[Marks]: Thank you very much, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Michael Marks, 37 Wellington Road, the great city of Medford.

[Marks]: My initial thought is, just standing out in the audience, when many people hear about free cash, I think it's important in layman's terms to spell out exactly what free cash is.

[Marks]: And it's an overabundance of taxpayer money.

[Marks]: That's what free cash is.

[Marks]: So free cash is not pulled from a cherry tree.

[Marks]: It is the overabundance of taxpayer money.

[Marks]: And the reason why I bring that up, Mr. President, is being a former member of the council for 20 years.

[Marks]: One thing I do regret, and many residents probably feel the same pain, is the water and sewer bills.

[Marks]: And the reason why I bring this up, Mr. President, is because so many years ago, we created a rainy day fund in the water and sewer.

[Marks]: It's called the Water and Sewer Enterprise Account.

[Marks]: It's not called the rainy day fund.

[Marks]: And that fund was supposed to be, the intended purpose was supposed to be for infrastructure improvements or offset the rates.

[Marks]: And the fund started out some many years ago with three, $400,000.

[Marks]: And that's not a lot for a city this size, with an infrastructure that's a hundred years old, you know.

[Marks]: But what happened over the years, unchecked, it turned from 300,000 to 6 million.

[Marks]: So all of a sudden now, the bills that are going out now have a little bit of padding.

[Marks]: Why?

[Marks]: Because it goes back into the free cash.

[Marks]: And before you know it, it's an end around about proposition two and a half.

[Marks]: So you're bringing in additional revenue has nothing to do with proposition two and a half.

[Marks]: And you're using that for purposes other than which it has been used over the years.

[Marks]: I'm not sure if you were on the council, Mr. President at the time, maybe Mr. Scarpelli can remember for purposes non related to water and sewer, because there was that buffer.

[Marks]: My concern about creating an additional account now is that that's also going to be unchecked.

[Marks]: And it's going to mushroom into this large, large account of taxpayers money.

[Marks]: And it's going to sit there until someone decides to use it on whatever project they want to use in the community.

[Marks]: And I think that's a real concern right now.

[Marks]: And if anyone behind this railing can tell me exactly how much we have in the water and sewer enterprise surplus account now.

[Marks]: Does the city administration know what's in the account?

[Marks]: All right, thank you.

[Marks]: Right.

[Marks]: Do we know how much is in there currently?

[Marks]: Do we know how much is in there currently?

[Marks]: I am all done.

[Marks]: Stick a fork in me, I'm all done.

[Marks]: The one thing I do want to caution the members of the council, in particular, I hate to say new members, because we all start somewhere, right?

[Marks]: But the creation of a fund sounds good.

[Marks]: But an unchecked fund is not a good thing.

[Marks]: And unfortunately, that's what exists in this community, whether it's water and sewer, and doesn't require council approval, or rainy day fund that does require council approval.

[Marks]: It's an unchecked account.

[Marks]: And that's a problem, in my opinion.

[Marks]: And you know,

[Marks]: We at the beginning was mentioned that, you know, we all have rainy day funds.

[Marks]: I'm not sure what the chief of staff makes, but let me tell you, that's not true for most people in today's society.

[Marks]: We don't have rainy day funds that we can count on.

[Marks]: Most people are living paycheck to paycheck, putting their kids through school, helping family members out, whatever it might be, housing, which we're going to talk about later.

[Marks]: So I just don't want to be too cavalier when it comes to having rainy day funds sitting around with surplus money.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And thank you for to the members of the council for hearing us all so late.

[Marks]: We appreciate it.

[Marks]: Um

[Marks]: The one thing I need to start off by addressing is the fact that it was mentioned by Councilor Callahan that this proposal may not have legs to stand on, you know, it may never get through the legislative process.

[Marks]: And I would say with all the things that we need to do as a community, in particular regarding affordable housing,

[Marks]: Why would we waste an ounce of energy on something that we know is not going to go anywhere?

[Marks]: And the reason why I say that is under the current housing production plan, which is a five year plan that was signed by the council on September 27th, 2022.

[Marks]: And it created by the city and is a state recognized planning tool, which establishes 18 housing strategies for the planning and production of affordable housing stock in the community.

[Marks]: A transfer fee alone

[Marks]: is not a plan to create affordable housing.

[Marks]: It was never mentioned at all a transfer fee in the 117 page housing production plan that the city hired a private consultant to come in and work with many city agencies, state agencies, this council to develop.

[Marks]: One strategy

[Marks]: to create additional affordable housing outlined in the housing production plan is called affordable infill.

[Marks]: And that may be a new terminology for people, but it's written right within the production plan.

[Marks]: And I remember as a city council, we discussed this issue ad nauseum because at the time it had a lot of merit in creating additional affordable housing citywide.

[Marks]: not just in Wellington Circle where I live, or not just in South Bedford, but citywide.

[Marks]: Think about that.

[Marks]: Think about adding affordable housing in all sections of the neighborhood.

[Marks]: There are roughly currently right now 550 vacant city and privately owned lots that are non-buildable.

[Marks]: Through zoning, through dimensions, through setbacks, through lot size, but they're non-buildable.

[Marks]: We can create, through zoning provisions, an infill ordinance that would allow us, with these existing current lots, we're not talking about transfer fee, we're not talking about all these pies in the sky, the current lots, the city owns 128 of these 550-odd lots that are out the community.

[Marks]: we could create a housing trust fund with those hundred and 20 think about 129 lots in the city that could be valued at 75 85 100,000.

[Marks]: And the reason why I value that is because we're looking at creating affordable housing.

[Marks]: Right.

[Marks]: So think about creating a first of its kind, where we tap into these odd sized lots, work with the city, work with developers that do affordable housing, and start moving, not rental units,

[Marks]: We're talking about home ownership, generational wealth that we would create in this community.

[Marks]: And this right now is something that you have at your fingertips.

[Marks]: This is something you can do tomorrow.

[Marks]: And it's been in this plan since FY21.

[Marks]: And there's been, you know what action on this?

[Marks]: Goose eggs, goose eggs.

[Marks]: And the low-lying fruit right now, councilor, is what a monkey would decide to do, is let's just tax people.

[Marks]: That's the easy thing, right?

[Marks]: We need money, let's just tax people.

[Marks]: We have a way to create revenue, we have land, we have the will of the city, we have the will of this council, and we're not moving forward.

[Marks]: So rather than waste time on something, a home rule petition that's gonna go nowhere,

[Marks]: Let's start spinning our wheels on things that will produce results.

[Marks]: And this is one of them.

[Marks]: 30 seconds.

[Marks]: 30 seconds.

[Marks]: One last thing I'd like to mention, and this is important.

[Marks]: I was involved with creating Method's first dog park.

[Marks]: What does it have to do with this?

[Marks]: Absolutely nothing.

[Marks]: I was involved with creating Method's first art center that we just had a ribbon cutting.

[Marks]: And I can tell you unequivocally,

[Marks]: If we started off both those meetings, we would not have a dog park, reference for a dog park, or an art center, by saying, you know how we're going to pay for this?

[Marks]: Let's go to the taxpayers.

[Marks]: We went to the Stanton Foundation, and they paid for the entire dog park.

[Marks]: Right, we got a fund in a public private partnership with fitness wellness fitness to pay for our center for the next 10 years, not one cent of taxpayer money went to this.

[Marks]: So if we're looking at killing affordable housing this community, keep on this track, we're going to kill a dead.

[Marks]: And if you want to have the opportunity to explore these other avenues that are already out there, there's already a plan.

[Marks]: He's already been vetted.

[Marks]: Let's move forward.

[Marks]: I want to work with you.

[Marks]: Let's move forward.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Thank you, Madam President, Michael Marks, 37 Wellington Road.

[Marks]: It's an honor to be here tonight, Rick, to honor you for your 12 years of commitment and dedication to this community.

[Marks]: And, you know, I can honestly say, as has been eloquently stated here tonight, that you are a man of results.

[Marks]: and didn't let anything get in the way.

[Marks]: Didn't let politics get in the way, personalities.

[Marks]: He wanted to see things happen.

[Marks]: And as Council Vice President Bears just mentioned, the library, right?

[Marks]: A little thing like the library came to fruition because Rick thought out of the box and said, you know what?

[Marks]: We need this for our community.

[Marks]: We need this for our residents.

[Marks]: And it was you that pursued that dream and why it became to a reality.

[Marks]: Another issue that we didn't even mention, and I don't even think we've touched the tip of the iceberg here, is an issue that was near and dear to me when I first got on the council in 2002.

[Marks]: And that was to create an art center in our community.

[Marks]: And I had the keys to the Swan School in my hands.

[Marks]: And every Saturday and Sunday, I used to open the building and let the artists roam the building.

[Marks]: And we were gonna put an art center in the Swan School.

[Marks]: That never came to fruition.

[Marks]: And I worked on creating an art center for 19 years after that.

[Marks]: And I was responsible as one member, creating arts collaborative method.

[Marks]: Our sole responsibility was to create an art center in this community.

[Marks]: And for three to four years, we looked at the Heckner Center and realized that building would have cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to bring it up to a reality.

[Marks]: And then one day we got a phone call.

[Marks]: And it was from Councilor Caraviello that said, I have a community public-private partnership that's going to allow an art center to come on Mystic Ave.

[Marks]: You're not going to have to pay anything for the first 10 years.

[Marks]: They're gonna suit the building to your need, ample parking, we're gonna have community art classes, we're gonna have artist space, all for nothing.

[Marks]: And by the way, January 20th of next year,

[Marks]: they can have a ribbon cutting.

[Marks]: Medford's first art center in this community came to fruition because of this man right here that put together a public-private partnership to make that happen.

[Marks]: And I'm a little envious, it took me 20 years, it took him 20 minutes, but that's all right.

[Marks]: It came to reality, and that's the most important thing.

[Marks]: You know- Can I say something?

[Marks]: Absolutely.

[Marks]: Well, and I appreciate that.

[Marks]: You know, you hit the nail on the head, George.

[Marks]: It's almost like you stole my speech because honestly, I mean, you look at someone's character and we're celebrating Rick for 12 years.

[Marks]: Rick's been dedicated in this city for five decades.

[Marks]: Rick did the reverse.

[Marks]: Usually people get elected, then they start getting involved in the community.

[Marks]: Rick was involved for five decades and then got elected and continued to do what he did from the previous five decades.

[Marks]: As you mentioned, feeding the most needy in our community, helping veterans, whether they had a leaky roof or needed accessibility ramp to their homes.

[Marks]: know, those are the type of things that, you know, I think go unnoticed, because there's no print paper anymore, there's, you know, there's no really way of getting the message out.

[Marks]: But those are things that Rick did, because he wanted to do, not for any fanfare.

[Marks]: And, you know, I personally, Rick, you know, I have to say, when when I was on the council, and you were running for council, I said, this son of a gun, he's, you know, he was out there campaigning, I said, this son of a gun.

[Marks]: And then when he got on the council, I said, you know what,

[Marks]: He adds a lot to this council.

[Marks]: He has a lot of integrity.

[Marks]: He cares about this community.

[Marks]: And as members said behind this reel, no matter what side of the issue, Rick was always respectable.

[Marks]: And that's one thing that I take, Rick, and I'm proud to call you my friend.

[Marks]: And honestly, I hope that you will maintain your leadership role in this community, because we do need leaders.

[Marks]: You know, when the Chamber of Commerce didn't have a president,

[Marks]: It was Rick Caraviello that stood up and took over the reins in order for small business to be represented.

[Marks]: And that's a lot of work and a lot of effort.

[Marks]: And those type of things go unnoticed.

[Marks]: And I just want to thank you, my friend, and I'm sure you'll be active in the community.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Thank you, Madam President, and I, too, wanna thank Councilor Knight for his friendship and his many years of service.

[Marks]: As you stated, Madam President, there's been no bigger advocate for working families in this community than Councilor Knight.

[Marks]: I gotta be honest, I learned so much regarding living wages and rights of workers from listening to Councilor Knight over the years.

[Marks]: It made me a better councilor.

[Marks]: And I know over the years, when he first got on, he was a young man at the time, and he's still a young man, but, you know, some of us said, oh, I hear some fresh meat coming onto the council.

[Marks]: And before you knew it, we had our own parliamentarian.

[Marks]: I mean, it was Councilor Knight, honestly, that knew the rules and regulations inside and out.

[Marks]: And the only way I could combat

[Marks]: his knowledge was I thought if I spoke louder that I would I would win the debate and that was my attack when I when we used to go at it he'd bring up rules and regulations facts and figures and I would mostly yell and raise my voice and I thought that I won the argument but I

[Marks]: I knew all the time that I never won the argument because he was armed better than I was.

[Marks]: And I just want to thank you for your years of service.

[Marks]: Councilor, it was a pleasure getting to know you, the person who you are, the family man, the care that you have for this community, and I hope to see you around the community.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Thank you, Madam President.

[Marks]: It was an honor and pleasure.

[Marks]: We only served for one term together.

[Marks]: I can tell you the first six months that Nicole sat next to me, I don't think she said hi to me for six months.

[Marks]: And I didn't know if it was me or she was new on the job and trying to feel her way around.

[Marks]: And I think our very first debate was a difficult one because we were sitting next to each other and I may have taken some liberties at the time and you turned around and literally snapped at me.

[Marks]: And like, after that, I think I was like walking on a tightrope the whole time.

[Marks]: I was, what's she going to do next?

[Marks]: You know, I was kind of in fear to be honest.

[Marks]: I believe that when you've gone on the council, your intentions were always to move the city forward.

[Marks]: I also believe that you were even-handed, you were willing to listen, which I think goes a long way.

[Marks]: We may not agree, but if you know someone's at least listening, that means a lot.

[Marks]: And, you know, the one thing that I didn't agree with, it was the leaf blower ordinance.

[Marks]: However, I think you've surpassed that with the school committee race.

[Marks]: At the very least.

[Marks]: But I want to thank you for your years of service.

[Marks]: It takes a lot to do what elected officials do in this community.

[Marks]: I think people think, you know, it's an easy task.

[Marks]: You come on a Tuesday night and attend some subcommittee meetings and they don't know the hours of reading, the hours of phone calls, the really

[Marks]: that takes place to be an effective Councilor.

[Marks]: And I think you've shown that over the last four years, and hopefully we're losing a lot of knowledge behind this reel.

[Marks]: Hopefully some of that will be spread on with the existing members.

[Marks]: But I want to thank you for your service, and hopefully you'll spend some more time with the family, which I think you'll find equally, if not more important.

[Marks]: So thank you.

[Marks]: I would just ask if one of my colleagues would be kind enough to suspend the rules to allow residents that took time out of their busy schedule

[Marks]: in the middle of the summer, waiting for two hours, that we would allot them a little more than two minutes.

[Marks]: So if we could suspend the rules.

[Marks]: Thank you, and I appreciate that, Madam President.

[Marks]: Michael Marks for the record, 37 Wellington Road.

[Marks]: It's been seven months since I've appeared before this body and in City Hall.

[Marks]: And the reason why I'm here tonight is because of the petition that is before us, which I believe strongly will hurt many, many people in this community.

[Marks]: And that's the reason why I'm here.

[Marks]: You know, we've had discussions before this body for many years.

[Marks]: And some of the council has brought up tonight about the process.

[Marks]: And I can recall being part of subcommittees that have met 15 to 20 times to discuss snow shoveling ordinances or leaf blower ordinances.

[Marks]: And here we have an issue of a prop two and a half override that's gonna cost the average taxpayer an additional 600 from the increase we just received in June on our taxes.

[Marks]: And have we had one subcommittee or committee of the whole to discuss this particular petition?

[Marks]: Have we had one?

[Marks]: So we haven't had one.

[Marks]: So when it gets brought up about process, I would agree that there has been no process.

[Marks]: And that is a major, major concern for me and many other people in this community.

[Marks]: I appreciate the dialogue.

[Marks]: I know there's people on both sides and I appreciate the dialogue and I can see both sides.

[Marks]: But I think many of the comments that have been made tonight, which I will reiterate some of them because my colleagues have already put out great comments.

[Marks]: is the first is how much should a realistic budget be for the complete operations in the city of method?

[Marks]: Can anyone behind this real that's in favor of this 12 million?

[Marks]: state tonight, what is a realistic operational budget?

[Marks]: Because if you're running a business, you know what your realistic operational budget is to run a business.

[Marks]: So what is it?

[Marks]: Can anyone behind the reel tell me what the realistic operational budget for this city?

[Marks]: It's a tough question, believe me, I know it is.

[Marks]: So we haven't answered that question.

[Marks]: What is a realistic budget?

[Marks]: Is 12 million on top of this budget realistic?

[Marks]: Is this gonna bring us to where we need to be, the promised land?

[Marks]: I don't believe so.

[Marks]: The second point is, can anyone behind this reel

[Marks]: refer to any budgetary study that outlines the complete financial needs of this community.

[Marks]: Can anyone tell us

[Marks]: of a budgetary study I'd like, and I'm asking this as a question not, not to be facetious, I'm asking I'd like to know, because in my 20 years on the council, I can tell you firsthand, I was never part of any budgetary discussion regarding the operational needs of this community so I'd like to hear from the council because I think that's an important question.

[Marks]: Right, and I think that's an important question that needs to be answered before we put the cot before the horse, right?

[Marks]: And these are the things I think needed to be vetted out before we say, well, let's just let the voters decide.

[Marks]: I think as the leaders in this community, we all look up to you as leaders.

[Marks]: These are the questions I think that need to be answered before we take the next step.

[Marks]: When is the last time a complete and independent audit has been done of all city functions?

[Marks]: The reason why I ask is because when I was a member of the council, this council has always been on record asking for an independent audit.

[Marks]: And we used to always state that an independent audit is not done by the same firm that's been hired by the administration for the past 30 years.

[Marks]: That is not an independent audit.

[Marks]: And I think members behind this reel could probably appreciate that.

[Marks]: So I think truly, if we're gonna move in a direction, and I'm not opposed to having these discussions.

[Marks]: I think this is healthy to be quite honest with you.

[Marks]: Put it on the table, discuss it.

[Marks]: But I think this information has to be on the table.

[Marks]: Have we had an independent audit?

[Marks]: The answer is no.

[Marks]: The answer is no.

[Marks]: So when we look at, are there ways we can cut costs?

[Marks]: Are there ways that we can work more efficiently?

[Marks]: There absolutely is.

[Marks]: Are there things that we're doing that may be duplicate in nature?

[Marks]: Absolutely.

[Marks]: And council and I brought up one in particular about duplicate positions.

[Marks]: So there's a lot of that that hasn't been looked at.

[Marks]: You know, when we say let's look at the charter, everyone's on board.

[Marks]: And I was the first person to offer having the charter be reviewed.

[Marks]: I offered about seven or eight years ago before this council.

[Marks]: And it was sent to the state legislature and it died.

[Marks]: But everyone wants to review the charter because it's the operational framework, how this city works.

[Marks]: And it makes sense.

[Marks]: You wouldn't run a business and not change a business plan for 30 years.

[Marks]: You'd be out of business.

[Marks]: This city is no different.

[Marks]: Now we're running on a budget, like Councilor Knight said, that hasn't changed in 30 years.

[Marks]: Yes, it increases every year, but the physical budget itself hasn't changed in 30 years.

[Marks]: and throwing more money into the budget is not gonna solve any problems at all.

[Marks]: It's not gonna solve anything at all.

[Marks]: The following three questions need to be answered in order to support this proposal.

[Marks]: The first one, and I think we've got somewhat of an answer is, what will the average increase be?

[Marks]: And I think we heard tonight, we're looking at roughly 550,000 based on an assessed value of 650.

[Marks]: So that could be seven or $800 depending on your assessed value.

[Marks]: Coupled with the increase we just received

[Marks]: when the council and the mayor voted for the budget.

[Marks]: So the 550 is one portion of an increase.

[Marks]: The other portion, you just approved.

[Marks]: So when we look at the numbers, I think we have to put it in perspective.

[Marks]: It's not 550.

[Marks]: For many of us, it's well over $1,000 that the increase may be.

[Marks]: Well over $1,000.

[Marks]: Right.

[Marks]: I think he said I was smart, so he can yell out any time he wants.

[Marks]: I think that's what he said.

[Marks]: No, I appreciate that.

[Marks]: But this is a very important issue for a lot of people.

[Marks]: I'm coming up here on behalf of the residents that reached out to me, to be quite honest with you.

[Marks]: That's why you haven't seen me in seven months.

[Marks]: This is a huge, huge issue.

[Marks]: And I would appreciate maybe if we could suspend the rules because

[Marks]: I don't feel like I've had five minutes and I feel rushed already.

[Marks]: I've had seven minutes.

[Marks]: I'm already over.

[Marks]: Will someone suspend the rules to allow residents to speak before the podium?

[Marks]: Right.

[Marks]: But, but not fully, not fully.

[Marks]: I think we were all, you know, listening to many speeches tonight and we'd like to be able to speak.

[Marks]: It's important.

[Marks]: There's only, there's a dozen people.

[Marks]: There's a dozen people in the audience.

[Marks]: Okay.

[Marks]: Well, I appreciate it.

[Marks]: I'd like to finish.

[Marks]: I only have a few more minutes left.

[Marks]: I really appreciate finishing.

[Marks]: So as we were mentioning, the 550 is not a realistic number for most residents in this community.

[Marks]: So that's question number one.

[Marks]: What actually will this cost the residents of this community?

[Marks]: There was a comment made tonight.

[Marks]: Each year, we're doing more with less.

[Marks]: That comment can't be furthest from the truth.

[Marks]: as a taxpayer for 30 years in this community, 30 years.

[Marks]: This is my 30th year.

[Marks]: Taxes have gone up each and every year for 30 years.

[Marks]: So I don't know how we're doing more with less.

[Marks]: The city is getting more money each and every year from the taxpayers of this community.

[Marks]: It may be not spent wisely, but they're getting more money each and every year from the taxpayers of this community.

[Marks]: Well, as Councilor Wright said, I think it's a spending issue.

[Marks]: So I think that's what I'm trying to address.

[Marks]: The other question is, what impact will this have, this tax increase on our most vulnerable residents?

[Marks]: And I think that's the key and that's actually why I'm up here tonight.

[Marks]: So when we talk about seniors on fixed incomes, which my colleagues mentioned, we don't wanna address that, but truly people are making decisions whether they eat,

[Marks]: or take medication.

[Marks]: And maybe members behind this reel don't see that.

[Marks]: You don't experience it, but it's happening in our community right now.

[Marks]: I'll tell you firsthand, it's happening in this community.

[Marks]: And we're asking residents to make that decision.

[Marks]: So I just want people to be aware of that.

[Marks]: What about the young families that paid top dollar for their home and brought in this community recently and have to decide whether their child will play sports, whether they'll go on vacation, whether they'll save for their college tuition.

[Marks]: These are the decisions that have to be made.

[Marks]: So it's easy to say, hey, look what 12 million will do for us.

[Marks]: But what's the collateral damage to that 12 million?

[Marks]: It's the seniors on fixed income.

[Marks]: It's the families.

[Marks]: It's the renters that Councilor Caraviello has mentioned in the past.

[Marks]: Many people, many landlords are going to pass this on to the renters.

[Marks]: And that's what's going to happen.

[Marks]: And as Councilor Caraviello mentioned, what about the seniors in this community that brought their home 25, 30, 40 years ago in a property rich, like Councilor Caraviello says, and income poor?

[Marks]: $500, I would submit to you, is a lot of money.

[Marks]: It's a lot of money for people on fixed incomes.

[Marks]: So I think, you know, when you talk about a cavalier, cavalier saying that, well, it's only 500, it's only 550.

[Marks]: And, you know, I think you gotta be mindful of who is living in this community.

[Marks]: And my last point, and I appreciate the time, believe me, and I don't wanna take up any more time.

[Marks]: We're in a time of uncertainty.

[Marks]: We're talking about inflation.

[Marks]: We're talking about recession.

[Marks]: And here we want to raise additional taxes on top of taxes we just raised.

[Marks]: How blindsided is that?

[Marks]: We have to be living under a rock to say now is a good time to increase taxes again a second time.

[Marks]: So I think this is what you're hearing from the community, at least what I'm hearing from the community.

[Marks]: Maybe the council's tone deaf, certain members of the council, but this is what I'm hearing.

[Marks]: Yeah, we all have a wishlist.

[Marks]: Streets should be done and so forth and more teachers.

[Marks]: We all have a wishlist, but we have to work within the confines of our budget.

[Marks]: And when we start pricing people out of this community, it's not a community I want to be part of.

[Marks]: I thank you very much.

[Marks]: For your time, I thank you for your consideration, and I would only ask when you make your vote, make sure that those three subjects regarding the impact of people, regarding the cost, regarding how it's gonna affect each and every resident becomes part of your consideration.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: do you recognize this Councilor Marks?

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I want to thank President Caraviello for bringing this issue up.

[Marks]: My line of questioning is similar to what Councilor Morell just offered.

[Marks]: What was the job specification on this if it called for granted curbing, which I believe it did.

[Marks]: And according to the contractor,

[Marks]: They weren't able to get granted curbing, then to me, you would put in a temporary maybe concrete curbing until you're able to get the granted.

[Marks]: One does not take the place of the other.

[Marks]: We were told recently that the structural integrity and in the building material, a similar nature.

[Marks]: concrete and granite curbing are not similar in nature, and I'm not a building expert, but I don't think you need to be a building expert to figure that out, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And if it's gonna stay this way, which I hope it's not, Mr. President, what is the difference in the contractual price that went out for bid with this particular company?

[Marks]: And did the city approve the changing of materials?

[Marks]: That's key, because if you're a homeowner and they're going to do work on your home and decided to do you something of less of value and less equality, you would raise an issue right and say as a homeowner say, I didn't pay for that I paid for this, and the city should do the same as the President, and if it's a matter of waiting some time.

[Marks]: until granite is available, then so be it.

[Marks]: But the job needs to be done right.

[Marks]: As Councilor Falco mentioned, at the McGlynn Andrews School, we've had countless concerns regarding crumbling concrete curbing around that whole infrastructure.

[Marks]: And it's been a nightmare for public safety, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I would just pose that question as well.

[Marks]: If the city did approve them to move forward and gave it the A-OK,

[Marks]: in that we as a community wait till granite is available in order to have that installed in place of the concrete curbing.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Someone that has their hand up.

[Marks]: Who has their hand up?

