like to say that I'd be voting in the affirmative for that.
[Adam Knight]: Ultimately, Mr. President, the paper says, be it resolved the Medford City Council had a city ordinance that requires all zoning board of appeals to be held at times of conflict with the city council meetings. What section of the zoning ordinance is that going to go in? When is it going to fall under administration of government?
[Adam Knight]: As amended.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor knife. Uh, yes, Mr. President. I'm just taking a look at my notes here relative to the zoning subcommittee and that paper was kept in committee in a legal question was sent to the city solicitor at that time. Uh, the legal question was, does the state law govern notice requirements and is this proposal outside of the scope of local control or is this a minimum guideline and we can build upon it? That was the question that was sent to the solicitor. Um, two, six, 17.
[Adam Knight]: I do not believe we have.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, looking at the papers that are remaining here, I think that if we put our heads down and just focus on what's going on, we'll be able to get out of here before 10 minutes is over. I think we only have all the items on our agenda have been disposed of. The only items that we have here are a couple of under suspension items that Councilor Marks has put forward relative to some public, uh, public safety concerns that he has in the neighborhood from knocking on doors or from his, from his parks.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, looking at the papers that are remaining here, I think that if we put our heads down and just focus on what's going on, we'll be able to get out of here before 10 minutes is over. I think we only have all the items on our agenda have been disposed of. The only items that we have here are a couple of under suspension items that Councilor Marks has put forward relative to some public, uh, public safety concerns that he has in the neighborhood from knocking on doors or from his, from his parks.
[Adam Knight]: First out of the gate. Thank you, Henry. Thank you to the organizers for this event. I really appreciate the opportunity to get up here and speak to you. My name is Adam Knight. I'm a candidate for reelection to the Medford city council. I'm number four in your ballot. And I'd ask for your consideration on November 7th. Um, a little bit about myself. I reside in West Medford with my wife, Alison and our sons, Ryan and Brendan, uh, Ryan's three and Brendan's one. I'm a product of the Medford public schools graduating from MHS in 1996. I then went on to earn a bachelor's degree in political science from Merrimack college. and a master's degree in public administration from Suffolk University. I have nearly 20 years' experience working in government, first for the late State Senator Charlie Shannon as his Director of Constituent Services, then as an organizer, a field representative, and a contract negotiator in the labor movement, and now as an arbitrator with the Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development. It's through these experiences that I've had the opportunity to work on many initiatives that have made a difference in our community, items like marriage equality, affordable health care, the long-term leasing of our skating rinks, Flint and La Conte, the school building assistance program, and the Greenland extension, just to name a few. And I think it's safe to say that in a city that has a $166 million operating budget and a council that's made $13 million worth of appropriations in the past two years, that qualifications and experience do matter. I'm very grateful to have earned your trust and to have had the opportunity to serve as your city councilor for the past four years. And since my election, I've always embraced the philosophy that results are more important than rhetoric. and this has been a very successful council that's produced a number of results. From a legislative standpoint, I've worked with my colleagues to implement changes to our city ordinances that benefits our quality of life and improves the operation of government. Successfully fighting for measures that have reformed the vehicle for higher ordinance to better protect consumers, increased the legal age to purchase tobacco products in the community to protect our public health, the implementation of a university accountability ordinance to safeguard our neighborhoods, and the wage theft ordinance to ensure proper distribution of tax dollars to public contractors. From a financial standpoint, the city's on solid ground. For the first time in recent memory, the city's passed a unanimous budget. We have suitable reserves and an A++ bond rating, allowing us to borrow at low rates, and a capital plan allowing us flexibility to meet our demands and spending needs. Today, our streets are safer. We've reduced the speed limit on city streets to 25 miles an hour. We've created and funded positions in the budget to combat addiction. We've purchased 12 new police cars and critical equipment for our fire department. But most importantly, we've appropriated $2 million for the design of a new police station and have a commitment to deliver new police and fire headquarter buildings by the year 2020. This is a commitment that I will not forget. We have great schools. Great schools open a world of opportunity for both our kids and our community. and I'm committed as a parent and as a city councilor to that end. In the past term, we've opened a new media center and a full service culinary arts program at MHS, expanded course offerings, implemented before school programs, and have the lowest class sizes in the region. In the next term, I'll work with the school committee to further expand and strengthen our opportunities for our youngsters and to deliver a new public library to the city of Medford. The strong infrastructure is the backbone of our community. We need responsive public works to provide the basic but essential services that we rely on every day. I've made a commitment to that end, improving service delivery with the funding of 12 new pieces of equipment for our DPW, securing over $2 million for water mains to bolster our light abatement programs. In the next term, I'll push to build upon this progress by fighting for increased staffing levels, improving maintenance and upkeep of our sidewalks and roadways, and improvements to our transportation infrastructure. Vibrant downtowns add to our economic stability and greatly contribute to the overall success of our community. We're making great progress addressing this priority through initiatives that help make our business district thrive, like the public-private partnership to bring headline acts to Chevalier Auditorium, the construction of the Crystal Campbell Peace Garden, the Riverside Plaza, and the Clippership Connector to generate foot traffic in our square, and most importantly, the master plan for the revitalization of Medford Square. Next term, I'll work with the stakeholders in our business district to ensure that we put that plan to use. I'm proud of the accomplishments that we've made just by working together. We've made safe streets, great schools, strong infrastructure, and vibrant downtowns our top priorities because these are the key to a strong quality of life. But there is more work to be done, and I would like to be a part of this work. I believe I have the qualifications, the experience, and the knowledge of the issues to continue to make a positive impact on our community, and I'm asking you for the opportunity to continue to serve. My name's Adam Knight. I'm number four on the ballot, and I thank you very much for listening. I'd appreciate your support on November 7th. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Um, Mr. President, uh, this is the first I've heard of the city receiving a grant. Could the councilor tell us a little bit about what this grant is? Councilor Locren.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, and the vote is to
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Dela Rousseau. Yes. 7 in the affirmative, none in the negative motion passes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, on page 223, there is item 17689, amendment B, Councilor Locksmith and Councilor Scott-Bell. I do not change the record as amended.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. Mr. Bavuso, thank you for that presentation. Ultimately, Mr. President, this council has requested the purchase of portable security cameras for the purpose of court enforcement on numerous occasions in the past. Here we have an opportunity to appropriate the funding to make that a reality and move approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. As we've seen throughout the community, the Adopt-a-Site program has been very successful in certain locations. Along Lawrence Road and Governor's Avenue, Mr. President, if you take a look, you will see that some of the islands are adopted and some aren't. So we have one island that looks great, another island that doesn't look so great, one island that looks great, another island that doesn't look so great. So there's a little bit of inconsistency there, Mr. President. We have a very successful framework in place, and I'm asking the administration to see if they can seek volunteers to go there and adopt that site, Mr. President, so that we can beautify the neighborhood a little bit more. There's some inconsistencies along that stretch of roadway, and I think that this will do a lot for curb appeal.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This certainly has been a topic that's been brought up before and in previous times when the issue was brought up. Um, I, I had a question and the question was, what are we trying to accomplish? We're going to, we want to review our zoning laws, but what is it that we want to try to accomplish? And that started a conversation, Mr. President, and the Subcommittee on Zoning and Ordinances has met a number of times, more than once, to discuss this very issue, Mr. President. And one of the things that we've been doing is trying to develop goals and develop criteria for further debate and discussion as to what we feel is what would be important to put Medford in a position to be successful as we grow. One of the items that we've been discussing was the ability to ensure that we continue to generate between 1.25 and 1.5 percent new growth annually. Another item that we've been looking upon, Mr. President, is the ability to expand upon commercially zoned parcels to ensure an equitable residential tax rate and an equitable shift of the residential tax burden to the commercial side. We've also discussed the possibilities that we have to meet and exceed the state-established thresholds for affordable housing, protecting the neighborhood's integrity and the historical assets in our community, as well as a few things that we're looking into with the technical assistance from the Metropolitan Area Planning Council, with the draft plan to revitalize Medford Square, and soon to be work on the revitalization of Mystic Avenue, Mr. President. So there are a couple of items that are in the works here, and there's been a conversation that's been ongoing on this current topic. And I think it was the desire of the subcommittee to establish these criteria, to go through the whole entire process, and then to report the paper out to the council. And once we have that paper ready to further debate and deliberate, we can send it to the administration and say, these are the goals we want to accomplish. What's it going to cost to get it done? So that's where we are in the process, Mr. President. I thank the council for putting the measure forward. I think it's a good idea. We've done a lot of work on it, and we're going to continue to work on it, and we're going to continue to make this happen.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. There are a number of areas throughout the community that have had asphalt patchwork performed on cracking sidewalks, concrete sidewalks that have been removed. And the theory behind it would be that we put a temporary patch down of asphalt sidewalk, and then when we have enough locations in the community that are in a certain area or region, we call the concrete truck up, and we get the concrete truck out there, and we break down these asphalt sidewalk patches, and we put concrete patches down, Mr. President. And I think that enough time has passed now, but we do have enough locations across the city of Medford that could require one, two, maybe ten concrete trucks to get out there and start pouring concrete sidewalks, Mr. President. We look at the Regency and the Rio Condominium buildings right on Winthrop Street. For two and a half years, they sat there and they had a gigantic drainage project performed right beside their house. Their sidewalk was taken down, replaced with an asphalt sidewalk. Two years have gone by. The concrete sidewalk has not been replaced. You go up to Ashcroft Road, Mr. President, and you'll see in front of 129 a tree being removed, the stump being ground down, the sidewalk being replaced with asphalt. I mean, with asphalt and concrete. It still hasn't happened. Two years have gone by. So I think it's time, Mr. President, that we make a focus on this really basic city service and this real quality of life issue. It's a curb appeal issue. When you look out the window of your vehicle when you're driving down the street, we like to see concrete sidewalks, not a patchwork of concrete and asphalt, Mr. President. So I'm asking the DPW to report back to the Council the following information. That is, when the replacement of the asphalt to concrete panels will be performed, and an inventory of those street panels, as well as when the concrete was initially removed, so that we have a better idea as to how long this has been going on, and we can get a better understanding, Mr. President, as to how many street panels how many panels it takes before we call a concrete truck out. So with that being said, I move for approval of resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Um, Mr. President, I certainly have no problem with the paper being amended. However, I'd ask you to be, um, placed forward in the form of a B paper. I want a complete inventory of all the asphalt street panels in the city. My concern isn't whether or not the funds that we appropriated earlier in the year, I believe it was $300,000 to take down some stumps and replace some sidewalks that were damaged during water service work, if I'm not mistaken, were done. So I just want to keep them separate, Mr. President. I certainly support Councilor Falco's amendments to the paper. I just would like to see them in a B paper so that the administration doesn't confuse the two issues and only give us one report.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, yes. Very similar to the situation that Councilor Marks just spoke of. This sidewalk panel on the corner of Sherwood Road and Governors Avenue was broken down and it was replaced with gravel. And the gravel remains. There's no smooth surface there. As leaps fall, it becomes a trip hazard. Move for approval, Mr. President. Hopefully the DPW can get to this before long.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Rose, happy birthday. I'd like my council colleagues to join me in wishing Mr. DeLuca a happy birthday. 90's a milestone, Mr. President, and I wish her another 90 happy and healthy years.
[Adam Knight]: So thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Scott.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, thank you very much. And thank you to the sponsors of this resolution. Um, I'd like to amend with a B paper as well. Mr. President, uh, if you're traveling northbound on main street, You go underneath the highway, past South Street, underneath the highway, and you go to take a left-hand turn onto Route 16. With the renovations that they've made to the Craddock Bridge and the relocation from the construction on the left side of the street to the right side of the street, right now it's very difficult when you're taking a left-hand turn onto Route 16 to see one whole lane of traffic. So I'm asking the engineering department if they'd be willing to take an inspection of the site and make recommendations to improve safety at the location, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Again, Mr. President, a basic service request. I was out knocking on doors yesterday. And I came up to 34 Toro Ave. In front of this residence was a very large tree stump, probably three to four feet in diameter. The tree has been gone for an extended period of time and the residents expressed some frustration that the tree has not been removed yet. So with that being said, I told them that I'd do my best to get it removed. I placed the matter on the agenda and I hope that our administration will take the appropriate steps to do such.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much, and I think my colleagues have hit the nail on the head. Mr. Miller's work in the community is not just limited to that at the MPHA. He's also been a strong advocate for the disabled in our community, and he's also been a strong advocate for his neighbors, and he's been a strong member of the Democratic Party, chairing our Ward 6 City Committee. So with that being said, thank you, Henry, for your service and your work, and congratulations.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I just want to take a brief opportunity to thank the DPW for the restriping work that they've done on Moobin Street. We put a resolution forward last week asking that the four-way intersections on Moobin Street be repainted, and in short time, they were done. So I'd like to thank Joe Palladino from the sign department and the members of the highway department for their work. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Um, I was just going to say that I have no problem coming on Tuesday night. You know, it's one of the sacrifices that we make if we have the privilege and opportunity to serve as council is that sometimes we have to spend time away from our family. Um, but with that being said, I think that I can still get some trick or treating in between five and seven. Mr. President, my kids are young, but I'm moving it to an earlier time. Wouldn't work out so well for me.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Leif. Paper 17668, amendment A. The amendment was made by, I was the sponsor of the initial paper, you were the sponsor of the amendment.
[Adam Knight]: If you look at 17668, I was the lead sponsor on the paper, and Councilor Caraviello was the one that amended it.
[Adam Knight]: If Councilor Caraviello could correct.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. Over the weekend I was out knocking on doors talking to some of my neighbors and one of the concerns that was raised was the fact that the roadway and the small patch of grass in front of 31 Wildwood Road has been damaged, and it's been damaged for quite some time after the Winthrop Street draining project was conducted, Mr. President. They used that location as a staging area for some of their supplies, equipment, pipes, and the like, and what's happened is the roadway has begun to sink in, the grass patch has also sunken in, so it's creating an issue where there's a lot of puddling and pooling. You can also see that there's a temporary trench that was made right there at the location, Mr. President, and that has also settled to the point where it's creating an ice hazard come the cold weather. I'm asking my council colleagues to support this resolution and request that the city engineer contact the private contractor that was hired to perform the Winthrop Street draining project and get out there and fix this problem. As we know, we issued a special permit and the special permit requires that all our streets be restored to pristine condition. Mr. President, that wasn't the case in this construction project, so I'm asking that this contract to be held accountable. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. The property located at 186 Winthrop Street is one that's been familiar to this council in the past. I've raised issues concerning its operations. Ultimately, this is a business that's on the corner of West Street and Winthrop Street. And what's happened is they've continuously exceeded operating hours. In the month of May alone, I've counted 15 violations that I personally reported. We're also seeing a large number of trucks using West Street or Residential Street for trucking purposes and for staging purposes while they cook their muffins and bagels, that stone and skillet, they're leaving the trucks idling on West Street, bringing them around the block, loading the trucks up, and while they're loading the trucks up, they're blocking the public way. Winthrop Street, they're blocking the public way, West Street. The neighbors have reached a point of frustration, the property's in disrepair. It's shabbily maintained, the sidewalk's covered in grease. The back of the facility looks like an abomination, Mr. President. So I'm asking the Zoning Board of Appeals to convene for the purpose of placing restrictions on this pre-existing non-conforming use variance that was issued to the property, Mr. President. I'm asking my council colleagues to support this. The way that this would work is we'd make this recommendation, it would go to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Zoning Board of Appeals would then take the matter up on their agenda, provide notification to the abutters, and the property owner, everyone gets in the same room, they can have an opportunity to explain and express some of the concerns that they have and some of the issues that they'd have to deal with, and then the Zoning Board of Appeals can make the appropriate determination because this is something that's under their purview.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. I'd also like to point out, Mr. President, that because this establishment's a bakery wholesaler, state law governs the oversight. And our local board of health has no local control. So that's creating a significant problem in our ability to enforce what's going on down there. Also, this non-conforming use variance has been issued, it's been in place since when Marty's for Potties was there with Marty Murphy Sr. So it's a non-conforming use variance that's been in place. I think it was even initiated before the Zoning Act, Mr. President. So with that being said, I think that the neighborhood has had enough. They need relief, and I'm asking my council colleagues to support this.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I've been contacted by a number of residents on Thomas Street concerning the operations of Jack's Gas Station. Aside from the fact that there are concerns about the hours of operation opening a little bit sooner than the city would permit and staying open a little bit later than the city would permit, there's also a lot of work that's being done on our public way. They're staging vehicles on our public way and they're performing repair work on vehicles on our public way. So we have a small residential street, it's Thomas Street, We have a business at the top of the street that has four to five employees that are all parking their vehicles on the street. And now we're having customers that are bringing their cars into this gas station, this service station for service, and they have no place to put these cars. So they're taking those cars and also putting them on Thomas Street, taking up a number of the residential parking spots that are on the street, Mr. President. So I'm asking the code enforcement officer to go down there and investigate the situation to see if we can come up with some sort of mutual agreement and some sort of enforcement in continuity with operations down there, Mr. President. This is a residential neighborhood, and the gas station has been there for a very long time. And under previous ownerships, it was able to operate in concert with the neighborhood in good standing. And I don't see why that cannot continue, provided that we can bring them together and the parties together and talk about what's going on and the impact that it's having on the quality of life of those residents.
[Adam Knight]: I certainly have no objection to that, Councilor. I think that anything that we can do to protect the quality of life of the residents in that neighborhood is something that's beneficial to all. So with that being said, I move approval on the question and ask for a second.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the tree stump at 75 Suffolk Street and I have a very long and colorful history. I think when I was 11 years old, I crashed my bike on it and got stitches in my head. And since that time, the sidewalk in front of the home at 75 Suffolk Street has been broken up from this. tree and not my head. The sidewalk's not broken because I fell down, but because I crashed into the tree. But the sidewalk's all broken up. The tree is gigantic, Mr. President. It's been cut down, but the stump remains in the same location for an extended period of time. So I'm asking that the DPW go out there and take the appropriate steps to fix the sidewalk and to remove the stump. Likewise, for the location at 15 Benham Street, Mr. President, although my relationship with that tree stump isn't as intimate as the one on Suffolk Street, it's the same circumstances, same situation, same facts, and I'd ask that the DPW remove those following tree stumps.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, thank you very much. Woobin Street is a relatively busy street that's populated with a number of children, and what we're seeing is a lot of kids walking to school in that neighborhood, Mr. President. Street right up over Austin Street right down to the Brooke School and the four-way stop sign at Wildwood and Woburn Street is operating but the actual striping on the street is not and in years past they've come out and they've restriped this area and when I was out knocking doors last weekend a number of residents expressed concern over the fact that it hasn't been done And they've also noted that they've seen an increase in the number of cars that are actually running the stop sign now because these controls aren't in place, Mr. President. So I'm asking that the DPW take the appropriate steps to rectify the situation for the neighborhood.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think this resolution speaks for itself. Mr. McGonigal recently passed away, and it's with deep condolences that I bring this matter before the city council. I'm asking my colleagues to join me in offering our deepest and most sincere condolences to the family of Phillip Bumper McGonigal. He's the father of MHS assistant baseball coach John McGonigal. John's the son-in-law of former town manager, John Cleone. So I'd like to ask my council colleagues to support this resolution. The gentleman lived a strong and long and healthy life.
[Adam Knight]: Absolutely.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to suspend the rules to take up paper 17673.
[Adam Knight]: We're under suspension, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Paper 17-433. It's under reports and deadlines, reports due and deadlines, Mr. President. This is the 90-day review of Annie's Pizzeria. 17-433.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I'd ask that this matter be placed on next week's agenda and that the business owner be notified to come and appeal before us so that we can discuss any complaints or concerns that have come up during the first 90 days of operation with the extended hours license.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to receive and place on file.
[Adam Knight]: Point of parliamentary inquiry, Mr. President. Councilor Knight. Paper's been disposed of. Gentlemen, is that a top and opportunity to discuss on this?
[Adam Knight]: This isn't even an item that's on the agenda at this point.
[Adam Knight]: What a clarification, Councilor Knight. The gentleman's talking about a legal document. Is he proclaiming that he has more knowledge than the city solicitor about the law?
[Adam Knight]: I was just trying to clarify, because it's getting a little off track.
[Adam Knight]: I think if he respects his elders, I can respect the councilor. The point of personal privilege is the councilor of this body, Mr. President. We have an agenda. That's correct. That's why we have an agenda, so things like this don't happen. I call for the orders of the day.
[Adam Knight]: I just want to thank Ed O'Neill publicly for the work that he's done for the city of Medford and for me personally. He's a great guy to give a call and ask some questions to, and he always gives you answers. He's always been readily accessible and sometimes referred to as the smartest man in city hall. So with that being said, Mr. President, I think we're going to fill a void. He's going to be greatly missed, and I wish him the best of luck in his future endeavor. But I want to thank him for his friendship, his help, and being a mentor to me during my early years on the council.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I'd like to ask that the city engineer, before granting the petition for a right of way, or before resubmitting it to the city clerk, that you take several steps and collect certain information. I think it's going to be very important that we have this information in our hands when it comes down to make a decision. Some of it, it would piggyback on what Councilor Mark said. Ultimately, a residential mitigation plan's important. I think that's something that we need. And I think that the city clerk needs to provide, I mean the city engineer needs to provide that with us before she submits back to us the special application for a permit for the grant right away. Also, Mr. President, I think we need to have a comprehensive review of the traffic management plan. We have to identify critical path items. And when we're thinking about this project, it's going to come right past this high school, right past this high school. It's going to go right in front of our police station. You know what I mean? Our police and fire headquarters, we're going to have construction in front of them for an extended period of time. And then when the construction's over, they're going to tell us they're going to come back in a year, and they're going to retrench and repave to bring it back to city of Medford standards, which we haven't seen happen from these public utility companies. And lastly, Mr. President, I think we need a clear and concise schedule with dates. Dates of when shuttles are going to be in the ground, dates when we can anticipate that this work's going to take place. So I think Councilor Marks put together a great resolution on this issue. I'd like to amend the paper and ask that the City Clerk express to the City Engineer that we need, number one, a clear and concise plan and schedule with dates. We need to identify the critical path items that are going to affect the operation of day-to-day government. We need a traffic management plan that needs to be reviewed. And we also need a residential mitigation plan, Mr. President. I think those are four key items that would make a big difference in helping move this project along, helping inform residents in the community what's going on, and helping us maintain a strong quality of life while it's going on. Ultimately, when you think about where the project's going, Winthrop Street, the residents on Winthrop Street dealt with two years of a drainage project. Then the day the drainage project was over, we got a letter from MassDOT saying that they were going to do 135, not even 130 feet of bridge, and it was going to take three years down to Medford Square. And the traffic management plan was to revert all the traffic right back up Winthrop Street on the new street that just got fixed. And now, when that project's over, we're going to see Eversource come in, and they're going to put their shovels in the ground, and they're going to tear that road up again, Mr. President. The residents in that area and that neighborhood have faced a lot. And it's not something that's happened for two years or three years or four years. Now we're looking on a half a decade. So I'd ask that these matters be added to the paper as a B paper as an amendment, Mr. President, sent to the city engineer and forwarded to us prior to her submitting the application for the permit for the grants right away.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. I'd also like to add a B paper to this, Mr. President, and ask the DPW commissioner to provide us with a report listing the pros and the cons of the use of race crosswalks. Maybe we're missing something here because I think it's something that the council supported in the past, but it's really not moving forward. And maybe there's a reason why that we don't know about. So like Councilman Mox said, we'll know where we stand. Why don't we have the DPW commissioner send us a list of the pros and the cons, what's good about it and what they see as bad, and then why it hasn't been implemented. But I think that we're on the right track. Race crosswalks, anything that could be used to improve pedestrian safety in this community is necessary, Mr. President. Every week we hear the same old stories. Traffic, crosswalks.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President. Councilor Knight. The reason I say let's get the pros and cons is so that if there are cons on the list, that maybe we can do some research and refute them and drive a better bargain to make a more convincing argument. They're saying, no, this is why we don't want to do it. Well, let's find out the reasons why, look at them, and see if we can come up with reasons why we should. And some counterargument, Mr. President, was all I was saying. But I think it's a great resolution. I'll support it wholeheartedly.
[Adam Knight]: Aye.
[Adam Knight]: Aye.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President. Councilor Knight. If I may. The issue of affordable housing in our community is one that's of paramount importance at this point in time. I think Councilor Marks hit the nail on the head when he said that families are being priced out. Families that have lived in this community for a long time that have helped make Medford the great place that it is to live now are being forced out. They're being faced with an option as to You can't afford this, so what are you going to do? And you're going to move. And we're seeing that a lot. I'd like to amend the paper, Mr. President, and ask that our Office of Community Development and the Medford Housing Authority do an analysis in regards to Chapter 40R of the General Laws. And Chapter 40R of the General Laws, Mr. President, relates to affordable housing. But it also provides a two-thirds reimbursement on the per pupil cost of students that live in those type of developments So if we're really serious about making a commitment to increasing the stock of affordable housing in our community And we have an opportunity to get a two-thirds reimbursement on our per pupil cost to educate these students I think it only makes sense that we examine that as we move forward So I'd like to amend the paper and request that our Office of Community Development and the Medford Housing Authority analyze the possibilities and potential of creating a Chapter 40-odd district, to increase the stock of affordable housing in our community, to make it family-friendly, and then to allow us an opportunity to capture some of the revenues from the state that will allow us to offset the cost of the per-pupil expense to educate a child by two-thirds, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Questions? Motion to receive and place on file, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President. Oh, it's so late. The ballot question passed. Citizens in this community have spoken. uh, the city council met, created an ad hoc committee on the implementation of the community preservation act. Um, we crafted a very strong ordinance. We drafted a very strong ordinance, Mr. President. And just in recent months, this community preservation committee has been appointed and they're finally up and running and they're doing a really good job. And there are a very group of dedicated individuals that are really committed to the success of this program. And I don't think we need to take steps as a council to undermine the efforts in the work that they're doing. Mr. President, I certainly support asking the state delegation to fully fund the paper. I certainly support asking the state delegation to fully fund the CPA match. I think that's a no-brainer, Mr. President. We all want more money. We all want more free money to come into our community. There's no doubt about that. But right now, we have an opportunity to build upon the successes of the work that we put in place. It's a grassroots effort and a grassroots campaign that came and brought the Community Preservation Act to our table, Mr. President. It's something that was supported by the voters, that was passed by the voters. I'm not one that's going to stand in the way of that. But ultimately, if we listen to the conversations that we've had here at the city council meetings, affordable housing is a topic that we've talked about. I'm pretty sure Councilor Scott Peli has talked about recreation in the past quite a bit. I know Councilor Longo-Curran has talked about historic preservation. These are three priorities of this council, three things that we've been very, very focused on, Mr. President. And there are three things that the CPA directly provides for. So whether or not the match is 1%, 100%, 14.5%, I don't think we need to stand in the way of the success of our CPC. I think what we need to do is take a step back and let them do some of their work and let them see what the fruits of their labor is going to bear. So, I for one, Mr. President, would support receiving this paper and placing it on file, supporting a B paper to ask our state delegation to fully fund the Community Preservation Act.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, I'd absolutely support that. I'd absolutely support that. I'd second that.
[Adam Knight]: I think that's what he said. the people that are appointed to do their job, do their job, and be successful at it, and not stand in the way of it, and not interfere and impede the work that they're trying to do.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: We're under suspension, Mr. President. Paper 7661. 7661.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. In front of the stretch of homes between Rice and Willard along Willis Avenue on the odd numbered side, You'll see that it's very difficult for one vehicle to get by when cars are parked on each side of the street. In the audience today, we do have a homeowner that lives along that stretch who's contacted me and asked that we move this matter forward. Ultimately, the residents at 195-197 Willis Ave had a yellow painting in front of the curb. connotating that no parking was supposed to occur there. And over time, that paint wore off. I reached out and contacted the Traffic Commission in consultation with Councilor Marksley, who's been working on this with me, and we spoke with the members of the Traffic Commission. The Traffic Commission went down and took a look at it. The DPW painted a certain stretch of the curb. However, they weren't able to paint the curb. the entire length of Willis between Rice and Willard. And they also were under the impression that even though the curb was yellow, if people parked there, the police weren't gonna do anything about it so that the appropriate steps that needed to be taken in order to address this public safety concern would be to put a no parking sign up. However, the archaic and arcane way that we do signage in the city of Medford means that the individual homeowners who was aggrieved by this public safety concern is now asked to get a petition and go knock on doors and ask their neighbors to sign a petition to address this public safety issue. And I don't think that that's right, Mr. President. I think that clearly there's a need, clearly there's a public safety concern. and I put this resolution forward to request that the Traffic Commission take the appropriate steps to put the parking restrictions in place so that the individuals that reside on the stretch of roadway can feel safe and comfortable and know that if a fire engine or an ambulance is called to their home, that the fire engine or the ambulance can make it down the street to get to their home to bring them the life-saving care that they need, Mr. President. So it's a very simple and basic resolution, and it's really cut out of the cloth for the interest of public safety and emergency preparedness.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to be a B paper just because usually if you ask for two things they split the loaf and I don't want them to split the loaf. I want them to put the do no parking sign up to it. They can go examine the rest of it.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I'd like to thank the Councilor for bringing this resolution forward. Ultimately, I don't think it's any secret in this community we need to do something with Medford Square. And this is just another approach. I think that right now our redevelopment focus on Medford Square is a leave no stone unturned approach. And this is just another tool in the toolbox for us to take a look at, Mr. President, and see if we can make a difference down there. So I support it wholeheartedly and move approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Although Ball Square Cafe is located right over the line over there on Boston Ave in Ball Square, Mike Mosher's been a long time Method resident. I've known him for the majority of my life, Mr. President, I first met him. Going into Victor's Deli in Ball Square, that's owned and operated by his parents, Victor and Rosa, and his sister, Nancy, and her husband, Jason. Michael left Victor's and moved on to the Ball Square Cafe, where he opened up his own breakfast spot. And let me tell you, it's quite a place to go for breakfast, Mr. President. But more so, Mike's a great guy. He puts out a great product, and he's an integral member of this community here in Medford. He does a lot to give back. So with that being said, Mr. President, I ask my council colleagues to join me in congratulating Ball Square Cafe and its owner, Michael Mosher, a long time Medford resident, Medford High School graduate on the success of the organization. Councilor Dello Russo.
[Adam Knight]: Be it ordered that... Mr. President, motion to waive the reading and have a brief synopsis by the City Clerk.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, would you like to amend the paper?
[Adam Knight]: To request that our Elections Commission review all the polling locations and do an analysis of feasibility to see if there are better and more local options for residents that live in certain woods.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I've reviewed the paperwork and the paperwork appears to be in order. I've noticed a couple of concessions that the applicant has made. Initially, the request was to stay open until 4 a.m. Sunday evenings. Chief Sacco wasn't too fond of that idea and has approved a restriction of operation until 1 a.m. That's something that he feels as though he's comfortable with. Also, I've noticed that the petitioner has agreed to have the doors locked at 11 p.m. And no one will be allowed to enter the facility unless they're buzzed in through an intercom system that they have there, which also has a camera capability so that they'll know who's outside the door so that random people won't be wandering in off the street. I do have a question for the petitioners. Is there going to be any live music?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the paperwork is in order and everything appears to be signed off on by other heads in the like. So with that being said, I see no reason in the way of this approval.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Dyke. Mr. President. Very difficult for us to sit here and vote on a special permit when we don't have a traffic plan that's for us to review, that there's no clear and concise project schedule as to when this work is going to take place. And the petitioner comes forward, and they've met their obligations that's been issued by the administration. But the city engineer has certain criteria and certain parameters that she'd like to see met. But before we issue the permit, I think these are things that we also need to know. I mean, we need to know if there's network that's going to be going on there. We need to know if it's going to take eight months for them to fix this. We've entered into a situation where we have a project with a construction schedule in Medford, where the Craddock Bridge, and it's been going on for three years. But we don't know what the construction schedule is. Now, it's 160 feet of conduit that's going to be delayed. I think it's important that we deliver Wi-Fi to the business district in Medford Square. I think that's going to be a key component for us to help revitalize the district. We need to embrace technology if we're going to be able to do a better job in Medford Square and fill in those stores and making sure that it's a vibrant place that people want to go. So with that being said, I don't have so much problem with the petition or the request that's being made, but I do have a little bit of problem with the information that's provided us from the administration. And I'd like to see it, Mr. President. You know, I think Councilor Marks is on the right track. I mean, we want to see the curbs paved. We want to see it paved curb to curb. That's been something we've been hounding on for four years. It's a pet peeve of mine when I go down these neighbourhood streets and I see French work and grounded inlay work that isn't completed or is completed shortly. Sometimes it seems more so that public utility companies that provide gas and electricity than Comcast are more focused on getting the next shovel in the ground than they are about coming back and repairing the damage that they've done in the neighbourhoods. So that's one of the concerns that I have, Mr. President. Certainly, I think it's a noble cause and I think it's a great and a great way for us to expand opportunities and methods of work. I'm just a little bit concerned about the fact that we're not being provided with enough information for us to see a full picture and we're being asked to vote on a special permit this evening without knowing exactly what direction this project is going to go and what to expect after the issuance of the permit.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I don't think that the rub lies with the petitioner. I think that the rub lies with some of the information that we've received. I think that we've held a public hearing. We've heard that there's really no outcry of opposition to the approval of this permit. I think that really the issue is whether or not we as a council this evening are comfortable approving this permit with the contingencies that the traffic engineer, I mean that the city engineer submit the traffic mitigation plan and submit the traffic on the project work schedule. to the Council for approval. So we could this evening, Mr. President, approve the permit with the contingencies that the traffic plan and the schedule of work be submitted to the Council for approval. So if the permit can be approved, provided that those materials come into the Council and we approve those. Just an option, just a way for us to maybe move this along. I don't think the problem lies with the gentleman from Comcast. As I said, we just need a little bit more information to feel comfortable moving forward. We could approve the permit with the contingencies that the city engineer provided us with the traffic mitigation plan and with the concise work schedule for approval. And upon our approval, the permit will be issued. But we don't need to bring the gentleman back. I don't think we need to even have another public hearing on the matter. We can just ask that material to be forwarded to us and then vote as to whether or not we're comfortable issuing the permit at a later date.
[Adam Knight]: So as I understand it, Mr. President, the matter is that right now before the council would be moving for approval of the permit with the contingency that the gentleman has agreed to a curb to curb repaving that the city solicitor, I mean, the city engineer is going to report back to us what the construction schedule is going to be. And that the city engineer is going to also provide us with an updated traffic management plan. And the council would also be issuing a recommendation that the work be done off hours during the evening as to not impact negatively the local businesses or the traffic flow in the area.
[Adam Knight]: Move for approval as amended, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe we had that meeting already. We posed a series of questions to the city solicitor as to whether or not we could restrict the number of permits that are issued in the year, so on and so forth. I think that maybe we want to reiterate our need for a response to that paper as well.
[Adam Knight]: It was tabled based on a roll call vote for in the affirmative, three in the negative. I believe it was tabled for the purpose of receiving the answers to the questions that we had posed to the administration. But it doesn't say that, it just says upon motion to table a roll call vote. And it's not reflecting.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Clarity, Mr. President. So PayPal 17593 is off the table. We're going to vote on this evening to issue a permit. to dig a trench to access the armory building, and the same contingencies that we had just voted on for the prior paper would be in place?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, we're in suspension. Can we take communications from the mayor? Paper 17649. Motion by Councilor Knight to take 17649.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President and councilors. Mr. President, motion to waive the reading and have a representative from the administration. Give us a brief synopsis of the paper. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if I may? Constantly. Chief, have those door issues been rectified in their entirety? Have there been new doors placed in, or is it more of a patchwork repair type of thing?
[Adam Knight]: And if I may, Chief, would you be comfortable this evening giving us an update on the status of the relocation search committee for the training tower?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, so you've identified a site.
[Adam Knight]: Great. Thank you very much. You've been done. One other item I just want to follow up on. The turnoff key, has that been issued?
[Adam Knight]: The second set of turnoff key, or is the second set of turnoff key have been issued? We're just waiting for delivery. Waiting for delivery. OK. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Move approval, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Move to suspend the rules and take 1-7-6-5-0, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to waive the reading and have a representative from the administration give a brief synopsis of the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Mr. President? Mr. Mulkey, you said that there's Thompson Plumbing Company and they went out to this site twice? Two separate occasions. Two separate occasions and the total bill was only $545? Yes. That's quite a deal.
[Adam Knight]: Move approval, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: 17-652. Mr. President, City Council. Mr. President, motion to waive the reading and have a representative from the administration give a brief synopsis on the paper. On the motion by Councilor Knight, do we have a representative from
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Ms. Hunt, thank you very much for your work. I'm looking at this paper and reading what it says. grant for this, grant for that, grant for this. And I know that those grants didn't write themselves. And I think that they deserve a lot of credit for going out there and finding the money. So thank you very much for your effort. And looking at this paper, I mean, we have $265,000 to upgrade the LED lights at the Andrews. My math, as spooky as it is, would come back and show that we have about 12-year return on our investment. We're going to save about $22,000 a year if we convert to the LED lighting, and we'll be able to capture this investment within a period of about 12 years. I also understand that this $83,000 is a 10% match on the battery, correct? Right. And if you add the $265,000 and the $83,000, we come up with a figure of $348,000. So this appropriation is for $348,000, but we're also looking at $100,000 grant? A $478,000 grant? Yes. A $125,000 grant? So the $100,000 is
[Adam Knight]: OK. So in looking at all the grant money or the matching funds that have been awarded to the city, how much money are we talking here?
[Adam Knight]: So this evening you're asking for us to make an investment of $348,000 so that we can get a return on that investment of over a million dollars?
[Adam Knight]: I'm comfortable voting for this this evening. Thank you very much for your work, Mr. President, and for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Layton. Mr. President, thank you very much. This is a situation that is very similar to the situation we faced at the last meeting, where we had a business that was seeking a special permit that directly abutted a residential property that was multi-family use. Now, we have Wegmans, and Wegmans has been a great partner of the community. I'm not going to say they haven't been. Wegmans has done a great job in redeveloping their parcel and giving it a new, fresh look from that old, tired, and drawn-out look that was the Meadowbrook Mall. But we also have an opportunity this evening to protect the quality of life of 132 residents whose homes face this building and face this street, Mr. President. I, for one, am a little concerned about an application for a special permit. And Wegmans coming here and asking us to offer it when they really haven't been in operation for too long, as it is right now. And the residents, the 132 residents that units face this property, haven't really gotten the full picture of what it's going to be like when Wegmans is in operation, whether or not the hours of operation is 7 in the morning till 11 at night or 6 in the morning till midnight. One of the concerns that I might have is, We say, OK, here's your special permit. You guys can go until 12 o'clock at night, and you can deliver until 12 o'clock at night. Something I'm not too crazy about at this point in time, Mr. President. And what happens is the residents come back and say Wegmans has been in operation now for 180 days. And over the last 180 days, at 930 at night, 55 trucks pull up, and they make more noise than we could ever deal with. We have the opportunity, because this is a special permit, to put certain restrictions and certain parameters on the special permit. Some of those restrictions that we could put in would be that signs are posted visibly at the access points that say no loading after certain hours or during certain hours. And those hours can be whatever this council sees fit, whatever this council deems appropriate, Mr. President. Whereas this is a special permit, and I believe it's Governor, under Chapter 48 of the General Law, Section 9, we have 90 days to act on the request once it's perfected and comes to our body. And I think it might make sense for us to table this matter and wait 90 days and see what happens with Wegmans when they're in operation so that the residents have a better idea of what it is that they're dealing with, Mr. President. Ultimately, we're in a situation right now where we have a new, fresh business in the community, and they're a great partner. They are a great partner. But I think that the first job that we have in the City Council, number one, is to keep our streets safe, and number two is to protect the integrity and the quality of life of the taxpaying residents that reside here, Mr. President. And I think it's very important for us to recognize the fact that the condo market in the city of Medford is, through the roof, skyrocketing hot right now. The residents in these condominiums pay a ton of money in taxes, as does Wegmans, Mr. President, as does Wegmans. But I think that the residents have to come first. And I think that this is something that needs a longer and hotter look, Mr. President. We need to determine what the impact is going to be. And maybe we should look at that impact in the first 90 days of their operation. Right now, we have a permit that's in front of us that's saying, you let us be open longer. Why don't we say, well think about it, let's see what happens over the next 90 days, as opposed to putting contingencies and parameters on it. Why don't we see what happens over the next 90 days, let these residents get a taste of what's going on over there, so when they come back to us with their concerns, they have a little bit more of an informed opinion and a little bit more of an understanding of what it's really like. so that they can tell us what it's really like, because none of us live there. They live there every day, and they're the ones that are going to have to deal with this. So, well, you know, the partnership in the community is excellent, and we certainly appreciate the fundings that they've donated for the Clippership Connector and so on and so forth. It's the people that live in this community that make this community great, Mr. President. We need to protect them. So my recommended course of action would be tabling this matter for 90 days, as outlined by the general laws, which is well within our scope and authority, and seeing what happens over the next two or three months during the regular hours of operation of 7 a.m. to 11 p.m. so that we can determine whether or not there are additional parameters that need to be put on the special permit outside of the 11 o'clock hour, never mind granting it until 12. Maybe they come for a special permit and say we want our hours of operation to be X, Y, and Z. But all the residents are very upset that the deliveries that happen at a certain time, during jeopardy, I don't know, for whatever reason, whatever problems that the residents have with deliveries happening, whether the volume is high, so on and so forth. We have an opportunity to protect these residents, Mr. President, and I think that the proper course of action this evening would be to table the matter.
[Adam Knight]: Come on down, Frank.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Thank you very much, Mr. President. I appreciate it. Sir, can you please explain to me a little bit more about what Mr. Bakey was discussing, some of these contingencies and some of these commitments that you've made to the Condo Association over there, so we have a better understanding?
[Adam Knight]: The reason I ask, Mr. Dungill, is because I think that based upon what we're hearing from the residents, that they want to be a good neighbor. They want to be a partner with Wegmans. And I think they realize that Wegmans is going to be there for a long time, provided that they have tools to be successful. concessions that have been made, I think, are very important to gaining the support of the residents of 3920 Mystic Valley Parkway and their efforts to be in favor of extended hours. And I was hoping maybe that we could get these criteria outlined so that we could include them as conditions in the special permit. Because the way that I'm looking at it, I think, is that people don't seem to have too much concern over the front of the house. They're not too worried about the hours of operation being six o'clock in the morning till midnight in the front of the house. The concerns are really on the loading in the back. And, you know, the request that's before us this evening is to allow a 6 to 12 operation in the front of the house and allow a 6 to 11 o'clock at night operation in the back of the house. I, for one, am a little bit more comfortable with the status quo operation in the back of the house. and with the 6 to 12 operation in the front of the house. But I think it would be very important that we get these criteria included. I'd make the motion, Mr. President, to support the special permit, provided that there are restrictions that are placed upon it, one of them being that these special conditions and concessions that have been made by the developer and the condominium association are included as an addendum to the special permit. that the hours are restricted for deliveries from status quo 7 to 11 in the back, and that we allow the permit to go forward for 6 to 12 in the front for the operations of the house, Mr. President. I also have a concern about the permit being issued in perpetuity. And I think that there should be a review placed on it. And I also think that the permit should go with the petitioner and not the property. So those are some of the concerns that I have. And I think that with these parameters, I'd be comfortable voting for this.
[Adam Knight]: Correct. Do I have those three points? Those three points are correct. Hours 6 to 12 in the front of the house, 7 to 11 in the back of the house. The permit goes with the petitioner and not with the property. And then the criteria that have been outlined and agreed upon between the two parties would be attached as an addendum to the special permit so that we know what's expected.
[Adam Knight]: 30-day review, provided there's no problems with the deliveries. Maybe we can look at extending the hours of deliveries and the hours of operation in the back of the house, provided that there's no problems from the deliveries during the status quo hours. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Cops on night. This brings me back to my initial point, Mr. President, when I first spoke on the topic. We don't know what to expect down there. So now we want to go from 7 to 11 to 6 to 12. He just says, we're going to be going 100 miles an hour. The first 30 days, it's probably going to be bumpy.
[Adam Knight]: Well, why don't we do both, Mr. President? Because the residents are going to have to live there for the 30 days, and they're going to have to put up with it. So why don't we bring them in at 30 and at 90? So we can see if the kinks have worked out, if any issues are raised within 30 days that may be attributable. A 30-day review and a 90-day review.
[Adam Knight]: I'm all for it. All for it. Do it. I just want the flexibility to be able to address the residents' concerns and not have to wait 60 or 90 days to get the main evidence.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Scarpelli has requested a five-minute recess. Mr. President, can I move to have the record reflect that I vote in favor of that last paper, please?
[Adam Knight]: Where did you go to school?
[Adam Knight]: Where are you from? I'm from Lowell. Lowell?
[Adam Knight]: God, no Keith? That's what I was going to think was right.
[Adam Knight]: Do you go to the library?
[Adam Knight]: I used to go to the library. Oh, really? Are you from there? No, I'm from Medford, obviously. But no, I used to represent the waste water treatment plant and school custodians, the libraries, the school clerks, the cafeteria workers. You'd think it has been gone. It sounds like it's actually been abandoned. 10% of the population. You're busy, 90% of them. You see that in these people? I went there. Oh, you did?
[Adam Knight]: So Mike Javis was the Cambridge Region Latin basketball coach. Patrick Ewing, you know what I mean? They ended up down there in Georgetown. I chose Washington, rather. My father and Mike played together in college at Northeastern. They played against each other. My father played at Summerline. Mike played at Cambridge Island. And then my father was a coach. My father played at Northeastern. And Javis played at Northeastern. Well, they played together after college. And my father graduated. He graduated. He went to Cambridge Region Latin. My father went to Summerlin. He coached Patrick Ewing. when he got the college job. He's a lawyer?
[Adam Knight]: No, no, I live between Staten Fields.
[Adam Knight]: Do you go to the B&G? I literally go to the B&G all the time.
[Adam Knight]: Are you serious? Absolutely. I literally go to the B&G all the time. I don't mean to make myself sound like I'm too far off, but I go to the B&G all the time. Yeah, I go to some corrections offices. You guys always talk to me all the time. Motion to return back to regular business.
[Adam Knight]: Aye.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, we're under suspension. Can we take paper 17-606 off the table? 17-606. The recommendation for the sign for the Evangelical Occasion Church at 400 High Street.
[Adam Knight]: Aye. Mr. President, I think Councilor Marks gave an excellent synopsis of what occurred at the subcommittee meeting. I thank him and the other members of the subcommittee for their work. Personally, I think this is a good way to make some concessions to a situation that had some concerns. I'd just like to add that the permit expired with the petitioner, if my council colleagues would indulge me. And also, we put a 90-day review on it, and I'd have no problem supporting this this evening, Mr. President. I don't think I'd have a problem supporting it either way, but I have gotten some feedback from some abutters and residents in the neighborhood that did have some concern about the illumination and would like to see a review.
[Adam Knight]: Move approval as amended, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Committee report has been adopted. I want to move the paper out favorably. 17-606 approval for a special permit for the sign of variance with both following criteria of the contingencies. The AB&C that was established at the subcommittee, a 90-day review and the permit with the petitioner.
[Adam Knight]: We just adopted the committee report.
[Adam Knight]: We adopted the committee report and we took the paper up for the pastor and then we adopted the paper with those five restrictions.
[Adam Knight]: Well, the committee report came out. If I may, point of parliamentary procedure, Mr. President. The committee report was reported out favorably. That's paper 17651. Right. Paper 17651 contained two papers, 17606 and 17573. The petition 17606 is the Evangelical Church. But its entirety is the committee report. Yes. Which you're adopting those provisions.
[Adam Knight]: 90-day review and elimination. Good point. Good point.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and I'd just like to take a moment to offer my condolences to the Quigley family. Bill was a great guy. You'd always see him down at Puppers wearing his hat and showing that he was a United States veteran proudly. He and his sons would always go down for dinner. His grandson, Michael, and I were very good friends in high school, played lacrosse together. It's very sad to see him go. He was a good man, a good friend, and he's going to be sorely missed in this community because he was somebody that gave back. So with that being said, Mr. President, I move for approval on the paper. I ask my council colleagues to join us in offering our condolences to the Quigley family.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, this is a rather self-explanatory resolution. Ultimately, we spend lots and lots of money in this community on plans. And we get plans and reports back, but One thing that I think we're not so strong at is implementation. And this right here, Mr. President, is a measure that was outlined in the Medford Square Draft Master Plan. And it calls for the establishment of Medford Square Historic District. And I think that this is going to be a catalyst, Mr. President, in generating some interest in foot traffic down through Medford Square. I think it's going to be something that's going to help us revitalize that I don't wanna say blighted business district, but business district in need of some resuscitation. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'm asking my council colleagues to support the resolution asking for the Medford Historic District Commission to exercise their power established under the general laws and by city ordinance to provide the mayor with an analysis on the implementation thereof so that it can come to the council and then we can move forward on the matter. In looking at this, Mr. President, and thinking about the situation in Medford Square and the status of the certain requests that come before this council, I also want to put forth a B paper asking that the Medford City Council place a moratorium on sign variances in the proposed Medford Square Historic District until the analysis is completed by the Medford Historic District Commission. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'd ask my colleagues to support the A paper and the B paper moving forward.
[Adam Knight]: And if I may, Mr. President, the reason that I bring the B paper forward is because if we're going to take a serious look at preserving the historic character of Medford Square and the sub squares that have been identified in the master plan, then I think one thing that we need to do is make sure that we have some continuity and some compliance with our locally established ordinance. We've been giving a lot of variances. The property, 5 High Street, comes to mind. We've had how many requests for sign variances at that one property? That's one of the keystone buildings in our square. And the more times we issue permits for non-conforming use of signs, the less and less character we have down there, the less and less historic feel that we have down there, Mr. President. So I think that it is time to take a look at that. I certainly have no problem with Councilor Longo's recommendation that we deal with it at a later time. However, it's something that I think is very important. I think it's very important to the revitalization of our square. I think it's very important to the aesthetic feel of our square. And I think it's very important to us preserving our historic landmarks in the square and those items that people recognize from afar and have recognized from afar for many a year. So with that being said, Mr. President, I withdraw the B paper. I'll reintroduce that paper at a later date. And I ask to move for approval on the A paper.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I find this to be a great resolution. I hope the councilor doesn't mind if I amend it and give 10 recommended intersections that we can place flashing stop signs at. No, in all seriousness, this is a great resolution. It's something that the community needs. I was just sitting on Woburn Street the other day, and I watched five cars in a row going 35 miles an hour blow through a four-way stop sign. Just one after another. Boom, boom, boom, boom, boom. So it's getting to the point now where the cut through traffic is not only becoming a problem with congestion, but they're also getting pretty familiar and bold and almost have a contempt now for the rules of the road that we have here in our community, Mr. President. So I think this is a great measure. Anything that can raise awareness to drivers and bring some more controls to the area for pedestrian safety is something that I'll always support. This is a great resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think this is where it becomes important that we get the traffic engineer on board. We get the traffic engineer on the payroll. Because the traffic engineer is probably going to be the one that's going to be able to determine where the best locations are and where we're going to get the most bang for our buck and the most impact.
[Adam Knight]: And I think Chief Sacco is on the right track when he talks about that. I mean, Chief Sacco, I think, is more excited than anybody to have a traffic engineer come on board here in the city. for the last 20-some odd years. He's been the one that's been wearing the badge that says this is where the stop sign goes, this is where the do not enter sign goes after the deliberations from the Traffic Commission. So I think this traffic engineer is going to add some professionalism. It's going to allow us to have some data-driven decision making, Mr. President, as opposed to some reactionary decision making. So I'm looking forward to it. But I think this, again, is a great resolve. I mean, we can ask the Traffic Commission to implement, but the locations, I think, really should be up to them and the traffic engineer, the people that have the ability to make data-driven decisions.
[Adam Knight]: We've had the opportunity to see you at your finest hour. We had a couple of council meetings over there in the media center, and things went well. It's certainly a lot cooler in there than it is in here, and the lights aren't as bright. But with that being said, can you tell us a little bit about your experience so far being there, based upon where you've been in the past and where you are now, what you think the direction the media center can go in, and what we should expect?
[Adam Knight]: And in terms of programming right now, obviously the TV Guide right now.
[Adam Knight]: And where can an individual find out what's playing and when?
[Adam Knight]: Great. Awesome. Thank you very much. Keep up the good work. The place looks great. I think you're doing a great job. Thank you. Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Ben, if you could tell me, the Cori check is required. What if the Cori check does not come back clean? Is the person now precluded from being able to utilize the studio, or is it just so that you know that there is someone in there that might have a questionable background that needs to be monitored more closely?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, a couple of questions for the gentleman at the podium. It sounds like, based upon the presentation, that you haven't signed the producer in indemnification form. Is that correct?
[Adam Knight]: And if you did, you'd be subjecting yourself to a Corey check, is that correct?
[Adam Knight]: What I'm more concerned about, sir... Just bear with me for a minute.
[Adam Knight]: Just bear with me for a second, sir. You'd have to take a Cori check if you signed up for the producer identification form, right?
[Adam Knight]: It's not a big deal. Can you pass the Cori check? Of course I can. You can, Mr. Corry.
[Adam Knight]: I'm concerned about you. I actually worked for the school department for a couple of years.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I do believe I have the floor.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe I have the floor, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I'm congratulating you on your excellent presentation this evening. I do appreciate you coming out here this evening.
[Adam Knight]: What are they called?
[Adam Knight]: Sounds like you had a good night. Congratulations. I really do.
[Adam Knight]: It's nice of you to come up here and put that aside to come up here and share with us, so I do appreciate that, Mr.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, this is bringing me to my point, Mr. President. I fail to see how this is helping move Medford forward.
[Adam Knight]: I was just asking a question.
[Adam Knight]: I don't find it to be scary either. That's why I was just trying to get a little bit more clarification.
[Adam Knight]: It doesn't sound very scary to me, but I do appreciate Councilman Longocare bringing this matter forward, and I do appreciate Mr. Brown for being up here this evening as well, because I think he did a great presentation. So thank you very much, Mr. Brown. Name and address of the record, please.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Clerk. The minutes haven't been adopted. I do not know. The minutes haven't been adopted from the last meeting. Until we get official minutes.
[Adam Knight]: It is 17607, Mr. Kessinger. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: We'd like to take the sisters for ovarian cancer out of order, Mr. President, if that's possible. Sisters for ovarian cancer.
[Adam Knight]: Is that me? Is that a check?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to waive the reading and have the representative from the petitioner have a brief synopsis
[Adam Knight]: Okay, thank you. So it's strictly sidewalk work? No. Yeah, nothing in the street. And what materials are used to replace the sidewalk panels? The same existing? Same, yes, it's concrete.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President also looks here that the petitioner has agreed to remove an asphalt patch that's been put around another existing utility pole as part of mitigation to help fill those gaps of concrete to keep it consistent with the rest of the sidewalk. So I have no problem with this petition, Mr. President. I move for approval. Second.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to waive the reading and have a representative from the petitioner give us a brief synopsis of the project. That would be, let me see, Siena Engineering Group.
[Adam Knight]: This is what it looks like, what, 948 feet of trench work that you want to do? I think it's about almost 1,100 feet. Almost 1,100 feet. Yeah. And you said something at the beginning of your presentation. You said this is going to be common trench work like you see all around the city. And we've had a big problem in this city about trench work that's being performed by public utilities in the community. Just last month, we had a committee of the whole meeting with the city engineer, and we asked a series of questions to the city solicitor as to whether or not we could place a moratorium on trench work. One of the big problems isn't necessarily you guys getting in there and doing the work that you need to do, because you need to get the work done. never coming back and fixing it to the standard that we want to see it fixed. And that's become a very big problem in our community. We're seeing a number of streets in residential neighborhoods and in main roads alike that are getting torn up and torn apart. I mean, if you look at tonight's agenda, for example, you know, if you have 1,100 feet, we've got 115 feet coming up after that. I mean, we're looking at 2,000 feet of trench work that we're going to be putting through the city. You know what I mean? There's applications for 2,000 feet of trench work in the city. And we have some questions that are pending right now before our City solicitor that I think I'd feel a little bit more comfortable getting an answer to before I move forward in supporting this paper. You know, 1,000 feet is a lot of stretch of land. It's 10 football fields. Councilor Dello Russo is absolutely right. That neighborhood has been beat on for the last three, four years between, you know, the reversals of Winchester Street and the direction that it's going in, the impact that the expansions of the Harvard Street Bridge have had. the discussion about eminent domain land takings coming up in the near future to, again, accommodate the extension of the Greenland, which I think is going to be a benefit to our community. Don't get me wrong. I think the Greenland extension is a good thing for us here in Medford. But in the meantime, we have residents that really need to maintain a strong quality of life, and that hasn't happened in that neighborhood. So this evening, I'm having a very difficult time supporting this paper, Mr. President, if we don't have the answers that are going to come back from the city solicitor. based on the committee of the whole that we had. And the committee of the whole meeting that we had was exclusively focused on trench management and the issuing of permits to public utilities and what they do to our streets, and whether or not they come back, and whether or not there's a schedule for them to come back, and whether or not we can limit the number of permits that are issued in a quarter or a year, so that we can better manage the job and better oversee the job that's being done. Because I think that the focus is more on the next special permit than it is on coming back and completing the work from the last special permit that you got. Now, I haven't had the opportunity of working with Siena, and I'm not sure what Siena's reputation is or anything like that. I'm sure you guys are great. You're working for AT&T, which is a multinational company, you know, a $20 company. So I'm sure you guys do a great job. But we need to do some housekeeping here, in my opinion, before I feel comfortable supporting this paper. And I'm not going to be able to support it this evening, Mr. President, for the reasons that we've asked a series of questions to our city solicitor through the administration. Asking for some input and some feedback as to what we can do to better manage The trench work that's being done in our community because it's killing our streets It's killing our neighborhoods and and the residents are speaking to go out against it in this particular street in this particular neighborhood they have been under the thumb of construction for the better part of three years and It is in the work needs to get done.
[Adam Knight]: In this alternative here that's being presented, I would assume would be the least costly alternative to the provider, right?
[Adam Knight]: Is there another way you can do it where you don't have to dig 1,000 feet in one of our city streets, I guess is the question.
[Adam Knight]: There's barely any space between U.S. Travel World and, you know, from what they've done over there, it's about this far away from the building, so I understand we don't have a gap.
[Adam Knight]: into our roads? Or can you go underneath the rail bed? Can you go through some of them?
[Adam Knight]: And really Winchester is... And what do these conduits service? Are they home telephones? Are they internet IP? Bandwidth? What do they provide?
[Adam Knight]: I appreciate you for answering my questions. I don't think my positions move much off of Mr. President, although the answer is from the solicitors office.
[Adam Knight]: Based upon your plans and construction guidelines and so forth, do you see a need to do any more underground work on Winchester or Granville before the completion of the Green Line extension?
[Adam Knight]: Because part of the concern would be if we did go curve to curve, then that would put in effect a moratorium for digging. So we require to go curve to curve. and pave the whole entire street, then we could say that they can't dig for five years.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. So you just said that you've gotten the authority to do curb-to-curb?
[Adam Knight]: I anticipate it. The other question I have was, would You have a pre-construction meeting, obviously, with our engineering department. Absolutely. Absolutely. Would you be willing to have a pre-construction meeting at maybe the South Metro Fire Station with the same people that are the abutters that are on your abutter list?
[Adam Knight]: Why not?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think we're making good progress tonight. You know, a curb-to-curb solution is something that... So it's just my agreement that you are going to do a curb-to-curb?
[Adam Knight]: And so, could we have that as a condition? If you could put that as a condition, Mr. President. And just another condition that there's a meeting that's held pre-construction with the residents that are at Butters. At Butters, upper Butters.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to waive the reading and have a representative from the petitioner give a brief synopsis of the project.
[Adam Knight]: Sir, were you here when we just did the last permit? Yes. And can we have some of your feelings concerning a curb-to-curb pay upon this project as opposed to a trench and patch and a grounded inlet?
[Adam Knight]: The location that you're requesting to dig, and I'm sure you're from Woburn, I'm around the Woburn area, so I'm sure you're familiar with the area, but right at that particular location, there are points and times where there are two MBTA buses that are driving down the street and they can't even get by each other. I think we have a gentleman from the square who owns a business down there, a restaurant, that's getting killed by construction on the other side of the square. right up the street on the other side. So two points of entrance to certain businesses are going to be blocked or hampered or impeded for a period of time. Now I know you're only going to be out there for one or two weeks tops, as you said, on High Street. And then if any residual effects happen, I'm assuming that the rest of the repair work would go up Hillsdale Road if it's damaged? Yes. Okay. And that's not a major act, I don't think. It's a neighborhood. That's not something I'm so worried about right now, because you guys don't know what's underground over there. You don't know if there is a problem over there. But the concern that I do have is with flow and with the trench repair work. And I'm not going to give the same 25-minute thing that I just did at the last one. But ultimately, you know, we have a problem in the community with the way that our trenches are managed and our trenches are overseen. And I don't think we're doing a very good job at it. We need to do a better job at it. So in order for me to be comfortable with this, I need some insurances.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And Mr. Camardi, thank you for being here again. I think we're all familiar with Matt. He's been here a number of times before. I request a permit. This particular permit, I have no problem with. I'll certainly support this evening, and I look forward to the next permit to come back for some street trench works.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President. I've got a couple of questions for the gentleman. Excuse me, sir. Councilor Knight has a couple of questions for you. It's somewhat unrelated to the topic that you brought up, but we've had a number of resolutions that have gone forward from this council concerning Brooks Park and some illicit and what we call unsavory behavior going on down there, maybe behind the new apartment buildings and so on. The council's passed a number of resolutions and I might follow it up a little bit, but I'd like to hear from you as to what impact you've seen. Have you seen an improvement down there in the illicit activity that's going on in Brooks Park?
[Adam Knight]: I heard they were ordering pizzas to their cars, staying in the parking lot and hanging out all night. Right. Some of the things I heard from residents. But I haven't seen that lately. So aside from the uptick in the enforcement in the parking over there and some of the communication issues that are going on and everything in the neighborhood seems to be going well. It seems to be all right. Excellent.
[Adam Knight]: I was just wondering if you had the dates as to when these tickets were issued.
[Adam Knight]: I'd appreciate it.
[Adam Knight]: And please give that to Ray and let Ray give it to me. I appreciate it, Mr. President. It almost sounds like the gentleman received two tickets, right? You received two tickets and you paid $25.
[Adam Knight]: So you came in there and you went and paid 25 bucks.
[Adam Knight]: Oh, you paid for both tickets. I paid for both tickets. Okay, all right. It's sad because it almost sounded like you paid for one but not the other.
[Adam Knight]: When you went in there, you appealed one and paid for one.
[Adam Knight]: Because obviously it was issued in violation of law.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think every meeting that we have is a public meeting. I mean, every meeting that the council has when we convene is a public meeting. And I think also that it's important to point out that, you know, oversight and the implementation of the traffic regulations falls under the jurisdiction and purview of the Traffic Commission and Republican come all they want, but if the Traffic Commission is not on board as the oversight agency, then we could be talking to a deaf ear as we're talking to the wall. This is under the purview of the Traffic Commission. This is something the Traffic Commission establishes. They've contracted out with an entity for parking management purposes and the purposes of the contract is to enforce the existing parking ordinances that are constructed through the Traffic and Parking Commission. So, I think that if we're going to do anything, that it should be important that they're involved as well, Mr. President. And I can totally understand, however, you know, also looking at this thing on a Citywide basis there are there there are inconsistencies. There's no question about it, but I Think that we need to come up with a better solution Then you know I have this ticket happened on this day at this place this guy did this at this place You know that that approach doesn't really bring us to a solution mr. President, and I think we need to come up with some solutions as to what it is that we need to do and some of these things that are going on in the community have been what I would call a laughable in moments, and you know what I mean, just wrong in others. And I've had good luck in speaking with Mr. Stackhouse and explaining the situations that are going on in the community. But part of the issue that I have, Mr. President, is that when we said, let's bring parking into Medford, let's bring parking enforcement into Medford, that the focus was on freeing up spots in our central business districts to prevent people from other communities coming in here and taking up spots in our downtowns. And it's expanded upon that. And I was a little bit more comfortable when the focus was on our business districts, not in our neighborhoods, not on streets that are dead ends, not on streets that, you know, have had families living on these streets for 30 and 40 years, like Sylvia Road, where they have individuals that have a system of how they park because they've all lived together and they're good neighbors and they know what's going on. So, they might block a driveway or they might park with two tires up on the curb. so that cars can get by. Now, the gentleman on Brookings Street, Brooks Parker, spoke about a commercial vehicle where the guy lives on Sylvia Road. Well, that vehicle's off of Sylvia Road. Why was it off of Sylvia Road? Because the neighbors went to him and said, you can't park your car here. It's a commercial plate. We can't get up and down the street. And they policed themselves. And they've been able to do that successfully for a number of years. And we're coming into a situation now where I think Park Medford's focus is leaving the business districts and coming more towards the residential neighborhoods. And we need to really realign and refocus the direction that they're going in, because I don't think it's making the residents' quality of life any better. And I don't think that it's really meeting the objective and goal that was stated when they first came up. So I appreciate you taking the time to come up here, Mr. Scott, for all the work you're putting into doing it and investigating. Thank you. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much and thank you very much for your patience going through the process. I know it can be a confusing and daunting task sometimes to get involved in government when you're not familiar with it. Yeah, ultimately the sign was 11 feet tall when it was brought forward. They had a rendering of a gentleman that said it was six feet tall, and next to the guy there was a sign that went way over his head, so we all had a number of concerns about that. It's at the location of the church right next to the book school, so there was some concerns about sight lines and visibility and whether or not it was gonna impact pedestrians and cars driving up the street and so forth. I think in our discussions, we said that we're not really opposed to the sign being five by eight, but based upon the rendering that we have here, confirmation and some assurances that, you know what I mean, it's going to be a little different. So this is something that I've been waiting to hear at the council floor since you came in for your first application. We went through the subcommittee process and the subcommittee did a great job on it. You know, and I certainly don't have a problem supporting the sign this evening and I'll move for approval, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilman? I personally, Mr. President, have lived next to churches and across from churches with my address on High Street where I have two churches that are right next to me. One church has a sign and one church doesn't. The church that has a sign that's in non-conformity with our sign ordinance always has message posted on it. The church that doesn't have a sign, instead puts two stakes out there and puts a banner out there. And they change the banner from time to time and it looks awful. It looks absolutely terrible. It's an eyesore to the neighborhood, really. And I think that, you know, this isn't going to be harmful, provided that we can put some restrictions on it. It's a special permit request. They're asking us to issue a special permit and we have some concerns about internal illumination. Assuming that the concerns of my council is have about internal illumination are that they don't want it lighting up the sky at night So we can put restrictions on it eight o'clock nine o'clock ten o'clock Whatever it is that we feel comfortable And we could also put restrictions on it if we approve the sign to say that they won't put any hang any banners or any other type of materials in the front lawn, so ultimately we'll have a clean, crisp look. It may be a little bit bigger than we're used to, but at least we're still protecting the quality of life in the neighborhood, because I think a big sign that's lit up that's controlled in the certain hours that it's controlled to be litting up is much better for the neighborhood than two posts that are stuck up there with an old sign that's hanging down the middle, and then it gets changed every three days, and it flaps in the wind, and it looks terrible. So I'm inclined this evening, Mr. President, to support the petition as filed. However, I know that my colleagues have concerns and I want to be a part of coming up with a solution that we can all have by putting our heads together. And I think that putting restrictions on the application would probably be a solution that could kind of satisfy everybody behind the rail.
[Adam Knight]: I no longer have a second. Second. I no longer have a second.
[Adam Knight]: Aye. Mr. President, please mark me in opposition. Are you still chairing? He is still chairing.
[Adam Knight]: That's right. Mr. President, I think you may be correct. Evan Street was not included in that expenditure request that came forward as being funded through another process. And from what I understand, Now, I'm pretty frustrated about the 7th Street thing, too. You know, we're looking at this 24, maybe 36 months now. It's been going on. You know, it's going out to bid. It's going to be out to bid in May. Well, the bid never got awarded in May. Then, you know, work's going to start, you know, May, June. Well, now it's August. Work still hasn't started. So I'm a little frustrated with the situation as well. But the answer to your question, no, it wasn't included in that. It's being funded through a different mechanism and a different paper.
[Adam Knight]: That's why they haven't resurfaced the street, because they want to dig it up to make a water main surface.
[Adam Knight]: What happened was the contract got awarded to Mr. Capucci and then when the engineering department said that this is your construction schedule and your construction criteria, they said we can't meet those criteria, so you have to re-bid the construction. So they backed out of the deal after they were awarded the contract. But from what I understand, they weren't one of the preferred vendors that the city uses anyhow. So the product that they put out isn't necessarily one of the better ones, but based upon the public bid laws, that's who we were stuck with. Although it's been taking a long time, the delay may be a blessing, because from what I understand, the workmanship of that entity isn't necessarily the best of the best.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Capucci, I'm in full agreement with the residents in your street that know that I come to a lot of city council meetings too, call me and say the same thing.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Layton. I think Councilor Marks is on the right track, Mr. President. I think our council rules can dictate whether or not this is something that we can handle ourselves without having to make a request to the mayor. Also, if we look in our council rules, it says every ordinance and every order for a bond issue shall before its passage be referred to the solicitor who shall forthwith examine its legality and respond back to the council in writing thereof.
[Adam Knight]: You know, there are a couple of remedies in there for us to take, and I think that we should just do them ourselves as opposed to kicking it across the hallway. We've voted on this in the past. I've supported this measure in the past, Mr. President. Some of the frustrations that my Councilors share. I don't see as much of a, I have a strong working relationship with the administration, past and present. I pick up the phone when I get my agenda and I talk about issues that I have questions on. But maybe some people don't have that type of access, I don't know. I do the best I can to get the information and be prepared for the meeting. But I think that our council rules could really dictate what direction that we can go in and how we can police this ourselves as opposed to relying on someone else to do it. But it's something I've supported in the past, I certainly have, but this evening I won't be.
[Adam Knight]: item doesn't have to make the agenda if we don't have the information that we need. Just because the mayor sends a paper and says, put this on the agenda, it doesn't have to happen the next week. We control our own agenda. We control when the items and matters come up. So if we get a paper that says, put this on the agenda, we say, well, let's talk about the council, but when do we want to put this on the agenda? Maybe we have six papers that are coming up for bonds, and let's talk about bonding for a whole meeting and have a universal picture of what's going on in the city of Medford in terms of bonding instead of doing it Play and connect the dots.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Stone and Skillet, Mr. President, is located on the corner of West and Winthrop. It is a bakery wholesaler that over the past several months has not been the greatest of neighbors, Mr. President. I've received a number of complaints from area residents concerning their hours of operation and the cleanliness of the facility. and some parking concerns that they have. Ultimately, this bakery wholesaler has operated in excess of our hours of operation. They're permitted to operate from 7 a.m. to 11 p.m. Between May 1st and June 22nd, I personally reported 16 violations of operation after hours. This coupled with the fact that there's a dedicated parking spot beside the building for 30 minute parking which has turned into stone and skillets personal loading zone for their renter car, renter truck, 18 wheeler that sits there for 7 to 8 to 9 to 10 hours a day without moving. The facility and the grounds around it are in deplorable condition, Mr. President. And I'm asking for these materials so that we can move forward and investigate whether or not there's anything that we can do to designate them as a public nuisance and move them out of the neighborhood. So, it's been brought to my attention in recent weeks since I filed this resolution that a gigantic for rent sign has been placed on the side of the building, which would lead me to believe that Stone and Skillet is on their way out of the community. The bakery wholesaler does not fall under the jurisdiction by state law of our local Board of Health. They're controlled by the state Board of Health. So we have very limited recourse concerning our concerns about the cleanliness of the facility and what's going on around it. With this good news coming forward that they are putting the place up for rent, I'd still ask the paper to move forward and for us to be prepared, because they said they were going to move last year, they said they were going to move the year before that, and they haven't, Mr. President. They've certainly outgrown this facility, and I think it's time that they find a new location. Whether that location is in the city of Medford or somewhere else is to be determined, Mr. President. But right now, I think that these residents have been subjected to enough quality of life issues down there that the benefits that Stone and Skill are bringing to the community are lacking. And the impact on the quality of life that they have is major. And for that reason, I bring this resolution forward and ask my council colleagues to support it.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Back a few months ago this council passed a wage theft ordinance, and a wage theft ordinance is designed to ensure that taxpayer dollars that are being paid to public contractors are then passed on to their employees pursuant to the public wage laws. What happens a lot of times in these instances is an individual that works for a private contractor that lays pipe, for example, with all these groups that we had this evening, that's working on a public works project laying pipe. is going to have to be compensated at the prevailing wage rates established by the Department of Industry. And a lot of times what happens is when a private contractor gets a public contract, they continue to pay their clients, their employees at a rate that's far less than the prevailing wage rate, and then they pocket the difference. And the laws are clear in what they call for. They call for individuals working on a public work project to be compensated at the prevailing wage rate. Taxpayer dollars are being funneled away from workers and being funneled into the pockets of profiteers. So we passed the wage theft ordinance, Mr. President. Part of the wage theft ordinance called for the city to examine whether or not any of the existing contracts have been included on the disbarment list at the Attorney General's office or found in violation of any wage and hour laws that are established at the state and federal levels. ordinance is now up and running and in effect, Mr. President, I'd just like to get a report back from the administration as to what steps they're taking to implement and whether or not any of the contractors that we've awarded contracts to have actually been found in violation of any of the state of federal wage laws or have been included on the state disbarment list so that they're exempt and precluded from bidding on future public works projects, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: The Wage Theft Act just ensures compliance with the existing wage and hour laws. And it requires the applicant for the public bid to make certain disclosures to the community so that if in fact they are found in violation, then they have to take certain steps to ensure that if a complaint is brought forward to them, that they have bonded funds that are available to cover the payroll if in fact they have funneled or diverted this money from the worker and into the corpus of the business. So it doesn't really necessarily speak to the actual total amount of the bid. What it does is say if you have seven people that are designated as a municipal street sweeper, you need to pay the municipal street sweeper rate of $37 an hour for the hours that they work on the contract. And you're gonna work the contract for this many hours, so that's the rate that you have to pay them. And the rate's established by state law, by the Department of Labor and Industry.
[Adam Knight]: Well, the rates are established through the Department of Labor and Industries based upon the creation that you rent.
[Adam Knight]: Right, the public bid laws are relatively specific, and the city's ability to go and put restrictions in that would exceed the requirements that are established by state or federal law is not available to us.
[Adam Knight]: Or say you work a 40 hour work week, but you really worked a 60 hour work week and they paid you 40 hours at straight time and then the 20 hours under the table. Or say that you worked a 40 hour work week, a straight 40 hour work week and they only paid you at your previous rate from the job that you were working on a public work project and that rate is 50% less than what you should be making when you're working on the public work project. I think that that's some of the, it's really an effort and attempt to get some of these unsavory contractors that do business in municipalities out.
[Adam Knight]: I believe they call it. I think that's a Code for more money Thank you
[Adam Knight]: I guess the question that I have, Mr. President, is This letter that's been signed, do all eight candidates still stand in support of it?
[Adam Knight]: Would you be willing to disclose, Mr. President, which candidates? I will not. We know it wasn't Ms. Conyo.
[Adam Knight]: It can make sense, it makes sense. It certainly makes sense to save money, but then we also have to think philosophically about the way government works. We have to think a little bit more about what dictates why a primary election is supposed to occur. I, for one, came forward and stood with several of my colleagues against a home rule petition to change our charter. I stood with my colleagues and I said, I think that this is something the voters should address. Right now we have a charter that dictates the way our election should work. If we're going to change that document, that that document should be done by the initiative petition process and should be done from the ground up based upon the will of the voters. So I'd have a very difficult time this evening supporting a paper that would waive the requirements of a primary election because the primary election is dictated and outlined. in the charter of our community, the document, the blueprint, the constitution of how we're supposed to run our government. So I'd have a very difficult time waiving the primary. I guess it's a moot point at this point because Councilor Caraviello has withdrawn the paper and there's no paper that's before the council this evening addressing that issue. However, I can certainly see the benefits of it and the financial aspect to it. However, the question comes as to what's more important, process or the funds. And I would have a very difficult time if this paper was still on the ground today to vote to win the primary election, Mr. President. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, point of parliamentary procedure? I'd like to make a call for the orders of the day, Mr. President. The paper that's, the discussion that's being held before us is attached to a paper that's been disposed of already by the council.
[Adam Knight]: We're going to continue this discussion. We can do it during the public presentation of the meeting, but we do have some agenda.
[Adam Knight]: They were allowed to do that.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information. So for the record, do you want to waive the primary?
[Adam Knight]: Oh, because I'm looking at the letter and your name's on it, and I just wanted to figure if that was... Okay. That was all, Mr. President. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I think this is a good resolution and I second the recommendation. Ultimately, we just this morning, I should say this morning, it feels like this morning, but a little earlier in the evening, we had a presentation by the Massachusetts Area Planning Council and our Office of Community Development concerning the master plan for Medford Square. And that plan focused a lot on the Clippership Connector. So I think it's very important moving forward since we have this draft plan for the Medford Square that they're looking at that we understand what's going on over there environmentally. on the Clippership Connector, because that seemed to be a major part of connectivity between the square and other parts of the city.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Steve Tanaglia, Brian Cairns, and the members of the Medford DPW. I placed a phone call and put this matter on the resolution on the council agenda, but because we're meeting sporadically over the summer, the issue was taken care of in 24 hours. So with that being said, Mr. President, I withdraw the resolution, and I thank the DPW for their prompt and quick response.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe, Mr. President, the public records law would dictate the provision of public documents to individuals in the community. That's the state law. I find it nonsensical for the council to think that they can move forward and put more stringent requirements on something that's already been established by a higher governmental jurisdiction.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I too got the same phone calls that the Councilor refers to. And I've had conversations with the project manager, Mike Winnick, as well as Dan Fields, the DOT contact and liaison. And it's been brought to my attention that probably the start of September, all the work's going to transfer to the other side of the bridge. All the public utilities are going to be able to be moved. That was the side of the bridge that had the most significant amount of public utilities underneath it. That was the side of the bridge that was going to be posing the most trouble and complications during their what seems like once in a while construction that they do. And come September 1st, it was my understanding that they would be moving to the other side of the street and all the work done in front of Carol's restaurant and the Zamperrelli building and so forth would be complete.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, but if I may, I think that maybe in terms of the direction we're going in, calling the state delegation and telling them to do something, why don't we have the state delegation tell us what they're doing and see if that's something we want to support. So maybe it might be nice for us to have a conversation with the representative and the representative share with us what efforts that they're taking to see if that satisfies us as opposed to standing in line.
[Adam Knight]: Why don't we just ask to be invited to the meeting that he's setting up.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and a lot can happen in 18 months. As the corner office transitions to a new administration, we saw former Mayor McGlynn reach his 50th wedding anniversary, and we also have seen his daughter bring another grandchild into the world for him. So I'd like to take a moment to congratulate Amanda and Patrick on the birth of their first child. They've just purchased their first home as well. And I think it's a great momentous occasion to see a family that's five generations in Medford continuing to stay in the family and hopefully have a sixth. So with that being said, I just hope my council colleagues would join me in congratulating Amanda McGlynn Collins and Patrick Collins on the birth of their first child, Ella McKenna Collins.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. If anybody remembers their time at the Brooks Harb School or at Medford High School, they'll remember Mrs. Downey standing in the front door saying, how can I help you, lovey? And she did that for a good 35 years. And her son, David, is my closest friend. I met him the first day of school in kindergarten at the Brooks School. And we keep in touch today, even though he's moved overseas across the country about 20 years ago. But with that being said, it's with great happiness and great pride that I stand here today and I congratulate my friends, Pat and David Downey, on the momentous occasion of their 50th wedding anniversary, especially on this night, because this is a very night that's, this night's very special to me. So with that being said, I'd ask my council colleagues to join me in wishing Mr. and Mrs. Downey a very happy 50th wedding anniversary and wishing them another 50 more.
[Adam Knight]: the energy use. Mr. President. Councilor Knight. I'd like to amend the paper to be added as a co-sponsor. And if you could add, Mr. Clayton, if you could add.
[Adam Knight]: I'm sorry? Does that make me be the one that has to read it? Oh, it's a long one. Do you want me to read it?
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. It's with deep sadness that I put this resolution forward. Annette was awake last evening and was given her burial today. She's a good friend. Her son John and I grew up together. Her son Tommy and I grew up together. And very sad to see her go. She struggled for a very long time with multiple sclerosis and was also bravely battling cancer towards the end. And the illness got the better of her body, but didn't get the betterment of her heart and soul, Mr. President, through the whole time that she was ill. She was a constant fighter, and it's just a tragic, tragic situation to see it happen. I want to just offer my deep, insincere condolences to the family. You know for those of us that remember Annette, we'd always see her down in Mario's Classic Barrel working down there for Mario or over at the liquor store, clerking at the liquor store on Mr. Gabb. So, you know, she's a face that's been in the community for a long time. She raised two great kids here in the city of Medford and she's going to be sadly missed, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Mr. President, we're on suspension. Paper 17575 off the table, please. 1775.
[Adam Knight]: Community Preservation Act Homework Petition. Councilor Knight, motion to receive and place on file.
[Adam Knight]: The petitioner is not here, Councilor Knight. I say that the paper's out of order, Mr. President. It's not really a petition because it's not a use of the petition process. It's really something that should be referred to public anticipation. You are correct. Thank you. Move to questions.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Like I said, Mr. President, it's more of a procedural issue than anything else. I feel as though it's something that should be done in the public participation process of the meeting. That's not something that can be filed at the beginning of the next meeting and be put on the next meeting. It doesn't have to be something that sits on the table for the entire period.
[Adam Knight]: I just have a little bit of a concern, Mr. President, about the way that the petition process is being used and not necessarily maybe in the right way or in the right frame. I think the petition process is starting to become overly politicized and a lot of these items that are being brought up through petitions should really be done during the public participation process.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to suspend the rules to take up 17570, 17571, convictionless petitions. That's it.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Naito. Mr. President, this is something I'm very excited about this evening. This is something that's been in the works for quite a bit of time when the Brown and Blue coffee shop was removed and we've seen Dave's Fresh Pasta on Holland Street that's been very successful. That's a very successful business over there in Somerville. They run for their money, but I don't want to let anybody know that out here. But I think that this is going to be a great addition to the community, Mr. President. And I, for one, feel as though this is something that should be supported this evening, and I'll move for approval to pay for it.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President thank you very much and Mr. Solicitor thank you for being here this evening. If you'd be so kind to explain a little bit about the background and why the MBTA has taken the position that local zoning laws won't control the height of the tower and so on.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I certainly feel comfortable supporting the majority of the signs here this evening. I think that this falls in line with some of the work that we've done in the past at the Fellsway Plaza. We've approved some signs at the Fellsway Plaza that actually enhanced the way that the And I think that these signs will do the same thing. I certainly have no problem with the signs that are advertising particular businesses, Mr. President, but I do have a problem with sign K. And Sign K isn't advertising a particular business. Sign K is advertising wine, liquor, and beer. It's going to be located directly across the street from our skating rink, directly across the street from Honell Stadium, and directly across the street from the campus of the McGlynn Andrews School. So with that being said, I certainly would support this evening approval of the 15 signs, but I myself personally can't support Sign K. It's not something that's advertising a store. It's advertising a product that's sold inside a store. And I think that that is really not the intent of our sign bylaw. So with that being said, Mr. President, I have no problem supporting the 15 other signs, but I'd move for approval of all signs except the sign K at this point in time.
[Adam Knight]: It doesn't say turkey, steak, and potatoes either, you know what I mean?
[Adam Knight]: Like I said, I can live with 15 out of the 16 in 30 seconds, but 16 out of the 16, I can't do. So if we want to exclude a particular sign.
[Adam Knight]: I think it's also important to point out one of the things that was discussed at the Committee of the Whole earlier this evening was the regional bulk purchasing of the electrical load. Maybe you can talk a little bit about that and how that had an impact on being able to secure such a low rate.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, so it sounds like this past year in our budget hearings we learned that we were able to save about $300,000 in the provision of our electricity to Esquiz by taking over the maintenance of the poles, right?
[Adam Knight]: And now with the approval of this, we're going to be saving another, what did you say, $422,000? That would be over the life of the contract. So in the last three months, say, it's almost close to three quarters of a million dollars that we could save on just the cost of electricity by these two boats. Yes, within 20 years. It's still the same amount of money.
[Adam Knight]: Well, we have one more resident in.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to waive the additional reading and have a brief synopsis by the city solicitor representative of the administration.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I think this is a step in the right direction. It's another really building block to the long-term success of the Chevalier Theater and also helping revitalize Medford Square and, you know, kind of bringing Chevalier Auditorium up with the times. You know, you go to the Somerville Theater in Arlington, both of those theaters over there have the ability to serve alcoholic beverages on premises. And in order for us to compete, I think that this is something we need to do. I support it wholeheartedly and I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to waive the reading and have a brief synopsis by the State Solicitor.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, as the chairman of the subcommittee on zoning tonight before us, we have a hearing, a public hearing on a special permit. And this hearing is governed by chapter 48, section nine of the general laws. And if we take a look at chapter 48, section nine of the general laws, you know, it will say that the special special permit granting authority has the right to allow nonconforming multifamily residential use in an industrially zoned district. It goes on to say that in order to do that, the Special Permit Granting Authority has to find that this non-conforming multifamily residential use is in the public interest. So that happened, and we have a facility on Locust Street now, a multifamily residential use on Locust Street that directly abuts this property, Mr. President. And as we read Chapter 48, Section 9, which this hearing is being governed under, it says that the non-conforming use shall not adversely affect the existing industrial uses and provided further that future permitted uses will not be noxious to the non-conforming multifamily residential use. So here before us this evening, we're gonna be asked the question on this application as to whether or not this particular site's an appropriate location, whether or not, as developed, it will not adversely affect the neighborhood, and whether or not there'll be no nuisance or serious hazards to pedestrians and to vehicles. We're also being asked the question as to whether or not these are adequate and appropriate facilities. Now, Mr. President, I personally have no problem with the facilities. I think they are adequate and appropriate for this type of business. I do have serious concerns about whether or not this is going to be a nuisance or a serious hazard to pedestrians and to vehicles on Linden Street. Linden Street's a dead-end street, Mr. President. We have the petitioner here before us saying that they're going to have five employees plus two other people there. That's seven people. They have parking, as they said already, for five bays of cars that's locked between two electronic gates, Mr. President. I think that's going to create a serious nuisance and a serious hazard to pedestrians and to vehicles alike on that street. Secondly, Mr. President, as we look at this, you know, we have to say the use as developed will not adversely affect the neighborhood. And I don't think anybody behind this rail can say with 100 percent certainty that that's going to happen. I think we all have questions about noise. We all have questions about smell. We all have questions about traffic now. Also, Mr. President, as we look at this, the question is whether or not this is an appropriate location for such a use. This directly abuts a multifamily residential use. And the people who live in that building have come up and expressed concern, Mr. President. People that live there now, residents of this community, have said that this is something that they don't want in their own backyard. And I can understand why, Mr. President. I certainly think that the petitioners have done an excellent job in putting together a strong business plan. The petitioners have done an excellent job in putting together something that's going to be successful. I just don't think this is the appropriate location, Mr. President, and it's for those reasons that I'm not going to be able to support this paper this evening. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Back several months ago, several months ago, Albert, the council, myself and Councilor Penter, I believe, if he's still around here, had put forward a council resolution to congratulate you. The Medford City Council had put forward a resolution to congratulate you some months back.
[Adam Knight]: Yes about the metal.
[Adam Knight]: Me too. Medal of Honor.
[Adam Knight]: never well the council did mention it Albert myself a Councilor and Councilor pet to put it forward to so we asked you to come down and we wanted to congratulate you and since we have you here tonight hopefully give you a round of applause thank you sir and it's also Albert's 95th birthday
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Mr. President? Point of information, Councilor Knighton. I don't think it's the nature of the business that's anybody's concern. It is the very nature. No, it's the location. It's not the nature, it's the location of the business.
[Adam Knight]: That's why it's required to go through a special permitting process.
[Adam Knight]: Right, it's a perfect location for them to operate a business that they're proposing and they're coming before the council and they're asking us whether or not we feel it's a perfect location.
[Adam Knight]: In your opinion.
[Adam Knight]: Move the question, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think that the resolution sums itself up. Judge Lee Johnson passed away recently. He was a great, great public servant, a great person, and a great individual, Mr. President. He went above and beyond the call of duty. to provide for his constituencies. As the first justice of the Malden District Court, he did an excellent thing in implementing drug court, Mr. President, and instead of putting individuals in the system, he got them assistance and treatment. And I think that's a compassionate and humane way of going about things, and it's become the norm, Mr. President. So I'd like to extend our deepest and sincere condolences to the family of Lee Johnson, a longtime Medford resident, on his recent passing.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. It's ironic that we're here this evening having our meeting in Medford High School because this is where I first met Rosemary Alfie when she was Mr. Maskell's administrative assistant, as Mr. Maskell was the submaster and Ms. Alfie worked there on the second floor of the B building. She recently passed away unexpectedly at age 85, and I just want to say that she was someone that made my days in high school a little bit brighter every day that I came to school and I got to see her face. She was certainly someone that made my day a little bit easier and made things go a lot smoother for me in high school. So I'm very, very grateful to have her as a friend. And I'm very, very sad that she is gone. And she will be sadly missed. I ask my council colleagues to join me.
[Adam Knight]: No, communicate, that's what I meant. I'm sorry.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Finance question, Mr. President? Councilor Knight. Ms. Zerwan, can you explain what impact this is going to have, if appropriated this evening, on the schedule of bonded indebtedness and the plans to hopefully construct a new police station and fire station?
[Adam Knight]: So zero impact on our ability to bond in the future. We're still on the same track as we were. And what was that last part I missed, I'm sorry?
[Adam Knight]: Retained earnings, okay, excellent. Thank you very much, I appreciate it.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. So I know Councilor Schapiro just asked about Evans and Paris, and I'm just a little confused. So where are we exactly on Evans again?
[Adam Knight]: When did the contract ago?
[Adam Knight]: Was any of that information shared with us?
[Adam Knight]: I don't recall seeing it. You know, I echo Councilor Scarpelli's sentiment on Evans Street. This needs to get done. It's been something we've been beating our chests about now since November. You know, it's almost been a year. Even longer. Even longer. So with that being said, I'd like to see that get done as soon as possible. And I'd like to ask that we get quarterly reports on the status of the Evans Street paving project, Mr. President. Thank you. Councilor Dello Russo.
[Adam Knight]: important to point out that when the Massachusetts State Legislature passed the public smoking ban back in the early 2000s, they exempted private clubs. And they exempted private clubs and they allowed local control. And they vested that local control into the local boards of health. Personally, I think if they were going to implement the ban, back then the legislature should have either implemented a ban or not implemented a ban, but they left these certain low-hanging fruit, as we'll call them. that are out there. So what's happened here in the City of Medford is we've had a couple of changes at the Office of the Board of Health, a couple of changes at the members of the Board of Health, and they've brought this proposal forward and they voted on it. It's my understanding that when the proposal went through, there were a number of individuals that were very upset in these private club settings about learning of the fact that smoking is going to be banned in these facilities that they've been smoking in for a long time. So in response to that, the administration felt as though it would make sense and the Board of Health felt as though it would make sense to sit down and give a period of time for people to have dialogue and exchange some conversation about the situation, Mr. Castagnetti. So as of right now, it's my understanding that the reason why the moratorium was put in place on the ban was to allow for the stakeholders, the people at the VFW, the people at the American Legion, the people down at the Amici Club, the people over at the Sons of Italy, and every other private club, the Elks, for example, to come and get to the table and sit down with the Board of Health and talk about what's going on and why this is happening and why they're seeking to implement it. And I understand there's also been some discussion about doing what they've done over in Winchester at your private club, which is designated smoking areas, so on and so forth. So right now it's actually a work in progress, Mr. Castagnetti. It's my understanding that the Board of Health is meeting with the leadership of the clubs, or has met with the leadership of the clubs, and they're going to continue to keep them informed. on the ongoing deliberations and discussions and include them in these conversations.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, rather self-explanatory resolution. Very recently, Chris Murphy, one of the city's members of the Parks Commission, recently had his first child. He and his wife, Caitlin, had their first child. And he's a very happy, proud dad. Caitlin's very healthy. The baby's very healthy. And I just wanted to take a moment to congratulate them and wish them the best of luck in their new endeavor. Thank you. All right. He's still up, by the way, now that he had the baby.
[Adam Knight]: I'd ask my council colleagues to join me in supporting this resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I would certainly second that motion. I think it's a great idea, and I'd like to add that if they do pave it, that they stripe it as well, so that we can have defined parking spots there, because it does get a little haphazard during the busy season.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I move to waive the reading and have a brief synopsis by the Director of Financial Services, please.
[Adam Knight]: Ms. Dunley, if you could take a moment to just go through the end of year transfers and explain the document that you passed out. I know the document that we have here this evening is a little different than what we received in our packet. It's much more detailed, and I think it answers a lot of the questions that may have come up. So if you'd be kind enough to go through a brief presentation, I'd appreciate it.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, it's been my experience that at the end of the year, we see a number of end-of-year transfers. We have some accounts that run in a deficit, some accounts that run in a surplus, and really all this is is housekeeping to balance the books. I know that there looks like there's a good amount of surplus here that's going towards a snow and ice deficit, which is something that we need to take care of at some point in time as well, Mr. President. I wanted to thank Ms. Notley for her presentation. I think she did a lot of work putting this document together, and I appreciate it.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, Ms. Nunley mentioned something. She said that, you know, if we reduce the funds in this paper, then it's going to have to be made up for the snow and ice control through the tax recap. And I was wondering if she could get up and explain to us a little bit about what impact that will have on the community and on the tax rate going forward.
[Adam Knight]: So you'd add this surplus deficit, this deficit for snow and ice to the 2.5% maximum tax?
[Adam Knight]: So it would be snow and ice plus the property tax would generate a tax levy? Yes. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: We want to direct the questions for the chair, and then she can have an opportunity to address them afterwards. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I move to postpone the hearing of this matter until after a committee of the whole can be held for an explanation from the administration as to where this expense is going to go. I know there's been a number of concerns from the business community about that, and I think that it might make sense that we all sit down in the same room, Mr. President, and kind of figure out what's going on with these appropriations before we move forward in spending the money.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I just want to be clear that the motion's understood. The motion is to lay the paper on the table until such time as the Committee of the Whole can be held.
[Adam Knight]: Table the paper until after the committee of the whole.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if anybody wants to be notified, if they can leave their email address with the city messenger, maybe we can send out a notice to those people that are here today that wanted to I'll learn more about the topic and we can inform them when the meeting is via email if they leave a letter to the messenger.
[Adam Knight]: Council night. I'd recommend having a committee of the whole before the July meeting on July 18th, if that makes everybody happy.
[Adam Knight]: We can schedule it for July 18th. This committee of the whole, provided that representatives from the administration can be there. We can go off that night before our council meeting.
[Adam Knight]: For your approval, the fiscal 18... Oh, we have to take up the table, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Nice. Maybe Mr. Belson can give an overview of the school department's budget as well, Mr. President. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Belson, do you feel as though based upon the budget that's been approved and appropriated by the school committee for a request for appropriation from the city council that you can meet all of the state and federal mandates and requirements that have been set forth?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: And can you tell me, the vote looks like it took place on June 19th? I'm sorry? The budget vote for the school committee looked like it took place on June 19th? 21st. 21st.
[Adam Knight]: 7-0, unanimous. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I won't go through every single highlight of the budget because the superintendent's done it, members of the administration have done it, members of the council have done it. I'd like to take an opportunity to thank Ms. Nunley for her hard work. I'd like to thank Ms. Kahn for her hard work. I'd like to thank Ms. Irwin for her hard work. We sat through nearly 20 hours of budget debates in a short period of time and these three individuals were there every step of the way with us. When the budget debates were over and we asked a number of questions, we went home and they went back to the office and they got us the answers that we needed and they got us the answers in a timely fashion. So thank you very much for the hard work and effort that you put into this budget. Mr. Belson, I'd like to thank you as well. You did a great job putting your budget together. You gave a great presentation and I really appreciate the work and effort that you and the school committee put in as well. One thing that's a highlight of this budget that I haven't heard much about is the work that happened in the electrical department and the work that has been performed by Steven Rendazzo. And his electrical department budget was decreased by $300,000. And he was able to decrease his budget by $300,000 through a cost-saving measure, where the electrical department actually purchased the streetlights from National Grid. And this resulted in a $300,000 savings to our budget, which is actually the equivalent number to the monies that we appropriated for the recreation department. So I think it's very important that we recognize the work and effort of Steve Randazzo. He's one of our newer department heads here, gone above and beyond the call of duty, and he's done a great job managing that department. And he's shown us savings, and he's shown us his experience, and it's really paying off. This budget does build on the successes of the past, Mr. President, and I'm very excited to see that we're utilizing the Office of Substance Abuse Outreach and Prevention and building upon the successes of that office with a recovery coach. So it's a very important role here in the community, and I'm very thankful that we have it in the budget. I'd also like to take a quick moment to thank the school committee for the work that they've done. Last year they put forward one of the best budgets that I've seen the school committee put forward in a long time. And this year they've built upon those successes as well, Mr. President. So I'd like to thank the school committee as a body for all their work and effort in putting this document forward. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'd like to move the question. I think this is a good budget. It's something that I can wholeheartedly support this evening. And I'd ask for a roll call vote.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I can certainly understand why the Chairman made this motion. In the past, we've had a number of requests for signs that have been put into subcommittee, especially at this particular location. I can understand why the Council wants to do it. It looks like this sign is going to be next to where another proposed sign has been, an application has been submitted for another proposed sign. The business owner of the building has given letters of support in the past as to what it is he'd like to see, and I think that that's something that we might require here. But in terms of the design of the sign, Mr. President, I think it's a nice design. I think it does fit in with the historical nature of the square, and provided that the building doesn't look like a NASCAR, you know, car with advertisements slapped all over it. That's something that I don't think I'll have a problem supporting, but I do think that Councilman Marks is making a proper and appropriate suggestion that it go through the subcommittee process. so that we can take a look at the whole picture and the whole building at once.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. It's being referred to subcommittee and the summer meeting schedule doesn't have any reflection subcommittee meeting schedules. The subcommittee schedule is usually, uh, taken care of by the chairman. I understand we get into vacation schedule and stuff like that, but I'm sure that, um, it's based upon the leadership of Councilor Marks. This is something that could happen in short order.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Marks, thank you for bringing this issue forward. I think that it's about time we start talking about this project. It's gonna be right around the corner. I certainly think that your resolution is one that's rooted in common sense, and it's something that we certainly need to look into. The question that I have is, would a committee of the whole be beneficial, or do you think that moving forward with a community meeting might be of help? If we have a community meeting, then we can have Eversource come and give yet another presentation on the project, and then maybe have some input from the residents in the community as well. We'll have our own questions, but sometimes I feel as though when we paint something as a committee of the whole, we have a lack of interest and a lack of involvement. If we paint something as a community meeting, and we ask the individuals in the community to come out and express some of their concerns, we might get a better turnout and some more constructive involvement from the personnel in the community. But it's the councilor's motion. I support it wholeheartedly the way he wants to go. It's just merely a suggestion.
[Adam Knight]: We can do both for that matter.
[Adam Knight]: Why don't we do the committee of the whole first and move forward as Councilor Marksley will get some of those technical questions answered. And then if we see fit, we can move forward with a community meeting. I think at some point in time, we're going to have to do it regardless. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I wholeheartedly support the resolution and second it. I would like to ask my council colleague, Councilor Falco, through you if the tracking software is going to have any impact on the way that our resolutions are tracked moving forward, if he's aware.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, this is an issue that we just addressed down in Riverside Avenue. About a year ago, I went down to the Riverside Avenue fire station with Mayor Burke to take a look at the same exact issue that was happening in the driveway apron at the fire station, Riverside Avenue. And after some discussion with the firefighters on duty, we've determined that it's attributable to the chains that they put on the tires of the trucks and the weight of the vehicle that comes down. So I'm hoping that as we move forward and we look at these issues in the community, we look at the type of material that we're using on these driveway aprons in front of our fire stations, because it's clear that the concrete asphalt mix that we have right now cannot withstand the test of time.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd just like to take this opportunity to extend my deepest condolences to David and Matt and Suzanne and the grandkids on the loss of Kyle. Over the last couple of years, it's been very tough for the Galuzzi family. Matt and Dave lost their mother about a year and a half ago, and they've lost their father. just this week. So, um, I'd like the council to join me in offering our condolences. Um, Kyle was a great guy. He'd always, uh, see him up there on the corner of Winthrop street and Whitney road, uh, the corner of Blakely road and Whitney road, um, hanging around, sitting on the porch. Uh, he's always the first one to come up to you and shake your hand and tell you a funny story. And he'll be sadly missed Mr. President. So, uh, with that being said, I'd ask my council colleagues to support this resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think that if we're all going to sit back and talk about some legislation that the council passed this year, one of the things that we did was a demolition delay. And I'll tell you right now, I wouldn't have supported the paper if it weren't for Danny Menezi. Danny's a great guy. He was supporting historical preservation in the city of Medford before it was the cool thing to do. He was on the forefront of this issue, Mr. President, for a number of years. His involvement in the historical society, and his ability to find these old photographs and old articles about the city of Medford was something that I really enjoyed, and he's going to be sadly missed. I offer my condolences to Mary as well. She's a very hard worker, who's done a great job up there in the DPW office, and it's reflective on her work during the budget hearings that we just had, Mr. President. She had every answer to every question. So with that being said, I ask my council colleagues to join me in extending our deep and sincere condolences to the Menizzi family on the recent passing of Daniel.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, if I could make a brief announcement this morning, I believe it was, I was driving to work and I was listening to the radio and on the radio, there was an individual that came on from Andover, Massachusetts. who had just appeared before the MBTA's fiscal control board relative to the issue of these communication towers that they're putting up along the commuter rail. And, um, based upon the tone of the article and what was report, uh, the tone of the radio report and what was reported, um, it seemed as though the fiscal control board had some serious concerns over what's going on with these towers, almost like they didn't know what was happening. So I look forward to a report back from the MBTA on that, Mr. President. But I did want to provide some updates to the council based upon what I've learned. I've placed a call over to the legislative liaison at the MBTA to see if I can find out any more information. But just heard it this morning on the way to work, just last week or two weeks ago, we talked about the ordinance. So this is something that I want to keep in the forefront. I think this is something we all want to keep in the forefront because the 73-foot tower Right behind Tyler Radley-Chawin Road in Medford isn't something that's going to add to our quality of life, and it's certainly not going to be an improvement to our community. So with that being said, Mr. President, I just wanted to make that brief announcement. There should be more information forthcoming.
[Adam Knight]: Well, first of all, Madam Mayor, thank you very much. I appreciate your work and your efforts in being able to secure this grant. Zoning has been a topic of discussion during the last term, week in and week out, and it's very important that we take a long, hard look at our zoning here in the City of Medford to determine what direction a strong focus and a strong effort to look at maintaining sustainable parcels of commercial and industrial parcels to be sure that we can offset our residential tax burden as well as looking at developing some more infrastructure down on Mystic Avenue to allow us to grow. It's an untapped resource that's in the community. It's something that we've heard a lot of outcry about and it's something that I'm looking forward to working with the Mayor. and the residents of the community and the members of the council with. I'd really like to thank you for your efforts. Since Mayor Burke's election, we really have been partners in progress. We've done a great job working together, coming across the island, across the hall, and that's going to continue going forward. So thank you very much, Madam Mayor, for your efforts and your work. And thank you very much for having me this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think this is a rather self-explanatory resolution. Ultimately, I went to the park over the weekend with my kids, and my kid picked up some Canadian goose poop, which grossed me out to no end. So I've been talking with some individuals in the community. I talked with the director of the parks department. It's a problem that's prevalent in a number of our parks in the community, and I'm hoping that the administration can provide us with an action plan as to how to address it. We only have a very small window where we can utilize our public parks. It's finally stopped raining, and we finally had some nice weather out there. So it's my intent that we have opportunity to quietly enjoy our public parks free from goose droppings.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Nice. Mr. President, I have had great luck with the Board of Health and the Code Enforcement Office in getting some of these issues rectified as well, so I really think it might be that we need to point an individual in the right direction. With that being said, though, the lady was kind enough to pass out a copy of an ordinance that I'm hoping we can all get copies of. At this point in time, I'd ask that the paper be received and placed on file. We have an opportunity to take a look at the draft ordinance that's in place, and we can contrast that with our existing rules and regulations that are established by the Board of Health and the Building Commission, and then we can determine whether or not we need to move forward with a minimum standard of cleanliness ordinance, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. To the gentleman at the podium, I do believe, and refresh my memory, because I know you've got a lot of good notes there. At one point in time, the previous administration did put forward a paper for the council to appropriate $250,000. Isn't that correct? Yes. Yes. And do you know when that happened?
[Adam Knight]: October 2014.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. And then the paper was introduced to the council floor, I believe.
[Adam Knight]: So there was a request made of the council to incorporate $250,000 to the building districts, but the previous council didn't act on it.
[Adam Knight]: Folks, the previous administration did send us a paper requesting appropriation.
[Adam Knight]: And then that money was never appropriated because the council failed to act, correct?
[Adam Knight]: See, I'm remembering that we got a paper requesting the $250,000 be appropriated. That's why I ask, because my recollection is a little bit different than that that was presented. But with that being said, I rest, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I've actually drafted a draft ordinance regulating short-term rentals. And I'm just putting the finishing touches on it. I'm actually waiting for a little bit of feedback from two neighboring communities. And once I received that information, I was going to produce a paper. Ultimately, the paper that I put together with the proposal was to require a short-term rental operator's license. And we define a short-term rental as a book stay of 29 consecutive nights or fewer. The state's division of local services has offered a number of opinions on this relative to whether or not we can tax them as a motel or as a short-term lodging facility. So there are some technical questions and some technical expertise that's going to be required, Mr. President, before we can put together a working ordinance. In my research, one of the other things I found is that in a lot of places, they've drafted and implemented ordinances that are so restrictive that they make it impossible to enforce. And that's something that I think we need to take a look at as well. Because if we're going to craft an ordinance, we're going to have to craft something that's going to be able to be enforced. Because if it's an ordinance that can't be enforced, people are going to continue with their behavior, and they're not going to comply with the regulations. So there's been several conversations that I've had between you and I, actually, because we were both working on this together. to address the issue. But I thank Councilor Scarpelli for bringing it up and I can send him a copy of the draft proposal as soon as the finishing touches are put on it.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. A couple of the items that are being looked at would be an annual license, a residency requirement for the operator that has to reside in the property. On-site and off-street parking must be made available and utilized for all patrons in their vehicles. So on-site, off-street parking. That means that they're not going to be parking in neighborhoods. No more than two adults per bedroom per stay. No more than foreign-related individuals staying during the same stay. The provision of a copy of the noise, trash, and parking ordinances posted inside the rental dwelling and included in the rental contract. The provision of a 24-7 emergency contact hotline for all the neighbors to be posted on the front door in case anything happens. A physical safety inspection of the dwelling by the city on a quarterly basis, the cost of which will be borne by the short-term operator. the ability for the city to institute discipline that's progressive up to and including fines and the revocation of license, and the requirements for a general liability insurance policy, Mr. President, and a figure that has to be determined to ensure that personal property and individuals that are staying in the place are protected appropriately. So those are some of the things that we've looked at thus far.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to amend the paper, Mr. President, and get an update from our state delegation. I know that there was a paper going through the House of Representatives to regulate short-term leases. And I know that there was also a paper in the Senate that was very different that was going through. So if we could get an update from our state delegation as to the deliberations regarding any implementation of state law, I think that would be helpful as we look forward to constructing our local ordinance. It needs to comply with the state standard.
[Adam Knight]: Move approval, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, earlier this afternoon, the subcommittee on zoning and ordinances met to discuss paper, I believe it was 11474, related to wireless telecommunication towers in the city of Medford. A presentation was put on by the city solicitor and the building commissioner. Upon conclusion of the presentation, the council moved, uh, the subcommittee moved to, uh, refer the paper to the committee of the whole. So, uh, the paper is going to go before the committee of the whole for further discussion and deliberation. Uh, it was a rather well thought out and technical ordinance that governed the placement of cell phone towers and wireless telecommunication facilities in the city of Medford.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President. I think it's also very important to point out that although this is an ordinance change, it will have to go through the legislative process, but it's also a zoning change. So because it's a zoning change, it's going to take about 180 days from start to finish for the paper to come to fruition. I don't want to think that people to think this is something we're delaying. It has to go to the Community Development Board, come back to the council. There has to be a series of public hearings before we can move on it. So that's why it's good that we're starting the process now.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. As we've started our budget hearings and we've discussed a lot about personal and ordinary expenses in the City of Medford's budget, one of the things that we continuously discuss is the fact that the majority of the funds that are being appropriated in the FY18 budget are for negotiated salary increases and contractual obligations. As such, Mr. President, I'm requesting that the administration provide us with some documentation relative to the status thereof related to collective bargaining agreements between employee organizations in the city and the school department so that we have a better understanding as to where they are and what direction these negotiations are going in.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the committee has decided that they want to go to the Committee of the Whole. That's fine. I just wanted to inform the delegation that we had some preliminary discussions this evening and early last week about setting up a summer schedule for zoning and ordinance to address some of the papers that are in committee. However, if the council feels as though we should go to a committee of the whole first, that's fine with me.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Neistat. Mr. President, thank you very much. I certainly think that noise monitors will help us in our plight against Massport and the airplane noise that we have in our community. I do have a question, maybe we can put this in as a B paper, as to how the location of the Andrews School was selected. I know that we've had a number of discussions about locations of noise monitors, where we want to put them, so on and so forth. If we're going to be requesting that a delegation expend funds, and we're going to be requesting the placement of additional noise monitors, I guess my question is, do we want to take a longer how to look at it and study whether or not we can get more bank for our buck with the placement of three towers in different locations that may cover the entire city? Because it's my understanding we have one tower in the community now. If we had four towers in the community, we'd be able to cover the whole city of Medford. How was this location selected, I guess, would be my first question, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: So the reason that the Andrews Middle School would be the selected location is because, based upon the information that our Massport CLC representative has told us, is that 100% of the aircrafts that fly out of Logan on that runway will go over that beacon? Yes. So if 100% of the?
[Adam Knight]: So 100% of the planes are going to fly over there. A good amount of them, yes.
[Adam Knight]: I believe the implementation of GPS trackers is part of the federal government's edict to Massport to transition from a beacon system to a GPS system. And as part of that, it's a directive of the federal government, which would preclude the city of Medford from going up the chain and suing the state government or the federal government due to federal preemption.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knightth. Mr. President, thank you very much. Um, may I be so bold as to suggest that we table this matter for one week? For the simple reason that tomorrow night we're having our budget hearings with the building commissioner. I believe this building falls under the jurisdiction of the building commissioner right now as it's a city-owned parcel. It's vacant. And we're having our meeting with them tomorrow night. We might be able to get some of these questions answered tomorrow night during our budget debates, our budget discussions, without having to send a paper to the administration and having to wait for it to go through the proper protocols. We take the paper, we send it to the mayor. The mayor takes the paper, she refers it to the appropriate department. The appropriate department gets the paper, notifies the mayor that they're in receipt, puts a report together, sends it to the city clerk.
[Adam Knight]: The city clerk. The city clerk then takes that paper and puts it back in our packet as a response. I think it might be a little bit more efficient, Mr. President, if we considered tabling the matter for one week, brought the matter up. Are you making a motion to table? Well, I mean, I think that this isn't my resolution. It's a resolution that's been brought forward by two councilors. It's been seconded, thirded, and fourthed at this point in time, Mr. President. But I think that this is an alternative course of action that we can take. We may get an answer a little bit quicker. So, you know, if it's the body's wishes and the delegation's wishes to go through the process and wait for a response back, that's great. If we want to table it and maybe have a meeting tomorrow with the building commissioner and ask him about it, or do both for that matter. I mean, we can raise the issue tomorrow with the budget hearings. That's fine. I just think that for us to send the paper forward and then ask for a response and then you know, have the approval of the budget be contingent upon a report back on the Heckness Center, it might be more expedient for us to sit down with the building commissioner and discuss this issue. They're going to be before us tomorrow night anyway, provided we provide him with the notice that this is a topic of conversation. I don't think he'll have any problem discussing it tomorrow when answering some of the questions and concerns that we have. If we need to delve further into the situation, then we can put a paper forward addressing the specific questions that we want answered that have ever been unanswered. But again, I would, um, I certainly would defer to the wisdom of the body. I just think that this might be a more expedient way to get it done.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, on Saturday morning, we had our budget discussions and Chief Sacco was before us and we had a long and very fulfilling discussion about Medford Square and some ways to make Medford Square a little bit safer. And one of the easiest ways that was noted was to improve the lighting in Medford Square. This council has been very proactive in looking at the lighting and the fixtures, so on and so forth, that's going to be utilized down Medford Square. And it's my understanding that we're almost at the point of implementation. So I'd like to ask the city administration to provide us with the status of the upgrades, as well as a schedule for the implementation, so that we can share that information with the community. So the individuals that contact us with concerns about transient individuals in the square and safety concerns that they have. can be addressed appropriately with some accurate information that shows that there is going to be some improvements in the area.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, yes, we've all seen a trend in government, see something, say something. If you see something wrong, you say something. And I think one way for us to see more is to have more rise across the community. We've had a number of questions and concerns and issues that arise relative to our public parks. We have a number of issues and concerns that arise relative to our publicly owned buildings, concerns about vandalism, concerns about injuries, concerns about crimes that may have been committed, concerns about the general maintenance and upkeep and what's going on in the neighborhood. So I think that this would be a very low-cost proposal for us to implement stronger security measures throughout the community and allow us to have more eyes on the ground, Mr. President, to allow us to go back and take a look and see what happened to this. Why did it happen? How did it happen? Why is there a lot of dumping going on in this certain section of the community? Why is this place structure continuously getting vandalized? Why is this port-a-party in a public park continuously getting burnt down? I think this will be a helpful tool in us identifying some of the concerns that we have in the community related to quality of life and public safety, Mr. President. I'd like to move forward for approval and ask my council colleagues to support the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I certainly have no problem with the individual, Councilor, amending the motion. Ultimately, if we think about it, the Boston Marathon bombers were identified through traffic cameras that were in the community. So this is a measure that's only going to make us safer. Week in and week out, we hear discussion about roadways that are unsafe, speeding cars, cars blowing through the four-way intersection at the bottom of Doonan Street, for example. So maybe we have some problem intersections and some problem locations, and this would be a great idea, Mr. President, for us to combat some of those issues with the limited amount of manpower that we have. We can embrace some technology and hopefully see some benefits in investing in technology.
[Adam Knight]: That would not be the intent in my understanding based upon the discussions that I've had with the chief of police is that certain sections of the general laws would need to be adopted before we can utilize traffic cameras to even consider issuing speeding and tickets or parking, moving violations. But that's not my intent at all. It's more or less a see something, say something opportunity for us to monitor the streets and if something happens have the ability to go back and review what those eyes have seen to maybe see if we can identify trends or identify certain criteria that might contribute to public safety concerns, whether it be traffic backing up in the morning at Winthrop Street, so cars taking a left-hand turn, go around the rotary once, and then try to cut into the left-hand lane. If we see a patent of involvement or a patent of activity at a certain location, maybe we can put a sign up there, a patent of activity where the police have to be called. We can put the cameras up on those intersections and then take a look at what's going on there, and then go back and monitor it and see if maybe we can control it through signage, through other traffic control devices, through education.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Nice. Mr. President, as filed, you know, my concern was more about public buildings than our parks. And then the paper was amended to address some certain intersections and streets.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I certainly understand Councilor Marksley's position. I think that this was more about a question of whether or not Big Brother was watching and they were going to use this as a tool to start finding violators for certain traffic violations. That wasn't the intent at all. It was a data collection tool, not a punitive measure, punitive tool.
[Adam Knight]: There's a lay on the table.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I defer to Councilor Falco. This is an issue that he's been working on since his start of the term this year, and I think he should be provided the opportunity to present.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Presently in the legislative section of the FY18 budget, we have funding to implement this. We have a question here that we're reporting out of the committee. Can monies be appropriated out of the cable access funds? If the answer is yes, then maybe we can use the money that gets appropriated out of the cable access funds to implement additional monitors. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. It's been a common and recurring theme behind this rail for the past term that our public utilities that are performing construction work in the city of Medford aren't doing so in a fashion that would be beneficial to the residents of Medford and their quality of life during the construction. That the final product that they're leaving us with is shoddy at best and not up to city of Medford standards, Mr. President. So paper 16404 was filed in April of 2016. The engineering division did not submit a response to the council. So a committee of the whole was held. At this committee of the whole, we had a very informative and at-length discussion relative to public utilities, their rights in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, in the community of Medford, Mr. President. And ultimately, we've generated several questions that we're going to ask the city solicitor with the hopes of tightening up the permit process so that these public utility companies that are running roughshod over our streets and sidewalks are held to a better and higher standard. I'd move for approval on the paper, Mr. President, there was a long time coming.
[Adam Knight]: Aye.
[Adam Knight]: We had a meeting on this a month ago, same similar subject matter. We had a committee of the whole on this as well, correct?
[Adam Knight]: OK, I thought there was something in the rules about bringing something up that was already discussed within the last 90 days, Mr. President. It was similar, same subject matter.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I do believe that the Water and Sewer Commission is an autonomous body that's appointed by the administration to implement and effectuate public policy related to the water and sewer, but in no way do they make recommendations to the mayor. They actually implement policy.
[Adam Knight]: I just feel as though sometimes accurate representation of the facts is important when we're here in the public forum.
[Adam Knight]: With the land transfer, when the city accepted ownership of Hormel Stadium, the establishment of the Hormel Commission was statutory and is required by state law.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. My experiences with the members of the Water and Sewer Commission have been nothing but positive. I think that they're a great group of individuals, and if given the opportunity to explain themselves and explain the connectivity, if you will do so in a fashion that will make people a little bit more understanding of their implementation and their reasoning behind it. With that being said, Mr. President, on the community calendar this evening, it's posted that the next Water and Sewer Commission meeting is on 6-28 at 5 p.m. in the council chambers. So those individuals that do have questions and concerns about the connectivity field, the baseline charges, as it's called, can appear before the commission and take those issues up that evening. It's going to be in this room, and it's my understanding it may be televised, but I'm not sure.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Ms. Hunt, thank you for being here this evening. I'm wondering if you can explain to us a little bit about what the contaminants are in the ground there and what you're aware of the contaminants in the ground right there. Cause apparently it sounds like you're going to have to do a little bit more research to figure out exactly what we're dealing with. Number one. Number two, I'm hoping you can also explain to the council a little bit as to whether or not this need for funding is in direct correlation to the extension of the Clippership Connector, or if this is work that would be done regardless of whether or not the Clippership Connector project was in the design stages.
[Adam Knight]: And another question that I have, Mr. President, this will be it for me. In the area that we're discussing here, was any of this surface level dirt, or was this any of this dirt disrupted to make it surface level dirt? Was there any digging excavation work or anything like that going on there that made this contaminated product come up to surface level?
[Adam Knight]: So is it safe to say that the state is going to be requiring us to test and remediate this situation regardless of what's going on in the area?
[Adam Knight]: And if, Mr. President, I could just ask the Director of Public Health, Ms. O'Connor, if she could explain some of the health risks that are associated with this type of contamination. what her office's position is relative to the record. Name and address of the record, please.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, may I rest? Thank you very much. Appreciate your help and understanding.
[Adam Knight]: It's my understanding that the design phases of the Clippership connector have not been completed yet. Right. there's now an assumption that it's going to go back behind this residence?