[Marks]: Christopher Leary.

[Marks]: Mr. President, it's important to note too, for the edification of the viewing audience that the council's vote tonight is a recommendation to the city administration.

[Marks]: We don't have the authority to stop a project in the community.

[Marks]: However, the city administration does, and this is a recommendation to the city administration.

[Marks]: Mr. Clerk?

[Marks]: We want to let the mayor know the importance of this, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Absolutely.

[Marks]: Mr. Clerk, the roll call vote has been called.

[Marks]: Will the clerk please call the roll?

[Marks]: Motion to revert, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I'll be brief because this resolution that's on tonight was a result of the resolution that was offered by this council unanimously last Tuesday that came under suspension.

[Marks]: And the reason why we could not give it a formal vote, Mr. President, is the fact that it appeared on the agenda under suspension and the open meeting rules require that the

[Marks]: item that we vote on appear on the agenda.

[Marks]: So we requested that it appear on tonight's agenda agenda so we could take a formal vote for reinstatement.

[Marks]: Um, it's a little troubling to me, Mr. President.

[Marks]: It's now 12 days since Mike Durham, a veterans officer, was walked out of City Hall.

[Marks]: Um, and

[Marks]: According to the letter that was written by the administration, there is no corrective action being taken against Mike Durham.

[Marks]: That was part of the letter.

[Marks]: So the city is not putting Mike Durham on corrective action.

[Marks]: What they did state to Mike Durham is that they will handpick a physician

[Marks]: a psychiatrist that Mike needs to go to to submit to a psychological exam.

[Marks]: That was 12 days ago.

[Marks]: If anyone felt that there was need for Mike Durham to submit to a psychological exam, that should have been done immediately, immediately.

[Marks]: The urgency of a psychological exam should take place immediately.

[Marks]: It's 12 days now.

[Marks]: Mike Durham went on his own to the VA hospital in Bedford.

[Marks]: He met with a nurse for 45 minutes and they conducted an evaluation.

[Marks]: He met with a board registered psychiatrist for 45 minutes that came out with a multi-page document

[Marks]: stating that more or less, and I'm not gonna quote, because I don't have the report in front of me, that Mike was fit to go back to work.

[Marks]: No underlying issues, he was fit to come back to work.

[Marks]: Here we are 12 days later, that report was sent to the administration, and the administration still sticks by, they wanna have their own person evaluate Mike.

[Marks]: To me, Mr. President, I think we're getting into a very slippery slope when you have someone that's a whistleblower, that brought up potential fraud, potential wage theft that's going on in this community, and brought it to his superiors, which he should have done.

[Marks]: And then to have this type of action taken against this employee

[Marks]: to me, is not acceptable, Mr. President.

[Marks]: It reeks of retaliation.

[Marks]: Leaving someone out of work for almost two weeks now, not knowing when he's gonna get this call to go see this particular doctor is unacceptable.

[Marks]: In particular, it's unacceptable when there's no corrective action against this particular employee.

[Marks]: The employee has unblemished record in this community.

[Marks]: Check out his personnel file.

[Marks]: It speaks volumes when you look at it.

[Marks]: A gentleman that's gone over and above the call of duty, not just in the city, but the call of duty to this nation.

[Marks]: So, Mr. President, I am really troubled that this is going on for so long, that we can't get back to the business at hand of running and operating our community.

[Marks]: And we're focusing on an issue, in my opinion, that we shouldn't be focusing on.

[Marks]: We should be looking at the wage theft and potential fraud.

[Marks]: That's what we should be looking at.

[Marks]: As I stated last week,

[Marks]: In the federal government, a whistleblower gets congratulated.

[Marks]: They get compensated in certain circumstances.

[Marks]: In the city of Medford, they ask you to take a psychological exam and they kick you out of work.

[Marks]: And they tell you, you can't go in a municipal building.

[Marks]: What does he say when he has to go have a parent-teacher meeting?

[Marks]: You can't talk to other city employees.

[Marks]: That sounds like a corrective action to me, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Again, I'm very disturbed about this.

[Marks]: I would hope the city administration that talks about transparency all the time will be transparent and come up and discuss the issue with the other legislative body, the elected body in this community,

[Marks]: and put this behind us, and that is yet to happen.

[Marks]: So my vote tonight, Mr. President, will be the vote I took last week to respectfully ask the mayor, who's the only one that can reinstate Mike Durham in this community, to respectfully ask the mayor to reinstate Mike Durham.

[Marks]: And let's not continue to play out personnel matters, as the mayor always refers to it,

[Marks]: I can't discuss it, personnel matter.

[Marks]: Can't discuss it, personnel matter.

[Marks]: Personnel matter.

[Marks]: The council can't meet in emergency meeting or executive session, that's a personnel matter.

[Marks]: However, these personnel matters are finding their way into social media.

[Marks]: I don't know how they're getting there.

[Marks]: Some even say confidential at the top.

[Marks]: The private investigator, Mr. President, that was hired by this administration, hand selected, is not so independent.

[Marks]: The private investigator that was hired, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And the record should reflect that.

[Marks]: And it was stated here before the council.

[Marks]: If need be, we can pull the tapes.

[Marks]: It was handpicked by the administration.

[Marks]: So from now on, Mr. President,

[Marks]: If you can handpick the judge you go before or the investigator that's investigating you, that's a society I don't want to live in.

[Marks]: It's a report I don't put any trust or confidence or faith in, Mr. President.

[Marks]: This council asked, right, if we could hire our own investigator to look into it.

[Marks]: It takes it off the mayor's table so it doesn't look like the fix is in.

[Marks]: The mayor would not fund that, refused to give us one red nickel, Mr. President, to hire our own investigator.

[Marks]: We all know it came back.

[Marks]: The report came back, and the report found that there was no wrongdoing here at City Hall.

[Marks]: I would have had more respect if they said, you know what, we did find a little something and maybe this could improve or that could improve.

[Marks]: Nothing at all, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And it sends a message to everyone else in this community.

[Marks]: If you know something's going wrong, don't stand up.

[Marks]: Don't be a whistleblower.

[Marks]: Don't put your neck on the line like Mike Durham did because they'll go after you.

[Marks]: They'll go after your family and they'll make sure they hurt you.

[Marks]: And that's what's happening right now.

[Marks]: They're hurting a good man and his family.

[Marks]: And I want to thank this council for standing up.

[Marks]: I also have to go on record, Mr. President, because Saturday, when we asked the administration to appear,

[Marks]: The administration supposedly sent an email on the Friday to members of the council stating that they could not attend.

[Marks]: No one from the administration was going to come to our planned meeting on Saturday.

[Marks]: All I can tell you, Mr. President, is as one member of the council, I did not receive that email.

[Marks]: Excuse me.

[Marks]: I did not receive that email from the administration.

[Marks]: I've been using the same email in this community for 26 years.

[Marks]: And the administration knows there's members of this council that opted not to use the city email and have been using their own email.

[Marks]: And they know how to communicate.

[Marks]: I get lots of email.

[Marks]: I got two today from the administration on my correct email.

[Marks]: But Friday, I got it on a different email that I don't use, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And it happened to go out that this letter that was sent was now leaked on social media, stating that the council lied on Saturday.

[Marks]: The council stated that they weren't notified that the administrations weren't showing up, that the administration wasn't showing up.

[Marks]: And indeed, Mr. President, we didn't receive it.

[Marks]: I can say four members of the seven did not receive the email, Mr. President.

[Marks]: That was not a lie.

[Marks]: I haven't lied in 26 years.

[Marks]: I'm not gonna start now on my way out, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I'm not gonna start now.

[Marks]: We did not receive that.

[Marks]: So to play this out in the media and go back and forth is a complete disgrace.

[Marks]: And I would hope that this administration comes to their senses, Mr. President.

[Marks]: and resolves this issue before it goes any further.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President, and I want to thank you for co-sponsoring this resolution.

[Marks]: Dr. Edward Butler has been a staple in this community for four decades.

[Marks]: In particular, Mr. President, serving as an internal medicine doctor and infectious disease doctor at Lawrence Memorial Hospital.

[Marks]: Dr. Butler served on the Method Board of Health for a number of years, Mr. President.

[Marks]: and was always available, according to the brave men and women of our police and fire department, to be available for the departments of police and fire for communicable diseases and exposure, Mr. President, which many in law enforcement and our fire department come in contact with on a daily basis.

[Marks]: Dr. Butler was a professor of community health at Tufts University.

[Marks]: He also served at many roles at LMH as the Director of Medical Affairs, Chief of Staff, Senior Vice President of Medical Affairs, and Chief Academic Officer of Hallmark Health Systems.

[Marks]: He received a number of distinguished awards over the years.

[Marks]: In 2012, he won the Ken Kaplan MD Award of the Massachusetts Infectious Disease Society,

[Marks]: 2001, he won the Middlesex Medical Society Physician of the Year Award.

[Marks]: Dr. Buck was named three times to Boston Magazine Best Doctors.

[Marks]: He was a recipient of the Hallmark Health Hero Award and was in a number of publications, which I won't mention them at all, but the New England Journal of Medicine and the American Society for Microbiology, to name a few, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Here's a gentleman that when you met him, honestly, you would never know he was a physician.

[Marks]: He was a down-to-earth person.

[Marks]: He was one that cared about his community, cared about his patients, Mr. President, and he will sorely be missed.

[Marks]: He had a tremendous office in there that assisted him.

[Marks]: He would be the first to tell you that he didn't do this alone for four decades.

[Marks]: His team consisted of Maureen Hayes that was with him for 36 years.

[Marks]: I think that says a lot when someone stays with you for 36 years, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I think it speaks volumes on his character, how he treated his staff, how he treated his patients, and the type of man Dr. Butler is, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Nancy Mahoney, 20 years.

[Marks]: Charlene Devaney and Julianne Bartolino, who was the medical assistant for a number of years, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I know they're having a retirement party for Dr. Butler tomorrow.

[Marks]: I want to make sure that we get a resolution.

[Marks]: I know, Mr. President, I think you forwarded a resolution to thank Dr. Butler

[Marks]: I already have it.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: For all his years and commitment to the residents of this community, he did a great job in protecting us during the past two years of COVID, being an infectious disease doctor.

[Marks]: He was the resident expert in this community.

[Marks]: And many agencies, businesses look to Dr. Butler for his advice.

[Marks]: And that included city departments, as I mentioned earlier, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Again, I want to thank him and let him know and his staff that they will be sorely missed.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: What information, Councilor Marks?

[Marks]: Just so I understand, because when you say the artwork, you're saying they originally approved and went on a website and saw all your artwork and then approved the artwork as well as giving you approval to use the parks.

[Marks]: I just want to make sure we're talking.

[Marks]: You're saying by the park board or some other entity?

[Marks]: They can't approve to put something up in a public park.

[Marks]: That has to be done by the Parks Commission.

[Marks]: I just want to make sure we're on the same page.

[Marks]: So you're saying the Park Commission was the one that approved

[Marks]: So you're saying that was all in a making sure it was yes.

[Marks]: So when was the actual vote, if you could, just, I know you just- May 2021.

[Marks]: May 2021.

[Marks]: And that encompassed the approval to be in the PACS and the approval- For this specific project.

[Marks]: So that was May 2021.

[Marks]: Okay.

[Marks]: I think they meet, when do they meet?

[Marks]: First Monday, okay, so we could find out.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: no matter where they came from, if they were born here, if they weren't born here, Mr. President, what information Council about when you mentioned community wide programming, how is this publicized?

[Marks]: How is it advertised?

[Marks]: You may be aware, you're the contractor, the park board may be aware, the mayor's office may be aware, but how is this advertised?

[Marks]: Because you said the thing was,

[Marks]: partly to bring up conversations and dialogue.

[Marks]: So I'm just wondering, do these just appear in a park?

[Marks]: And how are you going to gather dialogue and conversation when no one knows what's going on, something just apparently appears and people reacted?

[Marks]: I mean, so, so I think part of it, we have to realize maybe, you know, some of the blame pie was how is this sent out to the community?

[Marks]: I couldn't agree more.

[Marks]: To notify, right?

[Marks]: So why wasn't that part of this grant?

[Marks]: Why wasn't this, right?

[Marks]: Why wasn't this part of the total picture?

[Marks]: And I think what we see right now is you're right.

[Marks]: There's a lot of division in this community.

[Marks]: And to me, one way to head that off is to have open dialogue.

[Marks]: And, you know, it would have been nice maybe to promote this like every other event.

[Marks]: Yeah, I'm going to an event Oktoberfest and and the may has been promoting that up and down.

[Marks]: It would have been nice to have some promotion.

[Marks]: You know, maybe you would have got people out saying, Hey, geez, what is this?

[Marks]: What does this stand for?

[Marks]: Why is this?

[Marks]: Why?

[Marks]: Who knows?

[Marks]: But maybe we would have had that.

[Marks]: And I don't think we allow that to take place.

[Marks]: I'm good.

[Marks]: I don't think you know what, how it was publicized and the way a trend, you know, transpired.

[Marks]: I don't think was enough notification really to alert residents that first of all, there's something going on, right?

[Marks]: Love to go down and check it out.

[Marks]: I didn't know about it until I heard, you know, someone else saying it was ripped down.

[Marks]: I would have loved to went by.

[Marks]: I'm very active with the Methodist council.

[Marks]: Right.

[Marks]: So, first of all, I would have loved to hear it.

[Marks]: And I think, secondly, I think it would have head off, maybe some of this supposed intention or whatever existed, it would have headed it off so I just think that that's the way I would have handled it.

[Marks]: We don't know who tore him down, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I'm not sure it's fair to say members of this community.

[Marks]: So I would just caution the speaker that we don't know who tore him down, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I just want to put that out there.

[Marks]: want to speak?

[Marks]: I think you want to speak.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: I agree with that, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Mr. President, if I could, because when we're talking about division, I think that's an important topic.

[Marks]: And I also think it's important, Mr. President, when we say create dialogue, it's not helpful when

[Marks]: people create anonymous websites listing the 10 most racist people in Medford.

[Marks]: That's not helpful either, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I believe strongly that, you know, if we want to have dialogue and move together as one,

[Marks]: We can't have this back and forth, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I would hope the same attention to this website, Mr. President, that's currently still out there that names, I believe it's over 10 Method residents as the top racist in the city, some pretty prominent business owners and activists and people in this community.

[Marks]: I think that equally needs to be brought up as well, Mr. President, because in my opinion, that is unacceptable as well.

[Marks]: And that deserves the very same nature, uh, Mr. President of attention, uh, by, uh, the, the authorities as well.

[Marks]: And, uh, I'm under the impression that is being looked at Mr. President, but I want to make sure we, you know, we put all the cards on the table and, and that to be is healthy.

[Marks]: That's dialogue.

[Marks]: That's discussion.

[Marks]: And it can't be one way discussion.

[Marks]: It has to be, uh, throughout the entire community, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Mr. President, I want to thank my colleagues.

[Marks]: I want to thank councilor beers for putting this on.

[Marks]: Um, you know, we, we voted a while back.

[Marks]: I think it's been over a year now to declare racism, a public health crisis in the city.

[Marks]: And I must say, Mr. President, in this past year, I haven't heard from the diversity director at all regarding racism as a public health crisis.

[Marks]: I haven't heard from our Human Rights Commission at all.

[Marks]: I know they meet.

[Marks]: I know they discuss these issues.

[Marks]: They haven't presented before the council.

[Marks]: They haven't raised any concerns to this council, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And secondly, as Councilor Falco mentioned,

[Marks]: You know, it was this council that stood up not too long ago when the mayor said, you know what, we're going to take our diversity director.

[Marks]: We're going to make the diversity director, the human resource director as well.

[Marks]: So you had a full-time diversity director.

[Marks]: Now we're going to combine the positions for one person to take on both roles.

[Marks]: And we're also going to ask that diversity director and human resource officer in the community, chief people officer, now, Mr. President,

[Marks]: to also look at all the parking herring violations in the community and be the arbitrator of the parking violations.

[Marks]: This person would have three jobs.

[Marks]: And then you wonder why, when Councilor Falco said, who's leading this?

[Marks]: Who's leading the charge?

[Marks]: You know who's leading it?

[Marks]: Nobody, Mr. President.

[Marks]: because they're taking positions and they're watering them down.

[Marks]: And that's why this council stood up and said the diversity director is far too important of a position to combine the roles and then give other ad hoc responsibilities.

[Marks]: Because we knew, the members of the council knew, if you did that, you'd water down the position.

[Marks]: And it's far too important of an issue, Mr. President, to water down the issue.

[Marks]: And that's what's happening right now.

[Marks]: And that's why we don't have any correspondence.

[Marks]: That's why there's no follow-up.

[Marks]: Yeah, the buck stops with the mayor, but there's also others in this community, Mr. President.

[Marks]: A commission on human rights, a diversity director, and others, Mr. President, that should be equally as involved pushing the envelope.

[Marks]: You know, we talk about having dialogue in the parks and so forth.

[Marks]: That's what should be happening by the director of diversity, which I haven't heard from in over a year regarding any diversity issues.

[Marks]: Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Marks]: Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Marks]: I haven't heard anything, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And we haven't had any dialogue with the human rights commission.

[Marks]: And I know they mean I've watched their meetings of what I know they're discussing these issues, but guess what?

[Marks]: It's in a vacuum and that's where it stays.

[Marks]: So to have meaningful dialogue, it's great to have these roadmaps and so forth, and you have these round table discussions, and then after that, it kind of dies off, it peters off.

[Marks]: Let's face it, after that, there's no centralized focus on this.

[Marks]: And if we're going to get serious, that's what we need, Mr. President.

[Marks]: We don't need to water down positions and make one person the chief of everything.

[Marks]: And meanwhile, nothing gets done because they're the chief of everything.

[Marks]: And that's what's happening.

[Marks]: It's exactly what's happening.

[Marks]: And I'm glad my college stood up and fought not to combine those positions, Mr. President.

[Marks]: It was a tough vote.

[Marks]: because they were trying to sell it.

[Marks]: Geez, look at this.

[Marks]: It's excellent to have the head of diversity as the director of human resources.

[Marks]: It may be a good idea, Mr. President, but we all knew one person that was far too big of a role for one person in this community.

[Marks]: And I'm glad we took the stance, to be quite frank with you.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: One person doing the job?

[Marks]: We've been in a pandemic, things change.

[Marks]: So that's a big difference, Jen, having it fully staffed and having one role combined, which we know is going to limit that person in that capacity.

[Marks]: That goes without saying.

[Marks]: Thanks to this council.

[Marks]: You're absolutely right.

[Marks]: Mr. President, if I may, if I may get us back straight quick point of information.

[Marks]: Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I want to thank Cindy Watson for coming up.

[Marks]: It's been a long time resident of this community and

[Marks]: an advocate on a lot of issues, including Chevalier Auditorium, and I thank you for the friends of Chevalier and all you've done, your efforts, and I appreciate that.

[Marks]: Mr. President, it was back probably now close to three years ago that I was approached by a number of artists in the community.

[Marks]: They knew back some

[Marks]: 10, 12 years ago, I sat on the vision committee to make the Swan School an art center.

[Marks]: And as you probably remember, Cindy, back then, it lost the vote of this council by one vote.

[Marks]: We almost had an art center coupled with local public access at the Swan School.

[Marks]: And that was very traumatic for many of the artists that put countless hours and time into that, making that building an art center, which we all know is needed.

[Marks]: So about three years ago, I was approached by some of the artists.

[Marks]: I formed a group, Mr. President.

[Marks]: We actually met on a rather monthly, every couple of months basis at Maple Park Condominiums.

[Marks]: It was comprised of a number of artists in the community.

[Marks]: We did look at

[Marks]: the old Hegner Center as a potential art center.

[Marks]: We had architects come in to look at the building and what the cost would be to refurbish that into an art center.

[Marks]: We were talking about having public art classes at no cost for Medford residents, small art studios there, and have a full-fledged art center.

[Marks]: And over the past three years, Mayor Burke was, I'd say, on board and committed to leaving that building open for us.

[Marks]: Mayor Lungo-Koehn was committed to leaving that building open to us over the years.

[Marks]: We've asked for it to be trimmed, which they have.

[Marks]: I know personally, I dealt with Paul Moki.

[Marks]: We had the roof showed up because it was raining inside the building, to be quite honest with you.

[Marks]: And we were concerned that we would get a building for the art center that was in such deplorable condition that it was going to be cost prohibitive for the artist.

[Marks]: So we asked that the roof be showed up.

[Marks]: And over time, Mr. President, I think there's been countless resolutions by each member

[Marks]: of this council to make sure that that building is at least kept up.

[Marks]: There is a group that uses that building.

[Marks]: We've all got calls regarding the organization.

[Marks]: What is it?

[Marks]: the middle six, that uses that building, the city allows them to use the building for training purposes.

[Marks]: So it's police officers from all these surrounding communities go in there and use that building for training services.

[Marks]: because a number of residents in your building saw police going in there all the time and thought something was happening, but they're using it for training purpose.

[Marks]: But needless to say, to make this story short, because it's getting late, the group that I formed back some couple of years ago, we now have the possibility of another building in the community that may be rent-free,

[Marks]: more parking, larger space, and a real suit for the art community for an art center.

[Marks]: And that's been our focus for the last probably close to a year, and it's been taken away from the Hegner Center.

[Marks]: So I would, it's fair to say that whatever's being done in that building right now is not involved with looking at a new art center.

[Marks]: for the time being.

[Marks]: And I would agree that that building something needs to happen.

[Marks]: Mr. President, we saved the building.

[Marks]: If members of this council remember the mayor, Mayor Burke, try to sell that building off.

[Marks]: Yeah, they were trying to get rid of that building.

[Marks]: Mr. President, this council saved the building, the deeds at the registry deed stated if there was no longer being used for that purpose of providing social services for the impaired, Mr. President, that

[Marks]: it would revert back to the city.

[Marks]: It was a little-known document.

[Marks]: The building ended up being reverted back to us.

[Marks]: It's worth $600,000 or $700,000, I believe the assessed value is.

[Marks]: And indeed, it's a building that we should take care of, even if we don't have plans for it.

[Marks]: As Cindy stated, it's across, it's in a neighborhood, it's across from the condominiums over there that keep excellent care of their property.

[Marks]: in their property values.

[Marks]: And I would go along with Councilor Falco that we ask immediately that whatever roof repairs, temporary roof repairs need to be done and work around the building be done immediately in the interest of public safety.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I want to thank Vice President Knight for putting this on.

[Marks]: In all the years that I've had in this committee, Mr. President, you never heard anyone once say that all the elections are not fair, or the elections are this, or the elections are that.

[Marks]: General Lasky, Judith Murray have run the elections in this community, along with the staff, Mr. President, in a way that gives us the trust and confidence that we're running elections, Mr. President, in the manner that they should be.

[Marks]: And I just want to thank them both for their many, many years of service.

[Marks]: It's a thankless job, Mr. President, especially on election day, as the clerk can attest to, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I want to thank them both for their many years of dedicated service.

[Marks]: Do you want you to answer for him?

[Marks]: Press stop.

[Marks]: Mr. President, I read the records, find them to be in order and move approval.

[Marks]: On the motion.

[Marks]: Okay.

[Marks]: Mr. President, if we could, Mr. President, I realized that we have been reading the governor's order since March of 2020.

[Marks]: And I would ask that we send this to our city solicitor regarding language that states no in-person attendance of members of the public will be permitted.

[Marks]: That is not, right now what we follow, Mr. President, as you know, we received from our local board of health, the approval of having in-person attendance.

[Marks]: We follow all the local board of health guidelines, as well as the CDC guidelines.

[Marks]: So I would ask that this be sent to our city solicitor for a potential update, Mr. President, on that language.

[Marks]: Is there any way the gentleman could maybe move up the sign and speak into the mic?

[Marks]: Because I don't think people at home are going to be able to hear.

[Marks]: at that distance.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Councilor Knox.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I want to thank my colleagues for their comments, and I want to thank BJ's

[Marks]: for being present tonight.

[Marks]: What I did hear at the outset, Mr. President, was that BJ's values their club and they value their members.

[Marks]: What I did not hear was that BJ's values the neighborhood.

[Marks]: And it may be because I live a couple of blocks over, Mr. President, that I could tell you firsthand the number of emails and phone calls I've received over the past

[Marks]: many years regarding BJs.

[Marks]: And it's great to say that this is their first club, this is their flagship store, it receives extra maintenance.

[Marks]: Mr. President, all you have to do is open your eyes and see that none of that is true.

[Marks]: All you have to do is go along Woodruff Ave and see the many breaks in the fence, year after year after year.

[Marks]: and the debris from their parking lot blows out into the neighborhoods.

[Marks]: It was just about three days ago.

[Marks]: So if anyone went by there and looked at Woodruff Ave and said, what a nice clean area it is, it was my call to DPW, which happens two or three times a year, Mr. President, to Steve Penaglia, the head of our highway, that got that area once again cleaned up.

[Marks]: And it was our DPW that went out there that would cut down the debris and so forth.

[Marks]: Yes, BJ's has done some improvements after many, many, many calls.

[Marks]: And I've personally made them to the store managers over and over again, the district managers and so forth.

[Marks]: And they will eventually make some improvements, Mr. President.

[Marks]: But it's clear to me, if you look at the lot, you look at the debris, you look at the fact that it is not a pedestrian-friendly business.

[Marks]: Anyone right now that has to walk to BJ's, so if you're an area resident or neighbor and you wanna walk there, you're taking your life in your hands going through their lot.

[Marks]: That's how dangerous it is, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And that's why the Community Development Board made the recommendations they did, Mr. President, regarding circulation.

[Marks]: It wasn't just for vehicular traffic, it was for pedestrians as well.

[Marks]: That's how dangerous it is, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I remember getting the calls over and over again, Mr. President, because the sweeping that they do in their parking lot, two, three in the morning, the sweeper would be out there.

[Marks]: You can imagine the noise and the echoing of the noise in the neighborhood.

[Marks]: And I can't tell you how many times, how many calls I had to put out, Mr. President, in order to get BJs to act.

[Marks]: And then they stated they did something, and within three weeks, it's back again.

[Marks]: The noise.

[Marks]: Idling trucks overnight, Mr. President, with the refrigerators, parked in the lot for hours and hours and hours, idling trucks.

[Marks]: It wasn't until we brought BJ over and over again and asked them, what can they do about it?

[Marks]: I believe they started locking their lot.