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. Uh, I too feel as though that this is an appropriate paper to approve this evening. I feel as though it's a good use of free cash. Um, ultimately it's an unforeseen situation that does require immediate action. I think that the residents of the neighborhood deserve it. We have a recurrent theme in our community here that, um, the residents want to see us tap into one of the most underutilized resources that we have here in Metro, which is our river. Um, that coupled with the fact that the residents along ship Avenue, that are abutting this property are going to see a drastic impact on their quality of life and their property value. The longer that this fence stays up that says contamination would lead me to believe that it's a good vote this evening to take, uh, to approve the $49,000 for Riverbend contamination LSP services. Mr. President, as such, I would support the amendments as well. Move approval. The question.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And Mr. Moore, thank you for coming here this evening. I appreciate it. And I can certainly understand your frustration. I, too, grew up in a home that lived next door to a person that ran a junkyard out of his backyard. And my next door neighbor on the other side parked an 18-wheeler in his driveway every night. So I can certainly understand the impact that it's having on your quiet enjoyment and peace in your neighborhood. Um, in addition to referring this matter to the code enforcement officers suggested by councilor Scarpelli, I'd also like to amend the paper. Mr. President requests that the board of health go out and do an examination out there. If the gentleman is in fact collecting junk and debris, then there may be border health issues that are coming along with that as well. So I'd like to ask them as O'Connor, uh, send one of the inspectors out there to take a look and make sure that they're in compliance with all, um, border health regulations that are in place as well.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And I'd like to thank Councilor Caraviello for putting this resolution forward. I, too, over the weekend had the opportunity to meet with a couple of business owners that operate on Harvard Avenue. And there's a situation where it's not just one development that's going on. We have the development at 640 Boston Ave being performed by 640 Boston Avenue LLC. And that's a 43-unit development housing. And I spoke with the general manager of the construction company yesterday, and that project is going to be wrapping up around July 1st. So the construction is going to be complete and people will be moving in July 1st. With that being said, Mr. President, that's not the only issue in the neighborhood. We've seen the MBTA perform an extended amount of work on the train tracks in preparation for the Greenland extension that's impacted this business. Then we've seen Tufts University go in and do some work up on the top of Boston Ave that's also impacted this business. And now we're seeing RX Devereux doing some public utility work on the Somerville side that's disrupting this business. So, if you wanted to get to the stretch of Boston Avenue between Ball Square and Harvard Street, and you were coming from Somerville, the only way that you'd be able to go would be to go up past Tufts University, all the way up to the library, then turn around down Boston Avenue and come back down Boston Avenue. So, in essence, the traffic constraints that are in place right now are detouring people directly out of the entire region, Mr. President. We're just having an impact on the businesses down there. So I think it's also pertinent that we receive copies of the traffic management plans from 640 Boston Avenue, as well as Rx Davaro, who's performing the utility work on Harvard Street, on the Somerville side, Mr. President, in front of St. Clement's Church. It's my understanding that Tufts University, at this point in time, has ceased their construction. That project is complete. And the finishing touches that are being put on are striping and signage. And I also am under the impression, Mr. President, that in the near future, the MBTA will be back out in the area performing some work. They're going to be doing some land takings, et cetera. So, I'd also like to ask that the MBTA provide us with their traffic management plan. Once we receive those documents, we can forward them to our Division of Engineering and ask our Division of Engineering to review the traffic management plans and come up with recommendations to create a better flow of traffic that will have a less adverse impact on the businesses that are in operation on that stretch of land.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Analetto, have you had any conversations with Tufts University or the city of Medford relative to the work that they're going to be proposing relative to the complete streets program in the reconfiguration of the intersection at Boston Avenue? And, uh, at the top of the hill by the library. No, I've had no correspondence with tough, no correspondence with tough. So, and nobody from the administration as well.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. Mr. President, if I could amend the paper to request that, um, the city engineer reach out to, uh, Titan gas station to explain to him the scope and circumstances of the complete streets project going on, uh, at the top of Boston. Now that would be appreciated as well.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, upon reviewing the papers, I do have a petition to hours of operation from 7 a.m. in the morning till 2 a.m.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. Yes. And how many employees do you have working for you?
[Adam Knight]: Four employees working for you? Mr. President, as I review the paperwork here, I see the statement of workers' compensation insurance affidavit for a gentleman. In box number two on the state form, which I have a little bit of familiarity of, it says, I am a sole proprietor of a partnership and have no employees working for me in any capacity. If, in fact, the gentleman does have four employees working for him, he will be required to purchase workers' compensation insurance. In terms of the materials that have been submitted to the council this evening, they are complete in terms of the accuracy as to whether or not he's not going to be required to carry workers' compensation. It's a different story, Mr. President. If, in fact, he does have four employees that are working for him that are not part of the sole proprietorship or the business partnership, then he will be required to purchase workers' compensation insurance. If you purchase the workers' compensation insurance, it does have a hundred percent guarantee if you are found in violation of the Workers' Compensation Act and fail to appeal it $250 a day if you're found in violation of the Workers' Compensation Act and do appeal it. So I guess my question to the gentleman at the podium right now is if, in fact, you do have people that are working for you and you are currently in operation, you will be found in violation of the law if these people aren't at least 25% of your corporation.
[Adam Knight]: So right now, you're open from 11?
[Adam Knight]: OK, so the articles of incorporation that were filed at the Secretary of State's office would list the offices and principles of the corporation and yourself and your wife? Yeah. And no others?
[Adam Knight]: And then if the Department of Industrial Accidents Investigation Division happen to go to 213 Middlesex Avenue. and went behind the counter, the only people that would be working, including delivering, cooking food, working cash register, any of that?
[Adam Knight]: So as long as you're aware that if, in fact, you do hire employees that are in excess of your ground.
[Adam Knight]: Of the individuals in your corporation. Mr. President, based upon the conversation I've had with the gentleman, I do feel as though the paper is in order and complete. I would suggest that because of the nature of the permit and the willingness for the employee to keep his business open until 2 o'clock in the morning, we place a 90-day review on this. I would also recommend, Mr. President, that if approved, that the approval for extended hours would stay with the business and not the address. So that if the business moves, then the permit for extended hours would die with the relocation of the business.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I do believe we ran into a similar situation back when we were discussing the extended hours at the old Panda Palace location, which is now Shanghai Moon. And we did a phase-in. And we phased it in, I believe we said. For the first six months, it would be X. For the next three months, it would be Y. For the final three months, it would be Z. And we had a review step at each step of the way. If the council is amenable, I mean, maybe that's a solution right now. We can help the gentleman out and I'll be in agreement that we give him a 90 day permit till midnight and then maybe a 90 day review after midnight. And then if there are no issues, it would revert for another 90 day period until 1am. And if there's no issues there, then it would revert to a 2am license with another 90 day review. So in essence, we'd have, you know, a year and a half, a year and a half review. of the extended hours and they'd be gradually implemented so that if any instances or issues in the neighborhood arise, we'll be able to nip them in the bud within 90 days of the event occurring. And then we can always, you know, have an opportunity to correct the wrongs if any are made. But if any aren't, then we can help the business owners succeed. I know the council has discussed the difficulty it is for businesses to be competitive in the city of Medford based upon a number of circumstances. And I believe that the extended hours was a permitting process that was put in place to address some of those concerns. And I'm hoping that maybe we can all sit down here and put our heads together and come up with a methodology that might work for everybody involved. So I'd ask the councilor if he feels as though that would be a suitable recommendation to do an increase of one hour, reach 90 days with a 90 day review thereof. And maybe that'll be a solution of compromise for all involved.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor. Nice. Mr. President. Yes. I'd also like to ask the gentleman, is it your intention to stay open this late every day of the week or just Thursday, Friday, Saturday?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think it may make sense to, based upon the feedback that I think I'm receiving from my colleagues, that we put a 90-day review, grant a special permit from 11 to 12 with a 90-day review. If there are no instances or issues, that we will grant the automatic permit from 12 to 1 with a 90-day review. And if there are no issues thereafter, we grant a permit from 1 to 2 automatic with a 90-day review. Mr. President, I think that the last 90-day review, when the permit is in place from 1 to 2 a.m., should be restricted maybe to the Wednesday through Saturday. Or maybe it should be restricted Wednesday through Saturday for the 12 to 1 and the 1 to 2. so that we can get through the 90-day review periods with them operating Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday, the extended hours, and then we can get a better feel from the neighborhood what's going on. We'd be approving it. We wouldn't be approving it for seven days of the week, and we wouldn't be approving it 100%. We'd be gradually phasing it in. So if any questions or concerns do arise, we'll be able to address them within short order.
[Adam Knight]: Um, where I was looking at it was if there's no issue that arises, if there's no concern, no complaint, then it automatically be granted the next level of.
[Adam Knight]: I think it's a fair compromise, and I'd support that wholeheartedly, Mr. President. I'm doing a 90-day review, bringing them back in. I think that that's a good way to proceed. It protects the neighborhood, and it also helps the business owner compete.
[Adam Knight]: I believe there is a section, there's a section in our agenda that, um, might indicate papers requiring action. And, um, I'd request that, um, this matter be placed on, uh, unfinished business rather that this matter be placed on unfinished business so that it comes up in the 90 days.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. Yeah. So it'll be in there. So it'll be on the agenda for the next 90 days. So we have a date cert coming up.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, several months ago this council voted on a resolution that I sponsored requesting that the DPW perform a complete assessment of our streets. And the resolution requested that they consider adopting new technology. And right now there is an opportunity for the city of Medford to utilize infrared technology. And it pretty much is a truck that drives down the street and takes an x-ray of the road and uses infrared technology to determine the quality of the infrastructure below the ground, as well as the defects of the infrastructure above the ground, Mr. President. I've had the opportunity to take a look at one of these machines. A local business on Mystic Avenue, Millennium Power Sweeping, is in possession of one. And this tool can work miracles. It can repair potholes and do a whole entire assessment of the roadway all in one felt swoop, Mr. President. I certainly think that this is a noble resolution. I don't know if a million bucks is going to be enough, Mr. President. And if we're going to be putting out a budget where we're looking to add $1 million to it, and this budget is funded by taxpayers, I don't think that it would be right to opt out of the budget. If we're going to add a million, we should be responsible and also make this a zero-sum game. However, I can certainly understand the councilor's frustration. And I expressed that in our subcommittee meeting this morning. However, I would like to include in this resolution an amendment asking that, number one, the infrared technology be utilized, and number two, I think that it's important.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe that they've done that already, Mr. President. And I think that Millennium might have been utilized to do a test run, performing repairs to some cracks on some basketball courts to show how far along technology has come. So I certainly don't have a problem. asking for a complete assessment, and I think it's premature to request funding until we get the assessment done, because we really don't know what it's going to cost. I think Councilman Marks has done a great job putting this resolve together, and he's done a lot of homework on it. I'd like an opportunity to review the numbers a little further. I did get a response from the administration that it would cost about $7 million to pave our emergency arteries in their entirety. And the question comes is whether or not we can use taxation money to do that, or if there are other funding sources that are available to us as well. I certainly can appreciate the resolution, however, for us right now to add a million dollars to the proposed budget I think is premature. I think we should start our budget discussions and deliberations and find out where money's going. Based on last year's fiscal year budget, I think we have close to $605,000 of money that's used for contracted services, for services that could be performed in-house that's being performed out-house, for services that could go towards paying for salaries to Um, replete the DPW staff. So there's a number of items that we need to look at, Mr. President. And this is a priority, but there are other priorities as well as the council and noted. Um, so I can certainly stand behind the resolution to ask for the assessment. Um, however, at this point in time, I'd feel very uncomfortable requesting that a million dollars be added to the budget without further discussion to liberation and investigation.
[Adam Knight]: I believe we got it. Uh, We were supposed to get it on the 31st, but we haven't got it yet, according to the meeting that we just had.
[Adam Knight]: I believe we got a response saying that they'll look into it. Yeah. Right.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, we do have money that's already appropriated for the paving of Evans Street and Parris Street. I don't think we've seen that happen either, and the money's there.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. I'll be happy to withdraw my amendment and put it in as a B paper.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Layton, the amendment would be that the city utilize the newest technology that's out there, which is the infrared technology, just similar to the same way we request the city to use the new technology.
[Adam Knight]: To evaluate the curve, to evaluate.
[Adam Knight]: Then the response back would be, it'll cost $3 million a year to do it.
[Adam Knight]: To evaluate the utilization. You changed it.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. Ultimately it was to evaluate the use. It's the same resolution we put forward before. Same resolution we all voted for before.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, at this point in time, I'd also like to move to withdraw this paper. I've had a correspondence with our city council liaison, Ms. Felch, and she and I have scheduled a meeting to sit down and further discuss the C-Click fixed documents.
[Adam Knight]: Upon receipt, I'll be happy to share the information with my council colleagues. I'd like to thank Ms. Felch. for her proactive response to my resolution and also her assistance in resolving a couple of issues. Thank you. Okay.
[Adam Knight]: Your light was on.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Nice. Mr. President, thank you very much, and I'd like to thank my council colleagues for supporting this resolution. As we're all aware, Timothy Brennan passed away some years ago with some complications to a health issue, but he was the consummate professional public servant, and he's someone that dedicated his life to the fire safety of the residents in the community of Medford. He's sadly missed. His presence is sadly missed. I know his brothers and sisters down at the fire station miss him as well. I'd like to just take an opportunity to extend My deep condolences to the family once again, and I ask that my council colleagues support the resolution and remembering Timmy on the anniversary day of his passing. Thank you. On the motion by Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: I don't have the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And I'd like to thank Mr. Cappucci and Ms. Smith for being here this evening. On St. Patrick's Day, 3-17-17, we received a response to paper 17209 from the administration. And this paper clearly said that the contract will be in place in mid-May, and construction will proceed with the schedule thereafter. Now, we put this paper initially on the agenda in October. I'm at a loss to figure out how long it takes to get the contract in place. But this all should have been done well before the construction season started, Mr. President. And not a week goes by now that I don't scratch my head and wonder what's going on inside that engineering office. I really have significant concerns about the way that that office is being managed and what's going on in the community. For us to have to wait 18 months for a response to a paper, for residents to have to wait six, seven, eight, nine months for a contract just to go out so that the work can be done that they said they've been scheduling for three years. is ridiculous. And I'm not one to go out on these rants, Mr. President, about the administration doing — not doing this and not doing that. That's not my style. But enough is enough. This office has got to keep its eyes on the prize, because the engineering office is far too vital to the delivery of the requisite services that we're here to provide, to be asleep at the switch. The President. Agreed.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I think it's important to point out that our tree warden, Maggie Tooden, was the two-time tree warden of the year, consecutive years in a row. And I think that we'd be remiss in moving forward without first getting some input and some feedback from Maggie as to what direction she'd like to see this going as well. So I'd like to amend the paper and request that the tree warden provide input. what you would like to see, an administrative procedure, an ordinance, and if she can make some recommendations thereof.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much, and I'd like to thank Councilor Scarpelli for bringing this up. When we passed the resolution, 16404, we asked for all of the work that was done on our roadways and sidewalks by public utilities for the years 2014, 15, 16, and to date. But it's been 16 months since that resolution was passed, Mr. President, so I'd like to update it so that the engineer can come to our meeting next week prepared with this information to date. So, we'd also have 2017 included in this report that we're seeking. Also, Mr. President, I'd like to amend the paper and request that, um, the administration provide us with all the C-Click fix reports related to work done by public utilities on the roadways, uh, in preparation for the meeting on Tuesday as well.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. I did have a question for the gentleman. I was wondering if, because it's new construction and the canopy was put in, is that the new code? According to the Fire Chief, yes, it is. That is the new code. They can't abuse the new code. And that gas station has been there for many, many years. And the matter was brought before the Zoning Board of Appeals because they were looking for a non-conforming use of the existing city zoning. Okay, thank you. Move approval, Mr. President. They were supposed to.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I just would like to amend the paper to request that the notice be given no less than 48 hours in advance.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, this is a rather self-explanatory resolution. I'd like to ask my council colleagues to join me in wishing former Mayor McGlynn and his wife, Sheila, a very happy and exciting 40th wedding anniversary. I got the opportunity to see Mayor McGlynn and his wife in CB Scoops over the weekend, and they seem to have started off this celebration with good fun, Mr. President. So I'd ask my colleagues to join me in supporting the resolution. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. Vice President. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I'd like to thank Councilor Marks for putting this resolution on. I'd like to ask this matter be added to next week's agenda as well when we request that the city engineer come prepared to discuss this matter.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I'd like to thank Councilor Marksx for putting this resolution on the agenda this evening. I'd request that this matter be added to next week's agenda with the city engineer, and we'd request that the city engineer be prepared to discuss it next week as well.
[Adam Knight]: One information, Councilor Knight. What impact would this have on the ability to meet our requirements and posting in the newspapers, so on and so forth, if we exhaust our ordinary expense account?
[Adam Knight]: Nothing's free. All right.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Mr. President. Um, normally, normally when our budget debates start, the first item that we discuss is the legislative budget. Now we're going to get our budget books. You said, hopefully by Tuesday for next week's meeting.
[Adam Knight]: Um, so. maybe we can set up the meeting for the legislative portion of the budget ASAP because once that's submitted to us, that's the budget. We can get that wrapped up and potentially maybe get an increase in funds there if it's not already included there in. So you want to hold that till?
[Adam Knight]: You did an outstanding job. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And I thank my colleagues for indulging me this evening as well. Team Medford in the Office of Outreach and Substance Abuse Preventage, Mr. President, has done a great job over the past year. Just last year, we funded their office, and since that time, they've made great strides. Just last year in the city of Medford, there were 19 opiate-related overdose deaths in 02155, Mr. President. And through the work of Penny Funny Alley, our outreach coordinator, and through the work of Paul Spencer, one of the citizens in the city of Medford who's been helping out with her office, they're doing what's called hidden in plain sight, Mr. President. This is a training for parents. And right next door to the council chambers, actually, we have what's set up, looks like a high school kid's bedroom. And they teach you what to look for and where to look for illicit substances in your home if you feel as though your child may be experimenting or abusing drugs. So I'd like to let everyone out there know that this program will be running through the end of the week. And if anyone would like to set up an appointment that they can give the substance abuse office a call at 393-2408. And they'll be happy to speak with you and let you know when they're going to be meeting down there. But I think this is a great step and a great stride, Mr. President, in helping parents identify and cope with the issue of addiction in the community. And they've done an excellent job in breaking the stigma that's associated with addiction here in Medford. So I'd like to thank them for their work and really appreciate what they've done and how they're going about doing it. So thank you to Penny and Paul and the rest of Team Medford. But this hidden in plain sights, it's really something else.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think everybody behind this rail at one point or another has supported green energy initiatives, solar power, so on and so forth. I think this is a great resolution. It's well thought out. It's well researched. I support it wholeheartedly and I move approval.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. This week we got very exciting news that the Fiscal Control Board has moved and appropriated funds to bring the Greenland Extension to fruition. So right now we have a $57 million appropriation for project and construction management of the Greenland Extension. Included in part of that money, Mr. President, is $8.7 million to provide infrastructure repairs and signal preparation. A lot of this work is going to be done on the corridor that runs parallel to Boston Ave. A lot of this work is going to be done on property that abuts residential neighborhoods and residential properties, residential parcels, Mr. President. As such, I think it's very important that we share the information from the MBTA with our community, when they're going to be in there, what type of work they're going to be doing. And I think the best way to accomplish that, Mr. President, would be by assigning a city liaison that's responsible to address all questions and concerns related to the Green Line extension. Therefore, Mr. President, I move for approval on the paper. I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting it.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I'd also like to amend the paper and request that the Traffic Division of the Medford Police Department establish a directed patrol. at the foot of Fulton Street by Gillis Park during the hours where permanent events are taking place. Mr. President, we're seeing Little League taking place at Gillis Park and some Little League softball, high school baseball, and so forth taking place at Higgy Park. It's an area that's certainly well-traveled by pedestrians that are going between the two facilities, two locations. Parking's tight down there, as we know, and it requires some parking further away and requires people to walk. So I'd ask that The Traffic Division of the Atlanta Police Department established a directed patrol down there, with particular focus made during hours that those two parks, Hickey and Gillis, are permitted, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I would once again request that the Engineering Department respond to Council Resolution 16-404. This resolution requested a breakdown of all streets that were opened by public utilities from January 1st, 2014 to date. It's been 18 months. We have not received this. Now, Councilor Marks puts a resolution on about 123 Place that Road and public utilities being out there, and it leads me to question as to whether or not our Engineering Department knows when public utilities are going out and tearing up our streets because, quite frankly, I don't think it takes 18 months to get a response for anything. So with that being said, I wholeheartedly support the resolution and I second the proposal.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I'd just like to amend the paper to request the DCR also provide us with the maintenance schedule for the area that's in question.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor knife. Uh, Mr. President, I'd like to amend the resolution and request that the traffic commission examine the feasibility of banning heavy, heavy trucking on South street as amended by Councilor Knight. Move approval. No second. Councilor Dello Russo.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knife. Yes, Mr. President. I think that's a great idea. But in the interim, however, we do not going to have a trucking team. So I'd like to further amend the resolution requesting that the state police established directed patrols at South Street and at Harvard Street for the purpose of monitoring trucking with their truck division.
[Adam Knight]: With all due respect to the gentleman behind the rail, I think that it would be best if we heard what they do and don't want to do from the police department, not the individual. I understand that he does attend the meetings. However, we are sending a resolution forward and we're asking for certain information. We want that information to come back from the police department and I don't want to deter from that.
[Adam Knight]: Judy's been a fixture in the community for a number of times, along with her husband John. I wanted to take an opportunity to wish her a very happy and momentous 75th birthday. I hope my council colleagues will join me in wishing her the same. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to take an opportunity to thank all the individuals that were able to come out and support this weekend's Memorial Day ceremonies by going down to the Oak Grove Cemetery and decorating the graves of our fallen veterans, Mr. President. Every year, the Post-45 American Legion puts together a contingency of volunteers. A number of them come from the Medford Elks, the St. Clement's School, the Boys and Girls Scouts, and a number of other organizations across the city of Medford to come and show their support for the veterans and support for the Memorial Day celebration, Mr. President. I had the opportunity of going out Saturday morning with my son and my father. out onto Aspen lawn and we decorated a number of graves with some members of the Medford Elks. These service organizations do a great job making Medford the great community that we live in and that we get to enjoy. So I'd like to take an opportunity to thank them all for their help and hard work in preparing for this weekend's Memorial Day Ceremonies.
[Adam Knight]: I believe the two papers that got referred to the subcommittee were one to create a sign ordinance relative to street sweeping, and the other one would be a 30 day requirement to remove stumps. Those are the two papers I believe that were referred to the subcommittee. That is correct.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Marks, thank you very much. And Mae, congratulations. I could say the same thing that my councilors have all said. I echo their sentiment. I am wondering, however, what you get for 25 years of service. Is it a watch? Do they give you a watch from the Cheville Air Commission? Nice, that's pretty good. That's an incentive right there. May, congratulations. I wish you the best of luck. Thank you very much for all you've done for the city and for his service.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, we're going to suspension. Can we take paper 17453, a petition for common victuals license? 17453.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. petition for a common victuals license is actually for a juice bar inside gold's gym. It's my understanding that historically gold's gym has operated juice bars in the past at other locations. Um, I've reviewed the paperwork and all the paperwork appears to be in order. Mr. President, um, this doesn't seem like anything that's too controversial in my opinion and I would move for approval on the motion by council.
[Adam Knight]: As such, Mr. President, I move for a roll call vote.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Nyth. Mr. President, I too support the plan that's been presented to us. The Office of Community Development has done an excellent job since my election to the council in explaining where these funds go. All the applicants come before the council at a committee of the whole meeting and pitch their case to request this funding as to why it would be good for the city of Medford. Provided that there's nobody here in opposition, Mr. President, I move that we close the public hearing.
[Adam Knight]: It's also my understanding, Mr. Lorenzo, that a draft of the plan can be obtained in the Office of Community Development on April 20th.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to amend the paper, Mr. President. I'd like to amend the paper with a B paper requesting that our federal delegation be written and asked to prioritize level funding of the Community Development Block Grant, Mr. President. Um, I'd also like to request that our state delegation send letters of support to a federal delegation requesting that they do their best to ensure level funding of our community development block grant. I'd ask my colleagues to support the amendment.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. As we go through our packet this evening, we'll see that there are two requests for sign reversals related to 5 High Street. And I think if both petitions before the council this evening were approved, it would be ugly is the best word that I can come up with, Mr. President. I don't think it really fits in with the character of the neighborhood based upon Um, the total number of signs that are being presented tonight and the location thereof, uh, all in the same building. Um, I certainly can agree with Councilor Caraviello's position that, uh, an illuminated sign wouldn't fit in with the quality, um, in criteria that's down in that area. Um, personally, Mr. President, I think the best course of action would be to have this matter referred to our subcommittee on signs, uh, for further review and discussion. Uh, I don't think that this is something that, um, when, partnered with the other matter that's before us is going to be beneficial to the revitalization of our downtown of Medford square. I think it's going to, uh, be an eyesore more or less. Right.
[Adam Knight]: To the point of information, Councilor Knight. when I raised the issue of referring it to the subcommittee, my intention was to do so so that we could get both petitioners wayside and global health services together in the same room and they could make a joint presentation to the council. It looks like it would be something that would fit more within the quality and character of the neighborhood was the way that I was thinking that it was going to work.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Similar matter. It's going to sound like the same exact conversation I think we just had.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight? Can the clerk please read back the resolution and amendments?
[Adam Knight]: Second, the approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to waive the reading as brief synopsis by the Director of the Board of Health.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor knife. Mr. President, thank you very much. Mr. O'Connor, thank you for being here this evening. Uh, also to you, um, Mr. Pillsbury, um, question that I have would be, um, whereas you're coming from the metropolitan area planning council, um, I'm sure that you have, of vast exposure to a number of these type of plans in our surrounding communities. So the first question that I'd ask would be, how does this plan measure up to those plans that are established in surrounding communities, number one? And number two, is there a regional focus that's taken when these plans are put together so that if a disaster does strike and there needs to be mitigation, is there a regional response or is it more of a local response?
[Adam Knight]: And one other question, Mr. President. Now, Mr. Pillsbury, you are a professional in the field of environmental planning, and I don't know where you live, but with this plan in place, would you feel safe and comfortable living in the city of Medford?
[Adam Knight]: Excellent. Thank you, Mr. President. Based upon the discussion here, I feel comfortable voting in favor of this matter this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: So what is it we're voting on, Mr. President? We're going to be asking the Office of Energy and the Environment to, and the Conservation Commission, to report back to us with any potential concerns regarding the Macklin Road development. And we're asking for an engineering study on McCormick Avenue relative to slope and pitch. Is that what we're voting on?
[Adam Knight]: Move approval of the question, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I think it's important to point out that Here in the city, we have two stump lists. We have one stump list that the city is responsible for and one stump list that the public utility is responsible for. And I think that Councilor Marksley is on the right track as part of the permitting process for our public utilities to come into the community to dig up our streets. They should also be required to take down the stumps on the trees that they've taken down. So I think that's a nice place to start. It's certainly a good, a good intention. And I think it's going to lead us in the right direction, Mr. President. In terms of the $250,000 for our business district, I think that nothing can improve our business districts more than improving the flow of traffic and making them more pedestrian safe. With that being said, I'm pretty sure that a traffic engineer will cost less than $250,000, Mr. President. I'm sure we could probably get two years of a traffic engineer out of $250,000. So with that being said, that would be a recommendation that I would like to make as an amendment to Councilor Falco's B paper. Also, Mr. President,
[Adam Knight]: $250,000 be spent for a traffic engineer as opposed to business district beautification because ultimately if we improve the flow of traffic and we make our community more pedestrian friendly, we are going to be improving our business districts and we're going to be improving the quality of life of our city as a whole, not just in these five areas. Mr. President. Um, so with that being said, I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: I've been waiting for a similar response from the engineering department since April of 2016 relative to the streets that have been dug up by our public utilities and the trench work that's been performed, Mr. President. I've put forward more than five resolutions on this matter. It's been 18 months. I'm going to make a friendly wager with Councilor Scarpelli that if he gets his list before I get mine, I'll take him out for dinner. You're not going to be that lucky if I win.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. Thank you very much. I moved to amend the paper. I have several amendments I'd like to add. Back in 2016, I filed a resolution requesting that the DPW, namely the engineering department, provide us with an estimate as to what it would cost to totally resurface the emergency arteries in our community. They came back with an estimate of $6.75 million at that time, Mr. President. I'd ask for an updated cost estimate as to what it would cost to resurface the emergency arteries in the city of Medford, Clerk Finn. And I'd also like to ask when each street that is designated as an emergency artery was last resurfaced. Second Amendment. Mr. President, I'd like to make a, would be this, um, back about eight months ago, the Medford city council recommended that the DPW division, um, examine the feasibility of creating a standalone signage and striping department to address some of the concerns that we have relative to signage and striping. Makes sense, right? So I'd ask for an update, Mr. President, as we prepare for the budget, I'd like to reiterate the council's position that this is something that we'd like to see examined and potentially be placed in the DPW budget. And third, Mr. President, I'd like to amend the paper requesting that the engineering division provide written response to the Medford City Council as to why paper 16404 has not been answered yet after a year and a half.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knights. Mr. President, the gentleman makes a good point. In other communities that surround the city, namely the city of Boston, which is very successful in the delivery of public works projects based upon, especially based upon the size. One of the things that they've implemented in the city of Boston, I believe, would be a residency requirement for department heads. And I think that that's something that might warrant a little bit of examination, Mr. President. I mean, ultimately, if someone lives in the community and they have to go to the same supermarket that we have to go to and listen to the same complaints that we have to listen to and the same concerns that we're here for and here to address, I just think it makes them take a little bit more pride in their job. Because I know, as I think back to a former gentleman that was working in our school department, and he was called to the carpet for some actions, and the quote in the newspaper was, Well, it's very easy for this gentleman to get in his car and drive up to Bellingham at the end, uh, Beverly at the end of the day. But those of us that live in this community and call it home, care about it and care what's going on. And we have a vested interest. And I think that that's something that we might want to examine as well. Mr. President move approval on the question.
[Adam Knight]: For just a moment. Councilman, I'd just like to take an opportunity to thank the tree warden and the forestry division. Two weeks ago, we put forward a request asking for a tree to be replaced in front of 112 Grant Ave. That work's been done. It was done like in two days. So I'm very thankful for the work that they do, and I appreciate their prompt response to the inquiry. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President, after brief illness, Mr. Meadows passed away. Services were held yesterday. He was a great fellow, a gentleman that always opened the doors to his home and let us kids run wild in there. He kept letting us come back day after day and year after year. And he was really just a great individual. He had a great sense of community, a great sense of pride in his neighborhood. And he will be sadly missed down on Bradshaw Street, Mr. President, and beyond. I'd move for approval of the paper and ask my council colleagues to join me in extending condolences to the family.
[Adam Knight]: One of the major counseling. I do believe the majority of the issues that, um, the speaker is discussing would be outlined in the condo documents or the HOA documents that would be established when a multifamily house becomes condominiums and that gets filed with the registry of deeds. Thank you. Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I feel as though the market controls what it is that developers are seeking to do. And as we see the baby boomer generation reach a certain age right now where they're looking to downsize, there is a demand for condominiums. in our city. That's why in the past I've brought forward requests to work with the city assessor to discuss condo conversion and whether or not we need a bylaw to address that. But I feel as though the market controls exactly what it is that would happen in development. And right now there is a push towards condominium living, and I believe it's attributable to the fact that the baby boomer generation is reaching an age where they're seeking downsize. Motion to receive and place on file.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Naith. I do believe that this paper has been before the Committee of the Whole on two previous occasions.
[Adam Knight]: Sent to subcommittee for recommendations on how to move forward. Are there any recommendations that are coming out of the subcommittee as to how they'd like to recommend the committee of the whole proceed. Is there a presentation of some sort that's going to be performed?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. With the recent passage of $2 million by the Medford City Council for a design study for the police station, There were a number of questions raised about the future of Medford's Fire Training Tower and Medford's Fire Training Academy. As such, the administration has agreed to appoint an ad hoc committee to begin to identify locations as to where this facility can go when it's reconstructed. So I'm asking for monthly updates from the administration or from actually the members of the committee as to the progress that they're making so that this can be a front burner item, Mr. President, making sure that it doesn't get lost in the shuffle of progress. So with that being said, I ask my colleagues to support the resolution and move for approval. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. With the recent establishment of the Community Preservation Commission and also the recent discussions that this council has had relative to zoning, I think it's very important that a copy of the open space plan be forwarded to the Medford City Council. I'd also like to amend the paper, Mr. President, and ask that a copy of the open space plan also be forwarded to the Community Preservation Commission. With that being said, Mr. President, today, about a half an hour ago, when I checked my email, I did receive a response from Lauren Felch, the Medford City Council liaison, that has already forwarded myself a copy of the open space plan, so I'll be happy to share that with my colleagues. And I'd like to amend the paper just to request that it also gets sent to the Community Preservation Commission, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, Mr. President. With the passage of the Municipal Modernization Act on Beacon Hill, Local municipalities have been given some flexibility in regards to their parking receipts. Presently, parking receipts are put into the general fund. And with the adoptions of section 22A, B, and C, these receipts can be reserved for appropriation. The theory and the thinking behind this resolution, Mr. President, is that we have a parking management program that's in the community where people are required to pay to park in our business districts and elsewhere. And if these funds can be reserved for specific appropriation, like a traffic engineer, then we might be able to fund this position off the tax rolls through the parking management program. So the idea is to, first of all, ask the question to the city solicitor as to whether or not if we adopt these sections, can we reserve the funds for a specific and exclusive principle, which would be the funding of a traffic engineer and the implementation of traffic calming measures that come from that traffic engineer. Number two, what's the industry standard salary range? How much do we have to pay? a traffic engineer annually to be competitive and to get somebody that's good? And then the third question is, what's the breakdown of receipts? So do we take in enough money to internally fund a traffic engineer off the tax rolls? And with the adoption of these sections under the general laws, can we exclusively earmark these funds for the sole and exclusive purpose of hiring a traffic engineer and implementing traffic calming measures, Mr. President? So that's the resolution. That's the breakdown of it. I'd ask my colleagues for their support, and I'd move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'd like to thank my colleague, Councilor Scarpelli, as well, for joining me in bringing this resolution forward. It really feels as though it's a self-explanatory resolution. Stephen Scaparrotti is a gentleman who lives in our community, who was recently fortunate enough to win a gold medal in the Winter Games out in Auburn, Massachusetts. Mr. President, I had the opportunity of seeing Stephen a couple of weeks ago. And out of his pocket, he pulled his gold medal, and he wouldn't let me touch it or wear it. So I'm hoping that when we bring him up here to give him his citation, he'll let me put it on, Mr. President. But he's a great kid, and I think this is something that definitely deserves congratulations and accommodation, Mr. President. The eMark has been doing a great job in our community, and this is just one of the many services that they provide their clientele. I'd like to congratulate Stephen on his efforts and Stephen on his hard work. They don't keep individual statistics, but from what I understand, he was dominant in the four games that they went undefeated, Mr. President. So, I'd ask my council colleagues to support the resolution and move for approval. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Nice. Mr. President, thank you very much. And thank you to councilor Falco for bringing this resolution forward. Um, the area in question that he speaks of was recently excavated, um, for the purpose of public utility upgrade. And, uh, that trench work was patched and now we have to wait one year, I believe, uh, until they come back and resurface the roadway. So I'd like to get a copy of the, scheduled from the engineering department as to when that's going to take place as well. So I'd amend the paper asking the question to the engineering department as to when the stretch of Governor's Ave will be repaved and resurfaced as a result of the excavation work that was performed by the public utility.
[Adam Knight]: Negative. I'm concerned there'll be a negative impact on the extension of the Green Line with an adoption of such a matter.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I do believe we had a two-hour meeting on this topic last week. I certainly support Councilor Knox's resolution relative to a leak detection program for our unaccounted water in our community, Mr. President. I move for approval on the paper as filed. Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Adam Knight]: One of the information councilor night prior to last week's meeting with the council, the water and sewer commission had their monthly meeting and I attended that monthly meeting and at the monthly meeting they had a draft letter that they were passing around and they voted on including this draft letter in your upcoming bill. I think they just want to put the finishing touches on it and make sure it reads smoothly, but you will see a breakdown and an explanation within your next bill. I'm authored by the water and sewer commission and Ron Baker.
[Adam Knight]: Fees and the merging of the water and sewer accounts. I'd like to take that paper up, Mr. President and adopt the committee report. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the, um, Medford city council made recommendations that the city audit to prepare the sources of revenue in the water and sewer enterprise account and provide that breakdown to the council. and the Medford City Council also requested that the mayor report back to the council on the status of the proposed leak detection program and equipment requested by the Water and Sewer Commission. Upon a motion by one of the councilors, the meeting report was reported out of committee and passed. The committee report was included on our packet today, and I move for adoption of such, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. The Medford City Council met at the Committee of the Whole on April 25th to discuss the proposed Clipper Ship Connection program, specifically the part between the Crystal Campbell Parkway and Riverbend Park. There were recommendations that were made at this, that the DPW commissioner examined the stretch of land proposed for the path and address any safety concerns, that the commission hold a meeting with the abutters and residents of the area to address these concerns before the public hearing, that the engineer look at any quick fix improvements for pedestrian safety along Riverside Ave, Mr. President. The committee report requested that the committee report be reported out and the matter be reviewed in another 90 days. The meeting adjourned at 7 39 PM. Since that time, Mr. President, it's been brought to my attention that There's been some environmental concerns in the area based upon some research that's been done over there, but it's also my understanding that those environmental concerns can be fixed and there is a strong potential that the proposed Clippership connection will move forward as designed. The committee of the whole meeting included a presentation by Kyle Hagland from the DCR who assured the community that design alternatives will be made to the initial proposal. There were a number of residents that were present that evening. It has some concerns about the distance of the proposed path to their private property. There's been other projects in other communities where they've had the same concerns, and they've been able to iron those concerns out, Mr. President, through what we call working together. So I'm hopeful that these issues will be resolved and the Clippership Connector can move forward. In the meantime, however, Mr. President, I'd move to adopt the committee report, and I look forward to our meeting in what would now be 83 days.
[Adam Knight]: I think the issue was the distance that the proposed pathway was from private property at some spots. I believe it was stated that it would be less than six feet, six feet from private property. Maybe I misspoke when I gave my presentation.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Leif. Mr. President, thank you very much. I just wanted to comment on something Ms. Valentin said about the amount of people and the percentage of people that are walking to school or biking to school these days. And I think that that's also a direct effect on big box education and the move away from neighborhood schools, Mr. President. We used to have the Gleason School, the Hervey School, the Brooks School. Now we have just the Brooks School. So I think that as municipalities and government that provide educational services, have changed the way that they do business, we've seen an effect in our community on the amount of people that are willing to bike, or able to bike and walk to school because of the distances between our big box schools now.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Um, I just asked that the city clerk make commemorative citations up for these eight individuals so that they could be presented at the retirement fund.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. Councilor Marks, great work. Great work, Councilor Marks. I'd like to amend the paper, Mr. President. As we know, Mr. McRitchie was the interim director, and he's since gone. And Mr. Driscoll is now the executive director, Jeffrey Driscoll, Attorney Jeffrey Driscoll, someone who I have had the pleasure of working with in the past, Mr. President. He was heavily involved with Mass Narrow during his tenure as an executive director in the housing authority business. And he's most notably renowned for turning around the Taunton Housing Authority, I believe, Mr. President, which was one of the worst housing authorities in the state, mismanaged. And at the time, he went in there and he whipped everybody into shape and turned the place around. So with that being said, I'm very excited to have Mr. Driscoll as part of the team here in the city of Medford. I welcome him aboard, and I wish him the best of luck. And I'd also like to extend to him the courtesy of coming before the council and introducing himself sometime.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, thank you very much. If any of us know Mr. Jack McDevitt, we probably know him from our days as students at Medford High School where he taught for over 30 years. He retired from Medford High School and he actually went on and he became a teacher helping inmates at the Middlesex County House of Corrections receive their GEDs, Mr. President. And after he slowed down at the jail, he moved on to the Board of Cemetery Trustees. So if you take a look at Jack McDevitt's long and storied history in public service, I think you'll also find out that he is a veteran. So here's a gentleman that's dedicated more than 50 years of his life to the public. And I'd like to congratulate him for his years of service, thank him for his years of service, and welcome and wish him the best of luck in his years of retirement. It's my understanding that the payroll at Frank's Steakhouse got a little larger, and now that Jack's retired and has more time to spend down there, Mr. President. So I wish him the best of luck. I thank him for his service, and he's a great friend and a great person who's really helped me out a lot in my life.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Yes, Councilor Longo, thank you for bringing this resolution forward and I think I'd also like to take an opportunity to thank the vendors that were there that donated their time and their effort and their energy, especially the amazing John Antarpa and his magic show. From what I understand, it was a big hit. Mr. President, I wasn't able to make it. I got down to the clippership days. They were packing up the cars. Allison and the kids and I went down and they were putting the tables in the back of Steve Tanaglia's truck, actually, when we got there. But it was a great day, had by all, from what I understand. I'm sorry I wasn't able to get there sooner to enjoy some of the festivities. And I'd like to thank everybody for their efforts in putting together such a great community event as well.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, this is just a friendly reminder to our friends at the DPW that they've made a commitment to pave Paris Street this season, and I'm hoping that the DPW and the engineering division can report back to the council with the schedule as to when that will be completed. We also have requested for Evans Street, and I believe Evans Street goes first. They're gonna do the water pipe, some underground work, and then they're gonna move over to Paris. So I'm just hoping that we can get a copy of the construction schedule so that we can inform our constituencies as to what's going on in the neighborhood, because this has been a long overdue project that needs to take place. Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to support it and move for approval. Second.
[Adam Knight]: Communications from the mayor, 17414, please. 17414, one second, please.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, this appears to be housekeeping to me. The council had voted to approve a change in the classification of the Assistant City Solicitor during last year's budget debates. And this looks like it's housekeeping to make sure that the accounts line up. I'm hoping that the city solicitor will be able to come up here and confirm that. And then I'd be happy to second council Dello Russo's motion. Mr. Solicitor.
[Adam Knight]: Oh, I am Mr. Solicitor.
[Adam Knight]: Um, the question that I would like to have it back, um, would be, This is just a housekeeping matter. During the budget debates last year, we voted to approve an increase in the salary of the Assistant City Solicitor, and this is just a- Yes, this is the appropriation which would take care of the increase.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, based on that explanation, I would second Councilor Dello Russo's motion for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President, it's my understanding that this matter was brought forward by the administration in an effort to reduce the duplication of efforts and to streamline some of the accounting principles and practices that they have in the office downstairs. We have a finance director here, and maybe she can confirm that and talk a little bit about how this is going to work, and then I'll be happy to second Councilor de la Rousseau's motion, provided that the questions are answered appropriately. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Mr. President, I'm satisfied with the explanation that the finance director gave a couple weeks ago. This couple, but the committee of the whole meeting that we had and the reinforcement of such and her statement again this evening would lead me to believe that this is something that I can support and I would second Councilor Dello Russo's motion for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information. Councilor Knight. Am I correct that the paper before us is as to whether or not we want to combine the accounts, not whether or not we're really looking at how the accounts are utilized, but whether or not we're really just allowing the finance director to combine the two accounts for accounting purposes and to eliminate duplication of efforts? Thank you. That is the purpose of the paper. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Can we take paper 17412 off the presentations petition for similar matters?
[Adam Knight]: You did such a good job, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I certainly support this paper wholeheartedly. And I also think that in light of the fact that the majority of these business owners in West Medford do purchase business permits, and this is the business permit law, that there should be a pro-ratio abatement to the business permit holder for the period of time equivalent to the amount of days that the law is closed. So I'd like to include that as part of the paper, that the Traffic Commission provide a pro-ratio abatement to the cost of a business permit in the equivalent of the number of days that the individuals that are in possession of the business permit are unable to access the lot.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President. I'm wondering if maybe someone in the business community can answer this question for me. But we also have a bus stop on the corner of Warren coming, I guess that would be West, into West Medford. And we have a bus stop at the corner of Placedead Road at Irving Street. Have those also been looked at as potential bus stops to move further away from the square to create some more parking on the opposite side of the street?
[Adam Knight]: The bus stop right in front of the spot.
[Adam Knight]: And then there's a bus stop on the corner of Irving Street in place of the road.
[Adam Knight]: And even if they move it.
[Adam Knight]: The question is whether or not those locations have been examined. So hopefully that'll be an area for them to park. If I can amend the paper to request that those two locations be examined, the corner of High Street and Warren Street, and the corner of Placid Road and Irving Street. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, this is a great resolution. I think Mitchell Ave's been in rough shape since Testis was opened. It's been long overdue that the street needs to be repaved, piggybacking on some of Councilor Mock's concerns. Between Route 16 at Winthrop Street and South Street, due to the detour that's in place with the closure of the Craddock Bridge, we're seeing an increased volume of cars that are being detoured down to the Winthrop Street and South Street, Winthrop to High and Winthrop to South. And in front of the baseball park, we're seeing the street fall apart as well. And we're seeing the exposed red rip rock like we're seeing on Evans Street. And we know that that's not something that we can just patch. I think this is something that may require a little bit of help from our friends at the state delegation in relation to the Craddock Bridge project and the request that we made last week for mitigation, Mr. President. So I'd ask that this matter be put on a B paper and request that we receive some help in repaving and resurfacing the roadway between Route 16 and South Street as a result of the increased traffic volume on the roadway due to the detour that's in place because of the ramp closure. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President. I actually had a conversation with Commissioner Kerins before the Committee of the Whole today, and he informed me that Paris Street would be going underneath, I'm sorry, Evans Street, not Paris Street, would have the ground broken in the next two weeks for that project to start up. So I'm looking forward to seeing that happen to answer Councilor Scarpelli's question. And also on your question, I spoke with Rocco DiRico from- I spoke with Rocco myself today. Tufts University relative to the speed bump. And that was a temporary speed bump that was put up during the construction. The construction is nearing an end. So they've taken the temporary speed bump down and they're going to move forward with the striping and safety markers and so on.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. Vice President. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I feel as though the course of action that Councilor Marks just laid out makes perfect sense, and I would second the motion. Move approved.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, this is a great resolution, and I don't think anybody behind this rail is going to vote against it, especially based on the fact that when C-Click Fix was rolled out, we've asked for quarterly reports, and those quarterly reports were not forthcoming. I thank Councilor Falco for putting this resolution on. I also thank him for his foresight in starting to think about the budget at this early time, not really early, but earlier than usual. So I certainly wholeheartedly support this request, Mr. President, and I would like to add a B paper. uh, requesting that the council reiterate its request to receive quarterly reports from C-Click fix.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think I might need a box of tissues for this one. A couple of weeks ago we saw Director Riccio here and she put in a great presentation concerning the capital needs and a request for authorizing a grant proposal to go up to the Department of Education. And we all commented about the work that she's done in her short time here in Medford and how she's moved the vocational school eons and eons ahead of where it was. She's broke down the invisible wall between the high school and the vocational school. She's added programming. The programming that's been added has had a great impact on our bottom line. It's had an ability to prevent kids from transferring out of district to go to other schools that provide programming that we didn't provide. So, Mr. President, it's with great sadness, but also great pleasure to see Heidi moving on to something that is really worthwhile. And it's an opportunity that she can't say no to. But it's with great sadness to see her to go because she's done great things in the city of Medford. And it's really just too bad that we have to see her go. I wish we could have done more to recruit and keep her here, but we can't make people move closer to Medford, Mr. President. She had quite a commute coming in there every day. With that being said, I'd ask my colleagues to support this resolution and wish her the best of luck and thank her for her service to the city. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, hopefully Mary's still at home watching this evening. I know we had a few things we had to take care of at the beginning of the meeting, and we couldn't take this up under suspension. But Mary was born and raised in the city of Medford, has been a lifelong resident. She raised her four children, Maureen, Paul, John, and Julie here in the community. Her sister Anne still resides in Medford with her husband. And she has three grandchildren and one great-grandchild. So we'd like to join me in wishing Ms. O'Sullivan, a very happy 90th birthday, Mr. President, and many more to come.
[Adam Knight]: I second the resolution, Mr. President, move for approval. I think it's also important to point out she is a member of the Medford Mustang Hall of Fame.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President. Thank you very much, Councilor Marksley, for bringing this resolution forward. I, too, had a conversation with Public Works Director Cairns this afternoon. And he's informed me that there will be two sidewalk crews that will be out in the coming weeks. One of the crews is a city crew. One of the crews is a National Grid crew. The National Grid crew will be dealing with sidewalk panels that they've disturbed during their construction over the last year, and the city crew will be working on the stump and sidewalk money that we appropriated some months back, Mr. President. But I appreciate the resolution going forward. I support it wholeheartedly, and I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. There's been much discussion about development in the community, much discussion about zoning. One thing that we all need to be wary of is Chapter 40B of the General Laws, which allows developers to bypass the local zoning laws if the city of Medford is not at its threshold established by the state standard for affordable housing. So I'd ask that the administration provide those reports to us so that we can take a look at them as we prepare our discussions.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'm very surprised that Councilor Marks missed one. The airplane noise meeting. That's right. Monday.
[Adam Knight]: 7 p.m. in the council chambers, and representatives from the Massport CLC will be there.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor knife. Mr. President motion to request that the administration examined the feasibility of allowing the senior citizen Abatement program to work as ambassadors between new businesses in the community in City Hall Thank you on the motion by councillor night seconded by councillor.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I move to take paper 1771, the Wage Theft Prevention Ordinance, from the table. It is eligible this evening for its third reading. This is a paper that has gone through the subcommittee process and through the committee of the whole process. And what it is, Mr. President, is it's a proposal to ensure that people that are bidding on public contracts here in the city of Medford comply with the wage and hour laws. It requires that a series of certifications are made and a series of statements of credibility I made to the administration so that when they're awarding a contract, the individuals that are awarded the contract have not been found in violation of any wage and hour laws. Wage theft is a problem across the country, Mr. President. It's something that we see here in Massachusetts a lot of times with contracts like cleaning contracts. For example, the high school has a cleaning contract, and they may bring people in to clean the high school. And the prevailing wage rate, which they are supposed to be paid by law, is $26 an hour. But these employees are hourly workers that make $18 an hour when not working on the prevailing wage. And their employer will withhold those funds, Mr. President. So they're actually employers that are stealing money from their employees. So this ordinance requires that people that are bidding on public projects that are covered under the prevailing wage laws and other state and federal hour and wage laws, Mr. President, are in compliance. They inform the city whether or not they've been found in violation. And they take out certain bonds if they have been found in violation. With us here this evening, we have some individuals that were instrumental in putting this work, this ordinance together, Mr. President. This is a paper that was originated through a group called Community Labor United. It's been a matter that's been endorsed and supported by the Greater Boston Labor Council. And here this evening with us from the Greater Boston Labor Council, we have Rich Rogers. We also have representing Sean O'Brien from Local 25, James Donovan, political director. We have from Local 537, Bill Young here with us this evening. I'd be remiss not to mention Louie Mandarini from Local 22, a long-time Medford resident, Mr. President, who was instrumental in crafting this language and also helped with some technical assistance. And also with us we have Phil Reason from the Painters Union here. Mr. President, this is a paper that Mayor Burke and I worked on in concert with the individuals that have been forementioned. It's something that I wholeheartedly support and I'd ask my colleagues this evening to vote in favor of it.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Neistat. Mr. President, George's Bakery has been in this community for a very long time without incident, without issue. Um, I get some bread from there every once in a while. I'm not going to lie. And, um, I certainly think that, uh, this proposal that's before us this evening is within reason and, um, meets the spirit and intent of the zoning ordinance, uh, relative to signage. And I too move for approval with a second to councilor Dello Russo's motion.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President, if you review Ms. Cyr's resume in contrast with the ordinance and the requirements that are set forth in the ordinance relative to what would make an appropriate appointee, you'll see that Ms. Cyr hits all the high spots. I, too, had the opportunity to work with her on the Community Preservation Commission subcommittee that helped draft the ordinance. And I wanted to thank her for her technical expertise and her input and involvement. Mr. President, this is a great appointment. It's someone that I'd wholeheartedly support. And I'd like to thank you for the opportunity for having us come up here this evening and vet this. I move approval as well.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, once again, if you take a look at Ms. Sewell's resume and contrast that with the ordinance and the criteria that's put forth therein, you'll see that she meets all the major requirements that have been put forth. It appears to me, although I don't know the woman personally, that she's been a qualified and dedicated professional in her field of expertise, and she's someone that I will have no problem supporting this evening. I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, if you review Mr. Pecora's resume and contrast with the city ordinance, you'll see that he also hits all the high points in terms of criteria that's been established. As we all know, the Community Preservation Act does have a focus, number one, on land acquisition and number two, on affordable housing. And I think he brings some much needed expertise in those fields and I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Bader, how are you? Good to see you. Good to see you. Um, all the procedural requirements have been met by the district commission.
[Adam Knight]: And right now, um, this would bring this, if we take this to a vote this evening, it would bring this issue of 21 to wrap the finality and it would have its single home historic district classification.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. By way of history, I'd like to just give a brief breakdown as to the process. In June of 2016, the historical commission came before the council during budget hearings and expressed some concern about the demolition delay. At that point in time, in June of 2016, I was working on a proposal with Mr. Haywood based upon some recommendations that he had. and Councilor Lungo-Koehn put forward a resolution requesting that the demolition delay be looked at. In June of 2016, that paper was referred to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, and it was introduced by way of a subcommittee hearing language. Language was put together, and in August of 2016, the Zoning and Ordinance Subcommittee reported the following changes to 48-78B out of committee favorably for full review and vetting from the Committee of the Whole. The first recommendation that the subcommittee made was to strike the figure 1900 and replace that with homes built within the last 75 years. Presently, homes subject to demolition delay have to have been built before the year 1900, and the recommendation of the subcommittee was to strike that and replace it with homes built within the last 75 years. Also, the subcommittee agreed in their committee report, which was reported out favorably, underneath 48-78B, subsection H to strike the figure six months and replace it with the figure 12 months. And, uh, that would be the amount of time for which the demolition delay can take place. Um, also under section I two, um, would be strike six months and replaced with 12 months again, uh, housekeeping to ensure that, uh, the ordinance would reflect that demolition delay would be 12 months. Um, the subcommittee also recommended that a new section be added to 48-78, which would allow for the historical commission to petition the city council for an additional six months of demolition delay if they felt certain requirements and criterias weren't met. This was reported out of the committee in August of 2016 and set for a committee of the whole hearing. The matter was being scheduled for a committee of the whole hearing when the commission asked to hold off and presented us with a revamped ordinance that they wrote that was a little bit more than just increasing the number of years that it takes to make a house eligible for demolition delay and also increasing the amount of time for which they have to delay demolition of a house. So in October of 2016, the historical commission presented those changes to the subcommittee. And in October of 2016, the subcommittee requested some technical assistance relative to some questions that were raised relative to legalities. Those were sent to the Office of Community Development and the legal department. Those questions weren't answered. And in January 2017, there were some subcommittee changes with the change of the leadership to the president. So Councilor Dela Rousseff, Councilor Falco, and Councilor Me, and I now make up the committee. In February of 2017, a meeting notice was posted to reconvene and discuss this matter where we had not received any response from the administration, at which time a snowstorm struck. And the meeting was canceled because City Hall was closed. So that brings us to February 2017, Mr. President. So it appears that as of August 2016, the subcommittee had reported out a paper favorably to the Committee of the Whole. And there is a paper that is now at the Committee of the Whole that would address this issue. The recommendations were to increase the number of years for which a home would be eligible for a demolition delay to be built within the last 75 years. It would also give a 12-month automatic demolition delay with the ability for the commission to petition this council for an opportunity for an additional six months, Mr. President. Recommendations still remain on the table and can be brought up at any time. We can move forward on those tomorrow. The proposed ordinance that the commission put together was a little bit more inclusive than just addressing issues of time and of delay. And there was a number of concerns that were raised by the subcommittee. The subcommittee was waiting to get some answers back from the administration's legal team and community development team. That hasn't happened. And we share the frustration that the individuals behind the rail share However, if the matter is just as simple as increasing the number of years to look at a house and the amount of time to delay demolition, there's a paper that's sitting right in our Committee of the Whole right now that we can act on, Mr. President, and that will address that issue. And then we can go and continue to properly vet the proposals. And that's the course of action that I would recommend.
[Adam Knight]: The recommendation of the subcommittee coming out of the August subcommittee report, which was favorable and unanimous, would be to strike the figure 1900. Right now it said any home built before 1900 was subject to a demolition delay. We wanted to reduce that figure to any home built within the last 75 years. That was the recommendation of the committee that was reported out favorably. That's subsection B under ordinance 48-78. We also have the opportunity to strike the figure six months and replace it with 12 months. And that was a reference to the amount of time for which the demolition delay would be in effect. That's under 48-78H. And we also have a reference to six months in 48-78I, subsection 2, which also made a reference to a six-month demolition delay. And the recommendation of the committee was to strike that and replace it with 12 months. So the committee made an initial recommendation to change the purview of homes that are subject to a demolition delay from houses that were built before 1900 to houses that were built within the last 75 years. So that would be a rolling scale. Um, we also agreed to give a 12 month demolition delay. And then there was new language that was reported out favorably, which said that, um, the commission would have the right to petition the city council for a delay of an additional six months. So that would give us 18 months of demolition delay if they could show that certain criteria weren't met. And that was the recommendation that was reported out of the subcommittee.
[Adam Knight]: That is correct, Mr. President, Councilor de la Russo. The commission and the council met on that. The language changes were minor in nature and didn't raise any question or concern about legality. When we started getting into a two-year demolition delay and some of the changes that were in place, some concerns came up relative to whether or not there would be legal standing as to whether or not that was a land-taking. Some questions and concerns about financing of projects and stuff, stuff that really I think warranted concern, but not stuff that should be a deal breaker. Number one. Number two, I think that, you know, moving forward, we have some recommendations from the subcommittee that met that are sitting on the table at the committee of the whole that will address the issues in the ordinance that are brought forward. They will extend the demolition delay period of time from six months to 18 months or a year guaranteed and potentially 18 months if need be. And it will also change the type of home. that is subject to a demolition delay. And that's something that I could support this evening, Mr. President. I have the subsections and the languages, the language before me this evening and I'm writing it up right now for the city clerk and I'll present that by way of a motion.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. August 2016 was when the Zoning Subcommittee issued its report. September 2016 was when the, the commission presented their changes. So there was a month break between when the council was moving forward and when the commission came before the council and then we asked those questions. But the questions got asked after August, 2016. Thank you, Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. McKillop, the council doesn't make the determination as to whether or not the home is historic. The commission does that. So all we're doing is giving them the right development.
[Adam Knight]: A very good portion.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, after listening to the residents in the audience come up and speak and discussing at sidebar with some of my colleagues, I'd like to propose an 18-month demolition delay for all homes within the last 75 years by amending 48-78B, by striking 1900 and replacing that with the language within the past 75 years, by amending 48-78H, by striking the figure six months and replacing that with 18 months. And I'd like to amend 48-78I2 by striking the figure six months and replacing that with the figure 18 months, Mr. President. The proposal that came out of the subcommittee gave the commission an opportunity to petition the council for an additional six months. I think that this is a paper based upon the sidebar conversations that I've had with my colleagues this evening. This is something we can support this evening and that we can pass this evening and we can put it through a first reading. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'd like to amend the paper to reflect such.
[Adam Knight]: I just did.
[Adam Knight]: Also nice, the council rules state that paper that met in subcommittee cannot be reported out of subcommittee until the committee of the whole meets and it's presented. So that paper would have to be presented to the committee of the whole in order to be reported out of the committee of the whole and reach the floor pursuant to our rules. But we have Councilman Lungo's paper that's in front of us that we can amend. That was the theory that I was going with when I made the amendment to the piece of paper.
[Adam Knight]: Correct. Yeah, you're right.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. This is a topic that's not new to anybody behind this rail, especially during this time of year. And one of the items that I see in terms of street sweeping in general that's lacking in the community is our public utilities. And when we issue permits to our public utilities to tear up our streets and they do it, And then they decide to come back whenever they feel like coming back to repair our streets. And then they leave the streets still looking in an awful situation, an awful mess with sand, with gravel, with dirt all over the place. I don't believe that public utilities are required as part of the permitting process when they open up our streets to perform a sweep when they're done. And I think that that's something that we should also look at. Mr. President, I'd like to amend the paper to reflect that. I'd also, as the chairman of the DPW subcommittee, would request that any of my colleagues behind this rail send out an email to the members of the subcommittee with any suggestions that they'd like to see, and we can get to the table and discuss these issues.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Neistat. Mr. President, thank you very much. I first met Roberta when she asked me for a signature on the Preserve Medford petition and since that time I've had the opportunity to work with her through the passage of the Act and now the passage of the community preservation commission. Um, she was a member of the ad hoc subcommittee, um, that put together the language for our city ordinance. And, um, if we take a look at miss Cameron's resume and credentials and contrast that with the city ordinance, you'll see that, uh, she meets all the criteria that has been outlined. Um, she has a great wealth of experience and technical assistance and, uh, implementing the community preservation act and other communities. And, uh, it was really a pleasure working with her and other members of the committee to get this thing passed. And this is really the final step that the City Council has this evening, Mr. President, in our involvement with the creation of the ordinance. We appoint the last member of the committee. Hopefully she gets approved this evening, and then they get to work on putting proposals together to give to us to decide whether or not they're things that we feel as though should be funded. So with that being said, it's with great pleasure that I wholeheartedly endorse Roberta's candidacy and move for approval on the paper number one. And number two, it's with great excitement that I'm glad to see the commission finally together, up, and hopefully soon to be running. I would like to point out, your colleagues waited as long as they could for you. And I'm on the committee, and they had to leave. But I will, for one, Mr. President, have no problem supporting Roberta Cameron for an appointment this evening. Thank you. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight, you will help me. The city's ordinance is rather specific and detailed in terms of the procedure and the processes that take place and how an applicant can move forward and request whether or not they have a funding opportunity. And there are also certain restrictions that are placed around who would be a qualified and eligible applicant.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Nice. On that note, Mr. President, I would like to commend the work that Ms. Murray, Mr. Lasky, and Mr. Wade do, our elections commissioners. I think they're doing a great job. It was great to see them.
[Adam Knight]: It was great to see them before the council this evening. It's something that we haven't seen too much of in the past, the full boarding, the full board coming before us this evening. So I'd like to thank them for the work that they do. Congratulate them and move approval on the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Point of order. Point of order. Stick to the subject matter on the agenda, please. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Being a father of children with allergies and understanding the severity thereof in looking at the past few weeks what's going on in the community. We have our first responders whose job is to save people's lives, carrying Narcan. We have our first responders right now reviewing a request that this council made to have defibrillators as part of their first response package. And this is an effort to build upon that, Mr. President, and to ask the administration to examine the feasibility of requiring EpiPens and EpiPen training for our first responders. As we all know, when you come into a situation related to allergies, every second counts. And most times, the police cars get there before the ambulances do. And if, in fact, there's a feasible way to provide this training and this product to our First responders, I think, will be making Medford a safer place. And I don't think there's anybody behind this rail that can argue that our first job isn't to have a focus on public safety, Mr. President. We're making great strides in that regard. And I think that this is just an opportunity for us to expand upon the services that we provide our citizenry. And I'd ask that my colleagues behind the rail support this measure. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Also, Mr. President, I know we've all seen in the news the drastic price increases of EpiPens and individuals that are on fixed incomes may have a little bit of a difficult time purchasing these materials, especially if they're without insurance. So one of my fears is that individuals that You know, I have allergies that require an EpiPen when they have a reaction. I'm going to use that as an area to save costs. And if someone's trying to trim their budget and they haven't used their EpiPen in two or three years and it's expired, they might say, well, I'm pretty good at watching the nuts. I don't think I need it, which is going to create a worse situation, Mr. President. So I, again, thank Councilor Longo for her kind words and move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This is a program or a process or a policy that's in place in many communities around the United States of America. think about the first time I saw it, I think I was in California when I saw this establishment has been rated a B plus by the Board of Health and its inspection. There are other establishments that were C's and other establishments that were A's. And what the Board of Health is doing is conducting their food inspections and then making an assessment based upon a certain policy or protocol they put in place to give a grade to that establishment with the hopes that it produces corrective action, Mr. President. We'd like to have every food establishment here in the city of Medford meeting every requirement that the Board of Health puts forward. So we'll see cities like New York City, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and most recently I believe the city of Boston adopted a system where they're grading establishments based upon the results of their food inspections. And I think that this is really a great act to protect the consumer. I don't want the policy to create an increased burden on operators or business owners here in the community, but I think that if we sell good products and the city is behind the fact that a business is selling a good product, that we'll have more customers in that business because the city and the government entity has made an effort to further regulate it and to make sure that they're complying by all the rules. And then we're telling people they're complying by the rules. So I know we have Mr. Pinter at the rail here. I thought Mr. McKillop was going to get up because he's a business owner and a restaurant owner. However, this is a measure that I'd like to get a report back from the Board of Health on as to whether or not this is something that they find feasible and find out if it'll work in the city of Medford, Mr. President. So I'd ask my colleagues to support it and move approval.
[Adam Knight]: The proposal that's before us is for the Board of Health to examine whether or not this would be a feasible approach. And what it is is not to have the Board of Health get involved into the business operations of a business, but to report to the general public that the facility that they're going to eat and purchase food from is clean. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: We all do things a certain way. And we could all do things better, Mr. President. And all this is is an opportunity for us to ask the Board of Health whether or not we're doing things the right way, and if it's feasible to do it a different way, and if that different way is going to be better. I don't think it's something we need to yell and scream about.
[Adam Knight]: There's a lot of things that are governed through state legislation that eliminates local control. So the answer to that is yes and no, I guess.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you for your retreat. Thank you, Mr. Coats. Sorry to.
[Adam Knight]: The Board of Health could very simply say, it's not feasible, we don't wanna do it. If it is feasible, we can do it. All we're doing is asking them a question. I don't see the harm.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: There are two ways to look at every issue, Mr. President. We can look at issues as to why we can't do things, and we can look at issues as to why we can't. And all I'm doing is asking a question. I'd like the support of my council colleagues, and that's all I have to say about it. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think it's also important to point out what a great job long-time Medford resident David McGillivray, Boston Marathon race director, has been doing. My classmate. Yes, and he's been involved. He's been involved in this race now, I think it's for the last 40 or so years. And one of the things that I heard on the radio today that was amazing to me, Mr. President, was that he's at the starting line at Hopkington when the gun goes off. Then he's at the finish line on Boylston Street when the first wave comes through. And then at eight o'clock at night, he's back in Hopkinton running the race himself. Um, so it just shows what a commitment and what a love he has for the sport and how, uh, he's been able to turn this passion into a career and it really is inspiring. So I'd like to thank Dave for all his work as well.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the gentleman at the podium answered my question. By looking at the diagram, I had a question as to whether or not any street excavation was going to take place and whether or not there was going to be a need for a traffic management plan. He's informed us that it's all going to take place on the grass strip, that it's 15 feet of conduit, that it's going to take one day to do. So I have no problem. I would second Councilor Scapelli's motion for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knightth. It's my understanding that this matter has made its way through the Water and Sewer Commission, and that's a recommendation that they've made?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. Section 17 of Robert's Rules of Order would say, to lay a matter on the table, you move to lay a question on the table. A second is required.
[Adam Knight]: On the motion by Councilor Dello Russo, Councilor Knight. Uh, Mr. President, thank you very much. Ms. Nunley, in reading the memorandum that you put together for the Water and Sewer Commission, it explains a little bit about a lot of duplication of efforts that your office performs now because you have these two separate funds. Could you go into that a little bit for me and make me understand it a little bit better, please?
[Adam Knight]: And that's in terms of operations and in terms of administration?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Ms. Dunley.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. In recent weeks, this council has requested that the administration provide us with a list of her appointments to the Community Preservation Commission. which is a function of the Community Preservation Act that was passed last November by the voters in this community. As we go through the list here and we see the individuals that have been appointed by the administration, four of these individuals are voluntary, five are statutory, Mr. President, and the council does have the power to approve the appointees that the mayor has put forward. In reviewing the resumes that have attached and looking at the voluntary appointments that the mayor has put forward, we see Joan Cyr from 40 Cedar Road, appointed to a two-year term. Joan served on the CPA Ad Hoc Subcommittee that helped craft the CPA language, the CPA ordinance here in our community. And she's someone who I think did a great job also. She was instrumental in getting the Community Preservation Act passed here in the community. We also have, she also has a background in project management, Mr. President. Then we see Roberta Cameron from North Street, also recommended for a three-year term. Roberta was also a member of the Ad Hoc Committee that helped put together the ordinance that's been adopted by this council. and she has a long background in community planning. The other two appointees that are before us this evening are Elizabeth Kerry Sewell from Douglas Road, appointed to a one-year term, and she has a very long and extensive history in landscape architecture, Mr. President. And then we have Joseph Pecora, a resident from Adams Street, appointed to a one-year term, who is a real estate professional. If we look at the Community Preservation Act and we see that there are certain aspects of the act that it's focused on preservation of open space, the creation of affordable housing, Um, the maintaining of our, uh, historic landmarks, Mr. President, I think that, um, the administration has done a great job in going through the applicants in presenting us with a group of, uh, or a team, I should say, of individuals that will move the city in the right direction. Um, so with that being said, I just wanted to have a brief moment to go over the individuals that were appointed. Mr. President, I'm uncomfortable this evening voting on them. However, I'd open the floor up to deliberation to my council colleagues to see how they feel as though they'd like to proceed. Thank you. Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: When the ordinance was crafted, there is language that's included in the ordinance that says that the appointees that are put forward by the mayor will do their best to represent all geographic areas of the community. And if we look at the individuals who have been appointed and where they live, um, we will see that the appointees that are before the city council, um, are spread out and relatively decently across the community in separate wards, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I never made a reference to a ward or a precinct. I made reference to a geographic area, which is what the ordinance speaks to.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to amend the resolution, Mr. President, and request that Arlington Street be included.
[Adam Knight]: I'd also like to further amend the paper. Mr. President, I request that Tufts University be contacted and that we request they take the appropriate steps to properly improve the visibility of the raised crosswalk that they have on Boston Ave. It's like Mount Everest. You come up the hill on it and you can't even see that it's there, Mr. President. I've witnessed cars going at a normal and acceptable rate of speed, still bottom out on it because of the size of it, Mr. President. So I think that we might need to do a little bit better work over there. denoting the fact that there is a raised crosswalk on the street on Boston Avenue right before the old post office. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I filed this resolution in response to some frustration that the neighbors had in the area relative to advertised power outages that never happened, Mr. President. Last week, residents were notified that the power would be out in the evening hours between 8 and 10 p.m. The power never went out. Two days later, residents are notified the power is going to go out between certain hours. The power never goes out. Three days later, residents are notified the power is going to go out during certain hours. The power never goes out, Mr. President. So I'm wondering what the situation is on Harvard Avenue and what notification systems are in place to inform the residents, number one, if their power is going to be shut off, but number two, if they're not going to do the scheduled and performed work. so that individuals that may have made dinner plans to go out that night, as opposed to staying home and opening their refrigerator back and forth, let the freezing cold air out, would be in a little bit of a situation, Mr. President. So I raise the issue based out of real frustration on behalf of the neighborhood residents especially. those residing in the condominium on Harvard Avenue that were notified multiple times.
[Adam Knight]: Dan Cameron is the individual and I have placed a phone call into him, Mr. President, but I'd like to ask that we send this to the engineering department for an update and I'll make my phone calls to Mr. Cameron and hopefully I can get an answer personally. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Aye.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, this has been an ongoing issue in the community for quite some time now. I feel like every 90 days I'm making a phone call to Code Enforcement or the Board of Health to go down and take a look at Stone and Skillet and what's going on. Now, don't get me wrong, Stone and Skillet's a great business, and they're doing a great business, and they've absolutely outgrown the location that they're currently located at. If you aren't familiar, Stone and Skillet right now is located at the old Marty's for Parties, the old Pranzi's location, right on Winthrop Street on the corner of Winthrop and West Street, Mr. President. In past months, we've seen 18 wheelers double parking on Winthrop Street to load up the truck with product from Stone and Skillet. We've seen grease trap problems and border health issues that have been rectified in the past. We've seen rodent problems because of the border health issues in the past, Mr. President. And quite frankly, the neighborhood's a little bit frustrated with it, and they've had enough. I had the opportunity last Thursday evening at 1 a.m. with a screaming child in the backseat of my car to drive by Stone and Skillett and see that all the lights were on and the place looked like a nightclub. And that's something that's not suitable or appropriate for a residential neighborhood, Mr. President. So I'm asking that the Code Enforcement Office go down and meet with the individuals that operate Stone and Skillett and reiterate the city ordinances that are in place and if need be, levy citation. It's also brought to my attention, Mr. President, that at that location, there were late hours when Prenzies was there. And any special permit or any approval that the city council issued relative to late hours should really go with that business, Prenzies, and not a muffin wholesale that's operating through all hours of the night that's really far outgrown its location, Mr. President. We're seeing legitimate 18-wheelers parked on the corner of West Street. Legitimate 18-wheelers parked right in front of Molten Seafood in the address 186 Winthrop Street during rush hour, normal business hours, blocking the street. It's gotten to the point of frustration that something needs to happen. Something needs to happen sooner rather than later. I'd like to thank Ms. O'Connor at the Board of Health and Mr. Bavuso and code enforcement because they've been working with me for the past year on this issue. And I've spoken with them both relative to the filing of this resolution. It's time that something happens down there, Mr. President. So I'm asking that my colleagues support this initiative.
[Adam Knight]: Move approval, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. It's amazing how time flies. I remember walking into Senator Shannon's office when I was 19 years old and getting my first big boy job, as I like to call it, and I sat down at a desk next to your son, Richard. And I logged on to a computer that Councilman Moxley used to sit at, and I began my career in public service, Mr. President. And through the relationship I have with Senator Shannon and the many moments of teaching that he allowed me to participate in through his guidance and his wisdom, I really miss him and bring this matter forward annually in his remembrance. Senator Shannon did a great deal of work for the city of Medford. He was a gentleman who, as they like to say, brought home the bacon to the district. And that type of representation is something that we need here in the city. And I was pleased to be a part of it in the senator's office. He worked on a number of important issues that we're seeing come to fruition now, like the extension of the Green Line, marriage equality, just to name a few, Mr. President. So it's with a heavy heart that I bring this resolution forward this evening. However, it's important to me to remember somebody that's meant so much to me and so much to this community. So with that being said, I'd ask that my colleagues join me in endorsing the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Nice. Mr. President, thank you very much. And Mr. Belson and Ms. Riccio, thank you very much for being here this evening. I just want to thank you for the job that you both have done on this. It's been a long work in progress, and you've done a great job. And I really think you're doing a great job in moving vocational education in Medford forward and in the right direction. You've broken down walls, the walls between the high school and the vocational school, and you've built the bridge over to Everett now. We built the bridge over to the casino, bridge to local 22, bridge to iRobot. You're really doing a great job, and I think that this proposal's not only well thought out, but it's data driven. And I think it'll both fill a void that we have here in the community, but it will also prepare our future leaders for the ability to be successful in our region's economy. So thank you very much for the work that you do. This is something that I'll support wholeheartedly, and I have no problem supporting it this evening. I think it's a great job. The amount of information that you've provided us this evening is terrific. It answers any question that I could even come up with if I wanted to. But this is something I believe in. I think you've done an excellent job. You know, when I was in high school, Medford High and the vocational school were operating in two distinct worlds. And since the time that you've been on, Ms. Riccio, we've seen a lot of changes in the culture up at Medford High School. And I think it's for the better. I think you're doing an excellent job. And, you know, I'd love to see the look on Mr. Kelly's face and Mr. Rendazzo's face and Mr. Mahoney's face come June when this opens up. I know that the vocational director when I was in school is no longer with us. He was a great person, Larry Volpe. And I can tell you right now, he'd be very proud of the progress that the vocational schools made. So thank you very much for your work. And I'm certainly comfortable supporting this this evening. Thank you, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, while we're making announcements, I just would like the opportunity to respond to the council relative to a resolution that was put on a couple of weeks ago regarding the street sweeping schedule. Um, it's been brought to my attention through, uh, the mayor's liaison to the city council that, um, the street sweeping will begin on Monday the 10th and we'll continue through the 28th. It will happen from 8am to 6pm on a zone by zone basis. Um, the DPW is established 14 zones. It's also been brought to my attention that the Metro police department will be enforcing parking restrictions and cars will be towed. Parking will be allowed on designated major arteries, however, and there will be no street sweeping on Patriot's Day, Mr. President. If you go to the city's website, under important links, you'll be able to find out what zone your home would be classified under. And if you don't have Internet access, you're encouraged to call 781-396-5500, and they will be able to tell you what zone you live in and tell you when your street sweeping is going to occur so that you do not face the wrath of the Medford police enforcing the parking restrictions during the spring sweep.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Thank you, Councilor. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I second the motion for approval. I wanted to congratulate the Lanzilli family as well. that we've had Brittany up here a number of times now, from her days playing in Medford High, where she was a top goal scorer, to her All-Scholastic selection two years in a row, now to her placement on the World National Team, and now coming back home with her bronze medal. So, Mr. President, it's great to have someone in this community that so many people can look up to. She comes from a great family, and I wish her the best of luck. And I want to thank her for representing Medford, Mass., and the United States of America with dignity and pride overseas, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: She is a student first, and she's out there at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, so.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, yes, in our packets this week, we also had a response from the mayor relative to a resolution that was put forward on the 21st. The resolution, the council asked if the mayor could update us relative to the appointments for the Community Preservation Commission. And the response that we received in our packet this week was that we should see the names coming across our desk within the next two weeks, Mr. President. So it's something I'm looking forward to. And I thank the administration for their prompt response.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I ask to suspend the rules to allow one of our prestigious Medford public school teachers to come up and address the council relative to a fundraising drive that he is participating in in the memory of one of our deceased Medford public school students. I'd like to call Anthony Petrellis to the podium, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Did I hear you correctly when you said the athletic director was going to be participating in this event?
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, I can't wait to see that. Anthony, thank you very much for what you do in the community. Also you have here with you is Chris Murphy, one of the members of the park commission here in the city of Medford, who's been a long time activist in the community and someone that's given so much back to the city of Medford. I really want to thank you guys for coming down here this evening and thank you for the work that you do. I am interested to hear from a friend here about what he thinks about the Buzz Off and how much fun he's had in participating.
[Adam Knight]: Thanks for coming down tonight, Jackson. You've got a pretty good head of hair.
[Adam Knight]: Jackson, can I come down so you can shave my head?
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, October. Isn't that when you started? October of 69. Mr. President, thank you very much for indulging me and allowing me the opportunity to suspend the rules. Again, Anthony, Chris, and Jackson, thank you very much for coming down here tonight. And to all the rest of the members of Team HEMO, thank you very much for what you do to keep the memory and spirit of a good boy who was taken from us too soon, Mr. President. So I motion to receive and place no file.
[Adam Knight]: See you guys in two weeks.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and thank you, Councilor Caraviello, for bringing this issue forward. If we take a look at the Attorney General's Guide to the Open Meeting Law, published in March of 2017, there's a section entitled Public Participation. And in this section, it reads, any member of the public has the right to make an audio or video recording of an open session of a public meeting. A member of the public who wishes to record a meeting must first notify the chair, and comply with reasonable requirements regarding audio or video equipment established by the chair as not to interfere with the meeting. I commend Councilor Caraviello for bringing this resolution forward. I too got a number of calls relative to the recording of the meeting last week and some people feeling uncomfortable that certain individuals putting a camera in their face and following them around. So I think that this is a good proactive measure to ensure that we have full participation and that individuals that want to come down to the Medford City Council meetings are not feeling intimidated or frightened to do so. So thank you, Councilor Caraviello. I appreciate your leadership on this issue and I look forward to the final product that the chair puts out as the presiding officer underneath the open meeting law.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor, report of information. Based on the reading of it, the Medford City Council is already governed and subject to the open meeting laws. And I think that this is something that can be done absent a change to our rules or even meeting in subcommittee. It's the sole discretion of the chair to establish the criteria for which the reasonable use of recording equipment can be done. And I think that this could certainly be taken care of sooner rather than later, just by way of a policy that's been implemented and submitted to this council for review. Personally, I think that we should have maybe four designated areas that individuals can record from. I think that it's also important that the cameras be stationary. There are certain aspects of this, if we're going to implement the policy, that I think are important. But I think that they can be done absent the adoption of the Medford City Council rules, number one. And number two, based upon my reading of the language in the Open Meeting Law Guide, I feel as though it's at the sole discretion of the presiding officer, not that of the body.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. So the motion would be to send the paper to the Rules Committee, as opposed to the president exercising his discretion under the law and putting something together for us to review? Be up to the committee. In my opinion, I think it should. Because I think the act would indicate. Right. But the open meeting law would say that it's the sole discretion of the chair to establish the acceptable areas. Yes. So the committee creating the acceptable areas is really in contradiction to what the access, um, in my opinion, um, however, I'll proceed. However, the body feels fit. I just think that this is something that the president could propose. And then we could either adopt it as something we want to encompass into our rules right away or make amendments to it. If you want to, if you want to propose it tonight and then go into subcommittee process, I think you could probably adopt an interim policy or something like that. In the meantime, to govern the meetings, cause it's going to have to go through the legislative process.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, as long as we have an understanding going forward that there are some restrictions in place right now.
[Adam Knight]: Ultimately, Mr. President, my concern would be that, number one, we have an obligation to comply with the open meeting law, and the open meeting law requires the chairman to notify other members in the facility, or in the locale, that they are being recorded. And I think it's very important that, as we move forward and have our meetings, that we are in compliance with the open meeting law. And by designating certain areas, it'll make us a little bit easier for the president to identify, number one, and number two, The City Messenger at the meeting has already started to identify individuals.
[Adam Knight]: Right. My concern was just between then and now, what's going to happen. Yeah.
[Adam Knight]: Let me clarify when I said the word stationary, I don't mean that someone needs to buy a tripod or someone needs to, you know what I mean, buy this elaborate TV3 or, you know, channel 56 WLVI, Saturday Night Live, David Letterman, it's on the shoulder, it's on a tripod. I just mean that the individual that's recording shouldn't be walking around putting the camera, recording here, recording here, recording here, over here, over there, over there, over here, over here, walking all around the place because the intent is that the meeting does not get disrupted. We allow audio and video recording. But the meeting is not interfered with or disrupted. And that can be a disruption when someone's walking around with a camera and pointing at people's faces.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight, point of information. The open meeting law in this section of the open meeting law speaks to public participation. It doesn't speak to the conduct of councillors. The conduct of councillors is governed under a different chapter of the general law. I believe it's chapter 43.
[Adam Knight]: Uh, Mr. President, thank you very much. I want to commend Councilor Marks for putting this resolution forward. I think it's a great idea. Um, certainly questions that need to be answered. Um, whereas we have an interim director right now, I think it would also be important that, um, we send copies of the resolution to each member of the Medford housing authority board. And I also think it would be important that we send a copy to the Director of Civil Defense, which is coming out of the Board of Health right now. So I just ask that the paper be amended to include those individuals to receive copies of the resolution. And hopefully we can get an answer within 10 days or so, Mr. President. Move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much and Councilor Caraviello, thank you for making that motion so we didn't have to read this long and voluminous piece of language here. Mr. President, ultimately, this is a draft proposal that I would expect to go through the legislative process, through the subcommittee process, the committee of the whole process, and make it back here to the council floor after deliberation. But what it is, is it is an attempt to regulate security bars and grates on commercial and industrial properties that abide in a public way. It's a beautification initiative, Mr. President. I feel as though right now, in the day and age that we're in, with the technological advances that we have, And the fact that a number of these security grates aren't being utilized in a fashion that would be neighborly. Sometimes they don't go up at all during working hours when they're graffitied. The graffiti doesn't come off, and at the end of the day, the grate comes down and the graffiti remains on. The security grate, I think that there are certain issues that we need to look at in this regard, Mr. President. So with that being said, I drafted a proposal, and it's a phase-in proposal. It calls for any existing commercial or industrially zoned property that has a security bars, grills, or grates. that were properly permitted to have a 10-year window to remove those from the community. And any location that has security grates that were not installed in compliance with the building code has five years to remove those. So existing structures that have these security bars, grills, or grates that are up would have 10 years if they were put in there in a conforming basis and five years in a non-conforming basis to take it off. There's also some restrictions in there relative to whether or not a permit's pulled and a requirement to take the security grates down. But ultimately, this is, Mr. President, an attempt to start a discussion on the issue of security grates, grills, and the like that cover windows of commercial and industrial properties that abut public ways, that provide an unsightly appearance to individuals driving into the community. If we take a look at our zoning map, we'll see that there are many commercial and industrially zoned areas that lie on the fringes and the periphery of our community, the gateways to our community. And the impression that we want to give people coming to MedFit isn't that. It's an unsafe community that requires security, greats, bars, and grills on your windows, Mr. President. So that's the intent of this proposal. I would move that the matter be sent to the subcommittee on zoning and ordinances of further improper vetting.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much and Councilor Falco, thank you as well. Similar to the preceding matter that was on the agenda and that was just discussed, this is nothing more than an opportunity for us to start a discussion and it's a proposal to regulate donation drop boxes across the community. I think all of us behind this rail have been contacted by a number of individuals that are concerned about this proposal and the effect that it will have on our public schools and the fundraising drive that they have going on with Bay State Textiles. And this proposal in no way was designed to hurt that effort in any way. Since the filing of the proposal, Mr. President, I've had discussions with several of my colleagues as well as members of the general public It was my intention and my intent. Again, this is a beautification initiative. The intent of the ordinance is to put some restrictions around donation drop boxes to ensure that we have opportunities and abilities to keep areas clean and to keep neighborhood quality of life and beautification at the forefront, Mr. President. So with that being said, this is also a paper that I'd request to get sent to the subcommittee on zoning and ordinances, but ultimately what it does is it requires a permitting process for those entities that wish to utilize a donation drop box. It requires a sketch of the spot, the dimensions of the box, where it's going to be placed, and approval by the building department so that we're sure that this donation drop box, number one, is authorized by the property owner, and number two, doesn't provide a risk to public safety. But again, it's an opportunity for us to start a discussion, Mr. President. I'd ask that the matter be sent to the Subcommittee on Zoning and Ordinances. It's in no way an effort or an attempt to restrict the great work that the Medford Public Schools and Baystate Textile have done in cooperation as fundraising drives for our PTOs. It's more or less an initiative to address a matter that's been before this council at least three times this term and at least four times last term, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. Yes, the textile recycling is something that's certainly on the forefront right now of everybody's mind. It's something that the Mass DEP has been very focused on promoting throughout the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Here this evening, we have Catherine Larson as well from Baystate Textiles. Mr. President, she dropped off a nice packet of information for me, and she's agreed to become a resource of technical assistance moving forward to ensure that we craft language in an ordinance for the city that does not impact the work of It's a very simple fix, Mr. President. We just put language in there that says nothing in this article shall apply to the Medford Public Schools or the property that's under their control and direction, and then it's over. So I certainly think it's something that we can address in subcommittee. I certainly think that it's something that's an easy fix, not a hard one, Mr. President. Again, the intention legislatively was not to restrict or impede upon the fundraising abilities of our public schools, and it's certainly not to have a negative impact on Bay State Textiles and the relationship and partnership that they've been able to forge with our public schools.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, As the legislative body in the community, we need to start somewhere, and that's what this attempt at this proposal was to do, to start somewhere, to have this discussion start. If there's certain aspects of the proposal that people don't like or that are possibly ineffective or not suitable for MEDFED at this point in time, that's great. That's why we have the discussion and we go through the vetting process, Mr. President. However, it's all too often that we put items on the agenda and we say, do this, do that, do this, do that, and then nothing ever happens with them. And I figured that it might be more conducive to time and to getting things done to actually put some language on a piece of paper as a launching pad, as a starting point. And then we can go from there, Mr. President. Like I said, it's a proposal. Proposals pass, proposals fail. It's certainly something that I'm comfortable supporting with the fact that we can take it through the subcommittee process, that it's going to have to go to a committee of the whole after it goes through the subcommittee process, that it's going to have to come to this council. for a vote for a first reading, be advertised for a second reading, and then come back to the council for a third reading, Mr. President. So I can certainly understand Councilor Marks's concern, because it did prompt some, I don't want to say fear, but certainly interest in the community. However, you know, I felt as though it would be in the best interest of this body moving forward to put something with some language on a piece of paper. We've voted three or four times now to regulate donation drop boxes. Nothing's ever come of it, Mr. President. took some of the concerns that I heard over the last couple of years and I put them together and put pen to paper and made a proposal. And that's where I was coming from with this. But I can certainly understand what the councilor is referring to in terms of, um, you know, shouting fire in a crowded movie theater. Um, this isn't going to pass this evening. It was never an intention to have this matter pass this evening. My intention was to have the matter go through the legislative process. Um, just like we do with most matters that come before this council.
[Adam Knight]: I defer to the senior member, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and Councilor Marks, certainly did a great job remembering Tom. My relationship with Mr. Howell was a little different. I remember Mr. Howell when he was the manager at Chisholm's Motel, and his nephew Jason and I were very close friends. And one of our first summer jobs, when we were old enough to work, was going over to Chisholm's Motel on Route 1 and flipping mattresses, which that in itself was an experience, let me tell you, Mr. President. I remember when Mr. Howell moved from Chisholm's Motel when he retired to 27 Playstead Road, and we helped him move. It's 27 Playstead Road, Mr. President, and the House of the Karate's and the Howell's was one of those homes when we were kids. We didn't have to ring the doorbell. We were walking by the house, and we needed to use the bathroom. We needed a drink of water. We banged twice. We opened the door. We walked in. We said our name, and she said, help yourself. I'll be right down, honey. Mary Ann, Joanne, Ron, and Tom were the greatest. Great neighbors, great people. And Tom's going to be sadly missed. I wish the Karate family and the Howell family all the strength that they need to get through this. And I really want to thank them for allowing me to have the opportunity to become a friend of Tom's. And he will be sadly missed, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Firefighter Meyer has been a longtime firefighter in our community and recently he was promoted to the rank of Lieutenant. I'd like to thank him for his service and congratulate him on his appointment. It's obviously a testament to the hard work and dedication that he's put forward in his professional career. So I'd like to say thank you very much and congratulations to Anthony Meyer, and I'd ask that my colleagues join me in doing the same.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, similar to Firefighter Meyer, now Lieutenant Meyer. Firefighter Blute was named a captain very recently. And again, it is also a testament to his dedication and hard work and his commitment to the community of Medford. Great gentleman, long family relationship. His mother and my grandmother go back very, very long time. So it's very encouraging and pleasing to see somebody with such a relationship to the family be so successful in their professional career. So I'd like to congratulate Stephen on his promotion and thank him for his hard work, service and dedication to the community of Medford.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, again, thank you very much. Many of us in this community, especially the South Medford area, we all know John Maher, Maher Service Station, right there across from Dunkin' Donuts. And for a number of years, this was a family-owned and operated business. And John Maher was a fixture in the community. I met him a number of years ago, Mr. President, when I was involved with Pawpawanna football. And Mr. Maher was the best cheerleader that the city of Medford ever had when it came to Pawpawanna football and cheering on his kids and the members of the team. He's going to be sadly missed, Mr. President. His impact on the community is certainly going to be noticed. For the last — the better part of the last four years, he struggled significantly with cancer. And unfortunately, the disease got the better of his mind and body, but it did not get the best of his soul. He's going to be greatly remembered, Mr. President, as an individual who gave of himself. For a number of years, he was involved with the Medford Elks and the Elks organization and all the charitable work that they've done there. And he's touched countless lives, Mr. President. He's going to be sadly missed. And I just want to extend the deepest condolences to his family in this time of loss and time of need, Mr. President. I'd ask that my colleagues join me in doing the same.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilman. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. Mr. Bellson, thank you for being here this evening. I think you do a great job, and I appreciate you coming down here this evening. So I think it's safe to say that you feel as though going forward with this statement of interest is the most prudent course at this point in time?
[Adam Knight]: And this matter did come before the school committee and it was endorsed by the school committee? Yes. I have the copies of the votes if you need it. Do you recall what the vote was? Pardon me? Do you recall what the vote was?
[Adam Knight]: So it's endorsed by the superintendent of schools. It's endorsed by the school committee. And the purpose of the paper before us this evening, as I understand it, is that you're really seeking permission to meet with the state to examine what competitive grant opportunities the Massachusetts School Building Authority has out there for us that the Metro Public School District may be eligible for?
[Adam Knight]: by submitting this application in the statement of interest, the Massachusetts School Building Authority in no way guarantees that we're going to receive money in the city of Medford, in no way guarantees that we're going to expend money?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. Belson. Move for approval, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think we're getting the cut way, way, way ahead of the horse here, Mr. President. If we look at the history of the Medford City Council, just several weeks ago, we voted unanimously for the administration to hire a grant writer. Before us right here, we have a grant that's been written and an opportunity to let the school department go and explore options and opportunities for the city to be given free money. I don't think that's a bad thing, Mr. President. We get elected to make tough decisions. And if there comes a point in time when there's a room full of students and a room full of firefighters that are sitting here arguing about whose project is going to get funded, I think that everybody behind this rail is committed to the understanding that public safety is our first priority, Mr. President. But we will be the ones that have to make that tough decision. But that's what we're here for. Ultimately, Mr. President, all this is, is the school district seeking permission to go and sit down and have a conversation. That's what this is, the school district sitting down to have a conversation. As such, Mr. President, I've made a motion to move for approval. I make a motion to end all debate. Move the question.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to end all debate requires a two-thirds roll call vote.
[Adam Knight]: Point of parliamentary inquiry, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: No, it's up to Robert's Rules of Orders.
[Adam Knight]: We're in the debate? Do we want to allow the school district to move forward and pursue whether or not they have an opportunity to receive free grant money? based upon the history of the council. That's what we're here discussing. Voting in favor of hiring a grant writer.
[Adam Knight]: So the question is yes or no. Do we want him to go forward and apply or not?
[Adam Knight]: We're discussing it. It doesn't seem to me like it's going anywhere. It doesn't seem to me like it's going anywhere.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah. Pretty sure three times in 10 minutes has been met. Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: It's not relative to millions and millions of dollars, it's relative to whether or not we're going to authorize the school district to sit down and meet with the Massachusetts School Building Assistance Program to determine whether or not there are any grant funding opportunities that are competitive in nature for the city of Medford to pursue.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President. One information, Councilor Knight. Robert's Rules of Order have been adopted by the City Council as a standard to be used in the deliberation and discussion in the governing of our meetings. Section 18 of Robert's Rules of Order was raised. Thank you. Section of 18 of Robert's Rules of Order failed. No big deal.
[Adam Knight]: One information, Councilor Knight. Training tower is being addressed by a working group that's headed up by the chief and made up of members of the fire department's training division. I do also believe that their wish, inclination, desire, and focus is to have a training tower that's located in the city of Medford that may be open to regional communities. However, it would be maintained, dictated, and controlled by the city of Medford. That's based upon some meetings that I've had with the training team and the administration, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if I may? Councilor Knight, has the street defect been repaired?
[Adam Knight]: Excellent. Mr. President, I'd also move for approval. I'd request that the solicitor forward that information to the council when she receives it. Thank you. Council Member O'Connor.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, uh, I am sure Mr. Kamadi is familiar with the area in the neighborhood. Um, and I'm sure he's also aware that we do have a public school in the vicinity of the location where they're going to be doing construction. Um, it's my understanding as he just stated that the construction schedule will be up to the office of the city engineer. Um, I'd ask the city engineering office by way of an amendment or a second paper, um, restrict the construction during the rush hour periods when schools drop off and school pickup is occurring, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: And you are aware that there is a bike lane that's been put along Winthrop Street in that vicinity? Yes. OK. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I put this forward two weeks ago. I guess it was wishful thinking, then the snow came, and here we are. It's not spring yet. However, I'm just wondering when the DPW is going to go out and begin restriping our crosswalks and our streets. We have some faded paint out there that is annually in the need of repair and replacement. And I would like the DPW commissioner to provide us with a schedule as to when that is going to occur. I'd ask my council colleagues to join me in supporting this resolution and move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knife. Mr. President, I wholeheartedly support the resolution. I feel as though getting an opinion from the solicitor is a great start for this conversation. I also think it's very important for the council as we move forward to consider the impact that zoning has on our tax rate. Because we have a bifurcated tax rate, we have the ability to equitably shift the residential property tax burden from the residential properties to the industrial and commercially zoned properties. And now we're seeing a lot of use variances where they're going to try and eliminate these commercial and industrial properties. And it's very important that we maintain a good stock of commercial and industrial properties so that we do have the ability to provide residential property tax relief, Mr. President. So, moving forward, I think that's a very important aspect. of zoning here in the community. Councilor Lungo-Kerr was absolutely right. You know, when we go back and we think five, six, and seven years ago when the website, the real estate website Reddit found Medford, the first thing that they said was unbelievable tracks of open space and natural resources and a large stock of single family homes. And as we begin to develop and grow here in Medford, we're moving away from our large stock of single family homes and we're moving into high density apartments, Mr. President. And in some areas of the city, that's OK. And in some places, that's good. And the mixed-use growth, I think, is an excellent opportunity for us to pursue an equitable shift between the commercial, industrial, and residential tax properties and the burdens that are provided to the residents. But going forward, there are a number of issues that we need to look at. And I think that one of them would be maintaining a good balance of commercial and industrial zone properties, as well as increasing our stock of affordable housing. Because as our real estate market begins to thrive, the people that have lived in this community for so long and made Medford such a great place to live are being displaced. and they have no place to go. So they're actually getting forced out of Medford because they can no longer afford to live here. And our stock of affordable housing is so low at this point in time, Mr. President, there's really no other option for them but to leave the community that they helped make great. So I want to thank Councilor Lungo-Koehn for bringing this matter forward. I support it wholeheartedly, and I would anxiously await the solicitor's opinion.
[Adam Knight]: We just had a discussion about zoning. We just had a discussion about zoning. As I look at the agenda, Mr. President, we have a petition on a similar matter, 17307, a petition by Ms. Rodriguez, who was just up here speaking. I think it might be best to continue the discussion on zoning if we have two papers that are similar in nature. Name and address of the record, please. If you don't want to do it now, you can come back when you're not prepared.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Neistat. Any zoning change is a process that takes about 180 days, about six months, Mr. President. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Um, yes, Mr. President. I was wondering if the sponsor of the resolution could explain, um, how more revenue was captured by changing the current situation. and whether or not she spoke with anybody from the Water and Sewer Commission as to whether or not we would be able to actually capture more revenue or whether or not it would be a zero-sum game. I know these are probably questions that you can't answer offhand, but something that raises a concern because I don't want to see raising fees and costing additional funds to individuals trying to develop certain properties if, in fact, we're not going to see a return on the other end, Mr. President. But for the purposes of the resolution, I don't feel comfortable dictating to the Water and Sewer Commission what approach they should take. I'd feel better having them present to us what our options are and then us making a recommendation. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: which establishes the Community Preservation Commission, which is required by law in order to execute the goals and objectives of the Community Preservation Act. The administration opened up a period of applications and that has since closed. And I'm wondering if she can give us an update as to what the status is of appointing that board so that we can get to work on some good projects in recreation and affordable housing. open space and historic revitalization, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: It always is. Sweet streaping, right? Mr. President, again, in line with the paper that I offered earlier in the evening, relative to when the striping of sidewalks and roadways, I'm sorry, crosswalks and roadways is going to be performed, I know that every spring we also have our, what's termed the big sweep. And I believe it's supposed to start relatively soon, weather permitting. So I'm hoping that the DPW commissioner can provide us with a schedule as to when it's going to happen so that we can help get the word out to the residents in the neighborhood so that they're not inconvenienced by any type of notification problems that may occur relative to the street sweeping program.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, earlier this evening at 6 p.m., the committee of the whole met to discuss two papers in committee. One paper was uh, regulating replica firearms in the city of Medford. That paper was, um, referred to remaining committee with, uh, some opinion from the city solicitor, uh, to take a look at some additional aspects of potentially, uh, regulating the sale of replica firearms in the community as well as recommended by councilor marks. Um, there was also a paper that was on the table, Mr. President, that has gone through the legislative process and that paper was related to the wage theft Ordinance Prevention of Wage Theft in the City of Medford, Mr. President. That paper was reported out of committee favorably. And I would move for adoption of the committee report this evening, Mr. President. And after the adoption of the committee report, I would move to put the paper through first reading.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Neistat. Yes, Mr. President. I do recall leadership from 1032 here a couple of weeks ago indicating that they were pursuing a charitable donation for the extractors. But I also think that we can't have too many. We only have one now, 10 of them more heart. Um, we have enough stations to place them as long as we have the space needs and the infrastructure needs to, um, to meet the capabilities. Uh, we should, we should have more than two, three, four, five, as many as we can get. We should get our hands on. So, um, I'd like to amend the paper to request an update, um, from the administration relative to the status of the charitable donations of the extract is similar to the grant that, um, Councilor Scarpelli added. Um, Councilor Falco and I had the opportunity to tour the West Medford fire station And one of the things that was most alarming to me was the fact that the actual smoke detectors in the fire station don't work. So I'd also like to further amend the resolution asking that an inspection be conducted to ensure that all of the fire alarms in our fire stations are operational, Mr. President. There's a fire in the fire station, and the firefighters don't know about it. I think we have a serious problem here. So I really think that's vital, especially when Councilor Marks brought this resolution forward in the interest of public safety and with a concern of public safety, um, you know, with the lights, um, same thing goes for having an operational smoke alarm in the building that they live in for their 24 hour shift, Mr. President. So I'd ask that, um, an inspection be conducted to ensure that all fire alarms in each station are operational and up to code.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I think that this is a great initiative and it's something that the subcommittee should certainly look into. I'd like to amend the paper to request recommendations from the building department and the electrical division as well as the chief of police as to what recommendations they may have in terms of outdoor lights, wattages, lumens, so on and so forth. I think that when we're talking about wattage and lumens, that's a little bit outside the level of expertise of everybody behind this rail. So I think that would be very helpful, Mr. President. But one concern I do have is obviously the ability to ensure the public safety. And Chief Sackles appeared before this council on a number of times in the past, indicating that one of the number one deterrents to crime is well-lit streets. So I think we're going to have to walk a fine line here, and there's going to have to be some balancing, Mr. President. But I certainly think it's a worthwhile endeavor that deserves exploration, research, and study. And I move for approval, as amended. Councilor Dello Russo.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, this was a matter that came up before this Council a number of times, most recently before the cold months when the ground froze. It's been brought to my attention that they were going to be having some pre-construction meetings and a construction schedule was going to be established. So for that reason, Mr. President, I think that the residents on Evans Street have waited long enough and this roadway needs to be repaved. And I'm asking for a copy of the construction schedule from the engineering department, Mr. President. As I sit here and think about this resolution and the need for resurfacing on Evans street, um, I do also recall that we had a extended discussion relative to Paris street as well. Um, then these two projects were kind of working hand in hand as, as the council discussed them in the past, Mr. President, over the spring. Um, so I'm asking that we amend the paper to also include, um, a breakdown for the construction schedule of Paris street and Evans street and, uh, move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. This was issued last April relative to a response to some concerns about excavation work done up in the Lawrence Estates along Crocker. along Trancroft, along Lincoln Road. Ultimately, it was a six-part resolution that was sent to the administration. A number of the items were addressed that were related to trees and utility wires. But we still have questions and concerns, Mr. President, about who's watching the shop when it comes to public utilities doing trench work. what type of trench management system they have in place. So ultimately this resolution asks what's been done and what's scheduled to be done and where. Has the utility met its obligation to the city of Medford to return the street into the condition that it was left in? And if not, where are the street addresses where this work hasn't been returned to the pristine condition, Mr. President? And I think that this is an important issue in our community and I also think that it's something that needs to be looked at a little bit closer because, quite frankly, I think that the public utilities are running roughshod over the public ways in our city. This coupled with the fact that the Everett to Winchester project has been approved, and the pipeline through the Winthrop Street Corridor has looked like it's going to happen within the next couple of years, Mr. President. I think it's very important that we hold our public utilities accountable for the work that they do in our community to ensure strong quality of life in the neighborhoods.
[Adam Knight]: I certainly have no problem amending the paper, and I know that Councilor Marks talks a lot about thermoplastic sidewalks, and that bump right there is probably the most effective speed bump that I've seen in the community in a number of years. So maybe we have an alternative to thermoplastic speed bumps, Mr. President, going forward.
[Adam Knight]: 80th birthday, Mr. President. I love Mrs. Patton. She's been great to us down there, especially at St. Joseph's School, but I don't want to give her another 10 years, Mr. President. Oh, 9th?
[Adam Knight]: Couldn't read your writing.
[Adam Knight]: Anybody involved with St. Joseph's Parish has in one way or another come across Miss Phyllis Patton. I first met her, I think, when I was in first grade going through CCD, and then I had the pleasure of playing some sports with her son, Ross, who was a great athlete growing up, and have been able to develop a relationship with her daughter, Robin, over the years, and her husband, Billy Raymond. So it's with great pleasure that I bring this resolution forward, Mr. President. I want to wish Phyllis a happy 80th birthday, although I don't see her as much as I used to in the past. She's in our thoughts, and I just want to hope that she had a wonderful day and wish her a happy birthday.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, this council put forward a number of resolutions requesting that the administration add to the names of the Veterans Memorial Park on Winthrop Street. And in our packets this week, we have received a letter announcing that the mayor will be commissioning an additional plaque. Last week, we discussed this at the meeting. We made the announcement. However, in our packets today, we also have the eligibility requirements, Mr. President. And I want to be clear that For consideration to get your name put on the Veterans Memorial at Winthrop Street, you have to have an application postmarked by March 15th, which is just around the corner, Mr. President, next week. Eligibility requirements would include that you enlisted while a resident of Medford and being honorably discharged, but there are also exemptions if you enlisted from another city or town. resided in Medford for no less than 30 years and were a World War II or Korean War veteran, then you'd be eligible for placement on the monument. If you enlisted from another city or town but resided in Medford for no less than 20 years and were a Vietnam veteran, you would be eligible for placement on the monument. If you served in Operation Desert Storm or Desert Shield or Operation Iraqi Freedom or Operation Enduring Freedom and enlisted after 9-11-2001, you do not have an entry requirement. However, you must be a current Medford resident. For any further information, Mr. President, you can contact, obviously, the members of the Veterans Service Subcommittee, the Director of Veterans Service, or the administration. But I did want to be sure that this was out there because a number of individuals in the community have contacted me relative to getting their loved ones or their own names placed on the plaque. And the list that we have here, Mr. President, is a list of date corrected on 2-21-17, which outlines Patrick Andriatola, John O'Brien, Richard Perella, Robert Emma, Carl Hicks, George White, and Calvin Chin as veterans that are eligible for placement on the monument, but I would reckon that There are a number of other individuals in our community that are eligible for placement, Mr. President. And the last time it was updated was in 2014, so that was three years ago. And as World War II veterans and members of our greatest generation continue to age, the opportunities for them to wait two and three and four years to see their name put on this plaque aren't necessarily there anymore. So I think it's very important that we get this information out there. I want to thank my council colleagues for entertaining me. And I would ask that this matter be received and placed on file.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I found the papers in order, with the exception of paper 17-088 and subsection A, amended by Councilor Knight, that Massachusetts Highway Department provide a maintenance schedule for the area. This correction has been emailed to the city clerk. And also under item B, amended by Councilor Caraviello, that State Representative Donato receive a copy on the resolution and amendment. Those are the two changes that needed to be made. I've emailed the copy of those to the city clerk. Mr. President, I'd move for approval as amended. Thank you. Councilor Lococo.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, um, Mr. Cito, Mr. Sisto raises a number of good questions and we've got a number of good answers from the administration, um, that are all public record that have been sent to this council. So, um, I don't think there'd be a problem if you gave your address to the city messenger, the city clerk could provide you with copies of what we received as well. If you'd like to see copies of the financials that the council received.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much, and Father Noah, thank you very much as well. You've been a great next-door neighbor. I've lived next door to the Grace Church now for a number of years, and I've certainly seen the parish grow under Father Evans' leadership. You've done a great job here in the community, and we really can't thank you enough for the efforts that you put forward in building social capital and creating an engaged citizenry with the parishioners. So thank you very much, Father Evans. You're going to be sadly missed, but I'd ask that even though you're down there in Pittsburgh, you still pray for us up here in Medford. Thank you very much. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I feel as though this is a great resolution. I second Councilor Longo's motion for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Motion to refer to the subcommittee on environmental affairs. Mr. President. Second. Seconded by Councilor Dello Russo.
[Adam Knight]: Then it would be incumbent upon the committee to meet and to request the pertinent information that's necessary to get the questions answered. Committee can meet as soon as possible and get the pertinent information?
[Adam Knight]: The table before the council at this point in time is to request the information and then have a subcommittee scheduled so that they can be discussed. Okay.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Point of information, Councilor Knight. This is all assuming that we don't receive any outside funding sources, number one, and number two, that we don't also incur any acquisition, land acquisition costs to find a new facility. for to locate a new facility. If it's not in the existing facility, then there might be land acquisition costs as well. So it's going to be a dynamic and moving object. Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I think it's also important to point out the work of Barbara Rubel and Rocco DiRico and their work with the Council in ensuring that this is an ordinance that is going to be operational. So I'd like to thank the work of the Tufts University Community Affairs Office, especially Mr. DeRico, who's here in the audience this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Apparently this quarter it's my turn to bring this resolution forward. I think one of us at one time or another have taken the opportunity to bring this resolution forward and request that the Massachusetts Highway Department, MassDOT, come down and beautify the retaining wall along Roosevelt Circle, which is right now plagued with very pretty pink graffiti. So Mr. President, I'd ask that my council colleagues support me in sending a correspondence to MassDOT requesting that that issue be resolved.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd like to amend the paper and request that the Massachusetts Highway Department submit to the Medford City Council a maintenance schedule for the area. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. As the council and the subcommittee on zoning and ordinances begins its discussion on zoning, one of the concerns that's been raised is the number of commercial and industrial parcels that are coming off the rolls with residential development and the city's future ability to provide an equitable tax shift from the residential tax burden to the commercial and industrial properties, Mr. President. So with that being said, there are certain streets in the vicinity of large commercial developments, such as the Meadowglen Mall, Linden Street being one, that is a dead-end street that abuts the private property of the Meadowglen Mall site. And I'm asking the city solicitor, with the support of this council, hopefully, To provide us with an opinion as to what steps are required to make Linden Street a thruway for the purpose of future examination of developing a strong commercial or industrial based district down there for tax revenues purposes, Mr. President. We've talked with some of the neighbors in the area, some of the residents and property owners on the street, and it's something that they've expressed concern about for a number of years in terms of making Linden Street a thruway. Also, currently, at the present time, there is a construction fence that is up at the end of the dead-end roadway, Mr. President. And in previous years past, due to the involvement and efforts of Fire Chief McCabe at the time, there was a breakaway fence that was put there for public safety purposes so that if there was ever a situation where fire trucks could not enter Linden Street from the Riverside Ave side of the property, they would be able to do so through the abutting property of Meadowland Mall, Mr. President. So I'd ask that this paper be approved. I'd ask my council colleagues to support it. And as we move forward, I look forward to updating you with any information that we receive. Council Member O'Karn.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Nice. I'd certainly make myself readily available to any constituent that has a question about a piece of paper or legislation that I've put forward, so they're always more than welcome to contact me directly as well, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. It's been brought to my attention that the gates down at Royal Park were removed. And the reason that they were removed was because for a number of years they were not being utilized as open and closed as often as they have been in recent past. The infrastructure wasn't able to sustain the ongoing use. I believe the gates were put up sometime in the 20s, according to some of the research that Mr. Lincoln and the Friends of the Royal House and the Slave Quarters have done. So with that being said, Mr. President, they're ornate gates that did serve a purpose. I feel as though it's something that should go back up. I feel as though the rotating wall surrounding Royal Park is in disrepair at this point in time. And a cost estimate as to what it would take to repoint the brick wall and put up the wrought iron gates is the subject matter of this resolution.
[Adam Knight]: I apologize, sir. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much, and I'd like to thank Mr. Pinnock for coming here this evening. This would be maybe a second foray into operating a business here in the community of Medford. He ran a very successful business down in South Medford for a number of years and was displaced by a fire, Mr. President. That's great. He had a great reputation as a business owner in the community, and it's with my wholehearted support that I second Councilor Scarpelli's motion for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much, and thank you, Councilor Marks, for bringing this topic up. As I think back to my time working in Senator Shannon's office, which ended back in 2005, this very same issue was something that would pop up now and again, but not quite often, because the state delegation did have tremendous luck in negotiating on behalf of the residents to ensure that parking was still allowed in that area, Mr. President. Councilor Marks hit the nail on the head. I think that this is really a simple issue. Let the practice continue as it does. We've made some accommodations, some negotiation to determine that this is what can be done to help the residents in the neighborhood. They've grown accustomed to it, and I don't think it's hurting anybody, Mr. President. So with that being said, I'd like to thank Councilor Marks for bringing this issue up. It certainly brings back some great memories of 15 years ago working in the Statehouse and having the same topic come up. And it was addressed, Mr. President. It was addressed successfully. Cooler heads will prevail at the end of the day, and this is something that can be worked out, and I thank him for bringing this resolution forward, and I wholeheartedly support it. Move for a second.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And I'd like to just piggyback a little bit on what Councilor Lungo-Curran says, because I think it's very important that we point out why Cheryl was selected to be Citizen of the Year. It's no secret that there's an opiate epidemic in Massachusetts and that Medford is not immune to it. And Ms. Delfano has really dedicated the majority of the last year and more helping those families in need, whether it be providing services to get into rehabilitation clinics for their children, or to provide family counseling services to let people know where they can get help to learn how to cope with this issue that affects families across the country, across the community, across the state. Mr. President, I really commend her work. She's taking on a very difficult undertaking. It's something that gets very emotional for families, and this type of guidance is very, very, very necessary in order for families to be able to cope and overcome some of the issues that come along with opiate addiction. I had the opportunity of attending one of the community police meetings, and I was very surprised to hear that I believe the figures were 107 times in 2016 that Narcan was administered for what would be suspected as opiate overdoses, Mr. President, with a mortality of 19 individuals passing away in our community in 2016 for what is suspected to be opiate-related deaths. So with that being said, Mr. President, that's more than 10 percent of the individuals that are receiving a dose of Narcan. are eventually passing away from this disease. So we need more people in our community like Cheryl, and I thank her for her work and congratulate her.
[Adam Knight]: Last week, we adopted a committee report for the zoning and ordinance subcommittee, Mr. President. They called for two meetings. They called for a meeting on 217 and a meeting on, I'm sorry, a meeting on 213 and a meeting on 220. The 213 meeting was canceled due to snow and the 227 meeting, Mr. President, has been canceled due to the fact that we are going to be having our committee of the whole meeting relative to the funding proposal for the police station. So I just wanted individuals in the community to be aware that those two meetings are canceled.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Dayton. Chief Sacco actually just took the words right out of my mouth. I was just going to ask if the city had jurisdiction over Elm Street relative to the recent ordinance that, I mean the recent change that the traffic commission put in place with thickly settled areas and their speed limits. I was wondering if that would apply there, but it's a state controlled roadway, so I don't think it would.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And I think Councilor Lungo-Koehn took the words right out of my mouth in terms of attempting to report the committee report out. However, procedurally, it's gonna be very difficult because we have this paper before us. Ultimately, the committee report included a number of items, one of which would be to include retrofitting the existing structure to expand for the allowance of fire service expansion. Um, the next item would be a cost breakdown, um, as to the whole entire cost of the total project. Um, a breakdown of our bonded indebtedness at this point in time going out, I believe 15 years Councilor, is that correct? Whatever the life of the box or 30 years, I believe, um, discuss and look at the feasibility of a combined police and fire department in the creation of a construction of a new one. Um, a listing of all the locations that were examined to establish the selected location for where this structure is going to be built, when the fire department and the fire chief knew, and that the administration established a working group requiring that members of the fire service division and members of the administration work to address some of the concerns with the training academy, and also that the training academy is an important and vital asset that we have here in the community, and that that's something that we'd like to see continue as we move on. I believe that is reflective of the issues that were brought up in the committee report, Mr. President, just for an informational purpose.
[Adam Knight]: If I'm leaving anything out.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Yes, you did, former Mr. President, and also discussion about pursuing grant funding for the construction of a new training academy underneath the- The federal grant- Urban Area Securities Initiative grant program that the federal government- Yes, hopefully the previous administration didn't, in their dispersal of tens of millions of dollars in the final days of their administration, hopefully some of that money wasn't sent to the Middle East.
[Adam Knight]: I just wanted to take an opportunity to go over the points that were brought up in the committee report, Mr. President, because procedurally we weren't able to adopt that report at this point in time.
[Adam Knight]: That's correct.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think that this council in 2014, 2015, 2016, now 2017, has made it adamantly clear that uh, a new police station is a priority. The number one priority for this body. Um, however, we also did just adopt a committee report that asked questions. And I think if we're going to be making a prudent expenditure of the taxpayer dollar and we have questions, we need to have those questions answered. Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Neistat. I don't support a government shutdown, Mr. President, just for the record.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I think that In the spirit of compromise, Councilor Marks raises a very good point, number one. Number two, I think it's very important that if, in fact, we are going to sit down and discuss this, that there is a date certain that we come back to further discuss this debate in this forum. So if we can't get our questions answered, then we should have a date certain that we're going to come back and actually vote on the paper.
[Adam Knight]: I think that that's an excellent suggestion.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Motion to postpone the matter 14 days. I'm getting there. I'm getting there. I'm trying. I'm practicing, all right? Motion to postpone for 14 days. And in the interim, have a meeting with the administration to discuss some of the questions that were raised this evening. On the motion by Councilor Knight to postpone the meeting
[Adam Knight]: That's me. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. The Subcommittee on Zoning and Ordinances asks that you call a committee of the whole to go over the following paper. We did adopt a committee report. The committee report is rather extensive. For a brief synopsis, I will tell you that the council addressed paper 16771, the wage theft ordinance. The committee also addressed council paper 15749, an ordinance regulating replica firearms. These two matters were reported out of the committee favorably in motion to refer to the committee of the whole, Mr. President. Uh, we also called a meeting relative to paper one six seven zero five, a short term rental ordinance paper one six five five five related to demolition delay that was scheduled for two 1317 at 6pm, which was yesterday, Mr. President, but city hall was closed. So, uh, we canceled the meeting. So that did not occur. Um, We took up paper one, two, three, nine, five, satellites antennas receivers ordinance. Uh, we voted to receive it and place it on file, but give notice to the building commissioner. The measure was introduced at his request and the paper has been in subcommittee for an extended period of time. We requested that if the building commissioner feels as though it's still an issue that he can reintroduce the paper. Uh, we looked at paper one, four, seven, zero, eight regulating e-cigarettes in an ordinance. We received it in place on file with a notice to the sponsor that the matter is currently governed by board of health regulation. We also looked at paper 1660, amending the graffiti ordinance 62-94 to authorize fines to property owners for the non-removal of graffiti on private property. We voted, Mr. President, to keep this matter in committee and reconvene on 2-2017, as well as invite a representative from the building department to appear before us. On paper 16626, notice of all zoning board of appeal hearings to all residents within 300 feet of the applicant. We voted to keep this matter in committee, Mr. President. We requested a legal opinion from the city solicitor. Does state law govern notice requirements? Is this proposal outside the scope of local control? Paper 16-666, moratoriums on building smart development. We voted to keep this paper in committee. We requested a legal opinion from the solicitor as to whether or not this is within our scope and purview. Paper 16359, an amendment to the Zoning Act to authorize front yard parking. The committee voted to keep that in committee as well. In paper 16338, paper to hire a zoning consultant, we voted to keep that paper in committee as well. Motion was made by Councilor Dello Russo to report the paper out of committee favorably. It was seconded by Councilor Falco. The meeting adjourned at 6.58 p.m. Mr. President, in attendance were myself as the chairman, Councilor Dello Russo, and Councilor Falco as members. We were also very lucky to have two members of our council here, Councilor Scarpelli and Councilor Caraviello. Councilor Caraviello and Councilor Scarpelli were in attendance as citizens and not as members of the subcommittee or city councilors, because that would have posed some issues, Mr. President. Also in attendance was Mr. DeVito and Ms. Rodriguez, and I want to thank them both for coming. So as such, Mr. President, we'd ask that the subcommittee report be adopted and that a committee of the whole be set up to go over the two pieces of legislation that are included therein.
[Adam Knight]: Aye.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I move for approval on the paper. This was a matter that was debated in subcommittee for an extended period of time, reported out of subcommittee to committee of the whole, reviewed by the Traffic Division. Recommendations were made. Recommendations were adopted. First reading has occurred. Second reading has occurred. Mr. President, with the passage of this paper this evening, it will become ordinance. Motion to approve.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to take papers in the hands of the clerk, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think that you, Councilor Scarpelli, and myself all had the same idea. when Ms. Wentworth came up here this evening and I've had discussions with the MBTA about it. I know Councilor Scarpelli has it as well. Councilor Scarpelli has it as well. Ultimately, Mr. President. Excuse me, Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Where was I? Mr. President, so, Ms. Wentworth appeared before the council earlier this evening to discuss the situation that she's having getting in and out of her driveway on Winthrop Street. It's a problem that's not exclusive to Ms. Wentworth with the number of buses that queue up on Winthrop Street and along Placehead Road. It does pose a visibility issue. With the recent amount of snowfall that we received, these buses are a little further out in the street, causing a significant issue for motorists, pedestrians, and cyclists. the administration reach out to the MBTA and discuss potential solutions to the long-term idling of buses in that location and the public safety concerns that it poses.