[Marks]: I don't know if they put a chain in the front back.

[Marks]: They started locking their lot, Mr. President.

[Marks]: But still, at night, that lot remains open on many occasions.

[Marks]: Drag racing.

[Marks]: You might say, how can you drag race on the back of the lot?

[Marks]: They start from the beginning of the lot on the Fellsway, Mr. President, where that little stretch of road runs along Woodruff into the parking lot, and they drag race inside there at night.

[Marks]: These aren't made up stories.

[Marks]: These are what the neighbors have to put up with, Mr. President.

[Marks]: You know, BJ's has not been a good neighbor, in my opinion.

[Marks]: I've lived in the area 30 years.

[Marks]: They have not been a good neighbor.

[Marks]: And I don't believe they value the neighborhood, Mr. President.

[Marks]: If this is their flagship store, shame on them.

[Marks]: I'd hate to see what the other stores look like.

[Marks]: You know, they mentioned about substantial improvement to the circulation, to the landscaping, to the lighting on their lot.

[Marks]: They haven't mentioned the concerns

[Marks]: of the neighborhood, Mr. President.

[Marks]: We heard that this new station is a great distance away from the homes.

[Marks]: I challenge anyone to take a walk down there tonight, and we'll see what this great distance is from the homes.

[Marks]: We'll see, Mr. President, the 64,000 gallons of flammable gas that's going to be in very close proximity to homes in that area.

[Marks]: and ask if you would like to live that close in that area, or anyone from BJs, if they'd like to live that close.

[Marks]: This is a secondary use for BJs.

[Marks]: And it's great that they wanna take care of their members, that's great.

[Marks]: What else does the membership want?

[Marks]: Where else can we put that lot?

[Marks]: It's a big lot.

[Marks]: How else can we accommodate the membership of BJs and disregard the neighborhood?

[Marks]: And that's exactly what we're doing here, Mr. President.

[Marks]: If I'm not mistaken, BJ's approached the city council some many years ago for a license for gas storage on that property, and they were denied.

[Marks]: For many of the same reasons you're hearing here tonight, Mr. President.

[Marks]: You know, we heard about trucking, one truck a day.

[Marks]: That's for the gas.

[Marks]: That doesn't include their other operations.

[Marks]: how many other trucks are coming in, 18 wheelers, and so forth.

[Marks]: Operational noise.

[Marks]: They're not putting this gas station for no reason.

[Marks]: As the gentleman stated, I believe it's near Woburn BJ's.

[Marks]: People would like to have one closer.

[Marks]: So we'll divert a lot of that traffic to Woburn, into Middlesex Ave, into the Felsway, into our neighborhood, Mr. President.

[Marks]: additional path trips.

[Marks]: It was stated.

[Marks]: I happened to have attended the Conservation Commission hearing on January 15th, and I spoke and represented what I believe the neighborhood concerns, and they did a good job as well.

[Marks]: I also spoke at the September 16th Community Development Board meeting.

[Marks]: And let's not forget, Mr. President, we can thank the Community Development Board, the Conservation Commission,

[Marks]: But guess who represents the neighbors in the neighborhood?

[Marks]: It's this Method City Council.

[Marks]: And we're the ones, Mr. President, that feel the complaints, that hear the concerns.

[Marks]: So, Mr. President, what I would ask is for BJ's tonight to present to us

[Marks]: what the lighting impacts associated for this proposal on the residents.

[Marks]: What are the direct lighting impacts on the residents?

[Marks]: I'd like to hear from them tonight, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I appreciate your comment.

[Marks]: So you're going to add an internally illuminated sign?

[Marks]: But you're going to add an additional sign?

[Marks]: No, sir.

[Marks]: So you're going to have the one BJ sign, and then you're going to replace it with a BJ and gas sign in one sign?

[Marks]: And what about, you're going to have a canopy around the station?

[Marks]: And is any illumination associated with that canopy?

[Marks]: What about on the exterior of the canopy?

[Marks]: Anything that's lit up on the exterior?

[Marks]: So what about, okay, that's, well, that's,

[Marks]: additional sign.

[Marks]: It's additional lighting that wasn't mentioned.

[Marks]: I just want to lay everything on the table.

[Marks]: I understand.

[Marks]: So there's no surprises.

[Marks]: And I want to be what about gas prices?

[Marks]: Are you not going to say what your prices are?

[Marks]: Right, so that's not what we just heard from this gentleman.

[Marks]: He said they were replacing the existing sign within the frame of that sign.

[Marks]: That's right.

[Marks]: And I'm sure you can't fit your pricing in there as well.

[Marks]: Yes, we can.

[Marks]: So you're gonna take that existing sign, you're gonna have the BJ's logo, you're gonna have the new station saying gas or whatever it is, and then you're gonna have your illuminated prices for your regular unleaded, high test unleaded, and so forth.

[Marks]: That's all gonna fit in the same sign.

[Marks]: And you're not gonna expand the square footage?

[Marks]: Okay.

[Marks]: Okay.

[Marks]: In regards to the emissions of odor from the gas, how are you addressing that?

[Marks]: All right.

[Marks]: So what happens when someone overfills

[Marks]: it leaks onto the ground.

[Marks]: Are there any vapors that are emitted from that?

[Marks]: I'll be honest with you, it happens with me all the time.

[Marks]: All the time.

[Marks]: I try not to, but it happens.

[Marks]: Is this self-serve or full-serve or both?

[Marks]: Self-serve.

[Marks]: Self-serve.

[Marks]: So you will not have any type of attendant on that property?

[Marks]: And is this only available to BJ's members or can anyone from the public use that?

[Marks]: Right.

[Marks]: So why does a company like Stop and Shop provide a discount for their Stop and Shop customers, but also allow you to purchase gas there as well with no discount?

[Marks]: just so you don't stop and shop.

[Marks]: And yours is just an exclusive.

[Marks]: So it's only for BJs.

[Marks]: So if I'm driving there and I'm running out of gas, I can't use your gas.

[Marks]: And how does that benefit the neighborhood and the community?

[Marks]: And those of us that are not members, we're not welcome.

[Marks]: We want to make you a member, sir.

[Marks]: I see the value if I'm a member.

[Marks]: I don't see a value if I'm not a member.

[Marks]: And that's, I think, something that your corporate office should really look into.

[Marks]: So regarding the- Okay, Mr., I'm sorry.

[Marks]: No, that's all right.

[Marks]: During the testimony at one of the public hearings, an outside expert came in regarding the report for traffic engineering.

[Marks]: And they mentioned in their report

[Marks]: that they predicted the traffic impacts have been underestimated by your traffic expert.

[Marks]: Well, I'd like to hear, you know, I realized there's two experts and one saying one thing, one saying another thing.

[Marks]: I appreciate your comments.

[Marks]: Mr. President, if I could just end my comments and I appreciate the council indulging me and I appreciate

[Marks]: BJ's not taking exception to what I had to say, Mr. President, but much of this has been pent up over a number of years with the lack of attention by BJ's to this particular neighborhood.

[Marks]: And, you know, it's great that they're at the table and they're willing to make some improvements, but they're also looking for approval from this council.

[Marks]: And it makes me wonder if

[Marks]: BJ's would be at the table if that was not the case.

[Marks]: The council's review of BJ's application for a gas storage and sale license may consider fire and safety hazards associated with the 64,000 gallons of fuel storage next to a residential neighborhood.

[Marks]: The council can also consider noise associated with the construction, increased trucking and car trips, and along with operational noise.

[Marks]: which we know will happen, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I just want to lay out my concerns regarding gasoline emissions, additional trucking, additional noise, additional car trips, fire and safety hazards associated with that amount of gasoline storage next to a neighborhood and the traffic impact on area residents, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I appreciate everyone indulging me while I made my comments.

[Marks]: I think, uh, I'm not sure if the petitioner is allowed to waive that requirement.

[Marks]: I think that's a statutory requirement.

[Marks]: Um, and at this particular time, Mr. President, this issue has been out before the community for close to two years.

[Marks]: There's been ample input

[Marks]: by both residents, by this council, by BJ's, and at this junction, based on what was brought up by this council regarding additional trucking, additional traffic impacts, additional car trips, noise, regarding gasoline emissions, fire and health concerns, regarding the amount of storage, regarding that BJ's has not been a good neighbor,

[Marks]: In the area, Mr. President, I would move for denial, Mr. President, of the application.

[Marks]: Yes, sir.

[Marks]: Yeah, I have a motion on the table, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Mr. President, if I could.

[Marks]: I'm not quite sure.

[Marks]: I know Council Vice President Knight mentioned that fact that they may not have to go back before the Community Development Board or the Conservation Commission.

[Marks]: I'm not quite sure without having our legal counsel give us guidance on that, that that is indeed correct.

[Marks]: And I would state at this point,

[Marks]: that we move forward on the motion that I made Mr. President.

[Marks]: I still ask that we take our vote Mr. President.

[Marks]: This is a Medford City Council meeting.

[Marks]: What's that?

[Marks]: This is to deny, yes.

[Marks]: This is a two-year process.

[Marks]: It's been a two-year process.

[Marks]: Vice President Rice.

[Marks]: Mr. President, thank you very much.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I'll be brief.

[Marks]: My colleagues, I think, did a great job on this.

[Marks]: Mr. President, I think it's only appropriate that we receive a correspondence from the chief of police regarding his reasoning for only allowing the one crew to start off on April 20th.

[Marks]: And what are his expectations

[Marks]: to have more crews added and what that timeframe is.

[Marks]: I think residents should be aware of what's going on, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I won't reiterate what my colleagues stated, but this project, as Councilor Falco mentioned, has been going on since 2017.

[Marks]: And really, I think this has to come to some type of resolve.

[Marks]: Yes, please.

[Marks]: In my opinion, Mr. President,

[Marks]: this process has been lackluster at the very best.

[Marks]: There's been insufficient community outreach.

[Marks]: And I think if you attended any of the two hearings that have taken place so far, you will hear that from residents, even the emails we receive and the phone calls that many residents feel left out of the process, feel that they haven't had any decision making within this process.

[Marks]: and feel that their concerns don't matter.

[Marks]: And that's their own feeling and their own opinion.

[Marks]: And residents are entitled to that, Mr. President, because indeed, I have the same feeling, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I attended both meetings that were held, both public hearings.

[Marks]: And to say that the public hearing is a place to allow for public comment, I believe falls short of the mark

[Marks]: when residents are given two minutes to speak and really can't get their message out within that period of time.

[Marks]: If we recall back a little over a year ago, I believe it was, there was a meeting up here with well over 100 residents that got canceled.

[Marks]: Then there was a follow-up meeting, as Council Vice President Knight refers to, that was held by the city in Verizon, and it was like a science fair.

[Marks]: that you come in and you just walk around to different exhibits that were laid out here in the chamber, and you never really got to sit down and hear what other residents have to say, never got really to participate in a back and forth dialogue, and I believe that was part of the insufficiency regarding community outreach.

[Marks]: The city, Mr. President,

[Marks]: And it's no reflection on the board members.

[Marks]: I hope they don't take it personal on the small 5G, but the city was ill prepared for this much anticipated 5G hearing that took place, the two that took place over the last two weeks.

[Marks]: The city did not present one subject matter expert, but relied heavily on Verizon and their subject matter experts.

[Marks]: And I think that lends itself right there, Mr. President,

[Marks]: to people in the community feeling that there's no one there looking out for their interest.

[Marks]: And I think they have every right to believe so.

[Marks]: We've had ample time to bring a subject matter expert on board that can give us some guidance.

[Marks]: People I've spoken with aren't necessarily against 5G, they're concerned with the proximity of 5G to their home, to their bedroom, to their front porch, to where their kids play.

[Marks]: That's their concern and they have every right

[Marks]: to be concerned, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I think right now where the next public hearing is coming up to finish off the remaining 20

[Marks]: applications.

[Marks]: I believe there are 44 altogether.

[Marks]: I believe there's roughly 20 left or right around that.

[Marks]: The next hearing is coming up.

[Marks]: And we should be discussing next steps now.

[Marks]: Because from what we heard, Mr. President, this was the first of many applications that are going to be submitted, not only by Verizon, but other vendors as well.

[Marks]: And I think we learned from this first process a number of things, of which that the small ad hoc small cell committee, we need to prepare for the next round of anticipated applications and putting safeguards out there that

[Marks]: will indeed address resident concerns and next step suggestions.

[Marks]: So tonight, Mr. President, and I know the clerk is looking at me with an evil eye, because we've often, this council has approved so many amendments and suggestions, but Mr. Clerk, just bear with me.

[Marks]: The next steps, Mr. President, we have to look at discussing improving the public outreach.

[Marks]: If we continue to have a process where people feel left out,

[Marks]: It's going to make this process very difficult, not just for 5G, in general going forward.

[Marks]: We need to devise a better way of reaching out to the community, getting feedback, implementing that feedback, and doing additional public outreach.

[Marks]: Just notifying people of a public hearing, in my opinion, is not enough public outreach.

[Marks]: We need to discuss immediately

[Marks]: to bring a consultant on board that has 5G expertise to protect our city's interests.

[Marks]: It's not too late, Mr. President.

[Marks]: That has to happen immediately.

[Marks]: We need to discuss amending the existing interim policy or creating a new ordinance to add community input and additional health and safety guides.

[Marks]: This council over the last year and a half has offered probably close to 18 to 20 amendments

[Marks]: asking the city administration to look at the interim policy and make some changes based on what we believe could provide some protection for our community and answer some questions in our community.

[Marks]: That is yet to happen, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I'm not opposed to creating an ordinance at the time, if we recall,

[Marks]: The interim policy was created because Verizon approached the city back in 2019.

[Marks]: They sat down with the city administration back in 2019.

[Marks]: They sat with the city engineer.

[Marks]: They sat with the board of health.

[Marks]: They sat with the city solicitor at the time.

[Marks]: They sat with the mayor at the time.

[Marks]: And Verizon said, we're coming into the community.

[Marks]: The city was under the gun to create some type of policy, some type of mechanism to hold Verizon accountable.

[Marks]: They put forward an interim policy within a matter of 24 to 48 hours.

[Marks]: They sent it to the council after creating this interim policy.

[Marks]: And we use that as a guide, Mr. President, knowing these applications were being submitted.

[Marks]: There's nothing that prevents us as a community to creating an ordinance now, enhancing the existing interim policy.

[Marks]: In my opinion, an interim policy has the same teeth as an ordinance.

[Marks]: So if we already have the current document, let's work with the current document.

[Marks]: But I'm open to any suggestions, Mr. President.

[Marks]: We also need to start immediately to discuss expanding the ad hoc small cell committee to include resident participation on the small cell committee and an expert in 5G on this committee.

[Marks]: Why would you create a committee with an even number of members?

[Marks]: What happens with a two-to-two vote?

[Marks]: Can anyone tell me?

[Marks]: What happens with a two-to-two vote?

[Marks]: It makes no sense, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And some of these things can be done at the wave of a pen.

[Marks]: That's all it takes.

[Marks]: Remember, an interim policy is far less rigid than an ordinance.

[Marks]: It's far less rigid, and it could be far more fluid

[Marks]: and changes and thinking and quick reactions, Mr. President, to safeguard this community.

[Marks]: We need to discuss mitigation.

[Marks]: This council has voted on it.

[Marks]: I'll bring it up again.

[Marks]: We need to discuss mitigation.

[Marks]: This council has requested 7-0 to ask the small ad hoc committee to stop moving forward on applications.

[Marks]: Last week, last Thursday, when they brought it up, I specifically mentioned that one recommendation, even though we voted on a number of recommendations, and we were told by the lawyer from KP Law, not our own lawyer, that not quite sure that has any bearing that the council wants the small cell committee to stop at this point.

[Marks]: That's what we were told, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Well put.

[Marks]: That's exactly what's happening.

[Marks]: That's exactly what's happening right now, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So that is a major issue, Mr. President, that recommendations by the community and by the council are being ignored, in my opinion.

[Marks]: When you have a unanimous vote by the council, it should carry some merit in some way, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And there's no rush to judgment.

[Marks]: No matter what 90-day shock rock we keep hearing, that Verizon is saying, Method, you're on a 90-day shock rock.

[Marks]: We're in the middle of a pandemic, Mr. President, for the last 14 months.

[Marks]: in the middle of a pandemic.

[Marks]: And yes, indeed, Verizon submitted their applications a while back.

[Marks]: But this community has every right to test out what's going to happen in this community, and every right to stand up.

[Marks]: Even though FCC regulations may say you can't discuss certain things like health, and you can't put a moratorium, which are FCC regulations, we have every right as the protectors of our residents and our community to stand up and say, wait a minute.

[Marks]: we want to take a closer look.

[Marks]: And we're not going to go by any 90-day shot clock, Mr. President.

[Marks]: We also need to discuss a community meeting with our state and federal delegation to address the 5G rollout and the concerns we have with the FCC regulations and this declaratory regulation that ties the hands of local municipalities, that does not allow local municipalities to make their own decisions.

[Marks]: The last thing we need are people up in Congress and people up in the White House, Mr. President, to be making local decisions.

[Marks]: Who knows best about local government?

[Marks]: Not the people sitting in Congress.

[Marks]: I can assure you that, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I would also ask, Mr. President, and this is a process of proven suggestion.

[Marks]: I was thinking about the process.

[Marks]: Right now when Verizon comes in,

[Marks]: They fill out an application.

[Marks]: They submit their location criteria, where they think the best poll is.

[Marks]: They submit their insurance binder, they're saying they have enough insurance.

[Marks]: They submit a lot of different paperwork, and they submit it to the city.

[Marks]: This is where we'd like to be, in front of 102 Main Street.

[Marks]: And that person that lives at 102 Main Street,

[Marks]: then gets notice.

[Marks]: Here you are, Verizon wants to be in front of your home, go to a public hearing if you have a problem.

[Marks]: Why not, Mr. President, why not have an application of interest?

[Marks]: Why not require through the interim policy that if Verizon or any other entity want to come in the community, the first thing they do is submit an application of interest.

[Marks]: We are interested in coming into the community, and we are interested in going in front of this location, or that location, just of interest.

[Marks]: That would trigger off the city, then, Mr. President, to do guess what?

[Marks]: Public outreach.

[Marks]: Why not address, Mr. President, if there are people in the community that support 5G,

[Marks]: People in the community don't believe that there may be associated health risks of being that close to the poll.

[Marks]: Why don't we reach out to the community and ask those that wouldn't mind having 5G in a poll in front of their home?

[Marks]: Sounds like a novel idea.

[Marks]: That way you're not just placing polls, Mr. President, you're asking for public input.

[Marks]: And if you happen to get 20, 40, 50, 60, 100, 200 people that said, you know what?

[Marks]: I don't mind it in front of my house.

[Marks]: Why not be armed with that information and then go to Verizon and say, now when you come in, you have your application.

[Marks]: These are the locations, when you do your grid and your networking, these are the locations we prefer you select.

[Marks]: Therefore, we head off all the public resentment, Mr. President, all the concerns that may be out there, which are rightfully so, about being in close proximity to 5G, and we head a lot of that off.

[Marks]: This is a suggestion, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I think it's a worthy suggestion.

[Marks]: And if we were sitting around a table discussing this and not just having Verizon force feed us what the next steps are, which is currently happening now, we're being force fed this by Verizon.

[Marks]: Rather than us leading this, we should be leading the discussion, not Verizon.

[Marks]: And it's the reverse right now.

[Marks]: So I make a motion, Mr. President, that the mayor

[Marks]: amend the interim 5G policy to include similar language that I just proposed.

[Marks]: And I'd be willing to sit down with the administration.

[Marks]: I'd be willing to sit down with the small cell ad hoc committee to work out some language in their interim policy.

[Marks]: I think it's a worthy suggestion to look at, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Also, Mr. President, I think it was quite telling over the last two meetings of the public hearings that

[Marks]: And out of the four board members, there was one board member that voted some petitions up and voted some petitions down.

[Marks]: And the board members have every right to vote.

[Marks]: That board member was the head of the Board of Health, which to me carries an awful lot of weight when we're discussing public health in this community, an awful lot of weight.

[Marks]: So I think it's only appropriate, Mr. President,

[Marks]: that we put in the form of a motion, I'd like to know that the Board of Health Director state whether or not 5G is a public health risk to the citizens of Medford.

[Marks]: I'm asking the Board of Health Director whether or not 5G, she considers 5G a public health risk to the citizens of Medford.

[Marks]: I think we all have the right to know

[Marks]: when someone takes a vote, Mr. President, especially a vote that goes one way, then another way, then another way.

[Marks]: What is the reasoning for that vote, Mr. President?

[Marks]: And if there's a public health concern in this city, I'd like to hear it directly from the horse's mouth, which is the head of the Board of Health.

[Marks]: Also during the meeting, Mr. President, Verizon asked for a waiver.

[Marks]: And the reason why they asked for a waiver, Mr. President, was the fact that our policy states that

[Marks]: These small cell antennas have to be located within a shroud or a canister.

[Marks]: Says it right in our policy.

[Marks]: It's black and white.

[Marks]: There's no ands, ifs, or buts about that.

[Marks]: Verizon stated at the public hearing they had their expert.

[Marks]: Unfortunately, we didn't have an expert.

[Marks]: They stated that their 5G cell doesn't work if it's located within a canister.

[Marks]: I'm being told other communities

[Marks]: have asked that, and they are receiving that, Mr. President.

[Marks]: But I'm being told that our board is going to give Verizon a waiver to waive that section of the interim policy.

[Marks]: So on one hand, these members can waive policy, but they can't consider amendments offered by an elected board, seven members of the council.

[Marks]: So I find that a little ironic, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Another point, Mr. President.

[Marks]: It was mentioned during one of the meetings by the city engineer, and he could speak for himself, he's a very capable person.

[Marks]: He asked, which I thought was an excellent question.

[Marks]: He said, in my background as an engineer, we do post-testing, I mean pre-testing and post-testing.

[Marks]: So for instance, 5G has this cell device that they wanna locate on our poles.

[Marks]: 5G Verizon does rigorous testing in a control environment.

[Marks]: Then they take the 5G antenna out of that control environment and they locate it on a pole 10 feet from your bedroom window.

[Marks]: Now something goes awry with that 5G.

[Marks]: Supposedly Verizon has a mechanism that sends an alarm to Verizon saying we have a concern

[Marks]: This pole, there's something wrong with it.

[Marks]: They may be emitting too much microwaves in that area.

[Marks]: It's not functioning the way it should.

[Marks]: And supposedly, that mechanism will send a truck out, and they'll do the testing they have to do.

[Marks]: The city engineer mentioned a great point.

[Marks]: He said, what about having twice a year, three times a year, quarterly a year to have post-testing?

[Marks]: So Verizon will come out to our 50, 60, 80, 100 locations, which won't take them long, they're a huge company, and test them by hand and make sure they're functioning properly.

[Marks]: You're not relying on a little bell to go off, or you're not relying on some safeguard that who knows, may work in the winter, may not work in the summer, who knows under what conditions, because it hasn't been tested.

[Marks]: Mr. President.

[Marks]: It was tested in an environment, a control setting.

[Marks]: And we all know it's not a control setting in the winter, in the summer of New England weather.

[Marks]: So I thought that was a great suggestion, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And Verizon pooh-poohed the idea.

[Marks]: But other communities, Burlington, I looked at their policy.

[Marks]: Cambridge, they have it built in for periodic reviews of their 5G.

[Marks]: They have it built in.

[Marks]: But for some reason, I don't know.

[Marks]: It looks like we just bend over for Verizon.

[Marks]: Next, Mr. President, Chapter 74, Section 225 of the Municipal Ordinances of Medford states, not making this up, Section B, extensions

[Marks]: shall not be made on any pole without the approval of the superintendent of wires.

[Marks]: So if they have an extension with this device, to me is an extension.

[Marks]: Some of the poles in the city now are higher than other poles.

[Marks]: These are extensions.

[Marks]: That ordinance, Mr. President, has not been followed.

[Marks]: We need to know how many extensions has Verizon put on these locations and other locations.

[Marks]: As we heard, I think it was from Councilor Penta last week or the week before, stating that they've been around the city for well over a year now preparing for this and working on polls that they're not even requesting applications for.

[Marks]: So there are extensions going on, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I don't think we should be giving a waiver to a city ordinance, Mr. President.

[Marks]: The last thing, Mr. President, is I believe in many of the conditions that the small ad hoc committee put on, I think we're rightfully so to help benefit this community.

[Marks]: But when you have 12, I think it was 12 last count I had,

[Marks]: 12 conditions on an application, I think it speaks volumes to what is going on.

[Marks]: Why do we need 12 conditions?

[Marks]: Maybe the interim policy is not enough.

[Marks]: Maybe the interim policy needs to be tweaked.

[Marks]: Maybe the interim policy, Mr. President, needs additional follow-up.

[Marks]: So I would ask, Mr. President, that we receive an immediate opinion from the city solicitor, and I'm putting this in the form of a motion, regarding Chapter 74, Section 225, regarding Verizon's poll extensions and whether or not these approvals and this process, Mr. President, should be valid and should continue forward when I believe it's in violation of city municipal ordinance.

[Marks]: I want to thank my colleagues for listening again.

[Marks]: I want to thank them for their support over the last several weeks, many of which have made their opinions known.

[Marks]: And most of all, Mr. President, I want to thank the community for uniting around this issue and making sure whatever is done, Mr. President, we know what the long-term

[Marks]: impacts may be to this community.

[Marks]: And right now, we don't know what the long-term impacts are.

[Marks]: And let's not rush to judgment on this.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Council Member Rowe.

[Marks]: If it wasn't part of it, I'd welcome that.

[Marks]: That's correct, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Correct, correct, yeah, emergency meeting.

[Marks]: No, I have no problem voting them as one, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I would just ask that if we can add the public comments regarding the discussions that we should be having, I laid out, I think it was seven different comments regarding what the next step should be.

[Marks]: And I don't know if that requires a formal vote, but if we can add that into the minutes of the record, and I can go over them with the city clerk.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I won't reiterate what my colleague stated.

[Marks]: But the one thing I remember about Joe was that you always knew where you stood with Joe.

[Marks]: And, you know, he would come out and tell you, you know, if you were talking to him and he disagreed, he let you know he disagreed.

[Marks]: He never sugarcoated anything, and I respected him for that, and I think that's what made Joe who he is.

[Marks]: As was mentioned by my colleagues, he was a true family man and really cared about the people that he was in contact with.