[Adam Knight]: Records. Councilor Knight. I'm just hoping that Coach Nestor's at home watching and maybe Coach Freck's available to come over to Medford and help us out a little bit over here. So maybe we can... No, Steve's a great guy. Thank you. All right.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I'd like to also point out that this restaurant will be filling a vacant storefront at 42 Riverside Avenue. Paperwork looks in order, as Councilor Scarpelli said. I go along with his recommendation, move for approval, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Aye.
[Adam Knight]: He's gone quick.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, move approval of the paper. I think that the DPW director has shown that doing this work in-house is going to be a cost savings for the city of Medford. It also shows that his expectations were exceeded when he initially came to this council seeking funding back in the spring. They were looking for some funds to fix 32 catch basins. They fixed 32 and six more, and they continue to do the work. I feel as though this is a good appropriation. Coupled with the fact that the work is being performed in-house, Mr. President, I believe that we maintain control and direction of the employees and also the ability to get them out there faster and fix any mistakes that may or may not occur. Personally, I feel as though the work that's done in-house is a far better product than what's done through subcontracted labor. And for those reasons, I support this paper wholeheartedly and move approval.
[Adam Knight]: Would it make sense for each individual that's representing a respective department to come up and do a brief presentation on the appropriation that's being requested right now?
[Adam Knight]: Name and address of the record.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And I certainly echo Councilor Dello Russo's sentiments. I feel as though this is a good paper. It reflects a lot of the desires and wishes of this council. In reviewing the appropriation, we're getting equipment to keep our police officers and firefighters safe, new vehicles for our police and our DPWs so that they can have the tools to do the job, and equipment to address efficiency of the administration and government, Mr. President. So I feel as though this is a good paper. I feel as though they're worthwhile expenditures. And for that reason, I will be supporting this measure and move approval.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. President. Councilor Knight. Councilor Caraviello, thank you very much for bringing this resolution forward. And I really think this is an important issue, Mr. President. I have brought a resolution of similar nature up in the past. And ultimately, these men and women didn't wait, didn't tell us to wait. when we needed them. They enlisted in the armed services, and they went overseas, and they fought for their country. And I really think that this should be done annually, Mr. President, on Memorial Day. I think every Memorial Day, they should be adding names to the list. If there's one eligible applicant whose name is eligible to be on that list, then every Memorial Day, we should be doing it. These individuals didn't tell us to wait. We shouldn't be telling them to wait, Mr. President. I support Councilor Caraviello's resolution wholeheartedly. I'd ask that it be amended and ask the mayor to implement an annual celebration on Memorial Day. where any eligible individuals can be added to the plaque, regardless of the number of individuals that are awaiting placement on a roll pack, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor Lockhart. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I move to amend the paper to request that the Traffic Commission examine the feasibility of implementing a commercial vehicle parking ban along Forest Street.
[Adam Knight]: Examine the feasibility, not implement, just examine it. Look, if that's something that's possible that they can do, can they put a commercial parking ban in place there in front of the Chevalier Auditorium, maybe a little bit further out in front of the old high school to alleviate some of the public safety concerns? whether it's certain spaces that are at the end of a driveway or certain spaces that are in front of the theater, Mr. President, to keep those areas open.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I, too, feel as though the room is too small. I really don't see any problem with having the meetings at a room that has a capacity of no less than 100 people. It doesn't necessarily have to be the Alden Chambers. We had a great presentation here by Barbara Kerr a couple of weeks ago. Hopefully, if we get a library grant, we're going to have a great library community space in the library. We have the South Metro Fire Station as a community space, so there are other available locales that these meetings can be held. If they want to use the Alden Chambers, that's all well and good too, Mr. President. But I do think that the room is too small. I do think that they can take affirmative steps to address the problem right now, especially in light of the small number of contentious developments that have been before the Zoning Board of Appeals in recent months, Mr. President. So I support the resolution. However, I feel as though putting it in the Alden Chambers isn't necessarily the end all, be all. There are other opportunities available. And my question as to whether or not if we're going to send a message to the Zoning Board of Appeals that they need to have a meeting, and the meeting has to be accessible to people, that we're dictating where it has to be as well. I think that if we can look at the number of seats that are available in the room, I think that that might be able to be something that's helpful in controlling the situation as well, Mr. President. However, in terms of the resolutions before the body this evening, I have no problem supporting it as authored.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I thank Councilor Marks for bringing up the issue of the fact that there are many boards and commissions in this community and if we're going to be requesting a policy change, that the policy change should be across the board and should not be singling out one board or one commission. I certainly also appreciate Councilor Dello Russo's position that where we have quasi-judicial and quasi-independent boards here in the community that we do need to watch the way we speak in terms of making requests of them. A suggestion or a request, I think, rather than a demand would be something that would be a little bit more beneficial. As such, I want to thank both of my colleagues on the council for sharing their insight and input because it certainly had an effect on the way I'll be supporting this paper. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: I do think it's also important to point out, Mr. President, that beginning with the new administration, this council made a request that the majority of board and commission meetings be held off hours during a period of time where individuals in the community can meet to come and attend. We were in a situation where a lot of our meetings were happening at 12, 1, and 2 o'clock in the afternoon during the week, where members of the general public weren't able to come. And the administration did take some affirmative steps to address some of those situations, Mr. President. Heeding our advice in that regard, and I think that if we Proceed cautiously and make the request appropriately. I feel as though the administration will be willing to listen.
[Adam Knight]: Well, Councilor Knight. I do believe on the city's website, on the community calendar, you can find the agendas of some boards and commissions. Some are better than others at posting them, but that information is available on the city website underneath the community calendar link for some, but not necessarily all the boards.
[Adam Knight]: So, what would the exact language that we're going to be voting on be?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Yes. Yes. Mr. Clerk, if you could please. Mr. Clerk, if you could call the roll please.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. Um, as previously noted, the similar matter was before the council, um, relative to electric lines, uh, several months back. And this council actually tabled that matter. based on concerns that we've had with National Grid and their ability to repair our roads into the proper fashion and as well as to repair private property in proper fashion. Mr. Camardi and I have had some dealings in the past relative to the trench work that was done on Doonan Street, and my level of satisfaction was limited in terms of the response that I got from National Grid and the steps that I needed to go through in order to get the private property that was damaged during that trench work repaired, and I'd hate to see the situation happen again. I'd ask Mr. Camardi if national grids actually performing the work, if they have a contractor performing the work, or if the work is gonna be performed through the developer's contractor?
[Adam Knight]: I'd agree that that is the fact. Uh, however, I'd also agree that it took two and a half years to get the private property that was damaged fixed. Mr. President, that's a concern of mine. Um, in regards to this project, um, we've approved similar matters in the past. Um, I'm glad to see that a national grid is going to be, uh, in lieu of doing the final trench paving, um, handing the money over to the city so that the city can ensure a curb to curb, uh, pave when this construction project's done, Mr. President. So, um, as such, I rest my case and I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: One of the information council and I, um, I do believe that the project is going to be curb to curb. I do believe that some linkage funds were, um, appropriated, uh, relative to some water main, uh, replacements. And this is all part of that.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Carmody, in no way are you saying that people that smell gas should call you. I think you're saying they should call the fire department, but if there are construction related issues that they should give you a call, correct?
[Adam Knight]: I just hate to have individuals in the community calling the project construction coordinator, if they do smell gas in the street and there is actually a gas leak, I think that that would have to go to our first responders as well, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Nice. Mr. President, thank you very much. As we look through our packet and we see the petition here, um, the petitioner is also seeking permission to lay and maintain underground laterals, cables and wires in the above or intersecting public ways for the purpose of making connections with such poles and buildings as each of said petitioners may desire for distributing purposes. Is there any plan whatsoever to do underground work with relation to this project?
[Adam Knight]: So I would question, Mr. President, if that language is necessary and if that's something we need to approve. I don't think anybody has a problem giving them the poll to hide there.
[Adam Knight]: Is it? Because with the approval of it, we're also granting them the permission to lay and maintain underground cables.
[Adam Knight]: If that is the case, Mr. President, I move approval.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Rule 35A of the Medford City Council rules governing the operations of this body would indicate that the council president shall review all committee papers in the committee of the whole meeting. I personally have no problem with the ordinance. I feel as though the ordinance is a strong ordinance. It's a measure that I brought forward and sponsored at one point in time during this last session, Mr. President. Um, and whereas the rules are under suspension, I don't think that approval thereof, uh, will be harmful. However, uh, if there are other members that might want an opportunity to review the ordinance and to see, uh, what it includes before they vote on it, um, I raised the issue.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Scott, probably. Councilor Knight. Um, yes, Mr. President. Um, if the chairman of the subcommittee would be so kind as to maybe explain to us the differences between the initial proposal and the paper that's before us. Councilor Falco, would you like to address that?
[Adam Knight]: I am very happy with the explanation, Mr. President. Now move for approval. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, at this time, I'd like to withdraw my motion for approval. I think that based upon the debate and discussion we've had here this evening, that there are certain individual councils that have some questions. And upon my further review of reading the proposed ordinance, I have some questions, too. For example, as we look into the violations section, it says that it's unlawful for many facility to fail to comply with these requirements, that each violation of the provision of this section is a separate and distinctive offense. In a case of continuing violation, each day that the violation continues constitutes a separate offense. The imposition of penalties herein shall not be precluded the city from instituting other remedies. So I have some concerns about that as well, Mr. President. I think that it would be good if the council as a whole had an opportunity to sit down and bounce some questions off the city solicitor and the building commissioner as well. I don't think that this is an effort to delay the matter at all. I think it's an effort to be sure that we put out an ordinance that's operational and that's strong and that actually meets its intent and its purpose.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Nice. Mr. President, motion to end debate on the topic. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, where the council rules clearly say that the council president shall review the papers of the subcommittee and the committee of the whole meeting and the debate has been contentious. I think that, um, at this point in time it would be prudent course to refer the matter to the committee of the whole and would motion a contrary motion, uh, the matter be referred to the committee of the whole. I concur.
[Adam Knight]: Um, I just like the record to reflect that I'm in opposition. I find that it would be impossible to administer such a pro policy. Number one and number two, we are meeting with Park Medford next week. So I'd like the record to reflect that I'm in opposition. for those reasons.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And vice president marks. I think this is a great resolution. Um, in your speech, you did mention a few items that, uh, my whole heartedly support such as a tax incentivizing, uh, vacant storefronts to begin to, uh, partner with our community to fill that space so that we don't have blighted squares and downtowns. Um, you also mentioned about, um, our underutilized parks and opportunities that we have at our parks and, uh, After reviewing the minutes of the parks board meeting that I attended last week, you'll note that the minutes reflect that the administration is looking into potentially putting up temporary skating rinks at some of our parks, and they're also seeking grant funding to put in a water and spray park at Harris Park, Mr. President. So those are a couple of things that are coming down the line. Hopefully, they come to fruition. But I think this is a great idea. I think that we're all on the same page in this regard, us here on the council and the administration, in terms of what direction we want to see happen with our open space. We don't want it to be open and underutilized. We don't want it to be open and not utilized at all. We want it to be open, accessible, and be an asset and a value to the community. So I thank Councilor Marksley for bringing this measure up, and I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: appointment of the city council representative to the Cormel stadium commission.
[Adam Knight]: Point of clarification, Mr. President?
[Adam Knight]: Motion to take paper 16795 off the table for a vote, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I've had the distinct honor and pleasure of living next door to the grace Episcopal church for a number of years now. And I'm very happy to call father Owens, my neighbor, I'm sorry, father Evans, my neighbor, and I'm going to certainly miss him. Um, he's done a great job with the facility, with the property. with the landscaping upkeep and with the flowers, Mr. President, so much so that I've seen individuals pull over in their car and actually pull the flowers out of the ground and put them in their own. So with that being said, he will be sadly missed, and I do wish him a happy and prosperous career.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, thank you very much. And thank you. Councilor Caraviello for bringing up this topic. Um, as we're all aware, this has been a topic of discussion before the council on a number of different occasions in the subcommittee on zoning and ordinances, um, has been reviewing it. Um, presently there has been some discussions about, uh, putting together a short term rental ordinance, uh, that would require certain notifications to be made to the city and to the neighbors in the area as well as a certain permitting processes, Mr. President. So. I'd anticipate that the subcommittees work on that topic should be complete within the next 30 days or so. And I look forward to reporting out a paper with my colleagues for full council deliberation on the motion of council president Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: That is correct.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Chrissy Fields Cedroni passed away recently from a very public battle with cancer, a 2001 graduate of public high school. She was a fighter. She was tough. She was an inspiration to many. She's going to be missed. And she was well-loved, well-liked, and well-respected in the community. And I offer my deepest condolences and ask that my colleagues join me in doing so. Counsel Scarpelli.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, Kenneth Bascom was a 1995 graduate of Medford High School and someone who I was proud to call a friend and a teammate. We played basketball together. He was the point guard on the 1994-95 Medford High School team that went to the Division I North Finals, losing to the ultimate state champion South Boston. I don't want to relive the glory days of sitting on the bench and clapping, Mr. President, while I sat there and watched Kenny put up some good points and have some great games. Kenny was a public servant. He was a corrections officer at the Framingham State Penitentiary. And after another long and public battle with cancer, Mr. Bascom succumbed to his illness, Mr. President. So I'd like to offer my condolences to the Bascom family. He was someone that was certainly a leader in our community and someone that will be greatly missed.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Does the portion of the resolution remain intact where the councilor is requesting that all tickets issued be voided?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I was just looking for clarification as to whether or not that actual portion of the resolution remained intact, because I personally have a problem with that. I feel as though if I was parking in a handicapped spa without a handicapped placard and I got a ticket, regardless of where the zip code said to return the money that I owed the city of Medford to go, I should be held accountable for parking in that parking spot. If I was parking in front of a fire hydrant and I got tagged and the ticket told me that I was supposed to mail my, to pay the ticket, I should pay the ticket. Um, you know, so I have a problem with that portion of the resolution, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Um, my question as to whether or not we have a legal basis to repudiate the contract that we entered into.
[Adam Knight]: No.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'm voting no. I would like to reflect that I'm voting no for the purpose of questioning as to whether or not we have legal authority. Mr. Scott.
[Adam Knight]: I second the Councilor's motion to refer the paper to the Committee of the Whole on February 7th with Park Manfred, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Um, I just question as to whether or not the answer is coming from the administration, uh, the actual entity that put out the RFP. I always thought that it was a dead issue, but... Yeah, that was my understanding as well, Mr. President, but I feel as though the answer should really come from a member of the administration as opposed to someone from the general public.
[Adam Knight]: Uh, there was the motion, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: And, uh, this is a perfect time to bring up an issue that, uh, I've had, uh, with,
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And I appreciate council Longo putting this resolution on. Um, so as she stated, uh, tomorrow evening, the office of community development will be having a meeting at 6 PM in room 207. Uh, I'm sorry. 308, I'm sorry, 308, 630 p.m. To discuss this very issue, Mr. President, the development of the parcel that was noted. And then one week from this evening, the Zoning Board of Appeals will be meeting to take up the question of whether or not they are willing to approve the requested variances. Mr. President, I personally feel as though the Zoning Board of Appeals is is an independent, autonomous body that should operate free from undue influence. When matters are before the Zoning Board of Appeals, they are applications. The Zoning Board of Appeals then makes a decision. As the Medford City Council, we have standing in every single decision that the Zoning Board of Appeals has made to then further question the decisions that are made and potentially pull this case into litigation, which we've done in the past. So with that being said, Mr. President, I think it's very important that the residents of the community get out and take a look at what's going on in the neighborhood. attend this meeting and express their concerns to the zoning board of appeals on Wednesday, on Tuesday, the 31st.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. On that point, Mr. President, something that's happened very recently that's been very successful. And, uh, it's been the taking of the monthly police meetings to the neighborhoods. And I think that this might be a perfect opportunity, uh, to do that relative to, uh, committees of the whole focus.
[Adam Knight]: And that's something that I certainly don't have a problem with Mr. President. And I've, I've stated it, um, continuously and consistently, uh, this whole entire term. I have no problem with doing the zoning. I have no problem bringing an outside consultant to review the zoning for a purpose. What's that purpose? What direction are we going in? Is it to develop an affordable housing plan? Is it to develop an open space plan? Is it to create economic economic development zones? What, what is the purpose and what direction do we want to go in? Once we figure out what direction we want to go in, then let's bring, let's bring the consultant in. But I think the council Longo is correct.
[Adam Knight]: I'd agree with you. That's why I was going to agree with Councilor Lungo-Koehn that we need to go to the community first and hear what it is that the people want.
[Adam Knight]: You know, I think, I believe, I- Point of information, Councilor Knight. I do believe at the third meeting of 2017, this council did pass a resolution asking for a meeting with the mayor to discuss development and her vision for what direction the city of Metro will go.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I find this to be a creative way to generate non-tax revenue. I think it's a great idea. I think it's something that's feasibility needs to be examined. I move for approval and request a roll call vote.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Um, Mr. President, as the debate wages on and I read the language of the resolution, it says, be it resolved. The city council will be updated with regards to discussions on charging a sewer connection fee for new construction. Um, I think Councilor Marks has pointed out that there have been discussions about charging sewer connection fees for also, uh, residences that wouldn't be under new construction. Um, I think that we're all on the same page that we want to be updated as to whether or not they are talking about sewer connection fees in one way or another. If we strike the language for new construction and we ask that the administration update us with regards to discussions on charging a sewer connection fee, I may be so bold as to suggest that that might satisfy all parties and we'd be able to get an answer from the administration on this and I'll show a unified front.
[Adam Knight]: I think that was it, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: If we look at the papers that remain on the table, I believe that was one of the papers that remained on the table from the 2015 session. It has not been decided what to do with the $250,000.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, this is a paper relative to the work that our subcommittee has done in the committee of the whole has done to transfer the licensing authority from the city council to the police department relative to taxi cab licensure. Um, The matter was vetted through subcommittee process and through committee of the whole process, and there was much discussion relative to the issue of providing accessible vehicles to individuals in the community when seeking a taxi cab ride. And this was an issue that was championed by Councilor Marks. We had much back and forth on the topic. We proposed a resolution, I'm sorry, we proposed an ordinance change, and the ordinance change was included in the committee report. That committee report was adopted by the council. The administration received a copy of the committee report and has proposed a recommendation to make an alteration to the committee report. It's a veto on a paper that hasn't made it to her desk quite yet, Mr. President. The paper hasn't made first reading. So this amendment in the committee report would require all taxicab companies that own or operate more than five taxicabs to purchase an accessible vehicle. The language in the proposed ordinance change right now says that all taxi cab companies have to file a paratransit plan with the office of, uh, diversity and disability to ensure that those in our community that are disabled have the ability to access a paratransit. Um, this goes above and beyond that. It says that anybody that has one will be required to put the paratransit plan on file. Anybody that has more, five or more will be required to purchase the vehicle. Um, this is something that really council max, as I remember it, was something that he was supporting through the measure, and it died on the table and came back. Now it's going to be facing a veto of the administration. There was some discussion back and forth. It's something that I believe in. My mind's been changed on the topic, Mr. President. We have about 13 to 14 percent of our community self-identifies as disabled, and if those individuals can't get access to a taxi cab, then I don't think we're doing our job. So, with that being said, Mr. President, I move to rescind the vote to include this language so that we can pass the ordinance change, and we can do it absent a veto from the administration.
[Adam Knight]: Um, but Mr. Claire, in my reiteration, I don't want to speak for Councilor Marks. If this is, this is in fact something that he does support. I don't want to put words in his mouth. That was my reiteration of how I recall it happening. Um, however, if the gentleman does want to speak on the topic, uh, by all means be my guest. I apologize if I feel as though I did put words in your mouth. Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: And I checked into that very same issue, because that was my question. And ultimately, when the committee report went out, because Ms. McLeod was involved in the process, she had a copy of it and made its way to the mayor's desk. I believe at the last meeting that we had, we adopted the committee report, but wanted to wait to act on the proposed ordinance change until we saw all the language included in the committee report. The city clerk has since provided that documentation to us. Um, so you're absolutely correct. Councilor Marks, I rest.
[Adam Knight]: So this will be, this is just adding that sentence, just adding, just adding that italicized sentence that was included in the paper that the mayor sent.
[Adam Knight]: That is correct.
[Adam Knight]: Um, so now Mr. President, um, may the main question be put. On the motion by Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. What we'd be doing tonight would be rescinding the vote to adopt the committee report, replacing, inserting the recommended language from the administration into the committee report, then we can take a vote to adopt the committee report, and if we'd like to take the vote to move the paper to first reading, we can do that too. Alternatively, we don't have to vote to rescind, we don't have to take the vote to rescind, and we can move for first reading this evening based upon the way we did it. And then we can shift the burden back to the administration to make a decision as to what they want to do.
[Adam Knight]: Um, it was the intention of the subcommittee, if I remember correctly. that we had a working document. There was some areas of the ordinance that were, um, unable to be resolved at the subcommittee level, but we had a great working document and we felt that it was appropriate to send it to the committee of the whole for further discussion and deliberation at that time.
[Adam Knight]: One information, Councilor Nice. I do believe that the language that the subcommittee reported out was not the same language that was reported out by the Committee of the Whole because through the legislative process, other members that became members of that committee, other members that didn't serve on the licensing committee that were on the members of the Committee of the Whole made changes to it, Mr. President. With that being said, I have no horse in the race. I was comfortable moving forward with the language that we had put together, Mr. President. However, in my presentation.
[Adam Knight]: With that being said, Mr. President, when I presented the resolution, I said that we would move to amend this document only to prevent a veto down the line. If it's something we can all agree on, that's great. If not, then so be it. The process is the process, Mr. President. Either way, the reason that I put forward the paper was to working as a homogeneous body, moving forward with the administration, taking their recommendation into consideration and determining right now through deliberation whether or not it's a good idea.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe that I was the member that authored the paratransit plan language at the subcommittee meeting. I put it forward. It's something I support. As I said, this is an effort to work with the administration and take their recommendation under consideration. I have no horse in the race. I move for a vote, Mr. President. Move for a vote. If we want to rescind the vote, we can. If we don't, we don't have to. We can move the legislation forward as adopted by the subcommittee and as adopted by the committee of the whole.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. Procedurally, we need to rescind the vote. Or, to amend it, to send it to the administration. We don't have to rescind our vote. We don't have to rescind the vote, then we can move for approval on the paper, one or the other. You asked to rescind the vote. And to prompt the discussion. I really, like I said, I have no horse in the race.
[Adam Knight]: As I stated, when the paper came forward, this was an effort to take their recommendations under consideration and move forward in concert, Mr. President. If the member doesn't feel it's a good language, all he has to do is vote no. You felt it wasn't.
[Adam Knight]: And like I said, it was an effort to work in concert with the administration. That's all, no more, no less. So now the paper can go through first reading, get vetoed, come back to us. We can override the veto and go through the process. That's fine. Well, then what's the motion? Mr. President, motion to withdraw. Motion to withdraw. The question to rescind.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to move paper 17-022 to its first reading.
[Adam Knight]: Let her veto then.
[Adam Knight]: It came to the Medford City Council's floor. The Medford City Council adopted the committee report. If you look at the minutes from the January 10th meeting, the language is included in the minutes from the January 10th meeting. Okay. So we all said, okay, let's adopt the committee report. We're going to hold off on first reading until we get a copy of the draft language with the changes that were made by the council and that were recommended also by officer Brooks from the traffic commission. So it's, it's attached in the official minutes of the council right here that I have beside me.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. So procedurally this paper has never made a first reading. That's correct. The committee report was reported out favorably by the council. The administration got a copy of the committee report. The administration gave us recommendations as to what they'd like to see happen. I put a paper forward to rescind the vote so that we could have the discussion on this. Mr. President, if we don't want to move forward on it, that's fine. I made a motion to withdraw that, withdraw that paper now and to move forward for a first reading on the paper as committed out of the, as reported out of the committee of the whole initially. We'll shift the burden back to the administration to take what steps they need to take.
[Adam Knight]: Excuse me?
[Adam Knight]: To move towards first reading. Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, in my hands here, I have a opinion from the city solicitor dated February 23rd, 2015. Um, at that time I had requested that the city solicitor provide me with an opinion as to whether or not it would pose to be a conflict of interest if I participated in discussions relative to the Group Insurance Commission, Mr. President. Whereas I'm a member that receives health benefits through the Group Insurance Commission, Solicitor Rumley has given an opinion that I should recuse myself from all discussions relative to the Group Insurance Commission and the rate setting thereof, Mr. President. I have a copy of this letter in my hand, and I'd like to give it to the city messenger to give to you to place on file, Mr. President. I feel as though the city solicitor has given an opinion, which I'd be happy to read into the record.
[Adam Knight]: It's not my opinion, Mr. President. It's the opinion of the city solicitor.
[Adam Knight]: I'd be happy to read it into the record. Okay. It says, um, actually what the question says is does general law chapter 268 a permit you to participate in discussions at the Medford city council that pertain to the GIC insurance rates in light of your being subscribers to the health insurance covered provided through the GIC. In my opinion, you should not engage in discussions at the many Medford city council that pertain to GIC insurance rates because under the provisions of general laws chapter 268 a you are considered a municipal employee and municipal employees may not participate in any particular matter in which he or she has a financial interest as elected of the members as elected members of the Medford city council. You are considered a municipal employee for the purposes of the Massachusetts conflict of interest law section 19 a thereof provides except as permitted by paragraph B a municipal employee who participates as such an employee in a particular matter, in which to his knowledge he, his immediate family or partner, a business organization in which he is serving as an officer, director, trustee, partner, or employee, or any person or organization with whom he is negotiating or has an arrangement concerning prospective employment has a financial interest and shall be punishable by a fine of not more than $10,000 or by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than five years or in a jail or house of corrections for not more than two and a half years or both. A financial interest may create a conflict whether the financial interest is large or small, positive or negative. It does not matter if your participation would result in money coming to you or additional money being expended by you. If you have a financial interest in a matter, you may not participate. Participation can be as simple as making a recommendation or rendering advice or otherwise. As rate-paying subscribers and health insurance policies offered by the GIC, you have an undeniable financial interest, and therefore you should not participate in the discussion of proposed rate increases. Furthermore, please note that the rule of necessity does not provide an avenue to allow you to discuss this matter. The courts have established the rule of necessity to allow public officials to participate in official decisions from which they are otherwise disqualified by their bias, prejudice, or interest when no other official or agency is available to make the decision. See the Mayor of Everett versus the Superior Court, 324 Mass 144, 1 5 1 1949 in Moran versus the school committee of Littleton 3 17 mass 5 9 1 pages 5 93 to 5 94 1945 in this case before the council, the G I C makes the decision regarding insurance rates. Finally, the filing of a form to make a full disclosure of financial financial interest is set forth in G L 2 6 8 a section 19 B is only available to appointed or non elected municipal employees as defined in GL chapter two 60 years. Yeah. I just wanted to be thorough.
[Adam Knight]: He's over there. You got me on this. Wrong one.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, I'm wondering if we can request an opinion from the solicitor to see what restrictions we can place on noise levels of trains that travel down our roadway after certain hours. And I'd like to ask the question of the solicitor.
[Adam Knight]: This week marks the 60th year on this God's great earth for Mr. Roberto Vasquez of Sylvia road. And, uh, over the weekend I was fortunate enough to be invited to attend his birthday party. and I just wanted to wish him once again another happy 60 years here in the city of Medford. He's a great gentleman. He's lived down on Sylvia Road for the majority of time that he's been here in the country. He resides from Tripoli and made Medford his home. He was a business owner in the community for a number of years, Mr. President, and it's with great happiness that I make this motion and ask my council colleagues to support it.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, this is a joint resolution. I defer to the senior member.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, this is purely a request to seek variance just based upon the size of the sign. Presently, the current sign ordinance would read that the square footage of the sign cannot exceed 12 feet. So that sign would be six by two. The sign here is six by four. And I think that this is a measure that I wholeheartedly support. I think it will not have much of an impact on the quality of life in the neighborhood by passing traffic, so on and so forth. renderings. The sign is about a six or so feet off of the sidewalk, Mr. President. So it has a ample setback. Um, really all it is is just so that the letters on the sign can be larger so people can have an easier time reading it, which I think will make it safer actually. Thank you. Move approval. Councilor Dello Russo.
[Adam Knight]: Uh, Mr. President, recently I did have a conversation with our highway superintendent and he asked that, uh, I announced that they will be accepting applications for pothole filling. Um, uh, always through Seekick click fix or through seven, eight, one, three, nine, three, two, four, four, five. Mr. President, uh, the highway superintendent did ask that I announce this at the meeting because they have been out patching.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Someone, being someone who doesn't know how to ice skate, but who certainly enjoyed watching hockey games growing up, I remember sitting in the stands at La Conte rink and listening to Mr. Driscoll, Coach Driscoll, coach at the top of his lungs from across the rink. But he did a great job. He really put Medford hockey on the map. And as a child growing up, the greater Boston league was very competitive in the sport of hockey. And it was always Arlington and Medford battling for the top spot. And then everybody else fell in behind us. And a lot of that had to do with great players and a lot of it had to do with great coaching. And Mr. Driscoll had a great deal of success here in the city of Medford. I remember my freshman year in high school watching Sean Bates and Eddie Buckley skate at the Boston Garden in the Super 8 Tournament versus Catholic Memorial with Coach Driscoll on the bench, and it brings back great memories. I'm very sad to see him go. He was someone that meant to a lot of young men in this community, and he will be sorely and sadly missed, Mr. President. I offer my deep condolences to his family, and I ask that the council join me. Thank you. Counsel Scott Pellett.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. Ms. Richmond will be sorely missed in our community. She was a member of our faith-based community here in West Medford with relationships with St. Rayfield's Church. And she was also an election official here in the city of Medford who gave a great deal of her time dedicated to the public to make sure that our elections moved smoothly and made sure that Clerk Finn had an easier time on election day because of the hard work that she did. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'd like to extend my deep condolences to her family and ask that the council join me in doing so. Thank you. Councilor Dela Rosa.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President asked to suspend the rules this evening so that the city council can adopt the committee report from the committee of the whole relative to vehicles for hire that just took place.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if I may, um, the city clerk's going to provide the language changes and include that in the minutes of a next month, next week's meeting. Uh, so everybody will have a chance to take a look at them in their full text and then we can move for a vote next week.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I think there's also the underlying issue of those who have purchased business permits that operate businesses down there and own business permits and rely on that lot. So similar to the metering and the alternative parking plan, I think this is a great idea. I think this is the direction that we need to go in. I'm certainly in favor of the paper. I feel as though this environmental issue down here needs to be addressed, and it needs to be addressed sooner rather than later. And the alternative parking plan, I think, is the sticking point. So this is something that I think is important, but I also think it's a great idea. and I think it's a good, happy medium so that we can move forward and get the construction work done while at the same time addressing some of the concerns in the business district. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And thank you to Councilor Falco for bringing this measure forward and Councilor Dello Russo for his rather accurate historic breakdown of the situation, Mr. President. I recall this matter coming up at the FY17 budget debates, followed by some community involvement, some community questions as to whether or not this is an expenditure that's worthwhile, and quite a bit of support coming out saying that it was. I, for one, personally feel as though we've gone the way of the consultant too long. I think that we need an in-house person that's going to be able to meet our day-to-day demands and our day-to-day needs and someone that will be under our control and direction. And I think that's very important, Mr. President. However, I think that Councilor Falco and Councilor De La Russa have hit the nail on the head. We're seeing a tremendous amount of congestion. We're seeing a tremendous amount of growth. One of the things that I've had a problem with for a long time is the timing of our lights. Because we have five-state roads that cut through a terminate here in the city of Medford, we have limited control over our ability to change the signaling and the signage and so on and so forth. And it really seems as though we have two separate entities that are working in opposite directions the state in the city doing different things And I think that we need to communicate a little bit better So that we can work on the timing of our lights for example the detour at the Karatek bridge brings three or four thousand car trips an hour up Winthrop Street Rotary And I think this detour was put into place three weeks after the road was closed up after a year and a half for construction with a brand new road put on it Now, if you look at Winthrop Street in front of Memorial Park, Mr. President, you'll see that the street's coming apart. It's falling apart. It needs to be resurfaced. I can claim that that is probably due to the increased volume of traffic that's been detoured and directed down to the city roads. So having these five-state roadways cut through our community and terminating our community is creating an increased burden, Mr. President. And I think that we might have also an opportunity to reach out to the individuals at the state level. and ask them for some mitigation and some help in addressing these issues because of the fact that we're closely approximated to the capital city and that we have so many state roadways and state controlled streets in our community. We might be able to leverage that for some additional funding, maybe a traffic study to check the signage, to check out lights and the timing thereof to ensure the traffic patents move more smooth, or maybe it's a one-time payment for us to purchase a, one-time payment for us to hire a traffic engineer and then it falls on us to continue the payment thereof. But this is a measure that I wholeheartedly support. I thank my council colleagues for supporting this measure as well. This is what we call, I think, a no-brainer. This is something we need in the community, and we all know it. Thank you, Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. These individuals just recently were sworn in as firefighters, completed their requirements at the academy, and are now undergoing field training. The majority of these individuals started work the week of Christmas, and we have some new firefighters in our ranks, Mr. President. So I'd like to welcome them aboard, thank them for their service, and wish them a healthy, safe, and happy career.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'll help you with that. Almaty, Kazakhstan is where they'll be playing, Mr. President. Brittany played for the Medford Mustangs hockey team, the girls' hockey team, and she had a very successful career. She is now a student at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, where she is continuing her studies, and her hockey playing. And recently, she was selected to participate in the 2017 USA Collegiate Hockey Team and their World Championships, Mr. President. So many of us know Brittany's father, Kenny. Kenny Lanzilli is one of our building inspectors down in the building department. And Brittany's been before this council a couple of other occasions when she received back-to-back, all scholastic Boston Globe, Boston Herald Awards for her play on the ice, Mr. President. With that being said, it's great to see Brittany represent Medford in the United States of America in the former Soviet Union, and we wish her the best of luck and her teammates, and hopefully they bring home the gold for the U.S. of A. Thank you, Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Councilor Mark said something that really sparked my interest, and he said that we're giving back three to $4 million a year annually to the MBTA as part of our assessment. And right now, we just had an hour-long discussion about traffic in the city of Medford and a need for us to have good, reliable public transportation. And when we're sitting here battling a traffic problem, the MBTA is actually cutting service and raising fares. So I think you're absolutely right. I think that we do need to bring them to the table, and I support Councilor Scarpelli's resolution. But I just found it very interesting when you put that into perspective like that, how much money we're actually paying for our MBTA assessments and the lack of control and the lack of respect that they provide us as a city. It's something that's very concerning, Mr. President. And at the same time, they're making moves towards raising fares and cutting service. Our commuter rail service right now has been changed and we're not seeing the same levels of service that we saw before. We're looking at the 326 and the 325 bus lines. They're looking at privatizing those entirely. They were looking at privatizing those lines entirely, Mr. President. When we're in a position right now where there's a demand and a need for improved services and we're seeing a lack of service and a cutback on the amount of service that's provided to us, I think it is very concerning. And I think Councilor Marks is bringing that up because that was a very good point.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Michael Callahan was a mentor to me for a number of years. He was a great individual. And anybody that came in touch with Michael left with a smile on their face and a story to tell. He was quite an interesting man. He was a Vietnam veteran. He was a public servant for 48 years. He served as our governor's Councilor for a number of years, Mr. President. And he passed away the last day of his term, six years ago. As we sit here in the community and we talk about development here in Medford, there's an urban legend here in our community that goes back a number of years. And Councilor Callaghan, if you go up to Wrights Pond, you'll see a memorial there in his honour. And the urban legend has it that developers were coming in and they were going to try to purchase the land surrounding Wrights Pond and turn that into condominium housing. And through Councilor Callaghan's efforts prior to his election as a governor's councillor, I may add, Um, they were able to beat back the development and secure the land for parkland for years to come. Mr. President. So, um, it's with great sadness tonight that I mocked the anniversary of my dear friend. Uh, however, uh, it's with great memories that I think back and, uh, recall the good times that I have with him. And I asked that my council colleagues support this resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. Mr. McDonald, good to see you. Happy New Year. And thank you for coming down this evening. As you stated, the partnership discussions with the Mass General Hospital were a little different than the ones that you're having now. And during the discussions with the Mass General Hospital, there was also some talk about expansion of the campus at Lawrence Memorial Hospital site. And I know that there's a lot of uncertainty in the area now based upon the newness of this relationship that you're entering into, but are those expansion plans still on the horizon?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. McDonald, thank you very much. I, for one, recognize the value that the hospital has here in our community, not only for providing quality levels of care, but for also providing jobs that provide a living wage to residents in the city and in the region. So I thank you for your work and for your efforts in keeping your nose to the grindstone and finding a partnership that the Commonwealth can live with and that will work out for Medford and for Hallmark Health. So thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. Um, Councilor Marks brings forward a resolution that I don't think anybody behind this rail is going to be opposed to. It's something that we've discussed in the past. It's something that we're going to continue discussing to the future because quite frankly, traffic on our streets and speeding on our streets is a significant problem here in the city of Medford. The legislature and its divine wisdom gave these municipalities back some local control with the passage of this law that would allow us to set the speed limit at 25 miles per hour in areas that aren't posted. But what the legislature also did in this piece of legislation, Mr. President, was they gave the municipality the ability to create local pedestrian safety zones where the speed limit can be 20 miles an hour. And it's for thickly settled business districts, areas abutting fire stations, police stations, parks, and schools. And, Mr. President, I'd like to amend the paper by putting forward a C paper and asking that the Examination of pedestrian safety zones also be looked at by the Traffic Commission in conjunction with Walker Medford, the Bicycle Commission, and the Chamber of Commerce, Mr. President. I think it would make sense to have these three entities working together to identify areas that can be designated as pedestrian safety zones, and the speed limit in those areas can be reduced down to 20 miles an hour.
[Adam Knight]: Um, I'm wondering if the traffic commission would be required to adopt those sections first and then bring it to the council or whether or not the council adopts those sessions, those, those sections first and then sends it to the traffic commission. Um, procedurally, I wonder what the appropriate fashion solicitor, could you give us some guidance here?
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I think that the issue of zoning is a very important issue here in the city of Medford. I, for one, am not in favor of eliminating a use zone, a use variance. Personally, myself, I think that it's going to hinder our ability to attract good businesses and to develop parcels that are underdeveloped or underutilized. However, I think that Councilor Longo makes a great point. We need to be in the same room with the administration to talk about a vision for the city and what direction we're going to go in. And I think Councilor Scarpelli makes a great point as well. We can bring in the Massachusetts Area Planning Council to come in and to talk to us about what steps we can take. But the first foundation of this is going to be to develop that vision. And I don't think that that vision is going to be developed without us first sitting down with the administration, Mr. President. So I would motion to have this paper referred to the Subcommittee on Intergovernmental Relations, where we can set up a meeting with the administration to talk about our vision for development here in the community. We can have the subcommittee generate some questions for the administration and report them back to the council.
[Adam Knight]: That was a subcommittee that was established by Councilor Camuso. And then we can start the discussion, Mr. President. You go to the subcommittee on intergovernmental relations. We have some questions that are asked. We have some foundation documents that are produced. Those foundation documents can be reported out to the committee in the hall. The committee in the hall can sit down. We can review the documents that we have. And now we have a launching pad and a jump off, Mr. President. So that's the course of action that I recommend, and I appreciate you providing me the floor.
[Adam Knight]: And I, for one, Mr. President, you know, feel as though we do need to review zoning, but we need to review zoning to accomplish a purpose. So what are we looking at it for? If we're going to bring in outside agencies and outside entities and spend money, we need to have a goal. We need to have some sort of a prize in the sky that we're shooting for that we want to attain. Not just, it hasn't been looked at, so look at it. It has to be, okay, these are the goals that were set out to accomplish. What steps do we need to take? And can you provide us with the technical assistance to get there?
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Uh, Mr. President, over the last 16 years, the representative has brought home the bacon per se, uh, to this district. He's done a great job delivering for his constituency here in the city of Medford. And, um, I just want to thank him for his hard work and wish him a good health and, uh, hopefully another 16 years. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. The Community Preservation Act has a requirement that a Community Preservation Commission will be established. And the Community Preservation Commission is the capital planning body and the body that would come up with where that funding is going to be spent and where it's going to be appropriated.
[Adam Knight]: In the past several months, we've seen a number of resolutions come across the city council, uh, agenda that had been voted on favorably by these bodies. Mr. President, um, that speak to directed patrols down in Medford square due to an increased amount of loitering. Um, uh, I believe the term was undesirables hanging around the square. Um, it was used a couple of times, but quite frankly, um, we don't have any right to tell somebody who's standing in public property. That's not a park land to beat it. When it becomes a park, it falls into the jurisdiction of the park commission. We have more control and direction over what happens in that piece of land.
[Adam Knight]: And Ms. Kerr, thank you for being here this evening. Um, this project looks like it's going to expand the library to about 44,000 gross square feet. What are we at right now? 29 29 so it almost gives us almost double hopeful. Not quite, but close. Um, do you think that based on the current staffing levels, you have enough, personnel to operate the facility once it, if we're lucky enough to receive the grant. Do we have enough staff and personnel?
[Adam Knight]: Well, I mean, I think that if you need the staff, you do the staff. And that's not a problem. And looking at this, Mr. President, this is something that the council's requested on multiple occasions to have the administration pursue the Board of Library Commissioners grant funding to expand or construct a new library. If we also look at this, Mr. President, this council and councils in the past have restored funding to allow us to be at a level where we can apply for the grant. We've dealt with many maintenance and capital issues related to the library, the roof leaking, some gutters being blocked, and we've invested money there. and studies and so on and so forth as to how we're going to move forward and address the present day concerns with the library. Mr. President. Um, I think that this is a great approach and a great step forward. I congratulate miss Kerr on her hard work in such a short time. Being the library director, we've been able to bring this to fruition and um, I really think it's, it's a great measure and it's something that I'm going to be supporting this, uh, this evening, Mr. President. So as such move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: We believe you.
[Adam Knight]: Um, yes, Mr. President. I just, um, I wonder if they have a green incentive. Are there any other incentives that are available for us to pursue to receive increased grant reimbursement or increased priority in receiving the grant?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Good job guys.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President motion to adopt the amendment as proposed by city solicitor motion. Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: Absolutely.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the Medford historical district commission came before the Medford city council's subcommittee on zoning and ordinances. They have constructed a proposal to amend the current language of the Medford city ordinances that deal with demolition delay. Um, the subcommittee met in the presentation was put on by the historical district commission and his chairman, Ryan Haywood, uh, members of the commission were in attendance, including, uh, miss Morris, I believe, who just walked out the door here, who was here for the library. Um, ultimately, Mr. President, this was a number of changes were being made. The subcommittee voted to send the proposal to the city solicitor, the office of community development and the building commissioners for recommendations and input. Um, prior to reporting the paper out of, uh, prior to reporting the paper to the committee of the whole. So we were asking that the council adopt this committee report so that we could ask the questions, get that answer back and then provide you with more information at a later date.
[Adam Knight]: Today, Mr. President, the community preservation act ordinance to develop the community preservation committee has reached its eligibility for third reading. And I'd ask that paper one six, seven, six, six be taken off the table for its third reading this evening on the motion that we take 16-seven 66 off the table.
[Adam Knight]: Move approval, Mr. President. Doesn't sound like it's too controversial.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, motion to take any paper that's been on the table for six months or more and receive in place on file.
[Adam Knight]: Aye.
[Adam Knight]: It's been there for a year. I think it was a paper that was put forward by the previous administration. It was tabled by a previous council. If the administration has an interest in pursuing it, they should refile the paper. The way I look at it, it shouldn't cloud up our agenda.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to send to the mayor's office to- I have a question, Mr. President. I mean, if the paper's been sitting on the table for a year, then nothing was ever reported out of the council. What are we waiting on an answer for if we never were able to ask the question because the paper was tabled and never moved from here? So is the question that you're asking is to ask the administration whether?
[Adam Knight]: It's tabled indefinitely pursuant to council rule. It can't come up anyway.
[Adam Knight]: Receive in place on file. All those in favor?
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Mr. President? Councilor. I believe in response to the February bomb threats, the superintendent of schools was presented with accommodation from the Massachusetts Association of School Superintendents on how it was handled and the policy that was put in place after the fact, if I'm not mistaken. I believe there was also a press release or an article that was put out about that.
[Adam Knight]: It's been there for six months and there has been a policy that's been adopted by the policymaking body that affects the school use facilities, the school committee.
[Adam Knight]: It was here September 20th, Mr. President. Today would be the 90th day. They get it by right after 90 days. They don't have to come back to us. They get it constructively. So it's the council's actually not taking action. We're sitting on it and we're letting them get the license. The question, because the matter was tabled, we wanted the question answered, but the question never got reported out of the, out of the council because the matter was tabled. So, because the matter was tabled, the question was never reported out. Because the question was never reported out, we never got the answer. Because we never got the answer, today is the 90th day. I have some concerns as to sitting on our hands and saying, let a constructive acceptance go through them, Mr. President. But, you know, I'll certainly do what my council colleagues feel is appropriate.
[Adam Knight]: The question was.
[Adam Knight]: I have the slides. what are the city council, what's the city's rights in terms of whether or not they grant or don't create the keynote license? And then what happens if we say no, what comes next?
[Adam Knight]: That was the question that got tabled. I believe a council one go table the matter because there was some opposition in the crowd and she wanted to see if there was some feedback that we could get. And then we all agreed to say, okay, let's get some feedback. We've tried to get the feedback, but because the paper never went out, The motion that we get the question, the question never got sent to the city solicitor. So because the question never got sent, we never got an answer, but off the table now, September 20th, October 20th. So 90 days from the date that they were here. So it's a constructive acceptance. If in fact, so what's the motion on the table?
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, I think that the way that we should, Mr. President, if I can recommend, um, That's exactly my concern because it's also included in the zoning act. We need to do something with it. And so I don't think we're gonna meet in two January.
[Adam Knight]: I don't think that the question was asked before the matter was tabled, Mr. President. So the matter was tabled, the debate was ended. We voted on the tabling of the issue. The question never got reported out because the question was asked after the matter was tabled, if I remember correctly. Either way, it's a matter that needs housekeeping for whatever reason. It's on the table. The 90th day is coming up. So we need to make our mind up as to whether or not we want to allow a constructive table, return it to the table. If it stays on the table, they're going to get a constructive approval of the license, but it might also open the city up to some legal ramifications because it's also included as part of a zoning act. So we need to give them a decision one way or the other.
[Adam Knight]: He's the petitioner.
[Adam Knight]: But nothing that doesn't preclude them from still pursuing relief through the zoning act and maybe holding us accountable in that regard, whether or not we're subject to litigation. by accepting a constructive approval of a matter that's also outlined in a zoning act, which says that we need to give a special permit to make a decision on it, might leave us open to some legal situation, Mr. President, some legal liability. So I think that the way to handle this would be, Mr. President, we can, I mean, I know that majority of the council was opposed to issuing the license, but if we don't do issue the light, if we don't issue the license, then we might be open to opening us up.
[Adam Knight]: The first motion is to take the matter off the table. If the council doesn't want to take the matter off the table, then that's fine.
[Adam Knight]: point of information. I think it's a two, it's a double edged sword him as the president. Um, the council has to act within 90 days of receiving the application and that's okay. If we don't, they constructed, they, that's a constructive approval and they get the license. But then there's also a question is because it's included in the zoning act and it says that we need to make an action within those 90 days. If we don't, is there a liability on the city for not acting?
[Adam Knight]: So as a B paper, chair recognizes Councilor Knight. I think the question wasn't whether or not the gentleman was going to get his license constructively after 90 days. The question was whether or not by the council being inactive on the matter, we're opening the city up to a liability in the courts of law.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Mr. President? Point of information on that, Councilor Knight, where individuals that are voting in opposition have to state the reasons they are for. Are they required to do that while they take the vote, after they take the vote, before they take the vote, during when they take the vote? What is the procedure in terms of how that's to be done?
[Adam Knight]: I just wish to wish everyone a Merry Christmas.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President motion to adopt the minimum residential factor as proposed at a rate of 0.903265 on that motion.
[Adam Knight]: Um, actually Mr. President, I was going to go item by item, um, by voting yes to, uh, adopt the lowest minimum residential factor and then the next Motion would be on the open space discount, and the next motion would be on the residential exemption. Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And Ms. DiLorenzo, thank you. And Ms. Crosby, if she's still here, thank you for your presentation. The last couple of weeks really appreciate it. This is an interesting project, Mr. President, and I think that it's a good approach for us to take in a way to address a need in our downtown district and also begin to revitalize Medford square. When we look at this project and this plan, it falls in line with some of the goals that are outlined in our open space and recreation plan. Um, it also allows us to take an underutilized and underdeveloped portion of our downtown district and put it under the control and jurisdiction of the parks commission, which allows us the opportunity to better control the use at that area. Mr. President, right now it's just an open public space, a public sidewalk. Uh, there's no anti-loitering ordinance in the city of Medford. I'd question is whether or not that would even be something that the city of Medford could implement as being legal. Um, however, when we have a public park in the downtown, We can put restrictions around that public park. We can say that people can't be in the park after dusk. We can say that this area cannot be congregated in for certain times. We can permit the area for use, for certain specified uses, Mr. President. So I think that this is a great approach to addressing several of the issues that the community is facing here. We need some passive recreation areas in our downtown district. We have an opportunity to now connect the nice sitting area in front of Century Bank, with a nice sitting area in front of the Salem Street Burial Ground, with a nice sitting area in front of the Senior Center. With any luck, the Clippership Connector is going to come through and we'll be able to traverse right into McDonald Park. So I really think that this is the beginning of the city creating its own Emerald Necklace, similar to that of the pathway system that the DCI has established, Mr. President. So with that being said, this is something that I'll be supporting this evening and I move approval.
[Adam Knight]: How you doing, sir? Thank you for coming this evening. Thank you very much. Thank you. Um, in looking at your application, it appears that the paperwork's in order. It looks like, um, what you're petitioning for is to open up a commercial, business in an industrial sector, uh, an industrially zoned sector. It's looks like it's about a 20,000 square foot facility. Um, looks like you're requesting hours of operation from 9am to 9pm. Maybe you guys can just go from there and kind of fill us in a little bit as to what it is you're trying to do over there.
[Adam Knight]: Um, as a pet store, um, can you explain to us whether or not you fall under the local control about border health or, um, as a pet store like this, uh, governed more by state regulation and state code?
[Adam Knight]: And how many full-time jobs are going to come with the approval of this facility?
[Adam Knight]: And can you tell me what an average annual salary is for someone that works in a Petco? I mean, are we talking that? It doesn't seem like this is a facility where people are going to be able to make a living wage and still reside in our community. We have an industrially zoned property. We're trying to change the use to a commercial use. And we have, I mean, quite frankly, if you look at there, it's a large parcel of land. We have coals on one end, marshals on the other. We're putting in a supermarket. Now we're going to put in a pet store. I don't think there's any jobs in that entire facility other than the manager of the supermarket that's going to get paid more than minimum wage.
[Adam Knight]: So this employer does provide health benefits to its full-time workers?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Uh, Mr. President, thank you very much. Uh, this paper came up last week and it was tabled, um, at the request of council Scarpelli and myself, um, based upon the historic, negligence that National Grid and their contractors has given to our public roadways, Mr. President. Ultimately, there was a permit that was before us, and I picked up the phone and spoke with National Grid last week, and I explained to them the reasoning for my vote and the reasoning for not supporting the permit, at which time the individuals from National Grid explained to me that what they were doing was pulling a permit for the developer, and the developer was going to be performing the work. They put me in touch with the developer. I had an opportunity to speak with the developer and Mr. Shea is here this evening as well as his project manager. And they explained to me that this proposal came forward as part of a redevelopment proposal with the location at 630 Boston Avenue. This is a project that's gone through the variance process at the Zoning Board of Appeals and is a move from a taxi cab stand to some residential rental units here in the community, Mr. President. Earlier in the year, it's my understanding that public utility came in and replaced all the underground utilities for water sewer from the roadway in Somerville, which would be called Broadway, along Boston Ave, Medford Stretch to Harvard. So that whole entire underground utility has been replaced. And it's also my understanding, Mr. President, that come the spring, that entire stretch of the roadway is going to be repaved from curb to curb for the entire length. So it's very important that we take a look at this permit and allow these individuals to go and do the work that they do. Because if we do not, and they come back at a later date, Mr. President, we will have a road that was just recently paved, brand new curb to curb from the Somerville line to Harvard Street. that is now going to need to be cut up and dug up and patched. And, um, I think that, um, I'm very glad that I had the opportunity to speak with, um, Mr. Shea and, um, Mr. Klein, the two people that are working on this development here, as well as the gentlemen that appeared before us last week to clarify some of the questions that I have, Mr. President. But, um, it's my understanding that Commonwealth contracting will be resurfacing Boston Avenue. Um, they're looking to start that work in the spring. And, um, my questions and concerns relative to whether or not the public contractor is going to be accountable have been answered. Um, the developers have agreed to stay in contact with me and provide me with a monthly update, um, a look ahead as to what's going to happen down there in a monthly update, Mr. President. So, um, with that being said, I'd move to take the matter off the table and move for approval based upon the fact that, um, the concerns and questions that I raised that held the paper up have been addressed. Um, I can't speak for my colleague, councilor Scarpelli.
[Adam Knight]: Um, I also, Mr. President, I think it's very important to point out that the reason for the, um, tabling of the matter wasn't because of opposition to the development, but more or less it was opposition to the work and national grids doing in our community and the followup that we're doing on the city side to make sure that they comply with city standards and restore our streets to the condition that they deserve to be restored. And so, I mean, it had nothing to do with the project or the scope thereof. Mr. President, it was more or less the relationship between our public contractors in the city here and what we need to do to have them do a better job. Thank you. Councilor Marks is now recognized.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, I'd like to further amend the paper and request that we reach out to the friends of the fells as well and ask if they can provide us with any data that they have. I know the friends of the fells were, um, spearheading the effort to combat the development there at this location, um, because of the impact that it would have on the ecosystem. So I think that they may have a lot of that traffic data and stuff. It might be a little bit outdated, but it might be a spot for us to start off with.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Um, last term, the city council, um, by way of resolution, uh, brought forward by Councilor Camuso voted to establish a stabilization account and, uh, At the time Governor Baker was just elected and there was some discussion about whether or not stabilization accounts were going to become a mandatory practice across the Commonwealth of Massachusetts at the municipal level because it's been deemed the best practice, Mr. President. So we here in the city of Medford do have a stabilization account, but after my conversations with Ms. Nunley last week, it appears that there is no money in our stabilization account, nor is there a policy to take money out of a stabilization account or a policy to replenish our stabilization account. So I think that it's about time, Mr. President, that we ask the administration to take a look at establishing a stabilization account. Now, the Government Finance Office's Association's Executive Board does recommend that a formal policy be established and that an unrestricted fund level be maintained that should be no less than two months of operating revenue, Mr. President. Now, if we take a look at the fiscal year's budget that we're in right now, we're looking at a $162 million budget, and two months of operating expenses thereof would be The equivalent of $13.66 million that right now would be deemed a best practice to be set aside into a reserve account, Mr. President. So I'd like the administration to establish a policy as to what functions and purposes that these funds can be used for. to set a target as to how much funds are going to be appropriated annually, and then we can begin to establish a real rainy day fund or a real reserve account, Mr. President, so that we run into situations like the police station, it's a catastrophic event, we're in a better position to deal with it.
[Adam Knight]: The proposal is to establish a policy to begin to fund our stabilization account as well as a policy to initiate withdrawals thereof and mandate replenishment thereof.
[Adam Knight]: It can be built up over time.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor, and I- $13.6 million is based upon the recommendation that's made by the government finance offices associations executive board that recommends that the formal policy that's established should set aside two months worth of general operating funds. It doesn't have to be the end all, be all. That's just what the standard that's recommended by the professionals that are in the industry, Mr. President. Um, I certainly have no problem with the paper going to subcommittee if the subcommittee is going to meet and vet it, but we just set the tax rate tonight and that subcommittee hasn't met since as long as I've been on the council. So, you know, although I have no problem with the paper going to subcommittee provided work is going to be done there. I think that this is something, Mr. President, we're asking the administration to put a policy in place because last council, we asked them to create an account. They created an account. The account has zero dollars and zero cents in it. So if we're asking them to create a stabilization account, for the purpose of providing us with reserves in the municipal bank account so that we can deal with catastrophic events, but don't put any money in it. I don't, I don't think it makes sense. So I have no problem sending the paper to the audit and finance and taxation subcommittee, provided that it meets council coffee.
[Adam Knight]: Either through a council- Point of clarification, Mr. President. I'm not looking for $13.6 million to get transferred from one account to the other tomorrow by the mayor. I'm asking for the mayor to develop a policy and a procedure so that we can define the level of funding that we want. It could be one month, it could be a half a year, it could be two months, it could be two bucks. But we have to have some sort of policy in place if we're gonna have a stabilization fund. We have a stabilization fund, we have no policy. Motion for approval on the floor.
[Adam Knight]: He's got two votes. He's got two votes.
[Adam Knight]: police officers are selected through the civil service hiring process.
[Adam Knight]: The conversations initiative is a group of 28 community organizations that got together and started this. It didn't start across the hall in the administration. It didn't start at city hall. It started through the community, through grassroots effort. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'm on trash day. As you drive around the community, you'll see the blue-topped recycling bins all overflowing. As the Christmas spirit comes into our homes and the holiday cheer permeates our residents and we begin to buy presents for our kids and our friends and our family, my house has turned into a bad episode of hoarders at this point. I have so many boxes in my house, Mr. President. And I think that others in the neighborhood are feeling the same crunch. So I'd ask that the administration reach out to waste management and see if there's any potential to increase the recyclable pickups to a weekly pickup between now and the week after the new year, Mr. President, so that those people that are battling the boxes and wrapping paper and so forth have an opportunity to get that stuff in the recycle bin. And I also ask that when They are in their discussions with waste management that they begin to publicize the Christmas tree pickup schedule as soon as reasonably possible because, uh, every year at the end of the Christmas season, we usually have a street or two that puts the Christmas trees out a day or two after the Christmas tree pickup occurred. So, um, I think it would be good to get that word out there for everybody to, um, know what steps to take. to get rid of some of the debris that they have, Mr. President, and when the Christmas tree pickup is going to happen.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and thank you, Councilor Scarpelli, for your input. I think that you might be referring to a paper that I put forward asking the engineering division to provide us with a list of the permits that were issued to open up our streets to public utilities. as well as a report back as to the status of those streets, whether or not they were restored to the City of Medford standards or whether or not that work is still pending. We've seen a number of problems, Mr. President, when it comes down to the private utilities in our community. If you drive down today, if you drive down Lawrence Road, you'll see a patch on the side of the road as you approach Forest Street that's an absolute disaster. You look at the work that they did on Doonan Street. They damaged private driveways. It took a year and a half for them to get out there after me screaming and yelling and beating my chest in order to get them out there to fix the private driveway that they damaged when they put their stabilization bars and their excavator down, Mr. President. So I think that what's happening here is that the public utilities are getting a number of permits very fast and very furiously, and they're tearing up our city streets. But we're not able to keep up with the work that they're doing to make sure that it's done in compliance with our standard, Mr. President. I'm a firm believer that if the public utilities are going to come into our community and tear up our street, that they should repave them curb to curb, as opposed to these, you know, 16-inch trenches that go down the middle of the street. I also know, though, Mr. President, that a lot of that stuff is dictated by state law as to what it is that they're required to do and what they're not required to do. So with that being said, I'd ask that the matter be held until we get a response from the engineering division relative to what I believe would be paper 16404.
[Adam Knight]: Um, I believe it was filed Mr. President in March or April and then reintroduced again two weeks ago. Um, and still haven't been able to be provided that list. So I know that, um, I put the paper forward, I think right after St. Patrick's day, um, requested an update right before the summer break. Um, didn't get it. Then requested another update again within the last three or four meetings. Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: You know, I know that you're not the fellow that, is responsible for restoring the ground, and you're the messenger. And I'm sorry to shoot you today, sir, but we have some priorities in this community that we need to take care of, and constituents that are expressing a great deal of frustration. You can go up Traincroft and Crocker Road right now, and you can see what a nightmare it is. So I appreciate the work you're doing. I appreciate you coming down here this evening, but I'm not able to support the paper this evening, Mr. President. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And this certainly sounds like a measure that I will be willing to support once I see a final draft from the city solicitor. Um, and I would be, I will be voting in favor of it this evening. However, I'd like to amend the paper and request that the solicitor, also request the input from our consumer advisory commission, which is the body that, um, you just mentioned in council and Mark's just mentioned as well. Um, we have three individuals in the office, um, Patty Wright, Paula Keefe and Linda Petarino, um, that work in the office doing a lot of the consumer complaints and, um, they might have a system in place right now that works for them and maybe we can adopt that and bring it into kind of our ordinance, Mr. President. So that's why I asked that we, uh, seek their input and I'd move for approval on the paper.
[Adam Knight]: The OPEB report is a requirement of the state government?
[Adam Knight]: Yes. And that's related to establishing our obligation underneath the pension liabilities, is that correct?
[Adam Knight]: Uh, Mr. President, thank you very much. Um, as presented last week, uh, this is a, an opportunity for Bianchi sausages to be provided with some tax relief, um, in exchange for creating some jobs and keeping their business here in the community. Um, but with the approval, it also opens up an opportunity for Bianchi sausage company to, uh, gain access to some state funding. So, um, that's where the real relief is, uh, from what I understand, Mr. President. So, Absent the passage of a local TIF, they're not allowed to apply for the state relief as well. And looking at the paper, it came out of the committee of the whole that they paid about $3 million for the building over there, the old Hoffs Bakery site. Since that time, they've invested about another $3 million into the building, Mr. President, and based on the present proposal and the present TIF, The tax relief that will be generated over the 10-year period looks like it totals about $75,000, Mr. President. This is something that I'm very comfortable supporting this evening. It's going to bring 27 jobs to Medford, 10 new jobs to the city of Medford, and it's also going to allow us to maintain one of the larger businesses here in the community. So, for those reasons, it's something that I'll be supporting this evening, Mr. President. The President.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to also point out that, uh, the, the, the Bianco sausage company was in Revere for a very long time. And, um, the family is from Revere and, um, now that it's moved to Medford, uh, we've inherited one of the sons as well. And Louis is going to be Louis lives here in Medford as well. Um, so, uh, I just want to welcome you to Medford and, uh, congratulations on, uh, your new purchase. And, uh, this is something that I'm going to support this evening, Mr. President, but, uh, It's a family owned and operated business for three generations. And it seems like a anytime that the business moves, a family member moves with it into the community. So a welcome aboard and thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Do you anticipate the impact on operations opening and closing of the abutting businesses down there?
[Adam Knight]: So through the chair, um, as I understand this right now, you're requesting, uh, an appropriation from the city council of 563,000 and some odd dollars to address a revenue shortfall. And you also stated that the water and sewer rates have not been raised. The sewage rates have not been raised for, was it two fiscal years? Yes. And you've also said that right now the MWRA assessment came back in at $523,000 higher than what was estimated by the city of Medford?
[Adam Knight]: Okay. Cause Mr. President, the way I'm looking at this is if in fact the water and sewer department estimated that they were going to have to provide, um, they were going to have to generate a certain portion of revenue for, for the, um, payment of the sewer portion of our MWRA assessment. And they based that on a figure, um, that was $523,000 less than what actually came back from the MWRA. The revenue shortage for the fiscal year is really $40,000 based upon their projections. Does that make sense to you? Am I understanding this correctly?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and congratulations to Gina, Maureen, and McGillicuddy on the celebration of their 50th wedding anniversary. Gina, Maureen, and neighbors of mine, we park next to each other every single day. Mr. McGillicuddy was my Little League coach when I was strapping on the cleats over there for Foodmaster down on the West Medford Hillside Little League, Mr. President. So it's with great pleasure that I get to offer this momentous congratulations, and I thank them for all that they've done for the city of Medford.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And thank you to Frank Femino for his services, a member of the Boston City Police Department. Mr. President, as we all know, Mr. Femino is the brother of Jeanine Femino Camuso, who works in the mayor's office. But he's also was a fixture at Placetet Park from the early 80s until he went away to college, Mr. President. And it's with great pleasure that I sit here this evening and congratulate him on this momentous award. He received the Detective Sherman C. Griffiths Medal of Honor. at the 145th Annual Boston Police Relief Association Awards Banquet. And this is a recognition of valor in the line of duty, Mr. President. So congratulations to Frank. We're glad to see that you came home safe and sound. And we wish you many, many more days, weeks, and years of safe service.
[Adam Knight]: It wasn't bad. He could play football, I'll tell you that.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, at the old location of Marty's Cater is at the corner of West Street and Winthrop Street. We're beginning to have a little bit of a problem with the wholesaler that is now in that facility. And ultimately they're running an operation, Mr. President, that goes seven days a week from at least seven in the morning until at least 11 at night. And that's what their permanent hours are, but it's more like two, three, four o'clock in the morning. So what's happening, Mr. President, is that, Their delivery vehicles, which are commercial in nature, are parking on the end of West Street in a 30-minute parking area for people that are patronizing Moulton's Restaurant or the old Pranzi's location. So that parking that was really for patrons of the restaurants after hours is now turning into commercial vehicle parking, where the trucks park there. They idle for long periods of time while they wait for the product to be prepared, prepped, loaded up, and put onto the truck. And it's really causing an issue in the neighborhood. It's a quality of life concern, Mr. President. So we're asking the Traffic Commission to take a look at this address it in a serious fashion. And I'm being commercial parking on the corner of West street and Winthrop street for the time being.
[Adam Knight]: Um, this is a cause and effect, uh, resolution that I put forward. Um, got the phone calls caused me to put it forward because of the effect.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. The Hormel Commission is comprised of three members, two appointed by the administration and one appointed by the council. With the recent retirement of Jack Buckley, one of the administration's appointees, and Cosmo Bowlby, the city council's appointee, we've had a vacancy there. The vacancy has been in place for some period of time. And I'm moving forward to nominate Leonard Agliona from 86 Chandler Road for the position, Mr. President. He has a number of contacts with professional and college programs in the area. He has past leadership positions in Medford Youth Hockey, Medford Little League, and the Medford Bowl Club. And he currently works in operations in an athletic facility. So I think this is a good choice, and I'd move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Um, if I may, Mr. President, please, um, three to the, uh, the consular, um, Mr. Glenn has served an interim basis as the mass mass port rep. Um, well may have Burke was conducting her search. Um, he was the mass port CAC representative. They meet on a quarterly basis. Um, he served in the position for a period of time that would have covered two meetings. One of the meetings was held. One of the meetings was canceled because of lack of quorum. He was at the meeting that was canceled because of lack of quorum.
[Adam Knight]: so i would respectfully ask that one of our nation is to present the same for us to make sure it's also night uh... i served on the council when mister will be was appointed uh... reappointed there was no process in asking at that point in time for anybody if they had any candidates if they had any but it was interested if they wanted to put forward any applications uh... secondly is a big difference between reappointment uh... and sexually i believe that the council also had made appointments previously during my tenure on the council without following that protocol for other matters that are under the council's purview, Mr. President. So for those reasons, the position has been vacant for some period of time. It's been something that sounds like it's been not on anybody's agenda or anybody's mind. We have a candidate in there that's going to be willing, capable, and able to serve the position. Again, I'd move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Cymdeithas Cynulliad Cymdeithas Cynulliad Cymdeithas Cynulliad Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cymdeithas Cym
[Adam Knight]: Aye.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much and thank you to Mr. Cristofaro and the rest of the officers that took the time to come here this evening. I truly appreciate your work and what you do for our community, Mr. President. Yn y blynyddoedd, ar hyn o bryd, yng nghanol y wlad, mae ychydig o ofalwyr sy'n ymwneud â'r gwaith y maen nhw'n ei wneud, ac rwy'n meddwl y byddwn ni'n gobeithio i roi'r bobl a'r dynion yng ngogledd yng Nghymru gyda'r ymatebau sy'n anodd i wneud y swydd, Mr. President, ac rwy'n meddwl nad yw ychydig o'r ymatebau mwy bwysig na sefydliad y tu ôl, sefydliad y tu ôl, sefydliad y tu ôl, sefydliad y tu ôl, sefydliad y tu ôl, sefydliad y tu ôl y byddwn i'n ymwneud â'r cyhoeddiadau y byddwn i'n ymwneud â'r cyhoeddiadau y byddwn i'n ymwneud â'r cyhoeddiadau y byddwn i'n ymwneud â'r cyhoeddiadau y byddwn i'n ymwneud â'r cyhoeddiadau y byddwn i'n ymwneud â'r cyhoeddiadau y byddwn i'n ymwneud â'r cyhoeddiadau y byddwn i'n ymwneud â'r cyhoeddiadau y byddwn i'n ymwneud â'r cyhoeddiadau y byddwn i'n ymwneud â'r cyhoeddiadau y byddwn i'n ymwneud â' Felly, rwy'n gobeithio y byddwn yn gweithio'n fawr i'r Prif Weinidog, ac rwy'n gwybod y bydd y Cynulliad hwn wedi gweithio'n fawr i'r Prif Weinidog, ac rwy'n gobeithio Yn ddiweddaraf, rwy'n gobeithio y byddwn yn cydweithio'n fawr i sefydlu gwasanaethau newydd. Yn amlwg, wrth gwrs, mae'r gwasanaethau newydd ddim wedi'u gwneud. Mae angen i ni wneud gwaith gwych i'r dynion a'r dynion a'r dynion yng Nghymru, Mr. Prif Weinidog.
[Adam Knight]: Mae'r Cynulliad yn cymryd ffyrdd, ond maen nhw'n ymdrechion bandaid. Mae'n ymdrechion bandaid. Mae'n ymdrechion bandaid, felly rydyn ni wedi cymryd ffyrdd i sicrhau'r gwybodaeth, rydyn ni wedi cymryd ffyrdd i sicrhau'r ffyrdd i sicrhau'r ffyrdd i sicrhau'r ffyrdd i sicrhau'r ffyrdd i sicrhau'r ffyrdd i sicrhau'r ffyrdd i sicrhau'r ffyrdd i sicrhau'r ffyrdd i sicrhau'r ffyrdd i sicrhau'r ffyrdd i sicrhau'r ffyrdd i sicrhau'r ffyrdd i sic Mae'n rhoi'n ffyrdd o ffyrdd i ffyrdd i ffyrdd. Rwy'n deall eich anhygoeliaeth, ac yn fawr iawn, dydw i ddim yn cael y busnes i fod yn anhygoel i'r dynion a'r dynion yma. Ond rwy'n credu y byddwch chi'n anhygoel iddyn nhw. Rydyn ni'n anhygoel iddyn nhw. Ond dyma'r cwestiwn.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I'd like to amend the paper to request that the representative from the Patrolmen's Association is also invited to the meeting with the administration once scheduled.
[Adam Knight]: Yn ddiweddaraf, rwy'n gobeithio y byddwn ni'n gweithio'n ddiwylliannol y ffordd rydyn ni bob amser wedi ceisio ei wneud. Rydyn ni'n edrych ar y Llywodraeth y byddwn ni wedi'u cymryd yn y dyfodol. Rydyn ni wedi cymryd cymorth i ddatblygu Comisiwn Dreftadaethau Dynol. Rydyn ni wedi cymryd cymorth i ddatblygu cyflawniad ymrwymiadau ymrwymiadau ymrwymiadau ymrwymiadau sy'n ymddangos llawer mwy na'r mater sydd gyda ni heddiw. Felly, wrth edrych ar y cyflawniad hwn, ac rydw i'n ei ddysgu, rwy'n dweud y bydd y Llywodraeth Medfyrd yn cefnogi'r prosiect ymchwil Medfyrd. Ac rwy'n credu Yn fy mhrifysgol hon, ac mae'n rhywbeth yr ydw i'n cefnogi'n hollbwysig, mae'n dweud y bydd Medfyrd yn dal i fod yn gyhoeddus cymuned gwybodaeth y bydd y bywydau yma'n ymwneud â'r bywydau y byddwn ni'n gallu gwneud'n well i sicrhau bod pob un yn cael eu treulio'n eithaf uchel. Rwy'n siŵr y bydd gen i ddim broblem gyda hynny, Mr. President, oherwydd roeddwn i bob amser wedi'i ddysgu y byddwch chi'n treulio pobl y ffordd y byddwch chi eisiau eu treulio. Rwy'n siŵr y byddwn i e Ond byddwn i'n gofyn y byddwch, Ms.
[Adam Knight]: Fodd bynnag, rwy'n gobeithio y byddwch chi'n well na fyddwch chi'n mynd, yn siŵr. Felly, Brif Weinidog, rwy'n deall y bydd Ymgeisyddiaeth Medfyrdd yn gweithredu o nifer o grwpiau yn y gymuned, ond un o'r pethau y mae'r ymgeisyddiaethau i mi wneud yw Mae gennych ddefnyddwyr sy'n ymwneud â'r ddefnyddwyr sy'n ymwneud â'r ddefnyddwyr, ac mae'n fy nghyfrifoldeb bod y prosiect ymwneud â'r gwasanaethau wedi'u cyfrifoldeb i ymwneud â'r defnyddwyr, ac mae'r defnyddwyr yn mynd i fod yn ymwneud â'r defnyddwyr, ac mae'r defnyddwyr yn mynd i fod yn ymwneud â'r defnyddwyr, ac mae'r defnyddwyr yn mynd i fod yn ymwneud â'r defnyddwyr, ac mae'r defnyddwyr yn mynd i fod yn ymwneud â'r defnyddwyr, ac mae'r defnyddwyr
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think that conversations are important. Conversations regarding our differences will lead us to have a better understanding of what our similarities are in the community. So with that being said, I move for approval of the paper, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Rwy'n credu ein bod ni wedi drafod y mater y byddwn i'n hoffi, Mr. President. Rwy'n sicr y byddwn yn cefnogi'r mater'n hollbwysig, os y bydd y dynolwyr yn teimlo y bydd angen i'w drafod'n fwyaf. Byddwn yn ddiolchfeydd i ddod o'n cyfrifiad i gynllunio'n fwyaf, ac byddwn yn gofyn y bydd y president yn mynd i mewn fel cyd-sponsor o'r cyfrifiad, felly bydd y papur yn cael ei hyrwyddo'n gyfrifiad gan y cynghorwyr, ac byddwn yn mynd i'r cyfrifiad fel mae'r iaith yn cael ei hyrwyddo'n
[Adam Knight]: Byddwn yn hapus i'r ymdrech i'r ymdrech i'r ymgynghoriad, Mr. Prif Weinidog,
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. Chair recognizes Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I think that the way that this lighting issue in the square is being approached is smart. It might have taken a little while, but it's smart. We've taken a look at three different samples. We've seen which one may work best for Medford. We've picked one of those samples. Now we're saying let's pilot the sample that we've selected so that, you know, there's a small impact on cost. We want to make sure that we're getting bang for our buck. I think that this is really a smart approach, Mr. President, to financing this project and ensuring that Yn ystod hynny, byddwn i'n ailgylchu arweinydd Scarpelli ar y cyfrifiad. Y cyfrifiad arweinydd Scarpelli ar y cyfrifiad arweinydd Knight, a'r cyfrifiad arweinydd Falco ar y cyfrifiad arweinydd Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Yn ystod yr adroddiad, byddai'n bwysig, Mr. President, i'r adroddiad B, ac i gofyn y byddai'r Prif Weinidog yn rhoi'r cyfrifoldeb a'r cost-benefit ynglyn ag y byddai'n gwneud y gwaith ar-lein, yn hytrach na'r adroddiad B. Byddai'n bwysig i'r cymuned a'r costau o'r prosiect.
[Adam Knight]: Gadewch i'r Prif Wein
[Adam Knight]: Did I do all right? Mr. President, I think your microphone was off. Can you repeat that, Mr. President? Mr. President, thank you very much. As evident by the length and verbiage of this resolution, this isn't something that was created overnight, and I'd be remiss if I did not recognize Mayor Burke for her efforts in helping put this resolution and requested ordinance change together, Mr. President. Mayor Burke and I were working on this for an extended period of time, and there came a situation where we said, beth fyddai'n well i'r ddinas Medfyrdd, a'r gweithredu hwnnw. A allai'n cael ei wneud gan awdurdod arweinyddol, neu a allai'n cael ei wneud gan gweithredu penderfyniad? Ac ar ôl roedd ymddiried yn ymddygiad ac ymddygiad yn dod yn ôl y bydd penderfyniad penderfyniad yn y gweithredu'n gweithredu'n well, oherwydd mae'n creu ymddygiad, Mr. Y Prif Weinidog. Felly, mewn gwirionedd, mae hwn yn llun o llwybrau rydyn ni wedi gweithio arnyn nhw dros llawer o amser, dros nifer o wythnosau, ac Yn ymwneud â'n ffyrdd yma, byddwch chi'n gweld eithaf o'r llyfr o'r Pwyllgor Berth sydd wedi'i ysbrydoli ar 29.11.2016, a'r llyfrau o'r Pwyllgor yng Nghymru. Y cyfrifoldeb y mae'r unigol yn ei wneud pan ydyn nhw'n oferu'r sgiliau unigol a'r talentau yng nghyfnodau'r farchnad, yn bwysig i'r dynas economaidd, ein cymdeithas, ac yn bwysig i'r well-being o'u teuluoedd. Mae'n rhan o llawer o gyfrifiadau Llywodraeth ar unrhyw lefel i weithredu i sicrhau bod y cyfrifiadau'n cael eu pwysleisio i'r rhai sy'n gweithredu. Nid yw'r Llywodraeth yn gweithredu ar y cyfrifiad hwn pan nad yw'n gweithredu ar unrhyw gweithredu i sicrhau bod y cyfrifiadau sy'n cael eu pwysleisio yn cael eu pwysleisio'n cael eu pwysleisio. Yn ymwneud â'r cyfrifiad hwn, rwy'n cefnogi'r cyfrifiad sy'n cael ei ymwneud â'r Cynulliad ym 16771, ac rwy'n gobe Mr. President, what this resolution does is it ensures the contractors awarded public bids with taxpayer money comply with the wage and hour laws that have been established at the federal and state level. As evident by the data that was mentioned in the ordinance change, the proposed ordinance change, Mr. President, wage theft is something that's becoming more and more common. And when we look at wage theft, wage theft is when Mae cyfrifiad cyhoeddiadol wedi'i ymwneud â byd, ac mae'n rhaid i'r cyhoeddwyr i'w gysylltiadu'r cyfrifiad sy'n ymwneud â'r cyfrifiad sy'n ymwneud â'r cyfrifiad sy'n ymwneud â'r cyfrifiad sy'n ymwneud â'r cyfrifiad sy'n ymwneud â'r cyfrifiad sy'n ymwneud â'r cyfrifiad sy'n ymwneud â'r cyfrifiad sy'n ymwneud â'r cyfrifiad sy'n ymwneud â'r cyfrifiad sy'n ymwneud â'r cyfrifiad sy'n ymwneud â'r cyfrifiad sy'n Dyma beth sy'n ei wneud oherwydd mae'r trafodaeth yn ymwneud â'r trafodaethau. Os edrychwn ymlaen at y budget ar gyfer y mlynedd hwn, byddwn yn gweld y bydd $607,000 yn y Deyrnas Gweithredu, $607,000 yn ffyrdd cyhoeddiadau trafodaethau ar gyfer sub-trafodaethau. Rwy'n credu y bydd y cyfrifiad yma yn sicrhau y bydd yr unigolion sy'n cael cyfrifiad gyda'r trafodaethau, y cyfrifiad cyhoeddiadau cyhoeddus, sy'n ymwneud â'r drefodaethau ar lefel byd a wlad, Mr. President. Felly, yn ddiweddaraf, pan edrychwch ymlaen at y newidiad yr adroddiad hwn, mae angen i'r gweithredwyr sicrhau nad ydyn nhw wedi cael eu cyflawni ar gyfer y byd a'r dreftadaethau mewn gwirionedd y byd a'r wlad. Ac os ydyn nhw'n cael, byddent yn adroddiadu'r cyflawniadau hwn i'r ddinas. Os ydyn nhw wedi cael eu cyflawni ar gyfer y trwynaethau o'r trwynaethau o'r trwynaethau o'r trwynaethau o'r trwynaethau o'r trwynaethau o'r trwynaethau o'r trwynaethau o'r trwynaethau o' Felly, byddwn i'n ymdrechu ar yr ymdrech. Rwy'n deall ei bod yn ymdrech sylfaenol iawn, ac rwy'n deall y bydd rhai o'n cymdeithaswyr a'r cyngor efallai eisiau ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ychydig ych Mae'r cyfrifiad hwnnw'n bwysig iawn, ac rwy'n gobeithio ei fod yn cymryd rôl leol ynghylch hynny, ond hefyd rwy'n gobeithio y bydd y Cynulliad yn ymdrechu ni fel newid cyfrifiad, yn ymwneud â chyfrifiad gweithredol.
[Adam Knight]: Mae cymunedau eraill yn y rhan, y Llywodraeth Boston a'r Llywodraeth Cambridge, er enghraifft, wedi cyflwyno adnoddiad ar gyfer ymdrechion gynllunol, lle mae Chelsea wedi cyflwyno adnoddiad ar gyfer y Llywodraeth. Yn ogystal â'r ddisgwyddiad gyda'r Prif Weinidog, gall y cyfrifoldeb fod ar unrhyw amser, a'r cyfrifoldeb bydd yn cael ei ymdrechu pan bydd y cyfrifoldeb yn newid. Mae hyn yn rhywbeth rydyn ni i gyd yn credu, ac rydyn ni'n teimlo ei fod yn bwysig i'r bywydau yn y ddinas Medford. i sicrhau bod yr awdurdodau'n cael eu penderfynu ac yn mynd lle'r ydyn nhw'n ymwneud â'u mynd, Mr. President. Dyna pam rydyn ni'n mynd ymlaen fel newid yr awdurdod, oherwydd er mwyn ei ddysgu, byddwn yn rhaid i ni fynd drwy'r proses ymdrechol a bydd yn rhaid i ni fynd drwy'r ymdrech a'r holl proses cyhoeddus. Dyna pam roeddwn i'n mynd ymlaen fel newid yr awdurdod eto. Rwy'n gobeithio, ac rwy'n credu, ac rwy'n meddwl ei bod yn gweithredu da iawn ac mae'n mynd i fod yn ddefnyddiol iawn i y cyfraniadau sydd wedi'u pwysleisio gyda'r awdurdodau cyhoeddiol, ac mae'r gweithwyr yn safbwynt i sicrhau eu bod yn cael eu pwysleisio ar yr awdurdod cyhoeddus sydd wedi'i sefydlu gan Lywodraeth a Llywodraeth, Mr. Prif Weinidog. Diolch.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. In looking at the language, the following certification shall be incorporated by the City of Medford and adopted as a required standard in regards to all bids and proposals for the provision and delivery of services within the city. Fodd bynnag, mae'r Prif Weinidog yn ymdrechu ar y materau sy'n dod allan o'r Deyrnas Prifysgol. Mae'r materau sy'n mynd i fod yn cael eu hysbysu ar gyfer ein cyfrifoldeb, ar gyfer ein cyfrifoldebau, ac eto, ac eto. Ond mae'r materau sy'n ymwneud â'r proses cyhoeddus cyhoeddus. Felly, nid yw'n ymwneud â'r Llywodraethau a'r Comisiyniaethau neu'r gweithwyr sy'n eu gweithredu arnynt.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to revert back to the regular order of business. Thrilling.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I've reviewed the paperwork and everything appears to be in order. I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President. So as I understand this, the question that we're asking the city solicitor at this point in time would be, does chapter 180 of the Massachusetts general laws apply regarding the sale and redevelopment of the Malden hospital site? Yes. Move approval, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Uh, Mr. President, thank you very much in our packets. And, um, following last week's committee of the whole, we had a discussion relative to the establishment of the community preservation committee. Uh, the community preservation committee is required, um, with the passage of the community preservation act. And, um, as we are all aware, the community preservation act passed about a year ago. Um, president Dello Russo appointed an ad hoc committee on the implementation of the community preservation act for the city of Medford consisting of myself, Councilors, Falco and Scarpelli as well as Alicia hunt from the office of energy and environment. Roberta Cameron and Joan Sear were citizen representatives and attorney Rumley served as legal counsel for the subcommittee. And, um, the subcommittee came up with a series of recommendations after about a year of deliberation. Mr. President. Um, we met at the committee of the whole and we went over these recommendations. The committee of the whole voted to send the recommendations to the city solicitor to establish a draft ordinance. The draft ordinance was presented to the council last week before our regularly scheduled Medford city council meeting. And it was, uh, adopted favorably. Mr. President, this paper right here is the product of the work of the subcommittee and the, uh, review and the, um, analysis of the Medford city council. And I would move for approval for a first reading on it this evening. Mr. President, it's our duty as the Medford city council to establish the community preservation commission to execute the functions of the Community Preservation Act. It's required by law, and this would be the first step in us becoming in compliance with the passage of the Community Preservation Act, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, thank you very much. Um, I had the pleasure of chairing this subcommittee and I'd just like to thank the members, um, that served on it with me. Councilor Scarpelli, Councilor Falco, um, Alicia hunt from the office of energy and environment and Roberta Cameron and Jones here. Um, we met probably 15 times at least on this. Um, everybody was very committed and diligent in their efforts and um, it was a pleasure working with them and I just wanted to thank them for their efforts and be sure that they were recognized for their hard work. Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Back in June, this council approved a paper that I sponsored relative to extending a community path from where the Crystal Campbell Peace Garden is located to Hormel Stadium and then from Hormel Stadium to McDonald Park, ultimately creating a community path that would link in those three amenities that we have here and offer here in our community. Um, it's been brought to my attention that this project is moving forward. Uh, the department of conservation and recreation in collaboration with the Massachusetts highway department has been, um, proposing the development and construction of this plan. Um, however, there've been some changes to the plan. Um, recently the office of energy and environment held a community meeting. I was unable to attend it, However, I did receive some feedback from a number of abutters to the community path that expressed some concern and I'd ask that the administration provide the council with a brief presentation as to the proposal for the creation of the Clippership Connector, Mr. President, what it entails, and give these residents in the community an opportunity to hear it once again and raise their issues, concerns, and questions.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor? Uh, Mr. President, I haven't had an opportunity to review the records. And if we look at paper one six dash seven, five, eight, it was amended by Councilor Marks. Um, absent that one change, uh, everything is in order and I'd move for approval as amended.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think councilor Caraviello gave us a great synopsis and I too would be supporting this paper and would second his motion for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'd like to amend the paper to request that the administration consider appointing one of the members of the council as either the representative to the mass port advisory commission or as the alternate delegate to fill in when that person is unable to attend the meetings as amended by Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: On the motion for approval, Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I'd like to amend the paper and ask that we include the school committee in the decision making process, Mr. President, whether the policy making body for issues that are affecting the school department. I think that that would be the courteous thing to do. Number one, number two, Mr. President, I'd like to amend the paper to expand it, not just to the Roberts Elementary School, but to all schools. Cause I think if we're going to be looking at improvements to the morning and afternoon drop offs at schools. And each school does have a different in, in, in particular set of issues that they're dealing with. But I think that if we're looking to improve things in the interest of public safety, that we should be doing it across the board, not just that one location, Mr. President. So I'd ask that a, in addition to the Rob's elementary school, we do take a look at all of the schools in the community on the motion of council.
[Adam Knight]: Move approved, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Um, in recent weeks, it's been brought to my attention that some of our neighboring communities have implemented a universal 25 mile per hour speed limit. um, on all city controlled and operated roadways. And, um, this may or may not work in the city of Medford. And I'd like to amend the paper requesting that the traffic commission examined the feasibility of putting in a universal speed limit across, uh, the, the board here in the city of Medford, Mr. President. Um, it's my understanding that I believe the city of Somerville has adopted a 25 mile per hour speed limit across the board at all, um, portions of the city, unless otherwise posted. And, um, I think that we're facing a significant issue right now with traffic and speeding vehicles and the like, uh, as evident by the last six or seven agendas of the city council. Um, so with that being said, Mr. President, I'd like to amend the paper and request the traffic commission to examine the feasibility as to whether or not it would make sense to implement a standard and universal speed limit across the board for all city controlled streets and roadways.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'm having grown up on Whitman road, which is the next street up from Essex street. Um, I've had a lot of experience with this crosswalk and I can appreciate councilor Falco bringing forward a resolution, uh, asking the pedestrian crossing signs be added at that location. But quite frankly, Mr. President, that is a very dangerous location. And I questioned as to whether or not a crosswalk should be there at all. It's on a blind curve coming down a gradient that's very steep. So if you're coming from West Medford square towards the Winthrop street rotary, as you're coming around a blind bend downhill, you're now going to see a crosswalk. Um, and I think it's very dangerous location, Mr. President. And I'd ask that the traffic commission examine the feasibility of removing the crosswalk as to whether or not that's a good idea before investing any funds into putting up any signs. So I'd like to amend the paper, um, and ask the traffic commission to take a look and see if that crosswalk is actually feasible location for a crosswalk and whether or not there's a safer alternative. um, prior to investing in implementing any money, um, to connotate a mark where the crosswalk would be at this point in time.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, we talk about a traffic engineer. We started this discussion about a traffic engineer in the budget debates, uh, back in 2015. and the conversation continues. And I think that this is the perfect location where a traffic engineer would come in very handy to take a look at this and examine this feasibility. Unfortunately, we don't have one on staff here at the city.
[Adam Knight]: Whether or not to remove the crosswalk.
[Adam Knight]: President to clear the record. I have no problem with the signs going up. If the traffic commission feels as though it's a safe location.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Um, this council, uh, the zoning in ordinance subcommittee and this council have worked on, um, the paper providing safe access to medicinal marijuana in the city of Medford for the better part of the last year. Um, with the passage of question four comes some uncertainty. Mr. President, uh, the department of public health at the state level, um, is now required to issue some public health guidelines in the form of regulations to guide us in the implementation of question four. And based on the language that I read in the proposal underneath question four, there is a direct correlation between the medicinal marijuana establishments and that of the recreational marijuana establishments. They go hand in hand, Mr. President. And the language included in the passenger question for limited local control, it restricted some of the decision-making powers that the municipality had. Um, as such, Mr. President, this paper is nothing more than a request from the city to the city solicitor to ask him what effect he sees coming out of the passage of question four in relation to the proposal that was before the council, uh, entitled providing safe access to medicinal marijuana in the city of Medford. Uh, and also, Mr. President, we'd ask that, uh, until this opinion is made available by the city solicitor that, um, we determine what options are available to us to hold the issuances of licenses in abeyance until it can be determined what impact it's going to have on the local level of government.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This paper came before the Medford city council as outlined in the resolution. Um, at the time I had several questions relative to why we were asking just for a beer and wine, an expansion of the beer and wine licenses, but not the full liquor licenses. Um, I wanted to do a little bit more investigation and I motioned to move the matter to the subcommittee on licensing. Mr. President. Um, ultimately I picked up the phone and made several phone calls, spoke with the commissioner of the licensing commission as well as, um, our economic development office, a city solicitor. And, um, my questions were answered and I was satisfied. Mr. President, I wanted to know why we weren't asking for more full liquor licenses. And the answer was because there were 32 available full liquor licenses here in the community right now. Um, my thinking behind the whole, um, my first referral to subcommittee was that, uh, full liquor licenses seem to be more of a driver in economic development. And here we are in the city of Medford and we discuss the economic development of our downtowns rather frequently. So I wanted to be sure that if we were going to be sending a homeroom petition to the legislature, asking them to pass legislation, that we took a look at everything that was possible, Mr. President, before bringing the matter to the legislature. Um, since the time of the motion to refer the matter to the subcommittee, my questions have been answered as such. I spoke with Chairman Caraviello was the chairman of licensing committee and I, um, suggested that I put a paper forward to rescind the vote. Um, councilor Caraviello was in support of that matter when I brought it up. Um, as such, I did some research, Mr. President. And, um, if you put on the council agenda with notice to rescind the vote, then a majority vote is required to rescind the vote. If there was no notice, then a two thirds vote is required to rescind the vote. Um, so I put the paper on the, agenda this evening, Mr. President, for us to be notified that the vote for our rescinding, uh, would be taking place this evening. And I would ask my colleagues to support rescinding the vote and introducing the matter back to the council floor for approval on the motion for approval by Councilor Knight to rescind first to rescind.
[Adam Knight]: I'll move for a roll call, Mr. President, just to be procedurally sound.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, paper 166, homework petition. Entitled, increasing the number of licenses available for the sale of wine and malt beverages.
[Adam Knight]: You get the minutes right there.
[Adam Knight]: One that are currently available in the city.
[Adam Knight]: Um, yes, Mr. President, it's my understanding that that portion of route 16 is entitled Sleepy Hollow and it's part of what's known as the Emerald Necklace, which is a system of parkways and boulevards, uh, that would go from Medford and reach into all the way to the Jamaica way. Um, I believe that it has historic value as well. I think it might've been designed by, uh, Frederick Law Olmsted, Mr. President. Uh, it was also famous for, I believe if I'm not mistaken, the design of the Boston common and a central park in New York city. So I think that the control and jurisdiction over Route 16 and that roadway falls under the Department of Conservation and Recreation, and I do believe there's a longstanding trucking ban on that roadway, Mr. President. You know, I'm off exploring options. I'm off exploring feasible options as to how we can address the heavy trucking on South Street and surrounding streets. However, I don't know if this is option that's going to be available to us based upon the historic nature of, um, the roadway and the history surrounding, um, the allowance of trucking on that roadway. Uh, but I guess, Mr. President, you don't get a kiss unless you ask. So it's not going to hurt to ask. But, um, I personally am not too, um, optimistic that this is going to be something that's authorized, uh, from the department of conservation and recreation, but move for approval on the motion approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think it's safe to say that everyone behind this rail could say that we can do a better job when it comes to street sweeping in the city of Medford. Um, year in and year out, we have the same conversations every spring and every fall. What's going on? When's it going to be posted? The big sweep. check the city website, how people have been notified, so on and so forth, Mr. President. So I certainly think that we can do a better job. And I think that this is a good step towards us being provided with information to maybe sit down and take a look at the job we're doing and come up with some suggestions as to how we can improve upon that, Mr. President. So I move for approval and I support the resolution on that motion.
[Adam Knight]: I don't believe it's the City of Medford's policy that authorizes cyclists to ride their cycles on the roadways. I believe it's state law that authorizes such. It's not our policy.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, thank you very much. Um, I believe that the construction project that the council was referring to was not on a traffic Island. I think that was determined that it was going to be a curb bump out, would extend the curb at Winthrop and South street, um, further into the street so that vehicles can't come down Winthrop street at a high rate of speed going towards the parkway. and continue down South Street at a high rate of speed. And I, too, would like to request, Mr. President, by way of amendment and update on that construction project, 1021, I sent an email to Deputy Director Curran for that exact same purpose, Mr. President. Also, I'd like to request that a traffic division provide directed patrols in the area during the rush hour hours, Mr. President. I think it's safe to say that a lot of this traffic is a direct result of the that's being placed on route 16, that's taking cars out of Medford Square and bringing them down the parkway, then up Winthrop Street, then back down High Street into Medford Square. Well, if you can go that way, you can also take a left onto Winthrop Street and then a left onto South Street and go down South Street and get into Medford Square that way as well, Mr. President. So we'd also like to ask if the Massachusetts Department of Transportation can provide us with some mitigation help here, Mr. President, maybe in the way of a traffic count or a traffic study or helping fund temporary speed bumps in the location. Also, Mr. President, back in April of 2014, I believe the council did support a community improvement initiative which authorized the purchase of two mobile speed bumps. One of those mobile speed bumps was placed out on central for quite a bit of time, and then it was removed. I believe that was part of the pilot program that Councilor Marks championed for raised crosswalks, Mr. President. So I'd also like to request that in the interim until a permanent solution can be made that the portable crosswalks that were, that funds are appropriate for an April of 2014, um, be installed on South street for the time being. Mr. President, with that, with the directed patrols, I think we'll have an immediate impact on the quality of life in the neighborhood.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, Ms. Welch mentioned something that made me think. As we look at South Street and its location, and then we look at right across the river, we have the Fellsway, and the Fellsway is part of our parkway system, and no trucking is allowed on on the Fellsway, on Route 16. And I see no difference between Route 16 and the same exact street, South Street, directly across the street, Mr. President. So I'd like to amend the paper and request that the Traffic Commission take a look at the feasibility of making that a no-truck route. No heavy trucking.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Resolution 16-404 was a resolution that I filed some months back requesting a list of all the roadways and sidewalks that were dug up or permitted for excavation by our public utilities, Mr. President, and the status thereof, whether or not they've been completed to the city of Medford standards or not. as well as a request for a list of properties that have received permits where the restoration work has not been completed. Also, as many of us are aware, in situations where trees wrap around power lines, the utility is responsible for pruning back the trees that are wrapped up in utility lines. And I asked for a list of locations that the utilities are responsible for in terms of trees growing into power lines, Mr. President. So it's a growing concern about the amount of construction work that's going on in our community here. that's being performed by public utilities. If you were going to drive down through the Lawrence Estates, for example, you'd see Trancroft and Crocker Road dug up for 15, 20, 30, 40 feet, Mr. President. Then we get down to the corner of Governor's Ave and Forest Street, and we see some more excavation work being done there. Then you look across the street on Ashcroft, and there's work being done there, Mr. President. There's a tremendous amount of trench work being done by our public utilities. But, quite frankly, I don't have the warm and fuzzies when it comes down to the restoration work that's being done, Mr. President. So I'm asking the engineering department to give us a list of these properties and locations, Mr. President. Once I receive the list, I'd like to take a review and then potentially create some criteria to mandate requirements in the permitting process. For example, if the utility comes in to do emergency work, that a fire detail be present. If the utility comes in to work on a roadway like Lawrence Road or like Forest Street, that they have to have a police detail present and a traffic management plan in place that's actually going to make sense and work, Mr. President. As we see our roads get dug up more and more frequently, we see detours and we see traffic getting routed through neighborhoods and through residential streets. And it's really a quality of life issue, Mr. President, between the traffic when the work is going on and then the shoddy repair work at the end of the job. I think that's something that we need to take a focus on. I'd ask for the council to support this resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to present this resolution. I'm proposing that the city change the structure of the sign department. I really think that the sign department should be a standalone division within the DPW and not a subdivision of the highway department. Reason being is it is a public safety department, Mr. President, and they need to ensure that there is proper installation and maintenance of our roadway control signs as well as the striping on our streets. If anybody's been paying attention to the last five or six meetings of the Medford City Council, I think it's safe to say that the topic of our conversation has been signage and has been the striping of our streets and the public safety issues that are surrounding those matters here in our community, Mr. President. And I'm asking that the administration take a look at this issue and determine whether or not it's feasible to create a standalone sign shop. The sign shop is responsible for all of the signage that's put forth by the Traffic Commission, as well as the existing signs that are in place. They're in charge of all the signage at the schools as well, Mr. President. a large job, and what's happening is these individuals that are assigned to the sign shop being a subdivision of the highway division are being pulled away to handle other matters that are in the community, and then they're put back into the sign shop, pulled out of the sign shop, put back in the sign shop. And I think that it would make good sense to have a full-time, stand-alone sign and striping division within the DPW, Mr. President, so that these issues in our community can be addressed promptly and properly. I don't think we have had a meeting yet when the good weather rolls around and we don't talk about when our sidewalks are going to be, our crosswalks are going to be striped, Mr. President. And I think that this would be a perfect remedy for that type of issue. I'd ask that my council colleagues support the measure.
[Adam Knight]: The commissioner has been appointed and is no longer wearing the interim tag, as far as I've been informed.
[Adam Knight]: Again, Mr. President, this is a resolution that asks that the administration examine the feasibility thereof, so there will certainly be issues that are going to surround this matter in terms of collective bargaining, contract negotiation, and whether or not it even is a feasible move or an option to make, and that's why I'm asking the administration to study it.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'd like the Council to join me in congratulating these individuals for the fine legacy that they've left behind them at Medford High School, Mr. President. And going through this list, we see a number of great student-athletes who have the blue and white running through their veins, who have done well in the classroom as well as on the athletic field, Mr. President. And as we go down the list, there is someone who I'd like to point out, and that's Martin Murphy Jr. Martin Murphy, for as long as I can remember, has been one of the most generous and giving individuals in our community, whether it's for Community Day, for I was going to second the motion. I know a number of the inductees and they are great athletes, Megan Richard, David Richard, and I also was coached by Lou Ruggiero as a
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the subcommittee Membership will be prepared to make a presentation tomorrow, and we will go over the changes word by word and compare and contrast them with the current and existing rules. So there will be nothing left out tomorrow at the meeting. We will be absolutely 100% sure to go over every single word, period, comma, so on and so forth, so that everybody is well aware of what's going on. Hence the purpose of the meeting, Councilor. That is correct, sir. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: So, um, that's Mr. President, that's why when the committee report this paper out on August 1st, 2016, um, we asked that the city clerk put the committee report together and gave it to the council probably five, six weeks in advance. Um, but you know, we'll do the best we can with what we got to get it together. I can't make any promises that it's going to happen, Mr. President, but the council, I think that the meeting should go forward, Mr. President. If individuals that have questions, raise them, we will answer them and do our best to answer them. And if it's not appropriate to call for a vote, are there further changes that need to be deliberated in subcommittee, which I anticipate would be the case, Mr. President. more or less a reform measure that would start a discussion. And I don't think that any of us on the subcommittee felt as though this was going to be a final product that came out of the committee of the whole. And we felt as though this is probably something that we're going to have to take a look at a couple of other things before it went forward and became operational. If in fact that was the will of the council as a whole, Mr. President. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, this is something that didn't happen overnight, and this Rules Committee started meeting before I was a member of the Council, and then continued to meet when I became a Councilor, and then continued to meet after the composition of the subcommittee changed. When Councilor Camuso retired from public life and when you became the President, the composition of the subcommittee changed as well. So this is something that started well before I was the Chairman. It went through my first term and was deliberated and discussed and it's been going on for the past year. We've probably met. Oh, I think between the committee right now we've met seven or six times on these proposed rules. Prior to that, when Councilor Dello Russo and Camuso comprised the committee, I think we met another six times. So there's been at least 12 public meetings on the subject and topic of rules in the Medford City Council rules to date, Mr. President, that I can recall since I've been on this council and this proposal is the fruit of that labor.
[Adam Knight]: It hasn't even been adopted by the council. It's on the council floor, but it hasn't been adopted by the council. It's still in subcommittee. The subcommittee reported a paper out. We're going to have a meeting on this tomorrow. There are going to be lots of questions. That's what the meeting tomorrow is for, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, pursuant to the present Councilor, I'm going to clarify this.
[Adam Knight]: Point of order, Mr. President. This is their floor. Point of order, Councilor Knight. Pursuant to the council rules, a paper that's in subcommittee cannot hit the council floor until a committee of the whole has met.
[Adam Knight]: And the committee of the whole has not met.
[Adam Knight]: It's a committee of the whole. If it doesn't even get out of the committee of the whole, it doesn't become operational. It doesn't even hit the floor. It doesn't become operational. It's often not. All it is is a proposal.
[Adam Knight]: You have to send them- That's not true, Mr. President. Thank you. That's not true.
[Adam Knight]: And it was also, it was attached to the meeting notes, but it was also attached to a previous council agenda when the subcommittee reported the matter out favorably and requested a committee of the whole, right? And it's been attached to the council agenda, the council agenda once, maybe twice. And it's been attached to the meeting notice now as well. So I believe it is electronically available online. Where?
[Adam Knight]: Tonight if you want to clarify that I do believe the meeting is a public meeting open to the public tomorrow. It is anybody that has a concern is more than welcome to come. They'll have an opportunity to be heard at that meeting Mr. President. Like I said, I don't think it's very difficult. When the paper was first reported out, I believe I explained to the council is because it is a lengthy document. If you look at it and you'll see article 1.1, the swearing in and the oath of office, and then there's a number right next to that. That reflects the rule that's in the current rules that are adopted. And I made that point soundly clear when the paper was reported out of committee. Now, the paper was reported out of committee some four, five, six weeks ago on this council floor. Nobody's looked at it since then. That's not my problem. I'm sorry about that. If they haven't looked at it, Mr. President, but this committee met for three and a half years on this topic, and we're ready to move forward on the matter and to present it to the council as presented to the committee of the whole meeting. In the interim, in the interim, I'd be happy to work towards putting a document like that together, but I don't feel as though it's something that should hold up the progress of the committee.
[Adam Knight]: And the public participation period seems to be limited just to whatever's on the council's agenda for that week, which... If you look at it, there's also an open forum section, and an open forum section was established by way of the subcommittee to allow for residents of the general public to come up and speak before the council on items that do not appear on the agenda. and anyone wishing to do so may do so by application in accord with rule 4.0, which is the way that everybody currently applies to speak before the city council. And if you read the sentence further, it would say, or with the city messenger on the evening of the meeting prior to that portion of the meeting.
[Adam Knight]: Subject to the will of the council.
[Adam Knight]: In response to that, Mr. President, the parliamentarian for the council is the president of the council at that period, at that point of time. He's in charge of enforcing and implementing and applying the rules. Presently, under the current rules that are in place right now, I believe they say that a citizen would be allowed to talk no more than three times for no more than 10 minutes. So this allows a person to speak still three times, for up to three minutes, which actually increases participation, because it gives you a full 30 minutes to speak, as opposed to three times in 10 minutes, it gives you 30 minutes to speak.
[Adam Knight]: 10 minutes on any item that's on the agenda and 20 minutes on any items that aren't.
[Adam Knight]: Whether or not the rules are adhered to, the current rules are adhered to in the 310 rules and story, Mr. President. Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: Something that's said at the podium during the public participation portion that warrants further investigation. That's great. We've heard it from a citizen. Now we have a week to investigate it. We have a week to investigate it. We're going to go and look at this for a week. Okay, there's an issue over here. Let's make some phone calls. Let's investigate it. Let's see what's going on. Okay, this might be worthy of a resolution. You file a resolution, then next week the resolution's on. Thank you, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, point of information would be if in fact, we're looking for the exact verbiage. Um, I know that the council is in the past, always accepted written testimony as well. Um, we can accept the written testimony and save Mr. Silver the trouble of reiterating it three or four times and going through the process. And, uh, you can submit the written testimony to the city clerk to be forwarded to the traffic commission if that's a suitable to the council.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And thank you. Councilor Marks for bringing this issue forward. Uh, I've been a firm advocate for examining citywide permit parking since my election some years ago. Um, and I think that that's really the best approach would be to taking, taking a look at this in a citywide perspective. Mr. President, um, the piecemeal approach isn't working as we're going street by street by petition. All it is is pushing the problem over to the next block. I think the only fair and equitable way to really address this would be to take a look at the whole entire city, because the problems that the individuals are having in South Medford aren't much different than the problems that the individuals in the hillside are having. And they're not much different than the problems that the individuals down on First, Second, Third, and Fourth Street are having. So I think that the only fair and equitable approach, Mr. President, would be to examine it in a citywide basis. That's the position that I've had for a number of years, and that's the position that I'm going to maintain, Mr. President. I certainly also would support a study. And I think that as we look at the best practices of municipal government, best practices would show that data-driven decision-making is the way to go. And you can't make data-driven decision-making without collecting data. And the way to collect the data would be through a study. So I can certainly sympathize with the issues that are going on down in South Medford, because I quite frequently spend a lot of time there. And I, too, have issues with parking. And as I think about it right now, I have a $100 ticket that I have to pay for being a little too close to a bus stop down there. So I, too, have been victimized and victimized myself, I guess, by trying to do the best I can to squeeze in down in that neighborhood, Mr. President. So I certainly understand the frustrations. And ultimately, it is a quality-of-life issue. And I think that this is something that can be addressed. I think that it's also taken too long for the Traffic Commission to make a determination as to whether or not citywide permit parking is the way to go. So with that being said, Mr. President, I think that looking at this in the only fair and equitable way would be to do it on a citywide basis.
[Adam Knight]: Uh, Mr. President, I'd also like to further amend the paper and request that the DCI provide us with a listing of all of the DCI controlled crosswalks and, um, cross signals in the community so that we can take a look and make sure that we're all operational and, uh, meeting their intended purpose on that motion as amended again.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to take papers in the hands of the clerk, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think it's safe to say that We here in the community ask a lot of our educators. But asking them to be crossing guards is a bit much. I'd like to publicly commend Principal Suzanne Buckley-Galusi on her efforts and her work in taking this situation as seriously as it is and getting out there and actually taking action. So I think she was a great hire and a great selection for principal of the Brooks School. And she's really living up to expectations. And this is evident, Mr. President. But with that being said, we have a representative here from the police department. Mr. Barry Clemente here, and maybe he can shed some light on the situation as to what happened and explain to us exactly what was going on on Monday morning and how we got to that situation and what steps have been taken to prevent it from happening again.
[Adam Knight]: Now before us live, the man behind the phone calls, right?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much. Uh, captain appreciate the work you do.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Captain, when you say reserve officer, are you referring to a reserve officer on the reserve list that could be eligible for hire if in fact a position became available?
[Adam Knight]: Do you have an auxiliary as well?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, so there's no auxiliary, please.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President. Yes. Um, I had a recent conversation with, um, personnel in the DPW that did inform me that some signage is in stock or has arrived relative to pedestrian crossings. I don't know if it's the rectangular rapid flashing beacon, but I know that they have some stock that has arrived and I can clarify that for Mr. O'Leary as to whether or not, um, that is the material that has come in, uh, that's in stock and ready to go, Mr. President. But ultimately I'd like to amend the paper and, um, include Councilor Marksley's recommendation that our traffic super and supervisors be outfitted with communication equipment that will allow them to dispatch either the main office of the school that they're working at or to the Metro police department. Um, I think that, like I, as I said, we ask a lot of our educators, Mr. President, but they're always willing to rise to the top and rise to the occasion. And if they're being, dispatched by the crossing got into the main office that there's a problem out there than the main office has some personnel that can handle some of the phone calls and stuff like that. Well, the crossing traffic supervisor continues to cross kids and make sure that they get to school. So I think that's an excellent recommendation, Mr. President. I think it should be added to part of the resolution. I thank you for bringing it up.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. I certainly appreciate the resolution as well, Mr. President. I think it's a good idea to increase the police presence in Medford Square. We're in a catch-22. We want to create a vibrant square with places for people to congregate and for people to relax and for people to reflect like at the Peace Garden. But at the same time, we want to be sure that we're policing the individuals that are there so that we're providing a strong quality life and a nice environment for those to utilize and enjoy these spaces, Mr. President. So I'm wholeheartedly in support of this resolution and I, too, move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. This has been a lingering issue for a couple of years now. There's been some complaints from residents on Terrace Road that there is a ongoing humming or buzzing sound that is coming potentially from the Lawrence Memorial Hospital. There's been some investigation into the matter and meetings with the city administration. And I'm just asking for an update as to where we are in that process, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. With Veterans Day fast approaching, I've received a number of calls of some individuals who have applied. to have their name added to Honor Roll Park. As we all know, Honor Roll Park is the monument on Winthrop Street at the foot of Steve Miller Way leading up to the high school that would honor those combat veterans that have served in our community. And it's been brought to my attention that the list is expanding and growing. I think we have potentially enough applicants right now, Mr. President, where we could move to add the names to one row park and it would be cost effective and I just would like this information so that I can cross-reference that and see how much it will cost and then maybe make a recommendation to the mayor to appropriate funds. Veterans Day is fast approaching on November 11th and I think if we get this information before then maybe by Memorial Day we'll be able to have some money appropriated and get the names added to the list.
[Adam Knight]: Um, pursuant to our rules, Mr. President, a similar matter was disposed of last week and, uh, the paper should not have reached the table for 90 days. Um, if we're going to be looking at the rules and Robert's rules of order, I think it's also important to point out that the rules of the Medford city council would indicate that that paper was disposed of and then, uh, substantial and like matters cannot be brought to the table for 90 days.
[Adam Knight]: Paper 16667 from the table for third reading.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, this was a piece of legislation that I put forward to increase the legal age to purchase tobacco in the city of Medford from 18 to 21 years of age. It was recommended by way of our tobacco prevention grant coordinator. uh, supported by the administration verbally. I'm in discussions with the administration. Uh, it was also passed unanimously here at the city council. Um, at its first reading, it was advertised duly in the Medford transcript on October 6th, 2016. It is eligible for third reading today. Mr. President, I would ask that this matter be approved this evening. Um, by doing so, we'll be addressing a public health concern.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, upon review of the records, I find them in order and would move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. This paper was brought before this body last week. It was tabled through some procedural action. What it is, is it is an appropriation for $165,000 to do some immediate work in terms of stump repair, catch basins, some sidewalk repairs, um, as well as, uh, some tree planting in the fall and, um, to increase the stock that we have of street signs in our, uh, sign department over in the highway division, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, as far as I can tell, this is the companion paper to the one that we just voted on. I'd move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Um, yes, Mr. President. I'd like to amend the paper, Mr. President and request also a breakdown of the number of motor vehicle accidents that have occurred on locally controlled roadways, um, as well as a breakdown of the number of, uh, instances where the driver was cited for speed in relation to those motor vehicle accidents.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, thank you very much. And thank you to Councilor mocks. Um, I think that this council has gone on record multiple times supporting advisory councils and advisory committees that are comprised of citizens, uh, wholly or in part. Um, Mr. President, I think it's a great measure and that's something that I'm going to be supported supporting. I'm just asking, um, that we amend the paper to make a recommendation that, uh, a representative from the disability community, uh, the council on aging and the school department, uh, be considered as, um, advisory committee slots, I guess would be the appropriate term. Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and thank you, Councilor Falco, for bringing this resolution up. I grew up on a stretch of road between the Winthrop Street Rotary and the Brooks School, and I wasn't allowed to cross the street until I was 18. So, you know, I can tell you right now that it was certainly quite a speedy thoroughfare. But Councilor Falco brings up a good point, Mr. President. This is a roadway that's state-controlled. There's dual jurisdiction, and where there's dual jurisdiction in terms of the operations of the roadway, I think there should also be a commitment from our state police um, for a dual jurisdiction and the enforcement of our traffic control laws that are in place here as well. Um, so I'm in full support of Councilor, uh, Falco's resolution. I think it's very important to note, Mr. President, that, um, we have a detour right now that is directing traffic down route 16 and up onto high street right now with the closure of the credit bridge and that's creating traffic and that traffic is causing vehicles that are trying to get through the Winthrop street rotary to get through West Medford square and pass that stretch as fast as they can. Um, so I think this is a great resolution. I'd ask, um, Councilor Falco if he doesn't mind that I amend it to request that the state police also, uh, kick up their police presence in the area to enforce, um, the speed limit, especially during the hours before and after school.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, thank you very much. Um, I'd like to amend the resolution and request that, um, the traffic commission look at the location of the crosswalk and whether, or not the crosswalk at the Brooks School would be best located on the corner of Alston and High and the corner of Auburn and High, or if it would be better off if they moved it off the intersection. and almost like into the 50 odd line. So it would line up right with the front doors of the school. Mr. President, that way vehicles that are turning left or right off of those side streets have a longer sight line so that they can see if there are people that are in the crosswalk. And it would also provide, um, the queuing up of cars to those corners so that pulling out and into onto high street would be a little bit more difficult because it would be much more congested.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, thank you very much. And thank you. Councilor Falco for bringing this issue up. Uh, I look out my window every day and see that rotary and, uh, some days are worse than others. Sometimes the days are worse than others. Um, There'll be certain periods of time when there's no traffic at the rotary, but during the rush hour times, it is absolutely brutal. And I think councilor Caraviello hit the nail on the head. It has a lot to do with the lights that are timing, the timing of the lights down at route 16. Uh, it has a lot to do with the backups at route 16 queuing up, but also has a lot to do with the backups on Boston Ave and Winthrop street. Um, so I certainly can appreciate councilor Falco's resolution. Um, however, I don't want to see us limit our options. If we're gonna study the intersection, let's study the intersection and let's see what works best. Maybe a bigger rotary works best. Maybe changing traffic patterns through right-hand and left-hand lane, only turn lanes works best. But I am reluctant to support a measure that's just going to say, take out the rotary and put in a set of traffic lights. And I think that that's what the language says, but in Councilor Falco's presentation, what he'd like to see, and correct me if I'm wrong, Councilor, is someone to take a look at this intersection and make recommendations into the design thereof. and see what we can do to put some traffic calming measures in there to slow cars down, but to also prevent queuing and backing up through the intersection during these rush hour periods of time. Yeah, so I'd be very supportive of the resolution, Mr. President, if we didn't limit our options into creating a regular intersection with lights, but rather exploring and examining all options that are before the council and before the engineer, I think would probably make sense. And that's something I could support if the gentleman would be willing to amend the paper. I think he will.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, can we get them to pay for it?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And if you look at Mary Ann and Tom, you'd never believe they've been married 50 years because they look like they're about 50 years old. Mr. President, they've had a wonderful and very happy marriage. And they've been good friends to me for a very long time. Growing up, running around Placedead Park, the Howells and the Caratis were very welcoming to the kids in the neighborhood. They opened their backyards and their home to us. was fortunate enough to develop a great relationship with Thomas and Marianne Howell over the years, Mr. President. On a side note, one of the first jobs I had as a young kid was working for the Howells at Chisholm's Motel on Route 1 in Saugus, where they used to manage and administer the day-to-day operations there, Mr. President. So it's with great happiness for the Howells and for the Karate family that I stand here this evening and congratulate them. I hope that my council colleagues join me Mr. President, I know Councilor Marks goes way back with the family as well. So, you know, with that being said, I turn the floor over to Councilor Marks. Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor. Mr. President, I was hoping we could take paper one, six, six, three, six from the table, a special permit use kino monitor at NK convenience five, six, two high street in city council, September 20th and tabled on the motion of council night to take off the table.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, this was a matter that was discussed and tabled previously following the public hearing on September 20th. I'm here before us. We do have Sean vegan representing the, property owner, and the applicant that's here for a special permit before the city council. I spoke with Attorney Began earlier in the evening. Mr. President, pursuant to state statute and our zoning ordinances here in the city of Medford, we have 90 days from the closing of our public hearing to make a final determination as to whether or not we are going to approve or deny the keynote to go monitor license. Whereas the city solicitor is on a scheduled vacation until the end of next week, Mr. President, I'd ask that this matter remain on the table. However, I did want to have Attorney Biegun have the opportunity to come up here and present the case for his client, and also have this written to the record that we will be willing to take this matter up. It's just going to take some time for us to get back with the city solicitor and get his opinion on a couple of issues that have been raised.
[Adam Knight]: For the purpose of taking two pieces of paper out of order. Mr. President, we have a claim, claims of over a thousand dollars from the law department, paper one six seven zero three. And we also have a claim relative to an appropriation of funds.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, a motion to waive the description of the claim and allow the city solicitor to make a presentation thereof. Madam solicitor.
[Adam Knight]: Chair awaits a motion. Mr. President, if I may, has the road defect been repaired since the injury?
[Adam Knight]: It has. Move for approval, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Terrence, this money gets appropriated, say, this evening. How soon before we see the work that starts to get performed? Are we going to try to get some of this work done before the 1st for us, or is this something that... No, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, this is quite a well-thought-out and thorough presentation, I think. Thank you, Mr. Kearns, for doing a wonderful job on it. This is certainly something that I have no problem approving this evening or voting in favor of this evening. So I'd move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Dear Mr. President and city councilors, I respectfully request that we waive the reading and have a brief comment from the city solicitor.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think this is a great idea. I just think it's something that needs to be examined a little bit further. I certainly have no problem increasing the number of liquor licenses here in the community and approving a homeowner petition to do that. However, I'd like to take a little harder look maybe in the licensing subcommittee. We're increasing it by 15 licenses. That's quite a significant number. It's almost 100% increase, Mr. President. So I think it's certainly something that needs a little bit further investigation. I'd also like to have somebody from maybe the Department of Economic Development there. our community development data discussed with us a little bit about the impact that these licenses will have on their ability to attract businesses to our downtown vacant storefronts.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to revert back to the regular order of business, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Thanks. Councilor Knight? Yes, Mr. President. This was a matter that came before us for a common victor's license just a short time ago. At the time, we spoke with the business owners and informed them that if they wanted to operate extended hours, as indicated on their application, they'd have to come back and get a special permit. It appears that the paperwork is in order, Mr. President. It appears that this business is looking to do everything according to the letter of the law. They haven't been violated for staying open past 11 o'clock, and they're waiting their patient opportunity to be allowed to do such, Mr. President. I see no problem with this application, and I would request that the paper be moved for approval.
[Adam Knight]: And, um, and looking at this, I mean, I think it looks like we have either five or six, um, students in each grade level. Um, we can invite them to separate meetings and have them sit in with us as well as receive their, uh, council commendation. If the council is willing to approve this resolution, Mr. President, I think that would be very educational for these individuals who are going to be the future leaders here. in our community and who are the current leaders here in the Medford public school system. It's not easy putting your name on the ballot and putting yourself out there to run for office. And these individuals have done it at a very young age and I commend them and congratulate them on their hard work. These were the individuals that were successful in their elections and I'm sure there were others that weren't successful, but to put your name out there and to give it a run and to give of yourself and to be willing to provide a public service is something that should be commended, Mr. President. I think they're going to be responsible also for planning the future high school reunions for years to come. And I think my 20th is coming up in a couple of weeks. So as I look at this list and see these names on it, the grade 12 President Anthony McKillop is going to be a name that Medford High alumni in the class of 2017 hear from for a long time. He's going to have quite a responsibility at coordinating and organizing these reunions as he graduates and the years go on, Mr. President. But I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to take papers in the hands of the clerk, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President. Yes. Thank you very much. And thank you, councilor Caraviello for keeping the conversation going on this important topic. Um, I've been keeping a close eye on what's going on when in surrounding communities and the approach that they're taking to dealing with this type of issue. And, um, they've been starting to designate some of these residences, accessory use residences for short term rental purposes. So communities that are authorizing and allowing Airbnbs and are regulating them by way of municipal ordinance are starting to develop a criteria on this. It's somewhat successful in other communities and not so successful in certain communities. So I think it's very important that we give this a long hard look, Mr. President. I'd like to amend the paper and ask that the city assessor provide us with a list of recommendations. Um, because quite frankly, if a private residence is operating as a short term rental or a hotel, there is some revenue that's out there that the city should be able to capture as well. Um, and I think that's very important. I am of the position that, um, a regulation would be more beneficial to the community and to our city and to our consumers than an outright ban. Um, some of my colleagues on the council may disagree. So I think the subcommittee is a great place to start with this so that we can make some recommendations, um, conduct some, interviews and get further educated on the topic before we move into creating some legislation, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Well, Mr. President, thank you very much for providing me with the opportunity to come up here this evening, because it's with a heavy heart I present this citation tonight to my friend Cosmo Volpe. Cosmo has served diligently as a member of our Hormel Stadium Commission for a number of years. Just recently, he announced his retirement from the board. And it's my honor and privilege this evening to present to Cosmo with this Medford City Council citation, which reads, the Medford City Council takes pleasure in awarding this council commendation to Cosmo Volpe in recognition of Your years of community service as the City Council appointee commissioner to the Hormel Stadium Commission. Best wishes, good health, and thank you on behalf of the city of Medford. Signed Frederick N. Dello Russo Jr., Adam Knight, Michael Mox, City Council. Take a moment to turn the microphone over to Councilor Marks. Cosmo first, Cosmo first.
[Adam Knight]: Counsel Marks chair recognizes constant night. Um, yes, Mr. President. I think consular marks gave a great breakdown as to the legislative history of this piece of legislation that's before us here this evening. Um, I was very pleased to have an opportunity to meet with the mayor as well. Um, I think we had a great discussion about the capital plan and the capital projects. This project here before us this evening is outside the capital plan. It's something that's not under the previous administration. It's to address the hole in the ceiling over here that we've all pointed at and looked at at one point or another during our term here on the council, to address the parapet that surrounds the top of the building that we can all see and disarray, Mr. President. I feel as though this is a great appropriation of funds. I feel as though it's a well-thought-out plan, Mr. President. And for that matter, I will be moving for approval. The motion for approval by Councilor Knight, you're recognized as Vice President and Local Current.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, yes, this paper for a loan order of $1.8 million would allow us to complete phase one of the project and also put the design portion of phase two out to bid. That's my understanding. And this paper also would ask that if the loan order is approved, that after its third reading, the administration would come back and rescind the vote or ask for the rescinding of the vote of paper number 16676. So the $1.2 million free cash appropriation would go back into the free cash account, and we would bond out the total amount of $1.2 million plus an additional $600,000 for phase two, Mr. President. I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Excellent, Mr. President. Excellent. Thank you. StreetScan, Mr. President, is a group of business and entity and organization that has developed technology where they retrofit motor vehicles with ground-penetrating radar, some acoustic engineering, and some optical engineering so that they can actually take a picture of the ground based upon what they've found on the radar underground, what they see through the optics, and what data they've gathered through the acoustical engineering. And then they can establish what's called a pavement inspection and management program, Mr. President. It grades each roadway and it does so in the normal flow of traffic. The car drives down the street just like you and I were going to work and it takes this data and it records it all. It brings it into one central location and they can actually put together a map using GIS technology to show you where your worst roads are, where your best roads are, what condition they're in. So say we had street scan here in Medford and they drove up High Street and they took pictures of High Street. They generate the map, and it would show that this section of High Street is in very poor condition, serious condition. It's red. You click on the map, and it would pop up, and it would show an actual picture of that stretch of roadway, Mr. President, what it looks like. And then it would also give you a series of recommendations as to what they feel as though would be the best solution to repair this at the current time based upon the data that they've collected. So there might be cracks in the roadway, and the recommendation might be seal the cracks. There might be a pothole, and the recommendation might be fill the pothole. such damage underneath the ground that the recommendation is there's a need for total resurfacing and reconstruction. tool does, Mr. President, is ultimately, within a day, someone can drive this vehicle around every street in our city, can collect all this data, and then in a few short weeks' time, can produce us with a map, with a pavement condition study of what exactly it is that's going on, not only above our roads, but also underground. So I think this will help us when we run into situations like we did at the Winthrop Street Rotary Project, where there was some cost overruns in the amount of, I believe, $300,000, because we brought an engineer in there to tell us where we can dig and where we can't dig, and they missed the mark. I think this is a tool, Mr. President, that we need to investigate, we need to look at, and we need to further develop because I really think it's going to be beneficial to the city. It'll save us a lot of time, a lot of energy, a lot of effort. And ultimately, once the pavement inspection is done, the management program is right there with it. It comes up. You can do set short-term goals, long-term goals. You can figure out what direction you want to go in in terms of resurfacing plan, restructuring plans. They also can help forecast. the rate of deterioration that the roads that they've monitored are going to come out at. So I think it's really a great piece of technology. It's certainly something that I feel as though the city of Medford would benefit from. And I think it's worthy of something that needs a further look, Mr. President. And I'd ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this.
[Adam Knight]: It's astounding. And we're in Middlesex County, and Middlesex County is one quarter of the state's population. So can you imagine that 66% of the traffic for one quarter of the state's population is congested to Middlesex County, Mr. President? It's amazing, with all the highways we have.
[Adam Knight]: A wise man once said, if we do things the same way over and over again, we're going to get the same results. This is an opportunity for us to take a look at a street. Gentleman comes up here and says the street hasn't been paved in 65 years. 65 years. I don't know how he knows that, because someone said it. Someone must have told him that it's been 65 years. If we have street scan, you know what we're going to have? We're going to have data. And we're going to be able to make data-driven decisions, Mr. President. And database decision-making is the best practice in municipal government. So, you know, with that being said, I still feel as though this data collection tool is very, very valuable to us here in the city. It allows us to make decisions that are informed. It allows us to bite off bigger pieces. And I think that it will really help us out in the long run in our long-term planning. Thank you, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: I talked to him actually the other day. I can read the email to you.
[Adam Knight]: Also, Mr. President, we have public utilities that come into our community, and they request permits to do trench work. And they do trench work, and they say they're going to restore the ground to the same or better condition, the city of Medford standards. Well, then we come into a situation like we're dealing with right now on Doonan Street, where the street got torn up, They've come in, the trench work's been replaced, and it doesn't really live up to what I would find to be city of Medford standards, Mr. President. They left it in worse condition than it was when they got there. And we'll be able to have this tool to drive over the street that they just resurfaced, and we can tell them, no, your trench doesn't meet the standards. It's less dense here. It's more dense here. You didn't pack where you were supposed to pack. You didn't tamp where you were supposed to tamp. So I really think it's going to be a great tool for accountability as well as for database decision making, Mr. President. Madam Researcher.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Um, many of us that grew up here in the city of Medford know Mr. Andre is a longtime Medford resident, a business owner, entrepreneur, uh, thoroughbred racing aficionado and uh, most importantly, the number one fan of the Andre chiefs, Mr. President and uh, recently passed away and his presence is going to be greatly missed in this community. I'd like to extend my deep and sincere condolences to the family and ask the council to join me in doing such.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much, and thank you to the Granada Scary Trust for all their work that they've done, Mr. President. A number of years ago, Kathy Granada Scary was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, and she inspired us all by creating the Granada Scary Trust and making a commitment to raise $1 million for pancreatic cancer research, Mr. President. Now, earlier this evening, you saw the city council spend $1.2 million in two weeks. From 2006 to 2016, the Granada Scary Trust worked tirelessly to raise funds, Mr. President. And they set a goal, Kathy set a goal, a goal of a million dollars. And the Granada Scary Trust, after Kathy's passing, continued to work tirelessly to meet this goal. And on Sunday, at their 10th annual walk, they were pleased to announce that they've met and exceeded Kathy's goal of raising $1 million for pancreatic cancer research, Mr. President. And I really think that this is something that the whole community has rallied behind, not for one year, not for two years, but for the last decade. And, you know, they always say, follow the money. If you follow the money, it's not going to lie. And that's just proof, Mr. President. They've been able to raise $1 million from residents in this community and surrounding communities. to fight this terrible disease all in the memory of Kathy, all based on Kathy's vision. And they didn't quit after a week or a month or a year. They worked for a decade, Mr. President. I think this is something that warrants recognition, Mr. President. I'd ask my colleagues here on the Council to support me in voting in favor of this measure.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And thank you to my colleagues for your input on this important issue. Having grown up in the area and attended the Brooks School and having been involved near accidents myself as a child in that intersection, I certainly understand the situation that's at hand, Mr. President. One of the things that I was thinking, listening to Councilor Caraviello in his presentation would be, we do have a dock pickup area on Auburn Street. If this ordinance gets passed this evening, there's no guarantee that those lights are gonna be changed tomorrow. So. Do I sound like Sinatra? So, as I was saying, Mr. President, I think Councilor Caraviello brings up some several good points, as does Councilor Falco. One thing that concerns me is that these events have been occurring quite frequently. They've been occurring for a number of years, and I believe there should be some reporting requirement that's taking place. at the school level. So I'm wondering if we can amend the resolution to request that the principal of the Brooks School, Suzanne Galusi, provide us with any suggestions or input that she may have in what she feels as though would make her job a little easier and make the students there safer. She's there every day, Mr. President. She also went to the Brooks School and grew up in the neighborhood, so I think she has a pretty good grasp and handle on the issues at hand, and I think that she'd be able to provide us with some very helpful information. And one of the other items I'd like her to look into, if possible, would be to move the pickup area to the rear end on Prescott Street, where there's a large lot that people can pull in and out of, where students can congregate free and absent of being right next to the main roadway, Mr. President. So those are the two items that I'd like to add to this matter. I appreciate the Councilor for bringing it forward and it's something that I support.
[Adam Knight]: The Treasurer-Collector or the Assessor, Mr. President? The Assessor's Office. I think you might be able to petition the Assessor's Office for an abatement on the additional $132 in excise. I think that if you petition the board of assessors with requests for an abatement as well as a sworn affidavit saying that your location was Florida and that you disposed of the vehicle prior to you leaving the state, that that would be enough to get your foot in the door and you can make a case with the board of assessors. That would be my advice.
[Adam Knight]: My advice would be to give Mr. O'Neill a call back, as the chairman of the Board of Assessors. He'll be able to point you in the right direction. If, in fact, they'll be willing to entertain an appeal for an abatement. We'll have to go back to the drawing board, but I think that's a good place to start.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much and thank you to the petitioner as well as the gentleman who came up to speak in opposition. After a view of the papers, all the paperwork does appear to be in order. Mr. President, as we've noted that this is an issue that requires a special permit, I personally feel as though we don't have a need for any kino monitors in our convenience stores and I'd like to be recorded in opposition. However, the paperwork is complete. I see no problem with the paperwork. This is a philosophical issue for me, Mr. President, not a matter of public process or procedure. So, with that being said, I'd move for approval on the papers, but I'd like to be reported in opposition because I feel as though we have enough keynote monitors in our convenience stores as it is right now.
[Adam Knight]: Does the gentleman have the ability to sell Kino right now, absent the monitor?
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: If I may, Mr. President, it's a special permit issue. Whatever permits were granted before I came on the council that I have no control or knowledge of, however, since I've been on this board, I've consistently voted against Keno monitors and convenience stores because I feel like it takes the convenience out of convenience stores. You go there for milk, you got to wait in line for people to play Keno, people are standing around loitering. It just gives a bad feel for the neighborhood, Mr. President. It's a philosophical thing. It's nothing to do with the individual. I think that they run a great business. I'm very familiar with the business. I was very familiar with Dan's convenience before they took over.
[Adam Knight]: I know that the application, Mr. President, indicated that that layout was still required by, I believe, our building department to take a look at before. Yes, we need a plot plan for the special permit through the city clerk's office. City clerk's application from the building commissioner. So that plug plan does need to be submitted to the building commissioner. We have submitted it. Yes. Everything has been submitted.
[Adam Knight]: Obviously.
[Adam Knight]: Yes. Mr. President, thank you very much. And Mr. Moki, thank you for your presentation. I think it was a rather thorough. It's my recollection that this council has appropriated funds in the past to make sure that the roof was weathertight to get it through the winter. I think we did that last winter. I think we might've done it the winter before as well, if I remember correctly. We've appropriated some funds so that we maintain that the roof is in safe water until we could get a paper like this before us so that we could go and get to work, if I recall correctly.
[Adam Knight]: And with the approval of this paper, you feel as though you'll be able to get the construction work started out there in the next, looks like, what, 30 days' time almost.
[Adam Knight]: And soup to nuts, Mr. Moki. We're looking at this project starting and how long do you think phase one will take to complete.
[Adam Knight]: We're at the close of the fiscal year. Okay, excellent. Thank you very much. I appreciate your time.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: So at this point in time, Mr. Mulkey, it would be the recommendation of the administration that we move forward to repair the roof and take further look at the seismic requirements in the state building code that might allow us to expand the building, as I understand it.
[Adam Knight]: So there's a possibility that we could expend $35,000 to $45,000 this evening for repair work to the roof that ultimately will need to be replaced in the future if the addition doesn't go as... discussed or planned?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'll reserve my comments. I think we're all understanding where we are right now and how we're going to vote. So with that point in time, I'd second Councilor Caraviello's move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I was going to say a motion to refer the matter to the Traffic Commission for review. I'm in support of it wholeheartedly. I think it's a great resolution and I thank Councilor Caraviello for putting it on.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I certainly can appreciate the ordinance, and I think that back last session, Councilor Marks came up with actually an excellent idea on a way to combat graffiti in private residences by creating a revolving graffiti removal account and having a graffiti removal team that will go out and speak with property owners who have been affected by graffiti and then, with their permission and waiver liability, be allowed to go onto the private property and remove that graffiti. I think that this is a great opportunity for us to explore further what options and opportunities we have to address this problem. I think that, you know, one of the things that Councilor Marks put together was an actual team that will go out and do it. And when we look at our DPW and some of the areas that we can improve on, I think that we might want to look at creating a permanent sign department that's responsible for the erecting of signs and the removal of graffiti in public and private places. I think that this would be a great, great place to start for us to have the discussion and to jump off on speaking on it. You know, Councilor Falco sits on the zoning and ordinance subcommittee with myself and Councilor Caraviello. And you know, I think that, We have a work product that shows that we've been able to get things done when we met and worked together. So, um, with that being said, I wholeheartedly support the ordinance. I look forward to sitting down with my colleagues on the zoning subcommittee and addressing the issue. Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, in our packets this evening, we have a letter dated September 20th, 2016 to the President and members of the Medford City Council from Stephanie M. Burke-Meyer regarding Resolution 16-662, Update on Enhancements to Communications and Relations with Business. Dear Mr. President and Councilors, in response to Resolution 1662, I would like to update the Council on the actions that have been taken to improve relations and communications between the new and existing Medford businesses and City Hall. In January of 2016, I created the position of Business and Cultural Liaison to ensure that a dedicated staff member in the Mayor's Office is always equipped and available to work directly with businesses on any and all issues brought to our attention, as well as to spearhead important initiatives that will strengthen our relationship with and promote economic development within our business community. The first priority of this position, currently held by Ali Fisk, was to immediately open a line of communication between the city and the business associations in Medford, including the Medford Chamber of Commerce. By attending numerous Chamber of Commerce government affairs meetings, as well as important membership meetings, Ali has gathered vital feedback from the businesses in an effort to elevate and evaluate business needs and ascertain ways that the city of Medford can better serve the business community. This month, my office will be releasing the Medford Business Guide, an online and print booklet designed to guide individuals through the process of opening a new business in Medford. Depending on the type of business, this guide directs individuals to appropriate departments at City Hall, describes permitting processes, and provides individuals with links to online applications and other web resources. In February and March of 2016, the Business Economic Development Transition Team conducted community meetings in Medford's five key business districts, and engaged over 250 participants who contributed ideas about desired changes, upgrades, and initiatives in these regions. The report, entitled Shaping Medford Community Conversations to Guide Our Economic Future, breaks down suggested improvements by individual business square and makes suggestions for ways the city of Medford can support economic development. In September and October, I'll return to these squares with members of the transition team to meet with businesses and constituents and underscore some of the important findings and suggestions specific to individual business districts. This will be an opportunity to further engage in a deeper dialogue with the businesses and stakeholders in the region about other important initiatives. In an effort to improve customer service at City Hall for both businesses as well as for residents, all City Hall employees have attended a mandatory customer service training, which engaged employees in important dialogue and guidance regarding best practices in customer service. We're in the process of contracting for a new phone system, which will be implemented in four to six weeks, and it will include voicemail, an efficient intercom system, and will allow City Hall to streamline its communications and better respond to important inquiries. This fall, we will be relaunching the senior work off abatement program, which will match the skills of seniors living in Medford with the needs of departments in City Hall. These individuals will provide essential support to the departments and improve the staff's ability to provide adequate customer service in a timely manner as required. One of the many job positions will be a greeter at City Hall to assist all who enter. maintaining a strong and testing relationship with the business community is of the utmost importance to my administration. Well, this letter outlines the important strides that have been taken to build these relationships over the next few months. We will continue to roll out other initiatives, maintain an open dialogue between my administration and business businesses and improve upon customer service systems that are in place here in city hall. Sincerely, mayor Stephanie and Burke.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I certainly think that we've all had discussions here behind this rail about development in the city of Medford, what direction the city of Medford's going in. what we'd like to see happen in our community, whether or not we want to remain a bedroom community, whether or not we want to be a hybrid bedroom community and a place with vibrant downtowns, or whether we want to be a full-blown extension of Somerville, really, is what it's coming into, Mr. President. So with that being said, I think that there are a number of questions that need to be answered, and I think that this would be a perfect measure to further examine and discuss at the subcommittee level. I'd like to hear from the Office of Economic Development to see what concerns they have about issuing a moratorium on building development would be. I'd like to hear from the Community Assistance Unit from the Department of Housing and Community Development at the state level to see if they can provide us with technical assistance. And we've already been working hand-in-hand with the MAPC in terms of our Safe Streets Program and some other matters that we're discussing, like the revitalization of Medford Square, Mr. President. So I certainly feel as though further discussion is warranted on this topic, and I feel as though further discussion is warranted at the subcommittee level in the Business and Economic Development Subcommittee, and I'd like to amend the motion to refer them out of there.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I appreciate you reading through that. It was rather long, but thank you very much. I think this ordinance change speaks for itself. The intention of this ordinance change would be to raise the legal age to purchase tobacco products in the city of Medford from 18 to 21 years of age, unless that individual is 18 years of age and in possession of a valid military identification card, a member of our armed services, Mr. President. 130 of the 351 cities and towns in Massachusetts have adopted a measure raising the legal age to purchase tobacco from 18 to 21. That's the equivalent to about 37 percent of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. 180 municipalities across the United States of America have adopted a measure raising the age to purchase tobacco products to 21. Massachusetts is obviously a leader with 130 of those communities laying here in our great state, but there are 50 other communities as of August 1st that have adopted this, including New York City, Kansas City, Cleveland, and even Boston, Mr. President. Two states in the union have also adopted a measure making it a statewide requirement that the legal age to purchase tobacco products would be raised from 18 to 21. Those two states are California and Hawaii, Mr. President. One of the largest states in our union, California, has taken this measure. It's a public safety issue. In 1986, in Philip Morris' annual report, Mr. President, you could read the report, and it would indicate that raising the legal minimum age for cigarette purchase to 21 could gut our key young adult market from age 17 to 20, where we sell about 25 billion cigarettes annually and enjoy a 70% market share. Mr. President, data will also say that 90% of all smokers started smoking before the age of 21, according to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health. released in 2011. And 99 percent of all smokers started smoking before age 26, according to the Surgeon General report of 2012, Mr. President. I'm putting this measure forward as an ordinance change in the interest of public safety, and I'd ask my colleagues to support it here at the City Council.
[Adam Knight]: At this point in time, Councilor Caraviello, I believe the vaping products have been addressed by way of a regulation. The Board of Health issued a vaping product regulation, and I believe that that regulation speaks to the vaping products. City ordinance does not at this point in time.
[Adam Knight]: Also, Mr. President, I'd like to add that of the 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 communities in the Mystic Valley area that is part of the task force. Medford is one of the remaining communities that has not adopted this measure. So while surrounding communities have adopted this measure, we're actually the weak link in the chain at this point in time, where individuals in other communities that have a legal age of 21 can come to Medford and purchase the cigarettes. So in an effort to work with our colleagues and our counterparts in the communities beside us, I think that this is a great initiative.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if I may. In terms of the military exemption that's included in the language here, that was something that I put in there based on feedback from individual constituents that I had spoken about that had served in the armed forces and that spoke a little bit about you know, how they started smoking at a young age in the military and how they felt as though if they were of the legal age to vote and fight that they should be old enough to make a decision to purchase cigarettes. Since that time and since some of my discussions with Ms. Busby from the task force over in the city of Melrose who helps us here in Medford, She's provided me with a number of articles and a number of documents saying that the military actually is looking to curb tobacco use among military members. They've put out a number of reports saying that those soldiers that actually smoke on a daily basis, it's having an effect on their military readiness and it's also obviously, Mr. President, having an effect on their longevity in the community after their obligations to the service of enlistment are over. With that being said, I have no problem with the language in there as it is, but if individuals have a problem with that particular portion of the language, I have no problem striking it. I think ultimately it's a public safety bill, and what we want to do here is be sure that the youth in the city of Medford aren't exposed to tobacco products at a young age so that we have a better opportunity of keeping them out of the nicotine habit. So with that being said, Mr. President, I personally don't have any problem striking that language, and it's really a matter that I'd rely on my council colleagues to provide further input. I have had some preliminary conversations with the administration, and Mayor Burke said that that was an exemption that she was certainly opposed to. She feels as though it provides an enforcement issue, and she feels as though it's kind of counterintuitive to the actual context of the resolution. So, you know, I have no problem striking it. I feel as though it might be an item that comes down to being vetoed anyway. So at this point in time, Mr. President, I think it might be in our best interest to strike the military exemption. send it over to the president to get passed, send it over to the administration to get passed if that's the wishes of the council, and then if we get some feedback from individuals that are over 18 years of age that are active and in the military, we can take another look at the ordinance. But the intent and purpose is a public health ordinance, and I think that putting that exemption in there based upon the materials that were submitted to me from the task force would prove to be counterintuitive and counterproductive, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd move to amend the paper by striking the following language. Unless said person is 18 years of age and in possession of a valid military identification card.
[Adam Knight]: I don't want to take credit where credit isn't due. Ms. Busby did all the research. I just read what she sent me in terms of the military exemption.
[Adam Knight]: I did. Thank you for your help.
[Adam Knight]: I guess my question would have been, Mr. President, but I think I have the answer to it, can the compliance checks be handled outside of the scope of the ordinance and by way of Board of Health regulation? And they can because the other inspections are. But move approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. As we're all aware, I think everybody across the Commonwealth of Massachusetts is aware, Mr. McGlynn passed away recently. The guy was just an amazing public servant, an amazing father, an amazing brother, and an amazing man. He's going to be sadly missed. Mr. President, I was very grateful to have had the opportunity to develop a friendship with him over the years, and I'm going to miss him. I know that his family is going to miss him, and I offer my further condolences to them. His track record speaks for itself. His resume speaks for itself, Mr. President. He was a person who gave of himself to the community, to the state, and to the country. and I feel as though dedicating this year's legislative session to him is warranted, and I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, as we noted earlier in the meeting, uh, the subcommittee on zoning and ordinances made up of myself along with Councilor Falco and Councilor carrot yellow. And, um, we've met on a number of times. Uh, we've met at a number of meetings, Mr. President. Uh, 512, 523, 81912, to take a look at the proposed safe zoning, the zoning amendment for the safe access to medicinal marijuana, Mr. President. And we made a series of recommendations for this committee of the whole to further entertain. The motion that came out of the subcommittee on zoning and ordinances was that the committee of the whole would further entertain this for further deliberation and discussion. Um, recommendations include, uh, vesting the special permit granting authority with the board of health, um, expanding the maximum allowable gross square footage of a facility to prevent lines from building outside, increasing the permitting fee and using the, uh, portion of the permitting fee for the programming and related materials to meet the mission of the substance abuse and outreach coordinator, um, requiring the filing of the floor plan with the city clerk, um, We examined the inclusion of C1 and C2 districts, Mr. President, but would recommend that we only allow it in industrially zoned areas. We looked at developing an overlay district versus a zoning amendment, and we figured that the zoning amendment was the way to go as opposed to establishing an overlay district. We discussed limiting the number of licenses for sale here in the community with the recreational bill coming on the ballot in November. There might be some issue with limiting the number of licenses issued for medicinal or other uses here in the community. We examined buffer zone provisions, residential buffer zone provisions from locating a facility near a residentially zoned district. We discussed banning or regulating marijuana-infused products, regulating the potency in packaging versus an outright ban. We also discussed allowing the administration as the contract negotiating authority here in the community to have the sole authority to sign a letter of non-opposition for a marijuana dispensary for medicinal purposes to come into our community. We made a recommendation of limiting the hours and days of operation from Monday through Friday, 9 a.m. to 6 p.m., not often on the weekends. We also recommend that we enable the Board of Health to be empowered to establish rules and regulations to implement the ordinance that's before us. And most importantly, that we'd hold a public information and input session out in the community so that we could receive some feedback from the residents that reside in this community as to what their thoughts and feelings are based upon the proposal that was put before us and the recommended changes that the Subcommittee on Zoning and Ordinance has made and what recommendations the Committee as a whole will make thereafter.
[Adam Knight]: In regard to the minutes underneath paper 16-624, there was an issue of payment of a legal claim. And I requested that the record reflected that the city solicitor found no conflict of interest with me voting after I gave my disclosure on the measure. I just wanted the record to reflect that clearly, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Uh, Mr. President, I actually pushed the button just to, um, raise the issue about the special permit, but you took care of that.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. I move to amend the paper to request recommendations relative to remediation if, in fact, these lead tests do come back positive from the Massachusetts Water Resource Authority.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And thank you to Jack Dempsey for his leadership and his work with the Medford High School girls softball team. Jack's dedication and hard work has certainly paid off. He had a very memorable, momentous season this year, Mr. President. They went deep into the playoffs and were contenders for the state title, however, things didn't pan out as well as we would have liked to see. The girls on the softball team certainly had a tremendous year, and I think Mr. Dempsey had a lot to do with that, Mr. President. He's been a dedicated public servant in our school system for a very long time, and he's also been a dedicated coach, mentor, and role model to the student athletes in Medford High School. And I'd like to congratulate him on this achievement. This is something that doesn't happen to coaches every day. It doesn't happen to coaches every year. It certainly is something that doesn't happen to coaches in their career. So with that being said, I think this is something that's worthy of recognition from the Medford City Council. And I'd like to thank Mr. Dempsey once again for all he does for our community.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. I think this item and the prior item go hand in hand. As many of you know, my father was a coach for a long time and he said it's easy to win games when you have great players. And he had a great player on his team. Ashley Eisner has done amazing things over her tenure as a Medford Mustang softball pitcher. And being named to the Boston Globe 2016 high school girls softball all scholastic team was really the capstone. She's going to go on and continue her career at the next level. And I wish her all the best of luck. But I'd like to thank her for her work here and her dedication as a Lady Mustang. The amount of success and attention that she's brought to the program is really unprecedented, Mr. President. The youth softball program is off the charts right now, and I think a lot of it has to do with the success of some of the older players that have gone through the program. So with that being said, congratulations to Ashley Eisner on being named an All-Scholastic. This too is an achievement that doesn't happen every day. It's not something that This is really a capstone to a great career, Mr. President, and I'm really just very, very happy for her and her family to see the fruits of her labor pay off.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think when we all think back to our times as students in elementary school or grade school or middle school and high school, you remember some teachers that had an impact on your life. And I first met Miss King at the time when I was a student in seventh grade. And we were at the Brooks Hobbs Elementary School, and Ms. King was my math teacher. And I just really think back to all that she did to help me achieve and succeed and to challenge me, Mr. President. And when I think back on those teachers that really helped make me the person that I am today, she's one of those that come to mind, along with people like Jack McDevitt and John McAdam and Buddy Kelly and Steve Maskell. But Ms. Murata was certainly one of the first people I met as a teacher that really inspired me to do more. And I can't thank her enough for her service to the community here, to the students in Medford, and to her dedication going above and beyond the call of duty. And I think that she warrants a little bit of recognition based upon her many, many years of service, Mr. President. And I'd ask my council colleagues to support this measure.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, as I look at the agenda, I see Councilor Marks has a similar resolution congratulating Mr. Volpe. And I defer to Councilor Marks as the senior member. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight? I don't think anybody could put it better than that, Mr. President. Mr. Volpe has been a dedicated and committed member of the commission. He's kept this council and members of the council informed of the goings on just as required by his appointment. And I think we can all see the transformation of Mr. Volpe's vision, and that of Mr. Buckley, actually, who he worked alongside with as members of the Whole Milk Commission to bring us to where we are today. So I'd like to thank him for his service. Cosmo's been around a long time, and I hope he enjoys his retirement.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think it's safe to say that the Jenkins family is legendary in the city of Medford, especially in the Barry Park area. Alan served with distinction as a member of the Medford Fire Department. And he recently passed away due to some complications from, I believe, exposure to cancer, Mr. President. And as we spoke with the chief of police — I mean, the chief of fire during our budget debates, he said that one of the leading killers of firefighters and retired firefighters is actual exposure to cancer after retirement. So, I commend the fire chief for his initiative to begin to try to study that a little bit harder and put some safeguards in place. However, that does nothing to help the Jenkins family, Mr. President. And the Jenkins family is going to sorely miss Alan. I know I am. I know many of the members down at the Medford Firefighters Club will as well. And I'd just really like to extend my condolences to his family on his recent passing, because he was a great guy, and it will be sadly missed.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd like to commend the mayor for bringing this paper forward. I know this is probably on the heels of one of Councilor Caraviello's resolutions to petition the State Board of Library Commissioners for some funding to see what type of work we can do to upgrade and renovate our library. This is a paper that I'm wholeheartedly in support of, but whereas it's an appropriation of $135,000, I think it might be nice to have Ms. Kerr come up and give us a little bit of a synopsis to back up this letter a little bit, Mr. President. But ultimately, it sounds like we're making steps in the right direction to fully fund our library and bring it up to a state-of-the-art facility.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the summer's almost over. I think we better accept this donation before Parks and Recreation is ended for the season. I certainly commend East Cambridge Savings Bank on their ongoing commitment to the youth of our community in helping subsidize our ability to provide recreational services to the youth of our community, Mr. President. This is something that I've supported in the past and I'll continue to support. I'd like to thank them for the free money and thank you for being a great neighbor, but I think it's certainly a great gesture and I support it wholeheartedly and I move for approval and ask my colleagues to support it as well and ask for a roll call vote.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe that the pond falls under the jurisdiction of the Parks Board and the pool, I mean the pond rules and regulations are established by the Parks Board or through the administration and the Parks Board's meeting this evening.
[Adam Knight]: So please, Scott. I don't think that the mayor is declaring Wrights Pond a pool. I think what the mayor is doing is adopting a pool safety standard because there is no pool safety standard for freshwater bathing areas. So what the mayor is doing is adopting a ratio of one lifeguard per 25 swimmers. If there's four lifeguards, 100 people can go in the water is my understanding and my reading of this.
[Adam Knight]: And a pool— No, she's adopting—at the municipal level, she's adopting safety standards.
[Adam Knight]: She's adopting safety standards, and she's using CMR—105 CMR 435 as the basis or as the mirroring language. I mean, I think right now what's taking place is there was no safety standard in place for the number of swimmers that are in the water and the ratio for swimmers to lifeguards. The mayor has looked at this and said it's a safety issue, and she's implemented a safety standard. That's the way that I'm reading this and I'm looking at this. Now, I can certainly understand people being frustrated and not being able to access the pond and enjoy the pond in the fashion that they see fit, but I think that people are going to enjoy it a lot less if someone drowns in the pond and dies. So, you know, I certainly have concerns over the implementation. But in terms of the rationale, the policy change focuses on the overall safety of bathers and permits lifeguards to ensure the safety of all persons in the swimming area. If this is the policy that they have adopted and this is the reason that they have adopted it, I certainly have no problem with adopting strong public safety policies so that people don't die in the pond, Mr. President. I certainly have no problem with that. Do I have a problem with the way it was communicated and maybe the way it is implemented and the way maybe it is handled? Yes, absolutely. Do we need someone with a softer touch up there? Yes, maybe. Maybe we do. I think based on the conversations that we are hearing, yes, we do. But ultimately, it's a communication issue, I think, more or less than a bad policy. And I think when we have the Director of the Board of Health here endorsing the policy that's in place and saying this is why it's in place, because there's no safety standard at a freshwater bathing pond, but there are safety standards for ratios for lifeguards to swim at a pool, this is a basis. I think the mayor is saying because there is a rope that clearly delineates the swimming area, Wright's Pond is delineated as to where you can swim, just like a pool is delineated where you can swim. You can't go on the other side of the ropes and swim at Wright's Pond. So they're saying this is the area, this is what's considered the pool or the swimmable area at the pond. So they've adopted safety standards to reflect what they feel is what's going to keep the people and the patrons there the safest so they can enjoy it. I don't necessarily have a problem with adopting safety standards, Mr. President. I think we've all behind this rail set at one time or another. Our number one job is to keep people in this community safe. If we're going to provide an amenity, we need to make sure that it's safely provided. So I don't have a problem with that. I do have a problem with the communication and with the way that it's been delivered in the rollout, and it probably should have happened like three months before the pool opened, and everybody should have probably got something in the mail or something with their permit when they signed up. That I do have a problem with. I have a problem with the communication, but I don't have a problem with adopting a safety standard to make sure that everybody who utilizes the pool is going to be safe. Thank you, Councilor. Ma'am?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And, Ms.—I always butcher it, How are you doing today? Thank you very much for coming. How much is it going to cost to extend the contract?
[Adam Knight]: Going forward, or is this including going back six years?
[Adam Knight]: Going forward. So how much have we spent already with Brown and Caldwell, going back to 2000 and what looks like? Nine. Nine?
[Adam Knight]: And do you see any benefits in doing a shorter term of a contract, a 1-year contract, as opposed to a 2-year or a 3-year going forward? I mean, it seems like we have had them on the hook now for quite a bit of time, and they have certainly been receiving some extensive amount of funds. Do we think it is in the best interest of the city to tie them up for another 3 years? And 9 years with the same company and a contract seems to be a little long.
[Adam Knight]: And is there a reason why a contract of this size wouldn't have to go out to bid, like most other contracts?
[Adam Knight]: I have a question for the solicitor, too, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Um, if it's been used for a purpose that's outside the ordinances of both the city of Medford and the ordinances established by the parks department in violation thereof, but then to say that there are very few problems,
[Adam Knight]: Because I don't think that you were down there enforcing off-leash hours by accident. I think you got a phone call, and that's why you were down there at that point.
[Adam Knight]: So there are some neighbors that are complaining about the off-leash use down there, and there are some people that are utilizing the park for off-leash use, but there are people that are abutting the property that are opposed to it. Is that what I'm understanding?
[Adam Knight]: Um, I do. That was my point of information.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Chair recognizes Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. Um, at the beginning of a solicitor Runley's presentation, he said there are two ordinances that need to be changed. So the first ordinance would be the city council's ordinance, which says that off leash dogs are prohibited citywide. Then he also said that there's a parks department ordinance. I'd like the solicitor to come up and explain this a little bit further. because the way I'm looking at it is we could pass this piece of legislation tonight, and it goes forward, and it goes to the Parks Department, and they say, so what? We have the authority to determine whether or not we're gonna allow dogs in our parks off-leash or not. So I'd just like a little clarification from the solicitor if that's.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, has the park board been consulted at all?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And I certainly concur with both Councilor Longo and Councilor Caraviello. I think this needs to be looked at. I think that we can reach a compromise or a balance. And I would certainly support sending the matter to the Parks Board. However, I'd like to have a joint public hearing with the Council and the Parks Board on the topic. If, in fact, there are two ordinances that need to be changed and we change one and they don't, then it's moved. If we don't change it, they can't move forward and change theirs. It is moved. So I think that the best course would be to put everybody in a room together, sit down and have a joint public hearing where people can come up and express their concerns. The President. Public meeting? Mr. Zients. A public meeting or a public hearing where people can express their opposition or support of the initiative and why. And then we can sit down and, you know, we can deliberate as our individual bodies as to what our concerns are and then make some recommendations back and forth and maybe come up with a medium, a happy ground.
[Adam Knight]: So that's what I would like to propose, Mr. President, by way of an amendment to the councilor's referral to the Parks Commission. I think it's a great idea to send it to the Parks Board. Certainly, that's something that I was going to vote in favor of. I just think that we do have a lot of questions and a lot of concerns, and we want to bring the neighbors and the butters in. Let's do it all together and all at once.
[Adam Knight]: The matter was tabled on January 7th, and the councillor moved to bring the matter off the table. So it wasn't like it's filed under suspension. I understand where you're coming from, councillor. I mean, it's 11 o'clock at night, and it's an issue that's going to affect 17,000 households in the community.
[Adam Knight]: But in terms of, you know what I mean, it wasn't like he filed a paper under suspension and waited until the bail indoctrinates to pull it out.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This item was an item that came up during our budget deliberations. It was a wage equality issue. We took a look at what the assistant city solicitor was making and compared that to other communities and recognized that she was making a significantly less amount of money in an effort to bring parity to the position. The mayor had presented an ordinance change reclassifying the position. The council supported it at its first reading. It was duly advertised in the Medford transcript and today it's eligible for its third reading. I'd move for approval, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the matter has been discussed and deliberated at the subcommittee level. Councilor Scarpelli's put a lot of work, a lot of time, a lot of effort into this. I respect his wishes and I think that if he has given his word to certain individuals and certain aspects of this matter would be vetted and looked at appropriately that we should allow that opportunity. Um, that coupled with the fact that the disability community has still expressed, uh, quite a bit of interest in maintaining this bus stop at this current position. And the council really hasn't had a meeting, a hearing or anything else with the individuals that would be affected thereof. I think that it's a little bit premature enough for us to take this vote. And as such, I'd be voting in the negative.
[Adam Knight]: I think we can also take the opportunity to reach out to Mr. Fielding who's been assigned and I'm sure that you've had multiple conversations with him as well, and I'm sure that the response that they've been giving is, well, move it to wherever you want, just tell us where you want to put it. But that doesn't necessarily guarantee that the bus is going to stop where you put the new stop either. So I think that there are a little bit more.
[Adam Knight]: It's my understanding, I spoke with Mr. Glowner earlier last week, and it was my understanding he was gonna be on vacation, I believe, a family vacation this week, if I'm not mistaken.
[Adam Knight]: Well, as the author of the motion, I think I have the authority to... I think he can withdraw because we didn't take a vote. He can withdraw 22. He can withdraw 22 because we didn't take a vote.
[Adam Knight]: Point of clarification, Mr. President, I have a question.
[Adam Knight]: So it's my understanding by Councilor Marks withdrawing a section 22 motion that he is now moving to adopt the pilot provisions that are included in that resolution to expand to those five or six events that were going to be taking place this summer to allow for the mobile food trucks to service those events while we go back and do our homework.
[Adam Knight]: I support that wholeheartedly, Mr. President, and I thank the councilor for his efforts in rescinding his vote, his motion.
[Adam Knight]: Aye.
[Adam Knight]: So the ordinance is not adopted. The pilot program is extended beyond the farmer's market to those other entities that were outlined in the cover letter by the mayor.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I find those records to be in order after review and I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. I'd ask how this resolution differs from the actual standard that's in place currently.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if the city solicitor has a moment to answer this question, the resolution says notice is sent to all people within a 300-foot radius. It's my understanding that presently with the term of butter, it's property owner versus a renter or a person that would be living.
[Adam Knight]: Because it's from the assessor's database of taxpayers.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. Solicitor. Mr. President, I'd like to amend the paper to strike the word all people and replace with all property owners.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This is an issue that I think we're all rather familiar with. We've all been experiencing the noise in one fashion or another. I honestly have made several inquiries into this, and it's a very interesting situation, Mr. President. Up until very recently, the flight patterns that were being used were based on the same technology that was used during World War II. I spoke with a gentleman by the name of Stephen Bolognese. He's an attorney, and he's one of the premier aviation experts here in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. And he explained to me that the way that planes used to fly was through a beacon system, and it was the same technology that was used in World War II. In the late 1990s, the federal government adopted a push towards using GPS-monitored flying control systems, Mr. President. And the reason they did that is because about 80 percent of the airspace wasn't being utilized under the post-World War II process. So I think that this is going to get worse before it gets better. But the mayor has taken affirmative steps and steps that I'm very pleased with. She's appointed attorney Leonard Gleona to the Massport Advisory Council to represent the city of Medford, Mr. President. And in my conversations with Mr. Gleona, he's already informed me that he's been to at least two meetings over there at Massport. And he's also been in contact with our state delegation to ask for some assistance where they have some funding responsibilities with the Massachusetts Port Authority. So with that being said, I certainly appreciate the work that Mr. Glaman has done. I think he's a great choice for the job and he's more than capable of helping the city of Medford address this issue and this concern. I support the resolution that the councilor has put forward and I look forward to hearing Mr. Glaman's response.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President. Mr. President, a motion to amend the paper before us in the second to last paragraph and the second to last sentence. We'd like to strike the word superintendent of the office of inspectional services and replace that with the building inspector. We also have, uh, an amendment that I'd like to propose. Mr. President, uh, it would read section point, uh, section seven dash one, five, five violations. I'd like to strike section seven dash one, five, five, and replace that with two six dash four or five. Mr. President, as amended by councilor night, Mr. President, this is an excellent measure that's brought forward by the mayor. Um, this is a piece of legislation that mirrors that, uh, that was being discussed in the subcommittee of zoning and ordinances. that came off the heels of a council resolution that was passed to establish what would be called a university accountability ordinance. In reading the language in this document here, It mirrors the language of the City of Boston's University Accountability Ordinance as well as that of the City of Somerville. It seems to have worked in those communities rather well, Mr. President. In my review of the matter, you know, it's virtually identical to those two other pieces of legislations in neighboring communities with the exception of some housekeeping matters that would make it reflective for Medford as opposed to Boston or Somerville or any other community for that matter. But this is a measure that I wholeheartedly support, 110%, Mr. President. I'd move for approval on it, and I'd ask that the body here support this measure and that the vote be taken by a call of the yeas and nays.
[Adam Knight]: I believe the paper is already lying in the zoning and ordinance subcommittee right now, and we did have one meeting on it previously, just in terms of procedural history of the paper.
[Adam Knight]: I file the resolution, I attach language. The same concerns that you raised that night, that you're raising tonight were raised that night. The matter was sent to subcommittee. The subcommittee met on two or three occasions at this point in time to take up this paper as well as other papers. We discussed the paper not in its full length or entirety. The language that was submitted by the administration mirrored the exact language that I was looking at when I was putting it together. as the sponsor of the resolution and the proposed ordinance change. So I can understand where you're coming from, and I'm sure you can understand where I'm coming from, and I'm very happy to see the language be pretty much virtually the exact same language that I was proposing at the subcommittee level. However, I feel as though this is a great measure, Councilor. I don't want to stop you further. I just wanted to give you procedural history as to where we were and where it came from. But I put a measure forward. voted to put it into subcommittee to draft something. Something was drafted. The vetting process was ongoing. The paper was never reported out of committee in the interim. The administration has put an identical paper forward.
[Adam Knight]: My concern is that it does keep moving forward, Mr. President. I think Councilor Lungo said it best. It's been eight years in the making. We've had no proposed legislation that's been before the body. Now we do. I took a shot at it. I put some proposed legislation together. I sent it into our subcommittee for review and for vetting. I'd be willing to withdraw my motion.
[Adam Knight]: Let me finish what I was going to say.
[Adam Knight]: What I'm saying is this, what I'm saying is I'd be happy to withdraw my motion, but whereas the zoning and ordinance subcommittee has already met on it, I think it would make sense that it would remain in that subcommittee.
[Adam Knight]: safe access to medicinal marijuana facilities.
[Adam Knight]: Maybe you guys are maybe overworked and underpaid.
[Adam Knight]: I have a motion for approval on the floor, Mr. President. I have no problem withdrawing that motion. If somebody else wants it to go forward, then they can make the motion. But I made the motion right out of the gate because it was something that I feel passionate about that I think it's a piece of legislation.
[Adam Knight]: Right. I made the motion right when I spoke, and I spoke first. So I'm saying I made the motion right out of the gate. I'll withdraw my motion and let everybody else say what they think about it. I have no problem with that.
[Adam Knight]: Which paper are we taking off the table, Mr. President? I think maybe the budget might be a good one to take up off the table at this point in time.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. Before we walked into our meeting this afternoon at 7 p.m., there was a Zoning Board of Appeals meeting going on. And one of the items in discussion was the development of a property on Golden Ave. The Zoning Board of Appeals has purview on that. However, there were some individuals that resided on Golden Ave that did have some concerns about the increase in volume of heavy trucking up their street. Golden Ave is a notorious cut through street. I think we've all seen people take a right-hand turn on Mystic Ave from Harvard and then their shop left at Enterprise Towing up Golden Ave and then they keep going all the way up. And I think for those who didn't know the shortcut, I just told them. how to do it, but ultimately, Mr. President, the road's seeing a large amount of increase in traffic, especially in heavy trucks. Heavy trucking is prohibited on the street, so I'm asking that the administration take the appropriate steps.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, upon the grand opening of McNally Park, I put a resolution in requesting that a crosswalk be erected so that residents who would like to walk to the park would be able to cross safely because the nearest crosswalk is either at the foot of Forrest and Salem or at Governors Lawrence and Forrest, Mr. President, so this would make it closer to the park.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. In early 2015, this council appropriated about $1.4 million in what was called the Community Improvement Initiative, and included in that was some funds to make structurally sound a retaining wall that had collapsed on a private residence between Gaston and Morgan Street, Mr. President. And there was some discussion about whether or not the property would be leaned if this construction work took place, and there was some confirmation that the property would be I'd ask the administration for an update, as I've gotten a number of inquiries from neighbours and residents about the property, concerned about the structure and about the safety thereof.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. I'd like to ask the Director of Finance to come up and give a brief overview of the budget and what it entails. The Mayor's budget statement might be sufficient.
[Adam Knight]: So now the budget's before us. Councilor Knight, you still have the floor. Mr. President, I think it might be nice if we extend the same opportunity to the superintendent to give us a brief rundown of his budget as well.
[Adam Knight]: I'm more or less Mr. Belson. I figured it might be good to just give a brief breakdown of the highlights in the budget for those of us that are here for the first time. I certainly can appreciate the work that you do. It's quite a voluminous document.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to echo your sentiments, Mr. President. I think Mr. Belson and his team did a wonderful job putting this budget together. It's a strong school department budget. I feel as though they've done a great job meeting all state and federal mandates, maintaining small class sizes of 20 students or less, expanding vocational opportunities in engineering and robotics. business, technology, biotech, the environment, emergency response, ems, Mr. President, cooperative education opportunities have expanded. We're going to see a multimedia program up there. We've seen the opportunity to integrate medford high school students and medford vocational high school, vocational technical high school students in the same programming, which is something that wasn't in place before with that brick wall that was between the two schools that no one could climb over has been broken down, Mr. President, and we're seeing students that are exploring opportunities that they didn't have in the past. We look at the budget. It also funds a new reading and literacy program, a new mathematics program at the elementary level, expands after school programs, and it actually allows for the creation of new before school programs. We have three full-time elementary aides that are going to be coming in at the Roberts, and we still maintain a whole student focus, which is something that I think is very important. Mr. President, this, you know, budget in the school side makes a commitment to technology, and we've also seen school security improvements, increases in personnel and equipment there, which is something that this council's certainly expressed concern over. So I'd like to thank Superintendent Belson for his work and that of the school committee as well on this document. I think it's a well-prepared document and I feel as though it's something I'm comfortable supporting today.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. I do believe we got our budget books before the school committee finished their deliberations. And we also had met prior to the completion of their deliberations. Is that not correct?
[Adam Knight]: That requires a two-third roll call vote to end all debate, Mr. President. I'm sorry? Requires a two-third roll call vote to end all debate.
[Adam Knight]: It requires a two-thirds, yes.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Marks has some comments that he'd like to add relative to the budget deliberation.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to take paper 16568 off the table, please.
[Adam Knight]: Is there a motion? Mr. President, it's my understanding that these transfers are required to be made so that there are no accounts in deficit or surplus at the end of the fiscal year, and it's required by municipal finance law, as presented by Ms. Baker last meeting. As such, I would move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: On the motion by Vice President Lagucurne, Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I too had a conversation with Mr. Ryan Haywood relative to this very same matter. And he and I sat down and he pointed out what sections of the metric code of ordinances he was referring to. Whether this is a matter that would be a change in our city ordinances, I'd recommend that the matter be referred to our zoning and ordinance subcommittee for a draft piece of paper that can be put together for the council to review.
[Adam Knight]: We can have the solicitor's input at that point as well, I think. He's always more than willing to help out with that stuff. But it seemed very remedial, Mr. President. It was a matter of crossing out six months and replacing it with the appropriate figure that we deem is proper at this point in time as a body. Thank you. So, on that motion, Madam Vice President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I think this is a pretty self-explanatory resolution. It came out of our budget meetings two Saturdays ago when the city engineer explained to us that this is a process and a procedure and a policy in other communities, and it's been met with success, Mr. President. I think it'll allow us the opportunity to identify the trench work that's being done by what public utility, and then we'll be able to hold them accountable. If neighbors have a concern or a question, they can go out and look at the trench identification number. The trench identification plates are coded by color so that you know what type of utility it is, whether it's electricity or water, and it allows a little bit easier quality of life issues in public service, Mr. President. So I think that this is a good measure. I also believe that it can be done at little or no cost to the taxpayer. So I'd ask my colleagues to support it, and I move for approval. On the motion approved by Councilor Knight, seconded by Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. One thing I noticed when I drive down the streets of our city is that we have some beautiful parks, some very large parks that take up quite a bit of acreage. But quite frequently, we don't see anybody utilizing them. Quite frequently, we don't see anybody there. And I think that part of that has to do with the fact that we don't have diversified options for the residents of this community to participate in. And I think some of these items are low-cost items, like a horseshoe pit or a bocce court or a shuffleboard court, Mr. President, that may bring people to our parks to utilize our open recreational space. I think that it's important that we provide opportunities for the members of our community, children and adults alike. to utilize these public open spaces, Mr. President. And I also think it's important with the discussions that we have here going on with childhood obesity and addiction that we provide opportunities for our community to utilize the services and amenities that we have in place. I'd ask my colleagues to support the resolution. I'd ask for it to be taken in a roll call vote, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. I certainly have no objection to the amendments that were made. I think Councilor Marksley's amendment is a great idea and it made me think about something that he brought up several months ago relative to graffiti walls where in certain areas and communities they put up graffiti walls and they allow people to write graffiti on them to focus their energies and efforts on that site as opposed to on other pieces of property. And I think that that's just a perfect example of how that could come into play. It takes a village, Mr. President. I think the more heads that are at the table, the more minds that get together to see what offerings we can extend to our community to ensure that our parks are operating in the capacity is going to be helpful and it's going to improve our quality of life. So I certainly have no problem with any of the amendments that were made, Mr. President. I'd move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President, I've gotten a number of calls and complaints, and I actually was walking down the Arlington Street area just a couple of days ago, and several residents in the area have requested that we see more visible enforcement of the posted speed limits. I don't think this is a problem that's exclusive to Arlington Street. I think this is something that's citywide, and I think we could all probably sit here and amend this paper over and over and over again to include all, I don't know, 100 plus miles of street here in the city of Medford. However, there is a need down there, Mr. President, and I've been contacted by individuals in the neighborhood that would like to see some increased visibility, and I am asking for it. So, with that being said, I'd ask that the council move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President. Thank you very much. If anybody's familiar with the area, Lincoln Road would run from Lawrence Road up to Pilgrim Road, and there is a trench that extends probably that whole length, as well as a trench that extends halfway down Crocker Road, Mr. President. And they're doing some infrastructure repairs up there, which is all well and good. However, the work's been going on for an extended period of time. There's dirt and debris and sand and dust all over the vehicles. And in a period of time where the weather is finally getting nice, individuals in this neighborhood are having a difficult time opening their windows during the weekends, Mr. President. Because come Friday around 3 o'clock, the construction crews pack up in their trucks and they drive away, but they leave some pipes, and they leave some bobcats, and they leave some big piles of dirt on the side of the road, Mr. President. This is a dense residential neighborhood with very small sidewalks, and it's really becoming a quality of life issue, Mr. President. I'd ask that the city administration take the appropriate steps to have the public utility contractor beautify the area while the construction work is going on. We already know that we're going to ask them to leave it in the same pristine condition that it was in before they came here, Mr. President. But I think it's an issue that needs to be addressed. Neighbors are complaining the neighborhood looks atrocious with the amount of dust and dirt debris that's on the road. Something that needs to be done is the least that the contractor could do based upon the disruption that they're causing the residents in the neighborhood.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Ms. Baker, thank you very much for your work on this budget and for preparing this document. Are there any other accounts other than those listed on this list that are in deficit?
[Adam Knight]: These are all the accounts that have a deficit.
[Adam Knight]: Are there any other accounts that have a surplus in them other than these? Oh, sure. Do you know offhand what the figure is for that surplus? Less than $1.1 million?
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, the total amount of a surplus account minus one, if you'd like us to translate it.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, this site is actually outside the jurisdiction of our community. However, I believe it does lie on the Somerville and Ireland, I mean the Medford and Arlington line. So I'd ask that DCR be stricken from the resolution and we replace that with our state delegation, Representative Garvely and Senator Jalen.
[Adam Knight]: I'm confused about what's going on. So is papal 16562 now being stopped and papal 16561 being started? I'm confused about what's going on here right now.
[Adam Knight]: Is that what?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, so you have your paper that's still, you want removed from the table then?
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Madam President, Mr. Reed, thank you very much for your well thought out comments. However, the fact of the matter is this, Madam President, the Medford City Council isn't the personnel department for Medford City Hall and the Medford City Council is not the procurement office for Medford City Hall. So we don't have the ability, even if we wanted to, to hire an employee in the engineering office, nor would we have the ability to issue an RFP for a contract that's required under the public bid laws in order to get a contract that'll work for the city, Madam President. So as such, I can certainly appreciate where the gentleman's coming from, but it's really a matter that's outside council purview. It's really a matter that the council has no ability to effectuate any change on in terms of our vested powers, Madam President. So as such, I'd move that the matter be received and placed on file.
[Adam Knight]: Remark. My rule would be that the Medford city council is the legislative body of the city of Medford. The administration is the executive name and address for the record.
[Adam Knight]: The paper's a personnel issue, not a procurement issue. I'm not going to do anything as far as the matter before us.
[Adam Knight]: We're going to be employed as a contractor. Anything over $10,000 must be subject to public bid law.
[Adam Knight]: I believe the question that was asked to the superintendent was how many students are enrolled in Medford high school, fy15, fy16, fy14, fy15. I believe the superintendent said he doesn't have those figures offhand. However, it's about flat. 4,600 is the estimate that I would give, I believe was the answer that he gave to that question, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe Councilor Scarpelli, at a subcommittee meeting, asked whether or not the City of Medford School Department was in all aspects of compliance with state law. I believe that the response that the superintendent of schools gave us was yes, the City of Medford school department is in compliance with all aspects of state law, including reporting requirements.
[Adam Knight]: Ultimately, Mr. President, this paper started out as a matter related to Evans Street and the paving thereof. And there was some talk that the Evans Street project wasn't going to get done, that it wasn't going to go out to bid, so on and so forth. So when that information was brought to my attention, I picked up the telephone and I spoke with Mark Shea over in the engineering division. And I'd like to just briefly read an email that he sent back to me. My question was, Mark, what's going on with Evans Street? It's my understanding that the project's not going to go forward and the bids have been rejected. Mr. Knight, I'm unaware of that news. It's my understanding that the contract review is complete and has been approved for award. The procurement office will be issuing an award letter. When received, the contractor needs to put together the required paperwork, bonds, insurance, construction schedules, et cetera. They need to sign the paperwork and return the contract to the city. And after these requirements are complete, the city will sign the contract, allowing the contractor to start the work. This project may take more than a couple of weeks, but once you receive the work schedule, we will pass this information along to you. Also, if you'd like to review the copies of the contractors' bid sheets, you can pick them up in the procurement office. They are kept on file there. I believe four contractors submitted a bid for the Water Works contract. Signed, Mark Shea, Assistant City Engineer, City Hall, Room 300, 85 George B. Esset Drive, Medford, Mass., Mr. President. So it appears to me that the process of the reconstruction of the water infrastructure on Evans Street is still undergoing. It's also apparent to me, Mr. President, based on that correspondence from the engineering department, that there taking the affirmative steps to make sure that this gets done in fast track. So with that being said, that was just for the record, Mr. President, so that we could get back to the item that was on topic and to provide the most up-to-date information. That was an email from Mr. Shea at, oh, about 3.30 this afternoon. Upon receipt of that email, I picked up the telephone and I spoke with Brian Cairns, Mr. President. And Mr. Cairns also got back to me, and Mr. Cairns' exact words to me were, and I wrote them down because I wanted to be sure I wasn't misquoting him this evening, was, The water main and service is then repaved. That is going forward. Procurement will be issuing an award letter. Then the contract is signed. It's all on schedule. So it's apparent to me, Mr. President, that this matter is going to be moving forward. It might not be in the schedule that we all would like to see it on, but it is on a schedule. And it's my hope and my wish and my desire that this gets done before the close of this construction season. And as such, I will continue to pick up the phone and continue to contact the individuals that are responsible for ensuring that this project goes out to bid appropriately and the construction work starts. But I did want to be sure that I shared that with the neighborhood, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I addressed the clarifications that I needed to be addressed. I find the records in order and I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to suspend the rules to take paper number 16546 and paper number 16547 out of order.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. There's a motion, a paper that's before this council this evening to address a pay equity gap between the Assistant City Solicitor's position and the City Solicitor's position. This paper that's before the council would upgrade the position of the City Solicitor from a CAF 10 to a CAF 12.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. This is a reappointment. Mr. Flynn has served as the chairperson of the Licensing Commission for a number of years. Recently, we've seen a new member appointed that hasn't served on the Licensing Commission before that this council approved, one Dean Bruno. I believe that Mr. Flynn's experience in his background and working in this position would be an absolute asset to the city. And I move for approval, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the last three years that I've been on the council, this group has come by and they've asked for the opportunity to turn the town teal. And one of the requests that I've continually made was that I'd like a little ribbon for my- We will have the ribbons. For my lamp here and for my colleagues on the council as well.
[Adam Knight]: Excellent, excellent. Mr. President, move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: I certainly think that Councilor Caraviello is.
[Adam Knight]: Freddie, give her the floor either one way or the other when we get to the end of it.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And, um, I certainly feel as though, uh, Councilor Caraviello's recommendation and his motion, uh, to consult with an attorney to see whether or not we have a case is prudent course. And, um, I'll certainly be supporting that motion this evening, Mr. President. Um, personally, I have a very different vision for the local street area. Um, I'm certainly not crazy about this large scale residential development and I'm really not overly crazy about Wegmans coming in there either, Mr. President. I think we have an opportunity to really take a look at putting in some mixed-use development at that location that's real, that has office space, that has commercial space, that has residential opportunities that are more in scale with the neighborhood, but that also will allow us an opportunity to really make a commitment to bringing affordable housing to our city, Mr. President. So, with that being said, I don't think that this is a good project. I stated my reasons why last week. You know, traffic impact, impact on our public schools, impact on our infrastructure, and pretty much everything that everybody said here this evening. I mean, I think we're all on the same page. Councilor Longo-Curran's right about that. We are all on the same page. We feel as though this development is too large-scale. We feel as though this development's not going to have a great impact on the quality of life and the residents in the neighbourhood that are there and that are existing. moving forward and taking a look at whether or not we have a case, Mr. President, to determine whether or not we should appeal this is certainly the prudent course of action. So with that being said, I will be supporting Councilor Caraviello's motion. You know, I think that we can really make a commitment to putting mixed-use development down there. I've filed resolutions in the past to take a look at an overlay district or a mixed-use district down there with a commitment to affordable housing, and I'll continue to take a look at that stuff, Mr. President. But it can't get done without the help and the work and the cooperation from the developers that are involved. And quite frankly, I feel as though these developers are coming into our city and they're trying to really maximize their potential to earn and not taking into consideration the factors that affect us and our quality of life and our everyday livelihood, Mr. President. So, with that being said, I certainly oppose the project in its current state and I certainly support Councilor Caraviello's motion to consult with an attorney. And I move for approval on that motion, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information. Our actions are going to be contingent upon whether or not we can actually get in touch with somebody and get a list of people that are willing to actually review the case and take a look at the case. Isn't that correct?
[Adam Knight]: OK. All right. I was a little confused by the direction that we were going.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd even be willing to entertain an ad hoc committee being established to go through that process and present it to the council at some point in time with the decision-making processes. But that's at a later date, you know what I mean? Obviously, we're going to get a list of lawyers. We've got to pick a lawyer.
[Adam Knight]: 16-Councilor Knight. Take a moment to withdraw paper 16548 and paper 16549 at this moment in time. I'll refile them when the time is proper.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, a motion to table last week's records once again.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President appears that everything's in order here. I'd move for approval of the paper.
[Adam Knight]: have a determination as to whether or not they need a special license for extended hours at this point in time?
[Adam Knight]: I don't feel so comfortable.
[Adam Knight]: license and allowed the gentleman to come back and petition for extended hours at a later date. Provided.
[Adam Knight]: If you look at the petition, it says 24-7.
[Adam Knight]: The petition says 24-7. So my concern would be that we're approving it for 24 seven, but he may have a requirement to go through a special permit as well. Okay.
[Adam Knight]: Aye.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, we're under suspension. Can we table item number 16533 until our budget discussions and budget hearings are complete?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to revert back to the regular order of business.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think this is a great resolution. It's something that I'm going to be supporting. I hope the gentleman doesn't mind if I amend it to request the same at the foot of Forest Street at Salem with a right turn onto Forest Street and a left turn onto Main as well as the arrow that goes straight up High Street because I see a lot of confusion in front of Modern Pastry in that area as well. But I think it's a great resolution and it's certainly something that I support wholeheartedly, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. I'm seeing here in the paperwork that was submitted by the code enforcement officer that an auto establishment in the C2 zone requires a special permit from the city council. That was the matter that these people are here before us for, but he also made a recommendation that the parking area associated with the business be limited. And I think that that's what Councilor Caraviello is trying to implement at this point in time. However, I think that it's also important that they produce to this council a copy of their parking plan so that we can actually see.
[Adam Knight]: Well, I know, but I meant by that.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I, too, am opposed to the project. I feel as though the scope is far too large. The impact that it's going to have on traffic, the potential impact it could have on our public schools, the certain impact that it's going to have on the quality of life of the surrounding neighborhood, as well as the lack of affordable units certainly make this a project that I feel as though something that I can't personally support. However, this matter is not something that's before the council. And I, for one, would certainly support and stand away from trying to influence unduly the decision that the Zoning Board of Appeals makes. However, the matter that's before this council doesn't ask the Zoning Board of Appeals to oppose the project or to approve the project. The matter asks for the Zoning Board of Appeals to delay its decision until more community input can be made. And that's something, Mr. President, that I can certainly support. I feel as though that the Zoning Board of Appeals should operate free from or under influence, but I also feel as though The decisions that they're making have a direct and significant impact on the quality of life of the residents in this community. One thing that I haven't heard any of my colleagues talk about is, with an addition of 790 units, there's going to be a need to provide additional city services. And although we've seen an improvement in the way we've been providing services in recent weeks, in recent months, I don't think we have the capacity to deal with that as well right now. The impact that it's going to have on our actual underground and aboveground infrastructure, Mr. President, is something that's going to have to be looked at a little bit more. with scrutiny. So for those reasons, Mr. President, I am going to be in support of this resolution, asking that the Zoning Board of Appeals delays this decision until a public hearing can be heard.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, thank you. I'd like to further amend the paper as well. Um, I'd like to ask that the zoning administrator report back to the city council as to what the current zoning is at the site, what the conforming uses are.
[Adam Knight]: How the property is now zoned and... How the property is now zoned and what the conforming uses are currently based upon a zoning table.
[Adam Knight]: I can say that the building on the corner of Winthrop Street and High Street has 116 units in it.
[Adam Knight]: That was one of his buildings, and I think it's a... You think it's a... There's 116 units on the corner of Winthrop and High at that building. And that's just in one building. So, if it's a... The scope of that's six times the size.
[Adam Knight]: On that motion, Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I think we discussed this matter just a few weeks ago, and I think this was something that we were all on the same page We're sitting here, we're asking our school department to conserve water. We're establishing a tiered system to encourage our residents to conserve water. But we're not monitoring our own intake. And I think what's good for the goose should be good for the gander. And I certainly support Councilor Marksley's resolution wholeheartedly, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you both for being here this evening too. I appreciate your presentation. So as I understand it, based upon what you're telling us, the paper before us is for the city council to authorize your office via the mayor to enter into a contract with the MAPC in good energy.
[Adam Knight]: And how did the MAPC and Good Energy become the people that we said, these are the ones we're going to go with?
[Adam Knight]: And the reason I ask is because it seems like This is going to be a contract that's over $10,000. It seems like it's something you're negotiating, and you've selected the vendors already. We might be able to get more bang for our buck if we put out an IRP and said, three vendors come and give it to us. I don't know if we can do that through municipal aggregation, and I guess that's one of the questions.
[Adam Knight]: So actually. The RFP is going out. It's, I mean, a request for proposals and bids are going out. You guys are doing it on a larger scale.
[Adam Knight]: They're doing the administrative work for us.
[Adam Knight]: So what I'm understanding is that good energy is the, preferred vendor that's been selected by MAPC through their due diligence process?
[Adam Knight]: Okay. And as you were filling me in on some of these questions that I had, I did hear you say, so we'd get a bill and a bill would come in the mail and it would be, today it's national grid, tomorrow we're entering into municipal aggregation. Is it, you know, good guy energy or is it still a national grid bill?
[Adam Knight]: we might contract with. We enter into a three-year contract for municipal aggregation, and I decide to opt out. Two and a half, I say, I want to opt back in. Am I allowed to opt out and in as many times as I want with no penalty, no charge, no fee, no pain, no suffering?
[Adam Knight]: And then the scope of contract would be limited to a three year contract by law because it's a municipal contract.
[Adam Knight]: That answers all my questions, Mr. President. Thank you very much. Thank you very much for your time. I appreciate it. Thank you, Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think it's rather clear, based upon the tenor and tone of the discussions that we've had this evening, that we're not going to be able to make a decision as to whether or not this is a matter that should go forward. And as such, I would recommend to make a motion that the matter be tabled. The motion to table by Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I don't think that it would be harmful either if I'm in part of the motions table. We also put a referral maybe to the subcommittee on energy and environment for further investigation.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to table, Madam President. One more? I think we're all going to vote to table this thing.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Just a point of clarification. I think when Dr. Starello referred to 17 employees in the Department of Public Works, he was referring to 17 employees that were just exclusively assigned to the highway division. But, Mr. President, I'd like to amend the paper to request that the matter be referred to the administration for inclusion in the capital plan. We just met with the mayor's office this morning, and they said that they're in the process of putting together a capital budget and a capital plan. And this is a capital expenditure, Mr. President, so I'd ask that they also put this on their list of items to add to the capital plan.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I don't feel as though we should be making one project contingent upon another. Two weeks ago, we sat here and we talked about sidewalks, and there's a dire need for us to repair our sidewalks. Last week, we talked about sidewalks. We talked about how there was a dire need to repair our sidewalks. There's certainly a dire need to repair many of our streets, Evans Street being one of them, Mr. President. But I don't feel as though holding one construction project hostage and make it contingent upon another is a good policy. Point of information.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Knight Mr. President, I think Counsel Knox took the words right out of my mouth. A traffic management plan is something that I think we're going to need to start requiring when we start allowing public utilities to open up the ground, Mr. President. And looking at this particular paper, I'm happy to see that the work is going to be done from curb to curb, and I believe that this is done under a program, I think it's called SRFO or SROF, where the public utility actually gives the city the money, and then the city's responsible for going curb to curb, and the utility's actually going to get out of the pavement business and allow the city to do it. So that I'm very excited about, Mr. President. And that's also something I think we really need to take a long, hot look at and make standard on. You know, we have the residents from Evans Street here talking about how patchwork repairs in the street have created a situation that they're in now where the place is falling apart. And I think that as we move forward and we start opening streets up, we need to really consider going curb-to-curb in the closing up of our streets when the work is done. But with that being said, Mr. President, provided that the public safety impact around our school is going to be addressed, I certainly have no problem with the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Move approval Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. May 26th represents a one-year anniversary of the passing of firefighter Timothy Brennan, a lifelong Metro resident who was known to be seen running around Barry Park as a child and running in and out of burning buildings as a firefighter, Mr. President. He sadly missed. He was a great public servant, but more importantly, he was a great friend and a great family man, Mr. President, and I ask that the council Indulge me in remembering him on this anniversary date.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd like to amend the paper to request that the traffic commission waive the tickets for all residents who purchase a permit. Same thing, but at least we can make official action of the traffic commission.
[Adam Knight]: Congratulations to Mr. Mayorca. It wasn't for that, you really threw me off there for a second. Mr. President, I'd like to take paper 16-491, a $500,000 appropriation to replace sidewalks and stumps throughout the city. That is 16-491, $500,000 to replace sidewalks and stumps throughout the city.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I for one was satisfied at the last presentation. I feel as though our sidewalks need to be repaired. I feel as though a $500,000 appropriation is a good place to start. I don't think it's a good place to finish, Mr. President. But with that being said, I think there were certain individual councilors here that had more concern than I did as to whether or not this was a worthwhile appropriation. Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I'd also like to request a copy of the RFP as well as the contract with the selected bidder when that becomes available to us.
[Adam Knight]: I'd ask that the amendments be read back and a roll call vote be taken, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think, um, uh, rather important question that we should be asking is why the school department is paying down this bond. I think if we take a look at all the other bonded debt that we have in the city, whether it be the science labs, the school pool, the rebuilding of our new schools, the debt was carried by the city side. And in this instance, and I can't think of any other instance that's occurring at this point in time or in the past. where the school budget would actually be required to use their operational funds to fund the bonded debt. So I think the real question is, why is the school department responsible for paying the bonded debt? Why is that not coming from the city side? Because as far as I can tell, and my research would indicate, that this is the only instance where that's happened in the history of the city since, you know, the last 20 years. So I think that's really the question to ask, Mr. President, is why is the school department being required to pay down the bond at Edgeley Field based on operating expenses, when every other bond in the community, including the new pool, including the building of the new schools, was covered through the city side?
[Adam Knight]: I think the question would have to be asked to the budget director of the Office of Administration and Finance in the schools, in contrast with that of our budget office here in the city, Mr. President. Um, you know, why is this the best way to go about it in terms of, um, paying down the debt? Why is the school department being saddled with this burden through their operational account? Because their ability to raise revenues is far more restricted than ours as, as the city government.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Many of us behind this rail and many of us in this community know John Jack Buckley. He's served our community diligently for many, many years. I believe Jack was a school committee member when I was in elementary school. I had the good fortune of growing up a neighbor to him, and he's been a great asset to our community, Mr. President. Last month was his last meeting as the chairperson of the Hormel Commission, and he has stepped down from public service at this point in time, and he is officially retired. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'd like to congratulate Mr. Buckley and thank him for all the work that he's done on behalf of the citizenry here in Medford, and I'd also like to have him come down to a council meeting and receive an official council commendation highlighting and denoting his many years of service that we appreciate here in the city.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and thank you, Councilor Caraviello, for bringing this matter forward. I'd like to move to amend the paper, Mr. President, to ask that we have the Substance Abuse Outreach Council, as part of this resolution, resolution to go down to the area in conjunction with our police department. I think that, you know, if there are individuals down there at 7 o'clock in the morning, under the influence of drugs and alcohol, then getting them out of that area is really going to push the problem down the street, but it's not going to actually take care of the initial underlying issue, which is these individuals in the community that need access to treatment. So, Mr. President, I'd ask that they be amended with the Substance Abuse Outreach Council. The motion is moved by Councilor Caraviello, as amended by Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I think that all of us behind this rail have been very supportive of the initiatives of Paws for Medford and the initiatives to bring a dog park into the city. We have a paper before us here that's giving us free money, and I don't think anybody behind this rail is going to be opposed to that.
[Adam Knight]: I don't think there are any restrictions or preclusions right now for people utilizing the public park that is Riverbend Park right now. The parks department set the hours as to when the park's going to be open. But there are no preclusions right now from anybody using the park. So I don't think there'd be any necessary preclusions later on for people to use the park and restrict their access to a dog park if there's no restrictions right now for them to do recreational activities at that location as well. Now they're just going to be doing those recreational activities with their animal. Thank you. Madam Vice President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And through you to Mr. Kerins, thank you very much for your work. In the short time that you've been here, Mr. Kerins, I've really appreciated the work that you've done. And I, too, cannot wait for the day they take the interim tag away, because I truly do think you're an asset here to the city of Medford. I wish we could have kept you from your first day here all the way through. But with that being said, you know, there's a dire need in this community for this type of work to be done. An appropriation for half a million dollars that's going to take care of about 400 sidewalks I think is a great investment, Mr. President. This is something that I certainly support. The one question I do have is, though, once the contract is signed, we have an RFP out, to nuts how long do you think it would take in terms of construction season. Would it be one full construction season to make it through? Two full construction seasons to make it through? And I understand the list is going to grow and I think that your approach is the right one because if someone went to my neighbor's house and put a brand new sidewalk panel down, and then walk past my house and mine was cracked and went to the next number on the list, I'd be on the phone with you in five minutes calling on what's going on. They just did the work right next door to my house and my sidewalk's broken too because I wasn't on the list. I didn't get it done even though there was a need. So I think that's the great approach. I think that's really the work smarter, not harder. Um, but in terms of, you know, how long it would take to, to get through 400, to get through the $500,000. Um, okay.
[Adam Knight]: Excellent. And I know we spoke recently about some asphalt sidewalk panels that have been replaced. a lot of the asphalt panels are being replaced as a temporary hold?
[Adam Knight]: Excellent. Excellent. I, for one, Mr. President, look forward to this work getting done and the administration putting another paper forward to us for us to appropriate some more funds. As Councilor Mark said, clearly, one of the largest concerns that he's heard after putting out a press release about what he feels, if you feel safe in your neighborhood, is everyone has very large concerns about pedestrian safety. And sidewalks are for people to walk on, for pedestrians. So, I certainly think that this is a worthwhile expenditure, Mr. President. I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Schell, would you group what paper it is she's looking at there, just so that we can take a peek at that?
[Adam Knight]: And does she have a date on it or anything like that?
[Adam Knight]: And what year is that from?
[Adam Knight]: And the document, Mr. President, though, wouldn't be just the bonds that were issued in 2013. It might be 15 or 20 years worth of bonds that are being paid off over the period of time.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: And for the figures that I have, it doesn't seem like... Mr. President, I don't think anything's going to be precluding the administration from coming back to the council and requesting another $128,000 at another point in time. But if they're not willing to move and appropriate the money at this point in time and ask us to appropriate the money at this point in time, then we're leaving $500,000 on the table. $500,000 of work that needs to be done, that should be done, that has to be done. I don't feel comfortable withdrawing my motion to approve, Mr. President. I want to see sidewalk work start, and I want to see it start yesterday.
[Adam Knight]: As far as point of information comes, the $500,000 is going to fix $500 worth of sidewalks that need to be fixed. List, no list. Broken sidewalk is a broken sidewalk. A broken sidewalk needs to be fixed. It's our job to provide public safety in the community. It's a number one job. Pedestrian safety, as Councilor Knox has stated before, is a priority in this community. Residents are talking about it daily. Residents of Miss Rodriguez was up there last week talking about pedestrian safety. Sidewalks are pilot apps, Mr. President. I think that we just got to get the ball rolling. Let's get some shovels in the ground. Let's get to work.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Um, yes, Mr. President, thank you very much. And I'm looking at the file notes that I have from this matter when it came up a year ago. If we look at Chapter 139 of the General Laws, Section 1, it would read that the alderman or selectman in any city or town may, after written notice to the owner of a burnt or dilapidated or dangerous building or other structure, or as authorized agent to the owner of a vacant parcel of land, and after a hearing, make and record an order in judging it to be a nuisance to the neighborhood. So I think what we need to do, Mr. President, is take the steps to designate this as a nuisance property. And I'd like to ask the city solicitor if he can give us the process in writing. and that will give us an opportunity to examine it and see if this is something we can help out with. Also, it's my understanding that the Clean It or Lean It ordinance here in the city is administered by the Board of Health, and we have a new Board of Health director, so maybe our new Board of Health director is a little bit more motivated to take on this project at this point in time where he's just been appointed.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. Back when the C-Click fix program was rolled out, I questioned the city's ability to meet the objectives with the current staff, the demands of a deteriorating infrastructure and, quite frankly, a city hall that's embracing technology about 15 years too late. So with that being said, Mr. President, we've made a number of requests for copies of the statistical reports. We've asked for training, so on and so forth. And I think we all hold steadfast in wanting to get that information. So I might once again, Mr. President, request that the administration provide us with a quarterly report relative to the C-Click Fix Program, items that were issued, items that were resolved, and the resolution that was recommended.
[Adam Knight]: On that motion as amended, Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. It's been brought up a number of times, I think, by Councilor Mack, actually, concerning whether or not the city actually monitors the use of water in its buildings as well as its school buildings. And I think that in order for us to accurately If we're going to reduce water consumption, we first need to gauge what we're taking in. So I'd like to ask for an update from the administration as to whether or not they are metering our city and school buildings at this point in time, because it was my understanding that they were not the last time we asked the question. We're not going to be able to gauge conservation if we're not able to gauge consumption, Mr. President. So unless we're able to do that, I think, you know, it's off and on.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. I'd like to invite our good friend and former 2014 Massachusetts Teacher of the Year, Anthony Petrellis, up here to make a little announcement relative to a special project that he's been working on, a fundraiser to help those children stricken with cancer, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: What I had to hear, huh?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, can we ask Mr. Petrelas if people would like to donate maybe where they can go to do that? Is there a site online?
[Adam Knight]: I'm sure he'll give it to all of us. Mr. President, I for one just want to thank the Medford Public Schools, Mr. Rich, Mr. Petrellis, for the work that they do. It's obvious that they're more than just classroom teachers, Mr. President, that they have a true concern for their kids and that they're perfect examples of the great job that our public school system here in Medford is doing in terms of focusing on the whole student, really caring for the students that are in that classroom. And, you know, it takes a village, Mr. President, and this is a perfect example of that. To see Hemo's mom here after several years, come back, and to see these two teachers who were affected by Hemo's life and Hemo's, you know, passing, to continue this tradition, it's really moving, Mr. President. And I'd like to thank Mr. Rich and Mr. Petrellis for all their efforts on behalf of the family. I'm sure that she's thanked them a thousand times over, Mr. President. Really, this is just another perfect example of the work that great public schools do here in the city of Medford, and our great public school teachers, and what they can do when they put their mind to it. So, Mr. President, thank you very much to everybody that's donated. Thank you to everybody that's paid attention to the cause. And thank you to these two gentlemen with those beautiful heads of hair that are going to be getting mowed down to wiffle length come early June. With that being said, Mr. President, I'd like to ask that the matter be received and placed on file, but I thank the folks for being up here.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think that's an excellent suggestion. An excellent idea. And I support it wholeheartedly. So the motion under discussion now is Councilor Marks council cafe.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Thank you very much to Hallmark Health for their support of what is shaping up to be a rather popular program. Thank you to Mass in Motion as well for doing your efforts to fundraise and to commit yourself to such an endeavor. I think that it speaks volumes when the actual people that are involved in the organization are going out there and soliciting donations because they believe in the product that they're putting out there. Thank you very much, Ms. McGibbon, and thank you very much to our friends at Hallmark Health. This is the perfect example of strong public-private partnership, Mr. President, and it's something that I hope that we can build on for years to come. I, for one, am very supportive of accepting the donation and would move for approval, but thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Paper 16481, Mr. President. While we're in suspension, I'd like to take that matter up as well.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think that it might make sense for us to refer this to the arts and culture subcommittee for an update from the council when in fact they do maybe put on an RFP or receive some further interest from other people and then the subcommittee can report back to us at that time. On the motion of Councilor Knight, Councilor Longo Crenshaw.
[Adam Knight]: It's my understanding at this point in time there is no RFP because they're in the process of drafting the RFP and that's what the discussions at the school committee meeting were surrounded. It's also my further understanding that once the RFP terms are agreed upon by the policy-setting body for the school department, the school committee, that this RFP will be voted on. And once it's voted on, it will become public record. So I don't see any problem with this.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, my point of information was this. Until the school committee votes on the RFP to be issued, there is no RFP.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knights. Mr. President, I do have a question. What were those periods of time that Councilor Lungo referred to as to when the bubble was going to be up? Madam Vice President, if you could.
[Adam Knight]: And the reason I ask, Mr. President, because having been very familiar with the administration of the fields, they closed usually at Thanksgiving and they didn't open up again until after March. So in essence, the fields are closed for the period of time that the bubble would be up normally. So any use that we're getting out of it would be bonus. You know, if we can establish a public-private partnership with an entity that wants to come in there and invest money into our infrastructure at the fields during and use it for the majority of time during a period of time where it would actually be inaccessible to everybody, anyhow, I don't see any downside to this whatsoever, Mr. President. They're going to come up, they're going to invest some money into the city of Medford, they're going to invest some money into our facilities, they're going to make our state of the fields even more state of the art, I guess you'd want to say. I'm a little confused by the resolution. I'm not going to be in a position to tell the school committee not to vote on something that's in front of them they're comfortable to vote on. They're the policy setting. of our government for all things that are related to the school department, Mr. President. So I can't support- Point of information.
[Adam Knight]: I believe the resolution doesn't say that, but I believe as you were speaking in your presentation, you said, I just want to get a copy of the RFP to look at it and review it before they vote on it.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah. So as I was saying, Mr. President, I'm not comfortable telling the school community they can't vote on something until we get a copy of something. Um, so for that reason, I won't be supporting this paper.
[Adam Knight]: I don't think anybody here is in a position to speak about what the maintenance plan is at the field. I'm sure there is a maintenance plan in place, but I don't think anybody knows what it is. I mean, Billy, I know you well, but I question as to whether or not he knows whether or not they go out there and groom the field once a week or not. They do. You know what I mean?
[Adam Knight]: But I was going to say that they sit there and just don't get treated at all.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. Carr was one of the first people, I was here, supporting the cause as a citizen back in, what was it, 2004, 2000? 2000, 2000, the year 2000. And if I remember correctly, the fields were opened up in 2002? Fall of 2000. Fall of 2000.
[Adam Knight]: So we're at year 16 now, anyway. So I think the shelf life on the field, no?
[Adam Knight]: So 2008, it went out 2010 and opened.
[Adam Knight]: Seventh year.
[Adam Knight]: All right. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, there are several items and suggestions that we've kicked around in the past. Um, this council, I believe, uh, appropriated 1.4, the prior council appropriated $1.4 million in funds for what would be called the Community Improvement Initiative, and part of that included portable safety cameras, portable security cameras that would be able to record and report back to our police department. And I had a brief conversation with Chief Sacco about it. and saying, we have two cameras, why don't we just set the two cameras up on Harvard and one on Maine, right at the location, and then we can have a guy sitting in the police station sending them $300 tickets with the camera pointing at the car. I mean, at least that way they'll get the message. After a couple of tickets, they're not going to park on the sidewalk anymore, and we don't even have to have somebody out there on the beep. All we have to do is have somebody who's maybe in the office on some downtime going through the paperwork, or weekly even, going through the tape and just putting the paperwork together and sending it out for those vehicles that we can't identify through that tape. Also, Mr. President, I think that we have a unique opportunity to work in concert with the Traffic Commission. Maybe we can establish certain hours for on-street parking and certain hours for loading so that the same parking spots that are used for business parking are the same parking spots that are used for loading, and they're just restricted to certain hours in the day. So I think there are a number of different ways that we can look at this and a number of different ways that we can approach this. And these are some suggestions that I'd like to send over to our Transportation Subcommittee because they anxiously await. their report on the issue.
[Adam Knight]: And I mean, I think that this council, since it's swearing in in January, has had more subcommittee meetings than we've had in 10 years. So we're out on the street, there's a lot going on, and we're working hard trying to get it done, but there are a lot of irons in the fire as well. But I think that Councilor Scarpelli's had at least two meetings. on this committee that he's chaired. He's been down to the site at least twice, so I certainly feel as though we're in great hands. I mean, it's an enforcement issue, and that's what it sounds like. It's an enforcement issue. Nobody behind this rail can write a parking ticket. Nobody behind this rail can write a ticket. The only people that can do that are the police and parking enforcement officers. So it's really an enforcement issue. If someone's parking on the sidewalk, they should be getting tagged. The Yale Street is not the only location. You're seeing it down on Middlesex Ave, too, at Asian Taste, at the Old Roses. You're seeing it at a number of different places. You're seeing it around our parks when games are being played, where cars are starting to park halfway up on the sidewalk to create a path because they want to park close enough to the field where they don't have to walk too far. but the vehicle's not in the greatest spot. So I certainly can understand the frustration that Ms. Fritz has. I drive that stretch from Bob's to LaCosche's, you know, at least 25 times a week. That is one of the most frustrating intersections that we have in the community, Mr. President. It needs to be looked at, and we need to engineer it properly. I think that, you know, all of us sitting, put a crosswalk here, move a bus stop here, do this, that's all well and good, but if we really take the appropriate steps and invest the funds in a traffic study or a traffic engineer, I think that this is something that'll resolve itself. But we have to get to that point, Mr. President. So I want to thank Councilor Scott Felley for the work that he's done. And, you know, let Ms. Fretz know that I certainly understand her pain and anguish, because I drive through it too. But there are some options out there that we need to explore.
[Adam Knight]: I don't want the people in the community to think that Oasis was cited for any cleanliness violations inside the store. Was there an inside inspection as well?
[Adam Knight]: There was, and everything came back fine from the inside. It was just the outside that was the concern.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much. Councilor Knight. Through you to Ms. Fowler, A dumpster that is located on private property, correct? And licensed through the Board of Health?
[Adam Knight]: Yes. So, um, who is responsible for getting the permit? Would it be Republic or would it be the business owner? The business owner. The business owner is responsible for getting the license for the permit?
[Adam Knight]: Okay. So now the business owner has a permit and the business owner has contracted a contracted relationship with someone who's violating the terms of the permit on the dumpster.
[Adam Knight]: Right. And the, result of the enforcement issue goes back to Republic, who is the provider, as opposed to the business owner, who is the permittee?
[Adam Knight]: Well, you sent a cease and desist order to Republic.
[Adam Knight]: And Republic is an organization that's contracted with Oasis. Yes. So if Republic keeps coming at 5 o'clock in the morning, and even if you see them, what can you do? Can you cite them? They're not the permitted entity, right? So who do you cite? Is there any ramifications?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, and is there a mechanism to find Republic? Is there a mechanism to?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, but at no point in time is Republic actually required to register their product in our community?
[Adam Knight]: It would jeopardize their other licenses.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. All right. Excellent. Thank you very much. I appreciate you clearing that up for me.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. The gentleman made reference saying that the mayor told the police not to give any tickets out or anything like that. I was just wondering how he had personal knowledge of such a directive. Sounds like hearsay to me, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: Also, Mr. President, the police department's a building, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: So what you have is— Point of information, Councilor Nice. I don't know if I'm having deja vu, but this seems—sounds eerily familiar to the meeting we had last week and the same exact issues that we discussed there. Thank you, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. Ms. Rodriguez was here before this Council, and this very same issue came up when we discussed it. We sent the correspondence to the administration, and we asked the administration as to what the status was for that piece of property across the street from this house that she referred to.
[Adam Knight]: It's a different side of the street.
[Adam Knight]: He already claimed that sidewalk.
[Adam Knight]: It's the same people, different side of the street now.
[Adam Knight]: All right. OK. So because we got report back that the side of the park side was actually a parking pad.
[Adam Knight]: Shame or not, it is what it is. It's a parking pad. But all right, I was a little confused about this.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to receive and place on file. The subcommittee is already working on the issue, Mr. President. On that motion, sir. Welcome.
[Adam Knight]: I'm a firm believer that people who provide high quality public services and abide by the terms of their work contract have the right to live wherever they want. I think one thing that we're not thinking about here is the fact that people may claim permanent residency in one community and live there not six months out of the year. For example, I think we remember when Suzanne Bump was running for auditor and there became a question as to whether or not she had a primary residence in South Boston or a primary residence in Pittsfield. On her tax returns, she put both. She had two primary residences. I don't know how the school committee would ever be able to quantify who lives in a place for up to 180 days, number one. Number two, I really don't understand the resolution. I mean, you know, anybody that works for the school department is provided their benefits through the benefit packages provided as an employee, their salary through the contract that they've negotiated or through the bargaining agreement. Really, all we're looking at here is, who are these people that don't live in Massachusetts? And whether or not we can determine whether or not they're residing in Massachusetts for more than six months of the year or not, I just don't see the relevance at all to how this is something that even makes any sense for us to do anything. I mean, what are we going to use this information for? I just don't get it. Thank you, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: I think, um, council Scarpelli addressed it. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: I certainly have no problem with the resolution, Mr. President, but I think that it needs to be a little clearer. I think we need to really delineate and designate what facilities it is that we're looking at here. Is it the Masha Cameron Theater? Is it the field? Is it Hormel? Hormel doesn't fall under the school's purview. Is it, you know, the side field? Is it the gymnasium? Is it the pool? Is it the community schools program? What the community schools programs bring in? I think we really need to be a little bit clearer as to what facilities we're looking at and what facilities we're trying to designate to get this information for, I think that that might make it a little easier for the administration to be a little bit more forthcoming with the information as well.
[Adam Knight]: I'm not comfortable voting for the paper in its current form. However, I didn't author the piece of legislation, so I'd ask for it to be amended or maybe move to committee for that to be delineated.
[Adam Knight]: I just wanted to know which facility, because I don't want to get a feedback that says, OK, all school facilities were rented to these organizations. This is how much it was. but facility is generating more money, how much we're getting from that particular entity.
[Adam Knight]: If they don't have it on Monday, then we can take it up again on Tuesday.
[Adam Knight]: I do, Mr. President. I do. I'd like to explain my vote on the last matter and on this one, Mr. President. Please. The city side is what funds the bond. The city side is what... funds the bond for both of these entities. So I think if we're going to start looking for accounting issues, we should be looking at accounting issues for our bonded indebtedness as a whole, Mr. President. We should be looking at our debt service as a whole, not just this little portion and this little portion, because I think if we put the whole picture together, we'll have a better understanding of what the actual scenario is. So for that reason is why I'm going to be voting against this matter. I understand.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'd just like to commend Councilor Marks for his efforts. He identified an issue. He brought the issue to everybody's attention. He stayed on top of the issue. He found a solution to the problem that was out there. So for that, I thank him. I think that this is some great stuff. And I just would wonder if there's an application deadline that needs to be met by the city.
[Adam Knight]: Excellent. Well, um, again, I just wanted to thank Councilor Marks for his efforts and, uh, commend him on, uh, coming full circle on an issue like this, identify a problem, come up with a solution. I mean, that's what we have for us. So thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Um, yes, Mr. President. Um, I certainly understand councilor Caraviello's position on this. They should be painted. So why aren't they painted? Why are we picking one over the other? They should all be done. Um, however, Ms. Rodriguez was up here a little earlier and she was speaking about the walking school bus and how groups of students will walk to school and they'll collect on their way to school at certain and different locations, Mr. President. And I think it might make sense for us to maybe identify some safe routes to school for these individuals as well. If right now we have some crosswalks that have faded out and there are individuals and groups that are meeting along a certain pathway or a certain route, maybe we prioritize those locations first so that these children that are walking to school and that are trying to begin that whole process of walking to school again like I used to do. You know, he's coming back and he's coming back in. Maybe we can make sure it's a little safer for them, Mr. President. So, um, you know, I'm, I'm looking at it saying that there's a group that's already together that's coordinating this. They have pathways that they already take. Um, it might be nice if they could provide us with that information or follow that information to the administration.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I apologize in advance for the length of the resolution before us this evening, and I thank you for indulging me in bringing it forward. The issue that's before us this evening is really an issue of poverty, Mr. President. As the top 1 percent continue to get richer in America, working families are under attack, and the situation here on the horizon is no different, Mr. President. If you take a look at what's going on with Verizon in the current situation between their workforce and their collective bargaining, you'll see that Verizon really has put profits ahead of people. You'll see that their top five executives made $230 million in the last year. You'll see that in the first three months of 2016, they've made $1.8 billion in profit per month, Mr. President, but they want to replace jobs that pay a living wage, jobs that provide unemployment health benefits, jobs that provide retirement security, but jobs that don't. Mr. President, this hurts our local economy. This hurts the 100-plus families in the city of Medford that have worked for Verizon for a number of years that have been committed to their job. president that were working with Mar-Bell and Miller-Manning, the same people that have made this organization so successful and have put this organization in such a position that they can make such record profits. But I really think that it's not right, it's not fair to put profits ahead of people and to really sell out the workforce to offshore overseas accounts and to a workforce that's not going to be as committed, because they're actually employees of a president, you know, such an organized party. I'm here in the audience. We do have several individuals who reside in the city of Manhattan who are directly impacted by this corporate grief. Corporate grief, Mr. President. And I'd ask my council colleagues to stand with me and to stand with the 3,600 members that are striking between London and New York to fight corporate grief to its finest, to force Verizon, to urge Verizon to end the campaign to destroy the jobs, and to be sure that we can have jobs that pay a living wage and remain in our community because they are essential to the well-being of all of us, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I spoke with mayor Burke briefly on the issue. I think that the person that should speak with mayor Burke would be the men and women of IBEW local 2222 who endorsed her candidacy when she was running for mayor. I think that those are the people that she should really be accountable to. However, she did not seem to be opposed to the idea that we support the striking Verizon workers, that we ensure that we have jobs that pay a living wage in our community, Mr. President. She did not seem like she was opposed to that at all. So with that being said, I'd ask for approval. And my motion of approval by constant night and vice president.
[Adam Knight]: I do not have a list of those contracts, but I'm unaware of how the city's bottom line would be affected if we didn't enter into any new contracts. I think that the idea here is, Mr. President, is until the corporate juggernaut realizes that the people that made this corporate juggernaut successful do some respect. There's only one way that you can get these corporations to listen, Mr. President, and that's to hit them in the pocket. And I think that hitting them in the pocketbook is certainly the way to go. We should take a long, hard look at the business that we're doing with Verizon and with other corporate entities that take advantage of their workforce, Mr. President. So, you know, with that being said, I do not know how this will affect the city's bottom line, but it's my understanding that we don't have much contractual obligation with Verizon at this point in time. But I'll be happy to follow up with the Superintendent of Lights and Lines and get back to you on that.
[Adam Knight]: I'm going to strike out after the second, be it therefore resolved. I'd like the resolution to read that the city of Medford will review any current contracts or obligations to purchase Verizon products or services. I'd like to cross out in any contracts or obligations. We're permissible by the terms of the contract and the party's obligations to one another. I think that might address Councilor Longo's concern as to whether or not there is a monetary effect it will have on the taxpayers here in the community, and it will also send the same indistinct message. And it will also, I think, make her friend feel very happy that she's supporting this cause as well.
[Adam Knight]: Now — Point of information, Mr. President?
[Adam Knight]: I believe about one and a half years ago, this city council did take action on a very similar matter that I brought forward when they were going to lay off 33 janitors up at Tufts University. And we brought a similar resolution forward, Mr. President. And I'd like to point out that there were 33 people on the chopping block. Only eight people got cut. So the council did take up an issue that might be outside its purview and outside its scope, and I don't think that's an unreasonable thing to say. Yeah, I mean, this has nothing to do with, you know, the legislative body of a local municipality. Absolutely not, Mr. President, but it does have to do with the lives of 100-plus citizens in this community who aren't going to work and aren't collecting a check every day, Mr. President. And that's what it's all about. It's about our neighbors and our family and the people that want to be able to provide for their families and people that want to make a living wage so that they can afford to live in Medford. The same people that have lived in Medford for their whole life, that have helped make Medford great, now can't afford to live here, and we're going to say it's okay, outsource their job, send it overseas, and tell them to go work for minimum wage? I don't think that's right, Mr. President. I don't think it's fair.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. I believe I'm entitled to have an opinion as well.
[Adam Knight]: The President. Point of information, Mr. President. I wonder if the gentleman would be qualified to discuss this, considering he's not a member of the bargaining team for Verizon and he's not at the table. I believe he's reporting to us what Verizon's reported out in their media campaign to destroy good jobs.
[Adam Knight]: What's the total, Mr. President, if the gentleman wouldn't mind answering that question? What's the grand total, after all those billions that he just rattled off?
[Adam Knight]: One third.
[Adam Knight]: It's also been very well publicized in the public record that the gentleman speaks about that while Verizon does bring Fios services and broadband services into certain communities, those communities that they bring them into are usually the more affluent communities. And low-income communities don't necessarily receive the same treatment or the same service or the same level of service, Mr. President, which, again, is, you know, reflective.
[Adam Knight]: No, I believe that what I'm saying is they would deliver the services to the more affluent communities because they have an easier chance of getting paid. They have a better chance of receiving some breaks.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, looking at the resolution, I believe the resolution asks that the City of Medford review any current contracts or obligations to purchase Verizon products or services. That's what this resolution asks for.
[Adam Knight]: No.
[Adam Knight]: No, Mr. President, that's absolutely positively not what I cited. That's exactly what you said, Mr. Bates.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if I may, I don't think that Mr. Capucci or I are going to be able to settle the Verizon dispute in this room right now, this evening. The reason I brought this matter forward was to stand with the men and women of Local 4222, the men and women in this community.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. If I think back and remember correctly, When we met before at the Committee of the Whole meeting with the administration, we adjourned. And when we adjourned, we said that we would reconvene again in 90 days. And I think that Consulate de la Ruzo has told us that he is working on setting up a date for that matter. So with that being said, Mr. President, I think we're looking to schedule a second meeting. We adjourned our last meeting with the intentions of having a second meeting. So with that being said, a motion to receive and place on file, or a motion to send these questions to the mayor. I mean, I don't know what you want to do with the issue of having the meeting and scheduling the meeting. I think it's already been decided and discussed and voted on by this council. We'd like to get these questions answered. I don't have a problem with that, and I don't think it's a bad idea at all. I guess my question is, how do we proceed at this point? Thank you. Councilor Falco.
[Adam Knight]: And... One information, Councilor Knight. I'm only speaking for myself. If I pick up the phone and I call the Mayor's office, I can get the Mayor on the phone whenever I have a question. I can get a department on the phone whenever I can have a question. So I think that that recourse is available to us. I personally think it's nice that we have something in the calendar that says that we're gonna meet with the administration quarterly. Nothing's precluding us from meeting with them more frequently than that or doing what we do as individual Councilors. But in terms of having quarterly meetings as a body of the whole, I don't see any harm or foul in that, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: One information, Councilor Knight. The gentleman's under contract. And when the contract expires, they'll either renegotiate a contract or not. You know what I mean? But I mean, to say the gentleman's got to go, I think that that's problematic. I didn't say he has to go. Excuse me, sir. Do I correct? He is under contract.
[Adam Knight]: One information, Councilor Neal. Mr. President, I think that we've already agreed to have a second meeting with the administration. So now, wouldn't it be us adding the items that we want to discuss at this meeting?
[Adam Knight]: So the vote, the vote that we're taking isn't to schedule it to the meeting, right? The vote isn't to schedule a second meeting.
[Adam Knight]: Right. What I'm getting at Mr. President is that we're not going to schedule a meeting to bring these items up to the mayor to have her say, okay, let me look at them. We're going to, schedule a meeting and have a meeting and send these items to her beforehand so she can be prepared to speak on them.
[Adam Knight]: I am, Councilman Mox, myself, and you, actually. The three of us make it up, and I'm sure if we put our heads together, we'll be able to come up with something. I would like to say that with the presence of our interim director, Mr. Brian Kerins in the DPW, I think we're in a very unique and plausible position right now to make this a reality. I believe Brian's background comes from U.S. sweep or American sweeping, where he's actually worked in the industry. He's worked for an organization and a company that specializes in street sweeping. So it would seem to me that the gentleman does have the knowledge of the industry and knows the tricks of the trade. And if anybody can make it happen, Director Karens, I think he's been doing an excellent job since his appointment, Mr. President. It's been a pleasure to work with him. With that being said, I hope they can make a determination on his permanency as well.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and Councilor Marks, I think you're right on point with your presentation. There is one thing that I did want to make clear, and it's if you are hit with a surcharge on May 25th, and your application is pending before the assessor's office, you will receive a refund from amounts already paid. It's not like you missed the deadline to file, so you're out of luck with the money. And, uh, the second item was that, um, any residential property owner who currently receives an abatement or a statutory exemption is automatically entitled to a proportional reduction in the CPC, uh, the CPA surcharge. So if, uh, you know, you get a reduction for being a disabled veteran, then you'd be able to get a proportional reduction on your CPA surcharge as well.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And I apologize for interrupting my coughing fit there, Councilor Caraviello. I know several weeks back we did request, by way of resolution, a meeting with the mayor to discuss all things parking, the successes of the program, the failures of the program, pros and cons of what we're doing and where we're going in the future, Mr. President. I'd like an update from the administration on whether or not we're still going to have that meeting. I don't think it's a problem having a meeting, regardless of who the entity is that's doing the third-party work. And I don't think that will have any impact on any type of negotiations that the legal department's having with him, Mr. President. With that being said, I'd like to amend the paper to request an update from the administration on the meeting request that we had made previously.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Thank you, Constantin Caprio, for bringing this forward. I'd like to further amend the paper, Mr. President, requesting that we get the schedule for the bottom line and swimming maintenance at all the bottom lines. And I'd also like to further amend the paper requesting that a hotline be developed for individuals that do find syringes in their neighborhood at the bottom line, so on and so forth, so that they can call in, whatever that may be, so that we can begin to track this data and collect this data so that we can see if there are cluster problems in certain areas of the city.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I certainly appreciate Councilor Marks' resolution on this topic. I've gotten recent calls from some of the former presidents. These presidents were fortunate enough to have their street put back. However, their street was not put back in of the City of Medford standards, Mr. President, and I believe the culprits were at the National Grid or was recently at the WRA. So I'd like to amend the paper to request that the City Engineer report back on the status of this report as it stands.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight? Mr. President, I think Councilor Caraviello covered all the bases. I just want to congratulate you on your decision to authorize the market. But so be it. And as far as the sproes and the water health, I've had a great time. Thank you, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, for the reasons stated multiple times before, it has to be recorded in opposition on this matter. Thank you, Councilor Knight. And I am in too.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, quickly on a side note, we had item 16-438 filed relative to Clematis Road and some construction debris that was left at the site after the road was closed. I'd like to thank the administration for taking the appropriate and proper steps to get them out there to get the equipment removed. They actually came back and resurfaced the street as well. So they did an excellent job. I'd like to thank the administration for their efforts, and I'd like to thank the contractor, Dallas Sandra Corporation, for getting out there in such a prompt and quick matter after we told them to get out there and do it. But with that being said, Mr. President, I've reviewed the minutes. I've also spoken with my colleagues that have had a number of items on the agenda that evening, and there didn't seem to be any items that were out of order, so I'd move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: I don't know if our tree warden has the right to go on private property and examine a tree that belongs to a private resident.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President. An interesting situation happened down in Duxbury that was very similar to this. A gentleman bought a parcel of land, and in the backyard of this parcel was a very old tree. And there was a bunch of community outcry to save the tree. And the gentleman had spent close to a million dollars on buying a piece of land that was waterfront property, and he didn't want to save the tree. And it was his land, and he didn't want to save it. And that was all well and good. And what happened was the community and the property owner got together and they sat down and they devised a plan to move the tree. So if, in fact, the property owner has intentions of taking the tree down, Mr. President, I'm wondering if our tree warden would be willing to take a look at it and maybe give the council an estimate with how much it would cost to actually move the tree. And I'm sure if the property owner is going to be cutting the tree down, he'd be just as willing to donate it to the city if the city would be willing to remove the tree and plant it elsewhere. It's huge, it's absolutely huge. I know it's gigantic, there's no question about it. And the tree in Duxbury was gigantic as well, but they were able to move it. So that's why I raised the issue as to what she thinks the cost might be associated with that, if they'd be able to move the tree as opposed to cutting it down if it came to that circumstance, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And Mr. Carroll, we had a long conversation last week about this topic, and it's something that I'm well aware of. And I apologize on behalf of the city and the state for what you have to go through. And I hope that You and your family are able to fare the storms until we can get some sort of resolve here for you. Mr. President, I'd like to amend the paper. And I'd like to ask that our city point person from the engineering department report to the council what steps have been taken to ensure the accountability of the contractors.
[Adam Knight]: In compliance with the mitigation efforts, Mr. President, that they've come up here and sold us like snake oil on several different occasions, I think it's important that the city holds them accountable. If they come up here and say they're going to do something and then don't do it, who's watching the house? Who's making sure they're doing what they're supposed to do? And I'd also like to ask the question as to what outreach efforts have been conducted by the city point person between the business community, the administration, and the contractor to ensure that we don't have to keep running into these same problems?
[Adam Knight]: And because I think, Mr. President, it's one thing for us to keep asking for some action. but there should be some sort of record or documentation of what's being done, what phone calls are being made, whether they're in non-compliance, whether they're in compliance, whether or not, you know, the simple and small items that will affect the quality of life that are really not very costly are being done so that we can all live together and get along and get this project over with without impeding construction but also allowing the businesses to be successful.
[Adam Knight]: I'm not comfortable at this point in time telling Mr. Nixon to screen or not.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'd like to congratulate these gentlemen on choosing Medford once again to be their home. We appreciate you staying in the community. I've reviewed the paperwork. I see no problem with it. Mr. President, I'd move for approval at this point in time, but I thank you for staying in the community.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Included in our packet this week, we have a copy of Mr. Lewis's credentials. And if you go through them, they're rather impressive. Gentleman's been practicing law in the Boston Housing Authority for a number of years as a litigator. has extensive experience as a courtroom litigator and a trial attorney, you know, well-educated with a law degree from Syracuse University and an undergrad summa cum laude from Assumption. Mr. President, I think it's clear to me that the gentleman does this for a living, and any type of volunteer service that he'd be willing to perform in our community here would be just a bonus at this point in time. So I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. The big sweep went down Circuit Street on April 19th. However, there was a lack of coordination with MassDOT, MBTA, to get the state property that would butt the railroad tracks along Circuit Street cleaned out. While our streets are nice and clean, there's paper and debris that lay up against the fence on the small portion of land that would be the property of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts or the MBTA, Mr. President. Where MassDOT and the MBTA are now under the same umbrella, I felt as though it would probably be the easiest to send it to MassDOT for them to send out to their appropriate department, Mr. President. So I'm asking that my colleagues support this resolution and bringing some cleanliness and beautification to Circuit Street in the interest of the quality of life.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, thank you very much. I think the resolution speaks for itself. Councilor Caraviello wants to take our friends from D'Alessandro down on a field trip to Austin Road. That might be suitable at this point in time, but I've been by the location. I've received pictures as well from area residents. It's a mess, Mr. President, and I have them back. So I'm asking that the administration take the appropriate steps to be sure that the area is cleaned and left free of debris, but also that our streets and sidewalks are also remaining in acceptable condition like they were prior to the construction work.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and thank you, Councilor Marks, for bringing this matter forward. I think we're all receiving a lot of the same calls, and more importantly, we're all seeing the mess that's out there when we drive down the streets. And not to pick on Tufts University, but, I mean, I think the fact of the matter is, when students move out of their apartments, they are leaving Medford, and they don't have a vested interest in Medford, so they don't really care what kind of mess they leave behind. A couple years ago, Mr. President, the city of Somerville adopted an ordinance and the City of Boston has adopted an ordinance, and the City of Medford has discussed adopting an ordinance, and I think that it's something we should take a look at, which would be a university accountability ordinance, Mr. President, which would require the university to register with the city the units that are being rented by students, so that we know where they are, so that if issues of public safety come up, we know how to identify them. I mean, God forbid there was an outbreak of a contagious disease or something like that up on the campus, at least at this point in time, we'd be able to identify where these people live, and if we needed to quarantine them, so be it.
[Adam Knight]: It's my understanding, Mr. President, that Tufts University, who operates a school in Boston, is complying with the Boston ordinance. And from what I understand, they're also complying with the Sumner ordinance. So, you know, but I think that Councilman Mack makes a good point. Garbage in, garbage out. If they're not giving us good information, it doesn't matter anyway. They need to give us good information and they need to be a partner in this and they need to be sure that they have the same concerns that we have relative to the quality of life in this community and in the neighborhoods and protecting the neighborhoods, Mr. President. Councilor Caraviello has a great quote when it comes to Tufts University. I think he says, Somerville gets all the benefits and Medford gets the rest. And, you know, I think it's time that we really take a look at that and we try to leverage our partnership with Tufts University.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, yes. Thank you very much. And Councilman Marks, thank you for bringing this matter up. On May 5th at six o'clock in room 201, the city administration is going to be having a public meeting concerning the Complete Streets Program. And in our packet this week, we had a meeting notice that referred to this. And the Complete Streets Program refers to roadways that are designed and operated for safe access for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and public transit users of all ages and abilities. So what this is, is it's a program where you sign up with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and they help you adopt some best practices, and they provide funding on how to implement those best practices, Mr. President. I think that this will be a great event for all, especially in light of the commentary and in segue to the commentary that Councilor Marks just made. So I'd just like to be sure that everybody is aware that that's going on from 6 to 7 on May 5th in Room 201 here at City Hall.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, yes, I'd certainly like to take a look at that contract too. You know, Mr. Bellson's been a fixture in this community for so many years and he does an excellent job in his endeavors, Mr. President, and we're very lucky to have him. If you look at the salary of our superintendent versus those and people in surrounding communities, you'll see that we're getting them at bargain prices, Mr. President. So I certainly would be welcoming an opportunity to review the contract as well. However, I do want to be sure that we take the appropriate steps to protect our bargaining position at the table and our negotiating position at the table as well, Mr. President. So, going forward, I just want to be cautious in that regard.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Is there going to be a project manager assigned or a point of contact assigned to make sure that the project is performed
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, a motion to waive the reading of each individual matter that's on the paper, and a motion to accept the committee report.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and I appreciate you bearing with my long-winded resolution this evening. However, I feel as though it's very important that we begin to hold our public utilities a little bit more accountable to the work that they do on our roadways, on our sidewalks, as well as dealing with the trees that end up getting wrapped around public utility wires up in the sky, Mr. President. So I bring this resolution forward based upon a constituent call that I received back about a year ago. Doonan Street was done over, and public utilities were on Doonan Street, and they dug quite a large trench, and it was a trench that went up the whole length of the street. And the size of the equipment actually damaged the majority of the street up there, and the street's still not been repaired, Mr. President. And I know that there are a number of other streets in the community that have this same situation happening. I'd like a list of the streets as noted in the resolution. I'd ask my council colleagues to join me in supporting this resolution. I've also asked for the trees that need to be cut down that are the responsibilities of public utilities. Just in the news last week, Mr. President, we saw couple down in Abington who were struck by a falling tree branch and killed. And there are many trees in the city that are wrapped up in the electric wires and the city of Medford will not cut them. The public utility is responsible for cutting them. So I'd like a list of those to make sure that we can monitor the work and be sure that it's done, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Can I further amend the paper, Mr. President, to ask for a directed patrol there for the next couple of weeks, just to be sure that we monitor the activity there as well as that it's getting more and more stuck in town. So if you want to go down that route, please. Thanks, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: On Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President, I think we've made a number of resolutions relative to the C-Click-Fix program since the press release came out about its inception. And I think that Councilor Falco, Councilor Luxembourg, the Grand Trafficking Committee, the Board of Governors, and I think that I understand and can kind of grasp as to how this program is going to work, whether or not we have enough personnel and manpower behind it to support the initiatives. The timelines that are being set forward, Mr. President, so with that being said, I owe a lot of your support. So it was a matter of being able to be able to pay this forward.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This new resolution was filed. I just wanted to just elect a notice to the residents on the street. A couple of weeks ago, I went up to the engineering division after a simple phone call from a constituent asking about the lines that are located on the street for cutting and excavation. And I went to the engineering division, and they said, Since that time, they have put, what was the construction? residence doors. However, there are still some questions, Mr. President. So I'd ask the administration to provide us with a timeline of construction, at least at this point, versus the scope and purposes for a drainage project that this council actually approved the funding for. There are going to be a significant number of restrictions on the road at this point, as is the number of pedestrians in the absence of residents. I'd just like to talk about communication, the engineering and planning to the residents of the road. First of all, as to what's going to be going on, what constraints are going to be in place, what restrictions are going to be on the expected potential of the road.
[Adam Knight]: Do we? Yes. And we invited her, but I think it might've been when Councilor Falco was.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to amend the paper, Mr. President, and ask the administration the question as to whether or not we actually received a qualified, received and accepted a qualified bidder for the running of the community access programs.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe when Barbara Kerr was here recently discussing some of the plans for the library, one of the things that was raised was that there was a deeded restriction on the library because that land was donated to the city of Medford and the only purpose that it could be used for was for a library, if I remember correctly. So maybe we can ask that question to see as to whether or not there's a deeded restriction on the library and as to see as to whether or not there is any other use that would be appropriate there other than a library.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, I think it's also very important for us to point out the fact that every time that the library comes up on our agenda, this council chamber has a good number of people here that are speaking in support of it. And if we're going to talk about changing the use of the library, the direction the library is going in, I think it's very important to include these individuals as well. So I'd ask that the friends of the public library be invited to our next committee of the whole meeting when it does take place to discuss this matter. I'd also ask that the city clerk compile a list of all the individuals that have come up to speak in favor of issues going on at the library so that an invitation could be extended to them as well. As amended by Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: And just to be clear, Mr. President, if we're going to, when I said invite the friends of the library and those people who have come down to speak in favor of the needs at the library, it's if in fact this council is going to deliberate a discussion of changing the use of the library and moving it away from just being a library, whether it's to add a second floor, make that TV three, or whatever it is, whatever direction we're going, I think that they should be involved in at least the conversation to provide their input, because those are the people that have supported the efforts of the library. When the library went through its worst times, they were the ones that held it up.
[Adam Knight]: I'm more concerned about the building and the actual use than I am about the money coming from the state.
[Adam Knight]: I'm pretty sure that for quite some time now, a plan's been published that they were going to put the public access station up at the high school. So I don't think that this should be a surprise that it's going up the high school. It's been in the newspaper. It's been in the transcript, right, Alex? It's been in there, right? You put it in the paper that it was going to go up the high school, right? The public access station. Now they start construction, now it's a big surprise. I mean, you know, I'm a little confused about the disconnect there, Mr. President. We've all been well aware that that's the location that they've... said that they were going to put it. Whether we like it or not, it's a different story. Whether we like it or not, it's a different story. But, you know, we know that that's what they're going to do it. Now we see progress in them breaking ground, and now we're not happy that they're breaking ground. I'm a little confused by this whole thing, Mr. President, to be honest with you. But that's just me. Thank you, Councilman Knight.
[Adam Knight]: One minor correction, Mr. President. Councilor Lungo-Koehn and I discussed it earlier. She brought to my attention that the St. Rayfield's 5th and 6th grade boys basketball team were not only the Northeast Regional champions, but they were also the New England CYO champions.
[Adam Knight]: Present.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. It's with great pleasure that I'm here this evening to endorse Dean Bruno and his candidacy. I've known the Brunos for a number of years. They're a long time Medford family, grew up in West Medford and Dean now resides up in the Heights. He has over a 20 year career in law enforcement and prior to that he had worked in government for about five years, Mr. President. So I have absolutely no problem with this appointment and I would move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, although I don't know the gentleman personally, I have reviewed his resume and it's rather impressive, and I'd ask that the committee move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, yes, thank you very much. As noted, this matter has been before the council a couple of occasions prior. It's relative to some surveying problems that were had with the Winthrop Street drainage project. It's my understanding that There is litigation subrogation that's in place relatively. Am I looking at the right one? No, I'm not looking at the right one. 15-734.
[Adam Knight]: This is the DPW facility.
[Adam Knight]: It was underestimated. It was underestimated on the mitigation for the pollution underground, Mr. President. Yes, yes. And we've passed a couple of readings on this. And I would move for approval on the third reading. It has to get paid one way or the other, Mr. President. Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, it's my understanding that this is just a simple clarification of the existing outdoor dining license ordinance that's in place. There was some misinterpretation of the legislative intent that's been addressed through the language in this newly crafted zoning ordinance, and I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. It's with great pleasure that I'm here this evening to endorse Dean Bruno and his candidacy. I've known the Brunos for a number of years. They're a long-time Medford family, grew up in West Medford, and Dean now resides up in the Heights. He has over a 20-year career in law enforcement, and prior to that, he had worked in government for about five years, Mr. President, so I have absolutely no problem with this appointment, and I would move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, although I don't know the gentleman personally, I have reviewed his resume and it's rather impressive, and I'd ask that the committee move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, yes, thank you very much. As noted, this matter has been before the Council a couple of occasions prior. It's relative to some surveying problems that were had with the Winthrop Street drainage project. It's my understanding that There is litigation subrogation that's in place relatively. Am I looking at the right one? No, I'm not looking at the right one.
[Adam Knight]: This is the DPW facility.
[Adam Knight]: It was underestimated on the mitigation for the pollution underground, Mr. President. Yes, yes. And we've passed a couple of readings on this. And I would move for approval on the third reading. It has to get paid one way or the other, Mr. President. Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, it's my understanding that this is just a simple clarification of the existing outdoor dining license ordinance that's in place. There was some misinterpretation of the legislative intent that's been addressed through the language in this newly crafted zoning ordinance, and I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to remove this paper from the table and withdraw it, Mr. President. This was a paper that I had filed. The issue is moot. It's been addressed.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, first of all, I'd like to thank Councilor Caraviello for bringing this resolution forward. He's done a great job on behalf of the veterans here in the community since this election. He served diligently as the Chairman of the Veterans Services Subcommittee. With that being said, Mr. President, I'd like to amend the paper and ask that the Director of Veterans Service provide us with a list of all veteran, war, and military monuments, memorials, and plaques in the city. And I'd also like to ask the Director of Veterans Services if he can establish a maintenance schedule for said war, memorial, monuments and plaques that are across the city, Mr. President. I think that this is something that should fall within the purview of our Director of Veteran Services. I think that he should be the one that's really taking the lead on this, and that he's the one that's helping coordinate this. So with that being said, I move for approval as amended.
[Adam Knight]: I was wondering if I could ask Councilor Caraviello a question. Yes. At 90 years of age, is Mr. Sloan still working?
[Adam Knight]: 90.