[Marks]: And on behalf of this council, I just want to send my condolences to his family and his wife.

[Marks]: Present.

[Marks]: So Chief, that's one of my main concerns is that the headquarters, as we all know, was pushed off

[Marks]: when we were gonna do a combined police and fire center.

[Marks]: And we only ended up moving forward with the police side.

[Marks]: And at the time, the headquarters had a lot of immediate needs.

[Marks]: And now what troubles me is that the mayor's capital plan calls for looking at the headquarters in year, I believe it's four or the five year capital plan.

[Marks]: And we all know that who knows what's gonna happen in year 2024, if that will still be the priority of the city, would be other needs that jump ahead of that.

[Marks]: which I hope is not the case, but it was the case last year when other needs jumped ahead of the headquarters, the fire headquarters.

[Marks]: So I'm concerned now that we're putting off immediate needs with the expectation that in year 2024, we may get a new station, a new headquarters, but that remains unseen.

[Marks]: We don't know that.

[Marks]: So we're kind of kicking the can down the street once again on the headquarters and, you know,

[Marks]: I realize we don't want to put good money after bad money into the headquarters if it's going to be replaced.

[Marks]: But I think the immediate needs, Chief, that we saw, the front of the facade that's pulling away from the building, the bathrooms that were in poor condition, as you know, the kitchen that's close to where the apparatus parks and contagions and everything else in the living quarters where these firefighters are.

[Marks]: You know, I think these issues, although they're probably costly, need to be addressed immediately.

[Marks]: And I'm hoping that under your leadership, Chief, that the fire headquarters is not last on the list, but should be first, Mr. Chief.

[Marks]: Right, so that's what I mean about kicking the can down the street on a building we already know, you know, it was housed where the police department was housed, and in my opinion,

[Marks]: was in no better shape than the police department, which we condemned that building more or less and built a new police station.

[Marks]: So I just want to put that out there, Chief.

[Marks]: I know the brave men and women of the fire department deserve no less.

[Marks]: And I'm glad to see after all these years of the council and residents talking about the condition, as well as the firefighters, the condition of the buildings

[Marks]: that at least something's being acted upon.

[Marks]: So I'm pleased to see that.

[Marks]: I just hope we're able to get to each building and the needs that they have Chief.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Yes

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I want to thank the number of residents that came out to attend this public meeting here tonight of the Medford City Council.

[Marks]: After attending the March 31st ad hoc small cell committee public hearing, I am concerned that corporate grade

[Marks]: and commercial benefits of 5G will outweigh the potential long-term health effects of 5G on our residents, home values, and environment.

[Marks]: Method must delay any wireless build-out until the law and public policy catch up to the science.

[Marks]: The Federal Communication Commission's declaratory ruling effectively tied the hands

[Marks]: of local municipalities to make decisions best for their community.

[Marks]: The city is prohibited from taking any action that is seen as prohibiting Verizon's 5G rollout.

[Marks]: Verizon representatives at one point during the hearing told Method residents unequivocally

[Marks]: that the FCC regulations would not allow for health concerns to be discussed as a reason for not approving their applications.

[Marks]: This comment, true or not, is outrageous and requires a formal complaint be filed with the FCC and our congressional representatives on behalf of our community.

[Marks]: The city, in my opinion, was ill prepared for the much anticipated 5G hearing.

[Marks]: not presenting one subject matter expert to represent our city's interest and its residents, and only relied on the one-sided Verizon paid expert witnesses in which there were many.

[Marks]: The city has not requested any potential mitigation from Verizon to address further disenfranchisement of the communities in Method who can least afford Verizon's

[Marks]: new 5G.

[Marks]: At the very least, Method should request Verizon provide free Wi-Fi to our communities of need, as well as schools, senior housing, and low-income housing.

[Marks]: 5G will substantially increase resonant exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields.

[Marks]: This has been proven to be harmful to humans and the environment.

[Marks]: We need to engage the U.S.

[Marks]: government to require the FCC to do an independent study of radio frequency standards and health risks.

[Marks]: We should support the recommendations of the 400 scientists and medical doctors who signed the 5G appeal that calls for an immediate moratorium on the deployment of 5G

[Marks]: and demand our government officials fund the research needed to adopt biologically based exposure limits that protect the health and safety of our residents and environment.

[Marks]: Human exposure guidelines for radio frequency used by the FCC are more than 20 years old and address only thermal, not biological impact of exposure.

[Marks]: Over the past 20 years,

[Marks]: A robust body of independent science has emerged showing significant biological impacts from exposure to radiofrequency microwave radiation, including clear evidence of cancer, neurological and cognitive harm, heart abnormalities, and reproductive effects.

[Marks]: Populations especially at risk include pregnant women,

[Marks]: Children, the elderly, individuals with implanted medical devices, or cardiac or neurological problems.

[Marks]: Mr. President, at that particular hearing, I asked a number of questions of the committee, as well as many residents, of which many remain unanswered at this particular time.

[Marks]: I am going to offer a number of questions that were asked at that meeting with the hopes

[Marks]: that we will be able to get answers prior to the Thursday meeting that the Small Ad Hoc Subcommittee will have to go over the remaining 43 applications that's before us.

[Marks]: Question number one, Mr. President, and I want to thank Councilor Scarpelli

[Marks]: for co-sponsoring this with me.

[Marks]: He's been there every step of the way and I appreciate his support in this.

[Marks]: I know he has a lot to add as well.

[Marks]: Question number one, the city's interim policy under the application process states, for residential areas, guidelines on structure height, lengths and minimum setback rules from dwellings, parks or playgrounds or similar recreational areas.

[Marks]: I asked that question last Thursday, Mr. President.

[Marks]: What are the setback guidelines that were created under this interim policy?

[Marks]: And to date, there has not been one setback guideline in this community.

[Marks]: So we don't know what the minimum setback.

[Marks]: We heard from residents, and I think there's a resident here tonight, the small cell that they're going to put on the pole in front of his house is about 10 feet from a bedroom window.

[Marks]: This admits, Mr. President, harmful, in my opinion, harmful exposure and radio frequency to residents of this community.

[Marks]: We don't know what the impact is.

[Marks]: There hasn't been enough studies.

[Marks]: There's enough reading out there, and I must add on both sides, but we don't know what the studies are.

[Marks]: Why are we going to move forward hastily

[Marks]: without knowing what the impact is, the health impact.

[Marks]: Whether the FCC allows it or not, we are here to represent our residents.

[Marks]: The FCC doesn't care about the residents of this community.

[Marks]: We are here, that's our responsibility.

[Marks]: And we'd be negligent not to bring these up, these questions, and ask for answers before approval, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So that's question number one.

[Marks]: Question number two, under the city's interim policy, the applicant must provide a description as to why the desired location is superior to other similar locations from a community perspective, including proximity to residential dwellings, schools, parks, and playgrounds.

[Marks]: Verizon submitted their location selection criteria for each of the 44 applications stating it is not directly adjacent to a park, school, or playground.

[Marks]: And I asked this question last Thursday.

[Marks]: Why did they omit dwelling?

[Marks]: Why does their location criteria

[Marks]: not in line with the city's interim policy that states it should be dwellings, schools, and parks, their location selected.

[Marks]: They left out, Mr. President, dwellings.

[Marks]: You know why?

[Marks]: Because many of these are within yards of dwellings, bedrooms, front porches, play areas where kids are, and so forth.

[Marks]: My next question, Mr. President, and I hope these questions don't fall on deaf ears.

[Marks]: I know we have a meeting Thursday.

[Marks]: And we got a robo call and we were already told by some members of that committee that they don't want any further discussion at this next meeting, which is outrageous, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Outrageous at a public meeting to say you're going to pick and choose what public input you're going to accept.

[Marks]: Outrageous, especially for a department head to make that comment.

[Marks]: My next question.

[Marks]: Under the current interim policy, the applicant is required to provide a certificate of liability insurance.

[Marks]: The policies submitted by Verizon currently are all expired for each of the 44 petitions.

[Marks]: I brought that up at the meeting.

[Marks]: The chair of the meeting thanked me for bringing that to his attention, and then proceeded to say they can make that a condition of approval.

[Marks]: Anyone else, Mr. President?

[Marks]: If you wanted to file for a license in this building or an application to build, they would not let a submission of an incomplete application move forward, except for 5G.

[Marks]: They'll make that a condition.

[Marks]: Unacceptable, Mr. President, in my opinion.

[Marks]: Amendments, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Those were, I'm sorry, I have a few more questions on the back.

[Marks]: Next question.

[Marks]: How are the neighborhoods being chosen by Verizon for the 5G rollout?

[Marks]: Wasn't my question at that meeting.

[Marks]: A lot of residents asked Verizon representatives, why did you start off with the rollout with these particular neighborhoods?

[Marks]: We could not get an answer.

[Marks]: We could not get a straight answer, Mr. President.

[Marks]: In my opinion, the neighborhoods that they picked out

[Marks]: We're going to be the neighborhoods with least resistance.

[Marks]: My personal opinion, which I'm entitled to.

[Marks]: I also believe, Mr. President, if you talk to anyone in this community, and they'll tell you when they drive through certain sections of this city, that they lose their phone call.

[Marks]: They lose their internet service.

[Marks]: And by the way, it's not in the areas where they're rolling out.

[Marks]: It's in other areas that they're not rolling out.

[Marks]: that are the most complaint driven.

[Marks]: That says a lot about this process, because the minute they get 5G in this community, it's gonna be extremely difficult for the other 150 applications, which are coming, this is 44, there's gonna be another 150 and maybe two or 300 after that from other carriers.

[Marks]: Once they get their foot in the door, there's gonna be no stopping them.

[Marks]: And that's what they're looking for Thursday to get their foot in the door.

[Marks]: The next question, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I'd like to know why they selected those particular neighborhoods for the rollout.

[Marks]: I believe it was South Method, Method Square, and the Hillside.

[Marks]: The city's interim policy under aesthetics and requirements states each small cell wireless infrastructure antenna should be located entirely within a shroud or canister type enclosure.

[Marks]: Why is the ad hoc small cell committee not following the city's interim policy and allowing Verizon not to locate these devices in a shroud or a canister?

[Marks]: Why are they allowing a condition of approval?

[Marks]: Why did they ask Verizon what their preference was?

[Marks]: Why are other cities like Cambridge stating that every single cell that they're putting up will be enclosed in a shroud or a canister?

[Marks]: But here in Medford, it's fine to ask Verizon, the petitioner, what's your preference?

[Marks]: And guess what?

[Marks]: They prefer not to have it enclosed.

[Marks]: My last question, Mr. President.

[Marks]: There's four members of the board, this small ad hoc committee.

[Marks]: They're all department heads here at City Hall.

[Marks]: And I must say, this is a very, very difficult decision for them to make.

[Marks]: It may sound like an easy decision.

[Marks]: It's not an easy decision.

[Marks]: Our hand is tied.

[Marks]: And we really should be looking at our federal delegation, our congressman, a woman, and our senator.

[Marks]: or our senators to be asking for relief, Mr. President.

[Marks]: But why, out of the four representatives, when they took the first vote, which they approved, was the vote three to one?

[Marks]: Three in favor, one against.

[Marks]: The one against, Mr. President, in my opinion, did not state a reason why they were against.

[Marks]: And that one person was the director of the Board of Health.

[Marks]: That should be concerning

[Marks]: for every resident of this community, and I'd like to know what the reasoning is for the Board of Health Director to state that she was against these 5G small cells within our neighborhoods.

[Marks]: That's an important thing, and I'd like to know why, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I have eight amendments, if you could just bear with me, and I'd like to go through them.

[Marks]: I know the clerk does a great job capturing these,

[Marks]: I feel comfortable that this is all being captured.

[Marks]: I'd like to make a motion, Mr. President, my first amendment.

[Marks]: The city's interim policy should be updated to include a cap on the number of 5G installations allowed in Medford.

[Marks]: Currently, there is no cap at all.

[Marks]: You can locate 10,000 of these in the city of Medford.

[Marks]: There is no cap, no restriction.

[Marks]: So I would ask that as my first motion, Mr. President.

[Marks]: The second motion, the city's interim policy should establish setback guidelines to address the distance small cell wireless facilities can be placed from residential housing.

[Marks]: So before we move forward, before we take any other vote,

[Marks]: Those guidelines, we've had plenty of time.

[Marks]: This policy has been in effect since 2019 from the previous administration and currently 15 to 16 months with this current administration.

[Marks]: The interim policy was created by Mayor Burke at the time.

[Marks]: It's a policy.

[Marks]: It's not a city ordinance that would be created by the council.

[Marks]: It's an interim city policy.

[Marks]: So that would be my second motion, Mr. President, the guidelines and distance from housing.

[Marks]: Third motion, amend city's interim policy to include the following language.

[Marks]: In residential zoning districts, installations should not be placed directly in front of a residential home.

[Marks]: Where there is a side yard setback with open space or other space, preference should be given to applications to locate an installation on the public way in front of a side yard setback.

[Marks]: I didn't create that.

[Marks]: I wish I did.

[Marks]: That's in the city of Cambridge's policy.

[Marks]: Mr. Clerk, if you don't get all this, I have it in writing so I can give it to you.

[Marks]: Fourth motion.

[Marks]: The city amended its interim policy to create a location requirement which lists the most preferable locations.

[Marks]: Right now, we don't have such policy.

[Marks]: The following are the most preferred location areas for 5G installation in order of preference.

[Marks]: Industrial districts, number one, if not adjacent to a park, playground, school, residential district, or historic district.

[Marks]: The second most preferred location, public rights of way areas, if not adjacent to a park, playground, school, residential district, or historic district.

[Marks]: Motion number five, amend the city's interim policy to include the following language.

[Marks]: No application may seek approval for more than five proposed facilities.

[Marks]: No applicant or closely held applicant may file more than two applications within a 60 day of one another.

[Marks]: So right now we have 44 applications that were filed, if not all the same day, within a day or two.

[Marks]: Other communities state no one application can have more than five and no applicant

[Marks]: may file more than two applications, so that would be 10 within a 60-day period.

[Marks]: How did we end up with 44 with another 150 to come, Mr. President?

[Marks]: Why?

[Marks]: Because our interim policy, for better words, stinks.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: It stinks.

[Marks]: But it can be changed.

[Marks]: Motion number six.

[Marks]: to request the Ad Hoc Small Cell Committee not approve any more 5G applications until the city has ample time to review questions and policy comments submitted.

[Marks]: Be it further requested, the city consult with its own 5G subject matter experts regarding issues of concern raised by residents regarding health and safety setbacks

[Marks]: FCC 5G regulations, potential mitigation, and other issues of concern.

[Marks]: So I'm asking for a vote tonight, Mr. President.

[Marks]: We can separate these motions.

[Marks]: I'd like to do them all at once, but I have all night.

[Marks]: We'll take a vote on each.

[Marks]: But this motion is asking that we send a message Thursday night to the ad hoc committee

[Marks]: No different than the message we sent, Mr. President, to the Zoning Board of Appeals back so many years ago when this council stood up and we thought that the Zoning Board of Appeals extended relief to a developer that hurt a neighborhood that we sued our own Zoning Board of Appeals.

[Marks]: If Verizon doesn't like it, bring it on, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Bring it on.

[Marks]: Lawsuits don't scare me.

[Marks]: Bring it on.

[Marks]: What scares me is health concerns in our community and not being at the table and being able to have input.

[Marks]: Motion number seven, request our federal delegation calls for an immediate moratorium on the deployment of 5G and fund the research needed to adopt biologically based exposure limits that protect the health and safety of our residents and the environment.

[Marks]: That is crucial, Mr. President.

[Marks]: That has to catch up with the science, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Currently, the FCC is working off 20-year-old information, and there's much more information that has been updated over the last 20 years.

[Marks]: Currently, Mr. President, another amendment, the city's policy states, and I offer this as an amendment, only one small cell wireless facility shall be eligible to be approved on a poll and support structure in the

[Marks]: this is the town of Burlington, and this is what they state.

[Marks]: So the town of Burlington states only one wireless on each pole, for each provider.

[Marks]: I'm sorry, thank you, Councilor Scarpelli.

[Marks]: And that makes sense, Mr. President.

[Marks]: However, many communities require co-sharing, and they write it right into their policy.

[Marks]: So if Verizon wants to come in and you see the ads for AT&T now all over about 5G,

[Marks]: They're coming in.

[Marks]: There's no doubt about it.

[Marks]: They're coming in.

[Marks]: And to allow them to go on separate polls means they're going to be in front of every hall.

[Marks]: You can guarantee they'll be in front of every hall.

[Marks]: So at least if we can safeguard, if these are going to be installed, which I'm opposed to, that my motion would read,

[Marks]: It is the town's strong preference, on this case the city, that whenever an applicant poses to place a new small wireless facility, that the applicant co-locate the same on an existing wireless support structure.

[Marks]: And I would ask that that be adopted into our interim policy, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And the last thing I just want to give

[Marks]: is notification like I did last time.

[Marks]: There was over 160 residents that were on the Zoom call.

[Marks]: on March 31st.

[Marks]: 160, Mr. President.

[Marks]: You really, very seldom, I attend a lot of hearings, meetings, very seldom see the like of that.

[Marks]: And let me tell you, if you had it on Zoom and opened it up to the public, that small ad hoc subcommittee should be meeting here at the chamber.

[Marks]: If this is not big enough, let's meet at Chevalier.

[Marks]: If that's not big enough, let's meet at the Bosch at Karen Theater at the high school.

[Marks]: all handicap accessible, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I don't want to hear the excuse about COVID.

[Marks]: We can accommodate and also accommodate the social distancing requirements.

[Marks]: So that alone, Mr. President, we had 160 on Zoom and we shut out many people that would love, that don't have access, that would love to come up like we have up here tonight and also participate.

[Marks]: Many seniors that have concerns, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And again, I would respectfully ask the committee, they're under no obligation.

[Marks]: They can continue the meeting.

[Marks]: They already continued it once from the 31st.

[Marks]: They can continue it again to have an open public forum where people can attend in public as well as Zoom.

[Marks]: I don't want people to start calling me up and saying, I'm trying to discourage Zoom.

[Marks]: I'm not discouraging Zoom.

[Marks]: I'm saying add another avenue for people that may not access Zoom or may not want to use Zoom.

[Marks]: We can do it in a safe fashion, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I would ask anyone that's in shouting distance that this Thursday, April 8th at 6.30, the Ad Hoc Small Cell Committee will meet once again.

[Marks]: And the meeting is a continuation of the meeting originally begun on March 31st at 6 p.m.

[Marks]: And it's a continuation

[Marks]: of the public hearing for Verizon applications for 43 proposed small cell infrastructures in the city of Medford.

[Marks]: And I would also state, Mr. President, that if anyone tells you on that committee they're only hearing certain testimony

[Marks]: only allowing certain public comments.

[Marks]: If you already spoke, unless this is directed directly in front of your house, they're not going to allow it.

[Marks]: They are in violation as far as I'm concerned, of the open meeting law and allowing for public input.

[Marks]: They're in violation.

[Marks]: There's no way that states that you can only speak one time, Mr. President.

[Marks]: There's no way that states that you have to be directly impacted to speak in a public hearing.

[Marks]: The Zoom information, meeting ID, for those that want to go on Zoom, 933-7697-5064.

[Marks]: And the passcode, they really don't want people to get on, because usually you go on a Zoom meeting.

[Marks]: This has a passcode on top of it.

[Marks]: 035-999.

[Marks]: And the dial-in number, which you can,

[Marks]: 929-205-6099.

[Marks]: Mr. President, I know there's a fair amount of residents here today that took the time.

[Marks]: I know Councilor Scarpelli, which co-sponsored this resolution, and we spent much time going through many of the recommendations here.

[Marks]: And I'll let him speak for himself, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I want to thank my council colleagues for indulging me on this very important matter, Mr. President, of safety and awareness in this community.

[Marks]: So question number three,

[Marks]: Under the current interim policy, the applicant is required to provide a certificate of liability insurance.

[Marks]: The policies submitted by Verizon are expired.

[Marks]: They were submitted when they originally filed the petitions back in 2019.

[Marks]: And the life on these was a year, and many of them were from just say June 2019 to, you know, the end of, yes,

[Marks]: May of 2020.

[Marks]: That is a requirement of the interim policy.

[Marks]: So, you know, and they weren't aware of it until I brought it up.

[Marks]: And that's a very important, it may seem like a small thing, but insurance certificate of liability is a very important thing to safeguard our residents, our poles, safety walking underneath these poles, and so forth.

[Marks]: I appreciate you bringing that up.

[Marks]: I will do so.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Absolutely.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Present.

[Marks]: Councilor Falco.

[Marks]: Present.

[Marks]: Vice President Knight.

[Marks]: Present.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Present.

[Marks]: Councilor Morell.

[Marks]: Present.

[Marks]: Councilor Scarpelli.

[Marks]: Present.

[Marks]: President Caraviello.

[Marks]: All rise, salute the flag.

[Marks]: I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God,

[Marks]: indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I want to thank the Board of Health Director for being on tonight.

[Marks]: Mary Ann, could you give us a brief update on where we stand with our application to be a mass vaccination site?

[Marks]: And where do we stand with the Tufts University proposal?

[Marks]: Okay, and I'm sure you're aware of this, but the number one call I'm receiving is the fact that residents have to go outside the city to get their shots, many of which that may be homebound or unable to travel too far.

[Marks]: So the quicker we can get this on board, and I realize there's a lot of moving parts, so I'm not pointing the finger at the city, but the quicker we can get a local vaccination site

[Marks]: on board would be beneficial to our residents.

[Marks]: In particular, we're gonna be opening up, I guess, for everyone over the age of 16, is it?

[Marks]: Sometime at the end of April or May.

[Marks]: And I think the numbers that are gonna need the shot are gonna quadruple in the city.

[Marks]: And I'm a little concerned that we're not gonna have anything set up by that point.

[Marks]: So I just wanted to put that out there.

[Marks]: So are we working with agencies that deal with people that are homebound?

[Marks]: to reach out and do some proactive outreach in our community?

[Marks]: So Marianne, what percent do you think we identified of having their first or second shot in the community that are homebound?

[Marks]: Right.

[Marks]: So that's excellent work, but I'm not quite sure that I would list it as great because I don't know the total overall number of homebound residents in the community.

[Marks]: And if we're talking, you know, vaccinating 10% of them, to me, that's not great.

[Marks]: So it's really hard for me to put a handle on this until I have, and I realize you're not going to get exact numbers, but do we know what percent that is?

[Marks]: So we're really not able to measure a success rate of

[Marks]: outreach and making sure our most vulnerable population is getting vaccinated.

[Marks]: I'm just trying to figure out what our numbers are in the community.

[Marks]: When I turn on the news, and they tell me throughout the state X number of seniors are already vaccinated.

[Marks]: I think I saw a number tonight 16% of

[Marks]: Massachusetts, the entire population now has a second second vaccination, which sounds like there's progress happening.

[Marks]: But I'm just trying to get a handle on our own numbers.

[Marks]: Okay.

[Marks]: but that doesn't include homebound or may include a portion of homebound.

[Marks]: Okay, so you're saying 76% of what we have recorded have received the second dose.

[Marks]: Say that again, sorry, I didn't get it.

[Marks]: Okay, well, I didn't know that number.

[Marks]: That's good to hear.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Why not?

[Marks]: Hi, Mr. Mallon, how are you?

[Marks]: So I've looked at all of your documents, everything seems in order, but I mean, to keep it simple and streamlined, could you give us just a brief synopsis of what's happening with the site that's there now and what you plan to be doing there?

[Marks]: I believe it's just a turnover, but if you can explain it, that'd be great.

[Marks]: Okay, perfect.

[Marks]: That's all I just want to be clear just because I, um, the way you answered it might've sounded as if you were adding something new, but this is just an existing, um, uh,

[Marks]: a body shop, a repair garage that is just changing over, hours operations staying the same, parking for your vehicles are staying the same, everything seems to be in order, correct?

[Marks]: Yes, sir.

[Marks]: Okay, so everything else I see, Mr. President, all of this paperwork is in order, every department has signed off on it favorably, so I would move approval, pending any questions from my fellow councilors.

[Marks]: Councilor Bears.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Franco.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Vice President Knight.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Councilor Morell.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Scarpelli.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I want to thank Launch Memorial for their update.

[Marks]: I believe it was several weeks back, residents across the street on Governor's Ave raised concern about the perimeter lighting around the hospital and how it was shining into windows up and down Governor's Ave.

[Marks]: And I believe last I heard that many of the lights were redirected.

[Marks]: And as we heard from Council Vice President Knight, that they are turning lights off

[Marks]: at night and still maintaining safety in the lot, which is important as well.

[Marks]: So I want to thank them for that, Mr. President.

[Marks]: The last outstanding issue that I know residents brought up was the cooling tower that's on the top of the front of the facade.

[Marks]: And that still remains an issue for area residents, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I would ask that we move that.

[Marks]: We asked about the update for

[Marks]: the cooling tower, and if they have any current plans on addressing some of the aesthetic concerns of neighbors.

[Marks]: To the coverage around the cooling tower.

[Marks]: That's been made an issue for

[Marks]: some time now.

[Marks]: Councilor Bears.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Council Falco.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Vice President night.

[Marks]: Council marks.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Council Morell.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilors compelling President Gary off.

[Marks]: Okay.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I want to thank my two colleagues for putting this on tonight.

[Marks]: I'm glad to hear what I've been preaching about for the last 20 years about the MBTA and the assessment that it's starting to actually finally get some traction.

[Marks]: because I've offered several resolutions before the city council requesting that the millions of dollars in tax exempt property that the MBTA has offset what they're charging us for millions of dollars on the cherry sheet, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So, you know, I think it's about time we take a look at the services we're receiving in this community.

[Marks]: And let's face it, many people come to the city of Medford because of our transportation services, and they're not paying the additional

[Marks]: tax on their cherry sheet, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Based on that, we are as a community.

[Marks]: The T has three different revenue sources.

[Marks]: One is the percent of the sales tax that they get.

[Marks]: Another one is the fares when you go onto the train or the bus, which has been hit because of COVID, Mr. President.

[Marks]: But I think what we have to do is take a long, hard look at what we're actually paying now, several million dollars a year,

[Marks]: for service in this community.

[Marks]: And guess what?

[Marks]: That assessment the T is assessing us, it's only gonna get higher with the green line.