[Adam Knight]: Beautiful. Beautiful.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to take the papers in the hands of the clerk.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. Councilor Caraviello actually brought this very issue up several weeks ago asking what was going on with that steel plate. And the response that we received back from the DPW was that it's a catch basin that has been plated because it has collapsed and is scheduled to be repaired. Well, today as I was driving home from the office, I did notice that the steel plate is about six to eight inches off the ground. Puddles pooling, Mr. President, due to the weather conditions, and it just needs a little bit of an adjustment so that it makes the situation a little bit safer there. I think part of the problem is the fact that it's very close to a bus stop, and when the bus pulls over, it stops right next to the plate and then drives over the plate and adjusts it due to the weight of the vehicle. So with that being said, I'd ask that this matter be approved by the Council and forwarded to the DPW.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd like to thank Councilman Knox for bringing this resolution forward. On two occasions, this council has approved resolutions to put a crosswalk at Forest Street between King Ave and Cedar Road to allow safe crossing of Forest Street to the newly renovated McNally Playground. And I'd ask that we amend the paper to receive an update on the status thereof, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: So on that motion. Mr. President, it has to be recorded in opposition on this matter, Mr. President. I feel as though the process could have been handled a little differently, and I'm not supportive of it. Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I had the distinct honor and pleasure of working for Senator Shannon, as did Councilor Marks, as well as Councilor Caraviello's son, Richard. And I just think that it would be fitting and quite a tribute to the service and dedication that this gentleman gave the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the citizens of this district over his 20 plus years as a state senator and his 20 years before that as a law enforcement officer. Senator Shannon died of cancer back in 2005. He gave me a shot right out of college as an intern, and I ended up becoming a member of his staff and worked with him from 1999 until his untimely passing. He's sadly missed. He's made a great deal of change and effectuated the number of people's lives in a positive way in this community, Mr. President. I think it's only fitting that we remember and reflect upon the contributions that he's made to the citizens of Medford.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. Thank you very much. It's my understanding of the language that was adopted here in the city of Medford that there are a number of exemptions, but there's one big exemption and that's the automatic exemption for the $100,000 off your And that, I believe, is an exemption that you don't need to apply for. That's an automatic exemption. So if your home is valued at $300,000, you have an automatic exemption on the first $100,000, and then the assessment will be leveled on to the $200,000 figure. So I wanted to be clear that there's no application process for the initial $100,000 exemption. That's an automatic exemption that's applicable to everybody.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. I'd like to amend the paper to request a report from the C-Click Fix Program relative to the requests to remove graffiti.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. In our council packet this week, we received a response. to Mayor Stephanie Muccini-Burke from Paul Moki, the Building Commissioner, in response to this Council's inquiry as to recommendations relative to Zoning Ordinance 194-191. The intent of that particular division is to reduce congestion in the streets and to contribute to traffic safety by assuring adequate places for the standing and storing of off-street motor vehicles. Mr. President, we have a response that provides us with a number of different options here. And in the interest of due diligence and an open and transparent process, I'd like to call for a Zoning and Ordinance Subcommittee, Mr. President, to review the response and to make recommendations to this August body as to changes in our zoning law to allow people to park in the front of their homes and change the current zoning ordinances that would call for 15 feet of frontage being required for the front yard of each home. So with that being said, Mr. President, I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And Councilor Marks, thank you very much, because I concur 110 percent with what you're saying. We have individuals in City Hall that have a relationship with those in state agencies that have that so-called backdoor phone number that they can pick up and call and be connected to the government affairs liaison at these agencies, whereas a regular citizen would have to pick up the phone and go through the switchboard and then be bounced around from department to department until they get the right person on the phone and then be told, oh, sorry, there's nothing we can do. We'll get back to you in a day, a week, a month, a year, not hear anything. I think that the whole purpose and intent of the see, click, fix program is to see it, to click it, and to fix it, not to see it, click it, and get a homework assignment to go fix it yourself. So with that being said, Councilor Marks, thank you for bringing this issue forward. I support this measure wholeheartedly.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. Thank you, Ms. Miller and Chief Gilberti, for being here this evening. Chief, can you tell me how old the current equipment is?
[Adam Knight]: And the SCBA for people that aren't firefighters is the mask and the oxygen tank that they wear when they go into a burning building. And the last time we've had them is from 1999. Mr. President, I don't think anybody behind this rail drives a car from 1999. I think that this is a good appropriation and something that we should support, especially based on the fact that we're going to get a 90% reimbursement from the government or up to a 90% reimbursement from the government, uh, God willing. So, um, with that being said, Mr. President, I think this is a, a good paper to move on. I think that it's going to make our firefighters safer and that it should be supported.
[Adam Knight]: I'll arrest that we have a full body, Mr. President. I'm sorry? I'll waive the suspension. I'll waive my motion to suspend the rules until we have a full body.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to suspend the rules, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to take paper 16295 relative to the personnel ordinance related to our fire department and their compensation package that is now completed at its first and second reading, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd move for approval. The reason the matter was tabled was not that anybody behind this rail had a problem with it, I don't think, but it was to give the public an opportunity to digest the package. and to have an opportunity to speak if, in fact, they were opposed to it. It doesn't seem like anybody here in the audience is here today to oppose the hardworking men and women of our fire department from receiving a cost of living adjustment. So as such, Mr. President, I would move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, as a point of order, we have paper one six dash three, three, nine offered by Councilor for alcohol, which is a similar subject matter, uh, speaks about the complete streets grants program, pedestrian safety issues and the like. So it might make sense to take this matter up with the other papers that we're discussing at this point in time. However, um, I'll leave that up to the body, but, um, it seems like, you know, the three papers that we've discussed right now all have something to do with, uh, pedestrian safety and the complete streets grant program, but we can keep it separated if you'd like. It just seems like we're having the conversation, go with the flow, you know what I mean? Instead of stopping the conversation, start it again later on in the meeting.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And I'd like to thank Superintendent Belson publicly for his work in putting a packet together for us to review here. In the review of this packet, I did notice that one of the steps that the City of Medford has taken is to train all of our school nurses how to administer Narcan. And one of the questions that I would have for the superintendent is that that's an excellent policy to put in place, but what happens after the Narcan is administered? Is there a follow-up policy? what controls are in place to ensure that an individual who required the administration of Narcan is going to be provided with the resources and tools to go towards recovery, Mr. President. So I'd like to amend the paper and ask that question to the superintendent of schools as well.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I certainly have no problem reviewing our zoning and the zoning here in the city of Medford. I do think it is due time. However, to conduct a zoning needs analysis, I think we first need to determine what it is we're trying to accomplish. Are we trying to accomplish increasing the stock of affordable housing? Are we trying to accomplish preserving more open space or creating more open space. We're trying to accomplish creating overlay districts so that we can have mixed use development. So those are some of the questions that I have for the councilor, Mr. President, and I'm hoping through you that he'll be able to answer some of those. Ultimately, we have an open space plan here in the city of Medford. We have an affordable housing plan here in the city of Medford and many other plans that are in place. And I think that based on my reading on this, that the council would mean that we conduct a zoning needs analysis to be sure that these plans come to fruition. However, I did have the question, and I'd feel more comfortable voting in favor of the matter if the gentleman could explain that to me a little bit better.
[Adam Knight]: Awesome. Chair recognizes Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I'm very reluctant to spend $200,000 or $100,000 with no specific goal in mind other than a review. I certainly think it's a good resolution. I certainly think it's something that needs to be looked at. I've brought forward resolutions in the past two meetings that have discussed zoning ordinances and the way that our zoning is set up, trying to see if we can address the issue of people being able to put an extra parking spot in front of their homes even though it's in front of the home and it's not legal right now because of the zoning ordinance. So I certainly understand what coming from, I just think it needs to be looked at a little bit harder. Ultimately, you know, if we want to focus our efforts just on the zoning in Medford Square, maybe we focus on just the zoning in Medford Square. Maybe that doesn't cost $200,000. Maybe we can accomplish that goal by spending $25,000. But until we really figure out what our goal is, spending the money to hire somebody with no goal at the end of the day just doesn't make sense to me, Mr. President. But with that being said, I certainly would support the matter going to subcommittee so we can properly vet this because I think it's a noble cause.
[Adam Knight]: Well, it says the administration and the city council take all measures necessary, including if it has to happen, hire an outside consultant, but I think that If we sit down in subcommittee and try to focus our efforts on establishing goals, we might not need to go that far to hire an outside consultant to examine all the zoning. Maybe limit the scope of it or expand the scope of it for that matter. I just think that there's a certain need for discussion. I don't think that the administration is going to be opposed to working with the city council to take all measures necessary to ensure that the neighborhoods in the city of Medford are protected. I don't think that this council is going to stand in the way of that either. I just think we want to do it the right way and have a plan and a goal.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, while we're talking snow, I think it might make sense for us to request, so I'd like to amend the paper, that the DPW director report back the status of our snow and ice budget.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I'd like to further amend the paper to request that the highway superintendent make recommendations as to what the proper equipment would be to use to clean it, to clear a sidewalk.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Chairman, after consultation with the other members on the subcommittee, we'd be willing to meet on the 19th of April at 6 p.m. in the council committee room. What night of the week is that? That is a Tuesday evening, and we'd ask the city clerk to post the notices.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, this is all contingent on being able to secure the folks from the administration to be able to attend.
[Adam Knight]: Yes. Um, Mr. And Mrs. Basile have been long friends of mine, uh, going back to my early days in high school when I befriended their son Jimmy and, uh, they opened their home to me, Mr. President. And, uh, this past weekend at Carol's diner, at Carol's Restaurant, they celebrated their 40th wedding anniversary. And it's very fitting that they had the celebration at Carol's Restaurant because in 1975, they actually met. at carol's restaurant and began dating shortly thereafter. We're married at St. James church over in Councilor mox's neighborhood. And, uh, the rest is history. Mr. President, they've raised two beautiful children, two great, great, great kids, Jason and James, who were very close friends of mine. And they have three beautiful grandchildren, Ana, Mia and Madison. Um, so I'd like to wish daughter and Jim a very happy 40th wedding anniversary and, uh, God bless them both on motion approved by Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. Last week, a gentleman from Ridgeway Road was here and we had some discussions about some of the problems relative to traffic that he's having on his roadway. There's also several residents on Upland and Leonard Circle who have called concerning the amount of vehicles, meaning volume, as well as the speed of vehicles that are traveling up and down that road. Anybody who knows Ridgeway Road knows it runs from Fulton to the Fells Way, is a major cut through street. And there are posted signs that would say that it's resident access only for certain hours, very similar to the recommendation that this council made. on behalf of Councilor Marksley's resolution for Oakland Street, Mr. President. So I'm asking that the Traffic Division of our Medford Police Department direct some patrols during the rush hour times of day at that location. Driving down a resident-only roadway when it's clearly posted that it's only for resident access is actually a surchargeable offense, Mr. President. So I think people that are using this road as a cut-through will learn very quick when they get an insurance surcharge that they should obey the signage that's on the street. So with that being said, I move for approval, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, thank you very much, and thank you, Councilor Lungo-Koehn, for bringing this issue up. The assessor's office will be handling the notification issues. The role of the Community Preservation Act Ad Hoc Subcommittee is to create the mandated community preservation commission and the structure thereof, which would focus on whether or not there are term limits, how the people are selected, the criteria for selection, so on and so forth. So the subcommittee has not had any dealings with the administration relative to the issuance of variances, so on and so forth. And that's part of the legislation that was passed. So I think that that's something that's a little bit outside the scope of what the Ad Hoc Subcommittee on the CPA is doing. What we're doing here is creating a list of recommended proposals for the general public to give, provide input on, and then for the city council to examine and then make decisions with all this information that they have. So with that being said, I guess it's a really long, long, long way of telling Councilor Longo no. We don't have any information on that.
[Adam Knight]: The President Yes, Mr. President. That's Friday night. We have the Russo event, the Raise Up of Russo. And then, on Saturday evening at the Intercontinental Hotel, Mr. President, an annual event is being held, the Autism Gala, sponsored by Local 25. And annually, the Autism Gala is held to raise money for autism awareness here in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and across the country, Mr. President. And tickets can be found at www.teamstidslocal25.com if people are interested in going.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, thank you very much. I have reviewed the paperwork and everything does appear to be in order. However, I did speak with the merits in the audience before the meeting started and they do have a couple of questions. If they'd like to address any of those questions, we'd be happy to do so prior to taking legislative action. Who does? Come up to the podium. I think Councilor Miranda might be in a position to answer some of the questions.
[Adam Knight]: I just need that paper back.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And thank you to Councilor Caraviello for bringing this initiative forward. I can certainly understand why he's done it. The program's been in place now for a year, and we've made a lot of requests, and we've asked for a lot of different things, and we've seen some inaction. So I can certainly appreciate where he's coming from. However, I would agree with Councilor Marks that I think a meeting would be more beneficial, more productive, and quite frankly, get us all on the same page. So in looking at the matter that's before us this evening, Mr. President, I think it's safe to say that we're not going to have any consensus tonight, which is fine. So I would motion that the matter be referred to a committee of the whole between the administration for public parking in the council to do an annual review of the last year, the first year of implementation, and to discuss the pros and cons, the complaints that we've received, so on and so forth, and then maybe help shape a new plan going forward as to what's going to work best for Medford, Mr. President. So I would recommend that we go to subcommittee and concur with Councilor Markson and Councilor Lungo-Koehn on this matter. And I would make that a motion.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President, I do have one question through you to the sponsor of this resolution. Are House Bill 463 and Senate Bill 312 the exact same language? They're not. Can you explain the differences, Ms. Duggan, if you don't mind? And which version would your organization prefer to see? What do you think would be the best fit for Massachusetts and Medford?
[Adam Knight]: And, Mr. President, through you to the Speaker, Mr. President, what goes into a screening? How long does the process take? I mean, I think we're all familiar when, you know, we went down to the Brooks School and they made us look through those glasses and follow the apple around or raise your left hand and your right hand when you heard the beeps and stand up against the wall in gym class when they checked your spine. What goes into – do they still do that? I'm sorry, physical education. My father's yelling at the TV right now as he's sitting at home. But if you could explain maybe a little bit as to what goes into the process.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I don't think you can argue with those numbers. That's for sure. Um, I'm in full support of this resolution and, uh, I would move approval on the motion for approval. Chair recognizes Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, ma'am. Chair recognizes Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President, I'd like to amend the paper to request what the permitting process is as well. Especially since last week, a pot of potty popped up in front of my house on High Street on the sidewalk. And also, Mr. President, I'd like to see what the fee structure is, not only for youth organizations, but for anybody that would like to receive a permit to put a protoparty on a parcel. Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Very good. So on the motion for approval by Councilor Caraviello, Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President, Councilor Caraviello took the words right out of my mouth. I know that Mei-Ling's has been open late night for a very long time and I wanted to be sure that they were allowed to continue to do so because I may, once in a while, pop in there after 11 o'clock at night to get a little bite to eat. So I wish you all the best of luck. So you have my support on this matter and thank you very much for appearing this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Earlier this evening the Subcommittee on Zoning and Ordinances met to discuss paper number 16309 at the request of Councilor Marks and the concurrence of this Council. This paper was before us last week and it was an amendment to the outdoor dining license. This amendment to the outdoor dining license clarified the improper interpretation of the legislative intent. It takes nothing out. Presently, this is a $25 fee, Mr. President, for an individual to apply for an outdoor dining license. The new language added to the ordinance would read, the provisions of this article shall be applicable and specifically limited to sidewalks and other property which is under the jurisdiction of the city. or any of its departments, notwithstanding the provisions of this article, all other laws, regulations, ordinances, and codes that pertain or relate to outdoor dining shall continue to be applicable and in full force in effect." So this change, Mr. President, based on the determination of the subcommittee with the advice and consent of the city solicitor, reported it out, indicating that all it did was clarify the legislative intent of the passage of the previous ordinance back in 2014. And the subcommittee reported it out favorably, Mr. President. As such, I would move for approval on the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Can the clerk explain after the three readings I waived what the process is in terms of notification, so on and so forth?
[Adam Knight]: So the advertisement requirement still remains in place. However, the final reading at the meeting would be waived. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. With all due respect to the speaker, this council hasn't had its own questions answered, never mind those that were made in campaign promises, Councilor Penta. So I can certainly appreciate where you're coming from.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Councilor Knight. I found the request, Mr. President, to be a moot point earlier in this meeting. The council has requested to sit down with the mayor and the administration and Republic Parking to speak about the program and the direction that it's going in. So I think that this action has already been taken. It has. The chair determines that. So on the motion of council on night.
[Adam Knight]: I believe that the, can the clerk please read back the amendments to the paper that were passed earlier this evening?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, in review of the ordinance and in my discussions with Councilor Rumley when I received this in my packet, I see no problem with the proposed language and I would move for approval. If my fellow colleagues have anything to say, I'd certainly welcome the opportunity. But as far as I can see, this looks like the paper just clarifies a problem that was discussed and identified by the council in previous sessions and terms. And right now, it's our opportunity to correct the inaccuracies of the prior ordinance, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Well, we have a motion before us. Councilor Knight. I certainly have no problem with reviewing the matter in subcommittee. However, I feel as though where it's a zoning issue, that the zoning and ordinance subcommittee would be the appropriate place to look at it, if in fact that's the approach we're going to take.
[Adam Knight]: I withdraw my motion for approval, Mr. President, and make a motion to refer to the zoning and ordinance subcommittee.
[Adam Knight]: All those opposed? Motion carries. Mr. President, I'd like to ask the clerk of the city council to post a meeting for next Tuesday at 6 p.m. for the zoning and ordinance subcommittee meeting for the purpose of taking up this paper. Does the clerk have that?
[Adam Knight]: While we're under suspension. While we're under suspension. We have Ms. Miller here from the mayor's office. I'd like to move to take a paper 15-736 off the table, the loan order for the Winthrop Street drainage project.
[Adam Knight]: All those opposed? Motion carries. Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President. This paper was laid on the table at the close of last session. It's been on the table now for over 90 days. Ms. Mill is here before us this evening. I would wonder if she'd be willing to give us a brief rundown as to where we are in the process of the subrogation between the vendor that we have taken to court and the situation with the Winthrop street rain project.
[Adam Knight]: And Ms. Miller, if I remember correctly, the engineering firm that was hired gave us some engineering plans relative to the replacement of the drains on Winthrop Street. Those plans were inaccurate. Public utilities had to be moved, which resulted in a cost overrun on this project, if I remember correctly.
[Adam Knight]: And this $350,000 is owed to the people that actually did the work as opposed to the engineering firm, correct?
[Adam Knight]: While we're under suspension, Councilor Knight, I move to take paper 15-734, loan order additional DPW facility project funds in the amount of $300,000 off the table.
[Adam Knight]: for a first reading. Mr. President, looking through the breakdown of the legislative history of this piece of legislation, this paper was brought before the council due to underestimation of contaminants at a DPW site, and as such, there was some cost overruns related to the removal of contamination. Because of that, we had to add to the project scope, and that cost about $300,000 is my understanding, but I think Ms. Miller will be able to give us a better breakdown than I.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor. Motion to take paper 16307 out of order, Mr. President. A petition for a common victual is licensed by Denise Baker, the manager for ADTM. LLC doing business as Salvatore's 55 High Street, Medford, Mass.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. Last week, a gentleman named Mr. Serino from Bradshaw street came before this council and he spoke about a problem that he had relative to adding an additional parking spot at his house. And, um, I did a little bit of research on the subject and if we look at our, Zoning ordinances, Mr. President. In division three, we have parking and loading, section 94-191, general parking and loading requirements. It is the intent of this division to reduce congestion in the streets and to contribute to traffic safety by assuring adequate places for standing and storing of off-street motor vehicles associated with any use of land. Continue on, Mr. President, through that division, and what we'll find is that under section three, parking spaces not enclosed in a structure may be provided anywhere on the lot except in an inner court except that no parking may be provided within the required front yards in sf1, sf2, and gr districts. Sf1, sf2, and gr districts, Mr. President, require maybe 15 feet of footage, frontage, at each home, Mr. President. So in my discussions with Mr. Bavuso and Mr. Moki, they said that this has been one of the most voluminous requests that they've received in their office. More often than not, people are coming down that say they'd like to add a parking spot, but they're not able to. because the local zoning ordinance is prohibited. So in an effort to see if we can alleviate some of the congestion in our city streets and provide more off-street parking, I'd suggest that the building department provide us with recommendations to amend our zoning ordinance in this regard, Mr. President. So they're the experts. They understand what would be best in terms of frontage and rearage and so on and so forth. But I think this is a step in the right direction to ensure that residents in the community have ample parking on their streets. and in their, on their properties. And I would move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knife. Mr. President, thank you very much, and through you to Ms. Miller. Ms. Miller, it's my understanding that this matter was in negotiations for quite a bit of time and was approaching the stages of arbitration?
[Adam Knight]: And the parties were able to sit down and negotiate this agreement, and both sides are comfortable with it?
[Adam Knight]: And has the membership of Local 1032 ratified this contract at this point in time?
[Adam Knight]: I'd move for approval of the matter, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I think the, the men and women of the Medford fight apartment in local 10 32, uh, more concerned about getting their cost of living adjustment than they are about getting an email account right now, Mr. President. I think the matter that's before this council is whether or not we feel as though they do their raise, and we can waive these three readings.
[Adam Knight]: All right. The email issue, though, Ms. Miller said she was going to bring it back to the administration. So I don't know what more we need to do. I mean, why do we need to take a roll call vote on an issue that we've already sent them three times and we have the word from the budget? It's been over 90 days.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and through you to Ms. Miller. Ms. Miller, this paper that's before us this evening was one of a couple of different options that the administration looked at, is that correct? In terms of, I think at the Committee of the Whole, there were a couple of different options that were presented to us, whether or not we wanted to see if we could build up on the second floor, and whether or not we wanted to just look at repairing the roof and that was it. And this seems like this was, based on my conversations with the administration and the Committee of the Whole, this seemed like the way to go. But Councilor Lungo does bring up a good point. So you're saying that it would take four weeks from the date that we approved this money to get someone out there and get the report
[Adam Knight]: And then, say, we get a report back that says it's going to cost $50,000 to fix the roof of the library. How long in your experience would that take to be taken care of, put out to bid, qualified bidder selected, and have construction staff?
[Adam Knight]: So with the approval of this funding tonight, we can expect to see, um, completion of the, I should say, start of the construction work at the library within the next three months.
[Adam Knight]: And, um, perhaps at the report, as it's safe to say that we're not going to know what the situation is at the library until we get this done.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, I think I'd have to agree with Ms. Miller that I would just throw in good money after bad over here. And until we do an assessment to figure out what's going on with the roof, um, I think this is, $18,000 that's wisely spent. I'd a second the motion for approval.
[Adam Knight]: President, I'd like to be recorded in opposition to the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if the solicitor is available, I just have a couple of questions for him.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and through you to Mr. Rumley, thank you for being here this evening. In reviewing this piece of proposed legislation, Mr. President, it's my understanding that by the council approving this matter, we would be bypassing the requirements to collect signatures to put this matter on the ballot, and we would also be erasing the question of asking the voters as to whether or not they felt the charter review was appropriate. Is that correct?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I don't feel comfortable bypassing the electorate. in this process whatsoever, and I'd ask to be recorded in opposition when this paper comes up for a vote. I think when we look at historically what the council has done, Mr. President, it's when initiative petition matters have come before the council and there's been a request to ask that it be placed on the ballot. Absent the signatures, the council was consistent in their application of requiring signatures, and I, for one, feel as though that's the best practice, Mr. President. I certainly feel as though chatter review is a noble cause. However, it's the process for which I am opposed and not the principal. So with that being said, I rest, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I don't understand how individuals going to collect signatures to put an item on the ballot, which would be one of the purest forms of the democratic process, would be too much to ask. That's all I'm saying, Mr. President. I feel as though there's a process in place. Why are we going to tinker with one of the oldest constitutions in the country? Why are we going to tinker with the Constitution of the United States of America that was based upon Massachusetts' Constitution to collect these signatures, to bypass them? This process, Mr. President, I just have a real problem with this process, Mr. President. It sounds like it's agenda-driven. And I have a real problem with it, Mr. President. That's why I'm voting in opposition. I rest at that, Mr. President. That's why I'm in opposition. It's a process argument. It's a process argument. I don't like the process. I feel as though we're bypassing the process. And I think that the people should have the right to participate, and there should be full participation, Mr. President, full participation. And that's where I'm coming from. I don't want words to be put in my mouth.
[Adam Knight]: I think this is the problem. This is the problem. This is where I'm coming from. People don't know what we're doing. What are we doing? What are we doing? He doesn't know. He's been to every single meeting. He ran charter review. He ran, he ran a caucus for charter review here, Mr. President. He doesn't even know what the paper that's coming out and he's just speaking in favor of it. This is why we need to collect the signatures and we need to go through the process. This is why. So people can get their questions answered so they can be full participation.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Madam Vice President. Mr. President, I think this is a great resolve, a great resolution. The Subcommittee on Rules will be meeting tomorrow evening. I'd ask that the paper be referred to the Subcommittee on Rules for deliberation.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And piggybacking on Councilor Falco's amendment, Mr. President, I'd ask that Also, any data related to overdoses, opiate overdoses be provided with the crime data. The community has access to a GIS mapping system, and I think it might make sense for us to begin to mapping, to begin to start mapping where our crimes are occurring and where our high concentration of drug overdoses are to see if there's a trend, Mr. President. So I might ask that that information be included. Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Uh, Mr. President, thank you very much. And Mr. Serino, thank you for being here. Um, I can attest to the good work that Budweiser does with its neighbors and I can certainly attest to the good work that you do in the community. So thank you very much for being here. Um, this council passed a resolution one five dash seven, eight, nine. And in our packets this week was a response from the chief of police. and that resolution was requesting that they made revisions to the resident parking permit process and implemented zones or went citywide. And the response reads that we've been discussing revisions to the resident permit parking program. Before anything is implemented, we will hold public meetings in order to seek input. In the meantime, we're using a common sense approach so that residents of adjoining permit parking streets are allowed to park on other permit parking streets in the neighborhood. Some initial feedback to citywide permit parking has been negative. Not every neighborhood has the same parking issues, so formalizing the neighborhood approach may be the appropriate steps. I tend to agree with Councilor Marks that the process that we have in place right now, it served a purpose and it met a need, but that need has evolved. And I think it's time for us to step up into the 21st century and to, as Mr. Serino said, be proactive and be visionary and have the foresight to figure out what we see coming down the line. So with that being said, Mr. President, the Chief is looking to seek public input and maybe get some suggestions. So I'm wholeheartedly in support of Councilor Marks' idea to maybe begin to have some hearings or a committee or put something together for us to gather some information to share with the Traffic Commission to make this process a little bit quicker, more expedient, and also so that we can all participate in it, Mr. President. So with that being said, thank you very much Councilor Marksley for bringing it up. I think it's a great idea. And Mr. Serino, I'm sorry it was at your expense, but it looks like, you know, this is something that I certainly feel strongly about and I'd be supporting going forward.
[Adam Knight]: I'll yield to the young lady. Councilor Knight. What she has to say is far more important than what I have to say, Mr. President. She's the one that has to live with it, so I'll be happy to
[Adam Knight]: Um, so through you to Councilor Marks, uh, the street has never been resident in the past, and this would be an effort to make it resident because what I've seen, um, work in other neighborhoods is resident access only signs between certain hours, as opposed to restricting the parking on the street between seven and nine. I don't know what's going to work best in this neighborhood, Mr. President. I don't. Just another option that's out there. But if you drive down, say, Winthrop Street, and you get to Rural Ave. Rural Ave. has a sign that says, no right turn between the hours of 4 p.m. and 6 p.m. Maybe that's another option that we can look at if there's no success with the petition in seeking. The request is to?
[Adam Knight]: I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I got tied up with the permitting because of the last conversation we had. I'm saying we just, they get, they're going through the process to get the permitting. Okay. I'm sorry. I missed that. I missed that. Um, move approval, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, and again, I apologize for getting confused there, resident only. I was thinking resident parking only as opposed to resident access only. But one reason I think this is a great idea, Mr. President, is because if, in fact, there is enforcement there, it is a surchargeable offense. If you go down the road when those restrictions are in place, it's the same thing as driving down a do not enter street. So it's going to be a surchargeable offense, and people will get the picture relatively quickly when they get a $700 surcharge.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, thank you very much. I'd like to amend the paper to ask the administration to report back when the current operating contract ends. It's my understanding that the administration and the DCR entered into an operating contract that was a defined term of either three or five years. And I think that that's coming up on expiration, Mr. President. Also, I'd like to ask the administration whether or not they're going to be pursuing a response to the RFP, and whether or not this RFP would contain language that allows the city to retain a right of first refusal as to whether or not they want to be the operator.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, as many of you are aware, I reside on the corner of Winthrop Street and High Street. And every time I go to get my mail, I've received a number of questions about this message board that's been sitting there for six, maybe eight months. At one point, it was flashing and said something, but that was so long ago, I can't remember what. So I would like to ask the administration to take the appropriate steps to have it removed in the interest of public safety, quality of life, and neighborhood beautification.
[Adam Knight]: Oh, on that note, Mr. President, I did receive a call from my highway superintendent, Mr. Tanaglia, who said that the DPW is open for business and are soliciting requests for pothole repairs. So if anybody has any, uh, I swear to God, he really did call and ask me to do this. Um, but I, Mr. Tanaglia did ask for anybody that has any concerns about, uh, potholes or any potholes that have been identified to either use C click fix. I'll give them a call. Very good.
[Adam Knight]: I was also informed that a port-a-party has been placed in the area in recent days, so there is the potential that construction might be beginning again there or some type of work might be going on, but there is a new Throne Depot box that's also on the corner there that has arrived within the last day or two.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And Mr. Jankowski, thank you for being here this evening. Um, if you've been looking at this petition for the public hearing, it says that, um, the contractor should utilize city of Metro regulations and standards for the restoration, as well as the removal of all the breeze related to this work. And, um, I'm hoping you can explain to me a little bit more about the process and how this works because, um, Now we have some construction that we've approved being performed by the grid that goes out two years or a year. And sometimes the road isn't repaired in a condition that was exactly suitable to the neighbors in the neighborhood. And the process that I've been working with a gentleman named Mr. Carmody would be that they do the best they can, let it set, and then come back the next season. And I'm by no means an engineer and not much of a construction worker either. So I was hoping that you'd be willing to explain the process a little bit so that people can understand how it works. Because I have a number of requests from residents here in the community that aren't too happy with the product that's left out in front of the house. It's not an end result. But it's still having to live with it now for an extended period of time, 8 to 13 months in some situations.
[Adam Knight]: And now you're going to repair it with the same color cement, not asphalt cement? I mean, we're seeing a lot of the sidewalk panels in the city get replaced. We'll see cement, cement, then there'll be a black asphalt panel. Mr. President, I'd like to, um, actually I won't attach it to this paper. I'll file a separate separate matter at our next meeting asking for the grid to report back to us as to the status of their inspections in the community. Um, but at this point, um, I'd move for approval of the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I think as we behind this rail are all aware, a certain dollar figure, $10,000, would require that the public bid process be kicked off. So I think the first question that we need to ask the administration is whether or not A bid has actually been put out for the roof to see if, in fact, the ball is rolling. You know, if we've all banged the table, we've all asked for the roof to be repaired. I think we're all on board that we want to see a new roof on the library. We don't want to see the library leaking. We want to see the library to be a sanctuary in the community. You know, I love quoting Solicitor Rumley. when he speaks of Dick Lee that says that the library is really the only city-owned building that people voluntarily go to. And, you know, people voluntarily go there because they want to utilize the resources that are in place and they want to do so in a fashion that's comfortable to them, Mr. President. Um, so, you know, we put a resolution forward, um, sometime in December, um, the roof was fixed, $5,000 was spent to do that. Uh, in February, Councilor Caraviello put a resolution forward, um, asking for some updates. Uh, the update said that the, you know, the building commissioner has actually met with an engineer and performed an evaluation and a cost proposal for repairs and roof replacement is forthcoming. Um, so Mr. President, I think it's important that we find out exactly where in the process this is. because I know that the public bid process is somewhat cumbersome, and I know that the Baker administration has put forward some proposals to streamline the way that municipalities can purchase, which Ms. Miller is in support of after speaking with her, and she's actually wrote some testimony and spoken at the public hearings on that. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'd ask that the administration report back to us as to the status of the repairs, as to whether or not an RFP has been issued to actually go in there and put a new roof on this building.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Councilor Marks brings up a number of great points, and it got me thinking about, you know, the state of the library and what exactly it looks like. And we all received an email, I believe, over the last week regarding the Henry Putnam Memorial that sits out in front of the library where the old play structure used to be closest to City Hall. And a gentleman came up from Pennsylvania, and he came up with his wife, and his wife's seventh great-grandfather, I believe, fought in the Revolutionary War. And his name is on that monument. So every time they come to Medford, they feel an obligation to, every time they come to Massachusetts, they feel an obligation to come to Medford and to see the memorial. And they were very disappointed at the status and state of disrepair of the memorial, as well as the library, Mr. President. So I'd ask that the administration also take a look at maybe a power wash of the Henry Putnam Memorial over there. You know, when reading the history, it's a pretty interesting story. The gentleman fought at the Battle of Monotony over in Arlington, and he also was a, revolutionary war soldier and war hero, Mr. President. So I think it's very important that we preserve that tradition and that culture here in our community. Also, in the research that I've done, it's my understanding that in order for the library to remain eligible for library funding and grant funding and to retain its accreditation and to not require an accreditation waiver, funding needs to be increased by about two and a half percent over the previous year's appropriation, Mr. President. So that means that the funding in the library budget for next year would have to be 2.5% higher than it was this year. And I think that it might make sense for this council, since we are seriously concerned about the status of the library and the future of the library, that we would make a request to the mayor that she include this figure in the next budget.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. This is a topic that I think we've all looked at, heard about, and discussed at one point or another since this term started. We've had resolutions that have gone to the administration requesting that we take the Donald Trump approach to Oasis and build a wall around it so that people can't park on the sidewalk. We've talked about increasing directed patrols down there. And the more I look into this, Mr. President, the more I examine what they do in other communities, one thing I've seen is that You know, the majority of these 18-wheeler trucks, they're not going to a pocket of residence to go in there and, you know, catch the baseball game. They're making deliveries. These are delivery trucks. And I think that we might be in a good position to restrict the hours the delivery truck can actually make deliveries. And if we restrict those hours, then we can get these trucks off the sidewalks during periods of time when people are more frequently diverting them. It's certainly not going to resolve the situation at this point in time, because without enforcement, restricted loading zones and restricting time to loading zones isn't going to work. However, we can create a structure in place, Mr. President, that has a fine structure, so that if someone is delivering outside the hours of the loading zones, that loading is delineated or restricted, then we can hit them in the pocket where it hurts. Because that's the only thing that's going to make any of these businesses realize that It's beneficial for them to get a $20 ticket for parking on the sidewalk and drop off a $1,000 order. It's a cost benefit. I'm not going to park seven streets down. And I think if we just put up a wall around Oasis or a wall around these areas where these problems with sidewalk parking is going on, it's only going to move this problem down the street further. But it's not going to actually address the problem. It's only going to take a small sample size in that area and just move it down the street, Mr. President. So I think it might make a good idea, and I would like to amend the paper, to have the Community Development Office and the Traffic Commission take a look at some recommendations into restricting the delivery hours in our business districts. And I think that this will ease the burden on our frequently parked sidewalks. And increasing fines. And increasing fines. And increasing fines, Mr. Clerk.
[Adam Knight]: I think if, Mr. President, we want to protect the integrity and quality of life of our communities, we need to have a consistent policy that's applied even-handedly across our business districts. The problems that we see in South Medford Square, as it likes to be called, are significantly different from those that we see in West Medford Square. So, you know, I think that it's something that needs to be deliberated and discussed, and that's why I suggested that we get recommendations back from Community Development and the Traffic Commission. because what works for one might not work for another. And we heard that same situation when the parking enforcement plan was rolled out. What works in Haines Square doesn't necessarily work in West Medford Square. So I think that we would be in a better position to rely on the recommendations of the Traffic Commission and the Community Development Office.
[Adam Knight]: And I think escalating fines, Mr. President, might be the way to do it. First offense, second offense, third offense, fourth offense, and they increase, you know.
[Adam Knight]: On the motion for approval by Councilor Falco, Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President. I certainly would be in support of the resolution. I think it's a good resolution for the city to hire a traffic engineer. This was something that came up through our budget deliberations last year. We did have a debate about it on the council floor at some point in time last year also. However, that occurred after the budget process, so it would have been very difficult for us to have this new position to the budget. With that being said, Mr. President, I think it's very important for us to take a look at where we want to put this traffic engineer, where we want them to work. Do we want them to work on the DPW? Do we want them to work on their engineering? What office do we want to have them in? And also, whether or not we know what the cost of traffic engineer would be. I think they run anywhere from $76,000 to $106,000. I think with my understanding of doing some research, Mr. President. So, um, I certainly support the resolution. Um, you know what I mean? I think if we want to make this really become a reality, uh, we might be able to get a little bit more information to the administration in order to, uh, put it through. So I'd be happy to work with the Councilor, uh, through the subcommittee process or through a committee, the whole process, or just, um, through the legislative process to be sure that we get this done.
[Adam Knight]: Actually, Mr. President, it all came out in the discussion. I wanted to know what recommendations the transition team was receiving from the business community in terms of this process. However, through you to Councilor Caraviello, did the gentleman at the chicken and rice that the chicken and rice guy, I guess we can refer to him as, share with you where the breakdown was, what department it came from. Did it come from the traffic plan? Did it come from licensing? Do you have any idea, Councilor, where exactly the delay was most significant? I'm sorry? Do you have any idea where the delay was most significant? It was less significant.
[Adam Knight]: No, no, no, but I'm saying, you know, it took 14 months. Where was the delay in the process? There are a number of different departments that are involved in the process.
[Adam Knight]: I know that the clerk has a several papers in hand as well. And in looking at the paper before me, we have some petitions and presentations for a couple of taxi operator licenses. And I think based on what I can see over your shoulder there, it might be in these gentlemen's best interest to get out of here and try to get home and battle that weather. It is now snowing. With that being said, Mr. President, I'd like to take papers 16092 and 16093 up so that the individuals in the audience have the opportunity to vote.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President? Councilor Knight? I'd like to amend the paper and ask for a report back from Republic as to what their policy is regarding parking at a disabled meter, whether or not it's a ticketable offense, whether or not you're not supposed to park there, whether or not you're allowed to park there for free, but for the two hour limit. So what is the policy for parking at a broken meter?
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. Um, recently it's been brought to my attention that the Fire Chief has, uh, submitted a service zone plan to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Uh, the service zone plan would delineate the proper operations for the deployment of emergency medical personnel in our community. I'd like to ask that the chief give us a report back as to the status of said report.
[Adam Knight]: Boards and commissions fall under the purview of the mayor, the appointment power. They don't have to be approved by the council or any of that. you know, in terms of what the council can do, we can take legislative action or advisory action, but in terms of establishing, we can establish a board of commission, I'm sure, whether or not we'd have the statutory authority from the state to do it regarding the cemetery or cemetery advisory committee is a different question that I'm not qualified to answer. However, the short answer to the question is no, at this point in time that was posed.
[Adam Knight]: Included in our packets this week, Mr. President, was a letter from Lauren DiLorenzo, our Director of Community Development. And inside that letter is an advertisement for the request for proposals for public service funding through the Community Development Block Grant Program. The City of Medford is in their 42nd program year. It's going to run from July 1st, 2016 to June 30th, 2017. And residents can pick up an application and submit their proposals by March 4th to the Community Development Office. So it's going to be a big year, I think, this year, Mr. President, and I'm hoping that There are a number of organizations out there that are helping work, curb the opiate crisis for low and moderate income residents here in Medford that are going to hear this and are going to apply so that we can continue to get some help here in the community in combating the addiction crisis that we're facing.
[Adam Knight]: Also, the Community Preservation Committee will be meeting to discuss the structure of the Community Preservation Commission on the heels of the Voter Approved Community Preservation Act, and we will be meeting on the 2nd in room 207 at 6 p.m.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Solicitor Rumley became a non-voting member. Right. George is on. We'll have to review that, I guess.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, they are. Yes, they are. So, Mr. President, the Rizzos have been good friends of mine for a number of years, dating back to the early 90s. Tony and Gino were great kids. And Mr. and Mrs. Rizzo were always very hospitable and welcoming. You know, they had that type of home where you could walk down the street and the front door would open and somebody would yell at you, get in here. What do you want to eat? They were great people. Billy was a wonderful guy. He immigrated here from Sicily after serving as a member of Interpol, actually. And, you know, he had thousands of pictures to show you every time you saw him. And he loved to kiss me and everything else, Mr. President. He's going to be sadly missed. Um, and I'd like to extend my condolences and that at the council in the city of Medford to a longtime resident who was very civically engaged, um, who's going to be greatly missed.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And I too agree that this is certainly a property that, we should take a look at and we should preserve. Um, I certainly think that a, uh, single district historical home is certainly a, uh, a good approach to protecting the neighborhood. Mr. President, if we think back in Councilor Penta, um, show you, you remember this, um, council paper one four dash six three five. We had some discussion relative to a certain home and you and I worked together to ask the historical district commission to examine all the single family homes. that could potentially be in single home historic districts. And that was back in August of 2014. Mr. President, I'd like to amend the paper and request an update from the Medford Historical District Commission on that request. Pursuant to the guidelines set forth. That matter was number what? That would be number 14-635. 14-635. And it was passed on August 12, 2014. In reviewing the Secretary of State's guideline on ways to establish local historic districts, one of the things that it notes is that it takes about 18 months for the process to be started and finished. And we obviously have a little bit of a different situation in our hands right now. And I think that it's important for us to work with Tufts University and to partner with Tufts University to ensure that there's a deed of restriction on the property, Mr. President, so that we can maintain the integrity of the neighborhood and the integrity of the home. So with that being said, I'm in full support of Councilor Longo's motion, which turned into a resolution. And I'd like to amend it by asking that we get an update from the Medford Historical District Commission relative to that agenda item. Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Do you have that Mr. Clerk? Mr. President, you know, obviously we want them to slow the sale of the house, but the ultimate goal is to put a restriction on the deed. So if we can't get them to agree to put the restriction on the deed, then the next best step would be to slow the sale down so that we can go through the process of designating this as a single home historic district. Thank you. So I think the first ask should be. to deed the restrictions, and then they can go about their business and sell it tomorrow if the deeded restrictions are in place and the neighborhood's going to remain the same. But if, in fact, they're going to push back on the deeded restrictions, then we might want to ask for a little bit more time until we can turn it into what we need to turn it into.
[Adam Knight]: In my experiences, Ms. Baldwin, I have never seen any citizen of the Committee of the Whole be precluded from speaking at any point in time. When the time is appropriate, I've never seen them be precluded from speaking, so I just wanted to... Absolutely.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And just for clarification purposes, I know when Councilor Marks was answering some of the questions, he said, we did it this way, we did it that way. And I just wanted to be clear that Is there a coalition or a group of people that helped put this together? Or is this something that was more driven through feedback that you've received from the constituency and from the conversations that we've had? Or is this something that, you know, there's multiple working parts and working people that are actually working on a working group of some sort?
[Adam Knight]: And then come out in the same form it went in as and be approved by the council.
[Adam Knight]: I think the role of a councilor is far more expansive than just the approval or the rejection of the budget, Mr. President. We're responsible for the establishment of all our ordinances here in the community. That's a very, very, very large role that we have. One of those big roles would be the zoning ordinances, for example, Mr. President. We just had a group come up here and discuss the zoning problems in their neighborhood and what's happening. So I think to paint the picture as saying the council can't do anything except for pass a budget is not accurate.
[Adam Knight]: I do not believe that that's the case as a matter of fact, Mr. President. I do not believe that's the case. I believe that's inaccurate. you know, if we're going to get up here and talk about the structure of government and how government works, I think it's important that we're informed.
[Adam Knight]: The way that I read this resolution before me is that it would be amendments to our present city charter, so that I believe would restrict us to amendments just surrounding plan A of government. I'm not the author of the resolution, and again, it's a work in progress. That's the way that I read it.
[Adam Knight]: Second, Councilman Marks. Motion, move approval.
[Adam Knight]: An item as imperative, an item as important as our charter shouldn't be something that we're rushing through, Mr. President. I think we can take both, we can go both routes, but I think that at the very least, you know, the council represented that he wanted to have a committee of the whole on the matter. That was something that I could certainly live with. I want to take a little bit more time to digest this, a little bit more time to look at it. It's going to take a long time to become an expert on charters, Mr. President. So with that being said, I would be opposed to having a public hearing next week. I don't think that that's a problem, having a public hearing on the matter, but I think it should be when we're all ready. And I think that we will know when we're all ready when we come out of the Committee of the Whole with some of the questions that we have answered and answered. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'm not going to withdraw my motion to have the matter referred to the Committee of the Whole. I feel as though it's going to be an opportunity for us to educate ourselves and learn a little bit more before we have to come up here and actually take a stance on certain issues and certain aspects of issues, Mr. President. Like I said, I want to become an expert on it before I come up here and deliberate on it.
[Adam Knight]: Like I said, I mean, you know, I think that this is a matter that's appropriate for Committee of the Whole. If we go into the Committee of the Whole, and like you said, 20 different people go in there with 20 different versions, that's okay. The seven legislators in this community will sit down, and we'll come up with maybe our seven different versions. Then we'll present those, and then we can hammer out the details. We can look at the commonalities and look at the differences, Mr. President. But I think that, you know, in an effort for us to be successful and to do this the right way. I think we need to slow the process down a little bit. I think we need to have a committee of the whole to further discuss our options, to have the solicitor there to provide us with some advice and consent as well.
[Adam Knight]: The process is slowed because there's no community support to gather the signatures. If they got the signatures, the issue would be on the ballot. It wouldn't be a problem. We wouldn't be having this discussion, but there aren't enough signatures. There aren't enough signatures to put the matter on the ballot. And I don't feel comfortable bypassing full participation of the residents in the city of Medford to put an item on the ballot for something that's as significant as charter reform. Mr. President. I just don't feel comfortable doing it. Mr. President. A special end to these auspices. A special end to these auspices.
[Adam Knight]: When the council has a closed door meeting and they come up with this, this proposal, which actually.
[Adam Knight]: No, the paper before the council... Don't try to slow down the process if you're against it. The paper before the council is based on the theory of charter review. If you're against it, you're against it. Not charter change.
[Adam Knight]: The paper before the council is based on the theory that there's a need for charter change. Not charter review. Which is it? Review or change? If you're against it, you're against it.
[Adam Knight]: I'm against the process. I'm against the mechanism that's been presented to us this evening. I absolutely am 110% against that mechanism. I'm not going to be a pot and parcel. All the books are closed door deal that was cut that excludes certain particular portions of the charter, and that defines parameters and limits the scope. Absolutely not. I'm absolutely not going to be supportive of that. Shut his mic off.
[Adam Knight]: I personally feel as though the initiative petition process is actually the bedrock of the democratic process. And circumventing that process would in itself actually be less democratic than allowing you to go out and collect the signatures.
[Adam Knight]: So, Mr. President, my point of information was this. The initiative petition process is actually the bedrock of a democratic foundation, all right, where citizens can actually go collect signatures and force something to be put in the ballot when they feel as though they're not being represented. So to bypass that process, I think, is problematic right now. And I want to weigh it. I want to weigh it, Mr. President. That's where I'm coming from. I certainly think that this is a noble cause. I certainly think that this resolution was based on a theory that there is a need for charter review, and that's something that I don't disagree with. But I do disagree with the process that we're looking at here and bypassing the signature route. Mr. President, I don't know if I'm crazy about that idea. I'd be more inclined to support something that comes from the people, where we have the opportunity to engage full participation, where we know right at first hand, right there, the signatures are there. They're on the ballot. It's going. And that's it. And if we look at the reforms that happened back in 86, it's my understanding, after doing a little bit of a history lesson, Mr. President, that the council refused to put recommendations on the ballot that were made when the signatures were collected. And that's where the problem started. And I might be wrong. I might be wrong. But, you know, Mr. President, that's what I've been looking at. And, you know, I think that, you know, right now, if we're going to be talking about the democratic process, circumventing the signatures is not it.
[Adam Knight]: I don't think I was asking for anything different than what counsel just said, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: All right. So committee of the whole next week, public hearing week after the public. No, no, no. Same, same, same night, same night.
[Adam Knight]: Point of privilege, Councilor Knight. A question as to whether or not this matter will be more appropriately heard in executive session. Rule number four of the top ten reasons to go into executive session, as published by the Attorney General, would indicate that to discuss the deployment of security personnel, devices, or strategies with respect thereto would be an appropriate reason to go into executive session, Mr. President. I don't feel as though it's appropriate to air out the business of what training and what people are going to be conducting public safety sweeps in our schools. All it does is make them a target. When we get that information, it will be a public record. It will be forwarded to this council in writing. So as such, I feel as though it would be more appropriate to have this discussion in the executive session. However, I would rely on the body to make a determination, Mr. President. Second. Councilor Lockhart.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Following the hails of the grand opening of the beautiful McNally Park, this council unanimously approved a request to the administration to install a traffic signal and crosswalk somewhere in the vicinity of Cedar Road and King Street crossing Forest Street so that individuals that would like to go to this new park that we just spent millions of dollars on were able to do so safely. We didn't get a response from the administration. We put another paper forward. That paper is also cited in the resolution. And I'm looking for a follow-up. I don't see any crosswalk there, and I'm wondering if there are any plans to do it in the springtime, Mr. President. Thank you, Mr. Clerk.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, this is an important neighborhood issue. A number of residents came down and spoke out against the property at 56 Boynton Road, which is an abandoned and condemned property, Mr. President. It's my understanding that the matter was going through probate court, probate litigation. However, it seems like it's taking an inordinate amount of time. for us to come to a resolve on this. The building is a public nuisance. The building is an eyesore in the neighborhood. It is a calling card for animals of all types. And it's my hope that we can get an update on this, Mr. President, because I think it's time that we need to move and take action.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to amend the paper, Mr. President, to request an update on the selection process of a new library director. We can amend that.
[Adam Knight]: There's a vacancy right now.
[Adam Knight]: It has been brought to my attention by the administration, Mr. President, that MassDOT will be putting in a crosswalk.
[Adam Knight]: to take papers 1602, 16021, 16022, 16023. All papers are eligible for their third reading relative to the reorganization of the administrative offices.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, I think this, uh, matter that the S the mayor's put forward is relatively cut and dry. What this matter does is, uh, it gives the city solicitor a two year appointment code terminus with the administration. The paper's been through its first two readings, Mr. President. If there's anybody in the audience that would like to speak, I think we should give them the opportunity. And if any of the councillors want to speak on it, so be it. But I'd move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, again, this piece of legislation would create the position chief of staff and reorganize the administrative office. It's been through its first reading. We had some questions. If the questions were answered, I'd move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Um, with all due respect to the Councilor, Mr. President, if she feels as though the position's overpaid, this is a piece of legislation. She can't amend the piece of legislation while it's on the floor. Um, we've discussed it. I think that it's a, It's a good position, it's a necessary position, it's a required position, Mr. President, and I support the matter wholeheartedly.
[Adam Knight]: Again, Mr. President, this was a reorganization of the administrative office. I would establish a chief procurement officer and also allow the chief procurement officer to continue in her role as a budget director. I move for approval, Mr. President. Support the paper.
[Adam Knight]: The other one regarding the vacation time was already passed. So the chair awaits a motion. Mr. President, this was a paper that would assign employee payment classifications for the positions that we just created. Mr. President move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to revert to regular order of business.
[Adam Knight]: Has there been any communication between the administration of the school department and the council to date, prior to the filing of the resolution? I'm not in possession of anything.
[Adam Knight]: There's a motion already on the floor. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, until I go to that meeting tomorrow night and find out exactly what happened and where the failings were and where the system failed, the students and the residents of the city, I don't feel comfortable making any recommendation as to a course of action. Therefore, I'm not going to be withdrawing my motion.
[Adam Knight]: I'd be happy to withdraw my motion if the council would be willing to table the matter until the meeting can take place tomorrow.
[Adam Knight]: As amended by Councilor Caraviello. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, this is a great resolution, a great resolve, Councilor Marksley. I commend you for bringing it forward. It deals with public safety, it deals with infrastructure, they're vital keys to a strong quality of life here in Medford. I support the resolution wholeheartedly, Mr. President, that I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much and I appreciate you giving me the opportunity to bring this resolution forward under suspension. I filed this resolution in an effort to further investigate the staffing levels at RDPW. As we go through our agenda week by week, many of the items that are on the agenda are actually related to basic city maintenance and city service issues. With that being said, I think it's important and imperative for this council to take a look at the staffing levels at the DPW to ensure that there's enough help to ensure that they have safe staffing levels so that we can have safe streets and strong infrastructure. Mr. President, I think part and parcel with a strong DPW will be strong downtowns because we'll have clean streets, we'll have repaired sidewalks, we'll have repaired potholes. which will be something that's going to bring people to our squares. We'll also have better lightage, because when lights go out, we'll have more people there that can help fix the lights. So I bring this resolution forward, Mr. President, to continue to look at and examine the staffing levels in our DPW. Presently, I believe there are 46 members in our DPW unit, and we are a community of about eight square miles. If we go right next door to Somerville, we have a community that's four square miles who have 65 members just in their highway division alone, Mr. President. So I think that this warrants a long, hard look. I'd ask my council colleagues to support me in this endeavor. The motion approved by Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. The welcome home bonus is a bonus that's given to veterans who are coming home from service, Mr. President. And if they reside in the city of Medford, they're entitled to a cash bonus by way of application. But what this welcome home bonus does is it allows us the opportunity to begin to quantitate how many veterans actually reside in our city. The date of 2001 was post 9-11 when the welcome home bonus was re-implemented and through 2015 will be the last fiscal year, Mr. President. As I stated earlier in our subcommittee meeting, the city of Medford's about the 15th largest community in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and our general population has somewhere between 7% and 9%. of people that self-identify as veterans, Mr. President. So I think it will be very helpful for us as we continue to ensure that our services delivered to our veterans are top of the line, that we see if there's been any growth there, if we can make an argument for more help in the office, Mr. President. We have a 20-hour-a-week clerk working in that office. That was a zero-hour-a-week clerk. a couple years ago, and before that, it was a 40-hour position. So we've seen the office go down from a 40-hour-a-week clerk to a zero-hour-a-week clerk, and back up to a 20-hour-a-week clerk, Mr. President. I'd like to continue to advocate for more help in the Veterans Service Office, because I feel as though our veterans deserve no less. With that being said, I'd ask my colleagues to support this resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight, for what reason do you ask for the suspension of the rules? To take paper 16-056 out of order, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I've reviewed the documentation that they've attached. I think it'll be a beautiful addition to the neighborhood and I'd move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. Whereas the resolution before us is calling for an on-site committee of the whole meeting, it might make sense to invite the administration to come and present to us what their solutions are while we're all there together on location. And looking at the issue, I mean, we'll talk about this till we're blue in the face, but it's an enforcement issue, Mr. President. It's an enforcement issue. vehicles parking on the street are being appropriately ticketed. And I think the answer that we all know is no. It's really a parking issue, Mr. President. We need to figure out where we're going to put these vehicles when they need to make deliveries so that these businesses and our business districts can be successful, but so there's also a balance between the neighborhood and the business concerns, Mr. President. So with that being said, I'd again like to amend the paper just the same way we did last week to ask for directed patrols at Harvard, Maine, and Yale during the day, Mr. President. So that our patrolmen, when they are out there, will make a concerted effort to continue to enforce the violators.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Um, Mr. President, I'd ask that the questions be separated. Um, although I understand the reasoning for Councilor Marks, bringing the last portion of the last amendment up. Um, if the purpose of, the council to go on site to have a committee of the whole meeting to talk with the traffic commission to see what we can do to move the bus stop and to improve the loading zone. Um, I think that maybe we want to start from scratch and if we go down there and we already stopped making recommendations without first sitting down and actually having the dialogue, I think that we're putting the cot a little bit before the horse, Mr. President. Um, so I'd ask that the, uh, the amendments be separated and be severed. Um, I'm fully supportive of all the other amendments that were filed. However, at this point in time, I'm not comfortable supporting, um, the erection of any signage until we can go actually on site and meet with the traffic commission to talk about what the options are.
[Adam Knight]: That was the initial paper, right? Right. So a yea vote would vote to put the Committee of the Whole process in session, in motion rather. Right. Then I amended for directed patrols at the area until we can get this meeting done, right? Correct. And we've had several other amendments as well. And there were several other amendments as well. I really just have a problem with the amendment of putting up signage at this point in time if we're going down there to try to determine what's going to work best. I think that we should go down there and have an actual picture of what's going on as opposed to changing what's going on there right now and then going down and taking a look. I mean, if we're going on the site, if we're going on the site to see the problems, we put up the signs, the problems aren't going to be there anymore, right? So why aren't we going to go down there and witness what these problems are, show what actual effect it is having on the neighborhood. I mean, we've all heard it before, Mr. President. There's no doubt about that. However, I think that it would be best to be to be dealt with at a clean slate. Let's go down there and let's take a look at it in its current state of disrepair so that we can come up with a comprehensive plan.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, I mean, I don't think we should put up any signage if we're going to go down there and ask the traffic commission to do a comprehensive review and to go forward and to come up with a plan. Let's let them do that. But we're asking for enforcement anyhow. So let's get the enforcement. People know they're not supposed to park on the sidewalk. I think that that's clear. It's just a matter of them ignoring the rules, regulations, and so forth, Mr. President. So with that being said, I rest my case. I think I've explained where I'm coming from. So you still have the motion to sever? I would have a motion to sever, yes. It can just be the last amendment, Mr. President, because I'm fully supportive of the rest of the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, Councilor Longo did speak a little bit about the female locker room at the police department. It's my understanding that they're in the process right now of rectifying the situation. So it's been brought to my attention that a certain area has been vacated by a certain department and they've been moved to the new DPW building. And the administration is in the process of building out a female locker room for female officers, Mr. President. So I'd like to amend the paper and ask for an update on that item in particular.
[Adam Knight]: Um, thank you very much, Mr. President. Thank you. Councilor Falco for this resolution. I think it's a great resolution. I'd like to amend it, Mr. President, to request that the administration begin scheduling their board and commission meetings outside of normal business hours so those individuals that are working for a living have the opportunity to appear after their work day to participate. And I'd also ask that if and when possible, the meetings be televised or streamed.
[Adam Knight]: Well, while I'm on such a role, Mr. President, I have also filed a resolution under suspension of similar substance asking that the three week look ahead. schedule for the Craddock bridge be posted on the city's website as well. So I'd like to amend this paper to include that and I'll withdraw the paper under suspension.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And Councilor Marks, I think everything you said is 100% accurate. There's definitely a need for someone to be the so-called clerk of the work, someone that has a set of eyes on these construction projects that are going on in our community. As these private contractors come in and these private utility companies come in and tear up our streets and then say they'll be back in a year to fix it, we need to make sure that there's someone there saying, hey, remember nine months ago when you said you were going to be back? Well, the nine months are up. It's time to start digging in the ground and fixing the street. I really support the position of the office of the project manager and the position of a project manager or the so-called clerk of the works, Mr. President, for the simple reason that it provides accountability. And we know if someone's not doing the job because we can see the ramifications and the aftereffects when the ground gets opened up and gets put back together. We know who to go to. We know who to talk to. So, you know, I certainly echo Councilor Mack's sentiments and statement when he says that he'd like to see a project manager rehired here at the city level. was an unbelievable asset to this community. I'm not just saying that because his backyard is right around the corner from my parents' backyard. He did a great job, and he did great work. And if you go down the list and you look at the projects that he oversaw, whether it was the pool, or the science labs, or the DPW yard, or the renovations at the firehouse, he certainly was someone that made sure that we got our bang for our buck, Mr. President. And I think we need someone in that capacity to continue. So I certainly support Councilor Mark's position wholeheartedly and I move for approval on the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I noticed in our packet that we had not received an update relative to the issues that we discussed on Marion Street. And I was hoping we could amend this paper to ask for a update on that situation as well, relative to the resident annual parking on Marion Street that we discussed last week.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I ask to amend the paper to request that the Chief of Police provide us with the number of complaints that they received in the past 12 months relative to heavy trucking on residential roadways, as well as the number of citations issued, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I find them to be in order and move approval. On the motion for approval of the previous records by Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: I've reviewed the documentation that they've attached. I think it'll be a beautiful addition to the neighborhood and I'd move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Um, thank you very much, Mr. President. Whereas the resolution before us is calling for an onsite committee of the whole meeting. It might make sense to invite the administration. to come and present to us what their solutions are while we're all there together on location. And looking at the issue, I mean, we'll talk about this until we're blue in the face, but it's an enforcement issue, Mr. President. It's an enforcement issue. It's whether or not vehicles parking on the street are being appropriately ticketed. And I think the answer that we all know is no. It's really a parking issue, Mr. President. We need to figure out where we're going to put these vehicles when they need to make deliveries so that these businesses and our business sisters can be successful, but so there's also a balance between the neighborhood and the business concerns, Mr. President. So with that being said, I'd again like to amend the paper. It's just the same way we did last week to ask for directed patrols at Harvard, Maine, and Yale during the day, Mr. President, so that our patrolmen, when they are out there, will make a concerted effort to continue to enforce the violators.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd ask that the questions be separated. Although I understand the reasoning for Councilor Marks bringing the last portion of the last amendment up, if the purpose of the council to go on site to have a committee of the whole meeting to talk with the traffic commission to see what we can do to move the bus stop and to improve the loading zone, I think that maybe we want to start from scratch. And if we go down there and we already start making recommendations without first sitting down and actually having the dialogue, I think that we're putting the cart a little bit before the horse, Mr. President. So I'd ask that the amendments be separated and be severed. I'm fully supportive of all the other amendments that were filed. However, at this point in time, I'm not comfortable supporting the erection of any signage until we can go actually on site and meet with the traffic commission to talk about what the options are.
[Adam Knight]: That was the initial, that was the initial paper, right? Right. So yeah, vote would vote to put the committee of the whole process in session and in motion rather than I amended for director patrols at the area until we can get this meeting done. Correct. And we had several other amendments as well. And there were several other amendments as well. I really just have a problem with the amendment of putting up signage at this point in time. If we're going down there to try to determine what's going to work best, I think that we should go down there and have an actual picture of what's going on as opposed to changing what's going on there right now and then going down and taking a look. I mean, if we're going on the site, if we're going to the site to see the problems, we put up the signs, the problems aren't going to be there anymore, right? So why aren't we going to go down there and witness what these problems are, show what an actual effect it is going to, it is having on the neighborhood. I mean, we've all heard it before, Mr. President, there's, there's no doubt about that. Um, however, I think that it would be best to be, uh, to be dealt with as a clean slate. Let's go down there and let's take a look at it in its current state of disrepair so that we can come up with a comprehensive plan.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, I just, I don't think we should put up any signage if we're going to go down there and ask the traffic commission to do a comprehensive review. And to go forward and to come up with a plan, let's let them do that. But we're asking for enforcement anyhow. So let's get the enforcement. People know they're not supposed to park on the sidewalk. I think that's clear. It's just a matter of them ignoring the rules, regulations, and so forth, Mr. President. So with that being said, I rest my case. I think I've explained where I'm coming from. So you still have the motion to sever? I would have a motion to sever, yes. It can just be the last amendment, Mr. President, because I'm fully supportive of the rest of the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, Councilor Longo did speak a little bit about the female locker room at the police department. It's my understanding that they're in the process right now of rectifying the situation. So it's been brought to my attention that a certain area has been vacated by a certain department and they've been moved to the new DPW building and the administration is in the process of building out a female locker room for female officers, Mr. President. So I'd like to amend the paper and ask for an update on that item in particular.
[Adam Knight]: Um, thank you very much, Mr. President. Thank you. Councilor Falco for this resolution. I think it's a great resolution. I'd like to amend it, Mr. President, to request that the administration begin scheduling their board and commission meetings outside of normal business hours so those individuals that are working for a living have the opportunity to appear after their work day to participate. And I'd also ask that if and when possible, the meetings be televised or streamed.
[Adam Knight]: Well, while I'm on such a role, Mr. President, I have also filed a resolution under suspension of similar substance, asking that the three week look ahead. schedule for the Craddock Bridge will be posted on the city's website as well. So I'd like to amend this paper to include that and I'll withdraw the paper under suspension. Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. McNerney. Mr. President, thank you very much. And Councilor Marks, I think everything you said is 100 percent accurate. There's definitely a need for someone to be the so-called clerk of the work, someone that has a set of eyes on these construction projects that are going on in our community. As these private contractors come in and these private utility companies come in and tear up our streets and then say they'll be back in a year to fix it, we need to make sure that there's someone there saying, hey, remember nine months ago when you said you were going to be back? Well, the nine months are up. It's time to start digging in the ground and fixing the street. I really support the position of the office of the project manager and the position of a project manager or the so-called clerk of the works, Mr. President, for the simple reason that it provides accountability. And we know if someone's not doing the job because we can see the ramifications and the aftereffects when the ground gets opened up and gets put back together. We know who to go to. We know who to talk to. So, you know, I certainly echo Councilor Mack's sentiments and statement when he says that he'd like to see a project manager rehired here at the city level. was an unbelievable asset to this community. I'm not just saying that because his backyard is right around the corner from my parents' backyard. He did a great job, and he did great work. And if you go down the list and you look at the projects that he oversaw, whether it was the pool or the science labs or the DPW yard or the renovations at the firehouse, he certainly was someone that made sure that we got our bang for our buck, Mr. President. And I think we need someone in that capacity to continue. So I certainly support Councilor Mark's position wholeheartedly and I move for approval on the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, I noticed in our packet that we had not received an update relative to the issues that we discussed on Marion street. And I was hoping we could amend this paper to, uh, ask for a update on that situation as well relative to the, uh, resident annual parking on Marion street that we discussed last week.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I ask to amend the paper to request that the chief of police provide us with the number of complaints that they received in the past 12 months relative to heavy trucking on residential roadways, as well as the number of citations issued. Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I can certainly understand the frustration of the residents down on the Main Street area, I can certainly understand the frustrations of Councilor Lungo-Koehn. However, I think it's very important to point out that if we want enforcement, we want enforcement across the board. I don't think we want our parking enforcement officers to pick and choose what they want to enforce and what they don't want to enforce. And, you know, although I understand where she's coming from, why are they ticketing someone who's 10 minutes over the meter and not ticketing the car that's on the sidewalk? I think they both need to get a ticket because the ordinance is clear. We've entered into a contract with Republic Parking. Republic Parking has the responsibility to enforce the ordinances that are in place. They're not doing that. They're not doing that. We have some ordinances that are in place. They're not being enforced, and they need to be enforced, Mr. President. It's really an enforcement issue. It's not a legislative issue. And I scratch my head every night thinking about ways of how we can prompt action, but it's really a function of the administration. So I certainly do agree with Councilor Lungo that we need some directed enforcement down in the area. We've all seen the pictures. We've all heard the stories. We've all voted in favor of directed enforcements down there, Mr. President. So I can understand why the level of frustration is growing high. However, I guess the question that I pose is whether or not they did 100 tickets or seven tickets, what's the end game? What's the solution at the end of the day? What are we going to do to ensure that this enforcement gets done? And that's the question that I pose to the body. You know, we need to provide a solution, some sort of solution. What is that solution? I don't know, Mr. President. I don't know. I don't have all the answers. I think that this body, based upon the seven people that are behind this reel, could certainly come up with several solutions and several recommendations, Mr. President. And I'd request that our subcommittee on transportation meet to do that.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Several months back when the chief was before us speaking about the rolling out of resident parking and the resident parking situation, he did make a representation that they were going to be looking at rolling out a citywide resident parking plan. And I'd like to amend the paper, Mr. President, to request an update on the rollout of the citywide resident parking. And I'd also like to point out that the mayor's office is conducting a survey. relative to their constituent services and ways to better communicate between departments and with the community, Mr. President. And those surveys are available in room 204 here at City Hall, at the Senior Center, at the library, and online at the City of Medford's website. And I think it's very important for us right now. We have a very unique opportunity to help the mayor shape her vision of what we'd like to see Medford be. And that's going to take participation from the community, Mr. President. So with that being said, I just wanted to be sure that everyone was aware that they do have that opportunity and option as well to voice their concern through the survey method.
[Adam Knight]: We have several pocket related papers Mr. President that are in your hands and I think it would make sense for us to continue that discussion while we're on broader.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Over in the city of Malden, right at the Highland Ave line, along the Fellsway, there is a crazy rotary right down there. It's a backwards rotary, actually. It operates in reverse. So you normally would drive through a rotary. It's supposed to yield at this location, right at the foot of Highland Ave. And it's been brought to my understanding that Councilman Matheson and Secretary Pollack at the Department of Transportation have been discussing a traffic study relative to the redesign of that intersection, Mr. President. And I think it might be beneficial to us to request an update or have our DPW director or our office of engineering request an update as to the discussions that are going on between the state and the city of Malden relative to the changes at the Rotary because they will certainly have a large impact on the traffic patterns that are going to back up into Medford. Maybe the positive impacts, maybe the negative, until we know what's going on, Mr. President. I really am not comfortable commenting, and that's why I'm asking for an update.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'd like to amend the paper before us by way of a B paper that would read, Mr. President, whereas Marion Street became permit parking in November in the 2015 permit parking stickers were valid only for six weeks, that these permits maintain their validity through the end of 2016.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Councilor Knight. Mr. President, this paper dates back to June of 2014 when Mayor McGlynn put a paper before the council asking for an appropriation. of $292. That appropriation was made, and once the reimbursement from the state occurs relative to the Magoon Park issues that were being taken care of, the mayor indicated that he would be requesting the transfer of the net costs to the city's sale of real estate account. So it's replenishing the account, Mr. President, for which the funds were taken out of. Looks like the state agreed to reimburse us $200,000 on the Magoon Park improvements, and this paper represents, Mr. President, this matter coming full circle. As such, I would move for approval. I believe that all the councillors here, all the councillors present at the meeting voted by way of roll call in the affirmative to appropriate the money, Mr. President. So I think this is just bringing the matter full circle and some housekeeping. So I'd ask that the council move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if it's a very difficult endeavor for the individuals that are stationed out of Boston to get to MedFed. I would be happy to go to Boston and meet with them there if that's what has to take place, Mr. President. I think we could meet there. I think we could also – I think Mr. Carroll would be more than willing to open up his restaurant to us to sit down there and have the meeting there if, in fact, it's ever going to happen, Mr. President. Now, I've had my discussions with the legislative liaison from Massachusetts Highway. I've gotten a number of correspondences from them because I've been added to their email list, Mr. President. It did seem that they were unable to make it because of the short notice from the last meeting to this meeting, but that there's no reason why they can't figure out when it is that we are going to be here and we are going to put our heads together and get this done. Um, some items indicated that certain phases of the construction have been complete. They're about close to 30% through, um, with the portion of construction, the phase that they're in right now. But there are a number of solutions, I think, that we can present to them. One of them being moving all the staging equipment onto the closed-down ramp on Route 16 right now. The ramp's closed. Put all your junk over there so we don't have to look at it, so cars can drive up and down the street, so people can park in front of the restaurant, so people can park in front of RE-MAX. You know, I think that we've made a number of suggestions, and they have been listen to, and we've been given a lot of affirmative yes, yes, yes, but there haven't been any results, Mr. President. It's a lot of lip service at this point in time. So with that being said, I think it might be easier and more flexible if we as a council are more than willing to go and meet them on their turf or meet them somewhere else if they're not able to come down here to City Hall at certain hours. I'd be happy to go to the transportation building and meet with them, Mr. President. I'd be happy to go up to State House and- Bring your ID.
[Adam Knight]: I have a state ID. And I'll lead at Donato's office if that's what it takes, Mr. President. But I think that there's more than one way to skin a cat. And if they're not willing to come here, maybe we have to go to them. The other thing we can do is maybe contact the Secretariat and see if the Secretariat can help us out in putting this together. So with that being said, Mr. President, I just wanted to put it out there that there are other ways that we can do this, and maybe one of them is to go to Boston and to have a small meeting with a group of appointees, maybe, to figure out when it is that we can come in there, what the issues and dispute are, what the agenda is going to be like, to create a format that we can all agree on, so when they do come here, we do have a productive session, Mr. President, It's one thing to drag the project manager and the people from the T down here to bombard them with questions, and that's all well and good. But then they get in their car and they leave. And then nothing changes. And I think we need to come to an accord. We need to work together, and we need to form a partnership with them. And that means that we need to be responsive to their concerns, and they need to be responsive to ours, Mr. President. So I'll rest with that, but I appreciate you indulging me for that moment. Thank you, Mr. Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Councilor Knight. One of the things that we discussed several weeks ago, Mr. President, was a central depository or a central receptacle for individuals who weren't able to make the meeting, but would still like to comment on it to be able to provide an email. And it's my understanding that through the works of Allison Goldberry and Mr. Rumley, this email was a setup and I believe Clerk Finn has been involved in this as well. And I think it might be very helpful to those at home who are eagerly and anxiously awaiting the meeting to utilize this tool. And with that being said, I was hoping that the city clerk could recite the email address for us if he knows it offhand. I could get it. I think I have it on my device here if you don't know it offhand. It can be linked through the city website. And it can also be linked to the city website. Medford.org. Yes. So the city is actually soliciting commentary right now on behalf of the council.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Several weeks, just a couple weeks ago, the administration put a paper forward for an ordinance change relative to a reorganization of the executive office. This council had some questions that needed to be answered. We had in our packets this week response to the questions that we had asked. I'd ask the current budget director to maybe come up and go over the response that the administration sent forward to us, and maybe we can get these papers off of the list of unfinished business this evening, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I certainly can understand where Councilor Marksley is coming from. I don't think we're talking about reorganizing the wheel here. We're just moving a couple positions around in the mayor's office. But if he feels as though it's going to be an impediment to open and transparent government, Mr. President, I'm not going to stand in the way of that and I'll be happy to withdraw my motion.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. I'd feel much more comfortable getting legal advice from the city solicitor, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: Until this paper makes its way through three readings, we have no position that's the chief of staff. So until we create the position, we have no position. So I'm a little confused as to the circular logic. We have a chief of staff that's in the job, but we don't have the position that's created. But if the person was in the position, then the person in the position should be looking at the auditor. I'm a little confused as to where this is going, Mr. President. The matter that's before us is whether or not we want to allow the administration the opportunity to change the audits and create a chief of staff's position. And looking at the matter that's before us, it's a reform that the administration is putting forward, a reform that they think that they need to be successful in order to accomplish their goals and objectives. I see no reason to stand in the way of it, Mr. President. And I think it's time that we move forward, and I move for approval on the paper. The President.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information. I think the appropriate time to bring that matter up would be in the public participation portion of our agenda and not right now. We're dealing with the paper that's before us. Thank you, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This resolution is rather self-explanatory. I bring it forward relative to Article 2 in taxicabs. The City Council currently has the power and authority vested in it through the Code of Massachusetts Ordinances to license taxicabs, taxicab operators. What this resolution would do would transfer that authority to the Traffic Commission, Mr. President. As a member of the Subcommittee on Licensing, we met and we performed an audit of the operators in the community here in Medford, and a number of them were not in compliance. But as the legislative branch of government here, I think that it's a slippery slope for us to get so involved in regulatory affairs. I think that that's a function that's really more relegated and more appropriately vested within the executive, Mr. President. So I bring forward this paper to reform the way that we do business relative to the issuance of taxi cab licenses. In my two years on the council, we've had Councilor Marks abstain from voting relative to the fact that we have an ordinance that doesn't make much sense. We've had a number of people come before this council seeking an opportunity to drive taxi. But our ordinance is all over the place, Mr. President, so I think it would make sense for us to step away from the regulatory affairs and take a look really at the language and actually legislating an ordinance that makes sense, but allowing the Traffic Commission the opportunity and the power to oversee the issuance, revocation, suspension, so on and so forth of taxi licenses here in the community. As such, I'd ask my colleagues to join me in voting in the affirmative.
[Adam Knight]: The paper was filed, Mr. President, to start a discussion, to start a discussion on making a reform that's going to work best for the city. So I certainly have no problem with that whatsoever.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think that we have a couple of different avenues we could take to address the issue. I'd be happy to call a subcommittee meeting on intergovernmental affairs, see if we can get our representatives from the state house down here as well as representatives from the administration, from the business community. And from the project to sit down in the same room and see if we can work something out, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I think, Mr. President, I went down last Wednesday evening at the request of a business owner to a site visit down there, and there's a lot of signage that's very confusing. I certainly don't think that there's a accessible pathway to get from the parking facility behind Donuts with a difference to, say, REMAX or that side of the square, Mr. President. So I think that there's a number of issues going on that are something we can address. But the way we're going to get them done, I think, is by working together and sitting down in the same room and trying to iron them out. I think that we could have Diane McLeod and the Office of Disability take a look at the accessible pathway. I think there are a number of different approaches that we could take, and I just think it's about sitting down and coming up with a comprehensive strategy where we're all on the same page, working to effectuate the same positive goal. Mr. President, I think that DOT is standing in the way of us trying to get something done here. And unless we show a unified front, we're not going to be able to accomplish that. That's why I say it might be time that we bring our elected delegation, as well as the administration, into the same room and develop a strategy as to how we're going to approach them and address what's going on and why our requests are falling on deaf ears. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Varsity Golf, Boys Soccer, and Girls. At this time, I'd like to ask the golf team to please get up and come over to the right side of the room, please. And I'd also like to ask Coach Dyer to come join me on the podium. And I'd like to ask James Riccardi to come up and help me present the citations. First of all, on behalf of the Medford City Council and the residents of the city of Medford, I would like to congratulate you on a wonderful season. Again, you've shown great success and you've made us proud, Coach. So thank you very much for your leadership and your guidance for these young individuals, shaping them into fine upstanding citizens and solid student athletes. I'm in my hands here this evening, Coach. I have a citation here from the Medford City Council, which reads, the Medford City Council takes pleasure in awarding this council commendation to Ray Dyer, coach of the 2015 Medford High School Varsity Golf Team, in recognition of capturing the Greater Boston League title and participating in the MIAA Golf Division I North Tournament. Coach, congratulations. Thank you very much. I'd like to ask I'd like to ask Mr. Mercati to come up here and help me pass these citations out to some of his colleagues. If he would be so kind as to read the names off, we'll have him come up and we can congratulate him.
[Adam Knight]: Last but not least, James Riccati, my helper here.
[Adam Knight]: The Medford High School GBL champs, the golf team, ladies and gentlemen. If I could take a moment to ask the boys' soccer team to rise and come over to the right side of the room, please. I'd also like to ask my friend Mateo Cuno to come up here and help me pass out these citations if he's able. I see Coach Petritus over there as well, and I'd like to ask Coach Petritus to join me up here on stage, as well as any of the other members of his coaching staff that may be here with him. Once again, we're here honoring the Medford High School Greater Boston League Champion Soccer Team. And it's really great seeing Coach Petritus on the sidelines, wearing the blue and white. And here in my hands, I do have a council commendation which reads, the Medford City Council takes pleasure in awarding this council commendation to Mike Petritus, coach of the Medford High School Boys Varsity Soccer Team. in recognition of winning the Greater Boston League title and securing a playoff berth in the MIAA State Division I Boys Soccer Tournament and reaching the semifinals for the 2015 fall season. Coach, congratulations. You've done a great job with this group of young scholar-athletes, and I'd like to thank you for all your hard work over the last several years. My friend Mateo here is going to help me out by calling his teammates up to pass out these citations.
[Adam Knight]: Sammy Reed.
[Adam Knight]: And lastly, I'd like to present my helper, Mateo Cuno, with his citation. If I could take a moment to introduce Coach Petritas for a few words.
[Adam Knight]: 2015 GBL Champ Boys Soccer Team, ladies and gentlemen. I could ask the Girls Varsity Soccer Team to please rise and come over to the right of the room. I'd like to ask Colson to join me if she's available, as well as my friend, let's see who we're gonna pick for this one, Emma DeRoses.
[Adam Knight]: Again, once again, we have the Greater Boston League Champion 2015 Medford High School Girls Soccer Team here with us. They've shown great success over the last couple of years. I know that they were here once before last year anyway. And I think maybe for the past five years since then. Say that again? Seven? Oh, all right, all right. So for the last five years, they've been the GBL champs. And it's great to see such success in the soccer field, also in the classroom. The coaches done a great job. modeling a program that's going to make sure that these individuals are strong contributing members to society who also have a strong focus in the classroom. So thank you for your work, coach. In my hands here, I have a citation which reads, the Medford City Council takes pleasure in awarding this council commendation to Allison Colson, coach of the Medford High School Girls Varsity Soccer Team, in recognition of winning the Greater Boston League title and securing a playoff berth in the MIAA State Division I Girls Soccer Tournament for the fall 2015 season. Coach, congratulations.
[Adam Knight]: For my special helper here, Gigi Braga. I can take a moment to introduce Coach Colson for a few words.
[Adam Knight]: Ladies and gentlemen, the 2015 GBL Champion Medford High School Girls Soccer Team with Sarah Clark.
[Adam Knight]: Motion will be adjourned at the table until the questions
[Adam Knight]: Motion to table is discussed in committee of the whole, Mr. President, until the questions are answered.
[Adam Knight]: I believe what came out of the committee of the whole meeting was that the sum of The financial impact on the current fiscal year's budget would be $953 for the remainder of 2015, if I'm not mistaken, Mr. President, just for personal peace of mind. So if these ordinance changes were passed this evening, the impact it would have on this year's budget would be $953 based upon what was presented to us this evening. We're not going to pass it this evening.
[Adam Knight]: I think they're filled by now, is what she's saying. She's trying to reorganize the structure of government.
[Adam Knight]: But they are filled already.
[Adam Knight]: I don't really think that it's an appropriate forum for a citizen and a city employee to be debating at the floor of the city council meeting. It isn't. We've met, we've had our committee of the whole meeting. We have some questions that need to be answered, Mr. President, and that's all well and good. We're going to be having another committee of the whole meeting on that when those questions do get answered. However, I don't feel as though it's appropriate for individual citizen and a member of the administration to go back and forth at the podium here at the City Council meeting. I think that it detracts from what we're here to do. Thank you. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight, I do believe that the executive branch of our municipal government does have something that will be called administrative prerogative, Mr. President, which would be the right to hire, fire, and create positions that they see fit if they fall within the scope of our ordinance. With that being said, Mr. President, I motion that we table the matter until all questions are answered as previously discussed and agreed upon in the committee of the whole.
[Adam Knight]: This is a committee of the whole, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: 16-024 is ordained. Motion to revert back to the regular order of business, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Two years ago when I was sworn in as a councilor, we began an exercise where we would meet in the Committee of the Whole to establish goals and priorities for this council moving forward. We'd use that as a template and a basis for our direction as we continue to make legislation here as a legislative body in the city of Medford, Mr. President. I think it was a very helpful endeavor, and it also allowed us an opportunity to begin to prepare for budget discussions. When I look at the agenda for this evening, I do see another paper on there offered by Councilor Falco relative to establishing a budget template and budget formats, which I'm going to be in full support of tonight, Mr. President. But I think that this is really a good way for us to start the discussion and to look forward to June. to see what our priorities are, what steps we're going to take to keep Metro moving in the right direction and to improve the way that we do business.
[Adam Knight]: I'd ask my council colleagues to support the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I also had an opportunity to take a look at Chapter 115, Section 12. And as Councilor Longo-Kurtz said, that it would be comprised of between five and 15 members. that are residents of the city. But in looking at the general law, and I may be wrong because I haven't had a chance to examine it thoroughly, there is no requirement that those individuals on the Veterans Advisory Committee be veterans. Right. Okay. So with that being said, Mr. President, I think it might make sense for us to maybe request that a certain percentage or portion of the individuals appointed to the Veterans Advisory Council when established be veterans. whether it be 50% plus one of the individual positions that are established by the mayor if she takes us up on this offer. I think that that would be... I think that that's a good approach, Councilor Caraviello, taking a two-fold approach where we send the request to the mayor, and then we have an opportunity to make some recommendations and act on her response would probably be the best course. So I certainly support the resolution, but ask that the Veterans Subcommittee also take a look at it.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, as we're all aware, the city is going to be soon rolling out a 311 program where individuals can make service requests. And I think that it would be a good idea if the administration would forward these reports to the city council so that we can have a good understanding as to whether or not the program is actually meeting its stated mission goals and objectives. So with that being said, I asked my colleagues to support the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I recently had a discussion with Karen Rose at the Board of Health, who would be the department head that would be responsible for the Substance Abuse Outreach and Prevention Coordinator. She was pleased to inform me that the incumbent on the position, Ms. Penny Funiali, has had her child and is on maternity leave. So she will be unable to appear before the council to highlight some of the efforts and successes that the program has had since its inception. With that being said, Mr. President, Ms. Rose did commit to having Penny appear before the council when she does return. So I'd ask that the council approve this resolution and then when Ms. Funigalli returns from her maternity leave, we ask her to come up here and tell us exactly what's going on with the new office and the new position that this council created.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And again, thank you, Councilor Falco, for bringing this matter forward. I think Councilor Scarpelli hit the nail on the head. It's a partnership. It's a partnership between this council. It's a partnership between the administration and the school department and the community, Mr. President. And the school department had great success last year, putting together a school budget that was probably the best school budget that I've seen in a very long time. And I think that part of the reason the budget was so successful, because they had the narrative budget summary that was there. They understood exactly what it was that they were working on and they didn't have to pry through 600 pages of line item budgets and ask every single question about every single line item because there was a narrative there, there was a mission there, there was an objective, a stated goal. And I was very pleased to vote in favor of the budget, Mr. President, because of the fact that the school department's budget was so strong and the work that it did in restoring adjustment Councilors, so on and so forth. We could go over the successes time and time again as we have in the past. However, we also passed a resolution back, I want to say in September, requesting that this council or the budget subcommittee meet quarterly with the administration to determine whether or not forecasts are meeting collections and to see where we are in terms of surplus and accounts and stuff like that, Mr. President. So with that being said, I'd like to see that those meetings start to begin getting called as this council did vote for unanimously by way of a roll call. With that being said, I certainly support this resolution that's before the council today. I think it's a great idea. It's a great approach. It sets the tone for us to start working together now on the most important job that we have, which is setting the budget. So, Mr. President, I move for approval and I'd ask for a roll call.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, thank you very much. As a frequent, user of the smartphone application relative to the park mobile system, I received an article, and the article was in an online magazine called The Register. The headline was, Carr Park Mobile Apps are Vulnerable to Hacking. And that made me rather concerned, so I continued to research, and I found another site called Hack Read, which said, researchers find critical vulnerabilities in the Android parking apps. and Info Security Magazine. The headline would read, Researchers Find Major Security Flaws in Parking Apps. And what's happening, Mr. President, is that because of substandard encryption, which, quite frankly, means nothing to me, but might mean something more to some people that are a little bit more tech-savvy than I, these phones are becoming vulnerable to attacks because the information is up in the cloud and people are able to get at it. So with that being said, Mr. President, there have been a number of suggestions and recommendations made by these And one of the biggest recommendations was that you use a credit card as opposed to a debit card to fund your purchases in your mobile app because of the fraud protections that are in the credit card system. However, Mr. President, we do have a parking program here in Medford. We do have a ParkMobile app here in Medford. So I would like to see what steps the ParkMobile people are taking to ensure that we do not have substandard encryption and that our consumers are protected. from cyber attacks, Mr. President. And in segue to that, if anybody has been affected by a cyber attack of some sort, I would ask that they report the matter immediately to not only the police department, but also the Office of Consumer, the Medford Consumer Commission, rather. The First Floor of City Hall. First Floor of City Hall, the old Medford Savings Lives Office. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'd move for approval. I think that this is a basic resolution that will allow us to understand what steps are being taken to keep consumers in the community safe.
[Adam Knight]: On that amendment. Mr. President, I put the resolution forward to address issues of cyber security. Although I can understand why certain people are coming from Facebook and this guy got a ticket this day. It is what it is. There's an administrative procedure that's in place. If you feel as though you got a ticket, erroneously that you go through the appeals process. With that being said, Mr. President, I have no problem amending the resolution. However, the principle that I wrote for was just exclusively for cybersecurity, and we kind of went off on a little tangent and went down a different kind of road, Mr. President, and that's not where I was looking to go. But with that being said, I'd ask that we several amendments and move forward.
[Adam Knight]: Annual update.
[Adam Knight]: What technology do they have to shut the matter off? To shut the meters off. To shut the meters off.
[Adam Knight]: If I may, Mr. President. Michael Callahan was a good friend to me and many of us behind this rail, as well as many of us in the community. He was a mentor to me. He taught me more about government in the short time that I was able to know him and be around him. And he was a great guy who had his head on right. He understood that government was about people, about helping people, and about making sure that it's working for you, Mr. President. He's sadly missed. I think of him every day. And I appreciate the Council indulging me as I bring this resolution forward. Thank you, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: If I may, I mean, we were here on Tuesday. We passed the resolution that was seven days ago, which was five business days ago. Councilor Caraviello met them there Wednesday evening at 10 o'clock, which was in essence, really Thursday morning. So that was only three business days ago. I think we need to give them an ample opportunity to get it done. I think Councilor Marks is on the right track. We need to put some sort of timeline in there to see if we can effectuate this change in a certain period of time. But I also want to be cognizant of the fact that it's really only been three business days that have passed since the request was made. So I don't know if we've gotten a refusal back from DLT saying that they're not going to do it.
[Adam Knight]: Based on my discussions with Mr. Daley from the DOT, that engineering has been.
[Adam Knight]: Bring the matter forward next week. It's not fixed.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Clerk, I move to nominate Breanna Lungo-Koehn as Vice President for the 2016 Medford City Council.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to close the nominations, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Six in the affirmative for Breanna Lungo-Koehn, one present.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And thank you, Ms. Clark, for such a thorough presentation. As we're all aware, the money bills come from the administration. And at Sunday's inaugural ceremony, Mayor Burke expressed such a desire to establish a five-year capital plan that I think, you know, timing's great. We're really striking when the iron's hot. I think that it's very important that those concerned with the maintenance needs at the library, be sure to attend Monday's meeting. Monday, the 11th at 7 p.m. at the Medford Arts Council, the Burke Transition Team's Cultural Affairs and Recreation Committee is scheduled to meet at 7 p.m. And I don't think that there's anything more significant in terms of cultural affairs than our library, Mr. President. So I feel as though it will be very important for those residents out there that do have a concern and do have a desire to see more funding at our public library to participate in these meetings as well as they come forward. I certainly support a five-year capital plan. I certainly support a maintenance plan for our buildings, Mr. President. I think it's something that all of us behind this rail have been preaching for a number of months. With that being said, Mr. President, I just wanted to be sure that everybody was aware that the transition team will be meeting on Monday, a week from yesterday, at the Medford Heights Council Space at the Meadow Glen Mall to discuss issues like this and what we're gonna do moving forward. So I think it's a welcome breath of fresh air to have an opportunity to come to a meeting like this, a community meeting, Mr. President, and I'm looking forward to it.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Councilor Knight. Thank you very much, Mr. President, and thank you, Councilor Knox, because I think that that pretty much sums up the issue. relatively well from start to finish, soup to nuts. Um, I think that, um, you know, we're, we're looking at a building here that certainly needs a preventative maintenance plan. We have a number of city buildings that need that. Um, and as I sit here and I listened to, uh, the discussion about this issue, uh, I think back to, uh, recent weeks when we were at the library, many of us for a dedication of the reading room to the late Richard Lee and in attorney Romney's address. Um, he said something that really stood out to me and this discussion really makes me think of it, Mr. President, it was that out of all the public buildings that we have in the city of Medford, the library is really the only one that people go to voluntarily. You got to figure. You come to City Hall to pay a tax bill. You go to the police department to I don't know what. But ultimately, the library is a building where people go for recreational purposes. And I think that the value of a strong public library has been minimized. And I think that we're on the right track right now, Mr. President, to really put together a strong plan. However, it has to be a partnership. It has to be a plan that the administration is going to buy into as well. So I certainly think that you know, it's a breath of fresh air to see this council come together and come up with some great solutions and great ideas as to how we'd like to see this move forward. But ultimately, if it's a money bill, it's going to come from the administration. So we need to work cooperatively with them, Mr. President. So with that being said, I just really wanted to reflect a little bit on the fact that, you know, a public library is really the only building that people come into voluntarily in the city and they do it because it's a great place to bring your family. It's a great place to, relax, unwind, have some peace, some quiet, and trust me, I need a lot more of that lately than I have in the past, Mr. President, with the new baby in the house. So I'm very fortunate to live across the street from the library. But with that being said, Mr. President, I move for approval on the paper. The President.
[Adam Knight]: They do. Mr. President, I have right here document produced by the administration December 17, 2015, outlining all of our boards and commissions that are under the authority of the administration, Mr. President, as well as the members and the terms that they hold. We have five members appointed to a three-year term on the board of library trustees. There are three $600 annual stipends, one $900 stipend for the chair and one $700 stipend for the vice chair, Mr. President. That addresses any of those questions.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, in looking at the resolution, uh, be a result of the city council, look into the possibility of a temporary parking on main street during the credit bridge reconstruction. I certainly have no problem with that, but, um, as councilor Caraviello, initiated and cited as you did as well, would it be appropriate for the traffic commission to review this, the administration to review this, or the city council's subcommittee on transportation, Mr. President? I think that by taking a two-fold approach, we'll be much more successful in actually accomplishing the objective, Mr. President. So I think that it would make sense if we are going to, in fact, send a paper to the administration to look into it, that we also hold a transportation subcommittee meeting and have the administration come before us and explain to us the reasoning why they feel as though this is a bad idea, whether or not there are public safety issues that surround it, what the traffic commission's position is on it as well, Mr. President. It's going to be very important as to whether or not this really happens. So I think that, you know, as we look at the end result and how to get to the solution, I think that it would make more sense, Mr. President, for us to send a correspondence to the administration, but also hold a subcommittee meeting where the individuals that are in a position to set this policy will be able to appear before us and explain to us why it is or is not a good idea. Very good. So, uh, we'll do this.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very, very much. But more importantly, Councilor Penta, thank you. I think everybody behind the reels has been involved in government for a good portion of their professional career. And we've all had interactions with Bob Penta. And one thing I can say about you, Councilor, is I'm certainly very disappointed that I don't have an opportunity to work alongside you for more of a tenure than I have. I think everybody behind this reel has had an opportunity to work with you a little bit more than I have. And one thing that I've really been able to take away from working with you, Councilor, is that it's about the issues. It's not about personalities. It's not about Winning or losing it's about the issues and it's about doing what's right for the people in Medford and you and I could maybe not get along on one issue and When that issue is over and the votes taken two seconds later something else is on the table It needs to be addressed and what's over is over. What's done is done. Let's work on the next thing Councilor So I certainly appreciate the way that you can leave it behind the rail, but it's not about personalities. It's about it's about people It's about the city of Medford. It's about moving Medford forward Councilor Another thing I'd like to congratulate you on is what a hell of a campaign you were in. What a hell of a campaign. You weren't outworked, Councilor. You weren't outworked. You did a great job out there. You pounded the pavement. You're out there working hard every day. And I don't think that anybody can ask for anything else. So thank you very much for all your service. Thank you very much for what you've done to make the city of Medford a great place, Councilor. And I know that this is a retirement party, but I'm pretty sure that you're not going to be gone for a long time. So thank you very much, Bob. It's been a pleasure working alongside you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And my relationship with Councilor Camuso is a little bit different than mine with Councilor Penta, because I think that this Super Bowl Sunday, Paul, will be 30 years that we've known each other. And our families have been friends for a long time. His uncle Fred and my father taught together in Somerville for a number of years. Paul and I have been very familiar with one another through Medford Youth Sports, Medford High School, his inaugural campaign, and I could go on and on about Paul's accomplishments. We could go on and on about what a great guy Paul is. how dedicated he is to the community, to his family, to his brothers, to his mother, to his late father and his grandmother. But I think that when you look at the election results over Paul's tenure and term, we'll see that he topped the ticket seven out of eight times, Mr. President, and I think that that speaks for itself. The people of Medford The people of Medford knew that Paul Camuso was doing his job. The people of Medford knew that Paul Camuso was working. The people of Medford knew that Paul Camuso was an effective city council and an effective member of the school committee. I'm just at awe, Paul, to sit here and see you step down and retire and go on to greener pastures. at this point in my young political career, because it wasn't too long ago that you were cheating off my papers in English class in high school. So I'd really just like to take a moment to thank you for your friendship, but more so thank you for your service, because when your political career ends, You go back to being a normal citizen. And, well, as normal of a citizen as you can be. And I look forward to the laughs that we've had and the laughs that we're going to have. I look forward to spending time with you and with your beautiful family. And I just can't thank you enough for all that you've done for the community and for me personally. So, thank you very much for all.
[Adam Knight]: Earlier this evening, we tabled a paper, a money paper, relative to the use of kiosks. And we're going to investigate that a little bit further in subcommittee. Audit and Budget Finance Subcommittee is going to take a look at whether or not the appropriation from the sale of real estate in the amount of $250,000 be transferred to be used for approvals to the five business districts, Mr. President. You know, I certainly support an exemption for senior citizens having to pay and park in our city, but I think maybe we can take a look at this in a universal approach as opposed to as one item here, one item there, one item here, one item there. However, I defer to the body.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I just wanted to take a brief moment to thank Mr. Kamara for his service to the city of Medford, not only as a member of the Water Commission, but also as a school teacher. I think many of us behind the rail that graduated from Medford High had the opportunity to I learned a lot from Mr. Camara, and when I became a member of this council, Mr. President, I certainly learned a lot from Mr. Camara relative to how a water and sewer operations work. So I would like to congratulate Councilor Caraviello for putting this resolution on and commend Mr. Camara for his service to the city of Medford.
[Adam Knight]: I had an opportunity to review the records and I find them in order. Move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and going back to what Councilor Penta was discussing about the federal court ruling, I believe that the federal court ruling was in response, and I'm asking him for some clarification on this, Mr. President, through you. I believe that the issue that was before the court was a city council rule precluding people from giving negative comments being deemed unconstitutional, if I'm not mistaken, based on my research of the issue and understanding of the matter. I think it wasn't so much that people were being shut down at the microphone and not being allowed to speak, but it was that the council had a rule that said that no negative comments were allowed to be brought up at a meeting. I think that's what the actual case was that was brought up, but I defer to the gentleman, but if it's my understanding, maybe I'm talking about a different case in 2014.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I am aware that when contracted work is done in the community that they usually make a video beforehand of what it looked like and then the before and after photos are available. If it was done by a private contractor and not done by the Medford DPW, it seems like in this instance it may have been done by the DPW, but in other instances, Normally we'll have a video on file and that could be accessed through the engineering office.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, paper 15789. Back, well, maybe four months ago, this council had met with the chief of police relative to a number of concerns relative to resident parking. And one of the discussions that the traffic commission was having was implementing a citywide permitting process for resident parking. And I'd like an update on that, Mr. President. As the winter fast approaches, the parking wars begin. And you wouldn't know that today's December 15th or so based upon the weather. But after our first snowfall, I think we're all going to find out about it relatively quickly, Mr. President. So I'm hoping that the Traffic Commission will be willing to provide us with an update as to where they are in terms of their deliberation on resident citywide permit parking.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Many of us here in the city of Medford know the Femineau family. Rose was the mother of retired Medford police officer Frank Femineau, and she recently passed away. She's also the grandmother of Councilor Camuso's wife. And I offer my condolences to the family on their loss, and I'd ask my council colleagues to do the same, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Brendan Patrick was born Wednesday evening, Mr. President. He's happy, he's healthy, 7 pounds, 10 ounces, 21 inches long. We came home from the hospital Friday, and mother is doing well, son is doing well, son number one is doing well also. So thank you very much, Councilor Caraviellole, for bringing this forward. I know my wife's probably sitting at home right now, very happy to hear it. And I apologize for not being able to attend last week's meeting. However, we had a couple of false alarms. that we needed to deal with over at the Winchester Hospital before the baby finally joined us. But thank you very much, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I move to take paper 15-432 off the table out of unfinished business to allow MassDOT and its contractor, Zippo and Company, to provide an update on the reconstruction of the Craddock Bridge, please.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, If the project manager would just come back for a second, Scott, it's, it's my understanding that the gentleman just referred to water windows and water work windows, water work windows. And based upon the presentation you guys gave last time, there are certain periods of time of the year precluded from being able to work at the site based on, is it federal standard or state standard? It's,
[Adam Knight]: Last week we put a resolution forward relative to the schedule changes that were potential at the West Medford commuter rail station. And I believe that we got word back from our state delegation that those changes have been put on hold for the time being until an exhaustive public hearing process can be conducted, Mr. President. So while Representative Donato was here, I thought we should thank him for his hard work and his efforts and give him an opportunity to maybe speak on the matter if he sees fit. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Representative.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President. Thank you very much. And Ms. Miller, thank you for your presentation. Um, Woodcock and associates is a consultant, correct? That is correct. And what type, what type of consultant services do they provide now for the city and for the, um, the, the water and sewer commission?
[Adam Knight]: And based upon our discussions that we had last week, one of the things that came up was that Woodcock and Associates recommends that we would maintain between 25% and 50% of our water sewer budget and reserves. Is that correct?
[Adam Knight]: We're on the lower end at this point in time.
[Adam Knight]: So if we make this appropriation, what you're saying is that we'll be at about 15% of our total operating budget for water and sewer and our retained earnings. So we'd still be 10% below what it is that is recommended from our consultant?
[Adam Knight]: And did they not also state that in terms of surrounding communities and communities that we're comparable with, we are in the middle of the road right now in terms of what we have in our reserves?
[Adam Knight]: Okay. Excellent. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
[Adam Knight]: I thought it was that he thought he would, that we would be at 26% 700,000. I would still be closer to 20, 26%, 25%. Okay.
[Adam Knight]: Um, If I'm understanding the motion that's on the floor, regardless, we're going to have to appropriate the money that's before us right now in this paper. No. So why don't we act on that and then worry about the rest of it at a later time? The amendment proceeds the main motion. No, that's fine. I'm just trying to make it. I mean, we all have a similar, you know, we were all okay with spending the 700,000. It's the excess of 700,000 that we're not all okay with. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knife. Mr. President, thank you very much. Steve Sealth is a Medford resident. He's a hardworking individual whose efforts were honored by President O'Brien, also another Medford resident here down at Local 25. So I'd like the council to extend the deep condolence, deep congratulations to Mr. Sealth and his family on his recent appointment.
[Adam Knight]: Absolutely not true. He does, and it most certainly does.
[Adam Knight]: With the clouds of negativity that sometimes surround this room, I think it's very important that we point out some of the good things that are also happening in this community, Mr. President. And quite frankly, I think being appointed a vice president of an international union is very important, very important to his family, very important to the people that work in that union, very important to the people that work in that union and live in this community, Mr. President. I bring the matter forward because it's a momentous occasion, not for any other reason. And for people to paint it another way is totally inaccurate, totally inappropriate, Mr. President. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: We may have a piece of unfinished business reporting the committee paper out today that we had the committee of the whole on for a public hearing. Oh yes. Uh, Councilor Knight. Um, we did have a committee of the whole meeting this afternoon at five 30 relative to setting the FY 16 tax rate, Mr. President. And, um, I believe, uh, it was the finding of the committee to have several questions answered, but to put this on for a public hearing next week.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. As we are all well aware, several weeks ago, the Community Preservation Act was passed by way of ballot question. The next step in the process would be for the Medford City Council to establish a Community Preservation Commission, Mr. President. I've been on the phone with the Community Preservation Coalition, which is a an organization that helps administer the setup of the community preservation committees. And, um, I bring this resolution forward so that we can sit down and invite them to join us and provide us with some technical expertise as to how to move forward in this endeavor.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. I bring the resolution forward because it's our duty, based upon the legislation that was passed by the voters. This is by no way a referendum on whether or not this ballot question was a good question, a bad question, or anything else. The fact of the matter is, the question was on the ballot, the question passed, and now the ball's in our court. to move forward and implement, Mr. President. I know Councilor Penta was very supportive of this endeavor back in 2001, I believe. He actually brought this paper to the table and asked the council to vote in favor of it at that point in time. So, Mr. President, I'd ask that the committee be set up, that there's no need for further debate. This is the next step in the process. It is what it is. You know, the vote passed, the vote passed. And now it's on us to move forward and be sure that we take the appropriate steps and meet our obligation and our duty and do what we were elected to do.
[Adam Knight]: Again, Mr. President, I think that the committee would be tasked with the function as to determine how many public hearings are going to happen, what the process is going to be. I think that that's something that should be done as a community, as a group. with a number of people putting their heads together to determine what the best practices are, Mr. President. So I'd ask my council colleagues to support the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: The easy answer to that question, Mr. President, is yes.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Mr. President, that is inaccurate. That is inaccurate, Mr. President. If you look at section 5A of the CPA statute, The CPC must consist of at least five members. The council has the ability to establish four more at-large members. We don't have to. It all depends on what the committee wants to do. It's not up to the council to determine whether, it's up to the council to determine whether or not they would like to have five members, six members, seven members, eight members, nine members, ten members. Well, not ten. It goes up to nine. But Mr. President, so that's actually not the case. The council doesn't have to have nine. It can have five plus one. It can have five plus two. But again, I think that it's in the best interest of the community.
[Adam Knight]: Right.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, exactly. And I think that the reason that we're putting this committee together is to determine what direction we want to go in. Each community that adopts the Community Preservation Act is required to establish a community preservation committee, and that is a function of the legislative body, Mr. President. So instead of us unilaterally doing that, I think it would make more sense for us to have a subcommittee that's in place that has members of the community that are also willing to participate and be involved and help us craft something that works for everybody.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if the messenger would like, I can share a copy of the document with the gentleman. I would like that very much.
[Adam Knight]: Roll call vote, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Presently in the city of Medford, I have passed out to all the members here a printout from the city's website. And it would say, when are payments due for motor vehicle excise tax? Payment of the motor vehicle excise tax is due within 30 days from the date the excise bill is issued. A person who does not receive a bill is still liable for the excise plus any interest charges accrued. Therefore, it's important to keep the registry and the post office informed of current names and addresses so excise bills can be delivered promptly. All owners of motor vehicles must pay an excise tax. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the owner to contact the treasurer's collector's office if you have not received a bill. If an excise tax is not paid within 30 days from the issue date, the amount will be assessed a $5 demand charge plus interest. If payment in full, including the demand charge, is not received within 14 days of the date issued, a warrant with additional charges will be issued. Warrants are turned over to the Deputy Collector Kelly Ryan and Associates for further collection and registry action. Mr. President, Chapter 68, Section 9 of the General Laws reads, in any town accepting the provisions of this section and notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter to the contrary, Any excise due under this chapter by a member of the Massachusetts National Guard or Reservist or a dependent of a member of the Massachusetts National Guard or Reservist shall be deferred while that member is on active service outside the Commonwealth and for a period of up to 180 days after the completion of that service. No interest or penalty shall be assessed for any period before the expiration of the 180 days. Mr. President, a vote for this is a vote for our veterans, a vote for those that service our country, Mr. President. It's a deferral of their excise tax that's going to be due them if they are deployed, if they are out of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts for a period of time for which their excise taxes due. It doesn't cost anything to the bottom line, Mr. President. At the end of the day, the excise tax responsibility still lies within the individual. However, I think that it would make sense for us to adopt this provision, considering if we have a resident in the city of Medford who is a National Guardsman who has been deployed to Iraq and their car is sitting in the driveway and their affairs are up in the air and not in quite great order because they're deployed overseas and their family life has been affected dramatically because of this. This is the least we can do, Mr. President, to provide them with some relief until they return and get their affairs in order. So, with that being said, Mr. President, I'd ask that my council colleagues support this resolution, and I'd ask for a roll call vote.
[Adam Knight]: Mortgage payments or property tax payments, Councilor?
[Adam Knight]: That's not a function of the council. That's not a function of the local government.
[Adam Knight]: Move for approval. Roll call vote, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the impact, it would be a zero sum impact because the obligation to pay the excise tax would still remain. It would just be deferred until their return and it, um, penalties and interest couldn't accrue until after the 180th day of their return.
[Adam Knight]: So, so in essence, the financial impact would be zero because they'd be getting the same amount of excise that they would be getting if, in fact, the person wasn't deployed and was here. The only loss that we're seeing is on penalties and interest. So we're just not penalizing an individual for being deployed and servicing the country while, you know, they're not able to be here and pay the excise. Right.
[Adam Knight]: So I'm not sure what you're saying.
[Adam Knight]: The money's still due. If I say that your bill's due on January, excise tax comes out. So January, your excise tax gets levied. It's due by February 2. But I'm deployed. I'm overseas, or I'm out of state, for that matter. Legislation just speaks for being out of state. So I'm out of state. I'm at Fort Bragg. And I'm at Fort Bragg until June. I come back on June 3rd. I have 188 days, 180 days from June 3rd in order to pay the excise tax before I will be fined and assessed penalties.
[Adam Knight]: On the motion for approval, Councilor Knight. This law's been on the books for quite a period of time. The City of Medford has not adopted it. We have a local option. I feel as though it would make perfectly good sense for us to adopt this local option, Mr. President. Bark or bite, decide. It's something that's going to help people, and it's something that I support.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I, too, I think that this is a good resolution in theory. However, in application, I think that there might be another way that we can do it that will not rely on us sticking together. It won't rely on an us versus them mentality, Mr. President. That would be a change of our city council rules. And maybe if we change the rules so that no paper related to a bond or expenditure shall be introduced to our agenda. unless we are in receipt of the paper seven days before and in writing. That will take the ambiguousness out of it. That will take the reliance on other members out of it. I think that we'd also have a concern, Mr. President, we really can't preclude somebody as a member of the body from voting on a paper that they want to vote on unless we use parliamentary procedure. You know, tabling at section 22 and at section 20.4, which we learned a little bit about a couple weeks ago. So with that being said, Mr. President, I certainly agree with Councilor Longo. I agree with everything she's saying. However, I think there might be a stronger mechanism in order for us to implement such. So I'd ask that the matter be referred to the Rules Committee for construction of a rule that would govern the City Council and govern and dictate how money papers are going to be introduced to our agenda. If we don't get the seven-day explanation, if we don't get the explanation within seven days, it doesn't get put on the agenda. If matter doesn't get in the agenda, it never reaches the floor. If it never reaches the floor, it doesn't reach a vote. And if it doesn't reach a vote, the expense doesn't get expended.
[Adam Knight]: I think Mr. President, we have an a paper and a B paper and a paper to address the rest of this preceding term. And then we will have a meeting of the rules committee to establish the rule. If we look at our rules right now, we have a section 22 rule 22. I'm sorry, not section 22. I don't want to confuse the two, but rule 22 says, Every ordinance and every order for a bond issued shall, before its passage, be referred to the solicitor, who shall forthwith examine the same as to its legality and notify the council in writing of his or her findings. And we'll see on every bond request that we receive and every expenditure request that we receive, we have a cover letter from the city solicitor. And that's been pretty effective, and we receive that every time, Mr. President. So I think that this is actually, you know, us working together to come up with a great venue and a great way to handle this. We can handle the rest of this term through Councilor Longo's resolution, and we'll put it on the Rules Committee to address it for the future. When the new Council comes in. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I am in support of the convictual's license for these individuals. However, I do have a request of them. It's a pet peeve when I drive down Central and I drive past Pease Variety, and when the store is open, they still have the security grates down, covered with graffiti on the Spring Street side, Mr. President. So I'd ask that while you guys are in operation and in business and the store is open, that the security grates be opened during operating hours, because it really is a blight to the neighborhood to see the security grates down. all day long with just the door open and maybe one window.
[Adam Knight]: So don't get me wrong, Mr. President, I certainly respect their right to protect their asset. However, I think during normal operating hours when somebody is in there, the grates could be lifted. And I'd also ask that a correspondence be sent to the convenience store on the corner of Fulton and Salem Street, asking the same.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, can I ask a question on hours of operation, if you don't mind? I'm sorry, go away.
[Adam Knight]: Move for approval, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President. I also find it confusing that they'd put the restrictions. Mr. Coakley. Mr. Coakley. A quick question for you, sir. Were these signs posted the full length of Goley Road into ISR?
[Adam Knight]: But would it go from Summit Street to George? Yeah. Summit Street to George? Pretty much, yeah.
[Adam Knight]: In a round, wide circle as well. It says on this paper here that they're going from- The reason I ask is because I've never seen National Grid, first of all, work on a project after 3 o'clock in the afternoon, number one. but they're restricting your parking till 5 o'clock in the afternoon. And number two, I don't understand why, if in fact they are going to do the project for the whole entire street, why it's not done in segments as opposed to shutting the whole street down.
[Adam Knight]: And I'm a hundred percent certain. I don't, I don't doubt it for one bit. You did your homework. You know what I mean? You see a lot of people come up here that don't.
[Adam Knight]: The matter that we're voting on right now would be to have the city engineer explain the process to us in the permitting process and the restrictions and why this is going to happen. Right. And then we're going to also have a couple of other side questions that the clerk has taken down. Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I'd like to amend the paper further. Um, on November 10th, we passed paper number one, five, seven, three, one, a request for the cost of the biannual street sweeping program, as well as a request, for the numbers as to what portion is handled internally and what portion is contracted out. And I think that falls in line with us establishing a street sweeping program that works for all, Mr. President. This matter was referred to the DPW response on 11-18-15, included in our packet last week. So I just wanted to reiterate the fact that we still await the response from the DPW, and I'd like to add that to the paper as a reminder, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Um, yes, Mr. President. Um, recently I was informed by, uh, several people on the train on the way into Boston as well as the conductor. Um, as I was waiting at the West Medford Commuter Rail Station to go in town last Thursday, that they were going to be making proposed cuts to the service at the West Medford Commuter Rail Station. Um, I bear with me for a moment here, but, uh, the morning commute after 8 AM, West Medford currently has service at 8.27 a.m., 8.45 a.m., 8.58 a.m., 9.30 a.m., and 9.48 a.m. The changes in this service will cut the times to 8.14 a.m., 8.34 a.m., and 9.47 a.m., with what looks like about an hour and 20 minute or so gap between the last two trains during the morning rush hour commute. And I'd be one to argue that 9.47 isn't really rush hour either, Mr. President. I think that's a little too late for people to be getting into town to go to work. Also on the way home, leaving North Station to West Medford, currently we have a 410 train, a 420 train, a 440 train, a 510 train, a 550 train, a 625, a 655, and a 730 train. The announced changes will reflect a train at 355, 445, 510, 6 p.m., 520, and 725, with service gaps as long as a little bit over an hour, Mr. President, during some of those periods. I'm really confused about the message that the MBTA sent to the City of Medford at this point in time, Mr. President. We're sitting here, we're dealing with proposed changes to our commuter rail schedule that's cutting service. We're sitting here looking at the privatization of our express bus routes with new contracts. We're also sitting here looking at the state wavering on its commitment to extend the Green Line to College Avenue, Mr. President. And I think that sends the wrong message to the City of Medford that, well, we're just a cutthroat. They're going to lay out tracks here, but they're not going to service us, Mr. President. I'm very concerned about the direction that this matter is going in. And in recent days, I have been informed that our state delegation, led by Representatives Garbo and Donato and Representative Barber, have met and offered a statement relative to the proposed changes in the MBTA schedule. However, no definite matters have been resolved at this point in time. And there will be a meeting in coming days with MassDOT and MBTA officials, Mr. President, and I ask that our representatives keep us apprised of that meeting and also maybe the council can appoint a representative or invite a representative to attend. So the purpose of the resolution, Mr. President, is to get more information relative to the cuts at the West Medford Commuter Rail Station and the service thereof, Mr. President. I feel as though it would be detrimental to our community to allow these cuts to go through. I know we have limited control. However, I think we need to put up a fight and put up a stink. make sure that Medford's not a cut-through for MBTA service, but rather a place where they stop and a place where it can flourish.
[Adam Knight]: I'm sorry. Yes. Two more things. I'm sorry. I apologize.
[Adam Knight]: The paper is referring it to me for action for next year.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, yes, we've had a very successful fall season this year, and in course with past practice, I'd like to invite the following GBL championship teams down to receive a memoriam citation from the city council in recognition of their hard work, their teamwork, and their efforts, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I said that I would like a ruling on Rule 35A.
[Adam Knight]: And also that we have a representative, um, point of order council night pursuant to council rules and the rule 35, no report of a committee shall be received unless agreed to in committee and actually assembled. Rule 35A, the council and the president shall review all committee papers in a committee of the whole meeting thereafter.
[Adam Knight]: And then we'll read rule 35A. The council presidents shall review all committee papers in a committee of the whole meeting, which hasn't happened yet, Mr. President. It most certainly has. And I personally, based upon the plethora of information that the gentleman's given us, based upon the information that the gentleman's provided with us, I'd like to do a little bit more research, because there might be some questions that I have, Mr. Brown. Well, maybe if you came into the meeting, you would have been able to understand what was going on. That wouldn't have changed anything. That wouldn't have changed anything. Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Mr. President. I believe the explanation of the committee report is informational. for the other members of the council who don't serve on that committee. And then when we meet on the committee... The committee report was brought forward like it always is. Mr. President, I wasn't talking. Mr. President, I rest my case. I'm not going to be interrupted repeatedly. I rest my case, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I think procedurally, Mr. President, papers need to report themselves out of committee, have to be reported out of committee to meet the committee of the whole, right? So they'd be in committee until the subcommittee reports them out.
[Adam Knight]: Or each individual subcommittee chair can perform an audit of the items that are in their committee, and then report back to the council what's sleeping and what's alive. And then we can meet as a committee of the whole and discuss what's going on from there.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, I think procedure is important, Mr. President. Procedure is established so that we're open and transparent.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, if it's been in committee since 2007, chances are nothing's going to happen with it anyway. That is true.
[Adam Knight]: The rules are the rules. I didn't make them up. They're in place so that we can provide order so that it doesn't turn into lunacy. You know, that's why we have the rules.
[Adam Knight]: The reason I asked to suspend the rules, Mr. President, is to take the tabled papers from last week.
[Adam Knight]: The papers that you- Can we take them one at a time, please? Absolutely. I'd like to move first, Mr. President, with the DPW loan order. Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Mr. President, point of information. Councilor Knight, a review of the minutes from last week's meeting would not indicate that the council requested anything other than enacting rule number 20 to motion to table it.
[Adam Knight]: The paper is before us. Why don't we invite Ms. Miller up to explain to us this loan order. Ms.
[Adam Knight]: That's a question for the solicitor, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. If, in fact, the matter is something that's going to go into litigation, I think that we need to err on the side of caution and not disclose too much in terms of what our litigation position is, our litigation strategies at this point in time, Mr. President. I think we've raised enough questions here for us to understand that the paper's not going to go through tonight, it's not going to pass tonight. Ms. Millers gave us a breakdown of what looks like $155,000 for replacement, a main replacement, $80,000 for police details, $90,000 for materials. So we have some understanding, but we need to have more understanding. I'm just very concerned if, in fact, we owe the money. We're going to have to pay the money sometime to somebody. The question is whether or not we're going to be able to recuperate it and how much we're going to be able to recuperate back during the separation process. And I'd be very cautious in compromising our position in separation moving forward, Mr. President. I mean, ultimately, You know, the overruns are there. We need to find out what they're for, what they're from, and that's OK and fine. But we also need to protect our interests, and we need to protect our position in litigation. So with that being said, I rest, and I thank you, Councilor, for allowing me to make the point.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And thank you for entertaining this resolution this evening. Recently, the city of Boston on November 9th had signed into law the banning of replica handguns in public places as an effort to provide our police officers with safer streets to work in, in an effort to provide our children with an understanding that the use of replica handguns are relatively dangerous in public places, and to protect the citizenry from the use of replica handguns in criminal activities, Mr. President. On November 9th, Mayor Walsh signed this local ordinance in the city of Boston into effect. On November 10th, in the city of Medford, a gentleman was arrested for brandishing a replica handgun in a road rage incident on Mystic Avenue, Mr. President. So I think it's safe to say that the city of Medford is not exempt from these type of actions and from the harm that can be caused by replica handguns in our community. In this packet that I put together and had the messenger distribute to my Council colleagues, I've put together a couple of different materials relative to other communities that have done this, not here in Massachusetts, but across the nation. And when I take a look from the back forward, you'll see Dallas, Texas has an ordinance that restricts and regulates the use of replica handguns in public places. You'll see that Beaverton, Oregon has similar laws in effect. You'll see that Minneapolis, Minnesota has similar laws that are in effect, Mr. President. New York City has actually gone a step further and has required that the sale of imitation guns in colors such as black, blue, silver, or aluminum is prohibited in New York City. And those stores are not able to carry those in New York City. So I think that this is an ability for us to sit down and to help make Medford a safer place for our police officers, for our children, and for the residents. So Mr. President, I'd ask that the consulate detain this motion to vote in the affirmative. to have a meeting with the chief of police and the city solicitor to craft an ordinance that will work best for Medford in keeping our residents and our police officers and our children safe.
[Adam Knight]: On the motion of council, if I may, the data would reflect that this is not cockamamie at all. But otherwise, in the city of Boston, for example, Between January 2014 and April 2015, replica firearms were used in at least 113 incidents that included assault and battery, robbery, drug dealing, destruction of property, breaking and entering, and home invasion, Mr. President. That's according to police department data. And also, during the 2014 school year in the city of Boston, 15 replica guns were seized in the public schools, and this year, 13 have been seized. So, Mr. President, I definitely think there is a need for us to take a look at this, and I'd ask my council colleagues to support the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: So those materials, none of the materials included in the packet or a draft ordinance in terms of what I'm looking for the city to do. I think that this is going to be best done to sit down with our chief of police and to craft something that he feels would be right for Medford. Um, what I included in here was just an illustration of other communities that have done this going back to 2007 and I included a copy of Dallas, Texas's ordinance just because it was very surprising to me to see a state like Texas and a community like Dallas actually putting restrictions on anything that shoots anything. So, Mr. President, I thought that that was one of the reasons why this would be very helpful to show that it doesn't just happen in Massachusetts. It's a problem in Oregon, it's a problem in California, a problem in Texas. If it's a problem in other places across the nation. We're not going to be exempt from it either. So I think it's a proactive approach to addressing an issue that really hasn't cropped its head up in our city too much, but we have seen it within the last two weeks. Yes.
[Adam Knight]: The intent of the resolution is to craft an ordinance that would work for the City of Medford that would be similar to what the City of Boston has done. If you look at the City of Boston's ordinance, Mr. President, a minor in a possession of a replica firearm in a public place, the replica firearm would be confiscated. It would be brought back to the police station. The minor would have to come back with their parent to receive the weapon. If it's confiscated from an adult, the adult has a 24-hour cooling off period. before they're allowed to receive the replica firearm back. There are certain controls and requirements like an orange tip and green tape or paint on it to make it stand out so that police officers can discern these toy guns from real guns. I mean, the last thing that we want to hear in this community is that a police officer is involved in a shots fired call with somebody that has a replica or a toy gun in their hand. Also, if you look at some of the statistics and the data, and I don't have them in front of me here, Mr. President, but based on my remembrance from the research I did, there's a thing that's called suicide by co-op. And in 48 percent of the instances of unarmed individuals, they considered them unarmed individuals because they had replica guns. They weren't real guns. But yet, the police executed them. Not executed them, but used deadly force to stop the threat, Mr. President. But in those situations, they determined that those people were unarmed because they had no real firearm, but rather a replica gun. So I think that the intent of the resolution is to sit down with the chief of police, to sit down with members of this council and our solicitor, to come up with a legally sound resolution. I mean, an ordinance that would absolutely and positively protect our community here in Medford.
[Adam Knight]: I certainly agree, Councilor Pender. I think that New York, and this is a city law, it's not New York State's law, it's New York City's actual local ordinance that prohibits the sale of any toy gun unless it's completely brightly colored. And one of the things that Councilor Pender keeps referring to is the $300 in fines. Those were $300,000 in fines that were levied upon businesses like Amazon and eBay who were violating the local ordinance and actually selling In Wal-Mart stores, actually, was one of the big purveyors of these replica firearms to New York City in violation of the local ordinance. And that's where a lot of that recovery came from, Mr. President. But again, Councilor Penta, I couldn't agree with you more in terms of looking at it and saying, should these replica handguns in the city of Medford, if they're being sold there, be brightly colored? I don't think that that's a problem. I think that's something that should be a great discussion topic. And I also think that there really is no place for replica handguns in our parks, in our public parks, in our public schools, in our public buildings. So, you know, that's why I brought the resolution forward, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think that this resolution speaks for itself. I got a call from a couple of constituents, one of whom is in the room this evening, whose birthday may be coming up, if I understand correctly. And this is an issue of importance to them. And I think it's an issue, it should be an issue of importance to us as well, Mr. President. The 101 bus, for example, travels up and down Main Street all day long, and it makes stops right at George Street in Maine. There are no pedestrian crossing controls at George Street in Maine, which is a heavily traveled thoroughfare, and buses along that route have pretty high ridership, Mr. President. So in the interest of public safety and keeping our pedestrians safe, I brought this resolution forward. I think it's a good idea. long in the waiting, but it's something that's necessary. And as the sun goes down a little bit earlier here, and people are getting home from work at 4, 5, and 6 o'clock at night when it's dark out, it highlights the problem even more, Mr. President. So I'd ask that my fellow colleagues support me in voting in the affirmative for the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight? If we could also send this paper to the Pedestrian Committee to add to one of their list of intersections of concern, I'd appreciate it.
[Adam Knight]: Yes. Ms. McGivern has been working with the Pedestrian Committee to implement some safety controls in our community to make Medford a safer place for those who choose to walk. Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Request to sever the motion. Mr. President, I have a question. Um, have you had any correspondence at all with anybody from dot to date relative to the issue? I have. And, uh, would you be so kind as to report back to the council as to how those conversations have gone?
[Adam Knight]: Motion to sever the two items, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to take subcommittee report. up before the council relative to the community garden commission appointment of the city council, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to revert back to the regular order of business, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and thank you, Councilor Marks. We share some of the same concerns relative to the deficit in the water side, and I'd like to amend the paper a little bit further to ask the Water and Sewer Commission to report back on the actual financial picture relative to the water and sewer revenue forecasts, as well as whether or not we've met conservation goals established through the tiered rating system, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. As a student in the Medford Public Schools, I was always very familiar with the security officers that we had at the high school, the security officers, the community resource officers that we had in our elementary and middle schools at the time, junior high schools. To date myself, Mr. President, everybody is aware of the incident where someone breached security protocols at one of our local schools and was able to steal $800 or so from some teachers Friday before the election. And with that being said, Mr. President, I think it's time that we take a long, hard look at restoring the actual school security guards to our public school buildings. Technology is great, and I certainly embrace technology, Mr. President. I certainly feel as though cameras are very important tools. However, they don't replace the good, old-fashioned work of a police presence or a security presence in our public schools, Mr. President. So I'd ask that my fellow colleagues on the Council support this resolution. getting a cost estimate from the superintendent of schools, as well as our budget director, and also having a copy of the security protocols forwarded to our attention for review. Mr. President, I feel as though, uh, as we prepare for the budget, this would be an important item for us to take a look at.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. The reason I bring this resolution forward is because I have concern as to whether or not we're getting the most bang for our buck in terms of our street sweeping. And is that Mr. Geer right there? I'll take the call. No, Mr. President, I bring this resolution forward because I have concern as to whether or not we're getting the most bang for our buck. So I'd like to see how much it is that we're actually spending on just the street sweeping the subcontracting and what we've done internally. And maybe we can expand from twice a year to three or four or five or six or God forbid twice a week.
[Adam Knight]: I think it's also important to note that street sweeping, I think we've all gotten the calls, but street sweeping has started and it's going to continue for the next several days and started on Monday. And also one of the biggest requests that I've seen from members of the DPW is not to put your leaves in the street. Exactly.
[Adam Knight]: Did we not appropriate some money in the community improvement initiative that we passed last April for the parapet as part of the?
[Adam Knight]: The community improvement initiative?
[Adam Knight]: The community improvement initiative?
[Adam Knight]: Yourself, Louise, came before the council for a bond of $1.4 million for various items, removable speed bumps, removable security cameras. Part of that, I believe, was the parapet included in that community improvement initiative.
[Adam Knight]: We had a resurfacing of seven parks. It had the removable speed bumps. It had the security cameras. It had $300,000.
[Adam Knight]: had the carriage house, 300,000 for stumps and sidewalk repairs that were related to water.
[Adam Knight]: Yes. Councilor Knight. I think it would also be very important that we invite a director of prevention and outreach now, newly hired, newly filled position. It falls right in our wheelhouse in terms of our substance abuse outreach coordinator. So I'd like to invite Penny as well. Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I think the resolution speaks for itself. I have a number of good friends that have served in the United States Marine Corps. We're very happy about the USMC's birthday, and tomorrow is Veterans Day, and there will be a number of Veterans Day celebrations in the community. I'd like everybody to be aware at 11, 11 a.m. at the VFW Hall on Mystic Avenue, there will be a memorial service there, and all are welcome to attend. Very good. On the motion for approval by Councilor Knight, all those in favor?
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. When I was newly elected last term, I was very fortunate to be invited up by then Councilor-President Mayarco to sit in on the meetings and it was a very beneficial exercise. I was able to hit the ground running in January and I think it's only proper that we extend that same courtesy to our newly elected city councilors that are going to be taking office in January. Very good. I ask my colleagues to support the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. If I remember correctly, there was a lot of discussion about a lot of different bus stops, a lot of different issues that we needed to take care of with the mass DOT. And the vote that we took was to have a subcommittee on transportation meeting to actually identify what these issues are, and then we can present them to the members of the MassDOT. But until we get there, I don't think it's going to be a fruitful discussion. We can bring them in and say, move this bus stop and move that bus stop. Okay, now what? You know what I mean? We have a laundry list of things that need to be taken care of, including Councilor Caraviello's resolution from two weeks ago relative to the train tracks at West Medford and those ugly yellow things that are standing up in the middle. We had a lot of concerns about the bus stops in South Medford in front of Oasis. We had concerns about the bus stops in Medford Square. We had concerns about the Craddock Bridge project. We've had concerns about the maintenance and upkeep at the West Medford commuter rail station. So there are a number of issues surrounding the MBTA and DOT that we're looking for action on. And I think it would only make sense for us to put a list of something together, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Everything else goes right to my point, Mr. President, but that's a separate issue. It's craziness that we're going to do.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, would it make sense for us to maybe get an opinion from Mr. Moki as well as to what he feels is the status of the structure is down there? That would be very helpful.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I think it's safe to say that there have been a variety of issues that have come up before this body relative to the MBTA or the Massachusetts Highway Department. Councilor Marks gave a great discussion and a great synopsis on the walk grant money that's available for us there, provided we get certified. And I think it's important, Mr. President, if we're going to keep calling MassDOT down here to address certain issues in this community, that maybe we establish a comprehensive list so that we can do it all in one shot, as opposed to doing a resolution, sending it out there, telling DOT to come down here on this issue. They come down here on this issue. We resolve that issue. They go back to Boston. Two weeks later, something else comes up. We send another resolution and bring them in. and go on and on and on and on, Mr. President. I think it might make sense for us to have our transportation subcommittee take a look at the issues that are out there pending right now, Mr. President. and put a list together, maybe then we can meet in the Committee of the Whole, prioritize that list, and then have the representative from the DOT come down, which encompasses the MBTA, the Massachusetts Highway Department, the road management for the DCR, and we can move forward in that regard. But at least it'll be a little bit more comprehensive as opposed to, you know, picking one fish out of the barrel at a time.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilors and Councilor Knight. Um, yes, Mr. President, looking at the minutes from the, uh, October 13th meeting, uh, we did pass a resolution. The resolution had a number of parts. And if we look at part E amended by Councilor Camuso, that the chief of police look into doing community policing in the area a couple of days a week for the next two months to prepare a list of concerns and then draft a plan to resolve them. I think that that still makes sense. I think that that's a good course of action and a strong way for us to move forward. If we can get the chief of police down there, because it seems like this is an enforcement issue more than anything else. It's an enforcement issue. That's what it is. You know, we wouldn't need bollards if they wouldn't park on the sidewalk. They won't park on the sidewalk if they get tickets, but they're not getting tickets, so they're parking on the sidewalk. So it's an enforcement issue, Mr. President. So I think it makes sense that we reinforce our position from October 13th.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President. I think it's important to point out that the issue before us is the placement of the bus stops, not the ballings or anything else. On October 13th, we sat down, we met as a council, we passed a resolution. It was a multiple part resolution. Part of that resolution was for our transportation subcommittee to meet to discuss the issues related to the ball. It's down there. That subcommittee meeting is yet to be scheduled, Mr. President. So, um, until that subcommittee meeting happens, I don't know how much of a productive conversation we're going to have other than the fact that we're just going to be rehashing all of the items that we discussed two weeks ago. As we already have, you know, so with that being said, Mr. President, um, I move for approval on the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And hopefully you'll bear with me for a moment here. Over the weekend, I had the opportunity to speak with Representative DiZaglio from Methuen. And she represents the 14th Essex district, Mr. President. She's the lead sponsor of House Bill 3811, an act to regulate oxycontin prescriptions to minors. And she has prepared a written statement because she was unable to appear this evening, Mr. President. So I'd like to read that into the record on her behalf. coming from Representative DiZaglio. I write to express my deepest gratitude to the members of the Medford City Council for your resolution and strong show of support in favor of my sponsored resolution, hopefully. House Bill 3811, an act regulating OxyContin prescriptions for minors. This past August, the Food and Drug Administration approved the prescribing of OxyContin, the extended release version of the painkiller Oxycodone, known in recent years for its frequent abuse for children as young as 11 years old. Under this legislation, OxyContin would be prohibited for prescription to children under the age of 17 in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. OxyContin is manufactured by Purdue Pharma, a drug company which came under fire in 2007 after three of its top executives pled guilty to misleading doctors and the public about OxyContin's risks of addiction. Recently, the FDA decided to ask the same company to conduct its own studies on whether or not they deemed this highly addictive substance safe for young children. When I heard about this, I was outraged. We are, after all, in the middle of an epidemic related to opioids. It is no time to expand access to opioids, least of all to young, vulnerable children. I was immensely pleased when, on September 9th, a bipartisan group of eight U.S. senators, including Senator Edward Markey, Senator Kelly Ayotte from New Hampshire, and Senator Gene Shaheen from New Hampshire, penned a letter to the U.S. Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee calling for an investigation into the FDA's decision to approve OxyContin as well as an examination of the rise in opiate abuse and overdose deaths. The letter noted the FDA decision was made without the advice of an independent advisory committee, which was approved by the FDA regulations on approving drugs. In a study conducted in 2014, the National Institute on Drug Abuse found that nearly one in 30 high school seniors had abused OxyContin. Each day, according to the American Society of Addiction Medicine, 2,500 youth in the United States abuse a prescription pain reliever for the first time. The number of opioids prescribed to adolescents and young adults has nearly doubled between 1994 and 2007. We in the Commonwealth have a duty to our children to regulate the distribution of an opioid like OxyContin to these vulnerable citizens. I thank the members of the Medford City Council for their support of this legislation and commitment to forcefully addressing the Commonwealth's opioid crisis. Mr. President, I bring this resolution forward because the statistics are alarming. If you do a little bit of research and you take a look into opioid abuse here in Massachusetts, you'll find that the Bureau of Substance Abuse Services conducted a survey in 2012 relative to the adolescent admissions into treatment programs. And this focused on the abuse rate among youths averaged age 12 to 17 years old. In Massachusetts during FY12, There were 2,254 admissions to substance abuse treatment services for children that were under 18 years of age, Mr. President. 48% of those seeking treatment were related to opiate abuse, Mr. President. So I think it's very important that the Medford City Council get on board and support this legislation. The city messenger was kind enough to pass around a packet that I had. And inside this packet, Mr. President, you'll find a copy of Representative DiZaglio's statement. an article from the Lawrence eagle tribune that outlines a little bit of the history of the bill as well. You'll also find in this packet, Mr. President, a legislative history of the bill. There was a hearing on the bill in the committee on mental health and substance abuse. This hearing was on the 22nd of this month. And from what I understand, Mr. President, it's going to be reported out of this committee favorably. Also you will find house bill number 3811 attached to this packet as well, Mr. President. So I asked my colleagues here in the Medford city council to continue their proactive efforts in combating opiate abuse here measured by joining me in voting in the affirmative to support House Bill 3811. Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the data that I referred to was put forward again by the Bureau of Substance Abuse Services. The report was prepared by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, Bureau of Substance Abuse Services, and the Office of Data Analytics and Decision Support, Mr. President. Books like this fact sheet was put out in 2012 that I have here relative to the press release that Representative Zaglia put out and asked for me to read into the record, Mr. President. She didn't cite where she got her data. However, I take it on face value this is part of her testimony that she used when she chaired the caucus relative to the passage of the bill in the hearing as well. So I can understand what Councilor Penta says. However, he doesn't see it in Medford High. I'm a little bit closer to some of these children and I do see it, Mr. President. And when you think one in 30 children, you're thinking one kid in every single class. And when we're looking at this epidemic that's facing our city, our state, our region, and the country, It's foolish for us to think that we're immune to it, Mr. President. It doesn't discriminate. And national averages and national averages and, you know, we're a part of that. We're a part of this nation and we're a part of the data collection module.
[Adam Knight]: The study was conducted in 2004 by the National Institute on Drug Abuse.
[Adam Knight]: And that's a subsidiary of the National Institutes of Health. Okay, yes. That was in Representative D'Souza's press release. The stuff that I got from DPH was from the Bureau of Substance Abuse Services. That was their fact sheet. The annual report provides information on adolescent admissions to substance abuse treatment services.
[Adam Knight]: The admission data presented here reported to the Bureau of Substance Abuse Services Management Information System in FY12 by licensed providers.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. President. Just in closing, I have here before me a paper written by Nora Vaklau, a medical doctor who appeared before the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control, Mr. President. She's also associated with the National Institute on Drug Abuse, and that's an affiliate of the National Institutes of Health. And what she says is, based on her studies, is that prescription opioids are one of the three main broad categories of medication that present abuse liability. and there are several factors that contribute to this. They include drastic increases in the number of prescriptions written and dispensed, the greater social acceptability for using medications for different purposes, and aggressive marketing by pharmaceutical companies, Mr. President. These factors together have helped create a broad environmental availability of prescription medications and, in general, opioids in particular. You know, the most alarming result that I saw here was in 2012, over 5% of the United States population aged 12 years or older have used opioid pain relievers non-medically. Children as young as 12 years old, fifth and sixth graders, Mr. President. So I think that although I understand the corollary in between those that are using the drug in its appropriate form, we're seeing a lot of diversion. We must recognize and consider, as Dr. Vauclau said, the impact of opioid abuse on health and mortality, but also preserve the fundamental role played by prescription opioid pain relievers in healing and reducing human suffering. So we need to strike the right balance, Mr. President. And quite frankly, I don't see how prescribing oxycontin to children 11, 12, and 13 years old is sending the right message to anybody, Mr. President. So I thank my council colleagues for entertaining me this evening. I usually don't go on this long, and I do certainly appreciate all your support. And I hope that you join with me in voting in the affirmative for this resolution, Mr. President, because I do feel as though it will make a difference. I don't think Councilor Camuso could have been more right. It's about one. If we can save one life, then we've done a good thing and we're doing our job. This is a discussion that we need to keep on the forefront. And I think that we're doing a good job as a council working together to ensure that Medford is a place where people that are suffering from addiction and seeking treatment services have resources. And I think this is just another step in helping combat. the opiate crisis here in Medford and Massachusetts and in the region. So, Mr. President, thank you very much and thank you to my colleagues. I'd move for approval on the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Move for a call of the yeas and nays, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Exactly. So the paper's out of order. It can't be brought back full for 90 days pursuant to our city council rules that we adopted.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor has withdrawn the motion.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This piece of legislation, Chapter 60A, Section 9, is relative to excise tax for National Guardsmen who are deployed out of state. And it provides a waiver to National Guardsmen whose vehicle sits in their driveway as they're overseas or out of state defending our country, Mr. President. So I think it would make sense for us to take a look into this issue. If the city hasn't adopted it and the solicitor comes back with that opinion, I will be moving for the council to support that initiative. I think it makes sense for us to provide servicemen and women who are deployed overseas defending our freedoms and liberties a tax incentive with their cassettes in their driveway, not driving up and down our roads, Mr. President. So I bring forward this resolution to get an opinion from the solicitor, and if we haven't adopted it at a later date, we can bring this matter up.
[Adam Knight]: Say it again? Reservists that are deployed.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think the resolution speaks for itself. The grand family of long bed fixtures in the city of Medford, and I'm proud to call Richard and Catherine friends, and I'm glad to see that they've had 50 years of wedded bliss, and I'd ask the council to join with me in wishing them a happy anniversary.
[Adam Knight]: I think we're really moving away from the substance of this resolution. You know, the resolution that Councilor Caraviello filed was to discuss the positive effects that the Chevalier Auditorium has on our economic business district down in Method Square. And now it's turning into whether or not the debate's being played. I think it's becoming overly politicized. You know what I mean? We're here to show our support for the Chevalier Auditorium. And, you know, while the resolution is coming out of the fact that we had a debate there, it was very well attended, it was recorded. I think that the intent of the resolution, and the councilor can correct me if I'm wrong, was to highlight the fact that the debate was a big success. It brought a lot of different people to our downtown business district and was a catalyst for economic growth. I don't think it really has anything to do with whether or not the debate's going to be played on channel three or not. I think the purpose and the substance of the resolution, Mr. President, is really about the effects of economic revitalization, the effects of vibrant downtowns that the arts community and that the Chevalier Auditorium can have on Medford. And I'd like to see us stay a little bit more focused on that and a little bit less focused on what direction we're going in terms of whether or not the debate's going to be played. You know what I mean? Is it important? Yeah, it's important. I think that that could be taken up maybe later on in the meeting during the public participation portion.
[Adam Knight]: And I want to see Chevalier get funded. Thank you. Chair recognizes Councilor Knight. Thank you very much, Mr. President. And again, I'd like to thank the folks down at the Chevallier Auditorium, the Commission, and the Friends of for putting on such a wonderful event. The place was immaculate. You could eat off the floor in there. It looked great. I think it's imperative that this council, Mr. President, amends this resolution to request that the administration take a look at putting seed money and to develop a master plan, Mr. President, a master plan to look at what direction the Chevalier Auditorium is going to go, the Chevalier Theatre is going to go in. And the master plan, you know, will take time to put together, but I think if we can act on this now and get some seed money now to start developing a master plan, then we can make this a priority for the FY17 budget. And then we might be able to get a nice line item in there, Mr. President, to start taking care of some of the capital needs that are necessary down there. So I'd move to amend the paper, Mr. President, by requesting that we take a look at developing a master plan to govern Shivire Auditorium's future direction, what direction they're going to go in to do a capital needs assessment, and move forward in that regard.
[Adam Knight]: I just want to clarify, Mr. President, because there was some discussion about when I said master plan and when I amended the paper for a master plan, I meant the master plan for the operations of Shavire Auditorium, not a master plan for Medford Square and the library or anything else, just a master plan for Shavire Auditorium, so we can see what direction the auditorium is going to go in, and I think that we can do that with the work of the people that have been doing keeping this place going for so long as it is right now. So, you know, I certainly look forward to a subcommittee meeting on this. I'll be in attendance even though I'm not a member, Mr. President, as soon as it's called because I think this is very important and I think we need to move on it. I don't think we need to wait until 2017. If we can give some seed money now to figure out exactly what it is to develop a master plan and we can start working right now on what the needs are and assessing the needs, then we can fund a master plan, then we can have the engineers come in and take a look at it and figure out what it's going to cost us to actually make a long-term investment into Chevalier Auditorium so that Chevalier Auditorium's up and running, and that there's a commitment from City Hall that's going to continue to fund it, and they're going to be able to generate revenues. I think they've done a great, great job using creative ways to generate revenue that's not on the backs of the taxpayers, and it may be through renting, through organizations and groups that some people don't agree with, but, you know, I think that they've done a great job, and they've done what they have to do to keep the place alive and keep it where it is, Mr. President. So with that being said, I see no need to wait. I don't think we need to wait for a new administration. I don't think we need to wait till January. I think we can start right now.
[Adam Knight]: And the chair recognizes Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I think that, um, one of the items, Mr. President, I'd like to add to the committee report to send to the mayor in terms of mitigation would be, um, to have a traffic study done relative to the timing of the lights. Um, because when construction projects come into the city, um, what happens is there's traffic flows disrupted. And when traffic flow is disrupted, the light timing doesn't necessarily line up with what's going on. And I think we have a problem right now with the timing of our lights anyway, so I think this project will be twofold. If we can get some mitigation to address some of the light timing along the stretch of the preferred route, I think that might be very helpful in the long term as well as in the short term. Second, and as I look at this preferred route, and we see where we cross over the Mystic River? Can you tell me exactly where that is?
[Adam Knight]: so you can actually go under the river.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Zimbra, would you be willing to also meet with the Mystic River Watershed Association to discuss this project as well as to what's going on?
[Adam Knight]: Excellent, excellent. I mean, one of the things that impresses me the most here, Mr. President, is that we get this and they're ready to send it to everybody in the city. And it's who to call, when to call, where to call, if you have any questions, concerns. And I've called and they've been very responsive to me. And I have a lot of faith that they'll be very responsive to the members of the general public. However, in the committee report, Mr. President, I would like to reflect that we'd like to see a traffic engineer address the light timing issues. And I'd also like to see in the committee report that we have them meet with the Mystic River Watershed Association to determine if there's going to be any environmental impact of their master plan, which just got funded through the state legislature last term. And when I was looking at the map, I was a little confused because I thought it was going to bring us right down to You're coming down South Street from Mystic, from the police station down South Street, and we have a large construction project going on right now, the renovations of the Craddock Bridge. So I think the mitigation of traffic in that area is going to be very important, Mr. President. I think it's going to be vital, actually, to the quality of life of the residents that are along the roadway.
[Adam Knight]: When I excuse myself and Garmin notes, actually I did take a look at that and I saw some of the commitments that were made before that it could be phased and it could be done in certain sections and segments and so forth. And one of the other things that I'm also looking at is the fact that it seems as though you're pretty much on schedule at this point in time. Nothing's changed from the last time you had all the time that you to the, to when you appear before us now in terms of timeline. which is very good because, you know, as Councilor Caraviello said, certain individuals that live along this stretch have been subjected to extensive periods of time of construction. And I'd like to see, you know, that as we move, we move according to schedule. I know it has to get done. It's something that needs to happen. And, you know, I can certainly appreciate the fact that you're here. I can certainly appreciate the fact that you're offering an olive branch to mitigate the circumstances. You know, I think that this is the way that we should be doing projects and I really commend you and your office and your team for coming here this evening, once again, to further update us on the situation. So thank you very much, Mr. Zamparelli. And Mr. President, I just ask that the report reflect such.
[Adam Knight]: I think that the folks from Eversource have already reiterated the fact that they would be more than willing to do that. And as such, you know, Mr. Zamparelli is the Eversource Community Relations Specialist for our municipality, and he can be reached at William.Zamparelli, Z-A-M-P-A-R-E-L-L-I, at Eversource.com. And I think many of us that are familiar with the city of Medford are very familiar with that last name, the late John Zamparelli, who represented our city with great pride, Mr. President. contact that other source would be Mr. Zamparelli, and that's how he can be reached as well. I think it's always good to get the info from the horse's mouth. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: When I got an email relative to this very issue after the May 20th meeting, I placed a call to the city assessor. And right now, the proposed tax levy on underground utilities in the city of Medford is $73 million.
[Adam Knight]: Just a few short weeks ago this council passed a community gardens commission ordinance and created a commission and the council has an appointee. The administration has filled their three slots and there is one vacancy that remains and that is the vacancy that the city council is to appoint, Mr. President. So I'd ask that we establish a committee of the whole meeting in short order so that we can review the applicants and create maybe some criteria or parameters as to what we expect from them as the City Council appointee and then move to fill the vacancy.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. Recently, very recently, our Medford Police Department And its patrolmen have been fitted with Narcan kits, Mr. President. And I'd like to know what the policy is in terms of when Narcan is appropriate. And it's my understanding that they have been trained, that Strong Ambulance has donated some services to train our first responders for the use of Narcan. And I'd just like to see what a copy of the policy looks like so that we can have it for our records.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I'm very pleased and proud to be one of the councilors that voted in support of that project.
[Adam Knight]: I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
[Adam Knight]: Can you do it? Mr. President, I think Councilor Camuso came up with a great suggestion. We refer this matter to the Subcommittee on Transportation for further investigation. These matters that the woman is speaking of have been before this Council before. The Council supported them wholeheartedly. These three issues that were before the traffic commission relative to the bollards, the stop signs, and the stop lines were as a result of Councilor Marksley's community walkthrough. It came by way of a resolution to the traffic commission from the council, Mr. President. So I think Councilor Longo-Kearns is absolutely right. There is a concern. relative to enforcement, and there's a concern relative to lack of follow-through. And I think that it would be appropriate due course for the council's Subcommittee on Transportation to further investigate the matter to determine what's going on. We put a resolution forward. The resolution went through the Traffic Commission. Okay, we're in agreement. The Traffic Commission thinks it works, and we think it should work. Now the question is, where is it? And I think that the Subcommittee on Transportation would be the appropriate venue for which we can figure that out, find that out, and report back to the body as a whole. Or maybe not at all, because it might get taken care of before then, Mr. President. It might be able to be handled right then and there. So on the motion by Councilor Knight, seconded by Councilor Camuso, Councilor Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I certainly can understand Councilor Mark's frustration, and I think that's why it's important that we work together with the administration, with the residents in the neighborhood, and we bring this issue to the table at the subcommittee. I think that if we have a group and subcommittee that's committed and willing to work on this issue, we have three members of the council that are appointed to the subcommittee. We should take ownership of the issue and get the answers to the questions that we need answered.
[Adam Knight]: And that's the frustration. I certainly think that our job here is to solve problems. If there's a problem in the neighborhood, then it's incumbent upon us to take care of it. And we need to determine what course of action is best for this council in addressing the issue. Me, personally, I think bringing everybody to the table and sitting down and hashing out the issues that are of concern is the appropriate approach to take, Mr. President. I don't think that it's going to take do this and do it now. How about why isn't this happening? Is it a funding issue? What can we do to help? encourage the funding? What can we do to move some pieces around? Is there something that's going to need to come before the council for us to release money? Are we supportive of that? These are the questions that we need answered, Mr. President. Why isn't it happening? We can address that in subcommittee, and then we can come up with a course of action as to what we want to do to make it happen. But we have to solve the problem, Mr. President. The problem is presenting itself time and time again before this council from at least 2007, according to the Speaker. With that being said, it's still not resolved. So the course of action that we've been taking isn't working. So why don't we try something different? That's all I'm saying.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think that there's a certain, I don't know why everyone's so scared of subcommittee. I don't know why it's such a scary place. Ultimately, a year ago, certain people came before this body. They asked for something. We responded to those individual citizens that came here. We passed a resolution. We sent that resolution to the Traffic Commission. That resolution went through the Traffic Commission. Everybody behind this rail wants to solve this problem. I think we're just having a disagreement as to what the best way to get it done is. Me, personally, I think the best way to get it done is to have the subcommittee meet bimonthly until the issues get taken place. And when issues arise up like this, let's say, why isn't this done yet? Bring them in. Why isn't this done yet? Bring them in. If there's a need not to meet in one month or in two months, that's okay. But let's keep this thing rolling, Mr. President. It's very easy to take a piece of paper and send it across the hall and wait for it to get a response back. We got a response back. It said it was going to be done 10 days into July. It's not done. So it's not throwing it into a black hole, which is a subcommittee. It's put into a subcommittee so that we can work on the issue, and we can keep it alive, and we can breathe life into the situation, and we can come up with a resolution for the people that are in this neighborhood, Mr. President, so that not just Ann Fretz and Ms. D'Antonio and Mr. D'Antonio and your sister can come up and talk about some of these issues, which you guys have, when there are other people in the neighborhood, too, that might be able to come to a subcommittee meeting once in a while and hear some of these issues that come up, as they're called. I'm not saying we need bimonthly subcommittee meetings on the Yale Street lot, Mr. President. What I'm saying is we have a resolution before us. We requested action. The Traffic Commission approved the action. The action hasn't taken place. Why isn't our subcommittee meeting to get the answers to the questions we need answered and to push for implementation on a basis that's quicker than every nine months? And I think that this would work out better, because we'd be meeting more frequently. We'd keep it on the front burner. It wouldn't get buried in a pile of paperwork somewhere. So when I hear that, you know, put it in another subcommittee and nothing's going to happen, the subcommittee is only as effective as the belief that you put in it and the willingness to work that you're willing to put into it, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I'll rest with that.
[Adam Knight]: It hasn't met, Mr. President, is the answer.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to take unfinished business off the table relative to the DPW contract, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Councilor Knight. Mr. President, we can move for approval. I don't think there's any need for us to go tell Mr. Maturana how wonderful he is. He already knows. I'd be happy to support him this evening. Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to do the same. He does a great job. Fair, impartial, qualified, committed. He rounds out a great board, probably one of the best boards that we have here in the city, Mr. President, so I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, on that note, if the clerk would be so kind as to tell us when the last day to register to vote in the municipal election is. Over, correct? Tomorrow. Tomorrow. Close of business tomorrow? Close of business tomorrow. 3 o'clock. 3 o'clock. 3 o'clock tomorrow.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President. I think that this is a great resolution, and I thank Councilor Caraviello for bringing it forward. I think that it's important for us to also find out that if we're going to be talking about best and highest use, we have a discussion about the arts in our community and the effect that they have on our downtowns and revitalizing them. If, in fact, CVS is gone and it's going to be an impact to our neighborhood, we might be able to replace that impact with something that's going to revitalize our square. So I'd ask that a home for the arts would be part of the discussion, Mr. President, moving forward.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Councilman. Mr. President, in the spirit of making some announcements, Saturday the 17th, At 7.45 AM at the Medford Elks, Team Timothy Brennan is going to be stepping out to fight diabetes. And as we all know, Timmy was one of our firefighters here in the city of Medford and we lost him just several months ago. So I'd like to announce that if anybody's interested in participating in the walk, to give a call down to the Elks Member Lounge and they'll be happy to sign you up. Be there sharp. 745, and they'll be hitting the road at 9 o'clock. And about 12, 31 o'clock, everybody will be back there to celebrate Timmy's life. So Mr. President, with that being said, I'd like to thank you for indulging me.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I move for suspension of the rules. We can take papers number 1 5 6 9 1. Paper. Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, move to waive the reading and have the solicitor give us a brief synopsis of the language.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and Solicitor Rumley, thank you very much. I think this is a great step in the right direction to solidify our position here and to allow us to continue our current practice. I appreciate the work that you've done, and I see no problem with this language or this ordinance change — this homeown petition, Mr. President. So, I'd move for approval at this point.
[Adam Knight]: Oh, that's okay, Mr. President. This is an important issue. I certainly support I think that the ends justify the means. It's going to bring us to a resolve in the situation that's before us, and it's going to be the most cost-effective way for us to deal with it. However, I too share the concerns of my colleagues relative to the board and what decision-making processes the board's making, and the council has a board appointee. And I was wondering if the Board of Point D could bring us up to speed on the recent talks that they've had relative to, you know, the ongoing situation at the Shepherd Brook Manor, what their future plans are. I know that there's been a strong push of support from the members of the Metro Brooks Estate Land Trust to, you know, build the carriage house up and turn it into a function facility of some sort. That matter came before the council, it failed, and now we are where we are. So I guess the question is, Mr. President, going forward, what steps are we going to take? And if the gentleman could fill us in a little bit on what's been going on down there, that would be very helpful to, I think, this board. Back several months ago, I thought that it might be a good idea for us to sit down and kind of develop parameters for the council appointees that we put on these boards and commissions. And the reason I thought that is because when situations like this arise, then at least we'd have some information beforehand, afterhand, and a real good understanding of what's going on in the process. So with that, Mr. President, through you, I ask the question as to if the gentleman could provide us with any information as to what's going on at the Mecklenburg estate land trust, what's going on at the Sheppard brook manor in terms of future plans, now that the carriage house proposal has been brought before the council, the carriage house proposal failed. We had an emergency request for appropriation up there, I think of about $275,000 over in the winter, Mr. President, to address some emergency issues that are up there. I think it might be nice for us to get a full picture of what's going on. I certainly support the endeavor and the underlying piece of potential litigation that we're going to be faced with or the potential cost of deletting. So I'm definitely going to support the paper this evening. And it might not be a conversation for right now, Mr. President. It might be a conversation for later on, where we really get to roll up our sleeves and dig into it. So I'd ask, actually, Mr. President, maybe that we use this as a B paper. We put it back on the agenda for a later date, and we give the gentleman some time to prepare something for us. He can come back and he can fill us in a little bit about what's going on there. Because I think that in terms of the matter that's before this council right now, it's too address the immediate issue that's at hand, which is, you know, the family that's living there and the birth of their child, and whether or not this $24,000 will resolve the issues that we're faced. I think it's a good measure. I think that, you know, the support of this appropriation will solve a lot of problems and will cost us less in the long run. So, as part of the B paper, Mr. President, I'd also like the gentleman to give us a brief synopsis as to what's going on. Mr. President. The President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, it wasn't my intention to spring something on him like that at this point in time. Not at all. We're talking about a multimillion dollar project over there. I don't expect him to just pull it off the cuff and throw it out here at the council meeting. We all recognize that.
[Adam Knight]: Having some experience in this field, Mr. President, having done this type of work and actually having represented the Medford DPW at the negotiating table in the past, it's interesting the way that this works. But the bargaining team comes to an agreement with the Mays bargaining team. The Mays bargaining team comes to us to fund the contract. The union's bargaining team goes back to the union to ask to ratify it. The members of the bargaining team who sat down and negotiated the contract, negotiated the contract in good faith, Mr. President, they are bound to support it because they agreed at the table. So I don't anticipate any problems with the passage of this. I've talked to some of the members of the DPW personally about it. I've gotten calls to support this measure. holding it up or voting on it tonight, it's not going to have any difference on the end game. And I'm not too sure about what protocols and controls that counsel is referring to. So maybe if you could clarify, I'd appreciate it.
[Adam Knight]: But there's no protocol, is what I'm saying. There's no protocol. It might be the past practice. That might be what's happened in the past, but there's no protocol, rule, regulation, law, or otherwise that would require someone to do that.
[Adam Knight]: Chair recognizes Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And Roberta, thank you for being here this evening. I'd like to thank you for taking the time to come up here and help educate the electorate about this question that's going to be on the ballot, because there have been a number of questions and concerns about it. It's a rather lengthy question. It sometimes can be interpreted as confusing. So thank you very much for coming out here this evening. I just wanted to echo your sentiments, Councilor Caraviello, You know, this is a presentation that's informative in nature to educate the electorate of what the question will be on the ballot and not really to debate the merits of the question and have a vote on it here this evening. That's going to be left for November 3rd. So with that being said, I just really want to thank you for your work. I want to congratulate you and your team for their efforts on being able to acquire the number of signatures to get the question on the ballot, because that was a heavy lift. That was really quite an endeavor, and you guys pulled it off. So congratulations, and I wish you guys the best of luck on November 3rd.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Again, we remind you that, uh, uh, Councilor Knight, um, Roberta, could you tell us, What a yes vote means and what a no vote means on the question, sometimes these ballot questions are worded in a way where a no vote means yes and a yes vote means no. So would a vote on question one mean a vote to adopt the Community Preservation Act and a no vote would mean to not adopt the Community Preservation Act?
[Adam Knight]: OK. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I appreciate you entertaining this resolution this evening. I wouldn't say trend in the city of Medford, where multifamily homes are being converted into condominiums. And the actual process thereof is very limited. The homeowner gets some condo docks together, they submit them to City Hall, and then that's pretty much the process. But what's happening is we're seeing a number of our multifamily homes, Mr. President, be converted into condominiums, and as a result, our rental market has become much smaller. So the demand for rental units is sky high. Therefore, the cost of the rental units is sky high. So I think it's in the city's best interest that we take a look at The way that we're doing business in terms of converting condominiums and the way that we govern that process, to be sure that we keep in mind that there is also a dramatic effect that it has on our access to the number of units that we have in our community that are affordable for moderate income households. Mr. President, if we see, you know, every multifamily home on Yale Street get converted into condominiums, then every multifamily home that once had a rental unit in it no longer has a rental unit in there. So we're seeing our actual stock of affordable rental units coming off the market and being replaced with much more expensive condominiums that people in the low to moderate income range can't afford, Mr. President. So I think that it's in our best interest to take a look at this and to come up with an ordinance or rules and regulations that would best fit what works here in Medford and come up with a nice solution for this problem. I think one of the other things that I've always said is that affordable housing is going to be a key to revitalizing our squares so that the people that work in our city have the means and opportunity to live in our city. So they can continue to, you know, contribute their discretionary income into the circular flow of our economy, Mr. President. So I think affordable housing is something that's going to be a very vital component to revitalizing our squares as well. That's why I bring this resolution forward.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, I certainly wouldn't have a problem looking at that as a B paper. My concern is that when multi-families are being converted into condominiums, more units are coming off the rental market. I think that the problem that's caused with the conversion of two families into three families or four families is the inverse. More units come on the rental market, but they also bring more cars to a neighborhood. They also bring more problems to a neighborhood, Mr. President. We had to solve problems, so I have no problem with that.
[Adam Knight]: I think that our local ordinance would speak to the difference between a lodging house and a rooming house and what's inappropriate. facility for the rental to individuals that aren't related, and our code enforcement office has been very responsive to the inquiries that I've made, and I'd ask that if you become aware of any of those situations to let me know, and I'll be happy to have him look into it if you've been unsuccessful in that regard. But the purpose of this resolution doesn't speak to that at all, Mr. D'Antonio. I mentioned Yale Street just because when I think of South Medford, I think of you when I think of Yale Street. So that's what made me think of it.
[Adam Knight]: I don't think that would be the word that I would use. Stop. That's what your card means. I know it means multiple things, I believe. But in looking at the resolution in the language that's on the table, what I said was the purpose of crafting an ordinance and establishing regulations to govern condominium conversions, to govern it. I asked all the stakeholders to be involved, the building inspector, the solicitor, the office of community development, and the council, and there might even be room to bring the housing authority into this. I don't proclaim to have all the answers, Mr. President, but I think that it's an issue that's there that needs to be addressed, that needs to be looked at, and we need to bring the people that are experts in to actually help us out and navigate the course so that we can craft A model that works here for us in Medford.
[Adam Knight]: I have a concern that as more and more conversions take place, the number of rental units are coming off the market. When there are no rental units in the market, the demand is exceeding the supply. So the rental market that's out there right now, there's no more $1,500 two-bedroom units. Now there are $3,000 two-bedroom units. Or, you know, the poor woman that lived on Tyler Rafferty for 25 years, whose landlord sold the house to a developer, came and threw her out, now she's living across the street paying double what she was paying for 25 years living on Tyler Road, in Tyler Ave. You know, that's what I'm trying to stem. There are long-term families, long-term renters in this community that haven't been able to purchase homes, but have really maintained a position here as being a part of our fabric and have really helped make Medford great. And I think that we need to do a better job being sure that they can stay here.
[Adam Knight]: I think it needs to be part of the overall affordable housing conversation that we've heard a lot about this evening. And that's one aspect of it. You know, the rapid conversion of multifamily homes into condominiums with lack of regulation and lack of a governing ordinance is leading us to a position where our rental stock is low.
[Adam Knight]: Establish a working group for the purpose of crafting an ordinance and establishing regulations to govern condominium conversions.
[Adam Knight]: No, I'm saying that the rapid expansion of conversions is having a dramatic effect on our affordable housing here in the community. It's taking rental units off the market. I'm not saying that condo conversions are a bad thing because they help our tax base. They help our tax base tremendously. We're having a committee to look at this, and that's all I want to know.
[Adam Knight]: Do we want to limit them? Well, I'm getting the opinion that that's what you want to do. I mean, I guess that's another question.
[Adam Knight]: solve this problem. I mean, I think the problem is that the rental units are coming off the market faster than they're being put back in it. So if we're going to, you know, look at what to do in terms of slowing or speeding up or making it easier or streamlining the permitting process, I mean, there are a number of things that can come up. I guess the question is this, what problems do they see in the building inspector's office? What problems do they see in the solicitor's office? What problems do they see in OCD? You know, we need to bring everybody together, put all our heads together. Like I said, I don't have all the answers, Mr. President, but I know there's a problem out there and it's a big problem. And I know it's a big problem, because I know that the people that I'm friends with can't afford to live in the community anymore. They can't afford to buy, and they can't afford to rent. So they're going west, and they're going north, and they're going south. But they're not staying here. And the money that's in their pocket isn't getting spent in our convenience stores anymore. And the money that's in their pocket isn't getting spent at sales and at Jim's Market. It's not going somewhere else.
[Adam Knight]: That's what the working group is for. Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I think the city always has the opportunity to regulate any type of permitting issuance that goes on in our community. I mean, we can streamline the permitting process. There are other ways we can make it easier. We can make it harder. You know what I mean? I just want to look at making sure that if, in fact, we're converting condominiums, that we're replacing those rental units with other ones.
[Adam Knight]: Do we have a motion on the floor? Mr. President, I certainly have no problem with the matter going to the subcommittee, provided the subcommittee meets within the next 14 days. Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Derek and Christine, welcome to our baby boy into the world just a couple of days ago. She joins her sister, Elise. They're very happy, very proud. They have two sets of very proud grandparents, one up in the South Medford area in Sylvia Road and the other set up off of Governor's Ave, Mr. President. So I'd like to take a moment to offer them my deepest congratulations and many years of happiness and good health.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I actually took an opportunity to review these minutes and I find them in order and move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Not conforming use.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I just ask that I be recorded in opposition to the measure. I don't feel as though we need keynote followers in our convenience stores.
[Adam Knight]: It's my understanding, speaking with the business owner, that when he received the liquor license from the state of Massachusetts, the Commonwealth, which was a liquor license that would end at 1 o'clock in the morning, he was under the impression that that would be what dictates his hours of operation, not the local control. So it's my understanding that it was more or less just an error in application than it was anything else. It wasn't any intentional violation. It wasn't any type of attempt to skirt the local requirements.
[Adam Knight]: Well, he came before the board. He did receive a common victuals license. And that was before the board this evening for a license for extended hours. The common victuals license would expire at 11 o'clock in the evening. The gentleman had a license from the city of Medford that would allow him to be open till 11 o'clock in the evening. He also had a license from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts that would allow him to be open till 1 o'clock in the morning. I think there was some disconnect there in understanding what it is that his actual hours of operation were going to be. But in my discussions with Mr. Wu, My understanding is that it's been nothing more than a misapplication and a misunderstanding.
[Adam Knight]: Pursuant to the established standard, the city is required to notify abutters who lay within 300 feet of the establishment. one football field of the establishment in the radius, as to whether or not there's a public hearing that's going on. So granted that two-thirds of the people that were notified are businesses or business entities, it appears to me based upon the map in Councilor Caraviello's packet that there's quite a large radius of individuals that were notified. They definitely covered all the grounds of the residences as well as the businesses that reside within the 300-foot radius, Mr. President. So I can certainly understand that, you know what I mean, you have some frustration about something that's going on in your neighborhood. But in terms of notification requirements, the notification requirements were met. It's a 300-foot radius from the property that's petitioning. That's a football field. People who live within a football field receive notification of the meeting.
[Adam Knight]: That's the standard. And that's what's shown in the.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President, and thank you, Councilor Longo, for your patience as well. I think it's important to point out that the issue before this council is the approval of extended hours for an entity that has an approved common victualized license. The issue of entertainment, the issue of licensing and liquor establishment and all that falls under the purview of our licensing commission. So some of these questions that are being asked this evening would be appropriate for the licensing commission. And I think that they're certainly worthy of an answer, sir. There's no question about that. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'd like to amend the paper this evening to request that the Liquor Commission on members thereof meet with us and the committee of the whole to address some of these questions that are being raised this evening for future edification. As an amendment to this paper, please. Side paper. Side paper. Or separate paper. B paper.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Madam Vice President, Councilor Knight. Thank you very much, and I think it's very important to point out that vibrant downtowns do help revitalize neighborhoods, and they do help improve property value. Bustling downtowns actually provide stability in our communities. And a reoccurring theme across Medford during this election season in particular has been the revitalization of our downtown squares. And I think that right now, you know, I couldn't agree with Councilor Marks more. There's a need for some balance. We need to figure out how we're going to balance the revitalization of our downtown districts with the needs of the residents in our community. And I'd wholeheartedly support his suggestion to maybe table the item for a little while to later on in the meeting, let the party sit down maybe in the council room and see if they can negotiate a compromise. Mr. President, You know, in situations like this, there are winners or losers if people don't come to the table to sit down and negotiate and meet in the middle ground. And, you know, I'd hate to see the business suffer. I'd hate to see the residents suffer. So I think that, you know, that's a prudent course of action to take. And I'd move that the matter be tabled and that the parties have the opportunity to meet in Council Room 207 to discuss the future of Shanghai Moon and maybe negotiate a compromise.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. several months, we've all heard the concerns of many residents in our community, many of those involved in the Metro Community Coalition and other community groups that have expressed concern about empty storefronts in our business districts. And I think tonight and the issue about Shanghai Moon was a perfect segue into that. I've been doing a little research. I've been looking at some programs that they have in other communities in other states. And I think that it's a good idea for us to think about ways to attract new businesses to empty storefronts and to keep them there. And we have a great plan for Medford Square, a plan that has been sitting on the shelf for a bit of time. And it talks about the type of businesses that we need to create in order to have a vibrant downtown business district, Mr. President. And I'd like the Office of Community Development and the city assessor to examine the feasibility of a business tax abatement or some sort of measure that would provide some relief to new businesses starting out in the community so that they can be successful and that they can shape our squares and our business district into what we envision them to be. Folks, could you take your conversation out? Please continue, Councilor. Well, that pretty much scared me half to death, Council President. With that being said, I think it would be a great idea for our city assessor and our office of community development to sit down and determine if there's a way that we can develop a tax abatement program or process to attract new businesses, to fill our empty storefronts, and to really help us shape and define our squares into more vibrant, more consumer, more pedestrian-friendly downtowns, Mr. President. So I'd ask that my council colleagues support this measure and join me in voting in the affirmative.
[Adam Knight]: I am sorry. Mr. President. Um, I certainly appreciate where the gentleman's coming from and, um, I look forward to fortunate enough to be reelected to work with whoever's in the corner office. So thank you very much. Councilor for that. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: I just look it up in the minutes.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. This resolution is the furthest thing from a single tax rate. That could be possible. That's not what I envisioned at all and that's not what I'm seeking to do. I'm perfectly comfortable with the bifurcated tax rate that we have in place right now. My concern is that we have empty storefronts and we need to do more to attract businesses to keep them there. And we need to do more to attract businesses that are conducive to the long-term sustainability and viability of our squares. And that's why I put this measure forward, Mr. President. plans in place for the redevelopment of Medford Square, the plan to redevelop Medford Square, and it tells us what kind of shops we need to have down there, and we don't have them. So the intention and the theory behind this was to attract those businesses that are part of the study that we paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for that provide us with the framework to revitalize and rejuvenate the area.
[Adam Knight]: I believe when we discussed the single-payer tax rate, the residential obligation would have increased tremendously to the residential homeowner, Mr. President, to the point of like... maybe close to $9 per thousand evaluation, if I believe I remember correctly. So we went through the numbers and it didn't seem to be something that was viable. And this council voted it down seven zero, Mr. President. So with that being said, I think, um, you know, I rest my case and I'll let the gentlemen move on. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: No, the concern was that people on a fixed income that are living at home and having struggling to pay their already high tax bill aren't going to be able to do it. That was my concern. That's why I've always supported adopting the lowest residential factor, and I'll continue to do so.
[Adam Knight]: We voted on the matter. We voted on it to a conclusion.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, we've debated this issue to its conclusion previously. We voted against the measure. We voted it down 7 to 0. Thank you. It was concluded badly, with all due respect.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I failed to see what the commentary has to do with the substance of the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. Several weeks ago I was up the field of dreams and I was sitting there with coach Perry watching the girls soccer team play Malden and it was about oh 150 degrees up there and as we were sitting on the field of dreams we could look out right across the top of Medford High School and what I saw was a gigantic flat roof and a lot of sun beating down on it and I thought that this might be a great opportunity for us to solar or, I mean, harvest some of our solar energy, Mr. President. We have our Harvest the Energy Festival coming up in just a few short weeks, and I thought it was fitting to put this resolution forward because I feel as though, you know, provided that it meets the health and safety standards, it might be a way for us to generate some revenue that's reoccurring and non-tax-based. So, I might ask that my council colleagues support this endeavor, and I would hope that they would join me in voting in the affirmative.
[Adam Knight]: But I think it's a worthy resolution. Point of clarification, Mr. President, would the council like to amend it for hydropower as well?
[Adam Knight]: In reviewing the packet, I did see and hear some sort of release or power of attorney notice that discussed TFS NUCCO LLC's power of attorney for licensure and permit purposes, and it speaks to having Gray and Robinson PA to serve as a nationwide regulatory council for alcoholic beverage licensure and permitting purposes. The two are separate and distinct. You're not before us this evening seeking an alcoholic beverage license. Is that correct? No. Okay, great. Mr. President, if I rest my case, I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I, too, have had the pleasure of knowing Tony Bova, but my relationship with him is a little different. We work together because I can't skate. I'm one of the only guys in Medford, I think, that can't ice skate. Mr. Bova and I worked together down the hockey rink. I was operating the Zamboni and working as a custodian down there. And Mr. Bova was doing what he does with youth hockey. And through that relationship, I've always admired the fact that Mr. Bova is a very soft-spoken man whose actions speak louder than his words. He's the first one to step up to the plate, volunteer to take the charge, and be there to help. And when he's there to help, he's sometimes more than willing to help with the youngest of children, which is sometimes the most difficult to deal with, Mr. President. And we've all been down there on picture night, right, Pat? And picture night gets a little crazy, and Tony handles it with the patience of a saint, as has been said before. So with that being said, Tony, congratulations for your 40 years of service, and thank you very much for being a part of Medford Youth Hockey and Medford Youth Sports. Really appreciate your service.
[Adam Knight]: When the city clerk sends out this notice to the parties, the political parties, acknowledging that the machines have been tested, he does so in writing. There's a certain correspondence of something that goes out?
[Adam Knight]: Can we have that included in our packet when it goes out, Mr. President?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. A few short weeks before the grand opening of McNally Park, we requested that crosswalks be installed. across Forest Street so that individuals who would like to go and utilize our new multi-million dollar park are able to cross the street safely. And I'm wondering if the administration would be kind enough to give us an update as to the status thereof.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. May I be so bold to suggest that we ask the Traffic Commission to also maybe temporarily place the temporary speed bumps that we have just purchased through the Community Improvement Initiative down there on Washington Street as well to prevent them from being able to race until we can come up with a long-term solution to the problem like an elevated crosswalk.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and I will be brief. I know we have a packed house tonight this evening. Councilor Lungo, I appreciate you putting this resolution forward. I certainly think it's a good idea in theory. I'm wondering if there are any other type of systems other than the Aquahawks system that might be out there, whether or not this is the best system for us to utilize, whether or not this is the one that we're going to get the most bang for our buck. I also do question the fact it was $25,000. Is that the correct figure, $25,000? Less than $25,000. Less than $25,000 per individual household. Is that correct? It would be per individual household.
[Adam Knight]: Citywide, okay. That changes things a little bit for me then. I'm doing the math and I'm saying it's going to be quite an expensive endeavor if it's $25,000 per household in the city. Mr. President, with that being said, I have no problem supporting the endeavor. You know, $25,000 for infrastructure, it seems like a drop in the bucket to me, especially with the rewards that we'll receive on the other end of the investment. I wholeheartedly support it and move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I certainly, too, would agree that a 30-day window is far too excessive. If you don't pay your ticket within three weeks, they're hitting you with a fine. So what's good for the goose should be good for the gander, Mr. President. I think it's important for this council to amend the paper this evening, and I'm going to make a motion to do such where we request A report and statistical analysis of the appeals process from start to finish, how long it takes on average. I'd also like to see a number of appeals filed, as well as the number of outstanding appeals, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: We can ask for that as well, but I'd like to see it in this format as well. I'd like to take a look and see how long it takes from start to finish. Very good. So when Councilor has the floor, he can make that amendment.
[Adam Knight]: I understand where you're coming from, Councilor. I certainly appreciate it. However, I'd like to see this data and this information for some personal analysis. But with that being said, I rest my case, Mr. President. I'd like to amend the paper as noted. I would move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Chris, you've been up before the Councilor a number of times on this very same issue, and I think we've had a lot of back and forth and discussion about what options are available to you. have you gone to the traffic commission and all as we've suggested in the past and have brought up any of these concerns with the traffic commission is responsible for setting traffic policy here in medford no no because i really don't know who to talk to traffic commission will probably be a place to start i think we might have brought that up a couple of other times at other meetings um but i can certainly understand your frustration i think that you know in looking at how we're going to approach the META system. The program was rolled out bad. There's no question about that. But the program definitely needs to be tweaked. There's no question about that, too. And we've had some successes in that regard. My question is, I guess we have several resolutions right now that are pending before the Traffic Commission that we haven't gotten responses to, Mr. President. So I'd like to ask that we remind the Traffic Commission that we have a couple of outstanding resolutions that need some responses. I'd ask the city clerk to add that as part of the paper.
[Adam Knight]: But I mean, the Traffic Commission sets the traffic policy in the City of Metro, not the City Council. So, you know, the only way that we can effectuate change is by asking. Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. If I was losing 35% of my business, like Mr. Spiracus mentioned, I'd make time to go to the traffic commission. This is my livelihood. This is the way that we provide to put food at our table for our families. If this is having this dramatic of an effect, you better believe I'm making the time to go down there and talk to the traffic commission or anybody else that's in charge of making these policy decisions that are going to affect my life in that fashion. So while the gentleman may feel as though the traffic commission structure and the times that they meet aren't necessarily convenient to him, That's a mechanism of the traffic commission. And I'm sure, I am sure that with a little outreach and a little communication with the traffic commission, they'll be willing to change that to maybe meet off hours, to maybe meet once a month, uh, late at night. Um, but you gotta ask the question, Mr. President, right now they meet at two o'clock once a month. I'm sure if we make the recommendation or we make a request, they will do that at a different, different times and different hours. But keep in mind, if I was losing 35% a month in my business, I'd be the first one down at the Traffic Commission. I think I'd be able to afford to close the doors if, in fact, my business was being affected 35% negative. To go down there and to talk to them.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. An informal poll from a gentleman that walked around and knocked on doors isn't statistical analysis.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Camuso.
[Adam Knight]: I'm looking at the underlying petition here, and what the petitioner has written down versus what's shown up in the agenda are two very different items, Mr. President. And I think that this is something that should be handled a little bit more sensitively than we are at this point in time, based upon what I'm seeing here, Mr. President. It's my understanding that in certain instances, if a person's reputation is on the line, that that individual does have the right to appear before the council, or they also have the option to meet with an executive session. to determine whether or not it's appropriate for the public forum, I think we might need to have an opinion from our city solicitor before we go any further, Mr. President. It's very troubling what I'm reading here on the petition signed September 11th, 2015. A very delicate concern that we have about the way a certain individual that's a member of the Chevalier Commission is treating us at the Chevalier Theater just because we are not white people and we are from a different religion. I think that that alone, Mr. President, would warrant us to at least err on the side of caution and allow the city solicitor to give us an opinion as to whether or not this is an appropriate matter for executive session. We have a city employee who's been named by name in a derogatory fashion, and I feel as though if this goes any further, it may be damaging to his reputation. And I also feel as though he should have the right to at least get an opinion from council as to whether or not the appropriate forum to hear this would be here or an executive session, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if I may. My concern is nothing more than a city employee.
[Adam Knight]: Very good. Councilor Knight. Councilor Camuso took the words right out of my mouth. As someone who takes the 325 bus quite often, I feel it's the only bus I can take that's ever on time. And from what I understand now, there are plans all to the personnel, privatize the route, and what have you. Although Councilor Camuso was gracious enough to withdraw his amendment, I feel as though if we're going to be bringing MassDOT down here and the MBTA down here, that it's totally appropriate and, quite frankly, necessary that we find out what's going on with these buses as well. And I'm not saying that just because I take it once a week. I'm saying that because when I sit there out my window, when I see people get on this bus, like my neighbor Chrissy and her two children that get on the bus every day, I have concerns about who's going to be operating these buses, where they're going to actually effectuate this cost savings, whether or not the service levels are still going to remain the same. So, Councilor Camuso, I concur with your opinion that, you know, we definitely need to take a look at the express buses. However, I do not concur with your opinion that we can do it later. I think we need to do it now. You know, this is a two-year construction project that's going on. This privatization effort is going to be happening much sooner than that. So, time is of the essence on both matters. I commend Councilor Penta for bringing this issue forward. I, too, have a number of concerns about the traffic flow patterns in Medford Square, where the bus stops are located. And I think if we're really serious about revitalization of our downtowns, these are some things that we need to look at, Mr. President. So thank you, Councilor Camuso. Thank you, Councilor Penta. Mr. President, I move for approval as amended.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, Mr. President, Councilor Lungo took the words right out of my mouth. You know, these individuals are here petitioning us to approve a sign that's non-conforming. However, they'd like the sign to be governed under the actual ordinance that's in place for hours of operation. If they need to come back before us for a special permit, so be it at that time. However, in terms of holding up what they're trying to do. They're here under the governing ordinance. They're asking us to approve a non-conforming sign. The size of the sign is what they're asking for us to approve, not anything more or anything less. So with that being said, I don't think it's... It's a bad idea now that we have a motion for a six-month review from the date of opening, I would like to say, that we can approve the sign. If we have problems with the illumination later on, we can review it in six months, and we can bring that issue to the neighbours, and I'm sure that the developer and the neighbours can work it out. I don't think they're coming to our community to invest millions and millions of dollars in here to make their neighbours upset. So, you know, with that being said, I'd move for approval as amended by Councilor Longo. Very good. Councilor Camuso? If I may. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to sever, Mr. President. Motion to sever. The amendments, Councilor Camuso is not willing to support a certain portion of it, so it's going to be contrary. I think we should sever the amendments. I'm sure he's in support of the hotel coming and getting the signage. He's just not in support of the six-month review. Very good. So motion to sever.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I do recall us taking a vote for $1.4 million for what was termed the Community Improvement Initiative. And included in that Community Improvement Initiative was $300,000, I believe, for sidewalk and stump repair, as well as energy efficient lighting. change-outs down in Medford Square for brighter and more energy efficient lighting. Mr. President, if we can get an update on those two items.
[Adam Knight]: Is there such a thing as a franchise agreement with the satellite provider?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. The resolution in question called for the DPW to re-stripe the crosswalk at Winthrop Street as well as repaint the three handicap parking spots that were right in front of 190 High Street. The resolution was put on the table on August 11th. By August 22nd, all the work was done. In addition to that work, they also did some striping on Rural Ave. It came out pretty nice, looks pretty good, Mr. President, but I might want to thank the highway department in particular for their fast turnaround on this request.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much and thank you very much to the Medford High School Boys Varsity Baseball team for joining us here this evening to accept this accommodation. The Medford High School Boys Baseball team has seen tremendous success in the last several years. They're two or three-time, Michael, is it three-time GBL champion now? Three-time GBL champion three years in a row. So it's my honor and privilege to ask the team to come up here and join me this evening. And we're going to have Andrew Cronin, captain of the team, say a few words about the season and the coaching staff. We're also joined here this evening by head coach Mike Nesta, assistant coach John McGonigal, and assistant coach Erazio Azzarello. Andrew Cronin, ladies and gentlemen, captain of the Medford High School boys baseball team.
[Adam Knight]: It's my honor and my privilege to read this City Council commendation into the record on behalf of the Medford City Council. The Medford City Council takes pleasure in awarding this Council commendation to Michael Nesta, head coach, Medford High School varsity baseball team, in recognition of winning the Greater Boston League title and earning a playoff berth in the MIAA Division I North Varsity Boys baseball playoffs for the 2015 season. Signed, Medford City Council President Frederick N. Dello Russo, Medford City Councilor Adam Knight. Thank you very much. Coach Nesta.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: I will read it now being of the full text of the amendment and recommend a brief synopsis thereof. Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. Mr. Rumley, thank you. And I think we also need to give a word of thanks to the members of the Medford Community Garden Volunteer Commission that were able to put this together. One question that I have for you, Mr. Rumley, would be the fact that we have these five total members in the alternates. And because they're going to be appointed to serve on this commission, they would be considered city employees, correct?
[Adam Knight]: And also, Mr. Rumley, in looking at this, I think that it's very thorough. They've done a great job putting this together. would expect that this has your stamp of approval on it, considering that you're here presenting it to us this evening in terms of legality?
[Adam Knight]: And I've witnessed them putting their backs in sweat and into the creation of the garden down on Winthrop Street. I've also seen a lot of excitement relative to the McNally Park Community Gardens down there. Mr. President, I think this is a great piece of legislation and I would move for approval as amended.
[Adam Knight]: Point of clarification, Councilor Knight. Would the gentleman clarify whether or not he means the council gets one as an individual member of the council, or as a council appointee? Council appointee. Council appointee. Thank you for the clarification.
[Adam Knight]: It is my understanding that McNally Park is metered, and it's metered as part of the general park maintenance meter, not just exclusively to the community garden, but it's metered as part of hot maintenance.
[Adam Knight]: That's at McNally. I can't speak to Winthrop.
[Adam Knight]: I'm sorry, sir. No, thank you. Thank you for coming this evening, and thank you for your work. Certainly, this is the fruits of your labor and the labor of the Friends Group.
[Adam Knight]: One of the questions that I have, and it might not be appropriate for you because you are an administrator, would be, you know, we see the community gardens right now. They're bustling. We have a lot of growth down there. You know, you walk down Winthrop Street and you have eight feet worth of tomato plants well over my head. At the end of the season, what's going to happen? Is that stuff going to be left there to compost? Is it going to be pulled out? What's the direction that we're looking at in terms of when we're out of season versus when we're in season? It looks great when it's in bloom, but what happens when it's not in bloom?
[Adam Knight]: I think it might even be premature to ask, because at this point in time, if we establish the commission, they have the right to establish the regulations. And I guess I was more concerned about what the practice is now and what's going to happen at the end of this season. Once we establish the commission, the commission has the right to set these regulations.
[Adam Knight]: I think that you guys have done an excellent job. certainly circling the wagons and paying close attention to detail and thinking of, you know, a lot of issues and items that might come up that aren't necessarily something that you'd see in the day-to-day operations. You've done a great job. You've done a great job, and that's why I support the ordinance.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. I think it's very important to point out that this was a citizen driven initiative and that the text of the amendment actually wasn't written at the hand of the solicitor. It was written at the hand of the people that are actually looking to create the commission. So I think it would be important for us to support their wishes and what they see is going to work. Um, you know, I certainly think it's a great ordinance. I've said it three or four times tonight. You know, this is what the people are looking for. This is what they put forward to us, and this is what they're asking us to vote on. With the exception of a couple of items, Mr. President, you know, I can't find a good reason to vote against it.
[Adam Knight]: Are you all set, Counsel? I think so at this point in time, Mr. President. I mean, you know, Like I said, it's a good idea. It's something that I think we should take to a vote. We've all looked into it. We've all reviewed it. We've all done our homework. We've all, you know, spoke about what amendments we'd like to see fit. I'd certainly like to hear from some more people that are either in favor or against it to see where they stand. But ultimately, Mr. President, the community gardens are coming. They're here already. And I think we need to govern them. We need to regulate them. And we need to be sure that there's a fair, open, and transparent process for these people who want to get a plot. And I think that this ordinance meets those goals.
[Adam Knight]: I think it's also important to point out that the ordinance was already amended by the council to reflect that there would be a council rep and a garden rep as members of the five-member commission.
[Adam Knight]: Point of clarification, Councilor Knight. We have two amendments. We have an amendment that I put forward at the suggestion of the solicitor, which would be to exempt Riverbend Park exclusively from the ordinance. Then we have Councilor Camuso's contradictory amendment that would exempt Riverbend Park only for a defined period of time. Right.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to waive all three readings, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: In building upon what Councilor Lungo amended, I'd also like to see a copy of the annual report sent to the people that actually hold the plot. I think that that might be very helpful to them to see the success of a growing community garden and the success in the community. If I had a plot and I was out there working every day, I'd like to get a copy of the annual report as well. So maybe we can make that a part of the requirement, Mr. President, that it goes to the mayor, the council, and as well as those that are fortunate enough to be selected to have a plot. Excellent.
[Adam Knight]: If I may, thank you very much for coming. This is certainly something that I was happy to support last year and I was able to get a couple of nice ribbons for us here as well at the council. And I'm certainly happy to support it. And I might ask that if in fact the measure does pass this evening, that we can have our ribbons displayed right here on our Rostam for first September.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And Miss Brady, thank you for being here this evening and sharing your story with us. I think the council needs to go a step further than what we've done. We've sent resolutions after resolution after resolution to the corner office. We've asked for the traffic commission to come in up here before us. I think that maybe we can take an opportunity to have our transportation subcommittee investigate the situation relative to the number of business permits that are being issued, the number of business permit parking spots that are available in our business districts, and report their findings back as well as proposed solutions to the council and the committee of a whole, something that we can all support, something that we can all get behind, and we'll present that to the Medford, Park Medford and the parking commission. But I think that, you know, we've, We've spoke a lot about the issue. We've been outspoken in certain aspects of what we don't like and we haven't effectuated much change. We did a good job at the beginning effectuating change and it's beginning to fall on deaf ears again. We filed a number of resolutions and we're not getting the responses that we like. Why don't we take ownership of the issue? Why don't we put this into our transportation subcommittee? We have a subcommittee hearing where we bring the principals together and we sit down and we try to bang out a solution that's gonna really resolve the problem. So, Mr. President, I would amend the paper by asking that the Transportation Subcommittee meet to conduct an investigation and provide findings and solutions to the committee level relative to the issue of business parking, the number of spots that are available in our business districts, and the number of permits that are being issued. The outcome could be a recommendation to limit the number of business permits for a particular business because there aren't enough spots. There could be recommendations. that fall right in line with what Ms. Brady requested. But I think that we need to take a better, longer, harder look at it and come up with some solutions that will work and findings that are going to be based on fact before we move any further.
[Adam Knight]: Move approval, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: The Press I'm wondering if the people who vote in favor of this project are going to get credit for addressing the environmental concerns that the residents in the North Medford section of Medford have, because this project will address environmental concerns that they have relative to sewage in the community, Mr. President. I also think, in looking at this, that it makes financial sense. And I'm going to vote in favor of this measure. I'm going to vote in favor of the measure as filed.
[Adam Knight]: If I were going to buy a car, and I went into the dealership, and I said, I want to buy this $5,000 car. And they said, OK, you can buy it. And I said, here's the $5,000. And they said, no, no, no, no, no. Don't give me $5,000. Give me 55% of the $5,000. And finance that 55% of that $5,000 over five years at 0% interest, and we're right off the rest. You better be sure. I'm going to be the first guy in line, giving them the 55%, financing the other 45%, giving them the 45%, financing the money. It's a zero interest loan, Mr. President, over five years that we can pay it back. I know there's a contrary motion on the floor. I don't support the contrary motion. I feel as though the money should be paid back through our sewer enterprise account, which is flush, which has funds in it that are available to pay this down. We can pay it down over five years at 0% interest, and we're getting 45% of the total cost of the project reimbursed by the way of a grant. Now, we can fund it another way, and that's fine. But what we're going to do if we fund it another way is we're reduce the overall budget in our sewer account by $2.1 million. We're not going to get any money back. And at the end of the day, we're going to be left with less money in there than we would have had if we went by the proposal that's in front of us right now. So I can certainly understand Dr. Stirella's concerns about having money in reserves. However, I think we can use the monies that are in reserves to leverage further projects, because they allow us to maintain a high bond rating, and they allow us to borrow at a lower rate. And in this instance, we're borrowing at a rate It's the lowest it can be, 0%, Mr. President. So I really think this is a good paper. I think that, actually, we might even have close to unanimous support behind the reel for the paper right now, Mr. President. So although I understand his concern to the taxpayer, I think that this makes good sense municipally. And I think that this protects the taxpayer. I don't think it hurts the taxpayer. And I hope that Dr. Starrell is willing to share that as well in his mailing. But I think that the residents up in North Medford deserve the fact, deserve to have this work done. It's an infrastructure improvement that's necessary. It's the plan that's in place, and the plan's not going to change. We've already gone through that ordeal when we were here at the meeting last time, when we discussed whether or not the plan was going to change, what phase we were in. We had a subcommittee meeting, and we went through that all again, Mr. President. So, you know, in looking at it, the infrastructure repairs need to be done. We have a mechanism to fund it. The mechanism to fund it makes sense. I think we should move on.
[Adam Knight]: I agree. In looking at the paper that's before us, we have a contrary point of view from a citizen. However, I think that the council has deliberated this matter to its extent, and I think it'll be appropriate for us to move the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Sir, can you explain to me what a J.O.
[Adam Knight]: It's a single pole, it's not a double pole, it's not adding a pole onto another pole with a strut that's attaching it or anything like that.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, we don't have the same renderings, I think, that you have in front of you. Sorry. Let me see it.
[Adam Knight]: And in looking at this diagram here, we're at 52 and 52, 54, I guess, would be your problem. 54. Okay. So you know, is there a driveway or something in, in regard to maybe in between the two houses here or anything like that, that would be blocked after Paul was moved to closer to the property line? Closer to. So does your home have a driveway? Yes. And that would be closer to 50. Okay. Oh, okay. All right. And then so access to 5254. Okay. Okay. So have you spoke with your neighbors and this gentleman to figure out if there would be a compromise of some sort? Okay. All right. So I didn't know if there might've been some sort of proposal. Um, Right, in terms of something that you guys can live with and discuss? And you'll make a commitment to going out there and meeting with them in the field? Yes. So is there a motion on the floor? Mr. President, I'd ask that we hold the paper until we can take a look and see if there's a mutually agreeable site where the parties can put the poll and hold off on the approval until such.
[Adam Knight]: Would you be so kind as to tell me How about how long the duration of this construction project will take?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if I may, um, I spoke with the sponsors of, uh, papers, 15609, 15611, 15621, and we've agreed to merge these papers together because they're all of similar substance and material.
[Adam Knight]: Is that the one you just went through here? The next three, the next in regular order of business? 609, 611, and 621? Council? Motion's passed. Am I at the right place? 609, 611 and 621? Yeah, they're all of similar substance and material. I spoke with the sponsors of the bills and they've agreed to merge.
[Adam Knight]: I'm going to defer to Councilor Caraviello as this paper was put on the agenda.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. It's been brought to my attention, and it's my understanding that The gas company did some construction work, and in the process of doing this construction work, they have ground up and repaved over the preexisting crosswalk at the corner of Winthrop and Morell. And that crosswalk has not been repainted, and it needs to be, Mr. President. Recently, we had a death. A resident of 190 High Street crossing the street was struck as a pedestrian crossing, and she died as a result of the injuries that she sustained in that. accident, Mr. President, so I think it's very important that we have a crosswalk in the vicinity of the corner, and I think that Councilor Mark's resolution to include yield signs there makes perfect sense. There are also a couple of handicapped spots, Mr. President, that are out in front of the building number 190 High Street that have fallen into disrepair. Mainly because of the amount of debris that's been on the road as a result of the construction projects that have been going on. The paint for the handicapped spots is worn completely away. There's been an outcry from the residents in the building that are asking that this be taken care of. I've had some preliminary conversations with the DPW and I'm very confident that it will be addressed. However, where the work still needs to be done, I figured it would be appropriate to continue further with the resolution. As such, I ask my colleagues to join me in support of this matter.
[Adam Knight]: I thought we were in the business. We did these, right?
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. These four individuals have long served our community. is firefighters. They've done their best to keep us safe. They've done their best to protect us. And because of their hard work, dedication, and commitment, they've been elevated to new positions. These four individuals have between them over 100 years of service to the Medford Fire Department. And it's with great honor and privilege that I welcome them aboard in their new role and wish them the best of luck. I would hope that my council colleagues join me in doing the same.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I've had a lot of talks and a lot of discussion with some residents in the area who are avid cyclists and avid pedestrians, avid walkers, and one of the things that they had expressed interest in would be connecting the Crystal Campbell Peace Garden by way of the waterfront to Riverbend Park. Sounds like a good idea to me. I'd like to amend the resolution to request that the department of transportation also be involved because my research would indicate that they're also going to be a party to this if in fact it does come to fruition, Mr. President. However, I feel as though linking Riverbend Park to the Campbell Peace Garden will also give people another reason to come to Medford Square. I think we can build upon a vision for the square with a bike and pedestrian path, maybe bring Hubway into the square, further expand a bike and pedestrian path from the Campbell Peace Garden along the Mystic River across Route 16 through Sleepy Hollow, and ultimately connected to the Minuteman Trail in Arlington. Should we use a little bit of planning, foresight, and vision, I think we can accomplish this, Mr. President. So I'd ask that my council colleagues support this resolution to take the small step in connecting the Campbell Peace Garden and Medford Square to Riverbend Park, and then we can take a look at the bigger picture at a later date.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Motion to take paper 15565. On the motion for the hearing 15-565, public hearing.
[Adam Knight]: The way that I understand this and the way that I see this presented is we have a bond order in front of us for $2.12 million. We're going to get paid back 45 cents on every dollar that we invest and the bond that we're taking out on the other 55% is at 0%. So actually, we're taking out a bond for 1, 2 million, we're getting paid back almost half of that. And then over a five-year period of time, we get to pay back the bond at a 0% interest rate.
[Adam Knight]: And then the projects that we're working on here are to address system upgrades for our water and sewer system. And part of that includes infiltration and inflow as a phase two project.
[Adam Knight]: So in essence, if we support this paper, what we can do is we can borrow 2.12 million bucks, get 45% of that money back, and then pay 0% interest on the money that's remaining over a five-year period?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much. Thank you. And I think that you guys are doing a good job. I mean, there's not too many places where you're going to get 45% back on every dollar that you invest, 45 cents on every dollar back that you invest. So thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Do you want to continue with a point? Councilor Knight. In terms of I&I and what the studies say, what exactly is, in a dollar figure, if you can, off the top of your head, what's the city actually spend on I&I issues here in the city of Medford? I mean, if we're looking at 2.5 million gallons per day, is that what I understood you say?
[Adam Knight]: What would that translate to in terms of cost on a sewer? Do you have any idea?
[Adam Knight]: I just want to see what exactly is this investment that we're making of about a million dollars is actually going to save the rate payers on the back end. And it looks like it's going to be exponential if we're losing 2.5 million gallons per day through I&I. It looks like this is really an investment that's going to show us a return.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I'm satisfied with the presentation. I'd ask for a move for approval on the paper.
[Adam Knight]: To the city engineer, is it safe to say that there is a need for infrastructure improvements to a water and sewer system?
[Adam Knight]: Is it also safe to say that The plan that's in place right now that you're working with will be the plan that we work with going into the future?
[Adam Knight]: Is it safe to say that if the construction and repairs of the system are put off that the inflow and infiltration will actually increase and continue to increase and continue to raise our sewage rate?
[Adam Knight]: So not only will rates remain the same, they could probably potentially get worse in terms of inflow and infiltration?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I don't disagree, and that's why I took out the time to sit down with Ms. Miller and talk to her about the project before the meeting tonight. You know I to take my responsibility very seriously and for two million bucks certainly questions I want to get answered and that's why I spoke with her about it before tonight So that I'd be in a position to intelligently speak about it and to move forward on the issue You know with that being said I think it's safe to say that our water and sewer infrastructure isn't going to improve any. The plan's not going to change. The plan that we have here is in place. The question comes down to whether or not this is the way we want to fund it or not. And when you look at making an investment of $2.12 million and getting back 45% of that money right off the bat, and then over a five-year period paying off the remainder at 0% interest, I think financially, this makes sense. I mean, you watch the Jordan's Furniture commercials. Everybody's running down there to buy a couch interest-free for five years, you know what I mean, hoping that the Red Sox hit the hole in the green monster. It makes sense, you know what I mean? An interest-free loan. Why take money out of the bank? Why take money out of our reserves when we can get an interest-free loan? We can use those reserves annually if we see it fit to pay down that bond or that loan at a zero percent. But ultimately, why take the money out of the bank right now and put it into one basket when we can have that money and use that to leverage other projects. And I think that's what we're doing. We're using this money in our water sewer enterprise account and our reserves to leverage projects. And we're continuing to leverage, use this money to leverage projects. We're using this leverage to get things done. Once the money's gone, the leverage is gone and the work stops. So I think that, you know, in terms of municipal finance, this makes good sense. And I support the paper as filed wholeheartedly.
[Adam Knight]: You just said we were talking about it for 10 years. We've been talking about infiltration. We've been talking about inflow. We've been talking about it for 10 years. Now we have a paper in front of us that's actually going to give us results instead of rhetoric. It's going to give us results instead of rhetoric. We spend the money or we don't, Mr. President. I think that that's where we're at at this point in time. We need the full votes to get the paper to pass its first reading. We can debate this all day. I think we all agree that the water and sewer system needs upgrades. I think we all agree that the water and sewer system is deteriorating. I think we all agree that something needs to be done. The question is, how are we going to do it? How are we going to fund it? I think that the paper before us is a good way to fund it. That's why I support it. Other individuals don't feel that way. Why don't we put it to a vote?
[Adam Knight]: You can call a subcommittee meeting. You're on business. You're on transportation. Motion for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Councilman. Yes. Vice President O'Connor.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and I'd like to thank the residents from the city for coming out here this evening and telling us about their concerns. I think it would be incumbent upon this council to make a recommendation to our Traffic Commission, Mr. President, and based on what I'm hearing, there are several items that I'd like to add to this paper by way of amendment. If the city clerk is ready, I think that we need to take a look at Utilizing the temporary speed bumps that we recently appropriated funding for through the community improvement initiative, Mr. President, along Arlington Street. I think that would be very important, and I think that would address some of the concerns. I also think it would be very important for our traffic commission to take a look at the feasibility of putting a stop sign at Arlington Street and Mr. Griveaux Road. And utilizing the speed boards that we have, Mr. President, by way of the police department at Willis Ave, Arlington Street, and West Street to control speeds, as well as Harvard Ave, Harvard Street, rather. And I also think that directed patrols for enforcement of violations, Mr. President, speed and truck routes along these roadways would be imperative. And lastly, I think that we need to request that the Traffic Commission revisit the issue of a truck ban a long habit, because I, too, travel that road quite frequently and see four trucks back up and block the intersection, and it's a waiting game. You just wait for the lights to change, wait for the lights to change. Individuals can't even get out of their driveway, Mr. President. I'd like to amend the paper by requesting that the Traffic Commission take these following steps.
[Adam Knight]: Transportation.
[Adam Knight]: My concern is that between now and when we get a transportation engineer that we went through an operating budget that we didn't fund already, and we already had this discussion just a month ago, I'm not confident that the administration is going to act and hire a transportation engineer between now and January. And that means that if we make the resolution, hire a transportation engineer, none of these items get taken care of. We still need to look at whether or not MassDOT has the ability and power and the past practice of providing transportation engineers to the community. I did investigation on this. I spoke with several individuals at MassDOT today. My understanding is they don't. They have an office that works with project managers and works with transportation planners that are working on particular projects in regions. They have technical assistance that they use to provide certain technical assistance to people that are working on projects in communities. But I think that there are a lot of financing questions here, Mr. President. And, you know, I think that if we don't vet it properly, it's just going to be another paper that gets sent to the corner office and sits there and collects dust in the corner office. But if we keep the conversation alive and take ownership of it, as opposed to passing the buck across the hall, I think that we may be able to get better results. We want to talk about a transportation engineer. I think we should be doing that through a subcommittee process, bringing the appropriate parties to the table and building the momentum that's going to make it happen, as opposed to sending a paper across the hall and letting us sit there, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: It is what it is, though. I mean, my concern is the people back here and whether or not they want these results on their streets. You know what I mean? I think that this is an approach that we can take where we can effectuate change immediately is all I'm saying, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: We could have five papers if we want. What I'm saying is in January, we discussed this very same topic in the subcommittee meetings, in the budget hearings. It wasn't included in the operating budget. The operating budget passed last meeting. Last meeting was the operating budget. Now, here we are, the meeting after the operating budget passed, saying, create a new position and add it to the operating budget. I'm saying, okay, that sounds like a good idea. Let's sit down and let's figure out how we're going to do that, as opposed to saying, hey, over there, put this in the operating budget. This is what we want. Let's figure out how we're going to do it, how we're going to fund it, what steps we need to take, where we can find funding for it, because I think it's a good idea. That's why I brought it up at the budget hearings when we were having the budget hearings, because a transportation planner is a good idea, and we need help. Number one, revitalizing our downtowns, and number two, alleviating traffic in our community. There's no question about that. But I think that in order for us to address issues of speed bumps and stop signs, that has to go to the traffic commission regardless of whether or not we have a traffic or transportation engineer on staff.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. I think maybe if there's anybody that has business before the body, we can take care of that. If there's any, you know, I think we have a traffic license. We have a brief presentation. I'll be happy to hold my resolutions until the end of the meeting. But if there are any other members of the general public that are here that want to, I know we have two taxi licenses and we also have three licenses?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Mr. President, thank you very much. And thank you, Mr. Tudin, for being here. I think if we all think back to a couple of weeks ago, we saw Curtis here wearing a different hat. It was a baseball hat. He's one of our coaches at the Medford High School baseball team, GBL champs. And one of his other functions that he does here is working on the Energy Commission, and he does great work. Curtis, I'd like to thank you for coming down here this evening. I appreciate your presentation. And I'd like you to maybe tell us a little bit about the Harvester Energy Fest and how fun it is, because last year I went down there and I think I bought more light bulbs than I knew what to do with by the time I got out of there. They had these energy efficient light bulbs at a great price.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Motion to receive and place on file, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Thanks, Chris. Mr. President, is there any other matters before the —
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. About 97 days ago, I believe, I put a resolution on piggybacking on Councilor Caraviello's resolution of about 180 days before that and requesting that the West Medford Commuter Rail Station be beautified in terms of deweeding and the replacement of stanchions along High Street and some other items relative to overall cleanliness and upkeep. And to date, we have not seen these occur. I've placed a call into the Department of Transportation requesting their assistance on this matter. However, I ask that my council colleagues support this agenda item in order to have an official paper passed by this body for the MBTA to act on.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Over recent months, I've been driving down the corridor of Riverside Avenue, and every time I drive past the Wellington Plaza, I look at it, and I look at it as a potential for great growth, a potential for us to maybe make some zoning changes there and address some of the needs that we have in this community. It's a very large parcel of land right now. It's about two stories high. thinking I think that maybe we can go up a little bit, a couple of more stories, create some commercial space, potentially maybe some tech industry jobs or some office space that might be resulting in the knowledge-based economy, in the health sciences, Mr. President. But more importantly, I think that we also need to take a look at this opportunity to create affordable housing in our community, affordable housing that's transit-based, affordable housing that can help us reach our quota, because we are not there at this point in time. And based upon our conversations that we had in our committee of the whole this morning with the issue of the Community Preservation Act, I think there is an underlying concern that the lack of affordability in terms of housing in our community is forcing people out. And with that being said, there's a need. And I think that transit-based mixed-use development at a location like Wellington Plaza would do a number of things, Mr. President. First of all, it would increase our commercial tax base. would allow us to develop more businesses, which would, in turn, allow us to have a broader tax base. It would also allow us to address the need of affordable housing by creating units there for people that can live with low and moderate income with access to the T, so that they have the ability to get in and out of town, to go to jobs, go to work, have more opportunities than they would have if they weren't based in a development that's further away from transit. So, Mr. President, I ask my colleagues on the council to support this measure. It's not the first time I've brought an item like this up. I've discussed this also at the site of, you know, Locust Street, Meadowglen Mall, and Shaw's. But I think it's a good idea for us to really take a look at our zoning and to come up with a combined use model for us to really capitalize on the space that we have.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I certainly agree that growth is good. And we're looking at growth here in this area. We're seeing it. We're seeing facade improvements go on in the retail aspect. We're seeing restaurants come in. But the way I'm looking at this is a little bit broader. commercial space come in that brings us jobs that are good-paying jobs that pay $80,000, $90,000, $100,000 a year, jobs that are outside the realm of the food service industry, more in the knowledge-based economy, life sciences, and the actual future of where we see job growth in Massachusetts and in the region. So I can understand that they want to build this area out, and they want to put chain restaurants in there, and they want to put Panera and Smashburger, and that's all well and good, and those are projects that I support. However, on a larger scale, I think if we're looking at bringing jobs to the community and we're looking at really addressing several concerns about improving our tax base, putting money back into the circular flow of our economy, and having good jobs that provide good wages with good benefits, I think we need to look at it a little differently as opposed to retail. We really need to take a look at commercial and industry.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. President. Last meeting, we wrapped up our fiscal year's budget. We approved that budget, and it is now on the books. But there was a lot of debate, a lot of question, a lot of concern about being provided with information, being provided information late, about having questions that need to be answered. So in looking at the process as a whole, when I took a step back and said, how did this all go, I thought it might make sense for us to meet quarterly with the budget director to talk about what's going on in terms of actual expenditures out of our budget. and forecasted revenues that we're hoping are coming in, and then also what our needs and priorities are, and how we can better address some of the concerns that were raised through our last two proceedings, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And thank you, Councilor Penta, for once again raising this issue. I did a little investigating on the matter myself, and it's my understanding that a brick fell from the roof of the building as part of the parapet, I guess they call it. And that scaffolding is not up because they're doing work on the building. That scaffolding is up so no one gets conked on the head by a brick is what my understanding is. And I think that, you know, this is probably an appropriate situation for us to look into the clean it or lean it ordinance that we have in place. However, I'm going to be with Councilor Penta to run this one 100%. I don't care what we do, but we got to do something to get it fixed. And if it's a public safety issue and it's because bricks are falling down off the top of the building, that needs to be addressed immediately. In the interim, you know, I think we need to have a building department take a look at it to make sure that there are no public safety concerns that are generally endangering, passes by, pedestrians and cars and vehicles alike, Mr. President. So, Councilor Penta, thank you for bringing this resolution forward. I like the approach. You know, if there's nothing on the books, let's put something on the books. If there is something on the books, then tell us what it is and let's take care of it.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And if Councilor Marks were here, I'm sure he'd be signed onto this resolution as well. Mr. DiMeo's son and I were very close friends, his daughter, and Councilor Marks are very close friends. With that being said, Mr. DiMeo, passed away recently, unexpectedly, after a short battle with cancer. And he was actually beating his cancer back and passed away from some complications very recently. However, it's my hope that this council will join me in extending its deepest and sincere condolences to the family on their loss. Mr. DiMaio was a great person, a great individual, a great family man. He's lived in Medford a very long time. He came here from Italy, settled in Medford, and has been here ever since. He's been a strong member of our community. He owns multiple properties in the neighborhood, and he's just an all-around great person, Mr. President, and he's going to be missed.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, again, Mr. President, thank you very much. And if Councilor Camuso were here this evening, he would be, I'm sure, assigned onto this resolution, as Marie's grandson, John, is very close friends with both of us. With that being said, Marie's children Giovanni and Nick still live in south Medford. Marie came over here from Tripoli by way of Italy some 70 plus years ago, Mr. President, and she recently passed away after a brief illness, and she too will sadly be missed. She was the stalwart of the family, the matriarch of the home, and she did a great job raising her children and her grandchildren, and she will be sadly missed, Mr. President. So I'd like to have the council join me in extending its deep and sincere condolences to the family.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, where the resolution before this body was to have the mayor provide us a copy of the contract if it has, in fact, been signed, and we, before us here, have a signed contract, I think that the request has been met and the paper can be received and placed on file. The gentleman, I'm sure, will do his due diligence and his research and take a look at this contract, and at a later date, I'm sure, bring a paper forward. I don't know if that's the way you want to handle it, Councilor, if you want to table the paper and then bring that back to life at a later date.
[Adam Knight]: Four members of the city council shall constitute a quorum. A committee of the whole meeting shall be postponed if a quorum is not present. The affirmative vote of a majority of all the members elected to the council shall be necessary for the passage. The affirmative vote of the majority of the members present shall be sufficient to adjourn any meeting of the council. So an affirmative vote of a majority of all the members elected shall be necessary for the passage of any order, ordinance, resolution, or vote. The affirmative vote to recess is by a majority of the members that are present. An affirmative vote to pass any matter before this body is by a group of all. So four is the magic number on the passage of any resolution or resolve or ordinance pursuant to our rules. So the motion fails. Fails.
[Adam Knight]: The Chair recognizes Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And thank you very much for being here this evening to the folks from the DOT. That's greatly appreciated. Is there going to be any disruption to boat access going under the bridge from the Mystic Lakes down to the Boston Harbor during the construction phases of the project? No.
[Adam Knight]: OK. All right. Excellent. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, yes, thank you very much. In terms of the traffic mitigation plan that took place, first of all, I'm hoping that you'd be able to provide the Council with a copy of the traffic mitigation plan. And secondly, is there any retiming of the lights that's going to be conducted or performed so that we can ensure the free flow of traffic through these detoured areas? You know, today has been pretty rough. And I know it's a new thing that people are going to have to get used to. And I think that once people realize Route 16 is closed, they're going to get off at Route 60 or they're not going to try to go the detour route. But in terms of retiming of the signals, is there any type of discussion or documentation that we can take a look at to see what you guys are doing in that regard?
[Adam Knight]: But in terms of Forest Street, Riverside Ave, Salem Street, because this is our center of town, this is our hub, so most of the main roads.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. I rest, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I believe Mr. President, In the past legislative session, Representative Donato was able to secure money in the transportation bond bill for that initiative. Senator Jalem was able to secure it in the House side, and the matter was non-conferenceable. So this council actually passed a resolution sometime back to meet with them once this construction project started to see if we can coordinate the release of these bonded funds to ensure that when the project is completed that all this work is done at the same time. Yeah, that's, yeah, that's all the, that's all the money that he bought at 200,000, 275,000. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Mr. Sincardi, thank you for your presentation as well. I've taken a look at this article that he refers to, and one thing that the article does fail to mention is the fact that Prior to the enactment of state law, we had local control. We had local control over the licensure of massage parlors, body work parlors and everything else. And that was taken away from us. It was a bad bill. It was a bad bill. And I think Robert Cappucci was absolutely right when he said that we need to get our state delegation in here because I think local control is really where it's at. I don't think we're going to be able to beat back this problem unless we have to have all the tools in the shed to be able to do it. One of the best tools that we have is local control, where our Board of Health actually governs the responsibility of massage parlors. Now, we don't have a body works ordinance in the city of Medford. That's the problem. But we had a massage parlor ordinance, and that was taken away from us. The rights and responsibilities to enforce that were taken away from us. And I think that local control would really be the best option and the best solution, Mr. President. So, with that being said, I'd like to request that our state delegation sit down with our Committee on Intergovernmental Affairs, Mr. President, and maybe come up with some recommendations as to how we can modify or amend the state law to ensure that we can gain some local control over these issues.
[Adam Knight]: On that topic, Mr. President, I think it might make sense to figure out what strategies they're going to put in place as opposed to asking them to put strategies in place. I think we're going to get a new certified pool manager. very shortly, if we haven't already.
[Adam Knight]: Beginning tomorrow, we'll have a new CPO. That's correct. So it might make sense, Mr. President, to talk to the new CPO and see exactly what type of vision they have for the pool, what type of plan they have for the pool, and see if we can make some positive suggestions to help them along.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. In looking at this budget and in looking at my philosophy, I think our schools are really vital to the future. success of Medford and the ongoing success of Medford. And this is an excellent budget for our schools. You know, I can go through the list like everybody else has. Adjustment council is a facility manager with a preventative maintenance plan and money to use, low student to teacher ratios, compliance with state mandates relative to teacher evaluations, the evolution of the vocational school. But more importantly, it's the addition of technology in our schools that was something that really excited me about the school budget, Mr. President. the use of Chromebooks and going digital and actually reducing the cost of materials by embracing the cost of technology. And I think that that's really something that we need to look at here in the city side as well as Medford continues to move and progress. You know, on the city side we have several new positions that have been created. We've put, you know, a quarter of a million bucks into the library. We have a code officer, an additional code officer. We have the Substance Abuse Outreach Coordinator that's coming on. We have a clerk in the veteran's office finally. We've added staff to the police and fire departments, full-time pre-warden as Councilor Longo said. And one of the other things that's very vital and very important is that capital investments at Hormel and Edgeley Field, they're actually paying off, they're working. So we're generating non-tax revenues that are reoccurring, Mr. President, that are going to be able to pay for some of these capital projects that everybody keeps talking about. So with that being said, Mr. President, I was prepared to vote on this budget last week and vote for approval on this budget. And with that being said, Mr. President, I'm prepared to do it again this week, and I'll move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor Cluso. Councilor Knight. Thank you very much. Ms. Miller, if I remember correctly, I believe that when we were at our budget subcommittee hearings relative to the issue of water and sewer, it was represented that we're not meeting our forecasted projections at this point in time, isn't that correct?
[Adam Knight]: You don't have the final revenue numbers. And do these numbers that you received today represent the final revenue numbers? No, they do not, correct? because they're not revenue numbers, right? That's what you have to pay, so they're not the revenue numbers. We really don't know what our final revenue numbers are going to be, but we're not meeting projection at this point in time, correct?
[Adam Knight]: OK, thank you.
[Adam Knight]: I'd appreciate it. Appreciate that.
[Adam Knight]: Council night. Mr. Solicitor, would it make sense for us to expand or extend the moratorium until this piece of legislation goes through the planning process?
[Adam Knight]: Same effect.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and thank you very much to the Medford High School GBL champion girls lacrosse team for being here this evening. You've had a wonderful season. You've made us very proud. And because of that, I put a resolution forward, along with Council President Dello Russo, recognizing you for your great achievement of winning the GBL crown. So with that being said, I'd like to ask Coach Galusi to come up here and join me, as well as the team, and we'll pass out some citations. Thank you. It's very fitting to have Coach Galussi up here, because when I was a young kid playing Park League, he taught me everything that I knew about lacrosse. It's an honor and a privilege, Coach, to have you up here with me this evening. And I'd like to take an opportunity to read this citation into the record. The Medford City Council takes pleasure in awarding this council commendation to Adrian Perrazzo, captain, Medford High School varsity girls lacrosse team, in recognition of winning the Greater Boston League title and a berth in the MIA Division I North State Tournament. Hannah Gallop, one of our captains, not here this evening. Next on the list would be Nicole Mortel, another captain. Brianna Burke, captain.
[Adam Knight]: Congratulations, girls. Carolyn Daly.
[Adam Knight]: No. Coach said all his team's at home studying for finals right now, so they're not able to make it this evening.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to offer the microphone to Coach Galusi for a few kind words.
[Adam Knight]: We also have joining us this evening the Medford High School Mustangs girls softball team who had an unbelievable year this year. They were one game away from the state finals, I believe. With that being said, I'd like to ask Coach Dempsey to join me up here this evening.
[Adam Knight]: The ceiling ain't gonna fall down.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Thank you. Well, Coach, thank you very much for joining me this evening and thank you to the team. I'd like to ask the team to step up and we'll have an opportunity to present you with your citations. The citation reads, the Medford City Council takes pleasure in awarding this council commendation to the Medford High School Varsity Girls Softball team in recognition of winning the Greater Boston League Championship with a 5-1 record, an overall record of 16-8, winning the second annual Crystal Campbell Tournament, and a playoff berth in the MIA Division I North Varsity Girls Softball playoffs for the 2015 season. The first person we're going to honor this evening is Hannah O'Leary.
[Adam Knight]: Amber Harbison.
[Adam Knight]: And I think that concludes the presentations for this evening. We also have some recognition for the boys lacrosse team, who were the GBL champions as well, and the boys baseball team, who were the GBL champions. But I don't believe that anybody was able to attend from either one of those teams this evening. So thank you very much to the girls softball team and the girls lacrosse team. Congratulations on a wonderful season. You've made us all proud. Thank you very much for being here this evening. And thank you very much. Oh, we do have some of the lacrosse team here. Liam, come on up.
[Adam Knight]: Congratulations. As the sole representative of the Medford High School boys lacrosse team and GBL champions, we have Liam Cullinane here. I'd like to thank him for being here as well, and I'd like to take an opportunity to read his citation into the record. The Medford City Council takes pleasure in awarding this council commendation to Liam Cullinane, Medford High School varsity boys lacrosse player, in recognition of winning the Greater Boston League title and a berth in the MIAA Division I State North Tournament. Liam, congratulations. On behalf of Bob,
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and thank you, Councilor Caraviello, for putting this matter forward this evening. I, too, got an email on this same topic, and I did some research, and it seems to me that Massage therapy parlors are not under the scope and purview of the local authority. They fall under that of the state. So the department of professional licensure has a licensing branch that would be responsible for the oversight of massage parlors. And it's my understanding based upon conversations that I've had with the code enforcement officer that they have reported this facility into the state for investigation and assurance with compliance, Mr. President. I just wanted the council to be aware that it's outside of local control and the local authority. It really lies within the state. And it's my understanding also that the proposed use of the location in Medford Square is a personal services use. It was a former barber shop, and now it's a massage parlor, which falls in the same use. So it's a conforming use. So that's one of the reasons why the business was able to open there. It's a conforming use. No special permit was necessary or needed. But with that being said, I think that the appropriate place to send the question would be to the State's Division of Professional Licensure as opposed to local authorities because they don't have any oversight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, yes, thank you. I believe it was Chapter 135 of the Acts of 2006 that was passed that created this board that would govern massage therapy parlors. And the principal function of that piece of legislation was to actually take local control away from local boards of health so that they could be consistent and across the board policy. from community to community, city to city, town to town. I think that it's a bad piece of legislation. It was a bad bill. You know, we can't take away the control of our local Board of Health. They're doing an exceptional job in ensuring our safety and our protection and well-being. And I think that's one of the primary flaws. It's actually with the legislation that was passed, Mr. President. And I think that going forward, this council might want to sit down and meet with our delegation to see maybe if there's something we can do to change that.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Parliamentary procedure aside, I think that the budget before us is a good budget. The budget before us provides with a number of technology changes at Medford High School and at Medford Public Schools. It moves away from standardized test teaching and towards whole person teaching, as Superintendent Belson said. It establishes a new full-time code enforcement officer that this council fought for for a year and a half, two years. It establishes a substance abuse coordinator's position that this council's been looking for for a year and a half, Mr. President. It also funds the facilities manager at our school buildings, a facilities manager who's actually put in a preventative maintenance plan at our schools.
[Adam Knight]: And, Mr. President, I don't think some of the questions that we asked about capital projects that aren't related to the budget are going to change the actual bottom line of the budget either. I think that what's important for us to do is to take a look at this budget and to determine whether or not it's a good budget or not. And I think it is a good budget. And looking at it, I think one of the biggest things is that it saves the library. It saves the library. It gives a quarter of a million dollars increase in funding to the library to keep the library certified, meets state certification standards. The council has asked for several things. We've gotten several things that are put into this budget. I think it's a good budget, Mr. President, and I move approval.
[Adam Knight]: Does this project have any relation to the easement project that we granted for the construction of the new science labs? We granted a permanent underground easement recently for the construction of the new science labs. Is this project related to that?
[Adam Knight]: Okay, no relation whatsoever.
[Adam Knight]: Okay, thank you. Madam President, I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: I'll close the public hearing, I guess. We'd have to open it up to anybody in opposition.
[Adam Knight]: Did we already close the public hearing? I don't think we did. No, I don't think we did either. I don't think we did either, but I started asking questions when the public hearing was open.
[Adam Knight]: Move for approval, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: Location of the poll attachment.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Can you tell me... When the project is going to start, once this matter is approved, how long after the approval?
[Adam Knight]: This is a residential fixture that you're going to be switching out?
[Adam Knight]: And your hours of construction work are going to be performed? 7 to 3.30.
[Adam Knight]: Normal working hours, yes. Madam President, it's delivering gas to a residential home. They've been waiting over a year for the project to make its way through approval design construction phases. So I think they've waited long enough. Let's eat their house. I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: I think I have the minutes, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: We sent them in the back room to meet with the residents, if you recall. And then they came out, and they reached some sort of agreement. But I have not found it, to make the answer short.
[Adam Knight]: Not so hot. I'd move for approval, Mr. President, based on the contingency that if there are any restrictions on the permit, that they remain in effect when we approve the convict.
[Adam Knight]: What are the hours the light's going to be on? They're going to be on from?
[Adam Knight]: Dusk till dawn.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to revert back to regular order of business, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Over the last couple of years, I've become very friendly with Paul Cavanaugh Jr. He recently lost his father. I was unable to make the services last week, however, I did want to extend my deep and sincere condolences to he and his family in their loss, Mr. President. And I'd ask my council colleagues to do the same.
[Adam Knight]: The same topic's been discussed within the last 90 days. I'd like a ruling as to whether or not the paper's out of order.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'm pretty sure that the Constitution of the United States of America does not say that you can come to a meeting and speak about whatever you want whenever you want. No one's impeding this gentleman from his freedom of speech.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I made a motion to have the ruling on the paper.
[Adam Knight]: It's with great happiness that I would recommend that the minutes of last week's meeting be approved, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Ms. Miller, with the approval of these transfers, with the exception of the Snow and Ice account, would it balance the FY15 budget?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Ms. Miller, if the money stays in the account, it doesn't go into free cash until it gets certified. So that would have to happen after June 30th, correct?
[Adam Knight]: So we'd have to wait for the funding that was surplus funding at the end of the fiscal year to be certified. And then once that free cash is certified, then it could be used again as an expenditure. What you're telling me is that if we transfer these funds now, The reason that they're not being expended is because of the bad winter and the fact that a sideway contractor hasn't started yet. So if we transfer these funds now, are these funds going to go back into a sidewalk account? No, right? They're going to go towards the snow and ice removal, correct?
[Adam Knight]: Now, can you explain to me a little bit about the snow and ice removal and the way that they're budgeted? Because it's my understanding that if you budget X amount for fiscal year 15, you can't budget less than that in fiscal year 16, correct?
[Adam Knight]: Ms. Miller, how many other accounts have a surplus in them at this point in time? Is this the whole list?
[Adam Knight]: surplus which would be transferred to certified free cash at the end of the fiscal year provided that this $20,000 to $25,000 would be remaining funds from the payment of utility bills that haven't come in at this point in time?
[Adam Knight]: Okay. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Can we just amend the paper right here to the regular hours of operation as outlined in the ordinance, and then the gentleman can come forward for a special permit at a later date?
[Adam Knight]: I certainly agree with my colleagues. Madam President, I think it's very important that we have a contingency fund available for capital improvements at our schools and our city buildings. I'm also pleased to hear after this weekend, I was with John McLaughlin, who's our facilities manager, the school department, and he's beginning the stages of implementing a preventative maintenance plan, and I think that's something that's also been lacking there, and I'm proud to see that Mr. McLaughlin has the foresight and the courage to put together a preventative maintenance plan to keep some of these costs down in the future, so I'd like to thank him for his efforts, and I'd also like to thank Councilor Penta, Councilor Caraviello for bringing this issue to the table. I'm a firm believer in the need for a capital improvement fund, and I support this resolution wholeheartedly.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. I think it's safe to say that none of us want to put a price tag on public safety, and none of us want to put a price tag on what it's going to cost to keep students in Medford High School safe. But I think we can put a price tag on what it costs to repair the alarm system at Medford High School. Certainly, it's my understanding that this was a fire detail. This was not someone that was pulled off of a piece of apparatus or pulled out of a station. And it is a fire detail, so it is a fire-related issue. It is a fire-related responsibility. It's a prevention issue, Madam President. I like the resolution. I think it's a good resolution. I think we need to know how much was spent up there. I think we need to know what bottom line it's coming off of. Is it coming off the school department's budget? Is it coming off of our budget? Is it coming out of the fire department's budget? So it's very important for us to know, Madam President. And I thank Councilor Penta for bringing the resolution forward. I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much, and Councilor Caraviello is also a co-sponsor of this resolution. I think that all of us, who have gone through grade school and middle school and high school have been able to identify with one teacher who's really had a positive impact on your life. When I was at Medford High, that person was Jack McDevitt and Bud Kelly. When I was at the Brooks-Hobbs Elementary School, that person was Herbie Wells and Carol Rickenbacker. And, Madam President, I met Ms. Rickenbacker my kindergarten years at the Herbie School, and I can tell you that she was a great positive influence on my life. She's served the community with great integrity, great diligence, and quite frankly, she's always put the children first. Ms. Rickenbacker donated a number of hours of her own personal time to take photographs of students throughout the 30 plus years that she's been a teacher here. She's maintained a high quality and positive relationship with a number of students whose lives she's affected. Mr. President, I'd ask my council colleagues to join me in supporting this resolution. She's going to be sadly missed. It's a void that cannot be filled here in the Medford Public Schools. And it's with great pleasure that I wish her congratulations. And it's with great pleasure that I let Ms. Rickenbacker know that she really earned this and that she made a great positive impact on my life.
[Adam Knight]: One thing, Mr. President, that I think we all remember about Ms. Rickenbacker is that she loves to pinch everybody's cheeks when they walked into the Brooks Hobbs Elementary School. And I think that the students going into school next year can rest assured that their cheeks will be safe from Ms. Rickenbacker because she will be enjoying her retirement.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I think it's very important to point out, as Councilor Longo did, that on 6-26 at Anthony's and Malden, 7 p.m. would be the annual fundraiser for the scholarship. And the scholarship doesn't exist unless people from the community come out and actually support this endeavor. It's something that I support. Billy was a great guy. He put a lot of time, effort, and energy into this. It was really his baby, so to speak, Mr. President. And I think it's very important for people to know that all the proceeds from the event on the 26th go towards the scholarship and towards the Challenge of Baseball League. So I thank Councilor Longo-Curran for bringing this initiative forward, and I move approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Freddie Berusso was a fixture in West Medford. Many people would remember his work truck sitting out in the corner of Bower and Canal Street. He recently passed away this week. He was a good friend of mine. I had the privilege and pleasure of growing up with his son Danny playing little league and every other sport, park league and everything else that we could do down at place park when we were kids. You know, Fred joins his wife who passed away recently and I offer my deepest condolences to the family. I think it's a very trying time for them and especially for Danny who has lost both of his parents.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. I believe that the governing body that's in charge of the rate structures at Wrights Pond would be the Parks Board who had a hearing this evening on this very same issue.
[Adam Knight]: I'm not questioning the use of the gentleman's time. I think I'm questioning whether or not this is the appropriate body that can affect that change.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if we can, if we can amend Mr. Council President, Council Camuso's resolution, asking the question to the solicitor and also make a request from the community development and community relations specialist, Ms. Rubella, Tufts University to provide us with a copy of the minutes from this meeting from this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you. And thank you to the Medford Community Coalition for their hard work on this very, very important issue. Mr. President, I'm very comfortable supporting this increase in the budget for the library. And the reason I'm supportive of it is because we're not just throwing money at a problem. There's an operational plan for the use of funds that's in place. And based upon the correspondence from the administration that we received today, we're going to have $70,000 for part-time helpers. We're going to have $30,000 for increased cleaning services. $75,000 for a new employee that would work in the technology field, $60,000 for a new employee that would work as a reference librarian, and $15,000 for new equipment, Mr. President. Because we have a plan and we have an actual dedicated use for these monies, I'm very comfortable supporting this. You know, I think that the grassroots effort of the Metro Community Coalition was a driving factor behind the issuance of these funds and the increase in our budget. And for that, I'm very supportive because I value our library.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, the paperwork appears in order. I would move for approval because the paperwork is in order and it's a conforming use. However, I'd like to be recorded in opposition.
[Adam Knight]: Point of clarification, Councilor Knight. It's my understanding that you already have the ability to sell Kino and now you just want to put the screen in so that people can sit there and watch their numbers come up while they're washing their clothes, right? Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I think that it's important to note that the resolution that was brought forward was to listen to the concerns that this gentleman had. And we've done that. And he's asked us to take some action. So I think it would be important for us to sit down, maybe as a body, and come up with something that we can agree on, that we can present to the Traffic Commission, if, in fact, it is the wishes of this council to get out of the contract. I'm a little concerned that the meetings are going to start turning into campaign commercials, and we're not going to be taking care of the business that needs to be taken care of, Mr. President. And, you know, I'd appreciate that. I think that, you know, we've heard from business owners, and we'll continue to hear from business owners, because it's not a perfect program. The gentleman's right. The gentleman's right. The signage is terrible. The signage is terrible. The communication is terrible. And the relationship that we have with Pac-Medfed could be much stronger. One of the recommendations that we as a council have been giving to people would be when they feel as though there has been a violation of their rights to report it to the Consumer Commission. I think that we have a job here to provide these people with recourse, what direction to go in if in fact they are aggrieved by the situation. You know, rhetoric is great, but action is better, Mr. President. And, you know, I respect Councilor Penta's position. I respect Councilor Camuso's position on the issue. It's a passionate issue. It's a big issue that's affecting the community as a whole. However, I think that we really need to start providing solutions as opposed to, you know, yelling and screaming and fighting with each other. We all know that the program's not perfect. We all know the program's not perfect. The question is, what steps can we take to make it better? Because as of right now, it's not going anywhere.
[Adam Knight]: I'd be a little bit more comfortable relying on legal opinions from the solicitor as opposed to a layperson.
[Adam Knight]: I think that we're losing focus here, and the quorum's starting to deteriorate a little bit. When individuals are speaking, they should be speaking through the chair. It's not a one-on-one conversation. It's a conversation through the chair, Mr. President, that's necessary. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And Councilor Caraviello made a very excellent point. And I think when we look at the transformation of this parking program and, you know, the reason why it was brought to the city was to turn over spots and to prevent all day parking from commuters. And I think we've accomplished those goals. And the one thing that we've accomplished as well as scaring a lot of people away from our business districts. And I've said that before, and I'll say it again, but, um, Councilor Caraviello was absolutely right when he said that, you know, a lot of the spots that have cleared up weren't necessarily all day commuters that were parking their car in West Medford square and getting on the train. There were all-day commuters that were parking their car in West Medford Square to go to work in West Medford Square. And when you look at the number of business permits that were issued in 2014 prior to the rollout of the plan, some 260 or so, versus the number of business permits that have been issued after the rollout of the plan, which is somewhere around 560 or so, I think we'll see that there was absolute abuse of our current systems. So I can understand when people raise the issue saying, well, enforcement would have solved that problem. And paying might not necessarily be the answer. However, the program that we have is the program that we have, and we need to work within the confines of this contract that we have right now to determine whether or not we can make it work for us or not.
[Adam Knight]: This is turning into people screaming in the playground. This is a legislative body. I think we need to act like it. Thank you. Mr. Martin.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if we can also get a listing of any complaints that were filed relative to the kiosk operation taking money after hours from the Consumer Commission.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. Uh, I certainly understood the concerns of the Councilor Camuso had and where he was coming from in sharing the names and addresses of, uh, our public employees here in the city of Medford, especially those in the public safety field, but also those in the school system where around we've seen an increase in violence in our schools and an increase in violence against teachers. With that being said, Mr. President, I think a proper negotiation and a proper middle ground would be that we strike person's name, we strike address as well, and we replace that with employee identification number. That way we'll be able to tell if it's the same person or not based upon their employee identification number, which everybody in the city has, Mr. President. So I'd like to move to amend the paper by striking the word name and striking the word address and replacing that with employee identification number.
[Adam Knight]: I think it's very important to point out that the school department's budget goes through a budget hearing process just like the city's budget does. And the school committee actually puts the budget together and votes on the budget. So there is a check and balance at that level as well. It's not just the mayor says do this and that's what they do. There is a check and balance at that level. There is a legislative policymaking body at that level that does review these type of things. So, you know, that's what the school committee is for, to set the school policy and to set the school department's budget. And they've gone through budget hearings. They had extensive budget debates, if I'm not mistaken. I think they met five times in the month of May to go over their budget. So just to clarify the situation, the school committee has had an opportunity to review this budget, and the school committee has also had an opportunity to vote on it.
[Adam Knight]: Your amendment and Councilor Caraviello's amendment and Councilor Mongo's amendment. Lump sums.
[Adam Knight]: It's contrary so that's why I said it.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Put it in committee. Let's figure out what we want to do.
[Adam Knight]: The contrary items, Mr. President. So I think we'd have to separate, separate councilor Caraviello's amendment as their contrary. So there'd have to be, there'd have to be seven.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And I can certainly see the frustration. And I think that a 100% increase in any fee that we have here in the city is far too much. With that being said, Mr. President, I support the resolution to have the park board take a look at their fee structure and to make accommodations. You know, a 5% increase, something like that, might seem a little bit more reasonable than a 100% increase at this point in time. I support the resolution that Councilor Penter has put forward in terms of having them take a look and revisiting the fee structure. And, you know, I thank them for bringing the resolution forward. I think that it's problematic to have city government shy people away from using our recreational areas when we have so many problems in our community with drug abuse, with childhood obesity and the like, that we want people to take advantage of these resources, not be deterred, Mr. President. So, with that being said, I appreciate your leadership on this, Councilor Penta. Thank you. Name and address of the record, please.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think that the question before us is what the prior fee structure was for Wrights Pond, what the current fee structure for Wrights Pond is, and why these changes were made. I think that's the question that we're looking to ask. With that being said, I think that we pretty much know more about the Rights Upon Pass program now than we've ever known before in the past. I think it's time to get the question answered, Mr. President, so I'd move for approval on the paper.
[Adam Knight]: the recreational councils at our park. We don't know. That's why we're asking the question. That's why we're asking the question. We tell them to reduce the fee structure, then what do they say to us? They say, okay, we'll reduce the fee structure, but they're no more parkway constructors. Why did the increase happen is the question that needs to be answered first and foremost. I don't support the increase, but I just want to know why it happened and where the money is going.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, we're asking the question here. Mr. President, we're asking the question. We're all in agreement we want the question answered. I mean, I think we're belaboring this issue a little bit. Right's Pawn is going to be closed by the time we close this debate on the issue.
[Adam Knight]: What information counsel tonight? Amendment A says to revisit the rates. Amendment E says to reduce the fees to last year's rate, Dick. Contradictory. We're either telling them to reduce it or we're telling them to revisit it, but we can't tell them to do both. Reduce it. Okay.
[Adam Knight]: Would the clerk please read back the resolution? As amended. Right now it just says be it resolved the matter of neighboring issues of concern around Magoon Park be discussed. What is the question that we're asking?
[Adam Knight]: Councilman, I mean, that's my question. We're going to pass a piece of legislation here, but we don't know what the issues are. But what are the issues of neighboring concern? Tell us what they are and address them for us. But we don't know what they are.
[Adam Knight]: Right.
[Adam Knight]: Very good. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And I have to commend Councilor Camuso for thinking out of the box and trying to address some of the traffic problems that are going to pop up with the Craddock Bridge reconstruction. You know, as we discussed last week in our budget debates about the possibility of maybe hiring a transportation planner for the city of Medford and the cost versus the benefits and what that will bring to our community. But I won't belabor that issue. I just think it's very important that this issue, as well as many other issues that are going to come up relative to Craddock Bridge, be discussed. And, Council President, I know you've been working very hard with members of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation, as have I, to schedule a meeting for them to come down here before this council. And, um, I believe that this would be a great issue to bring up at the tentative meeting that we have scheduled for the June 30th.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. As I understand, the transportation reform bill that was passed several years ago, everything is under the same mass dot umbrella. MBTA, highway, DCR, all of the parties that are going to be having a stake in the reconstruction of the Craddock Bridge, with the exception of us. And they're coming to see us.
[Adam Knight]: When was the last time we had this?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd like to say that Medford's no place for hate, and this is a good resolution. One of the best votes that this council's taken this past year was the ordinance that created the Fair Housing Ordinance in the Human Rights Commission. So I think that this falls in line with the actual past practice of this council and the support that this council's shown for anti-discrimination in the community. So I support this resolution wholeheartedly, Mr. President, and I ask my colleagues to join me in doing the same.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, while we are making announcements of matters that are going on in the community, I think it's important to point out, and I'm sure Councilor Caraviello will agree with me, that Friday the 26th at Anthony's in Malden is the Batter Up for Billy fundraiser for the Challenger League, which provides funding, necessary funding, for the Challenger League, which is a baseball league for individuals with developmental disabilities for which gone-but-not-forgotten good friend Billy Falasca was a pioneer for.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and I'd like to thank Mr. Fitzpatrick for the time and effort that he put into his presentation. I find it important to point out, like he said, it's very easy to point out a problem or a mistake or an issue, but to provide a solution is really to bring the matter full circle. So I can certainly appreciate the efforts that he's put forth, and I'd like to thank him for his hard work. Under the current circumstances, where the development are not right there, I think that the neighborhood is suffering through a significant amount of cut-through traffic. I found myself guilty just the other day cutting down Murray Hill Drive, and when my friend Lou Entopper yelled at me, I pulled over, and he said, I want you to sit here and watch. I want you to sit here and watch. So I stayed there for about a half an hour with Lou, and we watched, and we counted cars, and we counted 75 cars in a half an hour cut through Murray Hill Road. So with that being said, Mr. President, I think there's a significant problem there right now, absent development, and it's a problem that we can handle here in Medford. I know the Traffic Commission has taken a position that they'd like to see citizen-driven petitions when it comes to closing streets off to resident access, and I think that that might be an important place to start. If they close off Murray Hill Road to resident access only between certain hours, I think that'll cut down significantly on the cut-through traffic, similar to what they've done on Rural Ave here in Medford by the Winthrop Street Rotary, Mr. President. Also, one thing that I have learned is that if you drive down one of those streets that says resident access only between the hours of 6 a.m. and 9 a.m., And you get caught. It is a surchargeable offense. It's the same thing as driving down a do not enter street. And it's a surchargeable offense that goes on your insurance. So I think that this is a very effective tool to combat cut through traffic, Mr. President, signage and policing. And I think that that might be something that we here as a city council can support at this level, regardless of what they do in Malden, regardless of the development to address the issues that are in place right now, the cut through traffic problems that they're seeing in that neighborhood, Mr. President. So I'd like to request that this committee send a request to the Traffic Commission to examine the possibility of putting in resident access only. But I'd like to see that be done through a citizen-driven petition first. So maybe we can have a conversation about that, Mr. President. I don't want to say turn the street resident access only, and then have all the residents on the street come down here and say, what are you, nuts? We don't want that. But I think it's a tool that we can use to combat cut-through traffic in that area.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And Councilor Camuso, I certainly echo your sentiments. I think we could all sit here all night long and talk about Timmy Brennan and tell Timmy Brennan stories about what a great guy he was. what a great public servant he was and what a great firefighter he was. But I think Chief Goulding from the Western Police Department, who formerly was lieutenant detective here in the city of Medford, put it best. When talking about Timmy Brennan, he said, if someone has a problem with Timmy Brennan, there's probably a problem with that person. And honestly, I think that that's really the way that Timmy went through life. He was a friend to many. He was a great gentleman. He was a person that I'm privileged and honored to have been able to call a friend, Mr. President, and he'll be sadly missed.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much for the opportunity to speak on this matter. Last week, this matter was filed under suspension at the request of Councilor Penta. We tabled it for this week to have the residents have an opportunity to come up and speak. With that being said, Mr. President, I think that we might want to allow the residents to come up and speak on whether or not they're in support of a Charter Review Commission. I know there's been an undercurrent of residents in the community who have spoken on this issue a number of times. There's been several meetings that have taken place by this community group to take a look at the charter. So with that being said, there is a citizen-driven effort that's out there. So maybe some of the citizens that are out in the audience who have participated in such can tell us about their experience, about the progress and process that they've made, and then we can go from there. Thank you. Councilor Pentland, do you want to speak? No.