[Marks]: And so I think we really need to take a close hard look at why our assessment is so high in this community and why the T, as my colleagues mentioned, continue to cut routes and much needed buses that impact the most vulnerable community, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Many of us don't have to worry.

[Marks]: We get in the car and we go to stop and shop, or we go to a convenience store.

[Marks]: We do our shopping and we get around.

[Marks]: There are many other ones of us, Mr. President, that rely on public transportation.

[Marks]: And to have a population in particular with this route is in the heights, Mr. President.

[Marks]: This is gonna really impact, even if it impacts dozens of people, that's a huge impact, Mr. President, when it comes to needs that we just heard about getting to and from Wegmans and stop and shop in the hospital.

[Marks]: These are dedicated stops on that route for the 710 bus.

[Marks]: And that's not just a luxury when you're going to a doctor, when you're going to get food, that's a necessity.

[Marks]: And that's something that really shouldn't be cut, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I just heard the news, the city of Boston is fighting now the MBTA cuts in the city of Boston.

[Marks]: And I agree, we have to get more vocal as a community.

[Marks]: You know, it's great to send out a letter to the T and the head of the T, and then they respond back saying, we'll look into it, we'll investigate and so forth.

[Marks]: And then it ends there to be quite honest with you.

[Marks]: There's never any follow-up.

[Marks]: We have to take action, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I don't know what it's going to take.

[Marks]: Maybe we have to sit at the table and refuse to give the $3 million or so that we give on the cherry sheet every year.

[Marks]: Maybe we'll be the first city in the state to do that.

[Marks]: I don't know.

[Marks]: But it takes bold action sometimes to get bold results.

[Marks]: And I'm willing to do that.

[Marks]: And I've been talking about this issue for 20 years.

[Marks]: And when, you know, and I brought up before fell on deaf ears, no one wanted to talk about it.

[Marks]: Now the team's making some big service cuts and all of a sudden it's the topic of conversation, the cherry sheet and why we're paying so much.

[Marks]: So I'm glad to hear that's it, Mr. President, but these are things that should have been looked at over the years.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Councilor Bears.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Falco.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Vice President Knight.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Morell.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Scarpelli.

[Marks]: President Caraviello.

[Marks]: Councilor Bears?

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Falco?

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Vice President Nights?

[Marks]: Councilor Marks?

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Morell?

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Scarpelli?

[Marks]: President Caraviello?

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And this is a very important issue that we will be confronted with in the very near future.

[Marks]: And that is losing affordable housing within our community after so much talk about

[Marks]: how we increase our affordable housing stock here in the city of Medford.

[Marks]: According to the city's draft housing production plan, which I think we're all gonna receive a copy of very shortly, there are 35 HUD subsidized affordable rental units in Method that are set to expire in 2023.

[Marks]: It's only a mere year and a half, two years away, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And those units, those 35 units are located at

[Marks]: 42 Water Street.

[Marks]: And there's another three that are subsidized by DHCD, Department of Housing and Community Development, which are run by Tri-City Housing Task Force for the homeless.

[Marks]: And they're at 196, 198 Felsway, and they're set to expire in 2025.

[Marks]: So that's a total of 38 units that are subsidized, Mr. President, for low income residents that could potentially be lost

[Marks]: in this community.

[Marks]: And in my opinion, that is extremely sizable and something, Mr. President, I am going to fight hard to make sure we maintain.

[Marks]: And there is a way of maintaining it.

[Marks]: And I'm hoping that we can get some answers from this resolution tonight.

[Marks]: But the affordability of privately owned affordable housing units that were produced using state or federal housing resources can expire as owners pay off their subsidized mortgages.

[Marks]: or opt out of their existing Section 8 rental subsidy contract.

[Marks]: When such affordability restrictions expire, property owners can convert the affordable units to market-rate housing.

[Marks]: On November 23, 2009, the governor signed a general law, Chapter 40T, which is an act preserving publicly-assisted affordable housing.

[Marks]: And what this legislation did, Mr. President,

[Marks]: was aimed at helping preserve existing privately owned affordable housing in Massachusetts.

[Marks]: It also established notification provisions for tenants along with modest tenant protections, very modest, I should add, and terminate the right of first refusal for DHCD or its designee to purchase publicly

[Marks]: assisted housing.

[Marks]: I was never aware of this law, Mr. President, and maybe because we haven't seen the likes of so many housing units coming up, affordable housing units, coming up at once in this community.

[Marks]: But if you read Chapter 40T, Section 3, which deals specifically regarding the right of first refusal for DHCD,

[Marks]: and the ability to sign a designee if someone is interested, i.e., in particular, a municipality, if they are interested in becoming the designee to publicly purchase the affordable housing before it gets on the market.

[Marks]: And I found that very interesting, Mr. President.

[Marks]: If I could, it's pretty brief, and it's part of my motion, so I'd just like to read what, for the edification of the viewing audience and my colleagues,

[Marks]: section three.

[Marks]: It says an owner shall offer the department an opportunity, when they say department they refer to DHCD, an opportunity to purchase publicly assisted housing prior to entering into an agreement to sell such property pursuant to the time periods contained in this section.

[Marks]: But no owner shall be under any obligation to enter into an agreement to sell such property to the department.

[Marks]: Then it goes on subsection B. The department may select a designee, that's DHCD, to act on its behalf as purchaser of the publicly assisted housing and shall give the owner written notice of its selection.

[Marks]: So my first motion, Mr. President, is has DHCD selected a designee as purchaser?

[Marks]: So that's my first motion.

[Marks]: The section goes on to say the department shall probably consult with the affected municipality before selecting a designee and shall immediately designate the affected municipality as a designee upon written request of the affected municipality.

[Marks]: Motion number two, has DHCD reached out to the city of Medford and has the city of Medford expressed interest in becoming the designee

[Marks]: for these two particular properties, which is 42 Water Street and 196-198 Felsway.

[Marks]: And then it goes on to say, unless the department determines that such request is not feasible for the reasons set forth in the department's regulations, the department shall enter into a written agreement with its selection designee, providing that the designee and any of its successors assigns

[Marks]: agreed to preserve the affordability of the publicly assisted housing.

[Marks]: Once such an agreement is executed, the designee shall assume all rights and responsibilities attributable to the department as a prospective purchaser under this section, section four.

[Marks]: My next motion, Mr. President, is that we create a committee of the whole meeting

[Marks]: I believe we have one scheduled for next Tuesday.

[Marks]: So if that's the case, Mr. President, that would suffice for my resolution.

[Marks]: But my motion is that the city council meet and committee the whole to discuss options for preserving the existing privately owned publicly assisted affordable housing and method and review housing production per housing production plan.

[Marks]: And as part of the motion, it's to invite

[Marks]: the consultant that was hired by the city, Jen Golson, from the firm of J.M.

[Marks]: Golson, and to invite our consultant attorney, Bob Bobrovsky, to be a part of that meeting, Mr. President, to discuss what our next steps are so we don't use or lose this opportunity for maintaining our affordable housing.

[Marks]: One other portion I'd like to bring up, Mr. President of NLN, is that

[Marks]: Many people realize Chapter 40B establishes a goal that every Massachusetts community must work to provide affordable housing at a minimum of 10% of their overall housing stock.

[Marks]: And if you read the housing production plan, you will notice, Mr. President, on page 82 of the draft plan, it states that Medford has four 40B projects currently right now in the pipeline.

[Marks]: If all four of these projects come to fruition, Method will have an additional 1,087 units eligible to be counted on the subsidized housing inventory, bringing the city's portion of the subsidized housing inventory units to 11.7%, which would be above the 10% better right now.

[Marks]: Many people are eager to move on from 40B,

[Marks]: The true hard facts is the only way we really been making significant change in this community for affordability has been through the state law, chapter 40B, Mr. President.

[Marks]: That's where we've added the most affordable housing in this community.

[Marks]: There are other ways which the housing production plan addresses and that's something we're reviewing as a council, but I would strongly ask the administration because they are looking at these 40B projects

[Marks]: in court right now, I would strongly ask that they take a closer look, Mr. President, at what these units can bring to our community in regards to affordability and move forward on these 40B projects in the interest of adding more affordability in our community.

[Marks]: And that's all I have, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And tax revenue, absolutely.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: I'm not opposed to that, Mr. President, but according to J.M.

[Marks]: Golson report, this 120 page report, they listed those two particular properties.

[Marks]: I'm not sure maybe because they're the most recent, but I would hope this is a thorough report

[Marks]: but I am not opposed to looking at, you know, this all 10 years, I am not opposed to that.

[Marks]: We have to plan and I think that's a worthy suggestion.

[Marks]: Councilor Bears?

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Falco?

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Vice President Knight?

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks?

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Morell?

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Scarpelli?

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: President Caraviello?

[Marks]: Next Tuesday, right?

[Marks]: So as one of my motions, we can meet that night.

[Marks]: We don't have to meet a separate night to discuss that motion.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: If we all recall, our former esteemed councilor, Councilor Bob Penta, appeared under community participation a few weeks back.

[Marks]: At that time, the council requested that the city council take a vote on several requests for information.

[Marks]: However, because it was offered under public participation, we could not take a formal vote

[Marks]: and I recommended that we put it on the agenda so we can take a formal vote.

[Marks]: So at this point, Mr. President, I would welcome up former councilor Penta for his presentation.

[Marks]: I think, I'm sorry to interrupt, but I just want to be clear.

[Marks]: fellow cops can help, but the committee that you're referring to, is this the traffic committee that the mayor just put together?

[Marks]: Is that the committee you're referencing?

[Marks]: Okay, so I believe they said that they had no privy to discuss anything dealing with Republic Park.

[Marks]: I believe that's what they, that's what was quoted to us that when we asked questions about Republic Park to them, that they were directed not to,

[Marks]: that wasn't what they were looking to do.

[Marks]: Isn't this the transparency administration though?

[Marks]: It's supposed to be.

[Marks]: Mr. President.

[Marks]: Councilor Locks.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I wanna thank my colleague, Councilor Penta for his insight on this issue.

[Marks]: You know, when the mayor first established this working committee, I was under the impression they were going to look at the parking program in the city of Medford.

[Marks]: And I did hear bits and pieces of what their mission statement is, but I wasn't aware that they're not going to look at the current entity that oversees parking, which is Park Medford in this community and their contract.

[Marks]: I wasn't aware that

[Marks]: They weren't going to look at taking this service in-house, which has been an issue since, as Councilor Penta mentioned, since 2009, when the committee I sat on for two years, Mr. President, we visited, we did our due diligence, we did our homework.

[Marks]: We went to the city of Boston and met with their chief parking clerk.

[Marks]: We went to Malden.

[Marks]: We went to Everett.

[Marks]: We went to Somerville.

[Marks]: We spent countless hours and came up with recommendations, Mr. President, all of which

[Marks]: were to do meters and take the service in-house.

[Marks]: Those are the major recommendations of which the mayor at the time, and that's his authority, decided to do neither.

[Marks]: And he hired an outside company and he put kiosks all over the streets.

[Marks]: So what we spent two years for, he did the total opposite.

[Marks]: Now I'm hoping, Mr. President, because as Councilor Penta mentioned, there was a commitment made by this current mayor back in 2019,

[Marks]: that seniors were going to get free parking.

[Marks]: It's 15 months later.

[Marks]: Seniors have not received free parking, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Elimination of the kiosk, 15 months later, and taking it in-house, parking enforcement.

[Marks]: Now come to find out it's not even a subject of discussion among the committee that she handpicked and appointed, Mr. President, to discuss

[Marks]: the parking program in the community.

[Marks]: She may decide to do this outside of that, I don't know.

[Marks]: But what better time when they have in public hearings, public meetings, sending out surveys, spending countless hours working on this to discuss the program in its entirety.

[Marks]: It makes zero sense to me, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I wait with bated breath in June when this report's supposed to come out.

[Marks]: Not to belabor the subject, Mr. President, but I think it was two or three years ago, the city hired a consultant and spent close to $100,000 to look at resident permit parking in the city.

[Marks]: And the consultant came out with a report, it's probably worth all the other reports, collecting dust.

[Marks]: But this consultant came out with a report and stated that we'd like to do a pilot program because the city is so diverse in their parking needs, and we'd like to start off with Salt Method and the hillside.

[Marks]: And they made recommendations on creating a Salt Method hillside permit parking program.

[Marks]: And what did the city do with the $100,000 report?

[Marks]: Circular file.

[Marks]: And here we are back at the table again, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Are we here just because it's election year, and we have to keep up with campaign promises, and we're going through the motions?

[Marks]: Or do we really want to see change to this program that's needed?

[Marks]: It hasn't been tweaked in more than seven years, this program.

[Marks]: And it needs tweaking, Mr. President, a lot of tweaking.

[Marks]: And I supported at the time, and I still stand by it.

[Marks]: in-house, taking this in-house and having our own people control this program, Mr. President, and the revenue stays here.

[Marks]: And I supported at the time, and I still do, having double head meters rather than kiosks.

[Marks]: Kiosks are great for parking lots.

[Marks]: They don't work on the streets, Mr. President, as we found out from the number of complaints throughout this community.

[Marks]: So I want to thank my colleague for putting this on and for bringing up this issue.

[Marks]: And I hope in June,

[Marks]: This is something that we discussed, Mr. President.

[Marks]: We have the fire report that was just issued that the mayor commissioned.

[Marks]: We haven't gone through that yet.

[Marks]: That comes out with a list of recommendations and so forth.

[Marks]: So there's a lot of reporting going on, Mr. President, but very little action.

[Marks]: A lot of reports, you can hire consultants, put together reports, but they're meaningless if there's nothing tied to them, if there's no action.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: On the motion by Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Seconded by Councilor Scott Ville.

[Marks]: Mr. President.

[Marks]: If I could, I mean, in the past when a representative of the council is selected by the mayor to be on a committee, ad hoc committee, whatever you want to call it, they usually report back to the council.

[Marks]: And we have yet to receive any report back

[Marks]: from our representative on the board, and maybe there's nothing to report back now.

[Marks]: I don't know, they've been meeting for several months, but I think it would be interesting, rather than pointing us to a website on the city website, is to give us an update, Mr. President, on what's happening, and things that we should be made aware of.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Councilor Bears.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Falco.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Vice President night.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Bears.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Council Falco.

[Marks]: Vice President.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Bears.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Vice President night.

[Marks]: Council marks.

[Marks]: Council Morell.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Scarpelli.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Well, moving forward, I just want, if we can, just remind the residents that are watching that tomorrow's meeting for the Verizon 5G towers, it will be at six o'clock, I believe.

[Marks]: Is that six o'clock via Zoom?

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: I know that we've been getting phone calls and people begging us to please vote against it.

[Marks]: Just a clarification.

[Marks]: There is no vote that this council can take to stop anything that we have issues on, because I think all of us do have some concerns.

[Marks]: But unfortunately, this does not fall on our privy.

[Marks]: I'll be on the call tomorrow as a resident, making sure that I get the answers that I need for my family and my neighbors as well, dealing with safety and public health.

[Marks]: So thank you.

[Marks]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli.

[Marks]: Mr. President.

[Marks]: Councilor Markswell.

[Marks]: Just to follow up with Councilor Scarpelli mentioned, I received on my desk tonight a letter from Mary Ann Aducci.

[Marks]: She lives on North Street in Medford.

[Marks]: Many of us know her very well, but she did send in a two page letter that she wants read into the record.

[Marks]: I will submit it to the clerk and if my colleagues want it as well.

[Marks]: It's regarding the March 31st Verizon hearing.

[Marks]: And she wants to express her concern with 5G.

[Marks]: And also, Mr. President, that she has no access to a computer and finds it very difficult, Mr. President, and hard for most people that would like to attend the meeting.

[Marks]: But there is no way of attending it unless you have access to a computer or a call-in, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And the call-in is extremely difficult.

[Marks]: So she also asked within this letter that boards and commissions

[Marks]: and any other committee in the city return to in-person hearings and meetings so everyone can participate equally.

[Marks]: And I would support that as well, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: I didn't have a chance to review them.

[Marks]: I asked them to be tabled for one week, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Councilor Paris.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Falco.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Vice President Knight.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Morell.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Scarpelli.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: I prefer to adjourn.

[Marks]: We did receive a letter from Commissioner Moki regarding the donation bins on the Fells Plaza that they were removed.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: And as a resident in that area and a neighbor, I would like to personally thank you for your due diligence on that.

[Marks]: I called immediately right to New Jersey.

[Marks]: I know that, and the number of phone calls you made, and I'd like to personally thank you.

[Marks]: Councilor Bears?

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Keohokalole?

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Vice President Knight?

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks?

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Morell?

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Scarpelli?

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: President Caraviello?

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: The motion passes, meeting adjourned.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I put this motion on this resolution tonight.

[Marks]: It's that time of the year.

[Marks]: We're required every year to elect a president and vice president of the Medford City Council.

[Marks]: So tonight I offer that we meet Tuesday, October 27th, which is next Tuesday at 6.30 for the purpose of electing a president and vice president for calendar year 21.

[Marks]: Second, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Do we have the city engineer on?

[Marks]: So, Mr. President, if I could, just because this has been a longstanding issue with this council, it predates Todd.

[Marks]: But Todd, many years back, this council voted to implement a pilot program for raised crosswalks.

[Marks]: And at the time, three of them were recognized by the city under a previous administration.

[Marks]: One out of the three was initiated on Winthrop Street, Central Ave, and Harvard Street have yet to get their raised crosswalk.

[Marks]: Is that something that's being looked at or can we assume now that it's been several years that that is not being reviewed and no longer is part of the commitment that was made by a previous administration?

[Marks]: Right, and I realize when city administrations change, there may be a different direction in communities.

[Marks]: However, when residents are promised certain items to happen, especially with traffic coming in their neighborhoods, they don't look at it and say, now we have a new mayor, there's a new direction, and we're not going to get the raised crosswalk we were promised under the last mayor.

[Marks]: because now there's a different direction.

[Marks]: I don't think residents see it that way.

[Marks]: They would hope that commitments are kept from administration to administration.

[Marks]: And when you have a pilot program, at some point, a pilot program is supposed to have an end date.

[Marks]: So you're supposed to review how successful the pilot was and either decide to move on with other race crosswalks or decide that they're not useful and don't provide the safety that we need in the community.

[Marks]: But either way, at some point, I think we have to put this issue to rest.

[Marks]: And now you're the traffic engineer, and if indeed these other two areas, Central Ave, I get calls all the time about speeding cars.

[Marks]: I think all my colleagues can attest to that.

[Marks]: This was an ideal place for a raised crosswalk.

[Marks]: I can appreciate the expense.

[Marks]: I remember on Ring Road when they put that blinking crosswalk that looked like airplane traffic lights.

[Marks]: on ring road, that cost about $46,000 to put that on ring road.

[Marks]: And I would say within the first six months, it stopped working and it hasn't worked since.

[Marks]: So talk about putting good money after bad money into something that is no longer even in effect.

[Marks]: At least the winter street race crosswalk is still serving a purpose.

[Marks]: I would respectfully ask as part of this paper, and I have no problem supporting this paper,

[Marks]: that the city administration respond back, Mr. President, on where do we stand with the raised crosswalks on Central Ave and Harvard Street, the commitment that was made several years back.

[Marks]: And if it's no longer a commitment, I'm a big boy, just let me know.

[Marks]: And I'll fight for something else, or I'll fight to see if we can get those once again to become a commitment.

[Marks]: But just to leave them hanging, leave residents hanging that were promised.

[Marks]: These were promised, these were articles in the paper, discussion among the council.

[Marks]: These were things that were open and notorious, and then just to forget about them like nothing's going on, doesn't, in disservice to this community and the residents.

[Marks]: And that's what gives government a bad name, Mr. President, when things get forgotten about.

[Marks]: And I'm not going to forget about these, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So if it's no longer a commitment of this administration, just let us know.

[Marks]: So Todd, if you can take that back to the city administration, and if it's not a commitment, then just let us know.

[Marks]: But if it is a commitment, then these two are a priority.

[Marks]: Residents have been waiting four to five years on these, and we have to come out whether or not the pilot program is successful or not.

[Marks]: And my idea,

[Marks]: This is not something novel.

[Marks]: This is being done in many other communities.

[Marks]: A raised crosswalk puts you at a higher height, at a level with oncoming traffic.

[Marks]: They're very,

[Marks]: From a distance you can see them, they're very visually pleasing from a distance.

[Marks]: And they do provide safety in areas that we know are highly traveled and high rates of speed on those streets.

[Marks]: And if it provides safety for the community, whether it's $5 or $50,000, we just talked about shoveling sidewalks and creating a new ordinance.

[Marks]: It's worth every penny, in my opinion.

[Marks]: I know we want to make it look like we're everywhere in the community and putting these blinking signs up, which I may add, Mr. President, go by any blinking light.

[Marks]: And let me tell you, half the side's not blinking.

[Marks]: Some of it's blinking.

[Marks]: Some of it's not.

[Marks]: But these are pretty new.

[Marks]: And I don't know if the city goes around.

[Marks]: A lot of them are malfunctioning.

[Marks]: Or they're not working.

[Marks]: Or they're cheaper ones.

[Marks]: I don't know.

[Marks]: But they're not working.

[Marks]: They're not serving their intended purpose.

[Marks]: So I would ask that the

[Marks]: And this is no reflection, again, on the city and traffic engineer.

[Marks]: I think he's doing a tremendous job.

[Marks]: But there has to be more follow-up in this community, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I would ask, in the form of a motion, that we get an update on the two crosswalks, Central Ave and Harvard Street, whether there's still a commitment in the time frame, and that the other blinking lights that are throughout the community that were recently put in, that the city go around and audit them to see why a lot of them are malfunctioning.

[Marks]: If we could just add language on the commitment for raised crosswalks.

[Marks]: I know I said a lot of stuff, but that's important because that was a commitment made by a previous administration, and that should be honored.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. Clerk.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Ryan is here, he'll be presenting on behalf of Merritt's Wakefield HealthCare.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Mr. President, thank you.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President, and I want to thank Ryan and Sue for their detailed presentation.

[Marks]: I have a couple of questions, Mr. President.

[Marks]: One, if maybe we can get back to that first rendering of the building and the screening that was discussed by Ryan.

[Marks]: The screening itself, so that's the initial concept, right?

[Marks]: Yes, sir.

[Marks]: And that can't be accomplished because of concerns with the fire department, is that correct?

[Marks]: Okay, and the second rendering, that one right there.

[Marks]: So the unconnected screens, what was the reasoning why this couldn't be accomplished?

[Marks]: Okay, so I guess the concerns that I've received, Ryan, just so you know, is that I guess what the hospital's pushing for is to actually just paint the electrical box, is that correct?

[Marks]: Right, but clearly there's a huge difference, aesthetically speaking, from your initial proposal to this current rendering here.

[Marks]: And I can see why area residents would have some concern with that.

[Marks]: Is there any way to make the exterior, I can appreciate the fact that our fire department may need access and so forth.

[Marks]: And I don't want to block access or go against their recommendations.

[Marks]: But is there any way we can make this more aesthetically pleasing?

[Marks]: Because right now it just looks like a giant gray, what I would refer to as icebox.

[Marks]: And the exterior of the building looks beautiful, the frontage.

[Marks]: And that, in my opinion, sticks out like a sore thumb.

[Marks]: So I was hoping that maybe the hospital can circle the wagons back and come out with a couple more renderings on other alternatives to just painting that icebox.

[Marks]: that would be aesthetically pleasing for the neighbors and something that I think would fit into the new construction.

[Marks]: So if that's something that the hospital can do, can you speak to that?

[Marks]: Right, so why can't we put some type of screening right onto that mechanical box?

[Marks]: Something that's aesthetically pleasing like the second proposal or maybe some type of building material that could be affixed to the box itself rather than just painting it.

[Marks]: because your initial plan, I'm sure,

[Marks]: was costing tens of thousands of dollars, if not hundreds of thousands of dollars to cover that up.

[Marks]: I'm not sure why we can't take a look at putting something else there that would be pleasing to the neighbors and Director Butters.

[Marks]: So I would ask that that be taken into consideration and that you provide a couple of more proposals other than just the painting of the electrical box itself.

[Marks]: Okay, I'd appreciate it if you can work on that with the CAG group, as well as area residents.

[Marks]: My second question is regarding the exterior of the building, and in particular, the bottom lower part of the building itself.

[Marks]: Do you have any renderings of that?

[Marks]: So the front of the building there,

[Marks]: Well, now the other rendering, the other construction.

[Marks]: Is that a wood slat there, or is that brick?

[Marks]: So is it like a brick master, like a terracotta that's carved in?

[Marks]: Is that what that is?

[Marks]: You said it was a terracotta.

[Marks]: I was wondering if it's similar to like a simulated brick master where they put a layer of cement down and then carve the design that they want to carve into the terracotta or cement, whatever the substance is.

[Marks]: Is the intent to look like brick?

[Marks]: Is that the intent?

[Marks]: OK.

[Marks]: Okay, it doesn't blend in much to me, but if that's what you guys arrived at, that's fine.

[Marks]: My other point I have is regarding, as you know, Ryan, you've been involved with this since day one.

[Marks]: A lot of the direct abutters going up Governor's Ave, there was a lot of discussion in the back of your parking lot, the second lot, regarding fencing, shrubbery, trees.

[Marks]: I know that was part of your presentation.

[Marks]: The home at 216 Governor's Ave has completely no barrier at all from your parking lot.

[Marks]: And I was originally under the impression when we were looking at providing a barrier between the neighbors, whether it was plantings or fencing, that that was part of the project.

[Marks]: Are they not going to put fencing next to 216 Governor's Ave, which would separate your parking lot, a very busy parking lot,

[Marks]: from the residents.

[Marks]: OK.

[Marks]: I would ask respectfully, Lawrence Memorial has been great during this process.

[Marks]: We've come a long way.

[Marks]: And I would ask in the interest of being a good neighbor that I believe it's roughly 100 feet of fence.

[Marks]: that Lawrence Memorial make a commitment to extend that fence so we don't have a neighbor that's completely open to headlights and noise and everything else that's going to be associated with the parking lot.

[Marks]: And I would ask that Lawrence Memorial make a commitment to work with the neighbor at 216 to put up a fence, a barrier, in the interest of being a good neighbor.

[Marks]: Okay, so I take that that sounds like that you will put a fence up.

[Marks]: Okay, I appreciate that.

[Marks]: And just my last point, I know my colleagues have questions also.

[Marks]: During this entire process, some of the concerns within the neighborhood and the direct abutters was speeding cars, additional signage, pedestrian crossings.

[Marks]: And I know much of which involves city input, the traffic commission, the police department.

[Marks]: Has there been any steps with Lawrence Memorial Hospital and the Method Police Department or Traffic Commission to work on some of these concerns regarding speeding and pedestrian safety?

[Marks]: Okay, and do you have anything you could publicly share with us at a later date on what's being proposed and what's being worked on?

[Marks]: Thank you very much.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Mr. President?

[Marks]: I just would like to put my three recommendations in the form of a motion.

[Marks]: The first one would be that two additional renderings of the electrical box

[Marks]: and other alternatives aesthetically pleasing would be provided to the CAG group and to the city council, as well as neighbors and direct abutters, and that a fence be installed between the properties, between the parking lot and 216 Governor's Ave, a full fence, and that as soon as

[Marks]: the discussions had with the police department and the traffic commission regarding public safety, pedestrian safety, and speeding, as well as signage, that those discussions be presented to the council.

[Marks]: So those three in the form of a motion, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I want to thank Marianne for her commitment to this city over the last seven months.

[Marks]: It's been very trying, and she's been a leader in this community.

[Marks]: I appreciate that.

[Marks]: Marianne, have you had any involvement with the outside rentals of our school buildings?

[Marks]: Okay, so what type of contact tracing is being done by the city or what systems are in place to monitor the size of the groups and the purpose of which they're using our buildings?

[Marks]: Is that being done by your office or is that being done, it is?

[Marks]: Okay.

[Marks]: Is there any actual testing COVID testing being required?

[Marks]: So we don't know if we're welcoming anyone from an outside group into our buildings that may be infected.

[Marks]: Right.

[Marks]: What about a temperature test?

[Marks]: taking someone's temperature.

[Marks]: So as the health director, and I don't mean to put you on the spot, and if you don't want to answer, you don't have to, but what's your personal thought about entertaining activities in a building we're trying to lock down for safety reasons, inviting people from the public into these buildings?

[Marks]: What's your personal thought on that?

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: So Mary, just so I understand, and I don't want to beat a dead horse, but if we had an issue of a student contracting COVID that we know was, or a teacher, or faculty, whoever it might be, that was in the Marsha Karen Little Theater.

[Marks]: And the previous day, there was, or the day after, there was 75 people from an outside organization using the Marsha Karen Theater.

[Marks]: contact every person that we have on record that was in that particular part of the building.

[Marks]: Well, what about in a particular area?

[Marks]: I appreciate that.

[Marks]: So that doesn't make you eligible for contact tracing, although it could make you eligible for getting the COVID virus, correct?

[Marks]: So you wouldn't be concerned the following day that students may be using that exact room?

[Marks]: Just one last follow up to Mary Ann.

[Marks]: Maybe if Mary Ann can provide us over the next week or so, Mr. President, just the number of organizations, what building they're using, the capacity of the numbers that they have.

[Marks]: And I don't need to see names, but I would like to see how many people use in the buildings.

[Marks]: And I would like to see what the protocol is for these groups, Mr. President, regarding the contact tracing, the availability of information.

[Marks]: And as I stated in the past, Mr. President, during COVID, to me, doesn't make any sense at all to invite people that would never typically be in that building.

[Marks]: into a building that we're trying to secure for our faculty and our teachers and our students, that we're trying to safeguard and secure, Mr. President.

[Marks]: It makes no sense why you would want to invite that at that particular time, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I realize it's a revenue generator, but safety should come first, as the Board of Health Director mentioned, and that doesn't seem like safety first to me.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Mr. Marks.

[Marks]: If I'm not mistaken, the first amendment shows the exact ordinance that states the two different historic districts, Hillside Ave and Myram Simmons Historic District.

[Marks]: And the amendment two, which we would be voting on, is the addition of foster court.

[Marks]: So I'm not quite sure why you would sever it.

[Marks]: I don't think it matters, to be quite honest with you.

[Marks]: I don't think it has any bearing on the discussion.

[Marks]: I'd rather, Mr. President, hear about the meeting that was held last night and find out the great news about moving forward on the proposal that we put forward, Mr. President, with the owner of the property and the historical district commission regarding an agreement, Mr. President.

[Marks]: For point of information, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Just past practice, Mr. President, any paper that has been submitted by any mayor previously, we never had the authority to amend or change, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I'm not sure why this would be any different.

[Marks]: So I don't think we have the authority to change a paper submitted from the administration.

[Marks]: On countless issues, whether it's monetary or not, Mr. President, we've never had the ability to change the mayor's papers.

[Marks]: Mr. President, do we have any of the property owner or the- We do, we do.

[Marks]: Members of the Historical District Commission on it?

[Marks]: Whichever way you choose, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Point of information, Mr. President, just if I could.

[Marks]: Yes, Mr. Bader, one minute.

[Marks]: Point of information, Councilor Larkins.

[Marks]: Not to interrupt, Mr. President, but I really want to understand this because the way I understood it was we were looking at saving the facade of the structure.

[Marks]: And there was some discussion whether or not it was going to be to the roof line or not.

[Marks]: And the renderings that I saw gave two different versions, one to the roof ridge and the other one just below the roof ridge.

[Marks]: And so I'm kind of not sure what Mr. Bader is talking about, unless he can give me some more information about why it wasn't acceptable.

[Marks]: Because we were all there at the meeting.

[Marks]: And we thought we were moving forward on an issue.

[Marks]: And now to hear that it's not acceptable is a little troubling, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So Mr. President, based on the discussions that we had, the initial discussions, I was wondering if Mr. Bader can get into more detail from what we spoke about originally as an agreement to what the disapproval is now.

[Marks]: And I understand he's saying it's based on architects and other people, but

[Marks]: Did the petitioner not present in those renderings?

[Marks]: If I could just finish.

[Marks]: If I could just finish.

[Marks]: Mr. Bader, Mr. Bader, one minute, Councilor Locke has the floor.

[Marks]: If I could just finish, Mr. Bader.

[Marks]: No, that's all right, thank you.

[Marks]: I just want to understand this because we put a lot of time and effort into coming to what I thought was an agreement to save a piece of historical property and also, Mr. President, move forward.

[Marks]: on creating what I would consider additional housing in the area, which was a win-win situation.

[Marks]: So I am extremely disappointed to hear if that doesn't come to fruition tonight, Mr. President.

[Marks]: But I would like to hear more about why the two renderings that were presented, which to me address the exact issue that we were talking about.

[Marks]: I remember Mr. Hayward at the meeting, I asked him point blank,

[Marks]: about the windows on either side of the roof line.

[Marks]: I asked him about the chimney, and at the point, he said they didn't have, and I won't speak for him, but there was no real historical significance, and he didn't even see a reason to save the chimney and the two windows on either side.

[Marks]: So I really would like to know a little more why this is not acceptable, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Mr. Bader, please continue.

[Marks]: Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Stewart,

[Marks]: So why the vote last night then?

[Marks]: So was there a previous vote on this back in September to create this historic?

[Marks]: There was.

[Marks]: There was?

[Marks]: There was.

[Marks]: What was the vote at that point?

[Marks]: From what I recall, Mr. President, as part of the discussions that took place at the site, in addition, Mr. President, to agreeing that the owner of the property would come back with a couple of schematics of potential designs to save the front facade.

[Marks]: It was also mentioned at that meeting, Mr. President, that there would be no pursuit of the creation of a local historic district.

[Marks]: And that was part of the discussion.

[Marks]: Now, I know Ryan Haywood is on the phone, and I know he doesn't speak for the Historical District Commission, but I think the Historic District Commission should realize what was proposed at that particular meeting.

[Marks]: And it wasn't horse trading that took place, Mr. President.

[Marks]: This was an open public meeting that anyone was welcome to attend.

[Marks]: And I'm really surprised that some members of the Historical District Commission only found their way to this particular property within the last few days after this being around for 18 months, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And that's even more alarming to me.

[Marks]: Secondly, Mr. President, from what we heard tonight, the Historical District Commission has no say, Mr. President, in whether or not they like the rendering or not.

[Marks]: They have no say in that, Mr. President.

[Marks]: That's what we heard tonight.

[Marks]: So the vote that they took Monday night, I'm confused.

[Marks]: Was that a vote against the rendering or was that a vote to accept the mayor's revised ordinance?

[Marks]: I'm a little confused, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Chris, could you please clarify for Councilor Marks?

[Marks]: So, Chris, just so I understand, what was the actual vote last night then?

[Marks]: Okay, so I was under the impression that there was a vote taken not to accept the two renderings from the petitioner.

[Marks]: So, at this particular point, Mr. President, I'd like to hear from Ryan Haywood from the historic commission, and then also hear from the petitioner once again, Mr. President, because I know he had additional information to present.

[Marks]: My question was, Ryan was present during this entire process.

[Marks]: And I didn't know if he had any interaction the day after that we spoke about this.

[Marks]: Did he have any interactions with any members of the Historical District Commission in regards to what was presented and somewhat agreed upon at the time?

[Marks]: I know he had no authority to agree on behalf of another group, but I'd like to know a little more, Mr. President, about what took place on this, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Ryan, if I could, was there not mentioned at the Committee of the Whole site review that if the renderings were acceptable, that there wouldn't be a pursuit of the creation of a local historic district?

[Marks]: OK.

[Marks]: Now, did you just say Historic Commission?

[Marks]: So when did the Historic Commission meet to review the drawings?

[Marks]: And that was the opinion of the historic commission, correct?

[Marks]: OK.

[Marks]: Mr. President, if we could hear from the petitioner and whatever he'd like to present as well.

[Marks]: Okay.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks?

[Marks]: No.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I know contracts and negotiations between the administration and the unions.

[Marks]: I would just ask if we can get an update on any current outstanding unsettled contracts within the city of Medford.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I want to thank Councilor Scarpelli for co-sponsoring this.

[Marks]: We actually both offered this, it was probably a little over a year ago.

[Marks]: DPW was kind enough to go up to Winslow Ave and fill some of the many, many potholes that are lined in that stretch between 69 and 77 Winslow.

[Marks]: However, Mr. President, I think we're at a time where we probably could use some

[Marks]: curb-to-curb paving, even though one side of the street I don't believe has curbing.

[Marks]: I would say, Mr. President, at this particular point, it's a small stretch.

[Marks]: It's near Carpac.

[Marks]: It's a very heavy traveled area, as you know, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I would ask in the interest of public safety that that area be ground down between 69 and 77 Winslow Ave and repave curb-to-curb in the interest of public safety.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President, and I want to thank Councilor Bears for bringing this up.

[Marks]: There are many good aspects to this particular ordinance.

[Marks]: With that being said, there are very many aspects of this ordinance that need to be revamped, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I just would like to bring up a few because I think we all are concerned about public safety.

[Marks]: But we also don't want to be punitive in regards to getting something accomplished as well.

[Marks]: This particular ordinance would differ from the current ordinance because right now homeowners wouldn't be responsible for clearing out pedestrian crossings.

[Marks]: So if you happen to live at an intersection or if you live at a corner house, you would be responsible for shoveling the pedestrian pathway leading across the street.

[Marks]: So you'd be responsible for clearing out the corner.

[Marks]: Those of us who own homes and have shoveled for decades in this community realize that the city, and I hope this doesn't reflect poorly, but the city does a poor job cleaning corners up.

[Marks]: And there is no snow removal, there's only snow piling on city corners and intersections.

[Marks]: And I can just attest, Mr. President, moving five to six feet of packed snow from a snow plow would be an insurmountable task for residents to go through.

[Marks]: And especially if you have, like we did a few years ago, snowstorm after snowstorm after snowstorm.

[Marks]: So that would be the first concern I have, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I believe it's important to create the connectivity for pedestrian paths.

[Marks]: I'm not quite sure that this alleviates that by making homeowners responsible for that, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Also, this ordinance states, failure to comply within 24 hours of receiving a notice, the city may remove the snow and ice and charge the owner for the removal as a lien on the owner's property.

[Marks]: That currently does not exist right now.

[Marks]: So this is saying if you don't remove it within 24 hours, the city has the ability to come in and put a lien on your tax bill.

[Marks]: I'm not sure if that's legally binding, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I guess when we get subcommittee, we can have that discussion.

[Marks]: Also, Mr. President, it doesn't state at what expense.

[Marks]: So if I happen to be, just say I'm a snowbird and I'm in Florida for three or four days, and I realize that's my property and I'm responsible.

[Marks]: But if I don't attend to a particular storm, Mr. President, the city may hire someone.

[Marks]: There's no set fee in this.

[Marks]: And you can bet your bottom dollar the city doesn't have the resources to go out and shovel.

[Marks]: So they would be hiring someone.

[Marks]: That could be at a great expense to residents, to hire someone for $300, $400, $500 to shovel, depending on the amount and so forth, and to put sand and salt down.

[Marks]: So this doesn't make any mention about the cost to homeowners if the city does opt

[Marks]: to go out at their homeowner's expense.

[Marks]: So that's a concern I have, Mr. President, because I'm very mindful regarding people in our community, in particular seniors that are struggling on fixed incomes.

[Marks]: And every little increase, Mr. President, as we know, is a matter of if someone can stay in their home or not.

[Marks]: And I would hate to create an ordinance that may put someone in jeopardy of losing their home, Mr. President.

[Marks]: The escalating fines.

[Marks]: The current ordinance doesn't call for escalating fines.

[Marks]: So the first offense for noncompliance is a $50 a day fine.

[Marks]: And then for each subsequent offense, within 12 months, so that covers the full snow time, within 12 months, the fine or charge shall double.

[Marks]: That's not in the existing ordinance to double fines.

[Marks]: So let's take an example.

[Marks]: Let's look at the first offense, $50 a day, you go out there and shovel immediately so you only get charged for one day.

[Marks]: The second time it happens, which could be the next day, the following day, the following week within a snow period, who knows, Mr. President.

[Marks]: That fine then goes, if you don't shovel, to $100 a day.

[Marks]: Say you're that unfortunate that it happened to you three times.

[Marks]: Just say you were in the hospital, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And the third time, the fine is $200 a day for homeowners.

[Marks]: And if you were really unfortunate, the next subsequent fine would be $400 a day.

[Marks]: So if you didn't get out there for five days, the homeowner would get a $2,000 bill, according to this ordinance, because they didn't shovel.

[Marks]: Excessive?

[Marks]: I would say so, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So that's another concern I have with these subsequent offenses and the doubling of fines, Mr. President.

[Marks]: We all want to keep our sidewalks clear, but I think there's a way to do it, Mr. President, when we're not putting a stranglehold on residents.

[Marks]: There are no provisions, as Councilor Bears mentioned, to, and I'm glad he did, to assist seniors or disabled.

[Marks]: I have a senior mother that lives alone.

[Marks]: I can tell you firsthand, Mr. President, over the last several years, and I try to be a good son, but I can't get out there all the time, it is next to impossible to find someone to come out and shovel.

[Marks]: The days of people like we used to do when we were younger, going out, knocking the door, you don't find that anymore, Mr. President.

[Marks]: It doesn't happen, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So it's not as readily available.

[Marks]: I know the senior center has a list of people, and I tapped into that list, and it just wasn't consistent enough, to be quite frank with you.

[Marks]: It was great they offered, but it wasn't enough in the case for my mother.

[Marks]: And I know there's a lot of my mothers out there in this community, and there's a lot of disabled people, Mr. President, that would have to rely on this as well.

[Marks]: The ordinance also states, and this is both ordinances, the old and the new, whenever snow or ice accumulates on the sidewalk.

[Marks]: No mention the amount of ice.

[Marks]: How many times, Mr. President, do you look outside and say, is that an inch?

[Marks]: Is that a half an inch?

[Marks]: Do I need to go out there and shovel?

[Marks]: Do I not need to shovel?

[Marks]: How many times does that happen?

[Marks]: Should I put down ice?

[Marks]: Should I not?

[Marks]: How many times does that happen?

[Marks]: No mention at all, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So it's very possible you could be debating with your wife whether you should be out there shoveling or not.

[Marks]: There's no mention what the accumulation is, and the city defines it as, you know what, we believe you should have shoveled.

[Marks]: It doesn't say one inch, two inch, three inch, like I believe it should say, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And then you may get a fine based on that.

[Marks]: So that's another issue in here, Mr. President, that needs to be addressed.

[Marks]: About a year ago, Mr. President, I asked the previous administration.

[Marks]: I did a lot of research into this.

[Marks]: And other states, I didn't find many communities around here, but I'm sure it's done, create what they call a priority street sidewalk listing.

[Marks]: And they put funds aside, and many of them have to hire private contractors.

[Marks]: But they put funds aside for every snowstorm greater than three inches.

[Marks]: The city sits down with the DPW and residents and stakeholders and say, this is our ten miles of priority sidewalk in the community.

[Marks]: And most of the time, it's the major federal fears.

[Marks]: And what that does is create a connection, a linkage,

[Marks]: In the community, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So you would go down High Street would be done, Main Street would be done, Salem Street would be done, Fulton Street would be done.

[Marks]: All riverside out.

[Marks]: The major areas, Mr. President, I throw ten miles out there because that's probably reasonable.

[Marks]: It may take more, it may take less.

[Marks]: But I asked the administration back a year ago to look at that.

[Marks]: Because if we really want to provide safety in this community, for kids that are walking to school, right now there may not be many kids walking to school.

[Marks]: But for seniors, for people with disabilities, for anyone in general, Mr. President, what better to know and be reassured that every fall of snow that's greater than a certain amount, whether it's two or three inches, that those priority sidewalks will be done by a bombardier.

[Marks]: And if the city can't handle it, which I don't think we have the ability to right now, we would subcontract for it, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Some of the figures I looked at in some communities were upwards of $160,000, $170,000.

[Marks]: But if we're going to prioritize the importance, Mr. President, of doing the shoveling, opening up our sidewalks, making sure they're safe, making sure people don't walk in the streets, that's a small price to pay, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I would ask that in the form of a motion once again, because it fell on deaf ears in the last administration.

[Marks]: It's a great concept.

[Marks]: I didn't create this.

[Marks]: This is being done in a lot of communities around the country.

[Marks]: The second thing, Mr. President, would be on the lines of Councilor Bears, to have more of a full-fledged program where we deal with seniors and people with disability.

[Marks]: That way, Mr. President, we're not leaving this up to chance.

[Marks]: We're not leaving it up to whether or not someone can afford it.

[Marks]: Because this is an affordability issue too, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I would ask in the form of a motion that the city also create, and I'm not sure if we could do it by ordinance or policy, create a program where we assist.

[Marks]: If we're going to implement ordinances that create escalating fines and doubling fines and shoving corners and so forth, that we assist the neediest in our community.

[Marks]: which are the seniors in our disabled population.

[Marks]: Also, Mr. President, I would also ask that if we're going to make it the responsibility of residents to clean corners, clean hydrants out, the fire department has a great program.

[Marks]: They have a volunteer program, if you go on the firefighters website, where they go on and ask if people want to assist in clearing out hydrants.

[Marks]: And the firefighters do a tremendous job, let me tell you.

[Marks]: They're out there in every snowstorm cleaning out hydrants.

[Marks]: This ordinance requires residents to do it.

[Marks]: I'm not opposed to that, Mr. President.

[Marks]: But what I'm saying is, if we're going to require residents now to be responsible for a public sidewalk,

[Marks]: A public sidewalk, you don't own that sidewalk.

[Marks]: You can't do any alterations to that sidewalk.

[Marks]: And now we're requesting that you keep it a certain distance wide open.

[Marks]: We're requesting during certain hours of daylight that you have to shovel.

[Marks]: If not, you get fined.

[Marks]: I think at the very least, Mr. President, the city should have some responsibility for cutting away snow at intersections and corners of streets where they intersect.

[Marks]: The complaints I receive constantly, more than complaints of someone just not shoveling, are the ability for people to cross from street to street.

[Marks]: That seems to be the major concern.

[Marks]: And we have to create some systematic approach in the community where we don't just pile, we remove.

[Marks]: And that's going to be a large endeavor with seven square miles.

[Marks]: This is a big city, this.

[Marks]: I would venture to say thousands of corners.

[Marks]: But we have to have a better way of addressing this than saying, sorry homeowner, you're responsible for every pedestrian crossing and every intersection of streets and every corner.

[Marks]: Now you're responsible.

[Marks]: Sounds good in theory?

[Marks]: It doesn't work, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And if we truly want to put something together,

[Marks]: that addresses the issue, those are the discussions we have to have.

[Marks]: And I'm willing to have them, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I like the fact that this makes homeowners responsible and not tenants.

[Marks]: I agree, chasing after a tenant, many days now you have two, three, four, five people living in there.

[Marks]: No one's going to claim responsibility.

[Marks]: They're all paying a certain amount.

[Marks]: It would be a nightmare.

[Marks]: So I agree with aspects of this, Mr. President.

[Marks]: But I also want to make sure we put something that makes sense.

[Marks]: And something that's not punitive, Mr. President, to homeowners.

[Marks]: And some of this in here, I believe, is punitive.

[Marks]: And I think we can address it, but I want to make sure, whatever discussions I had, that these three items, and I offer them in the form of a motion, that the city expand, the last one, the city expand their plowing to include snow and ice removal on all pedestrian crossings along with corners and intersections.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: With shoveling services, correct.

[Marks]: All pedestrian crossings, corners, and intersections, correct.

[Marks]: Okay?

[Marks]: Right, so the first one would be the city create a priority sidewalks listing of responsible sidewalks for plowing.

[Marks]: And I put of snow greater than three inches, but that could be up for deliberation.

[Marks]: That was just for discussion purpose.

[Marks]: So the city create a priority sidewalk listing where they shovel, plow all the major sidewalk, dental affairs.

[Marks]: Within the community.

[Marks]: Okay.

[Marks]: It doesn't matter, whatever.

[Marks]: Just a point of information, what subcommittee is that, Mr. President?

[Marks]: And we have one in public safety?

[Marks]: And you have full body of the membership too.

[Marks]: Maybe worthwhile.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks?

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I want to thank my colleagues for co-sponsoring this.

[Marks]: Everyone behind this railing has supported one way or another that particular intersection in improving the pedestrian safety there.

[Marks]: This is the first encouraging news since I've been on this council regarding that intersection.

[Marks]: So I'm going to take it at face value, Mr. President.

[Marks]: If they're adding it to their list, I'm encouraged by that.

[Marks]: I look forward to working with DOT in rectifying that whole length of stretch of road to increase safety, Mr. President.

[Marks]: As Councilor Scarpelli mentioned, I did sit on a call last night with Eversource, and they discussed the Eversource project on South Street.

[Marks]: And Main Street in particular, they discussed that one of their major concerns with doing the excavating and so forth, was that no matter what they tried to do to slow down traffic on South, that they were unable to do so.

[Marks]: And it was actually very enlightening to hear, Mr. President, that what we've been talking about for so many years in residents and abutters, we're hearing from a construction company saying, hey, this is a dangerous stretch of road.

[Marks]: And indeed, as Councilor Scarpelli mentioned, they approached the Chief of Police and the Traffic Commission.

[Marks]: And they saw fit to put some temporary speed bumps in order to slow down traffic, which we've been asking for, I can't tell you how long.

[Marks]: And we were told, you can't impede the flow of traffic, you can't do this, you can't do that.

[Marks]: It's amazing what can take place, Mr. President.

[Marks]: But this is tremendous news and I would like to actually maybe as a council through the administration just follow up to make sure we can secure this commitment.

[Marks]: And maybe that may be from a motion from this council asking what we can do as a community to get this ball rolling.

[Marks]: put that in the form of a motion that the city administration as well as the chief of police and

[Marks]: The city engineer and the council send a letter to do.

[Marks]: Yep.

[Marks]: Do you want to do it now or?

[Marks]: No, that's fine.

[Marks]: Please.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I want to thank Council Vice President Caraviello for co-sponsoring this.

[Marks]: I'd like to ask several questions, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I know we're going to request a committee of the whole meeting, but I'd like to know what potential disclosure of information was contained and what personal information.

[Marks]: I'd like to know why no police report was issued.

[Marks]: The city stated they took all available steps to prevent further disclosure and fully investigated this matter.

[Marks]: I'd like to know, Mr. President, what steps were taken by the city to prevent further disclosure?

[Marks]: And what came out of the investigation?

[Marks]: And Mr. President, just as a note, the President of the Teachers Union filed a green sheet which seeks legal advice on the breach of personal information by school employees.

[Marks]: So I think that shows you how serious the nature is, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I think it deserves and warrants more than just an email to us saying that the city looked into this and took steps to prevent further disclosure.

[Marks]: So I would hope that we get more information, Mr. President, on behalf of city employees in this community to make sure their valuable personal information is not compromised.

[Marks]: If I can, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: This is on the border of the Arlington Method Line.

[Marks]: And from what I'm being told, it's been a very dangerous intersection for pedestrians, bikers for a number of years.

[Marks]: So I would ask in the interest of public safety, where we're looking at snow ordinance for sidewalk and other traffic calming initiatives, that DCR also look at traffic calming initiatives for pedestrian crossings at that intersection.

[Marks]: intersection as well as bike-friendly crossings, Mr. President.

[Marks]: That's a very difficult road that takes in three or four different avenues and is extremely dangerous for people that are using the Mystic Lakes or walking in the area.

[Marks]: and for passive use, and I would ask that we meet with our state delegation or presenters to the state delegation so they can present it to DCR to look for some traffic calming initiatives.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Anyone that knew Joanne Caputo, she was a sweetheart of a woman, Mr. President.

[Marks]: She was known as the mayor of 99 and 101 Riverside Ave to many of her fellow residents in those two buildings.

[Marks]: She was just a spitfire of a person.

[Marks]: She was very active in our community.

[Marks]: She cared an awful lot for the seniors in those two buildings.

[Marks]: And she watched over them, Mr. President, and just had a real guiding effect on many of the seniors in that building.

[Marks]: You couldn't go to an event, whether it was the meat bingo or whatever else they were doing in that building.

[Marks]: She was always part of what took place, she was always in the center of things, and she was always looking out for the residents of that 99 and 101 Riverside Ave.

[Marks]: And I would ask Mr. President that this meeting be dedicated in her memory, Mr. President.

[Marks]: She will be sorely missed.

[Marks]: So what we're doing is asking that the building department notify residents once they have the review back from the historical commission.