[Adam Knight]: I think that is the question that we're looking to ask the city solicitor, correct? Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: To take papers 15504, 05 and 06, taxi operator licenses out of order.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. The Medford High School Mustangs have had a rather successful year all around. And this spring is no different than the fall and winter seasons. I had the opportunity to speak with our athletic director, Mr. Maloney, I was pleased to inform you that the boys lacrosse, girls lacrosse, boys baseball, and girls softball teams were named the GBL champions. It's very great to see the Mustangs performing so well both in the classroom and on the field. And I think that it's appropriate that we recognize them for this great achievement. I think it's very important that we recognize the fact that these student athletes represent the city of Medford across the region and their efforts in our community. and community building are very important. They're role models to our youth, Madam President, and it's also a great, great, great honor to be named a GBL champion. So because of those factors, I would ask that my council colleagues support me in voting in favor of this resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Just the other day, I was speaking to a neighbor of mine who was driving down Winthrop Street, and a child came out behind a car, from behind a car. But the car was parked in an illegal parking spot, and there was a crosswalk there, and the gentleman had a problem with visibility. So he went around the block and he came and he approached the same intersection from the other direction to see if he had the same problem there, and he did. With that being said, Mr. President, with the summer months coming and Victory Park being such a great park where I take my kid quite frequently, as a matter of fact, I think it would be very important that this crosswalk be reviewed. I think that we might have to take a space away or two on either side of the street just to be sure that there's enough visibility here. Also, Mr. President, I did file a resolution several weeks back requesting that a crosswalk be put in between Cedar Road and King Avenue, and I'd like to amend this resolution to include that as well. Cedar Road and King Avenue cross Forest Street, which go to the new McNally Park, which this council voted in favor of rebuilding. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'd ask that my council colleagues support me in voting in favor of these two public safety initiatives.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Today, as a matter of fact, marks the day that Kenneth Nesta was laid to rest. And Kenneth was a long-time public servant at the post office, had a root here in the city of Medford for a number of years. But more often than not, you'd be able to find him down in one of our baseball fields watching his son, Michael, Park Superintendent, coach the Medford High School baseball team or watch one of his many grandchildren play. baseball or down the county rink playing hockey. Kenneth died unexpectedly, and he will be sadly missed, Mr. President. I'm honored and privileged to have been able to call him a friend as well. And today was a very difficult day for the family and for Kenneth's friends. And I'd ask that this council join me in Councilor Camuso in offering and extending their deep and sincere condolences.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. Recently, a gentleman from Boynton Road came up to discuss a house that was condemned and in disrepair in his neighborhood. The city solicitor gave a report back to this council indicating that on the 28th of last month, the case was going to be heard in probate court. With that being said, Mr. President, I'm hoping we can get an update as to the status of that property, because I feel as though if we don't see any action take place shortly, this council may have to take action to determine that the building is unsafe and the location is unsafe and take the appropriate steps to be sure that the neighborhood is protected.
[Adam Knight]: I rest, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Madam Vice President. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. Madam Vice President, Councilor Marks, thank you very much for your remarks on this topic as well. I think it's all well and good that we can bring a member of the CAC in here to discuss the flight patents, but Massport also has an Office of Community Relations, and they also have an Office of Government Affairs. And I'd like to amend the resolution to ask that Jose Maceo, who would be the Community Relations Director, and Nancy Donahue, the Assistant Director of Government Affairs, also be invited to our meeting to discuss the flight patents, Mr. President. I think it would be very productive to have all parties involved.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President. woman's gone through extensive lengths to get these signatures and to take them and place them on file with the city clerk might not be the best approach. I think maybe we should send these signatures over to the traffic commission to let the traffic commission know how much opposition there is out there in the community with the governing board.
[Adam Knight]: What was the original motion? There was no motion.
[Adam Knight]: The signatures, right, yes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I do believe this council has on multiple occasions requested the capital needs of all the buildings that are underneath the control and jurisdiction of the city government, but also specifically the library. And I think that this information will be very helpful, Mr. President, as we begin our preparations for the budget debates. Presently, if you take a look at the Medford transcript, you'll see a great article by Mr. Ruppenthal that speaks about the funding shortages at the library. and the risk that the city has been in, in losing its certification from the state. So it looks right now that, you know, based upon the figures that I read, we're about a quarter of a million dollars short in fully funding the library to make ourselves in a position where we would not require a state waiver and enable the ability to maintain certification, Mr. President. So I think there's a lot of stuff that's going on at the library right now that really needs to be looked at, or else we're going to be in a position where we might actually lose this asset The building is in rough shape. I know over the winter there was a significant amount of snow buildup that resulted in some leaks and some ice dams that have damaged some books in the children's section. We have the issue with the bathroom as well. And then, you know, the discussions that we've had in the past about expanding and making a media center on the second floor of the library and building up the library. So I think now is an important time to take a look at what's going on there in terms of the capital side of things, Mr. President, and as we begin our debates for the budget, determine whether or not the library is being funded at a level that's appropriate. Thank you, Councilor Knight. Councilor Penta.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I have concerns about the bridge. I've raised them last week. I had a resolution asking the harbour master to meet with the project manager to determine what restrictions were going to be on the roadway for boaters up river. I think that, you know, we've all scratched our heads and wondered what's going to happen with the buses. We've all scratched our heads and wondered how this off-ramp is going to work, where cars can take lefts and rights around the backside of Medford Auto to get through Medford Square. With that being said, Mr. President, you know, I wholeheartedly feel as though another meeting would be beneficial to get some of our questions answered. However, it appears to me that the DOT is not willing to have this meeting. So with that being said, I'm wondering if it would be a beneficial exercise for us to maybe put some questions in writing as to what we want answered and send them over to the project manager and have the project manager get back to us. If in fact the project manager doesn't get back to us in a timely fashion, then we can take action. But at this point in time, Mr. President, let's try to get the questions answered so that we can provide the information to those people that are going to be most affected by it. And we can go from there. But I think what we really need to focus on is solutions, Mr. President. And, you know, we need to focus on how we're going to help these businesses through this tough time. It's going to be three years of construction. How we're going to improve traffic flow during this three-year period of time as construction is going on. figure out what best practices work so that when we have another construction project at this scale, we're prepared to deal with it, Mr. President. So, you know, I'd like to see maybe a listing of the questions that we have that we need answered. And if we can get those together maybe as a group in committee of the whole and then vote on it to come out of the committee and then vote on that to have those questions sent to the DOT for an answer, I think that we might be on the right track, Mr. President, to actually getting solutions.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I know that mitigation is going to be very important to the businesses down in the Medford Square area and whether or not we're able to triumph that is a whole other question. But I think that there are some things that we can control here at the local level in terms of mitigation and maybe that's something that we need to look at. But, you know, one of the first things that pops to mind is the biggest complaint that we're hearing out there right now from shop owners is the kiosks in Medford Square. So maybe if if the state is not willing to help us out with mitigation, then maybe we can go a step further and we as a city can help mitigate by maybe changing the hours of operation of the kiosk or closing the kiosk down for certain days or certain periods of time in that business district while construction is going on to provide some relief to the business owners. I think that the construction alone, well, the traffic patents alone right now in Medford will get people away. With the construction coming in the kiosk, I think this is really going to have a detrimental effect, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight has the floor next. Mr. President, thank you very much. And Ms. Martin, thank you very much for that thorough analysis. One of the things that you said really stuck out to me, and that was the fact that seven years is too long, because in seven years, we're going to look at our school buildings that are going to be deteriorating. And I think that's a major problem. And we have a brand new DPW yacht, just built, just built. The paint's not even dry yet. What's our capital maintenance plan at the DPW yacht? This is our city's number one asset. This is the largest investment we've made in quite some time. What's our plan? What are we going to do to be sure that this stays a state-of-the-art facility so that 10 years down the line, we're not looking to borne money to fix something we've already fixed, Ms. Martin. I think that that's a great assessment, and that leads me into my point. We need to have a capital improvement fund in the city of Medford for our buildings. And without that, we're going to be behind the eight ball all the time. Until we actually take care of the facilities that we own and perpetuate And perpetual maintenance care isn't a bad idea, a perpetual fund. That's something that I support, a capital maintenance and trust fund, where we dedicate a certain portion of our city's budget to a trust fund, just for the purpose of maintaining and upkeeping the current buildings that we have, Mr. President. So, Ms. Martin, I think that that was a very good point that you made, because there are going to be competing interests the more time that goes on if, in fact, we don't have a capital maintenance plan to keep the buildings and the existing assets that we have up to par to be livable, to be workable, to be usable. So thank you very much for taking the time to come up here and provide us with that thoughtful analysis.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I signed on to this resolution because I want to know what the process is. There are multiple processes. This council can do it. It can be a citizen-driven petition as well. I think it's important for the city clerk to come out and provide us with the perimeters, which venue we can recommend people take, which direction people may want to go or may not want to go. If there aren't enough votes for it here in the council, at least people know what direction to go, Mr. President. So I see no problem bringing the resolution forward. There were citizens that came here and then asked this council to make a decision. At that point in time, I wasn't ready to support that. At this point in time, I am. I've done a little bit of homework. I've done a little bit of research on the matter, Mr. President. So I don't think that it's that outlandish. I don't think it's crazy. I don't think it's insane to bring this conversation topic forward. I don't think it's insane, crazy, or outlandish to ask for the question, to be answered by a clerk, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: And I, too, think that, you know, figuring out what the process is and figuring out what direction we need to go in if we feel as though there are changes necessary is important. It's important for us to know. It's important for the people to know. I'm on board. And more importantly, I think with the change in administration, there is a certain sense of insecurity or a sense of maybe uncertainty and instability right now. And I think that if we're going to make the change, now's the time to do it. If things are changing, let's really take a long hard look at what's going on. Point of clarification.
[Adam Knight]: I misspoke. I misspoke. Instability versus insecurity was the term that I meant to use, Councilor. Well, that's even worse. Well, you don't think that there's a sense of instability here in the community of Medford right now with the 28-year mayor that's retiring? There are two good candidates that are going to be in the race over here. And hopefully, maybe the best woman will win. A man will win.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, most are to withdraw.
[Adam Knight]: I thought this was a good thing, Mr. President. I thought this was a good thing. I thought this was something that, you know what I mean? It is a good thing, but I just want to know why.
[Adam Knight]: We can work together. I think that the future is what we should be focused on as opposed to the past.
[Adam Knight]: Is there a motion, Councilor Knight? If I could ask the folks involved with this Chatter Review Commission that's been put together, when the next meeting is?
[Adam Knight]: No, I'm talking about Mr. D'Antonio, actually, and to the committee that he was speaking about.
[Adam Knight]: I just didn't know if you were meeting again in the near future.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. D'Antoni, we've put some effort in and done some work on this and, you know, having dealt with you, I know that it's going to be good work and it's going to be thorough. Would you be willing to share that information with the council once we get our response back from the solicitor as to what your notes reflect in meeting minutes and stuff like that from the charter?
[Adam Knight]: If you could share that with us, that might be helpful and start in the conversation.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor, do you happen to have a site on that? For which one? The document you just read off of. Is there a website or some certain?
[Adam Knight]: OK.
[Adam Knight]: I appreciate it.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I ask that when we adjourn, we adjourn in the memory of our deceased brothers and sisters from the Medford Police Department, Robert B. Corrado, Kenneth J. Hickey, Adrian L. Jean, Peter W. McGaffigan, Jr., Christopher E. Sano, Thomas J. Walsh, and Sheila Richard.
[Adam Knight]: Friday the 29th at 9 a.m. Immaculate Conception Church, Malden.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. Madam Vice President, Councilor Marks, thank you very much for your remarks on this topic as well. I think it's all well and good that we can bring a member of the CAC in here to discuss the flight patents, but Massport also has an Office of Community Relations, and they also have an Office of Government Affairs. And I'd like to amend the resolution to ask that Jose Maceo, who would be the Community Relations Director, and Nancy Donahue, the Assistant Director of Government Affairs, also be invited. to a meeting to discuss the flight patents. Mr. President, I think it would be very productive to have all parties involved.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President. woman's gone through extensive lengths to get these signatures, and to take them and place them on file with the city clerk might not be the best approach. I think maybe we should send these signatures over to the Traffic Commission to let the Traffic Commission know how much opposition there is out there in the community where they're the governing body.
[Adam Knight]: What was the original motion? There was no motion.
[Adam Knight]: The signatures, right, yeah.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I do believe this council has on multiple occasions requested the capital needs of all the buildings that are underneath the control and jurisdiction of the city government, but also specifically the library. And I think that this information will be very helpful, Mr. President, as we begin our preparations for the budget debates. Presently, if you take a look at the Medford transcript, you'll see a great article by Mr. Ruppenthal that speaks about the funding shortages at the library and the risk that the city has been in, in losing its certification from the state. So it looks right now that based upon the figures that I read, We're about a quarter of a million dollars short in fully funding the library to make ourselves in a position where we would not require a state waiver and enable the ability to maintain certification, Mr. President. So I think there's a lot of stuff that's going on at the library right now that really needs to be looked at or else we're going to be in a position where we might actually lose this asset. The building's in rough shape. I know over the winter there was a significant amount of snow buildup that resulted in some leaks and some ice dams that have damaged some books in the children's section. We have the issue with the bathroom as well. And then, you know, the discussions that we've had in the past about expanding and making a media center on the second floor of the library and building up the library. So I think now is an important time to take a look at what's going on there in terms of the capital side of things, Mr. President, and as we begin our debates for the budget, determine whether or not the library is being funded at a level that's appropriate.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I have concerns about the bridge. I've raised them last week. I had a resolution asking the harbormaster to meet with the project manager to determine what restrictions were going to be on the roadway for boaters up river. I think that we've all scratched our heads and wondered what's going to happen with the buses. We've all scratched our heads and wondered how this off-ramp is going to work, where cars can take lefts and rights around the backside of Medford Auto to get through Medford Square. With that being said, Mr. President, you know, I wholeheartedly feel as though another meeting would be beneficial to get some of our questions answered. However, it appears to me that the DOT is not willing to have this meeting. So with that being said, I'm wondering if it would be a beneficial exercise for us to maybe put some questions in writing as to what we want answered and send them over to the project manager and have the project manager get back to us. If, in fact, the project manager doesn't get back to us in a timely fashion, then we can take action. But at this point in time, Mr. President, let's try to get the questions answered so that we can provide the information to those people that are going to be most affected by it. And we can go from there. But I think what we really need to focus on is solutions, Mr. President. And, you know, we need to focus on how we're going to help these businesses through this tough time. It's going to be three years of construction. How we're going to improve traffic flow during this three-year period of time as construction is going on. figure out what best practices work so that when we have another construction project at this scale, we're prepared to deal with it, Mr. President. So, you know, I'd like to see maybe a listing of the questions that we have that we need answered. And if we can get those together maybe as a group in committee of the whole and then vote on it to come out of the committee and then vote on that to have those questions sent to the DOT for an answer, I think that we might be on the right track, Mr. President, to actually getting solutions.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I know that mitigation is going to be very important to the businesses down in the Medford Square area, and whether or not we're able to Triumph, that is a whole other question, but I think that there are some things that we can control here at the local level in terms of mitigation, and maybe that's something that we need to look at. But one of the first things that pops to mind is the biggest complaint that we're hearing out there right now from shop owners is the kiosks in Medford Square. So maybe if the state's not willing to help us out with mitigation, then maybe we can go a step further and we as a city can help mitigate by maybe changing the hours of operation of the kiosk. So closing the kiosk down for certain days or certain periods of time in that business district while construction is going on to provide some relief to the business owners. I think that the construction alone, well, the traffic patents alone right now in Medford square scare people away. With the construction coming in the kiosk, I think this is really going to have a detrimental effect, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight has the floor next. Mr. President, thank you very much. And Ms. Martin, thank you very much for that thorough analysis. One of the things that you said really stuck out to me, and that was the fact that seven years is too long, because in seven years, we're going to look at our school buildings that are going to be deteriorating. And I think that's a major problem. And we have a brand new DPW yard, just built, just built. The paint's not even dry yet. What's our capital maintenance plan at the DPW yard? This is our city's number one asset. This is the largest investment we've made in quite some time. What's our plan? What are we going to do to be sure that this stays a state-of-the-art facility, so that 10 years down the line, we're not looking to borne money to fix something we've already fixed, Ms. Martin. So I think that that's a great assessment. And that leads me into my point. We need to have a capital improvement fund in the city of Medford for our buildings. And without that, we're going to be behind the eight ball all the time. Until we actually take care of the facilities that we own, and perpetual maintenance care isn't a bad idea, a perpetual fund. That's something that I support, a capital maintenance and trust fund, where we dedicate a certain portion of our city's budget to a trust fund, just for the purpose of maintaining and upkeeping the current buildings that we have, Mr. President. So, Ms. Martin, I think that that was a very good point that you made, because there are going to be competing interests. the more time that goes on if, in fact, we don't have a capital maintenance plan to keep the buildings and the existing assets that we have up to par to be livable, to be workable, to be usable. So thank you very much for taking the time to come up here and provide us with that thoughtful analysis.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I signed on to this resolution because I want to know what the process is. There are multiple processes. This council can do it. There can be a citizen-driven petition as well. I think it's important for the city clerk to come out and provide us with the perimeters, which venue we can recommend people take, which direction people may want to go or may not want to go. If there aren't enough votes for it here in the council, at least people know what direction to go, Mr. President. So I see no problem bringing the resolution forward. There were citizens that came here and then asked this council to make a decision. At that point in time, I wasn't ready to support that. At this point in time, I am. I've done a little bit of homework. I've done a little bit of research on the matter, Mr. President. So I don't think that it's that outlandish. I don't think it's crazy. I don't think it's insane to bring this conversation topic forward. I don't think it's insane, crazy, or outlandish to ask for the question, to be answered by a clerk, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: And I, too, think that, you know, figuring out what the process is and figuring out what direction we need to go in if we feel as though there are changes necessary is important. It's important for us to know. It's important for the people to know. I'm on board. And more importantly, I think, with the change in administration, there is a certain sense of insecurity or a sense of maybe uncertainty and instability right now. And I think that if we're going to make the change, now's the time to do it. If things are changing, let's really take a long hard look at what's going on.
[Adam Knight]: I misspoke. I misspoke. Instability versus insecurity was the term that I meant to use, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: Well, you don't think that there's a sense of instability here in the community of Medford right now with the 28-year mayor that's resigning and going, not resigning, I'm sorry, retiring. There are two good candidates that are going to be in the race over here and hopefully maybe the best woman will win, a man will win.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, most are to withdraw.
[Adam Knight]: I thought this was a good thing, Mr. President. I thought this was a good thing. I thought this was something that, you know what I mean?
[Adam Knight]: We can work together. I think that the future is what we should be focused on as opposed to the past.
[Adam Knight]: Is there a motion, Councilor Knight? If I could ask the folks involved with this Chatter Review Commission that's been put together when the next meeting is.
[Adam Knight]: No, I'm talking about Mr. D'Antonio, actually, and to the committee that he was speaking about.
[Adam Knight]: I just didn't know if you were meeting again in the near future.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. D'Antoni, we've put some effort in and done some work on this and, um, you know, having dealt with you, I know that it's going to be good work and it's going to be thorough. Um, would you be willing to share that information with the council once we get our response back from the solicitor as to what your notes reflected minute, minute, meeting minutes and stuff like that from the ad hoc committee?
[Adam Knight]: If you could share that with us, that might be helpful.
[Adam Knight]: I don't think anybody behind this rail is questioning your motives, sir.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor, do you happen to have a site on that? For which one? The document you just read off of. Is there a website or some certain?
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, I asked her when we adjourned, we adjourned in the memory of, uh, deceased brothers and sisters from the Medford police department, Robert B Corrado, Kenneth J Hickey, Adrian L. Jean, Peter W. McGaffigan Jr., Christopher Risano, Thomas J. Walsh, and Sheila Richard.
[Adam Knight]: Friday the 29th at 9 a.m. Immaculate Conception Church, Malden.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Thank you, councillor Penta. And councillor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And thank you to the folks from Eversource for being here this evening. I think this is a great opportunity for us to get some questions answered. But more importantly, this is the beginning of a long relationship from the way things look. So, you know, thank you very much for taking the time to be here for us this evening. It looks like we had an open house in May of 2015. Now there's going to be a filing in the second quarter of 2015. a public hearing. When do you anticipate that public hearing would occur? I know that you guys aren't the ones that control it or that are going to hold it, but I know that you also have experience in this.
[Adam Knight]: This fall.
[Adam Knight]: So in terms of a timeline, we're looking at a filing in the second quarter of 2015. In the fall of 2016, there'll be a public hearing. And then we won't see construction start until the fall of 2017? That's right.
[Adam Knight]: The first open house in the fall.
[Adam Knight]: Public hearing. You guys do the public house, right? Right.
[Adam Knight]: Three to four months after the petition is filed. Right.
[Adam Knight]: So that's my concern is that we have a public hearing on the issue and then six, 12, 18 months pass and then construction starts and the residents forget about the public hearing that we had and what was discussed.
[Adam Knight]: This public hearing, when it's conducted, is this a public hearing that's exclusively for Medford or is this a regional public hearing for the entire pipeline project?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd like the committee to report reflect the council requests that the public hearing be held in the city of Medford.
[Adam Knight]: And again, gentlemen, thank you very much for your time. And I appreciate you coming down here. Like I said, I think it's important that we start this project off on the wrong foot. Councilor Caraviello alluded to the fact that I reside right there in the neighborhood where the pipeline is going through. And if you repair the streets in better condition that they're in now, we still might need some work. The way that things are right now. So I can certainly appreciate you guys taking the time down here, and I thank you for that. I think this is going to be the first of many discussions that we have. So with that being said, Mr. President, I rest.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Thank you very much for your work. I'm very happy today. I feel like this is very rewarding. This council came together and we all agreed on an issue. We worked together on it. We petitioned the mayor for The mayor was in agreement that there is a problem in the city. The mayor is in agreement that this problem is a crisis and the mayor acted promptly. So with that being said, Mr. President, I wholeheartedly support the paper. I feel as though this is a step in the right direction and it just shows what this council can do. We work together and we work with the administration to move towards positive results, Mr. President. So with that being said, you know, I support this wholeheartedly and I too move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: I do have concerns about the matter being held up because of the summer schedule of the council. So I'd ask that if in fact when the paper becomes ready and available for us to vote on, then we hold a special meeting immediately to take care of it. If in fact it falls during the summer schedule.
[Adam Knight]: While we're into suspension, can we take paper 15485?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, you never shut my microphone off from when you took the paper out of order. I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Chief, what's the step one patrolman receive at this point in time?
[Adam Knight]: And presently, the individuals that have been selected as officers but have not completed the academy would be compensated at a rate based upon the $56,000?
[Adam Knight]: But they can't be seen as a police officer until? Until they graduate the academy successfully. So at this point in time, there are no student officers and an individual that was going through the academy wouldn't be compensated at all? Or would be compensated at a rate of $56,000? at the $56,000.
[Adam Knight]: Right. Mr. President, I move for approval. And I'd ask that the three readings be waived. Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Chief, could you elaborate a little bit on the training programs that a traffic supervisor has to go through before they're appointed?
[Adam Knight]: So once they get appointed, is there any training in terms of best practices? What's the safest?
[Adam Knight]: And lastly, Chief, have there been any incidents of any accidents, any type of traffic supervisor being hit by a vehicle, or a child being hit by a vehicle, or a traffic supervisor?
[Adam Knight]: So the actual line of reporting is straight up the ladder, that's Sergeant Carroll? Right, that's correct.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Chief, now that the snow is gone, all 10 feet of it, We had a program that Republic was willing to participate in, and I believe they called it their ambassador program. And I think it might make sense to get them out there now that people are actually walking around in the streets as opposed to running to their car, running from their car, and trying to get into the stores as fast as they can to keep out of the elements. So I'm wondering, Chief, if that's something that the Traffic Commission would be interested in maybe requesting.
[Adam Knight]: Chief, when you said from Ashland Street down to, you know, the foot of the square, you'd never find a parking spot over there. And before, before the meeting, right. You know, the only time that I think I could ever find a spot was when, when Maddie and Sonya was working the shift before he retired down there, because he was very vigilant, um, in his efforts to ensure that the parking regulations were, were, were abided by. And, um, we're having a lot of problems with, uh, the current officers working for a public in their unfamiliarity with what spots should be enforced in what fashion. Has there been any consideration given to maybe giving some retired officers who work in the traffic division the opportunity to maybe come forward and assist in showing these people the ropes and how it's done, maybe for a per diem or something like that, to get the program off the ground and running smoothly? Because I think we can all agree that there have been a lot of bumps in the road. And maybe this is just one of the ways that we can solve some of the problems that we're facing.
[Adam Knight]: It's been very helpful from the constituents.
[Adam Knight]: Another thing, Chief, if Republic isn't so interested in doing their ambassador program, and when school gets out, we are going to have some of our traffic division officers helping out, maybe it might make sense to allow our traffic supervisors to maybe participate in the ambassadorship program as well. They're already city employees. They're already working for the traffic division. So maybe it makes sense to train them on the machines as well and give them an opportunity to maybe help out and make this work a little smoother.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. And thank you, Councilor Caraviello for bringing this matter forward. Although I understand your concerns, I do feel as though we need to really respect the autonomy of the Zoning Board of Appeals. and their process should be undue from political interference and influence. With that being said, I think that Councilor Caraviello raises some great concerns about the situation that's going on there. However, I think the proper course of action for this council to take would be to take a look at the current zoning ordinances and then maybe make recommendations to revise the current existing zoning ordinances that governs their operations as opposed to making recommendations to them that fall well within their scope and purview, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: By address, Madam President. If we're going to get a listing from the last 10 years, we want to get them by address so we can see what pockets of the city these changes are happening in as well. I have no problem requesting the information, My concern is the fact that we're the legislative body that actually makes the zoning ordinances. We have a zoning ordinance that gives the Zoning Board of Appeals this power. Now we're telling them, don't exercise that power because we said so? We gave them the power. If we want to take it away, we can take it away, but there's a process to do that. I'm not saying that Councilor Caraviello is doing something wrong. He's doing his job. He's going out there and he's exercising his due diligence, which he does every day. And I understand exactly where he's coming from. And I certainly have concerns for the fabric of the neighborhood, too. I certainly have concerns for the fabric of the neighborhood. But I think that there's a proper process that's in place. And I don't want to run rush out over the process. And I certainly don't want to make any steps that are going to put us in a position to be politicizing an issue that shouldn't be politicizing, or politicizing a process that shouldn't be politicized. So that's where I'm coming from, Madam President. Insofar as the Tufts University situation, The Tufts University is a resident of the city of Bedford. We don't have any oversight control or dictation over their operations. We can make recommendations and we can make suggestions, but the zoning board of appeals and the rules and regulations that they fall under and that they are there to enforce are created by us. We make them up. We're the ones that make them. We make the zoning ordinances. We're the body that creates the zoning ordinances. And now we're going to tell them which ordinances to pay attention to and which ones not to? I have some concern about that. And I certainly do question whether or not it's undue political influence. With that being said, Madam President, it's no criticism of Councilor Caraviello or his efforts. I think that he's raised a good issue and it's a good issue to discuss. I think we as a body have a duty now to sit down and figure out what course of action we want to take in order to ensure that the fabric of the neighborhood is protected and that the process remains a process that's free from undue influence.
[Adam Knight]: I requested the addresses of the homes because I wanted to see if there was any type of trend or any type of cluster in a certain neighborhood or a certain area where these requests have been made and then later issued. So that was why I asked that the address should be there, so that we can see and we can track it. Yeah, five requests came in, we approved two of them, and that's it. We still don't know where these houses were. We still don't know where it happened. We still don't know if it happened in a blighted area. We don't know if it happened in an area that was suitable for it. I mean, one area that I think of is right off of High Street, across from Essex Street, where they knocked down a dentist office and they built seven homes. You know what I mean? Seven $600,000 homes, all on the tax rolls. So it's just something to look at. That's all I'm saying, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, in proposing in Putting this question together, I think it would be very important that we clarify that it would be asking the Zoning Board of Appeals how many of those conversions occurred by way of approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals. So matters that were before them.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much and thank you for indulging me once again on this topic. I've gotten a number of complaints, Madam President, from the residents of the area, many of whom are my neighbours, relative to the closure of one lane of traffic going down Winthrop Street and one lane of traffic going up Winthrop Street so that these contractors can store their materials during the day and after the work hours. Now, I can understand blocking off lanes of traffic to ensure their safety and to allow them to have access to their equipment and materials when construction's going on, but at this point in time, with this mini big dig that's been going on for the past two years now, The area is just looking blighted and terrible. And this is a gateway to the city. As someone gets off the highway and they go down Route 16 and take a right onto Route 38 to go up to Winthrop Circle, they're going to drive through an area that's just blighted at this point in time. There's a generator, there's cones, there's curbs, there's piles of dirt, there's old rusted pipes, there's new pipes, there's plastic. There's a port-a-party on the sidewalk at the corner of Winthrop Street and High Street. I mean, it can't get any worse at this point in time, Madam President. I think that we have an opportunity to request that these materials be removed at the end of the day. And I don't think that that's too much to ask. There's ample space for the contractor at their yard. They're keeping two bulldozers out there. They can move the bulldozers. They can put the bulldozers in a parking lot. They can put the bulldozers at the condom shelf. They can put it in a number of places, Madam President, but one of the places that it shouldn't be is sitting in a lane of traffic, blocking a lane of traffic and creating congestion and creating traffic hardships, especially with the current condition of the roadway that it's in. So Madam President, I'd ask for my council colleagues to support this resolution and to make the request that at the end of each workday, the area is cleaned out of all construction materials, debris and equipment. in the interest of public safety and in the interest of, you know, egress into the city. I think it's just a beautification issue at this point in time, Madam President. The residents have been very patient in dealing with this issue. Earlier in the meeting tonight, we had a very long discussion about what these residents are going to have to face again in 18 short months. So I think at this point in time, they need a little bit of relief, Madam President, and I think that this will do it for a short period of time. But, you know, I'd also like to see when this construction project is going to end two months ago. When we made the request of the DPW, they said that there were 18 more connections that needed to take place. And that led me to believe that how many of them had been done, led me to question how many have actually been done if they need 18 more to do. So this project's been taking an extremely long time. I can only imagine what the budget looks like. I think this was something that was supposed to be wrapped up in short order, and it hasn't been, Madam President. So in the interest of mitigation, I'd make this request, and I'd ask my colleagues to support it.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, again, thank you very much. We're going to have budget hearings coming up in June. to go over the state budget. I think for the past year, this council has been very active and involved in lobbying for issues and matters that are important to it. And I think that now is the right time for us to take a look at these materials, go through them all, and to develop our position as we go forward to set the budget for the next fiscal year, Madam President. I think that it's very important for us to maybe take a look at what we've requested, prioritize them, and bring those issues to the administration. and make sure that they're included in the budget process, Madam President. So I'd ask that my colleagues support this resolution in order for us to prepare for council budget hearings.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to withdraw at this point in time, Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. I was contacted by a number of avid fishermen who during previous construction projects had loaded up their boat with their bait and their friends and their barbecue and their food. And they got on the river at 4 o'clock in the morning and tried to make their way out to the harbor to go fishing for the day. And they were met with a roadblock, no access, no access to the harbor. And these same individuals purchase a slip every year to house their boat in the upper lake. And it's a significant expense for them. So in discussions that we've had, one of the issues that was raised was whether or not there were going to be restrictions for these individuals to take their boats downriver to get into the harbor. I've had some discussions with our Office of Community Development and the project manager, and there will be some restrictions. The project manager has changed on the project at this point in time. So I'm requesting that the Harbormaster and the new project manager sit down and develop a schedule. And the schedule can be posted and shared with boat owners, and an information session be conducted so that people that have concerns about this can sit down and can actually speak to the individuals that are making the decisions in the Harbormaster to figure out what best course of action will be.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, I withdraw.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Early last month I had my office hours and an individual came before me. some concern relative to vacancies in certain boards and commissions and the lack of meeting in a frequency that would be established by statute ordinance or by way of law. So with that being said, Madam President, I took a look at the listing of boards and commissions and noticed that there are a variety of vacancies that exist in those boards and commissions. And I think with the change of administration coming, it would be very important for us to see what positions are vacant at this point in time. what's filled, what's not filled, and then take a look at why they're not filled and maybe make a recommendation to fill certain positions, Madam President. I have no problem with that. Madam President, I'd like to amend the paper to request what the salaries are.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Council Paper 14-083 was filed some months ago by Councilor Caraviello, and Councilor Caraviello was working very hard with the MBTA to get some beautification initiatives completed down at the West Medford Commuter Rail Station, Mr. President. However, the winter came and the winter left. And here we are with the same exact West Medford commuter rail station that we had beforehand. So, I filed this resolution to start the conversation up again, to prompt the MBTA to come down there and do a spring cleanup. I'd also like to amend the resolution, Mr. President, because upon filing the resolution, I did get a couple of phone calls from area residents and business owners who have a concern about the, for lack of a better term, port-a-party that is up against the fence behind the Seafood Depot, or the Depot Station now, I guess it would be called. And I'd like to see if maybe we can get that encapsulated or encased. It's my understanding after discussions with Karen Rose that the governmental entity is exempt from the local board of health's oversight. So hopefully this council will support my resolution and we can reach out to the MBTA and ask them to do a little bit of spring cleaning down there, Mr. President, and also do a beautification initiative to take care of that port-a-potty. According to Karen Rose, there was an attorney general's opinion that was issued some years ago that would exempt the state from local Board of Health oversight on their property. And that was based on a conversation I had with her today. And that's what she told me. And that came right out of the host's mouth. Sure.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah. So yeah, it's an attorney general's opinion. Uh, sometime ago in the world order.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. In recent discussions with the Board of Health, I have learned that they have filed some regulations that have strengthened the controls surrounding electronic cigarettes. However, they're not necessarily where they need to be. So I'm filing this resolution and I'm asking that the Board of Health take a look at the current ordinance and the current regulations that are in place and do their best to strengthen them. In our packets this evening, Mr. President, we have correspondence from the Coalition for Responsible Retailing. And the Coalition for Responsible Retailing does come out with a certain number of recommendations relative to the retailing of electronic cigarettes and tobacco products, Mr. President. I'd ask that this document be included as part of the research when the Board of Health does sit down to take a look at this.
[Adam Knight]: Be it resolved that the other- Mr. President, I withdraw the resolution at this time.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and thank you, Councilor Marks. I, too, would like to add a couple of recommendations, and I will be short. The first recommendation, Mr. President, that I think is important would be that Eversource provide access to a website for the goings-on of the construction here in Medford, so that a resident can go right on their computer and type up what's going on and be updated real-time, whether it's a Twitter feed or a daily update, something like that. to allow residents the prompt and quick sharing of information. The other item, Mr. President, that I'd like to see happen and that I'd like to recommend would be when, in fact, the road is closed up, that the repairs are done curb to curb, Mr. President, which would lead me into Councilor Camuso's amendment and the resolution that he refers to in the paper in response that we got back that Councilor Camuso refers to was a request that I made to determine what the cost would be to resurface all our emergency arteries here in the city. And in looking at this Eversource project, I don't think that it's going to go across every single major artery in our city. So with that being said, I don't see any reason why we would need to wait to begin repairing our infrastructure and resurfacing our roadways here in the city of Medford. I think right now, with all the things that are going on in the city, the number one most important priority in the city should be repairing our roadways. It's really a quality of life issue. It's a safety issue. Mr. President, and quite frankly, it's very difficult for people to be happy with the services that are being provided when they come over from Malden on a clean street and a smooth street, and they don't even have to see the sign that says, welcome to Medford. They hit the road and they know. So with that being said, Mr. President, right now I think the number one priority in this city should be taking a look at resurfacing the roadways because it's causing inordinate damage to people's cars. It's making traversing the roadways a public safety issue, Mr. President. So thank you, Councilor Marks. Thank you, Councilor Camuso. for bringing these issues forward. I support this measure in 110%, Mr. President, and I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to reflect that mass resistance has been designated as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center in March of 2008, Mr. President. It's formerly the Article 8 Alliance, which led the charge on Beacon Hill to oppose same-sex marriage here in Massachusetts. Those are politics that I can't agree with, Mr. President. So for that reason and that reason only, I'll be asking to be recorded in opposition.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. I believe the Southern Poverty Law Center in March of 2008, which I did state, made this designation, Mr. President. I'm not here to debate the merits of the resolution. That's why I'm not voting for it. That's why I recused myself when the debate was going on. I'm in opposition to the bill. I'd like to address that. Sir, you'll be recognized at the appropriate time. Mr. President, I think that the debate has ceased at this point in time. We're taking a vote on the matter. What are we talking about? We can talk about it, Adam. Just let people talk. That's why I left. I didn't want to interrupt the debate. I wanted to give you guys an opportunity to go through the reasons why I think this is good legislation. I just want the record to reflect. why I'm in opposition, that's all. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, we also run into the situation right now where we have an elected body, the Medford School Committee, that sets school policy. And I wonder if this very issue of being able to opt in and opt out of a survey could be handled by way of policy at the local level as opposed to state legislation and the state legislature taking action. I think if, in fact, our elected school committee feels as though there's a need to stop this, our elected school committee would implement a policy thereof.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think that we have recently voted to meet with the Medford School Committee to discuss a couple of topics. and maybe this is a topic that we can put on that agenda.
[Adam Knight]: The reasoning behind the southern poverty law center's designation of mass resistance as a hate group is because of the position they took. I believe it would say that suicide prevention programs aimed at gay youth were put together by homosexual activists to normalize homosexuality. That's the quote from the website, Mr. President. I know that there's a roll call vote. I'm going to be voting in opposition to this resolution, and I'd ask that the clerk record me for the reasons stated previously.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President can't say much more than that. Took the words right out of my mouth by arrest.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I do believe that the Board of Cemetery Trustees will be meeting on June 2nd at 7 p.m. to discuss this very issue. Now, I certainly have no problem meeting with the trustees of the cemetery. However, I think that if we are, in fact, going to have a productive session, that this meeting should wait until after the June 2nd meeting that the cemetery trustees have with the Director of Purchasing slash Budget Director to go over the RFPs and the RFQs. So with that being said, Mr. President, I have no problem having a meeting with the Board of Trustees, but I want this meeting to take place after they have their regular deliberations on the June 2nd meeting.
[Adam Knight]: Last week's motion was that we all voted on the past 7-0, I believe, was that the mayor not enter into a new contract until, not enter a contract, a tenure contract with Comcast, until a new mayor is selected and sworn in. And now this resolution is?
[Adam Knight]: Can you just explain to me how the A portion is to provide the information to the mayor's office, correct? The B portion of the paper, can you read that back just one more time, please?
[Adam Knight]: I have no problem with providing the information, Mr. President, or giving the residents a problem to provide the information. However, I haven't moved off my position that I don't think that we should enter into a new 10 year contract as we voted on last week. So with that being said, you know, maybe we let the resolution stand from last week because they're contradictory at this point in time. They are.
[Adam Knight]: Well, one of them says for the mayor not to enter into a contract, and the other one says to let the mayor enter into a contract, so.
[Adam Knight]: I'll vote for it. No, I'm saying that's fine. Let it be taken into consideration. But has this council moved off its position that they don't want the mayor?
[Adam Knight]: I just want to be clear as to what we're voting for. Well, I'm just reaffirming my position. I don't want to vote for four separate resolutions that are all contradictory to each other direct contradiction to the rules that we have where we disposed of an item that's substantially similar.
[Adam Knight]: based on the issue of redundancy. Thank you, so noted.
[Adam Knight]: Is the text of the resolution the text that the gentleman proposes be included in the letter?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I certainly can understand the councilor's concern, and I can understand where he's coming from. And I think that this is also going to be a very costly, costly endeavor. However, I'm reading the language of the letter, and I think that we might be better served coming across as a unanimous body that sits down and drafts a letter to the EPA as a group for something that we can all wholeheartedly support. Based on the language that's in the underlying resolution, I can't support it, however, I'm more than willing to sit down maybe in committee or in committee of the whole and we can come down and put a draft together, Mr. President, or maybe even go in a step further where there are five stormwater coalitions that have gotten together and that have actually done some work on this together. Maybe we have one of them come in and share their expertise with us and help us draft a letter that's going to really hit the points, the high points that we need to hit. Number one, and number two, also provide us with a little bit more information as to how a regional stormwater coalition would work and whether or not that's in the best interest of the city of Medford.
[Adam Knight]: I find them to be somewhat inflammatory. And if I got a letter like that sitting on my desk when I was at work, I'd look at the thing and I'd scratch my head and I'd say, who are these nuts that are sending it to me? You know, you look at the language in there, and it's very divisive. It seems very argumentative. It seems very, um.
[Adam Knight]: The aggressive schedule the EPA poses It is aggressive. In absence of EPA leadership.
[Adam Knight]: It's translated into another harmful and unfunded mandate on cities, towns, and taxpayers. It is. I just feel as though the tone's argumentative.
[Adam Knight]: No, Mr. President. Please record me in opposition. And the reason being I oppose the language, but I agree in principle.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Ms. Martin, I did want to touch on something that you opened up with, and that was you know, the theory or the situation where if someone gets caught spray painting on the street that they'd be responsible to come back into the community and do some painting or something like that. And I wanted to make you aware of a bill that's pending before the Massachusetts State Legislature that was filed by our representative, Sean Garvely. And this bill would authorize what's called restorative justice. And the principles behind restorative justice are rather interesting. And the way that it works is, you know, the people that are most affected by the crime, the graffiti, would actually benefit collectively from the correction of action that's taken by the perpetrator after they're caught. So I don't want to get into too much detail about restorative justice and the pros and cons and the theories behind it, but I did want to make you aware of the fact that there is some legislation pending at the House of Representatives. Representative Gobley is the lead sponsor on the bill in the House, and I believe Senator Eldridge is the lead sponsor in the Senate. And I suggest if you're really interested in doing a little bit more research, you give Representative Gobley a call, and I'm sure he'd be happy to talk with you about it.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And Councilor Marks, thank you for your words, because I, too, remember that imaginary line down the middle of Medford High School that, you know, if you opened the doors and stepped into the vocational school for Medford High, you'd think that alarms were going to go off and someone was going to come and put you in detention. I'm a firm believer in integration and inclusion, Mr. President, and I think that it adds a lot to education. I think that it adds a lot to the experience, number one. Number two, I think that it's important when we look at what direction our vocational school is going in, which really, you know, should be established by the policy makers at the school department, we need to really put a focus on the fact of what our state's driver is, what our state's economy is, and that's really the life sciences and stem-based occupations, Mr. President. providing a vocational education to our students and this vocational education isn't changing with the times, isn't changing with the actual economy that's out there for them to be employed in in the future, then we're not doing our job. So, you know, again, I certainly am not scared to see the walls, those imaginary walls at Medford High School come down so that the children in the vocational school and the children in the high school can integrate and be included with each other, develop good friendships, develop a sense of community, a sense of rapport, Mr. President, and then become strong contributing members to our society here in Medford. With that being said, Mr. President, I certainly would like to see these papers separated. On April 29th, we took a vote, and that vote stands. It hasn't been 90 days since that vote's gone through. Based on our rules, it's a paper that should be ruled out of order. However, I'll leave it up to you to make a judgment on the paper. However, I'd support Councilor Marksley's resolution wholeheartedly to congratulate the administrators, faculty, staff, members of the school committee, and so on.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. First of all, I'd like to take the opportunity to thank the Arts Council for such good work. If they weren't so committed to this endeavor, if they weren't so quickly able to efficiently implement some successful programming, then this resolution would never be before us. So thank you very much for doing the best that you can with the little that you've been provided. I think it's very important that when we look at the future of Medford and we look at the vision for Medford that we understand that the arts has to have a major role. and the future development of the city of Medford, Mr. President. This money is being well spent. An increase of $15,000 is a start. It allows us to build on the strong foundation that this organization has provided us. And I certainly need to take the time to commend Councilor Marks, Councilor Pater, and Councilor Lungo for putting this resolution forward. I too stand in full support of this resolution. I think it only makes sense for us to increase the funding in the arts community based upon the measurable successes that are in place right now. And I think that's very important that we look at it this way. There are measurable successes. We're not just giving money to an organization to spend. We're giving money to an organization to spend because they've shown us how well they're able to utilize this funding. So, Mr. President, with all due respect to the body, I'd move for approval on this matter ASAP. I'd like to have the residents and the citizenry have an opportunity to speak on it. But in terms of supporting this resolution, I'm wholeheartedly behind it.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and thank you, Councilor Penta, for bringing this resolution forward. I had the pleasure of growing up on the same street as Mr. Massaschusetts' daughter, and I became very close friends with his granddaughters, Colleen and Danielle. And over the years, I remember him coming to visit on the weekends and seeing his car, his long, black car, his Grand Marquis parked out in front of the house with the veterans' plates, and my father explaining to me what those veterans' plates mean. And I can tell you this right now, the country of France has bestowed an award on a gentleman who is certainly deserving. We affectionately called him Pa growing up in the neighborhood, Mr. President. And I can't thank Councilor Penter enough for putting this resolution on. I'm trying to withhold my smile on my face here this evening, because he's certainly a great guy. He sacrificed a tremendous amount for his country, Mr. President. Anytime I've ever met the man, or dealt with the man, or saw the man, he always had a smile on his face, and he was always there. A true family man, Mr. President. So with that being said, I support this resolution wholeheartedly, and thank Councilor Penta for putting it forward. Thank you, Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Ricky, congratulations. I know you're in the camera closet watching. I have a special request for Mr. Comia, Mr. President, and that's, that when he appears before the council to accept his citation, that he wear his star of life around his neck here so he can show it off a little bit to the residents of Medford as well as the members of the council.
[Adam Knight]: Actually, Councilor President, I wanted to share that same information that you shared with Councilor Penter. I spoke with Mr. Steadman's office early last week and I too was extended an invitation to attend the meeting. However, I too am unable to go tomorrow at 10 o'clock in the morning. With that being said, I have had some conversations with a gentleman named Paul King, who also is heading up the project and working on the project to address some concerns that I have, Mr. President. But with that being said, that's just a side note. I just wanted to be sure Councilor Penta was aware that the meeting was going on tomorrow.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I believe we did pass a resolution on 324.15, as I look at my resolution tracking sheet, paper number 15306, asking the mayor do not sign a 10-year Comcast contract. I'm not sure how this paper would differ from the paper that was previously passed. Is it so that he doesn't sign any contract? He doesn't negotiate into any contract at all? You know, I question the body's ability to take away powers of the executive. There's a separation of powers. The executive has certain powers in the community. We can make recommendations all we want. I think we've done that. I think we've expressed to him that we want a member on the negotiating committee, a member of this committee on the negotiating committee. I think that was part of the resolution, paper 15306. So I guess my question is, how does this paper differ from the paper that was passed previously?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I don't see how this paper is really much different than the last one that was filed then, and I question the council's ability to actually take a power away from the executive branch. You know, I certainly think that a 10-year contract is bad. I certainly think that in the future as we start negotiating these municipal contracts, that a member of the council should be included in the participation in the discussions, Mr. President, for the simple fact that we can avoid situations like this, where we have a conflicted council, a council that's in blatant disagreement with the length of the term of the contract, and an administration that doesn't feel as though that's quite the case. They think a tenure contract might be in the best interest of the community. With that being said, Mr. President, you know, do we have the authority to tell the man that he doesn't have the right to perform the essential functions of his job before he leaves? I don't think we do.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Again, Mr. President, if it were up to me, they'd fill the DPW director's job yesterday so we can start getting these broken roads repaired. We can start looking at doing a major overhaul of our streets. We can start looking at whether or not a citywide resurfacing plan is necessary and required, which we all know it is. We can start digging up our emergency arteries, and we can start actually moving Medford forward, Mr. President. So with that being said, You know, I just question whether or not, you know, this resolution's going to meet its purpose. I question whether or not we actually have the right to take the powers away from the executive. You know, we can ask that the mayor not do it, but to demand it or to require it, I don't think is within our scope.
[Adam Knight]: In looking through my records here, Mr. President, I see paper 15-306, the paper that I referred to earlier. As we deliberated, I believe this was the meeting where we may have taking a recess? No, that was in the kiosk, actually. We didn't take a recess. But we did craft some language here. And in looking at the language that we have here, it says, be it resolved that the mayor not enter into a contract or any other agreement until the public hearing is conducted. That was the language. That was the language that we approved. The public hearing will be conducted on Thursday. I personally have no problem supporting a resolution requesting that the mayor not enter into any contract that's 10 years in length after the hearing is conducted. You know, and I still do have, I think Councilor Caraviello raises a good concern as to whether or not that 10-year still remains in effect. So, you know, with that being said, Mr. President, after going through the meeting minutes here, um, you know, it clearly said that the council voted to, um, you know, recommend that the mayor not sign any contract until the hearing is conducted. The hearing going to be conducted this week. Thereafter, we're going to have to be in a situation where he's either going to sign a contract or he's not. And the council is not going to be on record advising him one way or the other. Um, with that being said, you know, councilor Penter, I stand corrected. I took a look at the minutes in the old resolution that was in there. And in my review of it, it clearly says that until a public hearing is conducted, the council is recommended that the man on enter into the contract. So with that being said, the difference would be the hearing is going to take place. When the hearing takes place, the council hasn't recommended any action thereafter. So with that being said, Mr. President, um, I certainly wouldn't have a problem supporting this resolution as, um, recited by the clerk.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. My father, having served as an educator in the city of Somerville for nearly 40 years, and the athletic director at Somerville High School for about 20 of those years, developed a strong relationship with Jack Regan when he was here at the city of Medford. Through that relationship, I too became friendly with Jack, and I really enjoyed the time that I got to spend with him. He was a mentor, he was a strict disciplinarian, and he was also an all-around great guy, Mr. President. And he will be sadly missed. After his retirement, I had the opportunity and pleasure to see him socially, as opposed to in the military setting of Medford High School. And in these dealings with him, I found him to be a well-rounded, down-to-earth gentleman. who will be sadly missed. He raised a beautiful family. He has a beautiful, he leaves a beautiful bride, Mr. President. He will be missed. So I'd like to express my deepest consolences to the family.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much and thank you, councilman Lago, for bringing this resolution forward. It's very interesting. The district attorney's report on opiate abuse came out and some of the statistics in there were staggering. The average age of those afflicted by opiate and heroin abuse is 45 years of age. The number one community in Middlesex County that's suffering the most per capita is the community of Redding, a very wealthy and affluent community, Mr. President. And I think that it's also important to point out that nearly 100 percent of the individuals in Middlesex County that were categorized in this study were Caucasian. It's very interesting to see the demographic breakdown, and I think that that's very important data, Mr. President. The council has heard from the Board of Health on a number of issues. We've heard from the Board of Health on a resolution that they're going to be putting forward before this. I mean, I'm sorry, an ordinance that they're going to be putting forward to this council for review and approval that would be related to substance abuse, Mr. President. And as an amendment to this resolution, which I wholeheartedly support, I would ask that we get a request, an update from the Board of Health on that ordinance as to what direction we're going in with that ordinance, where we are in the process, and why it hasn't been presented to this council for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd just like to thank Councilor Marks for bringing this resolution forward. I think it's very important that we recognize the successes of individuals and of groups in our community. I think that, you know, this resolution is a perfect segue into what we opened our meeting with this evening. It shows that the work of the Arts Council is paying off at the highest levels. We have our middle school string ensemble here getting high accolades, Mr. President. So that just shows what a commitment of the arts can do for the kids in our community, as well as the business and economic drivers. So with that being said, I too would wholeheartedly second the approval of this motion.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Tonight we have some very important guests joining us this evening. 2014, 2015 greater Boston league champion Medford high school boys hockey team. Um, at this point in time, I'd like to ask coach Bates to come up here and join me to help pass out the citations. The council commendation clearly reads the Medford city council takes pleasure in awarding this council commendation to Andrew Cronin. Number four, Medford High School varsity hockey in recognition of winning the Greater Boston League title and a playoff berth in the MIA Division I North Hockey Tournament. Andrew, come on up.
[Adam Knight]: Jonathan Haley, number 30. Number 29, Matt Santos. Number 19, Billy Crowley.
[Adam Knight]: Number 16, Liam Cullinane. Number 5, Gino DeSimone. Matt McCarthy, number three. Number 17, David Welch. Number 20, Harry Welch. Number nine, Jack Lonergan. Number 14, Brian Ciaroloni. Number seven, Gino Romaschi. Number 21, Brendan Sheehy. Number 15, Max Perazzo. Number 10, Joe Vano. Michael Cecchini, number 11. Number six, Captain Justin McDonald. Number 18, Captain Ryan O'Keefe. And lastly, we have number eight, Captain Brendan Hussey, who was also the greater Boston League MVP. I'd like to take a moment to allow Coach Bates to say a few words here. Coach Bates is a MHS Hall of Famer. a four-year starter at Boston University in the hockey program, had a very successful career in the NHL as a member of the Bruins and the Islanders, and most recently was honored by the New York Islanders just a few weeks ago as a member of the Raw Decade team. So, Coach, please.
[Adam Knight]: Again, Mr. President, thank you very much. Adrian, congratulations. Andrew, congratulations. It's my pleasure to present this award to you. First of all, I'd like to thank you both for being such a great representation of the city of Medford. It's quite an honor to have the Boston Bruins recognize you and all the hockey players in the state of Massachusetts to bestow this award upon. So congratulations. The city council commendation reads that the Medford city council takes pleasure in awarding this council commendation to Andrew Cronin and Adrian Perrazzo in recognition of representing the greater Boston hockey league as the recipient of the 13th annual MIAA Boston Bruins ice hockey sportsmanship award. for best exemplifying the highest standards of fair play and sportsmanship in high school hockey. So congratulations. Is there anything you guys would like to say? Avery, you've been up here before. This is all bad for you, Adam. Come on.
[Adam Knight]: Congratulations to you both.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And Ms. DiLorenzo, I want to thank you for your time and effort and energy, as well as Ms. Powers for putting this plan together. I think it's rather comprehensive. In looking through the public service agencies, I noticed that there are about eight agencies that will service close to 1,500 families here in Medford. And the other seven agencies of the clientele that they service is 100% Medford residents. So I really think that the plan was given some consideration and some concise review. I think we're going to get a lot of bang for our buck in looking at the proposal and the requests for applications versus what was funded. I see that a number of the agencies that didn't service as many Medford residents have actually been not so lucky this time around to receive funding. However, those agencies that do provide the majority of funding to residents that are from our city is included in here. So, you know, I just want to commend you on your work. I know this isn't an easy job. you know, we're on year 41 of an action plan. And the big question I have is, you know, are we meeting our goals and objectives that are established from the action plan? Um, we want to develop strong partnerships to develop, to develop low and moderate income housing. Um, what percentage of our housing stock at this point in time would be low and moderate?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Thanks for your work.
[Adam Knight]: Can you tell me how many residents live down Markland Court?
[Adam Knight]: And none of the units in that facility are air-conditioned, are they?
[Adam Knight]: This is the area where they'll congregate.
[Adam Knight]: But we vote there, I think. But there's been some improvements there in recent years where they've done some upgrades to make the place a little bit more hospitable and livable for the residents. Yeah.
[Adam Knight]: We were told that they do not. I do, but I'm satisfied with my questions being answered from Mr. Lorenzo. Thank you, Councilor Knight. Does Councilor Penta wish to be recognized?
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight? Yes, Mr. President. Mr. D'Antonio approached me before the meeting this evening, and he asked if the committee would indulge him so much as to allow him to make a brief informational presentation.
[Adam Knight]: If I may make a motion that the council adjourns this evening in recognition of Attorney Galeen's service. I mean, I'm Officer Galeen's service, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And thank you, Councilor Caraviello, for putting this resolution on the agenda this evening. I too thought that the facade looked beautiful refurbished, and I also like the color of the door. And I think that this, Mr. President, is a perfect example of how the Massachusetts film tax credit's working. for not only the residents of Medford and its local businesses, but also artisans in the community. You know, we brought artists to our community. They put up a new facade. They did a little bit of work. And now we have a proposal on the city council floor. So, you know, I think this is a very important illustration, Mr. President, that shows how the arts and government can invest together, and good things can happen. And I really think that this is a great success for Medford, seeing the film tax credit be put to work and actually seeing a movie being filmed here in Medford once again, Mr. President. With that being said, I wholeheartedly support the resolution, and I would absolutely, positively think that a public hearing would be in order for us to continue to get some feedback from the residents. Thank you very much, Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: While we're on to suspension, Councilor Knight. Can we take paper 15-337 off the table, please? Appointment of Mr. James Tarani, the Board of Trust Fund Commissioners. Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. I couldn't have said it better myself. The committee was properly, took a look at Mr. Tirani, had an opportunity to sit down and speak with him, ask the questions that they weren't able to ask when he was before the council the previous Tuesday. It's my understanding that he works Tuesday nights with clients and was unable to meet with us on a Tuesday. So he came the next available day, which was the week after. And it looks like everything's in order, Mr. President. I was very happy with his appointment. I think he's doing an excellent job. And with that being said, I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor Lungo. I too feel as though Ms. Burke is taking the steps that are appropriate to ensure that she is not posing a conflict of interest. If we take into consideration the election calendar, nomination papers don't even come out until May 28th. So until those papers come out, she might have announced for mayor, but until those papers come out, she can't even pull them. So I really don't see the big issue here, Mr. President. I can certainly understand where Councilor Pente is coming from, A lot of times the appearance of impropriety is in fact much worse than actual impropriety. However, in terms of the situation where the nomination paper's not even out, I have no problem with Ms. Muccini-Burke continuing in her position until the date that she decided to withdraw and resign. So with that being said, I thank the gentleman for bringing the resolution forward and for bringing the topic to the table. However, I too feel as though this is way outside the scope of what this council can do.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Um, you know, Snappy Patty's is a new restaurant. It's, it's, uh, one of the newer shops down in West Medford square. It's gotten some positive reviews and I think it's certainly a nice addition to our downtown and west Medford square. However, not at the expense of, you know, the rules and regulations that are put in place that make sure that this community is kept safe, that health standards are met, that certain engineering standards are met. And, you know, there's a process that must be adhered to, Madam President, and ignorance of that process takes no excuse to move forward. And Councilor Camuso was absolutely right. You know, I had a neighbor that wanted to put in one of those wood-burning stoves in their garage. And he said, I'm just going to do it. And I said, I don't think that's a good idea. You might want to talk to the building department. And they went to the building department, and they got all the appropriate permitting, and they got the appropriate measurements and the appropriate equipment and put it in. Well, it's inside their garage, and it goes out of the roof. Sure enough, the first day they turned it on, 7,000 people in the neighborhood thought there was a house on fire, and they called the police. And because they permitted it the appropriate way, everyone was aware of what was going on. And I think that that's the most important thing here, Madam President, is that there's a process in place. The process is in place to keep us safe, to keep the community safe, and to protect the quality of life of the residents and the people that want to use those businesses. So, you know, I think what we need to do is take a look at Councilor Camuso's resolution that he put forward, which would streamline the permitting process, because I think what this is is really it's just someone, a business owner, who's frustrated and wants the process to move faster than it really is. And because the permitting process is taking a bit of time, he's getting himself a little bit ahead of the gun. You know, I certainly want to portray a business-friendly attitude when people come before the council for common victuals licenses. But not at the expense of public safety and not at the expense of the established rules, regulations, and ordinances that are in place. Madam President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And I can certainly appreciate the concerns. However, I believe it's important to point out that our school committee holds their own budget hearings. Anybody who wants to go, can. They're open to the general public and we can ask those questions there. I'd move to sever the questions, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: That was interesting, Mr. President. However, you know, I think that the council have professed that there were certain members of the school committee that are gonna be running up the city council, and it sounds like it might be certain members of the city council that wanna be on the school committee. But ultimately, looking at the issue, you know, we approved a budget, We approved a budget, all right? And I have no problem asking questions, Mr. President, but I think that we have to ask them in the appropriate form. And if we're concerned about what's going on at the school department, then let's go on their turf and let's ask them what's going on over there. I don't have a problem with a joint meeting. I don't have a problem with that at all. But what I have a problem with is us trying to tell the school department what they need to do, us telling the school committee that this is what you need to do. They're the committee. They're elected to make those policy decisions, Mr. President. And I feel as though we're overstepping a little bit when we're starting to demand things from them and tell them what to do. They're elected into that office to vet that budget, to put that budget together and to issue that budget. They issue that budget to this council and this council looks at it. We either accept it or we don't. That's the fact of the matter. So to talk about the budget and to talk about what the school committee is including in their budget, I think the appropriate time to do that would be when the school committee is putting their budget together during their budget hearings.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. First of all, I think that the Police Patrolman's Association needs to be commended for being so receptive and willing to take these steps. Now, I've said it before and I'll say it again. Narcan is certainly something that's important. It's important for our first responders to have. It's important to keep people alive who are battling with opiate abuse. However, Mr. President, narcan is not going to solve the problem. And if people are not provided with better access to care and better treatment options here in the community, We're going to see the same situation over and over again, where history is just going to continue to repeat itself. Someone's going to use, someone's going to overdose, someone's going to be administered Narcan, someone's going to survive that overdose. Then what? The system just starts all over again. The cycle just starts all over again, Mr. President. So, while I agree that Narcan is a very important component to an overall and comprehensive plan to battling opiate addiction here in our community, I think that one of the major focuses that we really need to make is on treatment and access to it. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And Matthew, thank you again for coming up this evening and presenting. You and I had a brief discussion on this last week, and I looked into it a little bit myself. And the way that I look at it is any time that we can engage a greater base of citizenry in our community to participate in government, we're doing a good thing. And I think this is, it makes it easy. It makes it easy for our elected officials to determine what projects people want to see happen in their community. And it also allows us to get a great cross section of our residents. So I certainly appreciate the work that Matthew's done. I find it unfortunate that he can't get a meeting with the administration to discuss it. However, maybe after May 14th, you can call back again and get a meeting with Louise. But I question whether or not the city really has the capacity to do it at this time. Like you said, the ability to get the election up on the website is something that might be a struggle in itself. However, it's certainly an idea that I think that's a good one, and I welcome the opportunity to discuss it further with our budget director. Mr. President, maybe we can send this paper to the budget director for her response in terms of what her feelings are on it and where she stands on it.
[Adam Knight]: I believe that the Committee of the Whole that was represented that Republic was actually the body that made that recommendation to reduce the hours as opposed to the Traffic Commission.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Rayanne Conway Forbes, assistant coach of our girls hockey team, recently lost her mother. And Rayanne's a great person. She's been certainly traumatized by this loss, and her mother will be sadly missed. I offer my condolences to the family, and I ask the council to join me in doing such. Great family.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. That was quite a presentation. And as I sit back and I look at House Bill 2847, I see that half of that stuff that was just discussed will not be addressed by this piece of legislation. I'm very cautiously optimistic about moving forward in support of this legislation, Mr. President, reason being that the paper was just assigned to committee recently. No committee hearing has been held. And if we take a look at the first item on our agenda this evening, we'll see that it came in one way but came out with six different amendments to it. So I'd be very cautious in this body's deliberations in moving forward on this. I think it may be in the best interest of this body to wait until the committee reports out a paper favorably. before we decide to take a position one way or the other on it. The reason I say that is because we don't know what it's going to look like when it comes out.
[Adam Knight]: The comp is the resolution that we're looking at, whether or not the council should support house bill 2847 or am I missing something?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I find it very interesting how a resolution that starts out as talking about a piece of legislation in the House of Representatives that has yet to have been even heard by their committee would turn into this. And I really feel as though it's been laid on the table. Now, here we go.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Several short weeks ago, I filed a resolution asking the city assessor to take a look into third-party lodging websites such as Airbnb and HomeAway. The assessor had reported back that the Department of Revenue does not have any mechanism to define these residents as short-term lodging facilities at this point in time, and the burden falls back on the local government to establish an ordinance that would, in effect, create this type of designation for a property so that the city would be able to, number one, capture some of the revenues that are associated with these short-term rentals, but also, number two, and more importantly, ensure that these units are safe for habitation, Mr. President. So I'd ask that my council colleagues support me in voting for this resolution so that we can have an ordinance on the books that will allow us the opportunity to capture revenue from third party lodging websites.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I just want to be clear that this isn't resolution that I'm putting forward to discourage or impede the use of these third-party websites. I think that, you know, Airbnb and HomeAway provide a great alternative to hotels. They're also very pet-friendly, so individuals who like to travel with their pets are able to use these type of services as opposed to going to the Hyatt or the Hilton or the Marriott. So, you know, I want to be very clear that I want this resolution that gets authored to actually define the same parameters relative to public safety and also define some parameters relative to registering the unit that they have for sale or for rent rather. And this isn't something where someone goes in and says, I want to sign a lease for 12 months and live in the unit. It's, I want to come and stay at your condo on 28 ninth street for a week and pay you $800 instead of going to a hotel downtown. So, you know, I have no problem with the resolution provided the Councilor and I are on the same page. I certainly think we are in terms of asking the city solicitor whether or not this is something that's legal, and we're asking the treasurer, collector, and assessor to work in concert with the solicitor. So I think we're on the same page in this regard. I just want to be very clear that this is not a resolution that I'm putting forward to impede that actual commerce, Mr. President, but rather embrace it and figure out ways that we can capture the revenue and ensure public safety.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, that's the criteria that I would speak up when I see a criteria in place. All right.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. First of all, I certainly think that This program has been nothing short of a disaster since the rollout. I was supportive of it. I felt as though it was something that was going to work. And boy, was I wrong. The rollout's been done poorly. There's no signage, no loading zones, no striping. And there's a huge competing interest between the needs of the residents in the residential communities and the needs of the businesses in the business communities, Mr. President. And I was always a firm believer that the residents should come. Residential enforcement should be done first and foremost. I think that that's really where we need to focus our efforts at this point in time. So I'm glad to see that the police department is investing some money into the same technology the republic is using. However, in terms of the job the republic is doing in enforcing our business districts, I think it's come to a point now where, I mean, I think it's safe to say that Paul Revere's horse got a ticket yesterday out in front of gappy funeral home, Mr. President. They were everywhere. They were all over the place. And my major concern is, This program and this plan was pitched to the council as having an objective to turn spots over and to keep all day commuters out of our business districts. And there was going to be a residential component on top of that. And I think that we've certainly met the objective of keeping commuters out of our business districts all day. But I think we're also meeting an objective of keeping 50% of the people that were comfortable utilizing our business districts out of our business districts as well. You know, I'm a little bit less concerned about the financial cash windfall side of this program, and I'm a little bit more concerned about the fact that the stated objective is just not being met at this point in time. We've been very vocal and outspoken in our displeasure with certain aspects of the plan. We've had individuals from Republic come down and talk to us and give us nothing but lip service. We've realized and come to the realization that Republic's only doing what they're told. The Traffic Commission governs traffic policy here in the city of Medford, and the Traffic Commission needs to be before us. And I certainly share the frustration that Councilor Penter and Councilor Camuso and Councilor Marks has. However, I think that we do need this meeting. for any other reason but for to have the traffic commission explain itself as to why the program's been implemented so poorly, why it's going in the direction that it's going in, whether or not they've actually had their finger on the pulse of what's going on in the implementation and rollout of this plan, Mr. President. And more so, I think, one of the glaring factors that leads me to find that I think it's time that we really take a long, hard look at scrapping this plan is the fact that We've continuously requested information, and we just don't get this information. So, either there's something going on that they don't want to share with us, or there's some reason why this material is being withheld from us. We want to have a good, productive meeting tomorrow night. We can't, because we don't have the information that we requested, for which we felt was going to help us to be productive, Mr. President. So, you know, at this point in time, I'd like an opportunity to hear from the Traffic Commission to see what they have to say as to why they're being so ineffective in the implementation of this contract. and what the reason is for the holdups. But at the same time, it doesn't matter at this point. It's been eight months, five months, four months, however long it's been. It's been far too long. And the people are suffering, and the businesses are suffering. So Mr. President, I'm really torn at this point in time. I think we do need an opportunity to speak with the Traffic Commission to hear what they have to say. But that's what it's going to be. It's only going to be say. I'd like to see more do and less say.
[Adam Knight]: I'd ask that you read that back, because we have been going for a little bit of time. And Mr. President, it's been amended on multiple occasions. So I'd ask if the clerk would read it back in its current form.
[Adam Knight]: If I understand this correctly, it's paper 15307 was taken off the table combined with a paper that was filed on suspension. That language has been replaced with what the clerk said.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I've really tried to approach this issue with an open mind, Mr. President, because I truly believe we need residential and business district enforcement, as this was really a nonexistent aspect of our local government prior to the kiosk plan. However, at this point in time, the hardship is certainly outweighing the benefits of any type of parking management plan that's been put into place. With that being said, Mr. President, you know, we have a five or six part resolution before us at this point in time. The language is contradictory. Councilor Penter has made a suggestion to eliminate some of that language. I think Councilor Camuso and Councilor Marksley are both 110% right. This meeting tomorrow night is not going to solve any problems. It's not going to change or fix anything. But one thing it is going to do is it's going to give us a peace of mind and an understanding as to why these shortfalls are occurring, why this breach of contract is in place. And also, I think that, you know, we're all close as a body right now to scrap this project. I'm right there, Mr. President. I want an opportunity to hear from the Traffic Commission, because they haven't been before us yet. They've sent the chief up here. as their sacrificial lamb over and over and over again to express to us what their public policy is and how they're implementing it and why they're implementing it. However, I think that we're going to have a very productive session tomorrow night, regardless of the traffic and parking problems that we're going to have outside. And regardless of the fact that we haven't been provided with the information that we've asked for. And the reason I feel that way is because everybody behind this rail is very passionate about this issue. And I think everybody behind this rail wants to come up with a solution to the problem. Ultimately, we're all here. We're all here to help people. We're all here to protect the integrities of the neighborhoods. We're all here to ensure that everybody has a strong quality of life, Mr. President. And right now, based on the current plan, we certainly do not have that. We certainly do not have that based on the current plan. Because the hardships that the business district is feeling and the hardships that the residents in the community are feeling are not outweighing the benefits, are outweighing, are not outweighing the benefits that we're seeing here in the pay-to-park program or the parking management program. With that being said, Mr. President, you know, I think that we're all right there. We're all right on the cusp of all being on the same page. I need one more meeting and I have some questions about language, but I think that Councilor Lungo was right on the ball when she said, okay, so we vote to get rid of this and we vote to return it in-house, but what's our plan going to look like? What's it look like? What do we want? What do we expect? And we've said it time and time again, and we've sent resolutions forward time and time again. Maybe it's time we sit down and we put together a comprehensive plan upon a review. of the contract that's in place as well as what we see in terms of our constituents calling us and expressing concern and what we see based upon the meetings that we have had here, what it is this council can live with and put a plan forward. I certainly don't think anybody wants to see these kiosks around the city anymore. I certainly think they're too far apart. I certainly think the signage is a nightmare. I certainly think that This council has done a good job of confusing people as well as to what's going on because we discussed it so much because we have so many questions because, in fact, the plan was rolled out inappropriately and improperly, Mr. President. So with that being said, at this point in time, I'm not comfortable with the language of the resolution or the message that the resolution sends. We've tabled it once or twice before. We've asked for the Traffic Commission to come before us. This is the first opportunity that they've had. I'm right there, Mr. President, and if my The responses to my questions aren't satisfactory. Tomorrow evening, I will join in and I will happily vote to remove these kiosks. But at this point in time, I think, at the very least, we should hear what they have to say. Thank you, Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: I think that the most important amendment to that resolution was Councilor Longo's, which would authorize the evacuation, I guess, for lack of a better term, of all the tickets that were issued yesterday. So that would have to be included. On Monday, rather, yes. So that would have to be included.
[Adam Knight]: Was it 15370 on the table? We took that paper off the table. Why don't we just strike the language from that paper? We have 15370 as the number for the paper.
[Adam Knight]: We strike the language from that paper in its entirety and replace it with the language that we've discussed right now. Now what I've come up with is be it resolved. The kiosk be removed due to contractual breaches, parking enforcement be handled in-house, and all tickets issued on 4-2015 be vacated. Well, that's what you have.
[Adam Knight]: Maybe the individual sit down and write something up and we can move on to another item and then come back if in fact we can have some language.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, we can move on to the next item on the agenda.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. The Financial Literacy Trust Fund is a trust fund that is governed by the State Treasurer's Office. And the purpose of this trust fund is to support public and private institutions that have displayed success in advancing financial education and empowerment to certain underprivileged communities. And Mr. Belson is the sole public sector educator that's been appointed to the board, Mr. President. So I think that's a testament to his wherewithal, his experience, his knowledge, and his standing in the educational community. And when I saw this on the Internet, I wasn't too familiar with the Massachusetts Financial Literacy Trust Fund, so I did a little poking around, and it's quite a big deal. The treasurer of the commonwealth has the power to appoint, and she used her divine wisdom to select our superintendent of schools because he does such a great job, Mr. President. And I think it's very important to highlight when people in our community do good things, because that builds social capital and it builds community. and make sure that the next generation of kids from Medford have that blue and white running through their veins. So I'd ask my council colleagues, Mr. President, to support this resolution. On the motion of approval by Councilor Knight, Councilor Camuso.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And Matthew, thank you for your work. I've spoken with Matt a little bit about this in the past. And one of the things that this council spoke about was not only the rebroadcasting of these council meetings, but also live streaming of the meetings as they're going on. And I don't think that that's too much to ask as well, Mr. President. So I'd certainly be supportive of a resolution going forward requesting that provided the IT department can go through and make sure that there are no viruses and no materials that'll corrupt our system, that this be, you know, maybe referred to Mike Ferretti for a review to see if that's something that we can do possibly. Please.
[Adam Knight]: I don't think you can put it much better than that, Mr. President. He's a gentleman who is willing, able, and ready to volunteer his time. He has a plan. He has a template in place that we could adopt. I think it would make sense for our IT department and our webmaster to take a look at it to see if they can come up with any glitches or any problems that they see might corrupt our system and then move on it.
[Adam Knight]: Moreover, Mr. President, I think that Councilor Marks makes a great point, and maybe for these boards and commissions that meet during normal business hours, that the broadcast or rebroadcast could become a requirement in the near future, because I know it's very hard for me to get to 2 o'clock meetings here at City Hall when I'm engaged in my day-to-day workplace activities.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. In correlation to Councilor Caraviello's resolution just several weeks ago, I believe this council approved a resolution unanimously that was tied to a permit for national grid to tear up Columbia Road. And we asked the city engineer, who in her public hearing documents, frequently closes with, be it understood that the contractor will have to close the street up and leave it and meet city of Medford standards, I believe is the language that's used. And we've asked for a copy of what those city of Medford standards are. And to date, we have yet to receive them, Mr. President. So I'd like to ask that the resolution be amended to include an update as to where we are on top of the city of Medford standards for public utility operators and tearing up our streets.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much Very recently, the building department had welcomed three new employees on. Steve Champoli handling plumbing inspection duties, Steve Randazzo handling some electrical inspection duties, both of whom were classmates of mine at Medford High School. As well as Peter Spock, who's going to be doing some code enforcement, Mr. President. So I think this is a very welcome addition to the building department. The council's been very outspoken in its need for a code enforcement officer, and we see one that's been put on. I'd like to commend the administration for listening to the council and taking the council's advice. And I wish these three individuals the best of luck and a healthy, happy, and successful career here in the city of Medford.
[Adam Knight]: Again, Mr. President, thank you very much. Last week we had a very fruitful discussion on crosswalks and I think we may have pushed the first domino over and a number of requests will be coming in over the next coming months. But I was contacted by a family down on King Ave. who was very excited to see that McNally Park was going to be renovated. And one of the number one concerns that they had was the fact that there's no crosswalk for them to walk from their home to the park. So I took a ride down Forest Street. And I think that the first crosswalk would be at Forest Street and Governor's Ave. And the next one is down in front of the old high school. So I'd like to see a crosswalk put in somewhere that's a little bit closer to the vicinity of the park so that our residents who are willing to utilize this investment that we just made can get there safely, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Sir, I want you to understand that the Medford City Council doesn't have the authority over the contract. The traffic commission has the authority over the contract, and the mayor is the chief negotiating authority for the contract.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, that's all we have to do. There's a methodology if someone wants to put something on the ballot. And signing petition. And I don't think anybody here agrees with you that the plan, that disagrees with you on the fact that the plan was rolled out and it was rolled out ineffectively and that it's created quite a bit of hardship for a number of residents and businesses here in the community. I just want you to be aware that this council doesn't have the power or authority to change anything in the contract. It doesn't have the power or the authority to change anything.
[Adam Knight]: I would like to let you know that Wednesday the 22nd at 6 o'clock, I believe, 5.30, 6 o'clock. 6 o'clock. 6 o'clock. We're having a meeting here in the chambers with the traffic commission.
[Adam Knight]: With traffic commission and representatives from the public.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Thank you, Councilor. Last week we passed a resolution, and the resolution suggested that, you know, the Mayor isn't responding to resolutions in a timely fashion. I think we were all in agreement that the 10-day window is met sometimes, but rarely. And we discussed putting on the tracking sheet the date that the resolution went forward. And that led me to take a look at the tracking sheets that we have, Mr. President, and the resolutions that have gone unanswered. And I think that it would be in our best interest and the best interest of the residents of the city of Medford for us to take a look at the resolutions that have gone forward that have been unanswered, sign them to subcommittee, and have the subcommittee further investigate and review the matters that were brought before this body, that were passed by this body, and that were sent to the administration. Um, so with that being said, Mr. President, I put this resolution forward, um, with the hopes that, um, you know, my colleagues would support the idea of us actually taking ownership of some of these issues that we sent across the hall to the mayor's office for action where there hasn't been action. Um, and we continuously send the same resolution saying the same thing to the same person to get the same result. I believe Albert Einstein was the person that said that would be the definition of insanity to do the same thing over and over again and expect that it's a different result. Um, so, I looked at this as an opportunity for us to change the way that we do business a little bit here, take ownership of some of these issues that we've sent forward to the administration, and let's roll up our sleeves and get to work and see if we can resolve some of them.
[Adam Knight]: at his discretion. Into the subcommittee structure that we have present, you know what I mean? And then we can take a look at investigating the matter further. Some of these items that we sent forward that have gone, you know, without an answer may have already been resolved. They might have resolved themselves. Right. So, you know, I think that it's just, you know, good for housekeeping.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Council Member. Council Member Nye. Well, Mr. President, I do sometimes have concern about a resolution that starts off on the council floor that says, be it resolved that the Medford City Council discuss subject X, Y, and Z. And before that discussion's over, the resolution turns into something that's a larger issue. It's not a discussion. It becomes an action item. So, you know, I think that we have an underutilized subcommittee structure that's in place anyway, and I've said that for a year now. And, you know, I've tried to make efforts to put papers into subcommittee for further vetting and for further investigation and for further review. But the one thing that we can do in subcommittee is we can call department heads to come before the committee and explain themselves as to why this hasn't happened or that hasn't happened. We can figure out what's going on. We can figure out the cost of items. We can figure out legally whether or not there's an impediment to the question that we've asked. We can really roll up our sleeves and dig in. And if it's something that we want to work on, we can figure out what the problems are, why they exist, and then we can come up with a strategy to get around them. We can send it to the administration. The administration can look at it and say, yeah, that's something I'm going to work on. But I also have all this stuff on my desk that I need to work on, too. So it's going to happen when it happens. Because this is my stuff, and that's what they've sent. And I think that that's what's happening sometimes, Mr. President. You know, it's obviously not an easy job to run a city. I think we all know that. And this body keeps the administration rather busy with our requests. And I think that all the requests that we send across his desk have merit in one form or another. However, if they're not being addressed, then we need to send 14 or 15 resolutions to the administration relative to the lighting down at the Condon Shell. And I went on the Internet and pulled up the Condon Shell agreement, and it clearly said, at dusk till dawn is when the shell is open. So it would lead me to believe that because the shelves open just till dawn, they're probably not going to put lights down there until we get special approval from the DCI. So we sent 15 resolutions on the same subject matter. I pushed the internet, and they came up with a contract. So I just think that it gives us another unique opportunity, Mr. President. I'm not asking to do it with everything. I'm asking to do it with the resolutions that have gone forward from 2014 to date, just the resolutions from 2014 that have gone unresponded. And let's try it out and see if we can do something different and get a better result than what we're getting. Thank you. Councilor?
[Adam Knight]: Again, Mr. President, like I said, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Obviously, week in and week out, we have the same people with the same complaints about lack of response from the administration, lack of respect from the administration. I looked at this as a new and creative way for us to approach the way that we do business here, to take ownership of the issues that we send forward, to actually roll up our sleeves and get to work, dig down and figure it out, what's going on, talk with the department heads, talk with the people that are there on the ground, that on the ground level doing this type of work, Mr. President. So that's where I'm coming from. Again, you know, I've been on the council now for a little bit over a year, and I haven't seen any proposal that would, you know, suggest that we change the way that we're doing business. However, I've also sat here and I've listened to the same complaints week in and week out about the frustrations that people have. I'm trying to come up with a solution to a problem, a problem that I feel as though is hindering the ability of this body to move forward and to act effectively. So that's why I brought the resolution forward, Mr. President. I'd ask for a roll call. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd like to withdraw the resolution as the administration's received a response from the federal government.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I had the honor and privilege of working for Senator Shannon from 1999 to 2005. Preceding me there was Councilor Marks in his office, and I believe while I was interning in the office, Councilor Caraviello was there with me as well. So it's apparent that Senator Shannon has touched the lives of many of us here involved in government, as well as many citizens in Medford through his hard work, dedication, and diligence on Beacon Hill. The morning that the senator passed away, I remember it clearly. I was walking into an event being held by the children's trust fund and senate president travolini at the time pulled me aside to make me aware of the fact that the senator passed away. I was a young kid with no cell phone who wasn't able, they weren't able to get in touch with me that easily. And, you know, it was a very sad day for me. Charlie was a mentor. Charlie was a friend. And Charlie gave me a chance. And I sadly miss him, Mr. President, and I think that it's We take a moment to adjourn this evening's meeting in his memory based upon the 10 years of time that's passed since he's been gone and the 20 years of dedicated service that he gave to the residents of the city of Medford. Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And on behalf of Councilor Camuso, He expresses his condolences for not being able to be here this evening and his congratulations to Stella for a stellar career in public service. She's a great woman. She's a very hard worker, very diligent, and that's evident by her many years of service to the residents of the city of Medford, Mr. President. So the next person that comes in to fill her shoes has some very large shoes to fill, and she did an excellent job for us, and she'll be sadly missed. However, she earned every minute of it, and I wish her the best in her retirement. Great lady, so congratulations to Stella.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. Marie was a long time Medford resident. She moved on to greener pastures down to Florida when the weather got cold. However, we recently lost her. I was in touch with her cousin, and he expressed some great sadness over the loss and explained to me how much he loved Medford and how much it would mean to the family if, in fact, this council did pass a resolution wishing them sympathy. So with that being said, I filed the resolution, Mr. President. I offer my condolences to the family, and I wish them the best. Marie will be sadly missed. On that motion, all those in favor, please stand for a moment of silence.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much for allowing me the opportunity to come up here this evening and present the 2014-2015 Medford High School varsity girls basketball team with accommodation, recognizing their GBL championship season. Girls, you've made the city of Medford very proud. Keep up the good work. They've had a conversation with their coach. We could ask Coach Burke to come up here and join me in the presentation. Coach Burke's explained to me what a great group of individuals that he has on his team. They're both great athletes on the basketball court, and they're also very good in the classroom. They're young, committed, Medfordites that have blue and white in their veins that have done great. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'd like to read into the record the citation. The Medford City Council takes pleasure in awarding this council commendation to the Medford High School Girls Varsity Basketball Team in recognition of winning the Greater Boston League title and a playoff berth in the MIAA Division I North Girls Basketball Tournament for the 2014-2015 season. Signed by Frederick Dello Russo Jr., Council President, Adam Knight, Medford City Councilor, this day of April 7, 2015. It's my great pleasure to present the first citation to Sam Morin, number 55, not here this evening. Gigi Braga, number 44. Thank you very much. Sophony Jakes, number 35. Ashley Eisner, number 33. Abby McCarthy, number 22. Hannah O'Leary, number 20, and the captain of the team. Destiny Fitzgerald, number 15. Grace Callahan, number 14. Claire Doncaster, number 11, and her co-captain, She comes from a great family of hockey players. Rhiannon Arnold, number 10.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to take a moment to introduce Coach Burke and say a couple of words on behalf of the team.
[Adam Knight]: I think it's also important to point out, girls, that Councilor Lungo was a star on the basketball team back in the late 90s. Also joining us this evening, folks, will be the Medford High School gymnastics team, the 2014-2015 GBL champions. I'd ask Coach Fortino or Coach Small, if they're in attendance, to come join me on stage. The first recipient from the 2014-2015 GBL Championship Gymnastics Team. The citation would read, the Medford City Council takes pleasure in awarding this council commendation to the Medford High School Varsity Gymnastics Team in recognition of winning the Greater Boston League Championship for the 2014-2015 season. And the first citation is for Camilla Hollingsworth. You can hold the cartwheels till the end. The next citation will go to Dominique Savoia.
[Adam Knight]: Alyssa Valentin. Alana Mullen.
[Adam Knight]: Victor Ho. Erica Lavoie. Camila Ribeiro. Kylie Mahoney. Victoria Falco. Abby Klein Olivia Ross Samantha Alberino. I'd just like to introduce Coach. Coach Small is going to say a few words about the girls.
[Adam Knight]: Point of personal privilege, Councilor Knight. Mr. McDonald came here this evening to discuss an issue on Terrance Road, and I find it unfair to have him come down here and now discuss the issue of the hospital merger. I think that Mr. McDonald might want to have an opportunity to prepare himself to come down here and speak about this to maybe get some questions in advance to have answers to, Mr. President. So, you know, I certainly can understand the issue of uncertainty, and I think that nobody understands that better than Mr. McDonald, because he's very uncertain as to what's going to happen as well. And to put him on the spot right here this evening and ask him, what's going on with this? What do you think about that? What do you think about this? When there's no plan finalized, it really puts him in a bad position. He's going to say one thing. He might come back three months later, and the situation's different. And then we're all going to say, you said this at this meeting. So I think we might want to give Mr. McDonald an opportunity to prepare himself to come down and speak about this. He's always been willing to come down to the council. He's never been afraid to stand up at that podium and take questions. for hours at a time, Mr. President, but I just think that, you know, we have to extend to him the courtesy to be willing to have an opportunity to prepare if, in fact, he is going to speak at length on this type of thing.
[Adam Knight]: For further clarification, Councilor Knight, I also believe that the gentleman represented the fact that they do have closed circuit surveillance cameras out there so that employees would not have to go outside if, in fact, someone was breaking the rules, jumped over the fence, that they wouldn't put themselves in danger, that they'd have an opportunity to call the law enforcement without actually having to go out there and confront individuals that may or may not be obeying the no trespassing signs or the no trespassing policy that they have in place after hours.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Just a few weeks ago I had the opportunity to go to a forum at Tufts University. It was put on by the Tufts Labor Coalition, Mr. President. And at that forum, the topic of discussion was the Tufts University's reorganization plan for the janitorial service providers. And as the forum went on, a presentation was made by the administration that would show that one-third of the janitorial staff would be eliminated based upon the reorganization plan, Mr. President. So there are 91 jobs or so up at Tufts University doing janitorial work, and the current reorganization plan will call for the elimination of 30 of those positions, Mr. President. As the forum went on, there was much discussion about the reason for the need for a reorganization, Mr. President, why the reorganization was necessary, and the reasoning that was given was that the reorganization was necessary only for the fact that they need to maintain sustainability. Now, Tufts University, Mr. President, a university that charges $62,000 per year plus. They're the 24th most expensive college in the United States of America. And they're undergoing a $49 million expansion project right now, Mr. President. So I don't think sustainability is really an issue for Tufts University. One of the things that was presented at this forum was the fact they're going to cut staff so that they can bring in equipment. And that's all well and good. But I think an investment in equipment and a divestment in the workforce is misguided and inappropriate, Mr. President. The 30 people that are going to lose their jobs eat at our sandwich shops, they go on Main Street, they buy goods, they spend their hard-earned dollars here in our community. That, coupled with the fact that they're some of the lowest-paid workers at Tufts University, leads me to believe that Tufts University's plan is misguided. So I'm asking my council colleagues here this evening to join me in supporting this resolution, which would ask Tufts University to maintain current staffing levels upon the reorganization plan. And looking at, you know, the workforce up there, Tufts University's in the process, in a construction phase of building their campus, but at the same time, they're going to cut one-third of the workforce, Mr. President, that's responsible for keeping it clean. I think it's a misguided policy, Mr. President, and it's going to cost people their jobs. These people make between $13.80 and $14.60 an hour. So I don't think that, you know, Tufts University's historical approach and the founding principles of social justice are being taken into consideration at this point in time with this plan, Mr. President. And I'd ask that my colleagues on the council support me. We have some of the affected individuals right here with us this evening who may or may not lose their job. They don't know right now because Tufts is keeping them in the dark. The best that they've been told is that any cuts to their job will be handled with sensitivity. And that's where we are, Mr. President. I'm asking my colleagues to join me to support this resolution so that these people here in the front row don't lose their job, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: And we actually have a Metro resident here in the audience that would like to speak on the matter, Mr. President, if the council would be so kind to indulge.
[Adam Knight]: That's the person that came to speak on behalf of the president.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. Tufts University's plan's not in flux, Tufts University's plan's not static. It's been defined. It's been established. They're telling us what they're doing, and they're looking to do it in May. So, you know, these changes usually happen at commencement when there are no students around, Mr. President. This is a student-led effort. There are students in the Tufts Labour Coalition that have gotten together that have contacted me because they need support. They need support. Students that live in Medford, that go to Tufts University, that go to that school, that is standing in support of these working people, of these working people who make between $13.60 and $14.80 an hour, Mr. President. They need their jobs. They need their jobs, Mr. President. This resolution will send a message to Tufts University that we support working men and women. That's what this resolution will do, Mr. President. So, well, the plan at the hospital, nobody knows what's going on. Mr. McDonald doesn't know what's going on. Mara Haley doesn't know what's going on. Nobody knows what's going on. We right here know what's going on. The administration has drawn their line in the sand, and they've said what they're going to do. So it's not comparing apples to apples.
[Adam Knight]: That's a mischaracterization. of what I said. I wasn't trying to prevent him from asking questions. What I was trying to do was keep us focused on the resolution that was at hand, Mr. President. The resolution at hand was the issues at 72 Terrace Road and Mrs. Michelle Casey and the noise. The issue wasn't the hospital merger. That door was opened, but I felt as though it was inappropriate and unprofessional for Mr. McDonald to be put on the spot here when he wasn't here to talk about that. He came down here out of his goodwill and his own personal volition at the request of this council to address that issue. Miss Casey's house. Nothing more, nothing less. Thank you, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: Coupled with the fact that the gentleman sat in the audience with the man for an hour before he got up to talk on the microphone, and those questions could have been asked then as well.
[Adam Knight]: We're at the last seven meetings that he was here.
[Adam Knight]: Rubel's office would be the inappropriate, uh, place to send that. I think it might have to go to the vice president of administration. So then we'll do that to the vice president of administration.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor Camuso. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. And I'd like to thank Councilor Lungo for bringing the resolution forward. I certainly feel as though Education is a vital component to addressing the substance abuse and the opiate abuse issue here in Medford. And maybe it's not there. Maybe it's other type of programming that we can put in place for self-esteem training for individuals so that they don't have the feeling that they need to go towards drugs to escape from something, Mr. President. But education is definitely a component. And public safety is a component, too. There's no question about that. We need to keep our drugs off the street, Mr. President. We need to keep drugs off the street. limit people's access to drugs. However, I think it's important to point out that a lot of people that sell drugs actually use drugs, too. So, you know what I mean? They're not necessarily just a drug dealer, but they themselves are also addicts, Mr. President. The one component that I don't hear many people talking about is the public health aspect of this and the lack of access to care, Mr. President. So, an addict that's looking for help can't find access to help, Mr. President. So, they sit there and they fight and they try to get clean and they can't get clean because they have no way to get help. And then they fall back into this vicious cycle and this vicious circle again, Mr. President. So I think that there are really three components that we really need to look at. That's the education, the public safety, and the public health aspect of this in order for us to tackle this epidemic and this problem in its entirety. So, you know, I can't thank Councilor Longo enough for continuing this conversation. I think we've all been pretty vocal and pretty outspoken in terms of our position on the topic. And I really do look forward to the response from the school department and also the response from the administration. as to what direction the ordinance looks like and what direction the school department's going in. But with that being said, Mr. President, I support this resolution wholeheartedly, and I'd move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, Madam President, thank you very much. And Councilor Camuso, thank you very much for bringing this resolution forward. I'd like to add by way of a B paper, a resolution that would ask that the Department of Transportation repair the stanchions that stand between the eastbound and westbound roadways at the railroad crossing. After this winter, they took quite a beat and they were all broken. They're in disrepair. And if I remember correctly, those stanchions were installed for the purpose of improving public safety at the railroad crossing for pedestrians and vehicles alike. I think it's relevant to the topic. Well, they all fall under the DOT now through the transportation reform. So I'd like to amend the paper by way of a B paper asking that the DOT take appropriate steps and the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority take the appropriate steps to repair the stations.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much, and thank you, Councilor Penta, for bringing this resolution forward yet again. I think that, at the very least, we deserve a response on this. When I saw this resolution on the agenda, I scratched my head and I said, this sounds eerily familiar. Sounds eerily familiar. I think I might have heard this once or twice or three times before. So I did a little research and a little digging, and I took a look, Madam President, The Condon Shell Park and Lot, I believe, is under the control and jurisdiction at one point or another by the DCI or the MDC, now the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs. And if you go on the website and you look up the Mystic River Reservation, the first thing it says is that the park is open from dawn till dusk. And the park is supposed to close when the sun goes down. So that would lead me to believe that that's probably why we're not getting a response, because no one's supposed to be in there after dusk. But regardless of whether or not We have a five year service agreement with them. Yes, that is correct. So we do have a service agreement with them. So there's an agreement for the city of Metro to service the property. Um, however, I think that that might be the sticking point right here is the fact that, you know, the, the parking lot supposed to be closed after dusk. So there might not be a willingness to make an investment there. Um, however, misguided that unwillingness is, um, I feel as though, you know, the parking lot should be lit. People should feel safe when they park there. I just think that we really need to get to the bottom of this. And the question is why? Why isn't it happening? Give us an answer, at the very least, something that we can say, okay, agree with or not agree with, or something that we can come up with a plan to circumvent or to work within those confines, Madam President. So, you know, I certainly can understand Councilor Penta's frustration, and I think that, you know, moving forward, you know, I think we should pass this resolution this evening, but moving forward, if in fact we have to bring it forward yet again, that we have to get everybody in the room at the same time and say, what's going on? And we want an answer on this. Because it's very easy to send a resolution and wait for a response, and then it gets mixed in with other responses. But at the very least, respond. And we haven't gotten that yet. So I think that everybody behind this rail's had it up to here in terms of not getting a response on this very issue. So with that being said, Madam President, I'm in whole support of the resolution. And I think we can go a step further maybe if this isn't resolved within the requisite 10 days. to bring officials from the administration and the DCI down here to tell us why, what's going on, what's it going to cost, and what we can do to make it happen.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Um, thank you very much. And I think, uh, Councilor Caraviello and I are on the same page with this. And, um, I certainly appreciate, uh, Ms. Casey going through the trouble of having to actually invite people into their, her home to get this problem resolved. Um, I think that it might make sense instead of having Ms. Casey have to open her home to multiple people who want to go there on multiple days or multiple times to see exactly what's going on for themselves, that maybe, We have an on-site meeting with Alan McDonald, our code enforcement officer in the Board of Health, as well as the Council, to see it for ourselves, to all be there in the same room at the same time, so that none of us can say, we didn't hear it, we did hear it, we weren't there at the time when it was going on, that we all experienced it ourselves. And I think we'll all have a better understanding as to what's going on, what Ms. Casey has to deal with, and what course of action we need to take. I mean, the Lawrence Memorial Hospital, if they continue to go back and forth with Ms. Casey on this topic for over a year and a half, but not be willing to invest $400, But they probably spent $5,000 worth of manpower just responding to her inquiries. It doesn't make much sense to me. I think if they're really committed to addressing the problem that they will pony up the money. I certainly have concerns as to whether or not the council's in a position to tell them to do such. However, I think it'll be really beneficial to everybody. We've heard it once before. We've given them a year to resolve the issue. They haven't resolved the issue. Mrs. Casey's been more than patient. I think it's time that we take a little field trip, Mr. President, maybe, and bring some members of our administration and members of the hospital down there to exactly see what's going on, and then we can have a real informed discussion about it right there on site. Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Thank you very much, Mr. President. Mr. Crowley, thank you for taking the time to come down here this evening. Certainly. When did the meeting take place through the chairman to the gentleman with Mr. Cervone?
[Adam Knight]: Okay. Um, Can you do me a favor and just give me that site again that you gave through the general laws?
[Adam Knight]: You referred to Selectmen and Board of Aldermen?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, that'd be great. That'd be great. Thank you. Um, Mr. President, I think it would make sense for us to have the city solicitor also render a legal opinion as to whether or not this council under, um, GL one, four, three, section seven and nine. It's Al, uh, has the power and authority to, uh, prompt the end of the building department and the board of health to go in there and see if we can get rid of this house and, uh, take the necessary steps that we need to do to beautify the neighborhood and ensure that these residents have a strong quality of life. Um, Mr. Crowley, was absolutely correct. I do live within walking distance of the house. I've been by the house. I've seen the house. Um, I've seen the house. We called it a haunted house. I think when we were kids and, um, you know, I, I think that, uh, they've been very patient up there. They've, they've taken appropriate steps, done their homework and made this very easy for us.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: I believe for those people at home who aren't watching the city council meeting this evening and are watching the Boston Bruins, in between the first and second period this evening, Mr. Cronin and Ms. Peraza will be awarded the sportsmanship award by the Boston Bruins. And I've spoken with both their coaches, and I've actually had the opportunity to speak with both of them as well. They're both great kids, great student-athletes, and both have had really great accomplished careers, both in the classroom and on the playing field, Mr. President. Their coaches would like to come down and say a few words on behalf of the children when they do receive their citations, if this council is so willing to adopt the resolution. So I would like to reserve comment for the people that work directly with them and know them best, Mr. President. However, I'd ask my council colleagues to support this. Uh, it's just another great thing. And another great representation of Medford, uh, you know, at the highest levels, Mr. President. So I'd ask that my council colleagues support the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I was down La Conte hockey rink one evening and a number of young kids came up to me and I was talking to them about the game of hockey and whether or not they play street hockey. And one of the things that came up was that they're not allowed to play street hockey in the tennis courts at Placetet Park, although Placetet Park is lined for street hockey. Which got me thinking, I said, well, why can't they? Has the park board put a prohibition in that's in place? And I did a little bit of research, and I don't see the park board actually taking an official action prohibiting such. However, there are signs up at the tennis courts that place the park. So I'm sure that the reason that the signs went up was because of outcry of some of the neighbors, I would imagine. However, in this day and age, when we're sitting here looking at an opiate addiction problem in the city of Medford, a childhood obesity problem across the United States of America, I think that keeping kids out of our parks and keeping kids out of our recreational areas to participate in organized and unorganized athletics, it may be misguided, Mr. President. It may not be the right policy. So, you know, I'd like to see if there are any prohibitions in place concerning the playing of street hockey in our public parks, what they are, why they're in place, and whether or not they make sense, because right now I don't think that they do.
[Adam Knight]: I did ask Mike actually, he was the first person I spoke with about this and he said he's aware of no prohibition. Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Thank you very much, Mr. President. Several weeks ago, we put a resolution forward relative to the Craddock Bridge. working with our state delegation to coordinate the release of some bonded funds that were attained in the transportation bond bill, so that when construction on the Craddock Bridge begins, we don't have to wait another 50 years for the lights at Main Street and South Street to get fixed. And in my attempts to speak with some officials from MassDOT after sending an email to an individual over there to ask for an update on the Craddock Bridge, and he sent me an email back saying, send me an email to remind me, which was just crazy to me. It was brought to my attention that they're looking to start before the end of this month. But when I followed up with some individuals in the DPW, they said, there's no way this project can start by the end of this month. So I certainly think that there is a huge communication gap here. There is definitely a problem with the top-down communication from the super agency that we call MassDOT in the city of Medford, Mr. President. You know, I think that Councilor Pente is right on track with this one. We have to get somebody down here to fill us in on what's going on so that we can plan accordingly and move accordingly so that we can get done what we need to get done. You know, I think it's very important that these lights are addressed at the same time that the construction is addressed, that the bonded funding is addressed at the same time the construction is addressed. And if the construction's coming out, and it's going to stop by the end of this month, I think that we really need to get rolling on this, Mr. President. So I applaud Councilor Penta for bringing the issue forward, and he has my support on the resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Will the clerk please read the amendments back? The clerk is going to read the amendments back. So 15.323 is what we're working off of here, is that correct?
[Adam Knight]: And we have a reverse 9-1-1 amendment, a reprogramming amendment, a refunds amendment?
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. No, Mr. President. Please be recorded that I'm agreeing in theory, but I'm in opposition based on the language.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, Mr. President, please forgive my ignorance, but... The only purpose of the money would be to purchase... By right, it's allowed to have the operation of Keno2Go, correct? Correct. However, by right, it's not an effective operation of the Keno2Go Act that would allow them to also have a TV screen to display the winning numbers that are coming out at that point in time? Is that all I'm understanding?
[Adam Knight]: I'd ask that the matter be tabled, Mr. President. This evening we had a license committee meeting. UnityCab was invited to attend the meeting because we have a number of items that we want to go over relative to our ordinance, and UnityCab failed to attend this evening. Now they're here before this council requesting a transfer of a license. I think that at the very least we should have our opportunity to discuss with UnityCab what our issues and concerns are prior to us actually authorizing this transfer.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you for your patience. Mr. President, if I may, I certainly have no objection to the transfer of the license after the gentleman does appear before the subcommittee and addresses the questions that we have for him.
[Adam Knight]: Oh, okay. Yes, I am. Yes.
[Adam Knight]: On that point, Mr. President, I do believe that the folks from Wendy's were before this council a couple of months ago requesting some sign variances. And the discussion of lights came up at that point in time as well. And I don't believe the council has received any type of response from the developer. So I think that that would be certainly a nice good faith effort on their behalf, Mr. President. I believe when you were here for the variance on the signage and we made the same exact recommendations and requests and we haven't gotten a response.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I certainly have no problem supporting this paper. However, several months back we had requested from the city engineer that she forwarded forward to us her policy relative to the city of Medford's regulations and standards for the street restoration and debris removal. To date, I don't believe we've received that, Mr. President. So I'd like to amend the paper by requesting that the city engineer once again send this materials to the Medford City Council for review. Thank you, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. As I look through the packet, I see a letter dated January 6, 2015, from Diane McLeod to the city clerk. And the letter reads, reviewing the outdoor seating specifications provided for Wendy's, I note that they do have three tables, one of which is accessible. Other than that, they provide no information on accessible seating. What is provided is not accessible. No path of travel with distance or access aisles with height or knee depth, as well as no seating policy. More detailed information is needed. That letter was followed up by a letter which looks like it's dated January 8th. And it says, in response to the memo dated January 6th, 2015 from Ms. Diane McLeod, ADA coordinator, Bowler Engineering is submitting the following supplemental information on behalf of Wendy's. Patio table cut sheet by Recycle Design depicting compliance with ADA, patio accessibility sketch, and Wendy's restaurants accessible seating policy. After that, Mr. Clerk, there's no correspondence from the Office of Disability to your office. Have you had any discussions with Ms. McLeod to determine whether or not, in fact, the seating policy is in compliance? MR. MCLEOD.
[Adam Knight]: No, that's it. I just wanted to be sure that... Thank you, Councilor Knight. Councilor Camuso.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, that's an interesting position that Councilor Marks has taken, and I think it makes sense. You know, we have Wendy's here, and I don't see any harm in maybe Wendy's putting out some temporary seating and us approving maybe a 30-day or a 60-day or a 90-day license for them to use temporary seating and see how it goes. Then they can come back to the council if, in fact, things have worked out and we can approve the design of the the standard equipment that's going to go in. But I think if we let them have an opportunity to give it a dry run or a trial run and see what the effect is, maybe that'll be a good compromise for all of us here. I think that we have some concerns about the permanency of the seating that's going to be out there. We also have some concerns about whether or not there are going to be transients there late at night. It's on Wendy's, obviously, to monitor their property, and I certainly don't want to turn this into you know, private detail for the police department to have to come down and keep monitoring Wendy's and what's going on, and I certainly don't want to see the quality of life of the residents in the area be hurt. However, I think that there's room for compromise here, Mr. President, and I think there's some room for some outside-of-the-box thinking, and if maybe we allow Wendy's to do a three-month trial period with seating that's not permanently fixed, and then they can come back to the council after that period of time, and we can take a look at the complaints that were registered by the police department, we can take a look at the the calls that have been made to our first responders, maybe we'll have a better understanding as to what exactly is going on down there after hours.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight? My question, Mr. President, is are we granting the license on these contingencies, or are we...
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think it's also important to point out that nothing precludes Wendy's from coming back and petitioning the council to lift the restrictions at a later date, provided that there are no problems.
[Adam Knight]: So, the public hearing, having previously been... Mr. President, I move that the public hearing notice be waived based on the issue that you've already read at once and to the record.
[Adam Knight]: That's what it is. Just waive the reading, not the actual public hearing.
[Adam Knight]: Can't we just do it right now?
[Adam Knight]: All those in favor? All those opposed? The public hearing's already been held. We voted on a paper. We're moving for reconsideration on the paper, not on the public hearing. The public hearing's already been held. This legislative body's making a reconsideration on a piece of legislation that it had passed. It's not
[Adam Knight]: I was wondering if the petitioners could tell me if they plan on having any music, televisions, entertainment, or anything like that out on the deck.
[Adam Knight]: Move for approval, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Wednesday the 18th we had a Rules Committee meeting at 4.30 p.m. in Room 207. to discuss papers in committee. One of the papers that was in committee was for the council to review the cost of a copy of a meeting of the Medford City Council. Presently, there was a policy put in place where the cost of a copy of a tape was $20, and that $20 was based upon the time when it took somebody however long the meeting was to sit there in front of a VCR and actually copy it on VHS, Mr. President. Under the deliberations in the subcommittee meeting, we reported out favorably a recommendation that the council meetings from zero to six months be $5 for a copy, and council meetings for anything over six months be $10 for a copy. We've also discussed, Mr. President, the council's ongoing position of support in putting the council meetings on the city's website. So those are the two items that were submitted, discussed in committee, that were reported out favorably, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Right. Yeah, we're not creating a new policy council. What we're doing is just changing the fee schedule for the existing.
[Adam Knight]: I know that this committee of the whole meeting was the first of many discussions that we are going to have relative to the issue of opiate abuse here in the city of Medford. I think we've made great strides and this is certainly a good start. At the close of the Committee of the Whole meeting on the 18th, we also voted that we would meet again in a period not to exceed 30 days.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And Councilor Camuso, I think that that's a great act and a great approach to take in terms of shaping this ordinance to something that's going to work here for the city of Medford. In reviewing the language and looking at the language, it says, be it resolved that the city solicit a draft an ordinance for Medford to hire a part-time substance abuse prevention coordinator working a minimum of 24 hours a week. I think we don't even need to put in the part-time, full-time, or anything else. I think what we really need to do is take a look at saying a substance abuse prevention coordinator koordinator working no less than 40 hours a week. If in fact we wanted to be a full-time position, someone that's going to actually be here and there, it's going to be outlined. It's going to be framed right there in the ordinance that their hours of work or what's expected of them is that they put in 40 hours. Full-time, part-time, I think that those are items that would have to be defined early on in the ordinance as we start moving along. I think we can all agree that, you know, people work a 40-hour work week, so if we wanted a full-time position, we could just put in there they work no less than 40 hours, and that might be, you know, some cleaner language in terms of what it is we want to accomplish.
[Adam Knight]: Again, that's for discussion, Mr. President. I don't want to go amend the resolution. Councilor Camuso has put a number of hours and time and effort into this, so, you know, I don't want to do anything contrary to what his efforts are. However, that would be a suggestion that I would make at this point in time.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and I'd like to thank Councilor Penta for bringing this resolution forward. I certainly support the resolution in theory. I have some concerns about the language, Mr. President. In looking at the language of the resolution, I mean, I think that everybody here is in agreement that we don't want to see a 10-year contract with Comcast. and the mayor has the authority as our chief negotiator to enter into a contract. By law, we've all been advised, informed, you know, told by the city solicitor that the longest term of a contract should be three years unless special approval is given. In looking at the resolution, you know, I think that it might make sense for us to go on record advising the mayor on behalf of Comcast subscribers not to sign any agreement in excess of three years. And the reason I say that, Mr. President, is because, you know, even if Comcast was providing new methods and new technologies and competitive rates, I still don't think that we'd support a 10-year contract for the provision of Comcast cable services. You know, when looking at this resolution, again, I support it in theory. I think it's a good resolution. I just hopefully think that some suggestions to accomplish what we're trying to get to are necessary, Mr. President. And looking at it, be it resolved the Medford City Council will go on record advising the mayor on behalf of Comcast subscribers not to enter into any agreement in excess of a three-year term. Would be enough for us to get our point across his desk. And I'm open to obviously discussing amending the paper with the sponsor. Again, like I said, in essence, I'm in support of it. However, I think that some language changes might make it a little bit more strong.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, I'd like to thank the council for coming up with some new language. That's language that I can certainly support. I appreciate his efforts and it's a pleasure to work alongside him on this.
[Adam Knight]: I believe inviting someone to Comcast to appear before the council to discuss the ongoing contract negotiations would be a little bit outside the scope of actual good faith contract negotiations. The mayor has his position, Comcast has their position, and they're in negotiations trying to hammer out an agreement for them to come to the council I think would probably set back negotiations. Having negotiated a number of contracts in the past, during my time with the union, most of the negotiating committees keep everything confidential until the parties enter into an agreement, then they report that information out, and that information gets reported out.
[Adam Knight]: I'm certainly not. opposed to a public hearing on the issue to discuss the concerns that residents have about their Comcast cable subscription. However, even if you look at the open meeting law, the open meeting law says a perfect scenario for executive session would be when, in fact, it would be detrimental to contract negotiations. So I think that, you know, based on past practice. Right.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I believe last week we did vote by way of resolution to invite the Traffic Commission here as well. The traffic commission is the body that's responsible for the oversight, the implementation of the parking program, but more importantly, they're the policy makers. They're the ones that set the policy, set the ordinance and the tone. Republic's tasked with the job of enforcing our ordinance, and they're doing that. I think that it's incumbent upon us and the administration to sit down and point out where the failings are, and then take corrective action. Councilor Penta is absolutely correct. The contract is not being adhered to. There are violations in the contract. I think that, you know, Councilor Caraviello's idea is a good one to bring them here in the next 14 days or the next 30 days. I'd suggest that we say 30 days, Mr. President, for the simple fact that maybe we can meet as a council and come up with our laundry list or our punch list of things that are driving us crazy about this program. It's not working. The violations of the contract are not being adhered to. So on and so forth, get this list together and give them an opportunity to remediate the problems that they have. I mean, I don't think 30 days, we've already given them two months for a review. I think that the review that's coming back from this council and members of the general public are not glaring.
[Adam Knight]: And that's all well and good. I'm saying let's get the list together. Let's give it to them. Let's give them 30 days to fix it.
[Adam Knight]: If they don't fix it within 30, they don't fix it within 30. Then we can take our vote on whether or not we want the contract eliminated. But I think that we've made a lot of progress. We've made a lot of progress and a lot of discussion.
[Adam Knight]: It's a shame. And I don't disagree with you, Councilor, and quite frankly, I find it kind of asinine to be giving people parking tickets when there are no signs that are out there that say where you can park and where you can't park, and that the signs are inaccurate, so on and so forth. And I think that these are real-life issues, you know what I mean? So I think that, you know, at the end of the day, is the contract going to be eliminated by the administration? I don't know. I don't know. But if it isn't, if it isn't, Then what? We're still left with the same project and the same program, and we still need to have these changes take place in order for it to work appropriately.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. I too feel as though it's premature to take a vote to opt out of the contract. I think that, you know, we have a very divided council right now, but it's a council that's willing to take a look at the direction that our traffic commission is going in and try to work towards putting some resolutions and resolves in place. With that being said, you know, last week we did pass a resolution. We asked the traffic commission to come and appear before us with Republic. My council colleague, Councilor Caraviello, referred to a response that we received in our packet. However, that response wasn't to the paper that we just passed last week. So I think that, you know, we're going down one course and one train, and we're saying, come on down, let's talk about this, let's figure out what's going on, and let's come up with some sort of plan that can work for us. And now, a week later, we're saying, forget about it, let's eliminate the plan in its entirety. I think we're sending mixed signals and mixed messages. I certainly like the solution that Councilor Marks had. I thought that was an out-of-the-box way of looking at the situation, and I think that that's where the problem lies. I think the problem really does lie with over-aggressive enforcement. and then, you know, a very reasonable traffic commission that's willing to address some of those issues that come up. So we have aggressive enforcement with a reasonable traffic commission. Maybe the enforcement arm is the problem. So, you know, I think that this item needs a little bit more time to be hashed out, a little bit more time to be vetted properly, Mr. President, before I'm ready to take a vote to say that the program should be eliminated. As being said, Mr. President, I'd move on the question.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This morning I had the opportunity to speak with our highway superintendent relative to this very issue. And I asked exactly how far $143,000 would get him. And a highway superintendent said that this $143,000 will be very, very helpful to the city of Medford to restore our roadways. In the conversation, you know, we continued to talk about the program and what direction the city was going to go in, whether or not they were going to participate and so on. And one of the things that came up in discussion was the fact that if we're going to get $143,000 in money, And it's for the purposes of repairing our roadways, what's the best way to use it? Would it be the best use to take that and put cold patch down so that we can get through the rest of the winter, Mr. President? Or would it be the best use of that money to wait until the winter's over to grind streets down, right back down to the bone and build them back up the way that they should be built? Much to my happiness, Mr. President, they're going to be doing a bit of both, from what I understand. There'll be some sections of High Street that are going to get ground down all the way in the near future, and there's also going to be some patchwork that's being done. So I certainly commend the work of our DPW to take this twofold approach, Mr. President, to grinding the streets down, but also repairing some of the patchwork that needs to be done. With that being said, You know, I think this is a great initiative, a great project, and I commend the highway superintendent for being in front of the issue as opposed to behind it. Thank you, Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Well, what happened was, Mr. President, I got a set of minutes and the set of minutes was incorrect. Then there were going to be some corrections that were made. I got another set of minutes that came out that had corrections in them. So before I could bring the corrections up at the Council meeting on the initial minutes, we got a new set of minutes. I got those new set of minutes. I looked at those new set of minutes. I've gone through those new set of minutes. I've made one change, Mr. President, and it comes under the first item on the GIC. And Councilor Penter and I having a little bit of a disagreement as to what it should read. What the president read into the record was, Councilor Penta asks that the record reflect he also spoke as a member of the Massachusetts Municipal Association. Councilor Penta would like the language to read that Councilor Penta did not speak as a city councilor, but as a member of the Massachusetts Municipal.
[Adam Knight]: What was written to the record by the President is what I'm going to go with, Mr. President. I've gone over this thing three or four or five times, so.
[Adam Knight]: As do I, because, you know, my name's on it, Mr. President. That's why I gave it such scrutiny. I wasn't going to move for approval if I feel as though it wasn't an accurate reflection of what happened at the meeting. You know, so I'd move for approval as amended, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: We just said that, you know, I was under the impression that if someone was going to be behind the rail and they were going to speak, but not as a city council, but as an average citizen or a member of an organization, they would get up and they would address the council from the podium. That didn't happen, which started leading me to have all these concerns saying, what's going on? Why is it happening here? And then I watched the tape and it says he was also a member of the MMA as opposed to exclusively speaking as a member of the MMA. So, I went with what the president said because of the fact that, you know, parliamentary procedure would do that. Which president? You. What did I say? Councilor Penta asked that the record also reflect that he spoke as a member of the Massachusetts Municipal Association. And I may have said something to the effect of so noted.
[Adam Knight]: There was action on the paper. There was action on the paper. It was a letter sent, I believe, to the administration and to the legislature.
[Adam Knight]: – What should the record reflect, and should it reflect whether or not what the president read into the record, or what was Mentioned during a speech when the gentleman wasn't speaking as a city councilor, apparently. I mean, I don't know. I'm deferring to the language that the president referred to when he read it into the record.
[Adam Knight]: Well, like I said, Mr. President, my name's on it and I move for approval. I want it to be an accurate reflection just because. Motion for approval by Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: I have. That's what I've come up with.
[Adam Knight]: I read the references saying that Councilor Pender wanted to also be recorded as being a member of the Massachusetts Municipal Association.
[Adam Knight]: The email I have in front of me reads, under paper number 15053, the vote was taken and the president noted, Councilor Penta would like the record to reflect that he also spoke as a member of the Massachusetts Municipal Association. The minutes should reflect that, hyphen. Councilor Penta spoke also as a member of the Massachusetts Municipal Association.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilor Camuso, for filing this resolution. I always think it's a good idea when it's time to put your money where your mouth is, And I think this is a perfect example of that. If we are going to take the issue of addiction in our community seriously, I think we need to dedicate a revenue stream to that. Mr. President, we've had a lot of discussions over the past couple of weeks about putting a line item in the budget, about inviting certain individuals down here to provide us with their expertise. And I think this is a great start to the discussion, Mr. President. I think right now we have the unique opportunity because we have certain services that are lacking to really tailor programming to figure out what's exactly going to work in our community. Not what's going to work next door across the street or up on Beacon Hill, but what's going to work here for Medford, Mr. President. I too would support further discussion of this matter in the subcommittee process. However, I feel as though it's a great idea, and as soon as we shape this thing to reflect what our wants, needs, and desires are here in the city of Medford, and what exactly it is going to take to assist those that are struggling, you know, I'll be supporting this wholeheartedly, Mr. President. I think it's a great idea, and I commend Councilor Camuso for putting his money where his mouth is. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if I may be so bold to ask, several weeks back, we did request some information from our first responders here in the community, providing us with some data relative to the number of overdoses that have occurred in 2013, 2014, and year to date, related to opiates. And I haven't seen any of that come across my desk yet, Mr. President. I was wondering if you might have seen it.