[Marks]: That they notify residents within 72 hours, is that how I'm reading this?

[Marks]: I am, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[Marks]: Mr. President, this may seem like a trivial issue, but this is the second time I've offered this on the agenda, and neighbors up on Mangels Street are worried enough to bring it to my attention again.

[Marks]: I requested that National Grid go up and take a look at it and report back.

[Marks]: I'm not a structural engineer, but my eyes don't deceive me.

[Marks]: Mr. President.

[Marks]: And it's quite dangerous.

[Marks]: And this is a poll that carries electrical wires as well.

[Marks]: And neighbors are very concerned, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So, I, as one member of the council, if I don't get a response, I will not be supporting any issues that come before us with National Grid requests, Mr. President, until they adhere to our request.

[Marks]: And that's true with double polls as well.

[Marks]: If you go around the city now, you're going to see more and more double polls creeping up around this community.

[Marks]: And unless we fight back, they're going to say, you know what?

[Marks]: You can get away with it in the city of Medford.

[Marks]: And so I would ask, Mr. President, that our head of wires, Steve Rendazzo, who does a tremendous job, reach out to National Grid and get a response immediately regarding pole 4354 on Mangles Street in the interest of public safety.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: that I bring this up tonight.

[Marks]: Louise was a dear, close friend to not only myself, but many, many people in the community.

[Marks]: Louise served her distinction with the Method Arts Council.

[Marks]: Incorporated for many, many years, many of the projects that you've seen around the city.

[Marks]: Louise Musto Cho was very involved, Mr. President.

[Marks]: She was a sweetheart of a woman.

[Marks]: She was dedicated to her family, her friends, and her arts, Mr. President.

[Marks]: If you know Louise, she was a jewelry designer.

[Marks]: She did tapestry, canvas prints, artwork.

[Marks]: She was a very creative person, Mr. President, and was always looking to put the city first.

[Marks]: Over the past few years, I had the opportunity to serve on a citizen-initiated arts center committee, which she was kind enough to let us use her building.

[Marks]: a group of people to use their building in the community room to meet and gather and discuss a potential art center for the entire community at the Heckner Center.

[Marks]: And the loss of Louise is truly devastating for this community.

[Marks]: Mr. President, if I just could, I omitted, I put Councilor Caraviello's name on the, we had a discussion.

[Marks]: I put his name on the email that I sent to the city clerk.

[Marks]: I may have spelled his name wrong, but I did put, and I just want to recognize Councilor Caraviello offered that with me as well, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I apologize for the omission.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: I reviewed the records, find them to be in order, and I do move approval, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Happy Wednesday.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I, too, want to reiterate my support for Post 45.

[Marks]: They've been longstanding members of this community, very active and involved in this community, and good neighbors for many, many years.

[Marks]: And I stand here tonight, Mr. President, to support them as they've supported members of this community for the last several decades, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Mr. President, does the owner of the property have plans to turn the sign off after hours?

[Marks]: Mr. Parris, can you comment on that?

[Marks]: I would state, Mr. President, to be consistent, and I've voted like this in the past, that the sign be turned off when the business is not in operation.

[Marks]: Okay, are you writing that as an amendment to the- I would like to hear what my other council colleagues would like to say on that, and I would have that as an amendment, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I would ask with consistency, Mr. President, that the light be turned off.

[Marks]: If the audience is 10, that's fine.

[Marks]: I don't want to come across- I just want to be consistent, because I know when station landing came aboard, we spent a lot of time working on the signage to make sure that it was aesthetically pleasing, because there are a number of residents that live in station landing.

[Marks]: And we have to be mindful of that as well.

[Marks]: I would say that it conforms with the existing sign ordinance, which I believe Councilman Knight is correct, that 10 a.m.

[Marks]: the sign be turned off.

[Marks]: 10 p.m.

[Marks]: 10 p.m.

[Marks]: 10 p.m.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President, and I happen to frequent this car wash where I live right up the street.

[Marks]: And let me tell you, there's no mistaking that there's free vacuum at that particular car wash.

[Marks]: There is banners on the fence, there are signs everywhere saying free car wash.

[Marks]: You can't help but drive by, I mean a free vacuum, and notice that there's free vacuuming there.

[Marks]: I would also state that these particular awnings, according to the letter we received that Councilor Knight just read, state that the awnings come off the building two feet.

[Marks]: So to state that this would be comfortable vacuuming their vehicles under the shade and shelter of the awning, I don't know how you create shade and shelter of a two foot awning coming off the side of the building.

[Marks]: Because the vacuum is in front of the car, which is a pretty big,

[Marks]: piece of equipment, there's no way that provides shelter for anyone that's vacuuming, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I think the awnings may be a nice addition to the building without signage.

[Marks]: So if the gentleman wanted to put 12 awnings and maybe one or two free vacuum, or maybe even three depending on the wish of the council, I would be amendable to that.

[Marks]: Because I think the building could use, it's just a squared off building.

[Marks]: Aesthetically speaking, it's not that pleasing.

[Marks]: Maybe these awnings will make it look more pleasing, but to have it on each awning, Mr. President, is overkill.

[Marks]: And it doesn't serve the purpose of shade or shelter.

[Marks]: And so I would put in the form of a motion, Mr. President, that out of the request for 13 canvas awnings, that we allow 13 awnings, but only three with signage that states free vacuum.

[Marks]: Also, if I could, and I realize the banners are probably up temporarily because it doesn't really, other than the banners, there's nothing else that says free vacuum.

[Marks]: I would hope as soon as the awnings go up that those temporary banners come off that are on the fence and around the property, Mr. President.

[Marks]: This may be a question for the building commissioner in his office, but I believe any banners in the city, Mr. President, have to be permitted and approved for businesses.

[Marks]: And I believe it's on a temporary basis.

[Marks]: I'm not sure if these banners are approved or if they, I don't know.

[Marks]: But I would ask as part of this paper that they be taken down as soon as the awnings go up.

[Marks]: Right, I'm not sure if he has current approval.

[Marks]: Maybe the owner of the property can state whether or not he got approval for the bayonets.

[Marks]: Yeah, so we can leave that language in.

[Marks]: He's committing to the language anyway, so we can leave that language in.

[Marks]: The banners come down as soon as the signage goes up.

[Marks]: Mr. President, does the petitioner have any plans for a freestanding sign as well?

[Marks]: I'll accept that answer, Mr. President, and if they do come back, I may not be supportive of an additional freestanding sign.

[Marks]: So as long as the petitioner knows that.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Are they able to control the lumens on the signage itself?

[Marks]: Right.

[Marks]: So we're all on the same page.

[Marks]: If we put a 30 or 60 day review,

[Marks]: And after 30 or 60 days, this council sees fit that we received a certain number of complaints.

[Marks]: I'm sure the hotel wouldn't want to remove a $50,000, $60,000 sign based on that.

[Marks]: So I would ask that as part of this, Mr. President, that they put up a sign that they can control the Lumens.

[Marks]: And that way, if there is a concern, we may be able to go back to the owner of the property and state that the brightness is bothering people or whatever it might be, and have some flexibility.

[Marks]: And that's the only reason why I bring it up, Mr. President, because once the sign goes up,

[Marks]: And if we do vote at a later date to take it down, that would be of great hardship, I'm sure, to the petitioner, and I wouldn't want to put them in that position.

[Marks]: So maybe if they can look at a sign that they can control the lumens, we'll be able to address any issues, because that would be my issue, the brightness of the sign.

[Marks]: I understand the petitioner saying they're not that bright, but if they're able to get a sign where they can control that one in particular, not all of them, that one in particular I think would be helpful for not only them, but for us as a council.

[Marks]: So I'd ask that that be part of the recommendation, Mr. President.

[Marks]: An amendment that the sign contain a dimming aspect on the north, facing the north side.

[Marks]: So I'd ask Councilor Knight to amend his motion.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I just want to thank members of the historic commission that were present there last night.

[Marks]: I want to thank the property owner and, Mr. President, I do want to thank this Medford City Council that took the time, Mr. President,

[Marks]: when it didn't look that anything was going to result in this property.

[Marks]: And I think we're that much closer to coming to a win-win situation on both sides, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I want to thank the members of this council that stood up to say, you know what, we'd like to go on a site visit.

[Marks]: We'd like to hear from the property owner.

[Marks]: We'd like to come to a resolve, because we all support the same issues behind this rail, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Don't let anyone kid you otherwise.

[Marks]: We all support it, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And it was because of the due diligence of this council standing up and saying that we believe we can make a difference, that I hope this comes to fruition, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I appreciate both sides on this, believe me.

[Marks]: But after last night's meeting, I think we'd be doing this whole process an injustice to keep on moving the goal pole.

[Marks]: If we keep on moving it, we got a commitment last night to move forward based on what was stated last night.

[Marks]: And that was clear to me, what was stated last night, that we were going to work to maintain the front facade.

[Marks]: And we were not going to move forward.

[Marks]: This is right out of Ryan Hayward's mouth.

[Marks]: And I think I asked him the question.

[Marks]: And he said, absolutely, we would wait.

[Marks]: He said, we may do it at a later date.

[Marks]: I remember him saying that.

[Marks]: We may do it down the line.

[Marks]: I can't promise you we won't revisit it again.

[Marks]: But at this point, if we're able to move this forward, like we did last night, that we weren't going to move that issue forward.

[Marks]: So now we're hearing that you want to move it.

[Marks]: Because even though it's the first reading, it's still moving the issue forward, right?

[Marks]: However you slice that pie, it's still moving it forward, and that flies in the face of what we agreed upon in good faith last night.

[Marks]: So I don't think we can keep on moving the goal post here and think we're going to come out with a resolve if we're going to change the game as this goes on.

[Marks]: That's all I say, and I don't think that represents either side.

[Marks]: I think that's just common sense in negotiations.

[Marks]: If you don't stick by a negotiation, it's not going to end up working.

[Marks]: I'm not saying it has anything to do with you.

[Marks]: But what I'm saying is I don't think we should change it at this particular point.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President, and I want to thank my colleague, Councilor Knight, for his comments.

[Marks]: This indeed is a very difficult time to move forward on such a large endeavor.

[Marks]: However,

[Marks]: It was back in February of 2016 when I offered the original home rule petition, which I believe some members of the council were on.

[Marks]: It reads a little different from what the mayor is offering.

[Marks]: At the time, we were looking at a seven member commission.

[Marks]: We also outlined when a final report would be back with recommendations, which at the time we thought was

[Marks]: key component to moving this along, because if you leave it open ended, the process inherently is a long process to start off with.

[Marks]: When we reviewed this back in 2016, February 2016, we were looking at potential ballot questions in 2019 or 2020.

[Marks]: So that shows you it's at least a two to three year process.

[Marks]: Built into that number is at the time what we established was an 18 month review process.

[Marks]: So once you establish a commission, then they had roughly 18 months to go through a charter that hasn't been reviewed in 34 years.

[Marks]: A charter that's only been changed over the last 34 years, ironically, to give increases to the mayor's salary, which is under the city charter.

[Marks]: And that's the only really review that's been looked at when it comes to charter review in this community.

[Marks]: The charter is the constitution that governs our community.

[Marks]: It's a vital document that I'd say most people in the community are unaware of because, let's be quite frank, we haven't reviewed it in 34 years.

[Marks]: There hasn't been much discussion and people are just not aware of what the charter defines.

[Marks]: And there's a number of issues within the charter or responsibilities and powers that define how government operates, the length of terms, the duties and powers and responsibilities.

[Marks]: And it is extremely vital, even during a pandemic, that we focus on a charter review.

[Marks]: And I, as one member of the council, think there's no better time than the present

[Marks]: to start the ball rolling and take a look at what we need to do.

[Marks]: And this is not putting a stamp of approval saying that things will be changed in the charter.

[Marks]: We're asking for a charter commission.

[Marks]: The commission may sit down and look at the charter and say, wow, you guys created a perfect charter 34 years ago, and we don't think anything needs to be done to this charter.

[Marks]: I don't think that's going to be the case.

[Marks]: But that could happen.

[Marks]: So this is not saying the charter's going to be changed in any way.

[Marks]: It's just saying, let's create a review process.

[Marks]: Many charters that, if you look at cities and towns, they have a built-in periodic review of the charter.

[Marks]: When ours was created some 34 years ago, there was no built-in review.

[Marks]: Hence why we're at a point now that the charter's never been reviewed.

[Marks]: So when I offered the resolution back in 2016, the home rule petition, one of the recommendations that was part of that petition was that at a minimum, an amendment be present in the city charter instituting an appointed committee to conduct a periodic review of the charter.

[Marks]: So at a minimum, whatever happened, if there were no change at all, then at least we know going forward, and I agree with this 1,000%, I don't know where my colleagues stand, that this charter should be reviewed every so often.

[Marks]: Whether it's yearly, whether it's every few years, whatever it might be, it needs to be reviewed.

[Marks]: If you had a business plan from 35 years ago, you would be out of business right now.

[Marks]: And the charter is no different, it's a business plan how we operate a community and how we run a community.

[Marks]: And so I think it's very important that we move forward tonight.

[Marks]: If it does calling for a refiling next year, then so be it.

[Marks]: So be it, we refile it again.

[Marks]: When we filed this back in 2016, it was a four to three vote.

[Marks]: It passed four to three.

[Marks]: We sent it to the state legislature.

[Marks]: Many of us that were supportive of this back in 2016 followed through the process.

[Marks]: Unfortunately, the process did not exist.

[Marks]: The chairman of the committee, and his name escapes me right now, decided on his own, Mr. President, because I talked to him back in 2016, decided on his own not to give this a hearing.

[Marks]: And I asked, why would you not give a petition that's before you, a home rule petition that's crafted by a city saying the city wants it, the representatives, the forefathers of the city said, we want this.

[Marks]: And his answer to me, Mr. President,

[Marks]: was that I don't believe that the four to three vote was a majority of the council.

[Marks]: It didn't represent a majority of the council.

[Marks]: And I question saying a four to three vote is a majority of the council.

[Marks]: And it's no difference when you vote as a state legislator that a majority wins, a majority rules.

[Marks]: And at the time, he just disagreed and didn't give it the proper hearing that it should have received, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I'm hoping this time, and I know there's some members that are hesitant with this, Mr. President, but I would respectfully ask my colleagues.

[Marks]: that allow this to move forward.

[Marks]: This is the first step in many steps.

[Marks]: This is a two to three year process.

[Marks]: This is not going to happen overnight.

[Marks]: And I'm hoping as we move forward, Mr. President, that the pandemic will be behind us.

[Marks]: That's how long this process is going to take, and I'm hoping that's behind us.

[Marks]: So regarding the signatures that are required, I believe it's 15% of the number of registered voters that you have in the community to put it on the ballot.

[Marks]: We've had people of the community for the last several years, some good people that have walked around, knocked doors, stood in front of stores, got thousands of signatures, still fell short of the mark of the 15% that's required, Mr. President, but did yeoman's work.

[Marks]: And I believe there's enough support out there in the community to move this forward.

[Marks]: Why not assist, if we can,

[Marks]: As legislators for this city, why not assist in moving the process forward?

[Marks]: Not disregarding a process, the signatures is one process.

[Marks]: A home rule petition is another process.

[Marks]: There's more ways than one to skin a cat.

[Marks]: We're skinning a cat a different way.

[Marks]: We're going to the legislative home rule petition.

[Marks]: It's long overdue, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I appreciate there's a lot of opinions on this, and it hasn't been looked at.

[Marks]: And some people may see this as a struggle for power, some people may see it all different ways.

[Marks]: I see it, Mr. President, as good government in reviewing a document that really requires review in this day and age.

[Marks]: The city has changed in the last 35 years.

[Marks]: And we should change with the times as well.

[Marks]: So I respectfully ask my colleagues to take a long look at this tonight.

[Marks]: I will be supporting this tonight, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Like I said, to move the first step forward.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks, there you go.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President, and I don't like to dwell on the past, but knowing what happened in 2016,

[Marks]: And I'm not sure if that representative is still even the chairman of that committee.

[Marks]: I don't know if it was the committee on local affairs.

[Marks]: I can't even remember the name.

[Marks]: Maybe election laws.

[Marks]: John Rogers, is that something?

[Marks]: Maybe it was Representative Rogers.

[Marks]: I can't recall, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I got a lot of.

[Marks]: Useful information stuck in my head.

[Marks]: Useless information stuck in my head, but that's not one of it.

[Marks]: But I would just ask, Mr. President, respectfully that I would hate to pass something that is going to be on the same wave as we did in 2016 and then only go up to the State House and them say that it doesn't have the support of the city because of the vote.

[Marks]: or the sheer number of votes.

[Marks]: So I can see what my colleagues are stating, that this may not be the best time, but if we looked at maybe the beginning of the next fiscal year, January, does that sound like a time that

[Marks]: would be amendable to other members of the council.

[Marks]: I don't know if it's strictly just the time.

[Marks]: They may have other philosophical differences with charter review and so forth.

[Marks]: But if that's the case, I wouldn't mind holding off until January, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Especially if this did happen to go down tonight, we couldn't bring it up again for what, 90 days?

[Marks]: So you're looking at that time frame anyways.

[Marks]: I'm prepared to vote on it tonight, but I just would hate to see this go down the same way, because I really believe in it strongly.

[Marks]: So I just want to throw that out to my colleagues.

[Marks]: If there is support, maybe not this particular second, but maybe in January, is that workable?

[Marks]: Point of information, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Point of information, Councilor Scarpelli.

[Marks]: Councilman.

[Marks]: I just want to clarify that the gentleman said regarding what representation and how we elect the city council.

[Marks]: There's also an elected board called the school committee, and they are elected the same way as well.

[Marks]: So I think when we talk about charter review, we have to be careful not to just isolate certain groups, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: You are correct, Councilman.

[Marks]: Matt, please continue.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President, and the letter we received from the Community Development Board with their recommendation, I thought was already part of our brewery ordinance when we talked about the serving of food

[Marks]: And the ability to produce on site or bring in food from off site.

[Marks]: And also have food trucks on private property.

[Marks]: I thought that was language we had.

[Marks]: If it's not in there for some reason, I know this went back and forth with attorneys and

[Marks]: Back and forth with the council, I strongly support adding the language that was recommended by the Community Development Board after the definition of brewery that states the facility may also provide food that is produced on site, produced off site, or produced with food trucks that are located on site.

[Marks]: So I would ask that that be part of the ordinance, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Second.

[Marks]: Point of information, Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: So we do have an established look at commission, and I would think they would be the appropriate body to- Right, right, right, to be the enforcement authority.

[Marks]: But I agree, and we have a fishing industry, and you can only catch a certain number of fish.

[Marks]: We don't have state or federal officials on the boats.

[Marks]: They have a quota that they're allowed to get, and it's on an honor system, and they keep track of it and so forth.

[Marks]: And I would see this as no difference.

[Marks]: If there is a limitation on what can be produced or the size or whatever it is, that would be the case in this as well, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Include the language from the CD board as recommended.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I'd be remiss if I did not thank the subcommittee for their work on this ordinance.

[Marks]: This was countless meetings over a long period of time, and a lot of time and effort.

[Marks]: went into this ordinance.

[Marks]: I realize that many other communities have come out with their ordinance.

[Marks]: But let me tell you, this was crafted in a way that I feel comfortable and residents of this community should feel comfortable that there are many safeguards in place.

[Marks]: in this ordinance, Mr. President, that protects neighborhoods, protects residents of this community.

[Marks]: It was a thoughtful ordinance that was put together, and I want to thank Chairman Knight and Councilor Scarpelli and Councilor Caraviello for their countless hours on putting this together, Mr. President.

[Marks]: This doesn't happen by chance.

[Marks]: This happens by work, and I appreciate my colleagues' work on this.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I want to thank my council colleague for bringing this up.

[Marks]: I just want to make sure we have the correct terminology because I'm not sure if that system tracks items that are resolved.

[Marks]: It may or may not, I think it will state whether they're closed or not, which doesn't necessarily reflect whether they're resolved or not.

[Marks]: So maybe Jackie can expound on that, but I want to make sure if we're comparing apples to apples that, because I think it is a vital tool, as Councilor Knight mentioned, that this C-Click fix should be used during a budgetary process.

[Marks]: So we can see the number one request and see what's happening in the community and use that as a budget tool.

[Marks]: So I agree with that.

[Marks]: I just want to make sure we're able to extract what we're looking for.

[Marks]: So maybe it would be helpful to find out what the terminology is.

[Marks]: Thoughts on the marks?

[Marks]: So just to follow up, Jackie, what are the reported items that you can currently draw from now?

[Marks]: So just if I could, I don't want to belabor the point, but maybe if I pose it a different way.

[Marks]: Currently right now, are you able to see within C-Click Fix, as Councilor Knight mentioned in his report, are you able to see if things are resolved?

[Marks]: Or if they're just closed out?

[Marks]: Maybe if we can get an update from the city administration, I thought they did hire an assistant city treasurer.

[Marks]: I thought that position was filled.

[Marks]: But if we can get an update on that, there's been some transition in the building.

[Marks]: And to be quite frank, we haven't received any correspondence on things that are going on within the building.

[Marks]: There's been people that have left positions and we haven't received any formal communication.

[Marks]: We can ask, Jackie should know that, but I thought they did bring on an assistant treasurer collector.

[Marks]: What about regarding the assistant treasurer-collector?

[Marks]: Has that position been filled?

[Marks]: Mr. President, if I could?

[Marks]: Yes, Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: That particular office, in my opinion, is in good hands.

[Marks]: We have an acting treasurer-collector who was the former treasurer-collector for many, many years in this community and ran that office with the utmost respect and confidence and accounting methods.

[Marks]: And I'm not sure what

[Marks]: The need is to have a city auditor audit the treasurer collector's office, unless there's an issue of concern, because there is a yearly audit that does take place.

[Marks]: And maybe we should be asking what the results were of the previous audit.

[Marks]: But I'm not sure what this would, we have a great staff down there.

[Marks]: They work very hard, and I'm not quite sure what this would accomplish, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I will not be supporting this tonight.

[Marks]: Thank you, Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: So it's my understanding the independent audit that we hired, independent outside audit, comes in and audits City Hall yearly, so once a year.

[Marks]: So that would be an independent audit.

[Marks]: The auditor from the city does a monthly audit.

[Marks]: So I just want to make sure whatever we're requesting is what we want.

[Marks]: Do we want the independent audit that's done on a yearly basis, three years worth of that?

[Marks]: Or do we want to look at three years worth of a monthly audit that's done internally?

[Marks]: So I just want to make sure we're on the same page.

[Marks]: From the independent audit?

[Marks]: The independent audit, not the internal audit, yeah.

[Marks]: Your microphone is now on.

[Marks]: And we all received an email, I think it was about a week, week and a half ago, from a resident that was very concerned about his automobile excise tax.

[Marks]: And he stated at the time that he usually gets a bill in the mail for his auto excise tax.

[Marks]: This year he did not get the bill in the mail for his excise tax and therefore forgot to pay it and he got a surcharge.

[Marks]: In addition to that surcharge, his wife, who the city goes into her account and automatically withdraws the excise, didn't go in.

[Marks]: Supposedly, according to this resident, didn't go in and withdraw the amount for the excise tax from her account and it went in.

[Marks]: they again charged a surcharge that wasn't her fault because the city was supposed to go in and remove the amount.

[Marks]: I think I'm explaining the email correctly.

[Marks]: So I think some of that issue, Mr. President, I'm hoping maybe we can resolve by asking maybe the acting treasurer collector regarding that particular incident.

[Marks]: And if that's, because the email we got made it sound like it was a systemic problem throughout the community.

[Marks]: And this was happening to lots of people throughout the community, and not an isolated incident.

[Marks]: So I think that's important.

[Marks]: Maybe as part of this paper, if Councilor Knight doesn't mind, we can ask that question directly to the Treasurer-Collector's Office.

[Marks]: Okay, so that's an amendment from Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: That the treasurer collect a report back to the Medford City Council regarding a concern of excise tax in the community.

[Marks]: Okay.

[Marks]: And then I can elaborate more on, that's the general gist.

[Marks]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Thank you, and I want to thank my colleagues, Councilor Caraviello and Councilor Knight, for putting this on.

[Marks]: You couldn't ask for a better person.

[Marks]: I grew up with Rich Razzo in West Medford.

[Marks]: We were very close friends for a lot of years.

[Marks]: And he is a great business owner, a great family man, a great son, and just a good friend, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And he runs his business the same way.

[Marks]: It's like going to Cheers when you go into Razzles.

[Marks]: You know everyone, he employs a lot of local kids from this community.

[Marks]: He assists, as my council colleagues mentioned, on a number of activities that go on.

[Marks]: He's the first to donate.

[Marks]: If you ever look at donation list, Razzles is always on there giving of not only his food and his expertise, but his time as well, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I wish him well, and as Councilor Scarpelli mentioned, I wish him another 15 years, at the very least.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I want to thank Councilor Knight and Councilor Caraviello for putting this on tonight.

[Marks]: Teresa was a true Methodite.

[Marks]: As was mentioned, John was a staple and a household name, her husband for many years in this community.

[Marks]: And she was always the foundation of that relationship.

[Marks]: And I just want to thank her for her many years of committed service to this community.

[Marks]: She was a terrific mother, wife, grandmother, and she will be sorely missed.

[Marks]: And if my colleague wouldn't mind, I think it's only appropriate that we dedicate this meeting in Teresa Galoni's name.

[Marks]: Mr. President, this was an issue that the council spoke about several weeks back regarding the need for additional assistance within the registrar voters office.

[Marks]: I have yet to see a response.

[Marks]: that addresses the council concern, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And this is not just the council concern, this is concern of many, many residents, if not thousands of residents, Mr. President, that just went through a primary election and some of the concerns that were associated with a new COVID type system.

[Marks]: with mail-in ballots and so forth of the likes that we've never seen in this community before.

[Marks]: The reason why I bring this up, Mr. President, is that we have an election, a very important election coming up in November.

[Marks]: We have a presidential election coming up.

[Marks]: And it's vital as a community that we have the resources to handle the election, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Interesting fact that I just found out, since 2010, in this community, the number of voters went up by 55% compared to 2010.

[Marks]: I've been telling people over the last several years, when they ask me how many voters we have in the community, I was rattling out a figure that I recall it was about 35,000 registered voters.

[Marks]: Unbeknownst, Mr. President, we're up over 40,000 registered voters.