[Adam Knight]: I just, it's my understanding that the EMTs and Armstrong Ambulance do carry the NACA. But in terms of public safety officials at this point in time, I don't believe they do. I believe they're in ongoing contract negotiations and discussions thereof. But that can be clarified. But as far as Armstrong Ambulance, I'm certain that they are carrying NACA. Very good. So Mr. Clerk, would you like to roll?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. President. This is a good resolution. I'm reading it, and I think that it could work. both ways I think inversely we could pair adults with youngsters who are willing to give back to the community to assist those maybe that are widowed at home that have problems maybe with some home repair, shoveling, mowing the lawn, that type of stuff, or other activities of daily living, Mr. President, whether it's helping pay the bills, that type of thing. I do have a concern that if in fact the city does institute a program that it might take away from some of the non-profit organizations in the community that are already doing this kind of work, Mr. President. So I'd ask that you know if in fact the mayor was going to put together a mentoring program that he'd draw the people in to his office right now for some advice, for some direction, for some deliberation as to what works, what doesn't work, and what we can do to pool our efforts together to ensure that the program would touch as many lives as it possibly can. If the Kiwanis have their Builders Club and it's, you know, working to make a mentoring program, pairing individuals, children with adults to mentor, we don't want to break that bond and we don't want to set back the good work that that club has done. So I'd ask that if the administration were in fact going to take this suggestion seriously, that they brought all the stakeholders to the table, Mr. President, to talk about best practices and to figure out ways that we're not pulling away from each other.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight? Mr. President, tomorrow there will be a Rules Committee meeting. And I don't want to be so bold as to suggest that Councilor Marks may be willing to put a B paper forward and refer that to the Rules Committee. And we can get the ball rolling on the mentoring program right now. And we're meeting tomorrow at 4.30. So moved. Well, no, I mean, we can set up the parameters. We can set up the parameters of the program in the rules committee, report it out to the committee of the whole for a vote, and then we can, we can start it up before this legislative session is over. Great.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'd like to amend the paper with the B paper, Mr. President. And the B paper would read that the Mayor and the City Council President work together to appoint a member of the City Council to be a member of the negotiating team in the upcoming contract renewals.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think that Councilor Camuso's revised amendment to the paper is the right course of action. I didn't feel too comfortable moving forward without first having an opportunity to review the initial and original vote that authorized the mayor to enter into a contract with a cable service provider for a period of time over three years. And getting the city solicitor's opinion is also something that I would have liked to have in my hand before I actually made a vote as to whether or not we would allow the mayor to move forward. So with that being said, Mr. President, I certainly think that after the debate and the deliberation that we've had here at this point in time, we have a paper that we can all support and I'd like to move for approval. Very good.
[Adam Knight]: Can we do one roll call vote on the whole paper?
[Adam Knight]: On the motion, Councilor Penta. I wouldn't have voted to put the papers together. We're going to continue to debate on the topic, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: You don't want to debate the topic.
[Adam Knight]: Of the vote to put all the papers, to unite the papers, Mr. President. I voted to unite the papers because I felt as though we had an agreement here amongst the members of this council that this is something that we can all support. As such, if we're all going to support it, we can stop debate and we can support the measure and we can move forward on it. If in fact, we're going to merge all the papers together and then continue debate on it and then start adding to it again, I have concerns about that. I'd like to keep my paper separate.
[Adam Knight]: I'm not out after you at all. What I want to do is I want to preserve my paper, and I don't know what's going to come up. I don't know what's going to come up.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: I'm just hoping that the Councilor can share with us the address and the location of Medford Pediatrics.
[Adam Knight]: Okay, that's Mystic Valley Pediatrics.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think bringing Republic here is all well and good. However, Republic's job in the function that they're tasked with is to enforce the existing city ordinance. And I think that the scope and purview and directive that they're receiving is coming from the Traffic Commission. So we can bring Republic here all we want. Republic's still gonna do what they're gonna do. The Traffic Commission is the body that has the oversight and the control and the ability to direct them to do certain things. So I think that if we're gonna do anything, we should bring the Traffic Commission here because the Traffic Commission is the policymaking arm that's in charge of this parking program. They're the policymaking arm that makes these decisions. They're the policymaking arm that's reduced the parking hours from seven to seven 8 to 6, so they're the ones that can effectuate change. So I think that those are the people that really need to be here, Mr. President, would be the Traffic Commission. So the Traffic Commission is invited.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Thank you very much, Mr. President. Recent conversation with athletic director Bobby Maloney who was very, very proud of the work of the 2014-2015 GBL champion gymnastics team. As such, Mr. President, I too feel sense of pride and sense of achievement. These are great kids that are good student-athletes that come in here and represent Medford to the highest degree. And I'd ask that this resolution be approved and that they be invited down to receive a citation.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, thank you very much. I believe the 2014-2015 GBL champs are back-to-back champs this year. And under the direction of Coach Bates, they've been really achieving at a high level. I'd like to commend the team, Mr. President, and ask them to come up here and accept a citation for their wonderful achievement. They, too, are great student athletes that represent Medford And, you know, I think that it's a real good thing to allow them to come up here and to be praised for the hard work that they do and for the way that they represent our community. On the motion of Councilor Knight for approval, all those in favor?
[Adam Knight]: I guess it was a good winter for Medford High School sports, Mr. President. Indeed. We have three GBL champions and the 2014-2015 girls hockey team was also able to win the championship this year, Mr. President. So, you know, they're a great team, great girls. They do a great job representing the city of Medford. They wear blue and white in their veins and they represent us well. So, again, I'd like to invite them down as well to receive council accommodation on their great achievement.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I did find error in the records. I'm working with the individual, and we're trying to see if we can figure out exactly what it is the miscommunication is. So we're going to allow them to remain on the table.
[Adam Knight]: I'd actually like to make a brief announcement, Mr. President, if I may.
[Adam Knight]: We're having a Committee of the Whole meeting tomorrow evening.
[Adam Knight]: At 6 p.m. in room 207 to address the issue of substance abuse in our community, Mr. President. This is a public meeting that's open to all, and I'd ask for those that have anything to contribute, add. or participate to come on down. It's going to be a good beginning. And also, Mr. President, there's a committee on the rules meeting at 4.30, prior to the subcommittee, the committee of the whole meeting. Will you be serving dinner at that meeting, Councilor? I'm thinking about it. I've got to talk to the clerk and see what he has on the menu. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilor Penter, for filing this resolution. I feel as though it's a good idea. Anytime that we can take steps to connect people with government and ensure that government works for them is a good thing. So I certainly will be supporting this endeavor. However, I would like to amend the paper by way of a B paper, Mr. President, because I think that it's safe to say that You know, the state of our side streets is so that they can't be traveled down as frequently as they have been when no snow has been on them. So the wear and tear on our main roads has become excessive. That coupled with the fact that we've done a good amount of snow removal on those roads has really torn them up. And I'd like to see what the cost would be, Mr. President, maybe an estimate from the city engineer explaining to us what the cost would be to resurface all of the emergency arteries in the city. So I'd like to amend the paper, Mr. President, asking that the city engineer and the DPW commissioner report back to this council on a cost estimate as to what the price would be to actually resurface from curb to curb each emergency artery in this community.
[Adam Knight]: I'm saying our emergency arteries, the dedicated emergency arteries that we have here in the community have been, you know, beat on because of the high volume of travel and the high volume of heavy equipment that's been on it. And they're all falling apart as well. We have a reporting mechanism here for people to report back whether or not they see something wrong on their street. But I think it might also be important for us to, actually get an estimate of the cost to resurface all those roadways that are in disrepair, so that when someone's coming into Medford from the city of Somerville, they can't tell they've entered Medford because of the way that the street feels.
[Adam Knight]: Right, and I mean, I don't think that the price is going to be the price. And then we can always go back and subrogate against whoever we do feel as though is responsible for it to get a collection of our money back in that regard. If we have main street and four different sections of main street are broken up, one's national grid, one's, you know, and star and the other one is the city. We're going to do four different construction projects.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. It's my pleasure to bring this resolution forward. I had an opportunity to speak with Councilor Caraviello earlier this evening and he was very regretful that he wasn't able to make it. Mr. Clark was actually waked this evening down at Gaffey Funeral Home and he's a great gentleman, a World War II veteran who was on foreign soil in Germany during that great clash, Mr. President. He raised 10 children here in the city of Medford, and he will be sadly missed. I've known Mr. Clark for a number of years, although we hadn't been in touch since I gave up my paper route. He lived around the corner from me. But he was a gentleman, he was a great man, a great family man, raised a great family, served his country well, and he will be sadly missed, Mr. President. So I'd ask that this meeting this evening be adjourned in his honor.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I think this is a great proactive approach for us to prepare for budget debates that are going to be coming up in very short order. And with that being said, on a similar focus, I think it may be important, Mr. President, for the Assessor's Office to report back to us whether collections are keeping up with forecasted revenues, Mr. President. So I'd like to see a contrast between current collections and projected revenues to date.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think the situation that we're seeing down off of Yale Street and Berwick and Benton and Bradford is really a failure of the street-by-street permitting system. If I live on Bradford Road and I have a permit to park on that road and, you know, you're only allowed to park on one side of the street, So there's, say, 20 spots, but there's 50 cars on Bradford Road, 50 cars with permits to park on Bradford Road. And I can't park on Bradford Road. Where am I going to go? I'm going to go to the next street over. However, that street's permitted for residents that just live on that street. So by the time I find a parking spot, I'm going to be down in Alexander's, walking all the way up the street to Main and Ovid. So I think that the street-by-street permitting system that we have in place is not appropriate. situations like this highlighted, that coupled with the fact that it's been brought to my attention, and I'm doing some research to figure out if it's the case, is that Bradford, Benton, and Berwick historically were granted a variance to be allowed to park along Yale as well as Bradford, Berwick, and Benton when the permitting parking went into place some four years ago down there. So, you know, Republic is tasked with the job of enforcing our current ordinance. We've had an ordinance that's on place, and because of the lack of enforcement, we're now seeing a lot of the problems that are coming up, Mr. President. I think that it's very important to note to the individuals that right now are in a situation where they're going to get tickets, and they're going to continue to get tickets, that they need to go before the Traffic Commission and petition for a variance to be allowed to park on Boynton or Yale Street The chief is well aware of the situation. The commission is well aware of the situation. And the members of this council are working towards a resolve as evident by the discussion that we're having here this evening, Mr. President. But, you know, I think that one of the things that we're seeing is a number of abuses that are coming out of renters in these streets with visitor's parking permits. They're not registering their car in Massachusetts. They may have five people living in a small apartment. They're registering three cars in Medford getting three resident parking permits and two visitor passes. So on a street that has 48 spots, not in a snow emergency, that's taken down to 20 spots in a snow emergency on one side of the road for 50 cars, and then of those 50 cars, we're seeing another 10 of them with visitor passes. It's creating a real, real problem, Mr. President. So, you know, I certainly commend the work of Councilor Marksley on this. You know, I'm going to do my part. I'm going to talk to the chief as well and see if we can't find out whether or not this variance is available for the residents that live down there on what I've referred to as the three B's. off of Yale Street at this point in time. But I really think that going forward, this is something that needs to be considered. This is good policy. It's not hard to break it down by ward. It's not hard to break it down by ward and precinct, for that matter, if, in fact, we have concerns about people coming from the north part of the city and parking at the train station, or people going from the west part of the city and parking close to the bus to get the bus. But I really think that this is just an example of how the street-by-street permitting system can fail. because it just pushes the problem to the next street, and to the next street, and to the next street. And now we have folks that are in a situation where they're going to have to take a taxi from their car, where they parked, to get to their house. So with that being said, Mr. President, I'd like a report back from the Traffic Commission, and I've already made this request privately, as to whether or not there is a variance or a grandfathered exemption for the three Bs off of Yale Street.
[Adam Knight]: That matter was discussed previously and I believe we're going to be holding a rules committee meeting on the 18th of this month to discuss papers and committee, one of them being that.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor. Councilor Knight. Thank you very much, Mr. President. First of all, I'd like to thank the Garrity's and Ms. Butler, and I'd like to let you know that you're going to make it through this. And the reason you're going to make it through this is because you have people like Janelle Rocco, who are here to help you. And it's a reciprocal relationship. Janelle, you're going to make it too, because you have people like the Garrity's and the Butler's that are here to help you. But I think that we as a city government need to take a look at the way that we are approaching addiction addiction recovery and The punitive approaches that we take, I don't think we're looking at this as a public health crisis. I think we're looking at it as a public safety crisis. And until we really change our focus and our efforts on treating addiction as a disease and not as a public safety issue, we're going to see a lot of the same problems repeat themselves over and over and over again, Mr. President. I think that we've had a lot of discussion about addiction here in this council, and it's something that's very close to a number of us. And one of the things I'd like to see is Medford Overcoming Addiction be invited to our Committee of the Whole meeting to provide us with some input and insight and maybe a little bit of direction as to what they see working in other communities and other places. And more importantly, Mr. President, to identify the voids that we have here in Medford. And to come up with an action plan to fill these voids so that in the future, families don't feel like they're left alone, that they're out there hanging around on a vine by themselves, Mr. President. So I'd like to move that this Committee of the Whole meeting be set up as soon as possible, and that Medford Overcoming Addiction be invited, Mr. President, to share their stories and to share their successes and to point us in the right direction.
[Adam Knight]: I was just going to suggest, Mr. President, that due to the fact that we're having a committee meeting on this stuff, we'll have a lot of good ideas and a lot of suggestions.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President. I'd like to invite Andrew Cronin up to help me present coach McGonigal with this award Mr. Cronin is One of the star athletes here at Medford High School. He's a great student, and he's also a great sportsman, Mr. President. And he gave a great presentation at the Friends of Medford Baseball's annual fundraiser on behalf of Coach Maggs. And I'd like him to come up behind the podium and do it once again.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Several weeks ago, Two of Medford's own, one Lonnie Hilson Sr. and John McGonigal, who's here with us, were bestowed awards by the Massachusetts Baseball Coaches Association. Coach McGonigal was awarded the Assistant Coach of the Year, and we have a commendation here for him, which will read, the Medford City Council takes pleasure in awarding this council commendation to John McGonigal, Assistant Coach of the Medford High School Varsity Baseball Team. in receipt and recognition of being the recipient of the Assistant Coach of the Year award. Coach, I'd love you to come up here and accept this award. And Mr. Cronin's going to talk a little bit about how much you mean to him and how much you mean to this team.
[Adam Knight]: John, congratulations. Sean, it's an honor to present you with this award, and it's an even greater honor to call you a friend. If you'd be willing to say a few words on behalf of the city of Medford here, it'd be great. We got a chair right here for you in case you need to. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: There may be 30 days between the two documents, between his application and the chief's signing off, which might have been rectified in the middle. But we were uncertain. I don't think that there's any harm in granting the license with the stipulation that- I mean, if a gentleman's going to be driving people in Medford, what if he gets tickets to Medford?
[Adam Knight]: Individual was on vacation when he passed it in. Individual got back from vacation. His paperwork seemed to have gone missing. He had to resubmit the paperwork, was what the story was that he told me. I think it would be safe to say that the reason there was a delay was because of a paperwork error administratively, and that it was rectified. But at this point in time, the gentleman's before us now.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Councilor Marks, thank you for bringing this resolution forward. I think that it's appropriate, directs the question to the proper forum, the proper board and commission that is the authority to make these decisions. Thank you very much for bringing this forward. I'd like to amend the paper, Mr. President, by way of a B paper. And I would also like to make a request that the convenience fee of $0.35 be waived on all online transactions. I've said from the start that that's been a sticking point of mine where you could actually pay for $0.50 of parking and have $0.70 of fees associated with it. So, no question, $1.20 to park for a half an hour and $0.50 worth of parking, Mr. President. So, I'd ask that the paper be amended by way of a B paper. that would request that the Traffic Commission look into waiving the convenience fee of $0.35 for online transactions when using the park mobile app.
[Adam Knight]: I believe the convenience fee was something that was arranged between the third party vendor and Republic. It's passed on to the consumer, but it's outside the contract with the city. That's my understanding. Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Another issue that's been brought to my concern that the Traffic Commission should be able to help us out with would be the fact that Republic, when they were here, they represented to us that they'd be more than willing and happy and ready to go over to the Senior Center. and to conduct trainings with the patrons thereof. And it's been brought to my attention that although they've been over there once or twice in the past, they've yet to come over actually with the kiosk and do an actual virtual training with the kiosk there in front of people to touch and feel and get comfortable with. So I'd also like to amend the paper further and ask that a training be set up at the senior center within the next 30 days, Mr. President, with a virtual kiosk present and available for the people to for lack of a better term, play with.
[Adam Knight]: Um, thank you very much, Mr. President. I think it's a great idea to have the city engineer report back to us as to where we are in terms of compliance, what the cost is going to be for the taxpayers here in the city of Medford. Um, I think it's also important to take a look that if in fact this program is delayed, what effect it's going to have on our watershed. I think we have a lot of questions that need to be answered, Mr. President, and I certainly don't have a problem asking those questions. However, until those questions are answered, I'd be opposed to sending a letter off to the EPA.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'd like to commend Councilor Caraviello on tackling this issue. In my time on the Council, we've had a lot of discussion about taxi licenses, about the ordinance that's in place, about whether or not it's outdated. And I think that an appropriate first step would be auditing these companies to determine where they're in compliance and where they're in non-compliance so that we can move forward and develop a comprehensive ordinance and make some changes. The city clerks work very hard on putting something together that mirrors what they've done in Brookline, which seems to be a rather extensive and comprehensive ordinance. I think that Councilor Caraviello's course of action is an appropriate one where we'll meet weekly or bi-weekly in order to hash this out and get it wrapped up hopefully before the end of the legislative session, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: But if Council President, Councilor Penta has an issue, I'll be happy to sit with them and talk about it and we can figure it out. So we'll table them until next week.
[Adam Knight]: Move for approval, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. At the bottom of the paper submitted by the Mayor's Office, The alleged defect has been repaired after the accident pursuant to the paper that's before us. It doesn't give the date though. Okay. Do you have the date? It looks like the date of accident was 11, 7, 14.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. Mr. Capuccia, I think when you have to look at the tiered rate system, you'll see that everybody that falls under tier one will be paying generally the same rate that they were paying last year. It's a conservation measure. So it's really based on consumption. So if you conserve your water usage, you won't see an increase if you stay within that tier. However, if you bump up out of that tier, you will see an increase. But it's a conservation measure. It's not necessarily a budgetary item. I think that the reason that the tiered rate system is going into place more so is for environmental concerns and for conservation issues. And I think to control the increases that we're going to see in the future from the MWRA based on our consumption.
[Adam Knight]: Point of further clarification, Councilor, Vice President.
[Adam Knight]: Carvey. I yield the floor, Mr. President, to the chairman of the committee. I didn't see him walk in.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think when you take a look at these two parcels that are in question, the Meadow Glen Mall and the site of the former Shaw's Supermarket that's vacant right now, We have two large parcels of land, and with the appropriate zoning, I feel as though we may be able to generate a mixed-use development of some sort. Now, I think that it's important to note that we could reclassify this area as a mixed-use zoning area, however. Maybe the use of an overlay district, maybe something that's more appropriate. So that's why I asked that the Office of Community Development, the Building Department, and the Zoning Board take a look at the options that are available there and present with us recommendations. You know, when I drive down Route 16 and I think about the pending construction that's going to happen, I think about stations landing, I think about Assembly Row, I think about the Meadow Glen Mall that we drive past so that we can get to those places. And I think with a little bit of effort and a little bit of hard work, Mr. President, I think we might be able to come up with a zoning recommendation for that area. that will result in a great turnaround. I think that, you know, when you look at Locust Street and you look at Meadow Glen Mall and you look at the Shaw site, you know, you can have a great vision there of mixed-use development with small commercial, light industrial. There's a number of housing that's going on there. And I think that it's important also to think about the zoning overlay district because we have existing businesses that are there that we don't want to displace, Mr. President. So I bring this resolution forward seeking the guidance and input of these three departments. I've had a number of conversations with our Director of Community Development, I feel as though it does a wonderful job, Mr. President. And in my conversations with her, you know, we've kicked around a number of different ideas, but I think this is something that's going to take the community as a whole to really come up with and see what their vision is and see what they want to live with, Mr. President. So, you know, I'd like to see a little bit of deliberation on this. a little bit of participation and civic involvement from the residents in the community to paint a picture and come up with some sort of development or some sort of vision that they have for the area for mixed-use development, Mr. President. So I'd ask that my colleagues support this resolution and await the findings of the Building Department, Office of Community Development, and Zoning Board, should they be willing to support this.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Just two short weeks ago, Mr. McGonigal, our assistant coach of the Medford High School Mustang Boys Baseball Team, was presented with the Massachusetts Baseball Coaches Association Assistant Coach of the Year Award. This is a very prestigious award, and I don't think it should go without recognition. Simultaneously, at the same event, a longtime South Medford Little League volunteer, Lonnie Hilson Sr., was given the baseball the Massachusetts Baseball Coaches Association Community Service Award for his over 50 years of community involvement and donating of his time, Mr. President. So I think it's only justified that we recognize these two individuals for their commitment to the city of Medford and to the betterment of student athletes here in the community.
[Adam Knight]: Yes. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, Chief Sacco is here. I think it might be appropriate for Chief Sacco to say a few words on behalf of Mr. Goulding. If you could.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. I, too, agree with Councilor Penter in terms of We need to get a little bit better understanding as to where our new Attorney General is coming from in regard to her approach. And again, there's been litigation, ongoing litigation, so I think that it would make sense maybe for us to let the lawyers do the lawyering, provide us with some information, and let us make informed decisions thereafter, Mr. President. But I think at this point in time, the position of the Attorney General is very, very important to this body and to the community. In terms of Mr. Sachs and his retirement, I wish him the best. I hope that he goes on to have a great, great, great retirement and enjoy the sunny beaches of Florida or wherever it is he may end up. Yes, indeed. Councilor Camuso.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, councillors. Councilor Knight. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you very much, Councilor Marks, for initiating a discussion on Medford Square. One of the things that you said was that, you know, the value of our homes is directly tied to the success of our schools and the success of our downtown business districts. And I think another thing that's important to point out is that the value of our homes is also tied to location, location, location, and we're in a great location. Medford Square is a great location. And as Councilor Mark said, you know, we have two parcels of land that are underdeveloped down there. We have great access to public transit in Medford Square, but we have no people there. And I think that it might make sense for us to maybe take a look at integrating some affordable housing or some moderate to low-income housing down in the area to actually put people in the square so that when these businesses do open and if we do get an economic development plan in place, and we start to generate new businesses, we actually have people that are going to go shop there. And they can do so by walking there. They can do so by riding their bikes there. They can do so by using alternative modes of transportation other than their vehicle, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. I'd like to thank both Councilors Caraviello and Penta for bringing this resolution forward. I think it's important to point out for those of us at home who would like to maybe understand Mr. Mombo-Kett's story a little bit better, that it is memorialized down at Placed at Park, right behind home plate. There is a plaque down there that speaks about his achievements and his professional achievements, but also his personal achievements and what he's done in the community of Medford to improve our quality of life here and to improve the lives of young athletes in the city, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilor Knight. Councilor Caraviello.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Jimmy. Councilor Knight. Yeah, Mr. President, I think that Mr. Spiracus makes a great point. When you look at the money that we're bringing in on meals tax, that shows almost a direct correlation as to how well our businesses in downtown are doing. So I think it might make sense for us to get some numbers in terms of what we collected pre-parking enforcement so that we can have something to compare them to at a later time so we can have a benchmark as to what business was like before parking. Then maybe we can do a 90-day review. We already have one on file. We can take a look at a 90-day review and match those numbers up with the same time last year and see exactly what the impact is. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: I think it might make sense that we go through the actual changes that the Traffic Commission has made prior to, you know, going through each point and making critical commentary. You know, we're talking about locations of kiosks now. We went from, we're on to item C, 10-minute grace period at the end of paid time. Now we're talking about locations of kiosks. I think we're really kind of veering off course here. The purpose of the Chief to come up here was to tell us what changes were made since the last meeting. So why don't we let the Chief explain to us what the changes were made, and then after that, we can present our questions. But maybe we can let him get through it a little bit cleaner and easier for people to understand.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. As I remember it, Mr. President, Mr. Nash came up and Mr. Nash says that we'll said that we'd work to waive all the tickets issued on January 15th, 16th. Um, however, if it was a handicap violation, a bus stop or a fire hydrant, that was something that they weren't willing to entertain. However, any type of kiosk violation was my understanding was with it. They were willing to live, but however, any type of violation that would be, you know, a normal infraction that necessarily wouldn't be, a creature of the parking management program wouldn't be waived. You know, if you're parking in a bus stop or a fire hydrant or something like that. That was my understanding. And I think we all did agree that those tickets would not be waived in terms of handicap or a fire hydrant.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. I also believe Mr. Nash stated when he was here that they were going to assist the City of Medford getting them at a cheaper cost because they were using their purchase power that they have because they're a national company that does this across the country so they buy more of this type of equipment. Thank you, Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Counsel. Good night. It's my understanding, Chief, that when a ticket is issued, it's recorded in the latitude and longitude of the vehicle is recorded, correct? On their plate reader, yes. On their plate reader, right. So it would be safe to say that if, in fact, a citation is issued that's outside the realm of a permit parking street, that they'd be able to pull that information right up on their system and show where the vehicle was parked and whether or not it was within All's good in Capen or Austin between Prescott and high, but not Austin between high and Uber. Right. Thank you. They just need to have the actual information. If you don't have good information, you're not going to put out good stuff.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, thank you very much. I'd like to congratulate Tiffany and Salvatore on the birth of their first child, as well as Josephine and Big Sal. and Paula and Billy on the birth of their new granddaughter. It's a very exciting time for these families and I just wanted to let them know that we're thinking of them during this time.
[Adam Knight]: Just a few short weeks ago, our tree warden, Aggie Tudin, was recognized by being selected the Seth H. Swift Tree Warden of the Year, presented by the Massachusetts Tree Wardens and Forestry Association. So I think it's very appropriate that we recognize Aggie for all her hard work and dedication that she does on behalf of the city of Medford. It's quite an honor and a privilege to have the tree warden of the year working here right out of Medford City Hall. So congratulations, Aggie. Please step up. The Medford City Council takes pleasure in awarding this council commendation to Agnes Aggie Tootin, Tree Wooden, City of Medford, in recognition of being selected as the Seth H. Swift Tree Wooden of the Year, presented by the Massachusetts Tree Woodens and Forestry Association. Signed, Medford City Council President Frederick N. Dello Russo, Adam Knight, City Council.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. Just a couple of questions. Um, you say this is a community based service. What communities do you service Medford? Is there a region, several cities in town? How many full-time and part-time jobs is this business going to bring to the city?
[Adam Knight]: 25 to 30? And what's the breakdown in terms of part-time and full-time?
[Adam Knight]: Okay. And do you have a specific number of slots of your hundred reserved for metric residents?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think based upon what we're hearing today, we can all agree that the plan is not perfect. This is not a perfect plan and we all know that. And I think the reason that there's so much frustration is because the lack of transparency in the process in establishing this plan, Mr. President. And because the process wasn't open and transparent, now we're in the situation we're in where there are a lot of questions, and it seems like there's a lot of reaction and reactivity versus being proactive and proactivity. Chief Sacco's done an excellent job, Mr. President, I feel, in addressing the concerns of the general public. He's been out there, and he's been working very hard on this. As Councilman Locke said, he right now is the face of this program, and there's no question about it. He's been working far too many hours, in my opinion, on establishing a parking management program and a little less on making sure that the other essential functions of our police department are up and running. I think that this is almost becoming a distraction at this point in time, Mr. President. But I guess the question is, where do we go from here? And what are our options from here? And in looking at the situation, we can go forward as the plan's presented. It is what it is. We can work towards trying to get the contract bought out and eliminate the contract, but I don't think that that's going to happen. I don't think that's a reality of the situation. I don't think that that's something we're going to be able to be successful with. However, I think that over the past three weeks, we have been very successful at moving this project and this plan towards something that everybody can live with. And, you know, I think that if we're going to make a commitment to parking enforcement or the parking management plan that's in place, we've seen people from Republic that have been willing to work with us, we've seen the Traffic Commission that's taking our concerns very seriously, Mr. President. So I think that in looking at what our best option is, our best option is to continue the discussion, to continue the dialogue, to keep this issue here at the table, to keep the Committee of the Whole open so that we can continue to make changes to the existing plan so that we can have a successful downtown. And when I look at the plan, I think that there are some other areas that we need to look at, Mr. President. And if we want to make this work, we need to take a look at the comprehensive zoning that we have in our downtown business areas to ensure that we're attracting sustainable businesses based upon the zoning regulations and ordinances that we have in place right now. I also think it's important that, because this is a parking management plan, it might be very suitable for us to take a look at what we can do to take cars off the road and to improve pedestrian-oriented transit and multimodal transportation down in our business district, Mr. President. So I think the proper course of action for us to move forward at this point in time would be to continue this discussion to talk about what changes that we can continue to make. We've been very successful over the past three weeks in addressing the concerns that have been brought to us. Thankfully, the people from our public and the chief have been willing to work with us and have been very, very patient in addressing our concerns. And I think that we've been patient because of the frustrations and the lack of open, transparent process that's been in place. We need to ask the residents to be patient because we're getting responses. We're moving in the right direction, Mr. President. So I think, you know, based upon the options that we have here before us, it's in our best interest to keep the paper before the council to keep it open and to continue the dialogue and continue the conversation.
[Adam Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Ms. Martin, you said something that really resonated with me, and it's something that I know our representative has been working on very hard for a number of years, and that is the closure of the Salem Street Car Barn. I think that's very necessary, and it's something that's long overdue. I think the closure of the Salem Street Car Barn would actually bring an effort and an opportunity for us to beautify the area, but more importantly, it'll improve the quality of life for the residents in the neighborhood. I know I've worked when I was in the legislature with Senator Shannon, with Representative Donato on a number of occasions in making an attempt to get the carbon out of there. But I'm pretty sure, if my memory serves me correctly, that the representative was able to secure some funding in order to perform a study and a plan to relocate the carbons to Wellington Circle. I don't know how far along we are in that process, but what I'll do is reach out to him and I'll let you know.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. Councilor Marks brings up a good point about the impact that a gaming facility is going to have on our transportation infrastructure here in the city of Medford. And then we're sitting here talking about some grant funds that are available to us and what to do with them. And I think it might make sense for us to maybe look at hiring a full-time transportation planner, someone that can look at the issues that are affecting our city, can determine what's going on, what impact they're having, and what direction we need to go. But someone that's a professional, not someone that we're going to give $100,000 to do a study to give us the study back and then disappear, but someone that's going to be on staff, or someone maybe that we can work with regionally with our neighbors in Malden and Everett, who are also going to be impacted at Wellington Circle by the, well, maybe not so much Everett, because they're going to have PNC or money coming in from wind management, but Malden, to help us out and maybe approach this issue regionally so that we can pool our resources and that we can get more bang for our buck.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President, and thank you, Councilor Camuso, for bringing this resolution forward. In my time on the Council, I've seen similar papers to this where we want to set up an account, whether it be for capital improvements or a rainy day fund. And I think it's a good idea. I think this is something that the city needs to build upon some of the commentary that Councilor Pinter has made. I think funding this account is going to be vital. Setting it up is one thing, but funding the account is certainly something else. I would be very wary, however, of going forward and putting together an actual dollar amount. I think that the way we might want to look at this is whether it be a percentage of free cash or whether or not a threshold is met and then a certain percentage can go up. If we have $6 million in free cash, then no less than 5% will go into the stabilization fund, something like that. We can get very creative with the language here. I think that we can really get some bang for our buck. provided that the administration's on board, Mr. President. This is a paper that I'll be supporting wholeheartedly, and I ask my council colleagues to join me, commend Councilor Camuso for bringing it forward. Thank you, Councilor Knight. Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Adam Knight]: I think everybody's made some very good points here. I think it's important to point out, though, if there's no account, then there's, no place to put this money. So I think that the establishment of the account is going to be critical in this success. I also think that moving forward, we probably should sit in the Committee of the Whole and discuss what we'd like to see happen. And we can do that every single year, and we don't have to set necessarily a criteria that's going to be carried on from the day that it's implemented until the day that it's ended. We might be able to propose three or four different options as to how to fund this account once the account is exactly established. based upon the financial picture, the financial snapshot that we received at that point in time. So I can certainly understand Councilor Muck's point where he says we can create the account. Once the account's created, then we lose all control and oversight over the account and our recommendations are just going to be that, just recommendations. Whereas if we have this paper in the committee of the whole and we sit down and we vet it properly and we go on to really create a program and we present it to the mayor for him to either accept or deny, then it's on him as to whether or not he wants to establish this capital improvement trust fund. or long-term stabilization account, a rainy day account, or whatever you want to call it. So I certainly could see both sides of the issue here, but I think that the most important thing really is establishing the account first and foremost. And once we get the account established, then we can figure out what we're going to do and how we're going to fund it. And we can do that every year during budget time.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. President. I know that there's been recent discussions from the Baker administration that there may be an edict or requirement that municipalities do establish a rainy day fund or a stabilization fund. Until that comes to fruition, you know, that's just rumor, that's just talk, that's just hearsay. However, this is something that may be coming down the line, so I do think it's important that we stay proactive on it. The resolution reads right now, be it resolved that the City of Medford establish a long-term stabilization fund to offset any major projects. I think that language is good enough in itself. I think we can now figure out what course we want to take, whether or not it's a budgeted line item, whether or not it's a separate account, whether or not we can sit down and negotiate, discuss, and plan a way to implement this.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Marks.
[Adam Knight]: I'm coming around full circle to that. Oh, OK. Thank you. Yeah, so, you know, in looking at it, I think that, you know, that the language of the resolution is what the language of the resolution is. We have a number of members here that are all pretty much on the same page in terms of supporting the idea and supporting the theory. So I think it might make sense to support the theory, support the language that's before us. Then we can sit down with the committee of the whole or a subcommittee. We can have Anne Baker, the budget director, we can have the May account and sit down with us and figure out what it is they can live with. Whether it's not, there's something that if they're willing to put a line item budget in, if they're not, if they want it in the budget and we don't, that's okay. We can negotiate, we can discuss, and we can plan ways to implement this and ways to fund this sitting down at the same table all together as opposed to it's an us versus them. This is what we say, what do you say? Why don't we say, let's set up the account, we all agree that we need an account. Then we can sit down in the same room and figure out exactly what the plan is. A mutually agreeable plan that we can all live with in terms of how we're going to fund this and what direction we want to see the account going. Thank you, Council Knight. Councilor Lococo.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight, we're all on the same page. Be it resolved the city of Medford established a long-term stabilization fund to help offset any major projects. Upon passage of the resolution, a committee of the whole be established with officials from the administration to discuss the funding thereof. Perfect. Councilor Knight, Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Adam Knight]: I just have a couple of questions and one request. And the request chief would be that during the early phases of the rollout of this parking management plan, that we move the traffic commission meetings to off hours so that people can come. Members of the general public who have issue or concern can come. Um, the, the second request chief that I have of you was, um, I believe it was last like last week or maybe the meeting before. Um, I asked that you just describe to us what the process is to petition the traffic commission. If in fact there is an issue or request for action or some sort of grievance that somebody has relative to the placement of a kiosk, the placement of the placement of a spot, a sign, so on and so forth. I think it's very important for the people to understand that. Um, if in fact there is an issue or grievance or a problem, that there is a place to go and, um, you know, that this body deliberates and does have that control and that power.
[Adam Knight]: I think it's also important to point out chief that if there's a loading zone in one of our business districts that that loading zone is in for that particular business, but rather it's a loading zone for, vehicles that are making deliveries to park and service all the businesses. Right.
[Adam Knight]: And the last question that I have, Chief, is that I believe that you represented that the residential transaction fee for convenience when making this transaction online has been waived. And Mr. Nash has worked hard with the administrative authorities.
[Adam Knight]: I guess my question is this. When can people expect to see a refund?
[Adam Knight]: End of the week. Beautiful. Awesome. Mr. Nash, thank you very much. I appreciate it.
[Adam Knight]: Okay. Thank you. Thank you for your patience.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Chief, there's a revenue sharing agreement on all tickets that are issued by the enforcement ambassadors? Enforcement ambassadors, and there's a revenue sharing component to that, correct? Where- There is, but I'm not totally familiar with the dollar amounts and any of that. Adversely, the Manfred Police Department still does maintain the right to enforce parking restrictions in place. Is there a reciprocal revenue share?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I certainly don't have a problem having dialogue and hearing from individuals that have concern over the parking management program, the parking enhancement program, the revenue enhancement program or whatever it is that we're all calling it. Um, I just think it's very important that if in fact we're going to have people come up here to speak to this council, we give them the opportunity to do so because they have to wake up tomorrow morning and go to work and keeping them here from seven o'clock until 10 30 or 11 o'clock at night. for them to have the opportunity to come up to this podium and speak, I think is a little bit much to ask. So in the future, I think, Mr. President, it might make sense when we have people from the general public that are here that want to raise questions and want to have answers about this parking program, that they're allowed to speak first, Mr. President, so that we can let them get their questions out. we can let them get their questions answered. That's going to raise questions that we have, obviously, and absolutely. There's no question about that. But I think we are in a unique position when we have access to the people from Republic, to the Traffic Commission, to the Chief. I mean, Chief Sacco is probably tired of hearing from me at this point in time. I call him so much. But at the end of the day, we have access, and the individuals in the community don't have that same access that we have, Mr. President. I have no problem continuing this conversation. I have no problem staying here until tomorrow morning if we have to, to listen to the concerns of the residents. To listen to those concerns, I have no problem whatsoever, Mr. President. When it turns into political theater and a little bit less more about action and results is when I get concerned, Mr. President. And I'm not saying that that's happening, but I'm saying it has the potential to happen. And I think right now we're in a spot where we've had three or four meetings on the same topic, and they've gone late into the night. They've gone late into the night, but most of the people from the general public haven't even had an opportunity to express their concerns until 9 or 10 o'clock in the evening. And I think it would make more sense moving forward and be more encouraging for people to come out if in fact they could come here and take the floor immediately. Or they could come here and they could be heard first without interruption and then we can move forward. And I'm guilty of it just as much as anybody else behind here with my points of information and with my questions and my concerns in between speakers lining up. But I think if we're going to move forward and we're going to be serious about speaking about this issue, and speaking about it every week because we want results for the concerns that are being raised, then we need to let those concerns reach the floor. We need to let those concerns resonate and saturate, and we need to give the chief an opportunity to address them before we start chiming in with our two cents. It's a process. The process is in place. We know what the process is if we have problems, questions, concerns, and grievances. I think that at the end of the day, they're not falling on deaf ears. We're seeing a lot of success. Councilor Marks is absolutely right. Why would we close this down right now when we're seeing results? We're seeing results left and right. I don't have a problem keeping it open, Mr. President, but I would like to see maybe more of a commitment to allowing the residents really express themselves and a little bit less of us interrupting them. And like I said, I'm guilty of it just as much as anybody else, Mr. President. So I have no problem keeping the matter open weekly, monthly. you know, in subcommittee, um, if we want to maybe all convene, um, on the Wednesday night, we can meet down there when the chief is having his presentation with the people of Republic, um, Wednesday night at his public safety meeting. Something like that. I'm open to all suggestions, Mr. President. I just want to be sure that the people coming up here feel as though they're going to be heard, because I've seen a number of people that were here in the audience walking around and get up and leave. Like Mr. Tomazak was here last week, and he ended up leaving. I saw a couple of other residents in the audience that were here as long as they could be here, and they left. So I just think that it's important they get their chance to speak. We have this forum every week.
[Adam Knight]: This resolution is no more than an attempt to institute best practices of human resource management here within the council. There are several positions that are under council purview relative to appointment. I'd like to see if we can maybe establish job descriptions for those positions as well as a performance evaluation tool to determine that the people that we do appoint to these roles are actually meeting the obligations that we feel as though are necessary. Very good. Thank you, Councilor Light.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. As I said, when we had this discussion previously, and the clerk can attest to the fact that I've sent this resolution to him a number of times, and he's been working on going through the statute to determine what positions are statutorily or by statute under council purview. Quiet in the chamber. Yeah, there are a number of positions by statute that are under council purview. Embelt, Hornell, the city clerk, the city messenger, the videographers, I believe are other ones. I just want to institute human resources, best practices, Mr. President. I don't think it's unreasonable to have people vetted. I don't think it's unreasonable to have a performance evaluation criteria to be sure that people are meeting the requirements of the position. And I don't think that it's, a bad idea to have a job description for a job that people are performing, so that we're all on the same page. That's all I'm trying to do. There's no ulterior motive.
[Adam Knight]: Again, again.
[Adam Knight]: The gentleman's taking the ship that's going down a straight road, and he's turning left. All right. This is for appointments that are statutory. All I wanted to do is say we have the M-Belt, we have Hormel, we have the city clerk, we have the city messenger. We have two videographers in here. I don't know if the videographers know what their job requirements are, their job descriptions are, if there's a base of knowledge that they need in order to have these appointments. That's what I'm looking for, Mr. President. Best practices. Best practices in vetting appointments. That's it.
[Adam Knight]: because I can't operate in a vacuum and create these performance evaluations and job descriptions myself.
[Adam Knight]: Well, he didn't. You've been working on it for seven months. And Eddie, when did I ask you to make the initial request?
[Adam Knight]: Right, because you said you were working on finding out if there were any other statutory positions that were out there. So I said, I'll give you the opportunity to continue to research these statutory positions. And it came to a point now. It's been seven months. Enough's enough. Let's put the resolution on it to get the teeth in it. The only reason I brought this resolution forward was to ensure that we're practicing under the best practices out there that's in every single human resource organization across the country. Thank you, Councilor Camuso.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd like to amend the resolution. I'd like to strike out the words for the purpose of establishing a performance evaluation criteria. When the clerk gets the information to me, then I can make a subsequent resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Just striking out the words for the purpose of establishing performance evaluation criteria. It seems that was a sticking point. We can have the clerk give us a listing of the positions, and then if I feel as though it's appropriate to move forward with the resolution at a later date, I will.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. Aggie Tootin, our tree warden, was awarded the Seth H. Swift Tree Warden of the Year Award. And this is the Tree Warden of the Year for 2015, reflective of the work that she did in 2014. It's been brought forward by the Massachusetts Tree Wardens and Forestry Association, which is a statewide professional organization. And I'd like to congratulate Aggie on being recognized by her peers as a leader in the industry. I'd like to thank her for her hard work here in the city of Medford and invite her down for a city council citation, provided that my colleagues so support the idea.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I had previously brought this resolution forward the night of torrential rains when Councilor Marks was unfortunately taken away from us due to a flooding issue at his home. And I brought the resolution forward because we had recently had a licensing committee meeting to discuss the fees for taxicab companies. A lot of other issues had come up in that meeting. We see a number of individuals petition this council for taxicab licenses and license to operate taxis. And there's a lot of concern about that. There are several councilors that refrain from voting in certain instances until there's a new ordinance in place. The city clerk has worked very hard on putting together a new ordinance. I think it's time that maybe we take a look at what areas of noncompliance are in place right now. So if in fact we are serious about moving forward and creating a new ordinance, we know where to start. We know where the number one offenders are, we know where the number one problems lay, and we know what we can do to fix it.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, loud and clear. Thank you very much, Mr. President. And thank you, Councilor Marks, for bringing this resolution forward. I think if, in fact, we're going to send code enforcement down there, it may also make sense to send the Board of Health down there. We have a vacant building boarded up. Who knows what rodents are inside or what else for that matter, Mr. President. I'd ask that if in fact we are going to send somebody down there to take a look at the property that we also include the Board of Health.
[Adam Knight]: Um, I was just wondering if the clerk or the president would be so kind as to read that back one more time. I'd be delighted.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I certainly support the resolution in theory, in substance, pretty much except for I don't like the tone that it sets forth, saying, knowing that NSTAR is the monopoly. It just seems like it's very argumentative, though. And I think if we're going to be going to these people and asking them to work with us and to maybe provide us with a little bit more information, or to come into our community and repair our streets the way that they're supposed to be repaired, or coming before us and asking for permits, that we have a good, strong working relationship with them, Mr. President. Again, I don't disagree saying that NSTAR is the monopoly. I just think that the tone, if we're going to send this to our federal delegation, has to show a little bit more respect, Mr. President. I'd be willing to support the resolution provided that the knowing the N star is a monopoly language was stricken from the resolution. If not, I'd just like to be recorded in opposition as supporting the resolution in theory, but not based upon the language submitted. Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: You don't want it to go there?
[Adam Knight]: That's the amendment.
[Adam Knight]: The motion is amended. You're not amending it, are you? He did not have to amend it. I said if you're willing to strike it, that's great. I'll vote for it. If you're not willing to strike it, then I'd just like to be recorded in the opposition. No, I'm not going to strike it. Supporting it in theory, however, I have a problem with the language.
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Knight]: Ask the clerk that it be recorded in the opposition.
[Adam Knight]: I'm going to need one more shot at these, Mr. President. I see a couple of errors that I'm trying to work out based upon the tape that I have at my house, and I'm getting there, but it's going to take me one more week. So I'd ask that those records be tabled.
[Adam Knight]: So we're going to go into a brief recess right here with the agreement of the members to take a photograph with the girls team and then we'll move on to the volleyball. call the meeting back to order. We have a similar presentation for the girls volleyball team, who is also the GBL champions. In my hand here I have a citation that reads, the Medford City Council takes pleasure in awarding this council commendation to Tyler Dyer, head coach of the Medford High School girls varsity volleyball team. in recognition of winning the Greater Boston League title with a regular season record of 10-8 and a playoff berth in the MIAA State Division I North Girls Tournament for the Fall 2014 season. Nicole Mortel, captain. Cassandra Ketty. Claire Doncaster, captain. Kali Amla. Ashley Eisner. Helen Lamb. Jocelyn McCarthy. Katrina Rasche. Victoria Rasche. Rene Stodd. Tenzin Funkeng. Brooke Pazzialli. Taya Elise Group. Nika Mirville. And lastly, Abby McCarthy. Congratulations to the 2014 Medford High School Girls Volleyball Champions.
[Adam Knight]: I'm going to take a brief recess to take a photograph with the team.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I think that it's about time we move on the question.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, at the present time, we adopted the standing rules of the committee. So those committees are presently, enacted until we make a change to the rules of the standing rules.
[Adam Knight]: And I think you're eager to speak. You echo my sentiment, uh, Mr. President. Um, I think we have a number of people here that are lining up in queue that have questions that they want answered. Um, some of which are business owners that probably have to get up very early tomorrow morning to be sure that operations are up and running. With that being said, you made a suggestion at the beginning of the meeting that we might want to reserve our questions for the end, allow the folks from Republic and the Traffic Commission to get an understanding of what the questions are that are coming to them so they can answer those questions. I think we're in a position to have the good fortune of being able to reach out to these folks and get return calls and speak with them much more frequently and much more easily than the people that are here in the audience. And they've been waiting patiently, Mr. President, so I'd ask that maybe we can
[Adam Knight]: So there could actually be an instance where we pay $0.50 to park our spot and $0.70 in fees. If you put $0.25 on the meter and you have to pay by your phone $0.25 for 15 minutes, then they charge you $0.35 on the $0.25. So it's over 100%. If you choose to use the service for that transaction. And then say we put another $0.25 in because we were going over our 15 minutes on our phone. We added time to the meter, which is a capability, as I understand. We'd be charged another 35 cents for adding another quarter run. If you choose to do that, that would be the transaction. So in essence, for a 50 cent, half an hour spot, I'd be paying a dollar 25.
[Adam Knight]: Um, I wouldn't be so sure to say that because today councilor Caraviello and I went down to Bocelli's to have dinner and I went to the kiosk and I put my credit card information and everything like that. And I wasn't, I was unable to pay through my, through my, Park Medford application today and I put the money in, but when I read the terms and conditions, I didn't see that there would be an additional fee.
[Adam Knight]: I already did register. I have a key. I haven't, if I go to Somerville, I can use my, device, right? Because you guys are the same company and you have the same database and all that, right?
[Adam Knight]: No, I didn't sign up. I signed up in Medford, but I'm saying it's not available in Medford. But if I drove across the city to Somerville and I booked, would that same transaction fee apply? And I guess the answer is yes? Yes. OK. And is that part of the contract that the third-party vendor has put together between Republican and you? Or is that part of this contract that's governing the relationship between the city of Medford and Republic?
[Adam Knight]: Chief, do you have any idea right now under the current system what percentage of tickets are issued? What percentage of issued tickets are appealed? I don't know.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Canal Street, Friend Street, Portland Street, they all have kiosks.
[Adam Knight]: It's not downtown Boston. A number of different communities in New York City, New York State, California, Los Angeles County, they have kiosks. I think that they're new, they're scary, but at the end of the day, we're going to be able to figure it out. I don't think that we're giving the public enough credit. in terms of their ability to adapt to new technology. We've all done it. We've seen people come along and be able to work computers like wizards after a couple of weeks. It is what it is. I think that, you know, we're in a situation right now where we can go and we can talk about the past and we can talk about what happened, or we can look forward to see, all right, these are coming in. What's the process? How are we going to deal with our griefs and our gripes and our grievances? And in order for us to move forward, I think we really need to look at the plan and say the plan's in place. These are the, these are the recourses that we have. The traffic commission governs. We have the traffic commission and we go to the traffic commission. That's the process. There's a process in place. Now we can talk about the process that didn't happen to get us to where we are, or we can look forward and we can say, this is the process that we need to take in order to make this a successful plan. And that's where I am with this, Mr. President. I think that, you know, the history is the history. We all know what we voted for. We voted to give the mayor the authority to enter into a contract for 10 years. That's what we did. And we allowed him to go to the table and negotiate. He went to the table, he negotiated, and this is what he came back with. We have our concerns. We all have our concerns. And we've all had individual conversations with the chief and with the people from Republic and with the administration. But I think that right now, for the people out there that have concerns and that are scared and that are worried about what's going to happen, we need to tell them what the process is and provide them with an avenue to get answers to have their concerns addressed. Because in my experiences so far, I've gotten a number of calls about people that had issues about loading zones, and loading zones have been made. The folks from Republic have been pretty reasonable in terms of making accommodations to make this program and plan work for them. If we're going to roll out a plan that's going to be successful and that people are going to buy into, we need to look at the future and what avenues we have in order to address problems, not the past and what didn't happen and what should have. Thank you, Councilor, for your point of information.
[Adam Knight]: Followed by Councilor Caraviello. Point of information, Councilor Knight. Personally, I don't feel as though Republic should be putting up any signs, Mr. President. And the reason so is because that work is DPW work. And we have a gentleman in the sign shop. who has a job, and his job is to be in charge of the signs. So this subletting of work that should be done by the DBW, I feel as though is a problem, Mr. President. I think that this work should be handled internally. We have a sign shop, we have a gentleman that's in charge of signs, and we have a gentleman who's well versed in the ordinances in the city of Medford. Quite frankly, Mr. Nash isn't from Medford, he came to this city. and maybe he relied on what he saw or what he's seen in other communities, so be it. But we have a sign shop, we have gentlemen in the DPW who know our ordinances, and I think that this is where the work should lie, not outside. Thank you, Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Any information, Councilor Knight? The contract that you're referring to is the contract with Republic, but the City of Medford also has a contract. The contract is with the Medford DPW Association, represented by Local 25, and they have rights. And if they aren't willing to sublet their work, and they haven't had an opportunity to negotiate the impact of the subletting of their work, then there's a violation.
[Adam Knight]: that the union contract has been repudiated based upon the fact that outside people- So you're just stating again tonight that the may is in violation of the union contract? That's my interpretation, yes. That's my interpretation.
[Adam Knight]: It's going to be a long year. If I may be so bold to suggest, please do, that if certain individuals want a paper, they file a resolution. And we can talk about it next week.
[Adam Knight]: I would certainly agree that history is important, but history is history, and it's time for us to move on now.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. As many of you are aware, Michael Callahan and I were dear friends. And four years ago this evening, he passed away. Michael Callahan was a public servant for 48 years working in the federal and state and local government. He was the consumer commissioner for the Medford Consumer Commission from 1978 until his passing. He was a four-term governor's Councilor, and he was also chief steward at the National Association of Government Employees. Michael is sorely and sadly missed, Mr. President, just this past year. He was honored up at Wrights Pond for his work in protecting Wrights Pond and ensuring that that location was not turned into condominium complexes in the early to late 80s. So, Mr. President, I think it's fitting that on this evening and this anniversary of the death of such a great man that the City Council adjourns in his memory.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I'd like to motion to suspend rule number 33 to take paper 14756 out of order.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. Having reviewed the paperwork, I find everything in order. I feel as though this is a long overdue and much needed revitalization to a site that's been in disrepair for quite some time, Mr. President. So, I'd like to second Councilor Dello Russo's motion to move for approval as amended.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, we're into suspension. I'd like to move to take paper 14795 out of order.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. Chief, thank you for being here this evening. I think it's safe to say that come January, this plan is going to roll out, correct? And moving forward, you know, I think that there are a lot of things that could have been done differently. There are a lot of different approaches that we could have taken to, you know, share information, to notify the public, to keep people informed. However, the stark reality of the matter is that this has happened, and this has happened in January. This has happened in just a couple of short weeks. So I guess my question to you chief is, um, it is the control and the oversight responsibility of the traffic and parking commission to set the regulations, to set where the parking spots are, to set what the rates are, correct? Correct. And the parking and the traffic and parking commission tend to meet monthly.
[Adam Knight]: And Chief, at these Traffic and Parking Commission meetings recently, I've seen the minutes and I've seen a lot of mention about this program and the rollout of this program. Moving forward, do you anticipate any changes based upon what we've heard here today? I know that the business community has been outspoken in terms of what their wants, needs, and desires are, and it seems like the commission's responded somewhat. As Councilor Mark said, when this rolls out, the residents are going to have a whole new set of concerns. So, you know, my question to you, I guess, would be, is once a month enough during the rollout? And what can we do to improve the dialogue between the administration, the council, and the Traffic and Parking Commission going forward to address residents' concerns as they arise?
[Adam Knight]: Excellent. Thank you, Chief. Appreciate it.
[Adam Knight]: Have you received any complaints or any concerns about locations and one business having one and one business not?
[Adam Knight]: But in terms of Joe pizza versus Espresso's pizza versus Amici's pizza, have you heard any concern about a business owner being very concerned about being treated differently or unfairly? No, I have not. Okay.
[Adam Knight]: Point of clarification. Point of clarification. I was speaking to the chief in terms of as the chair of the pocket commission who has the oversight authority of the plan, who would be the official receptacle for any complaints. as the chair of the committee. So the chair.
[Adam Knight]: To all of you. In reviewing the paperwork, I see here that it indicates that you're a sole proprietor and that you will have no employees working for you.
[Adam Knight]: Crystal Campbell was a regular citizen. She wasn't a veteran. She wasn't a member of our armed services. She wasn't a military soldier in a foreign land. She was an individual who went to go watch the Boston Marathon, which is one of our most historic events that we have here in the city of Medford, and she was tragically murdered by terrorists.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. Lauren, it's my understanding that the PAC grant application process is almost backwards, where you have to have an actual project in place, and this is what it is.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Mr. President, I stated it last week, and I'll state it again. I think this is a good project. It's a project that I'm going to support. I feel as though it's going to be a draw to the square. It's going to give people a reason to come down to Medford Square and frequent our local businesses. It's also going to provide the residents of the two housing authority buildings, the two affordable housing buildings there, a nice place to respite. It's going to revitalize our waterfront. It's going to provide us with access to our waterfront for once. And we've heard the council talk time and time again about one of our most underutilized assets here in the city of Medford being the waterfront. Here we are. We're in a process right now of opening up an opportunity to utilize our waterfront. We're also looking at the plan and the improvements that the plan is going to bring. The plan is going to help improve ADA compliance at the senior center and ADA compliance at certain egresses. It's also going to allow for multimodal transportation, Mr. President. It's going to open it up to a bikeway. So, I really think it's a great project. It beautifies an existing location. And more than that, I think that it's going to be a project of national significance. And I think if we're in a position right now to do a project of national significance, that we need to do it the right way. And I'm going to wholeheartedly support this paper as filed, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Mr. President. I'm a little confused about the motion. The council is opposed to the project, but she wants to add a contingency to the project.
[Adam Knight]: Well, you just voted to reduce the funding. I didn't vote against it.
[Adam Knight]: You voted to reduce the funding. Does that mean I'm going to vote for or against the program? I don't know. That's what I'm trying to clarify right now.
[Adam Knight]: Before when you were opposed to the project, that wasn't on.
[Adam Knight]: No, I'm just trying to understand the amendment to the paper.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I'd like to make a motion to suspend the rules. Uh, number the rule number 33 to take paper. If I can find the number of it here. One four dash seven three two.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. I believe just a couple of weeks ago, we did appropriate $1.2 million in free cash for a community improvement initiative. So I do think that some of this money that came in has been voted on and has been voted to be spent. And it's been spent on equipment, safety issues, and a number of resolutions that this council actually sent forward to the administration. Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I just think back to 2001 and All of us that have been involved in government since that time continuously hear from the Massachusetts Municipal Association about the need to restore local aid funding back to pre-2001 levels. We have a new administration coming in. We have a new governor coming to Beacon Hill. This is the governor who was the chairman of, he was the secretariat of administration and finance, and he was the architect of the nine C cuts that came into place. I think that we really need to be careful. Maybe now isn't the time. We had eight years of the same administration and we knew what to expect. Now we don't. We have a new administration coming in. The administration historically has supported nine C cuts to local aid after a budget's been passed, Mr. President. This makes me nervous, makes me very nervous to reduce the tax, to chip away at our free cash, not have reserves in the bank, and then be later on down the road, see something like this happen at the state level. We might be really put in a precarious position down the road if, in fact, this agenda item goes through.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe that the council every week makes recommendations to the mayor as to what projects we'd like to see funded, as to what steps we'd like to see the government move, and as to what direction we'd like to see certain initiatives take.
[Adam Knight]: That's only provided that the gentleman's there for another 15 or seven years. And I think every two years, everybody has the opportunity to, if they see fit, seek one of our office. And if they feel as though the city's going the proper course, or an improper course, they have every right to do that. You know what I mean? But I think right now, the issue before us is whether or not it's a good idea for us to reduce the tax levy by a million dollars.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. I believe the new governor just recently in the press has also discussed the idea of requiring municipalities to establish rainy day funds in order for them to maintain strong financial footing.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I think it's apparent by the debate and dialogue that there are many options that we as a council and we as a city have for the utilization of the so-called certified free cash. However, if we don't have any certified free cash, then we can't do anything. So I think that those reserves are very important to the fiscal stability of the city of Medford. I think that those reserves are something that we need to build up. We don't need to move away from them. I think we need to be ahead of the curve. I think that that's something that we can all agree on. We need to be ahead of the curve. And we have a lot of uncertainty coming up in the next four years. We have a new administration coming in that historically has supported making cuts to local government, Mr. President. And for that reason and that reason alone, I'm voting against this resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. I referred to Mr. Baker in his role as Secretary of the Executive Office of Administration and Finance, at which time the administration underneath Governor Romney, I believe, made unprecedented cuts under section 9c of the general laws, allowing them to cut local aid after the state budget has been passed, which left cities and towns in a very, very precarious position because they had already budgeted based upon figures that were provided to them. And that's why I'm a little concerned about the uncertainty of what his ideology will be, coupled with the fact that he publicly came out and supported the idea of local municipalities establishing rainy day funds, and this possibly being a requirement, would lead me to believe that this is something that he's going to keep his eyes on, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: recently in the press, he's come out and spoke about the need for a rainy day fund in municipalities.
[Adam Knight]: I have a question for Mr. O'Neill. If, in fact, the levy limit set at the 2.5% increase from last year, And we're going to reduce the tax levy just by a monetary amount. But that wouldn't necessarily reduce the tax levy, correct, for next year? An excess levy or an excess levy limit?
[Adam Knight]: And then next year, if in fact we didn't do the $1 million reduction and the tax levy limit went up another 2.5%, we'd see the recuperation of that million dollars that was cut as well as another 2.5% increase if in fact that was adopted. That's correct.
[Adam Knight]: Right.
[Adam Knight]: So next year, when the tax rates set, that figure at $96 million or five is still the levy limit plus the 2.5%. The levy limit doesn't go down to $95 million.
[Adam Knight]: No, it comes off the money collected for the 2.5%.
[Adam Knight]: But the percentage stays the same, correct? I mean, it wouldn't change the tax levy from 2.5% to whatever the factor would be, minus the million. The levy stays at the 2.5% exclusion, right?
[Adam Knight]: But next year, when you open the tax levy, it's going to include that million that was just cut plus the additional 2.5% on top of the 96 million.
[Adam Knight]: So it's safe to say that if, in fact, there's no reduction in the levy limit next year, that people see an increase of this million dollars that we're pushing, that we're not going to be spending Right, but it still stays in the levy limit for next year for when they collect.
[Adam Knight]: Right, but what I'm saying is the levy limit right now as proposed would be $96.5 million, right?
[Adam Knight]: If I understand the dialogue, Mr. President, I think, um, what the assessor is trying to indicate is that the tax levy is set every year. And when this tax rate and tax levy is set, that's when the exemption is taken into consideration. If this happens semi-annually, this is something that DSS is not going to take up until the next tax cycle?
[Adam Knight]: So if, in fact, the residential exemption wasn't wasn't passed this evening, and the council wanted to implement a residential tax exemption six months down the road, and we voted for it, that wouldn't take effect until the next time that you're before us to set the levy.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. President. And my question really revolved around the cyclical inspections. And, you know, give or take, we're about halfway complete with the residential and the commercial properties here in the city. Do you have any facts or figures relative to the number of people that have jumped from below the break-even to over the break-even through the cyclical inspections?
[Adam Knight]: 8% over market or something right now in Medford? Pardon me? Medford's over market at this point in almost double digits in terms of sales, correct? Correct.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. O'Neill.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, we're under suspension.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Brian, um, can, Can you just tell us a little bit about how you're liking it and how it's working out? And other than this ordinance, are there any other things that you guys have been working on? I know November was National Disability Awareness Month. Diane and I spoke at length about it. And I'd just like to maybe hear a little bit about your experiences being on the committee and how you like it.
[Adam Knight]: Excellent, thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Can you say that again, please, Councilor?
[Adam Knight]: Just a point of clarification. As I read it, it says five members of the commission shall constitute a quorum. No binding decision shall be made at any meeting at which not enough members are present to constitute a quorum when enough members operate. Okay, so I see what you're saying, Councilor. A vote of three of five could constitute a majority vote as opposed to a vote of five of nine.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. It was very interesting and informative presentation that was given at the committee of the whole meeting. One of the things that jumped out at me was the fact that with the passage of this project will be multiple ADA improvements down at the senior center and multiple ADA compliance improvements down there. Absent this project, I don't think that these improvements are going to take place. I think that these ADA compliance improvements are vital based upon the location alone of where the Peace Garden is going to be. It's located between two facilities that house elderly and disabled individuals in our community. Also, I think that it will beautify the square. It will give people a reason to come and to stop and to stay and to sit, and it will begin to create a revitalization and a utilization of our waterfront. which is something that this council talks about frequently. We have a very underutilized asset here in Medford, and that's our waterfront. And I think we need to give people a reason to come to our downtown business districts and a reason to stay in our downtown business districts. You know, I certainly like the plan. I think that it provides improvements for accessibility, but it also provides improvements for a cycling community. It puts bicycle racks in there. It's accessible to be accessed through multimodal transportation. Mr. President, I think this is a good expenditure. It's something that I'm going to be supporting.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. And I can certainly understand the concerns that my colleagues raise about a maintenance plan, a perpetual care at the site. However, I want to point out that this isn't Hormel Stadium. It's not Placed at Park. It's not even Barry Park, Mr. President. This location is the size of a large backyard in the city of Medford. And the city owns a portion of the space now and does provide maintenance and upkeep to the area. So the only major expense that's going to be outside of the ordinary, in my opinion, would be the fountain. And I don't think that the maintenance and upkeep of a fountain is going to change the scope of what's being done there right now too drastically. So, you know, I certainly understand the concerns about a maintenance plan. I think that these concerns are warranted, but I think they're warranted when we're looking at projects that are on a much larger scale. I know there is an expenditure of, you know, $1.1 million to construct this, but I think that the ends are going to justify the means, and I think that the benefits are going to fire away the costs. Thank you. May I also add that I feel as fitting tribute to those that were lost in the Boston Marathon bombing, Mr. President. And I also am proud to be a part of the community that's going to have the largest scale monument to that tragedy to date.
[Adam Knight]: I'm sorry.
[Adam Knight]: I didn't know what we were voting on. I thought we were voting on the paper. I apologize. It was my error. As a matter of fact, I'll move for reconsideration after the vote, if need be, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Merry Christmas. Thank you very much, Mr. President. I look back to some of my notes, and I have here resolution dated 09-803 brought forward by my colleague, Councilor Penta, relative to the creation of an excessive water use program, which passed unanimously by this council. Again, in 2010, Councilor Penta, implementation of a tiered rate system. Paper number 12720. So I think that this is something that's not uncommon and not unheard of, Mr. President. I went back and I, I, please.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor, did I hear that? Again, like I said, Councilor Penter, I mean, Councilor Marks, I have here at least eight resolutions that was put forth by past city councils over the last seven years that would ask for the implementation of a tiered water rate system. The administration responded to recommendations made by the council over a seven-year period. I'm scratching my head on this one a little bit, Mr. President. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Again, I kind of concur with Councilor Lungo-Koehn in her assessment. You know, there is a paper. It's the same exact paper that's in committee. 90 days haven't passed since that paper was disposed of by this council and no report from that committee has been issued forthwith to the body. So I don't think this is a matter that should be appropriate for discussion at this point in time based upon our internal rules. However, I mean, I'm not going to challenge the chair. I'm not going to raise a question, a question of rules. I just think that We're looking at this, and we have a set of rules that we're agreeing to live by. We voted to suspend rule 33 today to take items out of order, and that's it. It says, if a matter is disposed of, 90 days before it comes back to the floor. We have the paper that's still in subcommittee, and the subcommittee hasn't reported on any findings, Mr. President. I think that this is where that discussion should take place.
[Adam Knight]: Public participation in the agenda.
[Adam Knight]: I am aware that they do have public computers at the Medford Public Library that's accessible, and people are allowed to use them there as well. It's just a point of information if anybody's interested.
[Adam Knight]: I have nothing to add, Councilor. The microphone was on, but.
[Adam Knight]: All those in favor. Councilor Knight. Point of information, Mr. President. Um, last week we discussed the cyclical reevaluation process that's in place and um, Assessor O'Neill did have, get back to us and I was hoping that he'd be able to provide the general public with an update as to where we are in the revaluation cycle in terms of the DOI mandated process that needs to take place.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. O'Neill, thank you very much for getting back to the council in such a timely fashion. Um, in terms of the appellate tax book cases that are out there, pending is, uh, those cases handled internally or as outside council hired, uh, uh, the board of assessors, uh, tries to handle and negotiate those internally.
[Adam Knight]: Excellent. Thank you very much, Mr. O'Neill. I appreciate it. You're welcome.
[Adam Knight]: Aye.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. Um, Ms. Murphy, if I can ask a couple of questions, um, if approved, do you know when the work will start? How long after approval?
[Adam Knight]: Once construction starts, do you know how long this project is going to take?
[Adam Knight]: And do you anticipate this project being done in the winter months or in the spring months?
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I also want to take the opportunity to thank Ms. Murphy, because last time she appeared before the Council, I raised some concerns that I had relative to a sidewalk and a street repair between Smith Ave. and Hicks Ave., which is the subject of a resolution that I'm going to be bringing up this evening under suspension. And although Ms. Murphy works, from what I can tell, in the distribution of electricity, within a week, they were out there and they had fixed the street from Hicks Ave. to Smith Ave. and repaired it into its natural and pristine condition. So, Ms. Murphy, I want to thank you for your efforts on that. because it was two days later that I drove down the street and I saw the sawhorses out there and they were ready to get to work. So thank you very much for your efforts. And I trust that if you were able to do something with the 37% increase in the electrical bill, in the two or three days from now, we'd probably see it taken care of. So thank you very much for your past work on behalf of this council.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I was recently contacted by a number of members of the laborers union who are working on a project in Harvard square and they reside in Medford and they walk down to Medford square city hall and they get on the bus to take that bus to Harvard square. because parking is such a hassle over there. And it's been brought to my attention that usually on Thursdays and Saturdays, the 6 a.m. bus fails to make a stop at the City Hall stop, Mr. President, resulting in these individuals being late for work or having to take taxis to work. I think the reason that this happens is because of the way the route's structured. It has to go past, you know, the old Tony Lucci's, take a left down river, come back past City Hall Plaza, and then do the loop again. So maybe in the interest of time, some of these drivers are bypassing a certain stop that may or may not be busy all the time. However, it's had an impact on these hardworking individuals. So I'd like a letter to be sent out to the MVTA to be sure that their drivers are made aware of the fact that that is a stop and that that's a stop that means a lot to the residents here in the city of Medford. It's a publicized stop. It's on their schedule. It's on their route. So it's a stop that they should be making.
[Adam Knight]: Absolutely.
[Adam Knight]: As I alluded to earlier in the meeting, National Grid is doing some gas line repairs along the stretch of Main Street between Smith Ave and Hicks Ave. And over the last couple of days, they've ripped up several sidewalk slabs. However, they've ripped up sidewalk slabs on either side of the street from Smith down to Hicks. which would make it very difficult for a person in a wheelchair, a person with a cane, to walk down the street, Mr. President. Also, whereas Hicks Ave is the entrance to the Columbus School, I feel as though this may pose a risk to the students that are looking to walk to school, Mr. President. So I'm asking that our office of disability take a look and make sure that the project specifications meet ADA compliance for an accessible pathway for individuals. who might have to traverse that road, Mr. President. I'd also ask that her findings be reported to the school department to ensure that Mr. Belson's well aware of this safety situation down there. I would leave it to the Office of Disability to determine whether or not they feel as though a police detail is going to be needed down there during the construction project. At this point in time, I don't have any inkling of understanding as to how long this project's gonna take. I do know that I personally saw at least 12 sidewalk slabs on either side of the street torn up, so I don't think this is a one-day project. And based upon the weather that we're going to receive and have been receiving, I don't think this is going to be something that's going to be done in a fashion that's going to be suitable for a longterm solution. If in fact they do get out there to plug these holes. Um, so I'm asking that, um, miss McLeod and our office of disability take a look and, uh, make sure that, you know, the, the contractor out there is in compliance with the federal law on the motion.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I think that, uh, this fine scholar athletes accolades speak for themselves. Uh, she was the MVP of the greater Boston league this year. She led her team to the GBL championship title for the girls soccer team here at Medford high school. And she was also, um, asking Boston Herald Oskalastic, which is one of the highest accolades that, uh, a high school athlete can achieve. I think that she joins the ranks of some other great Medford athletes like Sean Bates, Jake Perrazzo, and Brittany Lanzilli to be named Boston Herald All Scholastic. So I think it would be fitting to invite her down here to receive a council accommodation and to offer her our congratulations on her great effort and great representation of the student athletes in Medford High School.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. This falls in line with what we did over the spring when we had the rowing team up here who was GBL champions for both the boys and the girls teams. I think that it's nice to see our scholar athletes being so successful on the field and in the classroom, and I think it's only fitting that we bring them down here and recognize their achievement.
[Adam Knight]: Again, Mr. President, as I just stated before, I think it's great to see such success on the field and also in the classroom. These student athletes are a great representation of the city of Medford and our public school system. and I think that it would be fitting to bring them down here and recognize their achievement.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, uh, In recent months past, we've had a licensing committee meeting to discuss the rates for taxicabs. We've had a number of license requests come by before this council. I think that it's important, Mr. President, that if in fact we are going to be issuing these licenses, that we make sure that these operators are in compliance with our rules and regulations. There's been a lot of discussion about the implementation of a taxicab ordinance, Mr. President. But at this point in time, I'm going to withdraw this matter. I'd like Councilor Marks to be here because he's expressed a number of issues of concern that he has. So I'd like to withdraw the matter, and I'll refile it at a later date.
[Adam Knight]: I received correspondence from the Chamber of Commerce inviting me to come, gave me a list of all the dates that it was coming, that it was going to be held and locations and times, emailed right to my inbox.
[Adam Knight]: I believe, I believe consulate Dello Russo voted in favor of a resolution asking Republic to come to each individual business district here in the city to present an information session with the business owners and the residents thereof. He voted in support of this resolution. The resolution was brought forward maybe seven weeks ago and it passed six to one. Um, so I think that when you say have a voice, consulate Dello Russo did have a voice. He used his voice here as a councilor to speak about his position on that. What's going on in the Chamber of Commerce and this private organization and the private decisions that they make really has no effect on what we do here as a council.
[Adam Knight]: Um, it seems like Republic's willing to do some outreach work, huh? If they're willing to come and meet.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, Mr. President, it's clear, I think, that republic's willing to do some outreach work. We've seen them at community day. We've seen them at a number of events that have gone on that the city sponsored. Now we're seeing them take the efforts to go and meet with the chamber of commerce, not on one night, not on two nights, not on three nights, but on four nights. So I think that, you know, I'd be remiss if I didn't say that maybe we should just call Republic and ask them to put something together. And if we have any constituents that have contacted us, we can have the same type of info session in room 201 or room 207.
[Adam Knight]: I mean, they've been there, they've done that. I think they've answered our questions for the most part.
[Adam Knight]: In terms of their track record and what they've shown us that they're willing to do, I don't think that there'd be any reason to think that they wouldn't be willing to continue to do such. I think that it might make sense if we can reach out to find out who the City of Medford liaison is, and then we can deal with these things on a case-by-case basis with that individual directly. If we needed to put them in a room with 10 or 11 or 13 people, then so be it. If business owners are calling you and they need answers, I don't think that this gentleman is going to be too afraid to come up here and give answers to the questions. The contract is signed. He is here. At the end of the day, He's here. We're going to have to live with him. So I don't think that they're going to want to start off on the wrong foot and create a relationship like that. I really think that based on what they've shown us already, that they're willing to be a part of the conversation, to come in and to talk and to answer the questions and to show us how they want to implement this. So with that being said, Mr. President, you know, I'd certainly be interested to find out what the contact information is for the liaison for Republic so that I can go and do some of that work. Um, I don't need an official action to this council to get that information. I can make the, make the full call and do it my own. Um, however, I think that that might make a little bit more sense than, than, you know, it'll get us some results. It'll bring us, it'll bring us to the end of the road yet.
[Adam Knight]: I have it right here.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information. I don't think we need to name the gentleman by name over here, Mr. President. That's inappropriate.
[Adam Knight]: I just don't think it's conducive to a positive debate.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I believe if my facts and figures are correct that Mr. Ryan served 14 years as the executive director with the Friends of the Middlesex Fells, and at the end of November, he retired. And I'd like the council to join me in wishing him a very fond farewell. He did a great job down there, and I think the fruits of his labor proved to be rather bountiful. The Department of Conservation and Recreation just recently released a master plan for a recreation plan for the Middlesex Fells, and a lot of that had to do with the work that Mr. Ryan did. Mr. President. So I'd ask that my council colleagues join me in congratulating him on his retirement and wishing him the best. Thank you for his service.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. The platties have been longtime family friends. I had the pleasure of meeting Irene and her son Joe during my time as an aide to Charlie Shannon in the state Senate. Since that time we developed a great friendship. Irene was a dedicated public service, a dedicated public servant. She spent a number of years as a cafeteria worker here in the city of Medford and we offer our deepest condolences to the family.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilor Marks, for bringing this resolution forward. I think this is a great idea. It's a great proactive approach to revitalizing our downtown business area. One of the things that I've seen in a lot of other communities is almost like a wall that would speak to the history of the area. And I think when we look at, you know, the Salem Street Burial Ground and the history that Medford Square has, that would be a perfect purpose for it. You know, if you see some of the things that we've done in our community here in Medford, we have a library that they opened up in West Medford Square, and it's just an open-air library, a box. Simple, put a book in, take a book out. Something like that would be a great idea down there as well. I'm really impressed with Councilor Mark's foresight in bringing this matter to the table, and I'm wholeheartedly in support of it, Mr. President. I think this is a great idea.
[Adam Knight]: I think it would also be helpful, Mr. President. I remember, I think back in January, the city began doing a real property inspection and valuation program. And it said it was going to take about 24 months to complete the program. I'd like to know where we are in terms of the reevaluation of the properties that have been inspected, how many houses have been done, how many houses need to be done before we move forward on the tax rate.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. In looking at the packet that we have this morning, I have noticed that the Bicycle Commission and members thereof who are here present this evening have provided us with some information relative to where it is they would like to see these bike paths. And we also have a correspondence from the Mayor's Office, and this correspondence would indicate that the Traffic and Parking Commission will have the actual oversight authority over the bicycle lanes. I think one of the important components of this funding that we released last week, Mr. President, is the fact that it's also going to be used to provide educational information and educational materials to the residents in the city of Medford so that they understand that these cyclists do have rights. And part of those rights involve sharing the road, Mr. President. Again, I think this is a great initiative. I think this is a step in the right direction. I think it's forward thinking on behalf of the administration, on behalf of this council, to vote to release this money, Mr. President. I stand in support of bicycle lanes here in the city of Medford. I'd like to thank the members of the bicycle commission who took time out of their busy schedule during this holiday season to come out here this evening. Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. Kulik, if you don't mind. I think it's important to point out that cyclists do have a right to ride in the street, correct? Yes, that's correct. And maybe you could share with us a little bit about your experience and knowledge of the law relative to You know, cyclist rights on the street and a roadway, similar to what you discussed with me last week.
[Adam Knight]: We've seen other cities, Cambridge, Somerville, Boston, you've seen articles in the newspaper, you've seen reports online about police actually enforcing the rules of the road and writing tickets to cyclists and stuff like that. I think it's safe to say that Medford in terms of its commitment to the cycling community is a little bit behind some of our neighboring communities. And I guess my question to you is, what steps can the council take proactively to be in a position to have a successful rollout of bicycle lanes and also successful enforcement of the rules of the road? And what changes would you like to see take place here in the city that will address some of the concerns that have come up during your commission meetings? Because from what I can tell you of a rather large commission that meets rather frequently, you have quite a active and involved group of people that are participating on this. So I'm sure there are a number of great ideas that have been brought up, a number of great ideas that have been hashed out. And I was wondering maybe if you could provide some direction to this council as to what you'd like to see happen, what might make for a smooth transition, and what might ensure that this idea comes to fruition. And when it does, that we're in the best possible place to succeed.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Mayne. Thank you very much, Mr. President. Again, I'm certainly supportive of the bike lanes and looking at it and seeing the bigger picture and thinking down the line. I mean, we know these bicycle lanes are coming. We know that this is probably only going to be the beginning of these bicycle lanes. And I was just wondering if maybe the ultimate vision that the commission has is to try to tie these lanes into the paths in Somerville and the path in Arlington. So that we can have a safe route for people to traverse from Medford to the Somerville bike path, from Medford to the Arlington bike path, or down the Arlington bike path to Somerville, back from Somerville and through Medford, and right back to where it started. So again, Mr. President, I'm very supportive of this endeavor. I think that in looking at the work that they've done in such a short period of time, it's amazing, you know what I mean? They're really showing that although government's designed to move slowly, it doesn't necessarily have to. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: have you sought any guidance from maybe the Massachusetts Area Planning Council or any other state agencies that have some control over the way that transportation funding is released and that infrastructure improvements are released, or is that still a little bit found on the line for you guys? I mean, we went from having nothing to having bicycle lanes. Next thing you know, now we're talking about tying it into the Greenway and into the parks and stuff like that, so I can see a big vision and a big picture. And I was wondering how far along in the process you guys actually are.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. When you say a barrier, Councilor Marks, what I envision is like coming down Fulton Street on Ridgeway Road, like a couple of Jersey barriers that are up with a sign that says resident accidents only. What exactly do you mean when you're saying a barrier in terms of, you know, what you'd like to see put up?
[Adam Knight]: I'm constant president commercial I'd like to further amend the paper to have the city councilor invited the developer to a committee of the whole meeting to present his plans to the council and so that we can ask some questions face to face with the individuals who are putting this plan forward.
[Adam Knight]: Absolutely. Thank you, Mr. President. Chief, now you said that you're working on building up the reserves. How does the reserve system work? Is there a substitute list? Is there a per diem rate? How does it work?
[Adam Knight]: I think, um, you know, regardless of the amount of time that they're out there, it's a very important job, a very vital job. I certainly have no problem with putting them through a, you know, intense vetting process. Um, a suggestion chief, one of the things that I've seen work at in other communities, um, when I, when I was representing city workers, was a per diem list that they used, and they'd call in retirees who had served in the position before, who had already gone through the vetting process, who had already served in the position before, been trained at it, had passed a CORI check, and brought them in on a per diem basis, almost like an O3 contract employee that the state uses. So just a suggestion, Chief, in looking at maybe a short-term solution would be maybe contacting some of the retirees so you don't need to go through the process of training and the process of vetting as intensely as you would somebody that's new. But people retire for a reason, I know.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Um, Mr. President and a city clerk Finn will be able to attest to this. Um, over the past several weeks he and I have been going back and forth and uh, it was my intention to file a resolution. And this resolution would be that the city clerk provide us with a list of all the positions that fall into the purview of the council for appointment. And the purpose that he would provide us with this list is for us to determine what the actual job description of these positions would be. And also establish a performance evaluation tool to determine whether or not the employees that are actually in these positions are meeting the objectives and the goals that we set forth, Mr. President. So while I do appreciate your resolution this morning and your recommendation, I think that it might be a good idea for us to take a look at the actual role and function of our representative on the MBELT board. Maybe take a look at what exactly it is that we'd expect of them to report back to us. And maybe if there's a meeting schedule, stuff like that. Certain requirements and protocols that we'd like to see take place so that we're sure that we're being informed. Furthermore, I also I'm not aware whether or not it's a requirement that a member of this council has to be the appointee. And that might be something else that we would like to discuss, Mr. President. Maybe someone that this council as a body can agree on to serve on the in-built board, because we're torn in a lot of different directions at this point in time. Appointing one of us to that board may not necessarily meet the goals and objectives that we set forth for the position, just based upon time and attention and the ability to really focus on it, Mr. President. So with that being said, at this point in time, I'm going to be filing a contrary resolution, Mr. President, in the coming weeks to bring this stuff up. So I'd ask that the matter be tabled.
[Adam Knight]: Aye. Roll call has been requested. And this is nothing against the job of Councilor Penn for the job that he's done in the role. I just think that, you know, it's very important for us to take a look at what exactly it is expected of these people that are coming under our purview time and time and time again. We reappoint people to positions, but there's really no measuring stick. There's no best practice that's in place here for us to determine whether or not we're getting what we need to get in terms of information.
[Adam Knight]: It's no reflection on the job that you're doing, Councilor Penter. As a matter of fact, I don't think that you're doing a bad job at all. My question was, let's determine what exactly it is we're looking for out of the individual that's in this place. Now, we have some legislative enabling language that's in there that's going to speak to that, and that's okay. But we also have other positions that fall under the purview of this council, and it's not just necessarily the end belt appointment. And if we're going to do it, we should do it at one time, and we should do it for all. I don't think we should do. the clerk, the messenger, the home-health stadium appointee, the in-belt appointee at separate times, I think it would make more sense for us to sit down and to establish a best practice for this council and a best practice for the way that we're gonna continue to do business in terms of these appointments that fall under Rapperview. Really, that's the intent of the resolution that I am intending to file. It hasn't been filed yet, so at this point in time, the only matter that's before us is Councilor Camuso's resolution that he filed. He has a recommendation on the floor and I've removed my objection or my motion to table. I certainly think that the matter should be tabled. I'm going to vote against the resolution this evening because I feel as though it should be tabled and for the reasons that I set forth. However, please don't take this as an attack. Councilor, I don't think you're doing a bad job, but I think you're doing a great job. Certainly, I think that it falls under the purview and the responsibility of this council for someone to be serving on that body. I just think that I'd like to have a little bit more information going forward. I certainly have taken a look at the master plan that the Shepard Brooks M-Belt group has put together. It's a great plan, you know what I mean? It looks like it's something that they put a lot of time and effort into. It's something that I couldn't support in terms of bonding. But that's a whole different story. My question really is the representation, the best practices that are in place, the job description, and how we actually evaluate performance and measure performance of the people that we're actually recommending to go into these jobs. That's all. No more than that.
[Adam Knight]: The positions that I was looking at, and the reason why I haven't brought the resolution forward is because we're still working on determining what other positions, based on past practice and past legislative action, actually falls under our scope, you know? And that's really why I haven't brought the measure forward. I mean, you can ask the clerk. I think, Edwin, that I bring this up maybe June, July, even before that. So this is something that we've been working on and going back and forth on. But again, you know, it's a resolution when I bring it, if I, when I, when in fact I do bring the matter forward, it can be amended. Um, you know, I was looking at the positions of the whole mail commission. I was looking at the position of the M belt. I was looking at the position of the city messenger, the city clerk. Those were the four that were glaring to me in terms of appointments that are under the purview of the council people that are actually appointed to serve. Um, so, you know, Councilor, I'm all for that debate. Um, you know, I will bring this matter forward. Um, I'll bring it forward sooner rather than later. However, I don't want that to hold up the resolution that's before us right now. So, you know, with that being said, I think I've talked ad nauseum on this as to where I'm coming from. I certainly appreciate and can, you know, understand where you're coming from. I mean, if there are going to be criteria in place, there should be criteria in place, and I have no problem with that.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. Clerk, for the reasons that I stated forthwith, I'd like to see a performance evaluation measure and a job description for positions underneath the city council purview.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. In similar substance, I recently got a call from some residents who are residing on Placetet Road and they expressed concern over the big sweep and the amount of leaves that have built up in and outside Oak Grove Cemetery, Mr. President. So I'd like to amend the resolution also to ask that the leaves on both sides of the fence at Oak Grove Cemetery abutting Placetet Road be removed prior to the conclusion of the big sweep.
[Adam Knight]: I think that's the purpose of them. Maybe we should just go to the meeting and figure out, ask the question right there to the people that are the ones presenting.
[Adam Knight]: I think the valid question is whether or not it's on city property, right? Because if it was.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd like to move for suspension to take paper number. Bear with me, please. 14-000.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah. I'm sorry. I got it off the wrong sheet there. Uh, 14 7 4 3.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Mayne. If we look at the text of the paper, we'll see that there is an item in there, plans for HDQT renovations. And I believe that that is an appropriation of $17,000 to take a look at a design for a female locker room for our women officers. I did see that. There's also some other.
[Adam Knight]: Commitment in there for, if you can let me give me a second to take a look at my notes.
[Adam Knight]: The evidence as well. That's going to include the evidence room and moving the fire engines out. You're correct.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I was able to speak with some members of the administration prior to tonight's committee of the whole meeting. And I also attended the Committee of the Whole meeting this evening. And based upon what's presented, I think this is a very good plan. I think if we look at what's before us here, we have a paper that provides for 15 vehicles. It provides for a number of equipment upgrades and a number of infrastructure upgrades. It addresses some flooding issues that are really bothering some residents and creating some problems for their personal property. Technology upgrades, there's some parks and recreation upgrades, public safety upgrades, a commitment to, a continued commitment to the arts, Mr. President. Overall, I think this is a great package. I can understand how some of the councils would want to go through this one by one. However, my view after attending the two meetings, having discussions with it prior to tonight, And taking a look at the comprehensive package, I really think it's a nice deal for the community. It's a great way to invest in the community. I mean, we're looking at 15 vehicles. We're looking at security cameras, which this council has requested before. Movable speed bumps that can be placed in certain areas of concern. Mr. President, LED conversion to lights that are going to be more energy efficient and brighter in our square. So I really think that this is a good plan, Mr. President. I'm going to be supporting it.
[Adam Knight]: as opposed to, I move for suspension of the rules. In hindsight, looking at it now, I probably should have move for suspension of Rule 33. However, I didn't. So we can take a vote, whatever you guys want to do about a vote as to what was under suspension and what wasn't. The motion that I put forward was a motion to suspend the rules. That's what I put forward. In hindsight, would I have liked to put a motion to suspend Rule Number 33?
[Adam Knight]: There was a motion to sever that failed, correct? Yes. So now, if this item comes back onto the table, that motion is still in play. It's already failed. The motion to sever has already failed. So are we going to be able to get to our, you know, is the council going to be able to get to his end result at the end of the day, if he even does withdraw? I mean, are we still going to be able to go back now and undo that vote?
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I had the opportunity to sit down and speak with Mr. Lawson a little bit earlier. He's well aware of the requirements that the city of Medford has in place relative to the restoration of the grounds that are in repair work. I just have a couple of questions. How long do you think this project is going to take?
[Adam Knight]: Both of them next week? Yes. And how long from start to finish do you think it will take once you break the ground over?
[Adam Knight]: Excellent. Do you have a traffic management plan? Yes, submitted to the city. Excellent, thank you very much. Mr. President, I move for approval. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Thank you very much, Mr. President. I think it would be important to point out that I think it was three years ago the nativity scene was removed from Royal House Park. And the reason that the nativity scene was removed from Royal House Park was because people kept stealing the caricatures that were there with the nativity scene. So I think it's very important that if we are going to in fact have the nativity scene put back out that we also ask the residents in our good city to respect it and to leave it alone and to leave baby Jesus in the manger and to leave the three wise men in their position. Point well taken. you know, providing their gifts, Mr. President. Thank you. Point well taken.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I bring this resolution forward after driving down the streets of Medford and seeing a lot of work being done by private contractors. by sitting here and approving a number of permit requests for private contractors to go and tear up our streets. If we read item one underneath the city engineer's comments on a number of these requests for petitions for permits, it will say that the roadways are going to be restored back to city of Medford standards based on the rules and regulations that are in place. Mr. President, I'd like the council to have a copy of those so we can hold these contractors accountable so that when they put the ground back in place and they pack up their tools and that they leave, that they're leaving the city in pristine condition just like they were when they found it.
[Adam Knight]: I believe that every week we send resolutions forward to the mayor asking him to do certain things that we'd like to see done, which I think would serve as a benchmark. or an understanding as to where the council is coming from, what type of initiatives that they'd like to see done, what direction that they'd like to see the mayor's office move in, in terms of this type of expenditures. We'll look at LED lights. That's something that the council put forward. We look at security cameras. That's something the council has put forward. We've looked at the issue of crosswalks and speed bumps. That's something the council has put forward. So I just wanted to make sure that we're all clear about that. Mr. President, I rest.
[Adam Knight]: God.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I've reviewed the paperwork, and I find everything to be in order. I've had conversations with Attorney Abruzzi and also with Ms. Pierce relative to requiring a police detail, especially for the Black Friday night. And they've been willing to accommodate that, Mr. President. So I'd be willing to move for approval, provided that we amend the paper to require a police detail on Black Friday. And I think that it might be a good idea to have a 90-day review, whereas this is an open-ended allowance.
[Adam Knight]: The Press Thank you very much, Mr. President, and through you to the gentleman. Would Kohl's be amenable to providing the dates that they would like to be open? say maybe the day following Veterans Day to the Chief of Police, would that be enough time? Sure.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, in looking at the language that we have here, we have a 90-day review. 90-day review is about March 25th. If we amend the language to say there's an annual 90-day review upon the conclusion of the issue of the hours, I don't understand what the problem would be. Why don't we just amend the 90-day review to be an annual 90-day review? It has to take place before March 25th annually. If it doesn't take place before March 25th annually, the permit remains. It's fine.
[Adam Knight]: Further, Mr. President, I've made a number of phone calls to Mr. Bruese about this issue, and he's been more than responsive and more than willing to address some of the concerns that I had before we came to this meeting this evening. So I don't have any reason to believe that that wouldn't continue.
[Adam Knight]: Why? Meadow Glen Mall has detail. That was my amendment, Mr. President. That was my amendment. And when I watch the news and I see what happens down in Alabama and Oklahoma on Black Friday, when droves of people push their way through the door and kill workers at Walmart and kill workers at these big box stores. I think the big rush is going to be Black Friday. I have a number of people that I know who I'm friends with who, all Thanksgiving long, can't wait to pack up their bags and get rolling at midnight to go out there and go shopping. Everybody's chomping at the bit. It's historically a day where most of the problems happen. That's why I said Black Friday would be something that would be amenable to me. On the motion, the clerk will call the roll.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information. Councilor Knight. Um, because we have this 90 day review, if anything does happen during that period of time, we can call Coles and have them back in there and we can discuss any other public safety concerns that we have after this initial issuance of a license and an immediate special permit. I'm sorry.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President, and through you to the gentleman. Can you tell me who's going to be doing the work? Is it an internal job? Do you have a contractor that's going to be performing the thing?
[Adam Knight]: The contractor been selected at this point in time?
[Adam Knight]: The reason I ask, Mr. President, is because I have some concern over the work the contractors have done in the past relative to repairing our roadways to the previously pristine conditions that they are in. But I know that we have some contingencies and controls available here at the city level relative to the applicable permits in the City of Metro regulations and standards for restoration. So I'll rest.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, Mr. President. In thinking a little bit more about the location, Emerson Street is a one-way, if I do recall appropriately, one way up to Maine, up to the gate, correct? So I guess I have some curiosity as to how exactly traffic would be routed around this project for a week. And with that being said, I'd also have concern relative to the traffic that would be coming in and out of Tedeschi's and crossing over out of the gate and out to Emerson onto Main. And where would that traffic go? Because I think the way that Tedeschi's is set up right now, the parking spots are all slanted so that the cars are directed to go down to the back of the parking lot, exit onto Emerson, and back out onto Maine. So those are some concerns that I think we have here, Mr. President. However, the Mass Eye and Ear Institute is one of the premier research hospitals in the country. And I think it's a privilege and an honor to have them here located in Medford. I also think that without the technology that they need in order to operate, we're going to be doing them a disservice, Mr. President. So I, too, will be supporting this resolution. However, I do have some questions and concerns relative to the actual traffic flow and traffic mitigation that's going to be in place. And I was wondering if the gentleman could speak to that a little bit, if possible.
[Adam Knight]: You've got the police officers that are going to be there. They're going to be performing detail work on the site. I'm sure that it'll be in compliance with the traffic plan, which is in compliance with the established rules and regulations that we have in place.
[Adam Knight]: I don't need it. I'm satisfied based upon the plan.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. You're welcome. Councilor Knight. Yes, Mr. President, through to the gentleman. Is the work done in-house or is there a contractor that's going to be doing the work?
[Adam Knight]: And a contract that hasn't been selected as of yet? Not yet. There'll be a project manager on hand in case there are any complaints? If there are any complaints, they can reach out to me and I'll be certain that they'll be taken care of. Terrific. Thank you very much. I'm satisfied, Mr. President. I yield.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. And thank you, Councilor Penta, for bringing this issue up. I certainly agree with some of your points. However, I urge my colleagues to move with caution. Recently, I believe this fiscal year, GASB, which is the Government Accounting Standards Bureau, has come out with a number of papers which will change the way that we're allowed to forecast and we're allowed to report our liabilities on our balance sheets, which means that if we're reporting liabilities that are less than what we have, our balance sheets are going to be off and we're actually going to go and owe more money. So if we owe more money on our liabilities that aren't showing up on our balance sheets now but will be later on, and we're spending money of our free cash to offset this, we might have a perilous effect on our bond rating, Mr. President, because we're going to be taking money out of our reserves to pay for this unfunded liability. With these new reforms that are coming in place and these new reporting requirements, I think that we need to move with caution. I think we need to get a report back from the Retirement Board as to what steps they've taken to address the generally accepted accounting principles that have been adopted by the federal government and passed down to the state. I think that it's important to understand that the unfunded liability is really a mismatch between the estimated returns that we have on our long-term investments and the estimated assets that we have. So in looking at what's happened, the GASB group has really taking a look at the way that we forecast. And municipalities usually forecast at a rate upwards of 8 percent, while private sector pension plans usually forecast at around a rate of 4 percent, which is a little bit more in line with what the actual returns on investments are. Now, as I've done further research, I've seen that the 25 largest pension systems for municipalities are returning at about 7.5 percent or 7.25 percent. So there's certainly some concern here, Mr. President. I think that we need to be on strong financial footing. We need to make sure that we keep money in the bank, and we need to be sure that we don't have a perilous effect on our bond rating before we move forward and start, you know, issuing annual checks for $500,000 a year to offset this pension liability. It might not be enough. It might be too much. There might not be a break-even there, and our bond rate is going to start to drop, and our pension liability is going to go up because of the new reporting requirements, Mr. President. So I urge my colleagues to proceed with caution. For those reasons and the uncertainty, I'm going to be voting against this resolution.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. That's what I was getting at. You know, with GASB making these changes to the actual accounting and reporting principles that are in place and the federal government adopting them as generally accepted accounting principles, the city of Medford is going to have to take a look at the way that we are doing things. I'm not saying that this is a bad idea. I didn't say that at all. What I'm saying is I think we need to tread lightly and we need to use caution because we don't want to make a decision that's going to have a long-term dramatic effect on our financial viability. Now, I understand what Councilor Penta is coming from, saying, well, we're never going to have financial viability if we have this unfunded debt and this unfunded liability. However, if we're looking at how we're going to pay it off and we have the free cash sitting in the bank collecting 1%, And we can take that money out and bond it for 2 or 3 or 4 percent because we have a AAA bond rating and then use that to spend down a pension liability that's going to get us a return to 15 percent, like he says. I don't see how we're losing money. But that's a question for another day, Mr. President. I'll certainly support the paper to go to committee to ask these questions that we have to get better informed and to properly vet the issue before we make a demand or make a — ask the question for the mayor to expend $500,000 annually to fully fund the pension system. I know that we've gotten a report back from Ann Baker. I believe it was in April. relative to the plan that they currently have in place. However, I don't have any understanding or any commitment or any knowledge that the city's actually looking at these new accounting principles and these new accounting standards that have been put in place. That's why I asked my colleagues to tread lightly. That's why I think this issue needs to be vetted a little bit further before we can ask this question and make this recommendation, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: You're saying we're getting returns of 15%, 20%, right? Other communities are getting returns of 15% or 20%, right? Those are, yeah. So if we bond the money for 3% and we invest that money and we're getting returns of 15%, I don't see how we're losing.
[Adam Knight]: But what I'm saying is, why not? Why aren't we putting up $6 or $7 million if that's going to address the problem and address the need and address it now, in the real time, right now? Why aren't we doing that?
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, counsel. If the federal government has changed their standards and they're making the municipalities and the states report their unfunded liabilities differently than they have required them to do in the past, then this information and data that we're getting isn't going to be accurate. If they're not reporting the liabilities the way that GASB and the way that the generally accepted accounting principles are calling for, then they can give us all the data in the world. But if they're not giving us a forecasted You know, if they're not giving us a forecasted, estimated liability that's done properly, it's garbage in, garbage out.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. I believe the paper that was before us was for the gentleman to address the council on whether or not we should purchase an arts and media center. That is the paper before us. Thank you for your point.
[Adam Knight]: Communication from the mayor.
[Adam Knight]: Aye.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I felt it was appropriate that we bring this resolution forward this week, whereas we're not going to be meeting the week of Veterans Day. As we all know, the country has been embroiled in turmoil for a number of years overseas in the Middle East. And we've had many men and women return to Medford and return to Massachusetts, suffering from the effects of being overseas at war. I think that we've seen a number of people come back from being overseas that are suffering from traumatic brain injury. I just think that it's nice that we raise awareness and that we thank the men and women who've actually dedicated their lives and dedicated their time and dedicated their souls to protecting our freedoms, our democracy, and our country.
[Adam Knight]: How did you find the records, Councilor Knight? Mr. President, I reviewed the records and I found them in order. I took special consideration to look at the South Medford neighborhood walk to be sure that everything there was in order. There were 13 amendments and they certainly all look like they were right to me, Mr. President, so I'd move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much, and Ms. Stein, thank you very much for coming down and welcome to the city. We're glad to see that you're willing to be an active participant in the government. I think this is a worthwhile endeavor, Mr. President, and I think that it might make sense for this council to send the paper to the Traffic and Parking Commission for them to maybe conduct an investigation and report back to this council what their findings are and what steps they feel is appropriate for us to take as a community to ensure that we actually address the issue.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. And I've had some conversations with Matthew about this very same endeavor that he's looking to spearhead, and I think it's a great idea. I, too, have some concern about the $20 fee to be charged to get a copy of the tape. And I think that it might make sense for our rules committee to take a look at the fee structure that we use for providing an archived copy of the tape to a member of the general public who wishes to have a copy, Mr. President. So I'd like to add that to the paper as well. We refer the issue of the cost of a copy of the tape to our rules committee for investigation and to maybe establish a fee structure.
[Adam Knight]: I believe the letter that Councilor Penta refers to was sent to the administration prior to the recommendations being made that the Councilor referred to at the beginning of his soliloquy.
[Adam Knight]: I do believe, if I recall correctly, that the only matter that was before the council that evening is whether or not the council was going to authorize the mayor to enter into a contract that would be 10 years in length. The actual contracted entity was not up for discussion. That was not within our purview that evening.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, as I understand it, the motion before us right now is from Councilor Dello Russo, which would be to request that info sessions be held, as I understand it correctly, Councilor, and as well as a cost comparison be conducted regarding 15 minutes free and 50 cents for the first hour. Is that correct, Councilor Marks? compared to the dollar, no free parking. Mr. President, I don't have a problem with either one of these amendments to the resolution. I think that if in fact we were going to request the traffic and the parking commission to hold an info session relative to the parking enforcement program, that they would do such and hold meetings in each business district to make it easy for the business operators to come there, to have less of an impact on their day-to-day operations. and to allow everybody an opportunity to understand what's actually going to be unveiled.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. In looking at the issue, there's a number of questions that need to be answered. A number of questions should be answered. And as such, we have a subcommittee structure that's in place. And I think that's the appropriate area and appropriate arena for us to get these questions answered, Mr. President. So, you know, I wholeheartedly support Councilor Caraviello's idea to keep this in either the Committee of the Whole or the Committee on Transportation to get these questions answered. Once we get the questions answered, then we'll be more informed, and then we can move forward. But the underlying paper that's before us is the council's official position on paid APOC. Now we have a series of amendments that have been added to that. We've asked a number of questions. I really think the appropriate place to ask these questions would be in committee, so that we all have the answers, and then we can all make an informed decision as to what direction we as a council want to move. Then why is the paper on the table? Well, if there's no direction for us to move, then why are we I don't think anybody in this table is precluding them from doing that counsel.
[Adam Knight]: Point of clarification, Councilor Knight. Point of order, rather. I think it might make more sense, instead of us throwing questions at the City Clerk to have him jot down, that we set a Committee of the Whole meeting, we set a deadline for us to actually email the questions that we want answered to the City Clerk. The City Clerk can put them together in a packet for us, if he's so willing, and we can send that packet to the Mayor's office, we can get the answers that we want answered, we can call the people in front of us to clarify these questions at the Committee of the Whole meeting, and then we can move forward as a body.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President, and I'd like to thank the South Medford residents together for putting this event together, as well as Chief Sacco for being so willing to attend. I think this is a great way to get things done in the community. It brings people together. It allows people the opportunity to meet their neighbors and meet some people in the city that they may not otherwise have the opportunity to interact with. I was unable to attend, as you can tell. I've been hacking pretty hard over here. I was a little ill over the weekend, and I would have liked to make it. And I do have a question. And one of the major problems that I see is I drive through South Medford a lot of the time vehicles traveling, say, down Main Street towards Alexander's, then we'll have a car double parked in front of Bocelli's, and we'll have a car trying to take a left-hand turn across the double line into slanted parking spots that are slanted the wrong way. And I didn't know if this was something that was raised during the meeting or if this was a topic of concern for the residents there. I understand that that's a little bit heavier of a lift than some of the things that are on this list right here. I think Councilor Marks did an excellent job in and making a concise and precise punch list for us to take a look at. And I certainly wholeheartedly support the majority of the recommendations that have been made here. So with that being said, I was wondering if someone could enlighten me a little bit relative to the parking issue and the vehicles that take the turn across Main Street into the slanted parking spots that don't really seem conducive to that type of turn across the double yellow line.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. President. Ms. Briley did come up and speak a little bit about the issues that she's had down at the end of Bonner and Mystic Avenue in the past, and it seems to me that some of these issues still persist, so if we could include that as part of the B paper that's going to go to the Committee on Intergovernmental Affairs, I'd be appreciative.
[Adam Knight]: As I understand it, the money that would be transferred from these retained earnings would be used to fund a contract. And the money that they're taking out of these retained earnings to fund this contract is an appropriate use, because it's going to be used to provide the salaries for people that work in the delivery of our water and our sewer system.
[Adam Knight]: I'm not so sure.
[Adam Knight]: In taking a look at the records for paper 14-599, no roll call vote was taken.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Knight. Ms. Andre, I do also believe that the Water Commission does meet monthly. I don't have that information in front of me right now as to when the Water Commission will meet again, but I know it's posted on the city's website.
[Adam Knight]: It's in the afternoon now. I think it's in the afternoon now.
[Adam Knight]: I don't work in the afternoon only. I'm in the same shipyard, believe me.
[Adam Knight]: I just did some figures. It looks like you're using like close to 6,000 gallons of water a year. And I'm sorry, yeah, 6,000 cubic feet of water a year.
[Adam Knight]: And each cubic foot's the equivalent to eight gallons. I go out to the laundry.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. It's with great pleasure that I bring this resolution forward this evening. Anthony Petrellis is someone who I consider a friend, and when I learned of this momentous achievement being bestowed upon him, I was very pleased, elated to say the least, Mr. President. Today, Mr. Petrellis is in the audience, and he's also accompanied by a number of his colleagues that know what a great job he does, and I think had something to do with nominating him for this award. With that being said, Mr. President, I'd like to give Ms. Carino an opportunity to come up here and speak. She's the principal at the McGlynn Middle School, to talk about Anthony's character and why this award is so fitting.
[Adam Knight]: Anthony, congratulations. On behalf of the Medford City Council, Anthony, it's my privilege to present you with this citation, which reads, the Medford City Council takes pleasure in awarding this council commendation to Anthony Petrellis. Whereas Anthony Petrellis has been named the 2014 Millikan Educator Award recipient, and whereas the Millikan Educator Award is a national accolade awarded to only 40 educators nationwide annually. And whereas Anthony Petrellis is the sole educator from the state of Massachusetts to be bestowed this great honor, and where Anthony has shown an untiring commitment to the educational excellence on behalf of the city of Medford and the Medford public schools, it is with great pleasure we extend this heartfelt thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I'd like to offer the floor to Ms. Kathy Young here. Kathy is a volunteer with our Office of the Environment and Energy, and she'd like to make a brief announcement about this weekend's festival. Name and address of the record, please.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. In recent weeks, I've gotten a number of calls relative to what I guess would be labeled trash truck slime leaking out of the trash trucks, causing a little bit of a problem relative to quality of life in certain neighborhoods. I've gotten a number of calls from the Lawrence Street neighborhood. It's also happened right in my own backyard, Mr. President, along Winthrop Street. We've seen it on Spring Street as well. So I'd ask that Waste Management do an inspection of their vehicles to ensure that they're not leaking any trash and refuse and fluid onto our streets. I think it may pose a significant public health hazard, but more or less it's really just a quality of life issue.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if this matter is moved for approval and we're all in favor of it, I was going to ask for a reconsideration on the previous vote because no vote was taken. Let's do this one first. Councilor Penta.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, motion for reconsideration on paper 14699. Mr. President, the vote wasn't taken. I'd ask that it be taken in the call of the ayes and nays.
[Adam Knight]: Opposed? Motion for approval. Motion for approval, Mr. President. Call of the ayes and nays.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I don't see any reason why we'd hold this one business to a higher standard than what's required under state statute, Mr. President. I think that this is something that's a reasonable request that falls in line with what the law is and I might certainly be supporting it. I think we should move for approval, but I'd like Councilor Marksley to obviously have a chance to talk on it. However, I don't, see any reason why we'd need to hold them to a higher standard or a different standard than that of any other business here in the community.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, we're dealing with two separate issues here. We're dealing with the matter that's before us, which it appears that, you know, Coles does have the right to just mail these out pre-postage. Anything else that we want to do that might well fall under the suggestion that Councilor Dello Russo had going forward.
[Adam Knight]: Right. So going forward, maybe we should consider Councilor De La Ruta's suggestion that we can go and we can refer that matter to the Rules Committee and come up with something that we can all live with. But as of right now, in this point in time, there is no requirement. So I think that what we should do, Mr. President, would be move for approval on this paper. And then if, in fact, we need to come up with a process or a policy that the Rules Committee can do such and report it back to the Committee of the Whole for further deliberation.
[Adam Knight]: Right, until we change the procedure.
[Adam Knight]: There is no procedure to change. Right now there is one.
[Adam Knight]: And if there are some internal controls that the council feels that those should be made, photocopying of the envelope, so on and so forth, that's all well and good.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Thank you very much, Mr. President. I agree with Mr. Givern wholeheartedly. I think that the Bicycle Commission meets rather frequently. They have a large board of people that are probably much more avid cyclists than anybody behind this rail. They know the dangers that they face. They know what the city needs to do to make them safer, because they're out there every day on these roads, Mr. President. So I think it would make sense if we got an advisory opinion from the Bicycle Commission to see what direction that they'd like to see us go. a number of issues aside from public safety and how to make Medford more bicycle-friendly. And I think that maybe if we look at this in a more comprehensive fashion, if we're going to send something to the legislature, that would be worth its weight.
[Adam Knight]: I'd like to table the matter and have it be sent to the Bicycle Commission for recommendation. Then we can bring it back to the floor for discussion.
[Adam Knight]: I believe when we were at the meeting in executive session with the mayor and we granted him the authority to enter into this contract for a term of 10 years, that we did not put any criteria upon the mayor's ability to negotiate this contract in terms of having a councillor present as a member of his negotiating team. I think it's very important to keep in mind that we want the mayor to go into this and negotiate a contract in good faith. And the mayor can't go and negotiate a contract in good faith if he can't bring that back to the board and have confidence that it's going to be passed. You know, we gave him the opportunity to go out there and we gave him an opportunity to enter into a 10-year contract. As Councilor Lungo-Koehn has said a number of times, and her sentiment is something that I have echoed, we knew what we were getting into. We saw the RFP. Councilman Marks is right. This is the mayor's parking plan. The mayor put this together. The mayor negotiated. The criteria come right out of the corner office. They don't come from this council. The authority that we gave him was to enter into the agreement solely. But when we were in the executive session, we saw what the plan was. We saw what the plan was. We knew what it was going to entail. We weren't allowed to talk about it.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I'd be interested to see the tape of executive session.
[Adam Knight]: I believe that because the city retains the right to determine where these kiosks, meters, and free spots are going to go, that the recommendation would go to the Traffic and Off-Street Parking Commission and then they would be the ones who would be implementing this because they retain jurisdiction. We're not giving up any of the sidewalks or any of our streets.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. If anybody's been paying attention to the recent debates relative to the Attorney General's race, a hot topic that's been coming up over and over again is sexual assaults on college campuses. And that prompted me to do a little bit of investigation. And I've come across a number of articles, two of which I provided my council colleagues with, as well as one for the city clerk. But in the Business Insider, I did take a look at a study. And the study was authored by Peter Jacobs, June 4, 2014. It was published in Business Insider. Here are the staggering numbers behind college sexual assault crisis. More than 99% of sexual assault perpetrators are male. Females account for around 95% of the sexual assault victims. Nearly 80% of the perpetrators are the same race of their victim, and around 90% of the victims know their perpetrator. Freshmen and sophomores in colleges are the most likely to be a victim of sexual assaults. 50% of the sexual assaults happen on Friday or Saturday, the majority of which happen between midnight and 6 AM. including almost 90% of the assaults when a victim is incapacitated. More than 40% of college sexual assaults happen in either September or October when there's an influx of new students. Around 80% of college sexual assaults happen either in the victim's or perpetrator's living quarters. In a 10-year study of college sexual assault in Massachusetts found that 81% of campus rapes and sexual assaults occurred in an on-campus dormitory. So these numbers were staggering, Mr. President, and when I read them, made me want to Google Tufts University and sexual assault on campus. And what happened was a very troubling article that I came across saying that the US Department of Education and Tufts University are at odds on the way that they're handling sexual assaults. Marcella Bombardieri, Globe staff from the Boston Globe, published an article on April 29, 2014 that spoke about some of the issues that Tufts University was having with the Department of Education relative to federal funding because of the way they handled the reported on-campus sexual assault. So with that being said, Mr. President, I think we've all sat up here and said time and time again that our most important job in this community is to keep our residents safe. I'd like to see the updated policy regarding the reporting of on-campus sexual assaults from Tufts University for the opportunity to review it, but also to send it to our chief of police and send it to the Middlesex County District Attorney for their review and recommendation.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Thank you very much, Mr. President. On Friday evening, I was getting some takeout at Bocelli's, and as I was sitting at the bar waiting for my food, the gentleman beside me took an electronic cigarette out of his mouth and started smoking it. And it didn't mean much to me. And I just kind of looked at him and said, oh, wow. But the couple sitting next to me that was enjoying their dinner wasn't as pleased as I was to see this happen, Mr. President, which got me thinking, you know, what exactly is going on with the regulation of electronic cigarettes here in Medford? And I think with that being said, Mr. President, I did a little bit of research and I found some policy options, copies of which I forwarded to all my colleagues here. possibly to regulate the sale, regulate the marketing, or regulate the use of such electronic cigarettes. I guess the end all be all resolution would be to ban electronic cigarettes in all places where smoking is prohibited. That's the ideal language from the National Center of Tobacco Control. However, I don't know if that language would actually be something that would work here in Medford. So I thought it would be a worthy endeavor for the subcommittee on zoning and ordinances to examine it, to find out what our legal rights are and to find out whether or not it's worthwhile for us to come up with a resolution that would do such.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilor Knox, for bringing this resolution forward. I think this is a great proactive approach to improving the quality of life for residents here in the city of Medford. I will be voting in favor of this resolution and I might ask that the resolution be amended by way of a B paper, Mr. President, which would ask that the Medford police or the building department report back to this council locations that have been reported to have been graffitied within the last 12 months. I think it's very important that we keep track of this data to determine whether or not there were clusters and trends that are occurring here in the city so that we know where to ramp up enforcement. So I'd like to thank Councilor Marks for taking such a proactive approach to looking at the quality of life in this city. And I will be voting in favor of this resolution, Mr. President. I just ask that it be amended for the Police Department of the powers that be to report back any locations that have been reported within the last calendar year.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I think it's very important that we recognize the efforts and the leadership that Councilman Marks has put forward on the issue of a dog park. Not only has he brought this issue to the council floor, he's actually put his money where his mouth is. He's gone out, I witnessed him personally collecting signatures from members in this community to seek support for a dog park, Mr. President. And that's the proactive grassroots type of work that makes the community really come together and it makes matters like this come to fruition. I'd like to congratulate Councilor Marks on the efforts that he's put forward, Mr. President. Not only does he file the resolutions, but he does the legwork.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. taken a big interest in recent weeks to the water and sewer billing system and the rates that are in place. And in my research, I've been able to determine that in 2006, of the MWRA communities, Medford was the 15th highest consumer. And it's also my understanding that a tiered rate system is put in place to promote conservation of use of water. Previous councils, dating back as far as I've looked to 2007, have consistently voted to establish a tiered rate system. We have paper 07464 to establish a tiered rate. Paper 07559 to establish a progressive H2O consumption system. Paper 08591, the city engineer present the tiered system for the council to review. 09535, a report on the tiered rate system. 09706, creation of a tiered system. 09838, an excessive use of water program. 10036, the status of a tiered rate system. 720, report back on the progress of creating a tiered system. Dating back to 12-4-07, the Medford City Council has been on record in supporting looking at water and sewer rates and eyeing a multi-tiered system. As recently as 12-24, Mr. President, there was an article in the Medford transcript saying that the City Council supported the implementation of a tiered system. Councilor Mayorka was a champion for such a program. Councilor Mayorka was of the theory that if you use more, you pay more. And I certainly agree with that philosophy, Mr. President. In looking at how the rates are determined, we have a Water and Sewer Commission. The Water and Sewer Commission meets monthly. Here in my city council packet this week, I received a notice of when this Water and Sewer Commission is going to meet. For the edification of the people at home, I'd like to let them know that on October 15, 2014, in room 201, at 2 o'clock, the Water and Sewer Commission will be meeting. It's open to the public and all members can attend. Mr. President, I certainly share some concerns about the itemization of the bill, and I too have seen irregularities in water bills, my own included. Mr. President. However, I think to say that this is a surprise is a little bit of a misconstrue of what's happened. It's not in line with what the history shows. It's not in line with what the history says.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. And I was getting there. I think that, you know, when we get a response from the mayor saying to call a public hearings within the council purview, it is. We have subcommittees, we have committees, committees of the whole, which has the power to call a committee meeting. We have a committee on auditing finance, budget, and taxation. We have a subcommittee on intergovernmental affairs, and I think that when we call for a public hearing, we don't need to have the permission of the mayor to do that. We can use our internal governmental structure that we have here as a council in order to promote these meetings, in order to make these meetings happen. So when I looked at it and I saw that it falls within the council purview, and then I read the language in the resolution, I said, well, I think that this refers to the fact that the council does have the power to call this meeting, and we don't need the mayor to give us authority to do such. And that's where I'm coming from, Mr. President. I certainly feel as though we need to have a better line of communication in terms of the way that our water and sewer billing is implemented. And I certainly have concerns, because when we look at 2007, we look at the ideas that came out. And the tiered system was really 0 to 1,000 cubic feet of use. And it's gone down to 800. So I can understand that there must have been some deliberation and some decision-making process. And I, too, share the concerns as to how do we get to this figure. It's my understanding that, based upon conversations that I've had with members of the Water Sewer Commission, that about two-thirds of the households in the city will fall in the first tier. I haven't seen any hard facts and hard figures on that, but that's what's been represented to me through the conversations that I've had with the Water and Sewer Commission, Mr. President. So with that being said, I certainly do not see any reason for us to go to the mayor's office and ask the mayor for permission to hold a hearing on this when we have a perfect structure that's in place that's underutilized right now in order to do such. So I would move, Mr. President, this be forwarded to one of the appropriate subcommittees that we have here that's in existence already for us to actually take ownership of the issue and get the answers that we need without relying on somebody else giving them to them. We can go and extract them.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Mack. Thank you very much, Mr. President. I echo the sentiments relative to infrastructure that Councilor Marks has raised. Our MWRA assessment is calculated every year. It's done so by the MWRA estimating the total amount of revenue that's going to be necessary for them to run their water system. The chart is then calculated at a flat rate times the metered water used in a community, and that's how they come up with their assessment. However, it's interesting to point out that debt service represents 60% of the FY15 budget at the MWRA. So that means 60% of their budget is dedicated just to debt service for infrastructure improvements that they've made to deliver these water to us. So I think it's time that we need to take a look internally and say, OK, now it's time for us to make this commitment to our infrastructure. Because ultimately, in the long run, it is going to reduce the cost for the individuals in this community to pay water bills.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I do appreciate where Councilor Pentland is coming from. However, where we're asking so many questions and we have so many questions, I think it would be better vetted appropriately in the subcommittee. I think that we can ask these questions, we can get answers to these questions, then we can convene as a body as a whole. and we can make recommendations to the Water and Sewer Commission, instead of asking these questions to the Water and Sewer Commission and not having any opportunity to properly vet it. That's why, Mr. President, I will not be withdrawing my motion to amend.
[Adam Knight]: Yes, please, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I'd also like to see the city solicitor present where there are some questions relative to legalities.
[Adam Knight]: Um, actually, Mr. President, I think that might make sense. If any of us have any questions that we'd like to have answered, that we send those questions to the chairperson of the subcommittee to forward to the water and sewer commission prior to this meeting taking place so that we can get this information to us beforehand and have a productive meeting as Councilor Penter suggested. Valid point.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. And Councilor Caraviello brought this up to my attention, actually, would be also Badger Road in Winthrop, where the Caliaco Construction Company's performing infrastructure improvements to our water and sewer pipes. They're driving over the sidewalk to use that piece of land as a layover land. And as such, they've caused extensive damage to the curb and siding over there. And I believe that's one of the safe routes to schools, Mr. President, so I think that's something that might also need to be looked at.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. Where October is National Disability Awareness Month, I found this resolution to be fitting. We have a number of projects going on, a number of projects that have been completed, whether it's through community development block grant funds or otherwise. We're seeing park improvements and accessibility, sidewalk improvements for accessibility. And I'd like the director of disability to have an opportunity to come down here and explain to us exactly what progress they've made over the last year or so in terms of improving accessibility and equal opportunity for the residents here in the city.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. There are two very proud grandparents in two separate parts of the city. Many of us know Joan Gatto from the magnificent Muffin and Bagel Shop, and right now I'm sure she's smiling with the birth of her newest grandson. As goes Jean Entapa from over in the hillside area of Medford, an employee at Tufts University, who brings, I believe, her third male grandson into the family. I think she has about six total. However, Benjamin David Entapa joins his sister Ava and his sister Callie. So we'd like to welcome her to the world and congratulate two proud grandparents, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: I think that it's important to point out that all the officers in our department are appropriately trained and the Chief of Police has implemented a number of programs as required by state law and otherwise to ensure the safety of our officers and to ensure the fact that the general public is protected and that, you know, these personnel issues that occur. in any organization, within any organization, not just within the police department. So although I appreciate what you're saying, I think that, you know, we're getting a little off base here in terms of, maybe you're losing me here, I'm just trying to figure out what direction you're trying to go in there. Maybe if you could, you know, you're talking about staffing levels, you're talking about programming, I'm a little confused as to where you're going here. All of the above.