[Marks]: So I was about 5,000 voters off from the last figure I had, Mr. President.

[Marks]: This is only to show that the number of voters in this community has increased.

[Marks]: The capacity in that office has not increased over the years, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And it's about time that we hire someone to assist the city clerk who wears many hats in his role.

[Marks]: And it's about time that we hire an election coordinator, someone that can go into the office, Mr. President, and run the registrar of voters office.

[Marks]: Now election coordinator would not be just a figurehead.

[Marks]: An election coordinator would address personnel needs, address issues of concern at all the polling locations, especially in a time of COVID.

[Marks]: We're talking about increased safety for polling workers.

[Marks]: We're talking about plexiglass.

[Marks]: We're talking about masks.

[Marks]: We're talking about sanitizing after someone goes into a polling booth.

[Marks]: There's a lot more responsibility and things associated in this new COVID era that we're experiencing right now.

[Marks]: The election coordinator would also be involved with the training of wardens, clerks, and inspectors for the elections.

[Marks]: The election coordinator would be responsible for the maintaining and date working knowledge of

[Marks]: election law as set forth by the Secretary of State's office.

[Marks]: They would oversee the distribution of the absentee and no excuse mail-in ballots.

[Marks]: They would follow and maintain all mandated deadlines, create all tally sheets for the clerk's folio, audit the folio at the close of the polls, ensure calculations are correct.

[Marks]: Set up and maintain all tasks, including staff, instruction, training, poll pads, working with DPW for the setup of the polls.

[Marks]: Process on a daily basis all ballots cast during early voting through the VRIS state system.

[Marks]: Organize early tabulation and central tabulation.

[Marks]: Create spreadsheets and certification tabulation of elections.

[Marks]: You could see the importance, Mr. President, of having someone that would oversee this process.

[Marks]: And I think asking the city clerk, who already has a full plate, just from being city clerk and dealing with the council, to then also say, you're also in charge every year.

[Marks]: This is not every couple of years, every other year.

[Marks]: Every year to run a major election in a city of our size, Mr. President, I think is asking for too much.

[Marks]: Most surrounding communities have an election coordinator, they have someone that's in charge of the election process, and it is not the city clerk.

[Marks]: It is an additional role.

[Marks]: And I would ask Mr. President, in the interest of maintaining what I would say is fair elections in this community, maintaining a system that I think we all feel comfortable knowing that our system is a good system in the city of Medford.

[Marks]: Does it need improvements?

[Marks]: Absolutely.

[Marks]: Does it require additional staff like a coordinator?

[Marks]: Definitely.

[Marks]: And we want to maintain the integrity of what we have, Mr. President, in our community.

[Marks]: And I think that will go a long way to ensuring residents that in this new day and age, with probably the expansion of moving forward with voting, early voting, and voting by mail and so forth, it's only going to expand.

[Marks]: that we really need to make sure we have a state-of-the-art register of voters office.

[Marks]: We have great workers in there.

[Marks]: We have great women that have been in there for a number of years.

[Marks]: They do terrific work.

[Marks]: But I think it's time, Mr. President, that we connect everything together now and really go into the 21st century and provide the tools that we need for that office.

[Marks]: So again, I ask that the administration, Mr. President, because this was sent to the mayor,

[Marks]: The administration reflect upon this and the integrity of our elections.

[Marks]: And we have previous experience from the primary of what can potentially go wrong in an election.

[Marks]: And the fact that we need this assistance.

[Marks]: This is not City Councilor Michael Mark saying it.

[Marks]: This is residents throughout the community.

[Marks]: This is the city clerk himself.

[Marks]: And I think it's about time that we get a commitment from this administration.

[Marks]: Mr. President, to put this position in the budget.

[Marks]: Whatever it takes to fund it, let's do it, let's move forward, and let's make sure we maintain the integrity of our electoral process in the city of Medford.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Thank you, Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Vice President Caraviello.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And even though it's late at night, I have the energy to be angry about this.

[Marks]: Let me tell you.

[Marks]: It was great on September 10th, Mr. President, when I put on the local news and I saw the governor, the lieutenant governor, Secretary of Transportation Pollack, all in Bistro 5 in West Method.

[Marks]: The governor was there to talk about his daily or weekly COVID report.

[Marks]: And then they also found time, Mr. President, to discuss the outdoor dining, which I support 1,000%.

[Marks]: And also as part of this, Mr. President, Secretary Pollack

[Marks]: mentioned about several projects that are going on in the community.

[Marks]: One being complete streets, how we've received money.

[Marks]: And I am thankful for the money, I'm thankful for the projects that have taken place.

[Marks]: The other is the recent money we received from MassDOT regarding the shared streets and spaces grants.

[Marks]: And that is partly the reason why they were there to show how we're able now to do some outdoor dining and take some of the money to do heating ramps and cement barriers and anything else that would assist local entrepreneurs in the community to have additional seating during this COVID, which I support a thousand percent, Mr. President.

[Marks]: The one issue I do have, Mr. President,

[Marks]: The one issue I think everyone behind this real should have.

[Marks]: And if we had a real media in this community, there was a lot of media there, Mr. President, but they weren't locals.

[Marks]: The questions asked weren't locals.

[Marks]: If they invited the rest of us, and if the rest of us were able to get into that,

[Marks]: meeting as my colleague experienced for himself that attended and wasn't one of the lucky people to be able to attend the meeting and maybe ask a question or partake in the conference that was happening.

[Marks]: But Mr. President, what has this council and the residents of this community have talked about and requested from MassDOT, Secretary of Transportation Pollack, for the last 20 years?

[Marks]: Although she hasn't been the secretary for that long, but she's been there for several years under this current administration.

[Marks]: One of the top three most dangerous intersections in this community.

[Marks]: The corner of South Street and Main Street.

[Marks]: It's been a bone of contention since I've been on this council.

[Marks]: And here we have the Secretary of Transportation coming in and touting complete streets and mass DOT shared streets, which are great programs, Mr. President.

[Marks]: But no mention of a major issue, we've sent countless resolutions from this council to DOT.

[Marks]: We've sent it to the mayor, we've sent it to our state delegation.

[Marks]: Councilor Scapelli has had countless meetings on this, requesting that signalization be placed at that intersection.

[Marks]: That some low lying fruit be done, signage, painting of crosswalks.

[Marks]: winding of curbs and sidewalks, traffic calming initiatives.

[Marks]: And to have the audacity, Mr. President, or maybe this doesn't make it to the secretary's desk when we request things as a city council on behalf of 60,000 people, Mr. President.

[Marks]: But I would think an issue of that importance should have been part of the discussion, whether it was during the press conference,

[Marks]: before the press conference, on the sidewalk, after the press conference.

[Marks]: But at some point, Mr. President, I would hope that this discussion around a two-decade-old public safety concern in this community needed to be addressed.

[Marks]: And I can guarantee you it wasn't mentioned.

[Marks]: It didn't make the list, Mr. President.

[Marks]: They were just here to tell what they want to tell.

[Marks]: And not address the issues that we're talking about as a community.

[Marks]: And South Street's just one, but it's a major one, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So as far as I'm concerned,

[Marks]: Next time we invite Secretary of Transportation Paul to the city of Medford, she should come bearing several million dollars to do the signalization we need from Salem Street to Potter High Street to Main Street.

[Marks]: To finish off that corridor.

[Marks]: That is not, that part of South and Main is not city property.

[Marks]: If it was, I'd be barking at the administration, I'd be barking at our traffic commission.

[Marks]: We're building a brand new police station across the street.

[Marks]: And you have to risk your life to get there.

[Marks]: It really is a disgrace, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And it bothered me to see Secretary Pollack sit back and take kudos for some other projects that are warranted, and I support Mr. President, but to not address the 1,000 pound gorilla in the room.

[Marks]: And if she wasn't advised of the letters we've been sending over the past 20 years, shame on her staff.

[Marks]: And shame on who's in charge there.

[Marks]: I'd like to send a letter, Mr. President, from this council, and I hope the council will support it, to Secretary Pollack, thanking her for coming to the city of Medford on September 10th.

[Marks]: And thanking her for her work on complete streets and the shared streets and spaces grant program.

[Marks]: However, Mr. President, I want to know what's happening at the corner of South and Main Street.

[Marks]: And I want to know why we haven't received a thorough response from the Department of Transportation that addresses the public safety concerns of this community.

[Marks]: You know how many accidents have been there.

[Marks]: I brought this up about six, seven, eight weeks ago.

[Marks]: I got the statistics from the chief of police.

[Marks]: And when I say in the top three accident related and most dangerous intersections, I didn't create that.

[Marks]: That was from his data that he presented to me.

[Marks]: That was directly from his data.

[Marks]: So this is not a pie in the sky or a wish list.

[Marks]: This is a public safety concern, and we've all addressed it.

[Marks]: We've all addressed it a million times, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I respectfully request that the city clerk draft a letter on behalf of the Medford City Council.

[Marks]: requesting that Secretary Pollack address, once again, the request of this council about what are they going to do regarding the intersection, the state road, the intersection of South and Main Street, in the interest of public safety.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I was approached by a number of residents in the city of Medford that had concern regarding state regulated and licensed halfway homes within our community.

[Marks]: I did a little additional research and some past history I have working

[Marks]: with residents regarding a previous halfway house that existed in the Wellington area.

[Marks]: I found some information that I think people would be surprised about when the state regulates and licenses halfway homes within the state.

[Marks]: There is zero notification to cities and towns, Mr. President.

[Marks]: There are zero regulations on our books regarding halfway homes within our community.

[Marks]: There are zero zoning ordinances regarding halfway houses in our community.

[Marks]: And I put this forward, Mr. President, as chapter 111B of the Mass General Law section 6A that the Board of Health regulates halfway homes within the state.

[Marks]: And I put it on that we have a round table discussion with Chief Buckley, with our state delegation, our building commissioner, our city solicitor, to make sure, Mr. President, that we have rules and regulations within our community, Mr. President, that safeguard our residents.

[Marks]: And there was an unfortunate incident that took place a few weeks back.

[Marks]: Thank God a resident came out of it.

[Marks]: All right, Mr. President, but it could have went very different, very, very different.

[Marks]: And there was some concern regarding this particular incident and that this particular issue of halfway homes within our community needs to be reviewed.

[Marks]: I'm not saying we have to eliminate, which I don't believe we can, Mr. President.

[Marks]: But I believe, as Councilman Knight mentioned, knowledge is power.

[Marks]: And I think that we should have the knowledge when a halfway home is licensed in our community.

[Marks]: And that at the very least, we should be on notice, Mr. President, on how we should protect residents that may be living within proximity of these particular homes, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I offer that in a resolution.

[Marks]: I would ask, I know you have a million things as committee of the whole, Mr. President, but I would ask at some point we create a committee of the whole meeting to address this very important issue on behalf of the residents of this community.

[Marks]: Thank you, Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Point of information, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Uh, I didn't hear anyone say about keeping anyone out of this community.

[Marks]: So, you know, if we're going to state things, Mr. President, we should accurately reflect what was stated and no one once said to keep anyone out of this community.

[Marks]: Says who?

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Mr. President?

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: You know, we are in the process, as many residents know, we hired an attorney to help us with our review of our zoning ordinances that haven't been reviewed in over 30 years.

[Marks]: I think many people in this community realize that there are many changes that need to happen, many updates.

[Marks]: And I would agree with some of the previous speakers that we really do need to look at a comprehensive amendment.

[Marks]: And I appreciate the fact that the mayor is trying to

[Marks]: put forward what she believes is in the best interest of the community.

[Marks]: However, I'd like to look at a total picture when I arrive at a decision, and I don't believe this arrives at that.

[Marks]: There is an issue, Mr. President, I've raised on many times.

[Marks]: before the council and regarding zoning is the fact that we're seeing many buildings pop up that have very little community feel and community impact other than providing additional housing.

[Marks]: And I've always stated, Mr. President, that we have to make sure that we're not just creating big blocks

[Marks]: residential places that really have no community feel.

[Marks]: So whatever I do as a member of the council, I'm going to be cognizant of the fact that I will be mindful of adding a component, like we mentioned about mixed use and so forth, and whatever votes I take, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: I would also ask that KP Law be invited for advice as well as the acting city solicitor.

[Marks]: Absolutely.

[Marks]: They've both been instrumental in- Councilor Marks, is that an amendment?

[Marks]: If you want that in the form of amendment, that's fine.

[Marks]: I'll use it as an amendment.

[Marks]: Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I would ask that the city of Medford and Tufts University put together a list of contacts for area residents, a clerk of the work that would be responsible for the project, and any questions that residents may have.

[Marks]: A list of project contact names and numbers, as well as the city of Medford to have a clerk of the works that is responsible for the project.

[Marks]: And I know Mr. DeRico said he has a list of abutters and so forth.

[Marks]: I'm sure he can disseminate some information that way and the city can also add it to its city website and local community access as well.

[Marks]: So residents know that they have a place and a person to talk to if need be.

[Marks]: Mr. President?

[Marks]: Councilor Marks?

[Marks]: Mr. President, as many residents are aware, we're undergoing a major infrastructure project going on right now with Eversource that's coming down Winthrop Street.

[Marks]: And there's going to be much disruption to the area, as well as South Street and Mystic Ave.

[Marks]: And I did have a couple of questions.

[Marks]: using the existing trenches that will be dug by Eversource?

[Marks]: Or will they be creating their own trenches?

[Marks]: They also mentioned underground laterals and cables and wires.

[Marks]: Is that going to be part of the extensive digging and trenching that Eversource is going to do for their electrical transmission?

[Marks]: So I have a number of questions, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I'm not sure if, you know, we don't meet until the end of August.

[Marks]: So I'm not sure if time is of the essence.

[Marks]: I don't know if we have our city engineer on tonight as well.

[Marks]: I thought I may have seen his name.

[Marks]: Mr. Clark, do you know if he's on?

[Marks]: Why don't we just move it to the end of the meeting?

[Marks]: And then if they don't show up, Mr. President, I would agree with Councilor Knight.

[Marks]: Because there's already a major project going on there, and I'm not sure the extent of this project.

[Marks]: We don't know the hours of operation.

[Marks]: We don't know if they're going to be working in conjunction with National Grid and Eversource.

[Marks]: I really don't know anything about the project.

[Marks]: So that's what I would ask, that we move this to the end of the agenda calendar.

[Marks]: Okay.

[Marks]: Second, Vice President.

[Marks]: Mr. President, I would move that we suspend the reading of the remaining

[Marks]: remainder in that this be placed and tabled with is not a representative from National Grid, that it be placed at the end of the agenda as well.

[Marks]: Okay, on the motion of Council... Was there another comment?

[Marks]: Mr. President.

[Marks]: I would ask that if the council is all right with that, that we amended to allow for any correspondence from Tufts University to be passed off to us as well.

[Marks]: A B paper is fine, Mr. President.

[Marks]: That's accurate.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Thank you, Vice President Caraviello.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I want to thank Councilor Knight for putting this on the agenda.

[Marks]: You couldn't meet a kinder, gentler woman.

[Marks]: She was truly what represented this community in everything she did, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And she was a loving wife.

[Marks]: mother, grandmother, sister, and just a truly great woman, as was mentioned by my colleagues, that raised a tremendous family that still continues to give back to this community, and she will be sorely missed.

[Marks]: If I could, Mr. President, I'd like to have this meeting named in her honor, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Mr. President?

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: I motion that we waive the remainder of the reading and have the petition to give us a brief synopsis of the work that will take place.

[Marks]: Mr. President?

[Marks]: Councilor Marks?

[Marks]: Will there be any disruption to the flow of traffic in roughly how long will this project take?

[Marks]: And when will most of the work be done?

[Marks]: During the day or at night?

[Marks]: I will leave that call, Mr. President, up to the city engineer and the city administration.

[Marks]: Thank you, Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I believe there may be one or two residents from the area on with us tonight that would also want to speak.

[Marks]: So I just want to let that be known.

[Marks]: I received a number of phone calls and emails, Mr. President, from area residents in the Washington Street, Spring Street, Bradshaw Street area regarding speeding traffic.

[Marks]: This is not common to this particular area.

[Marks]: We receive calls constantly throughout the community.

[Marks]: And one issue that I've brought up over many years was instituting traffic calming initiatives like they do in many other communities.

[Marks]: I've been on the city of Cambridge website, the city of Somerville, and we don't have to recreate the wheel, many of the initiatives

[Marks]: are out there and things that we can take advantage of.

[Marks]: One, Mr. President, that I believe our city has fallen short on the mark is the raised crosswalks that I've mentioned for the last at least 10 years.

[Marks]: Back several years ago, Mayor McGlynn offered to do a pilot program

[Marks]: with three raised crosswalks.

[Marks]: And to date, we have only implemented one of the three that was studied and approved.

[Marks]: And that is on Winthrop Street.

[Marks]: I would ask Mr. President in the interest of public safety,

[Marks]: in the interest of taking our roads back from speeding traffic, that this particular area of Washington, Bradshaw, Spring Street, receive a traffic study, a formal traffic study on speeding cars, as well as the need for additional signage, Mr. President, in the area.

[Marks]: And the day after, I believe it was, that I received one of the emails, I got a follow-up email from the same gentleman that said he witnessed a young boy get hit in the street by a car, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I don't think it was very serious, but it was enough, Mr. President, to alarm

[Marks]: residents of what is taking place in their neighborhood.

[Marks]: So I would ask Mr. President, in the interest of public safety, that our Traffic Commission quickly move forward on the

[Marks]: creation of a traffic study in this area, the implementation of traffic calming initiatives, whether it's widening sidewalks, whether it's putting road markings, whether it's a raised crosswalk, blinking lights, whatever it might be, Mr. President, to increase safety in the area, I think would go a long way.

[Marks]: We've, as a council, have mentioned this ad nauseum regarding many other streets in the community.

[Marks]: And I really believe, and this is no reflection on any current administration, but we really do a poor job when it comes to controlling the speed within our community.

[Marks]: And when people don't feel safe taking their dog for a walk or taking their child for a walk or going for a jog, you know there's a concern in the community.

[Marks]: And many of our secondary roads are becoming cut-through roads with all the Waze applications and other applications people are using, and drivers are finding any which way to get through our neighborhoods.

[Marks]: And that's creating much of the chaos we're hearing about on our streets.

[Marks]: So I would put that in the form of a motion, Mr. President, that that be sent to the Traffic Commission, and they look at additional signage on those streets.

[Marks]: and the commission of a traffic study for implementation of some traffic calming initiatives.

[Marks]: And I believe we have Ed Serino from the area and maybe Tony Mosca, I believe also may be on the Zoom meeting tonight.

[Marks]: Correct.

[Marks]: And any other traffic calming initiatives that the city can think of?

[Marks]: I agree with the previous speaker, and I would ask that Todd Blake, our traffic engineer, look at a citywide approach.

[Marks]: This council has been requesting that for many years, and we tend to take things up piecemeal, like we did on Salt Street and many other streets, because there hasn't been a formalized approach to look at the entire city.

[Marks]: So I am in full support of looking at the entire city, but as I get calls and emails

[Marks]: I react to those calls, Mr. President, and I would ask that Todd Blake be as part of my motion that he look at a citywide approach to traffic calming issues as was mentioned by the previous speaker.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: If we could, Mr. President, thank you.

[Marks]: I've got it, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Commissioner Mulkey, for being on tonight.

[Marks]: When you mentioned some projects,

[Marks]: that the historic commission wanted to see come before them.

[Marks]: Does that include porches?

[Marks]: OK.

[Marks]: And would that also include vinyl siding?

[Marks]: And prior to the meeting that you held with the city administration,

[Marks]: What items were you actually sending?

[Marks]: Was it just demolition to the historic commission or was it these generalized construction like replacement windows and porches and roof lines and everything else that's involved?

[Marks]: And you're saying the language that states demolition delay or parts thereof, the or parts thereof is the issue that they're hanging their hat on saying, well, this involves more than the demolition of a building.

[Marks]: It absolutely is a vague term.

[Marks]: And I would ask, Mr. President, if we could, when the Commissioner Mochi does arrive at whatever the standards are going to be that he shared with the council,

[Marks]: Because I, as one member of the council, never envisioned to have residents that may want to, under this demolition delay, may want to do some work on their property and have them run into a financial cost or say, you know what, it's not worth doing this additional work because I don't feel like waiting or going through another process.

[Marks]: So I, as one member of the council, am extremely interested in seeing what you come up with, Commissioner Mulkey.

[Marks]: And if that's the case, I would move forward on redrafting our ordinance to exclude that language of all parts thereof to make sure that we're not putting an undue burden.

[Marks]: I think we all want to save historic property.

[Marks]: But I'd venture to say 70 or 80% of our homes are greater than 75 years old.

[Marks]: And I don't see how logistically, we already have an overburdened historic commission, an overburdened building commission department.

[Marks]: And to create another layer that may discourage residents from doing work on their personal property, and then maybe an additional expense is not something that I signed up for.

[Marks]: And I'll make sure that that doesn't come to fruition.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Just if I could quickly, I know a lot of people want to speak.

[Marks]: Absolutely.

[Marks]: If I'm not mistaken, Council Vice President Caraviello said to meet with the historic commission.

[Marks]: I have no problem doing that, but it's my understanding this was a directive from the administration.

[Marks]: And I think the best person to have in the room would probably be the city administration as well.

[Marks]: Agreed.

[Marks]: We're going to get to the bottom of this, Mr. President.

[Marks]: We'll have all the so-called players in the room.

[Marks]: Sounds good.

[Marks]: Whoever the city administration would like to send.

[Marks]: Mr. President?

[Marks]: Councilor Marks?

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I, too, have a statement tonight that I'd like to read.

[Marks]: I first heard the phrase Black Lives Matter back in 2012, when Trayvon Martin was shot to death.

[Marks]: After that, Michael Brown, a young African-American, was shot by a police officer in Ferguson, Missouri.

[Marks]: Then another African-American, Eric Gander, died after being put in a chokehold by the New York City police officer.

[Marks]: These incidences and many others leading up to George Floyd's murder this year have led me to understand how the seeds of slavery, discrimination, and prejudice continue to threaten the ability of black Americans and others to equally enjoy the freedoms that we profess as a country.

[Marks]: So I am proud to join with so many others and state that black lives matter.

[Marks]: I do so with the desire that in making this statement, it will facilitate the clear acknowledgement of the destructive effect that discrimination and prejudice has had and continues to have in our country.

[Marks]: And my hope will encourage all Americans to work to erase inequality.

[Marks]: But as we consider this resolution, I have an important question for the mayor about hanging banners on public buildings such as City Hall.

[Marks]: My question is directed at the mayor because she has full authority over this building.

[Marks]: My question is this, what standards or procedures does the mayor use in deciding what signs or messages will be placed on City Hall?

[Marks]: The reason that I ask this question is because the right to use a government building to display a message is not unlimited.

[Marks]: This is especially true if the building is a public forum like City Hall.

[Marks]: If the mayor is going to allow City Hall to be used to display various messages, then the First Amendment requires that the city not discriminate among various messages or points of view.

[Marks]: Any standard applied by the city must be content neutral.

[Marks]: An example would be if a pro-life group wanted to hang a banner on City Hall.

[Marks]: The city could not prohibit that, and nor could it prohibit a pro-choice group from also having its banner placed.

[Marks]: So you can see that we should receive from the mayor a description of what the standards she applies in hanging banners.

[Marks]: Otherwise, we could be at risk of turning City Hall building into a billboard battle zone of conflicting and possibly polarizing messages.

[Marks]: In Method, we have experienced the impact that banners and signs have on our rights.

[Marks]: It was just two years ago when this council voted to stop using the VFW building on Mystic Ave as a voting location because some voters stated they were less inclined to vote because of a sign displayed on the building.

[Marks]: I mention this because City Hall itself is used as a voting location.

[Marks]: So before we vote on a resolution, I am simply asking my council colleagues that we request that the mayor give us a full description of the standards or procedures she uses in determining what banners or signs will be allowed to be placed on City Hall.

[Marks]: Having the mayor respond is a prudent and reasonable step to take when First Amendment and other rights are involved.

[Marks]: So at this point, Mr. President, I would offer a motion to receive and place on file the original resolution of paper 20-497.

[Marks]: And I offer a motion requesting that the mayor provide the council with the full description of the standards or procedures the mayor uses in determining what banners or signs will be allowed to be placed on City Hall.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Thank you, Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Not at all.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: So it would be a motion requesting that the mayor

[Marks]: provide the council with a full description of the standards or procedures the mayor uses in determining what banners or signs will be allowed to be placed on city hall.

[Marks]: So the first motion was to receive and place on file the original resolution, which is paper 20-497.

[Marks]: And then the motion was what I just offered, Mr. Clerk.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: I appreciate Councilor Bears bringing that up.

[Marks]: I just want to draw the light, Mr. President.

[Marks]: There was a recent court case just entered in the U.S.

[Marks]: District Court on July 1st, 2020.

[Marks]: And it's the case of Judicial Watch versus the mayor of D.C.

[Marks]: And on June 5th of this year, Mr. President, artists, demonstrators, residents, and employees of D.C.

[Marks]: painted Black Lives Matter on 16th Street in Washington, D.C.

[Marks]: The next day, June 6th, protesters painted Defund the Police next to Black Lives Matter.

[Marks]: The mayor of DC, Muriel Bowser, supported the painting on the street, but there was no permit or approval process.

[Marks]: Judicial Watch then wrote to Mayor Bowser and asked that their model, because no one is above the law, be painted on another street of the similar size.

[Marks]: In its letter to the mayor, Judicial Watch said it has tried to find procedures for getting approval for painting a message on a street near its offices, but could not find any procedures or permit process.

[Marks]: The deputy mayor then wrote back to Judicial Watch and said that it should apply for a permit.

[Marks]: Judicial Watch then checked out the District of Columbia's website, but could not find a permit process to paint on a street.

[Marks]: And when it contacted the Public Works Department, it was told, we never heard of that permit.

[Marks]: Judicial Watch then entered the lawsuit alleging a violation of its First Amendment rights.

[Marks]: The basis for its claim is the mayor favors one message over another, and that the city does not have any standards or procedures in place.

[Marks]: So I just want to make it be known, Mr. President, I think it's prudent that this council move forward to find out what are the standards and what are the procedures, Mr. President, because clearly anything could be challenged.

[Marks]: And clearly that if we do open up messaging on City Hall, it will open up other First Amendment rights and other concerns.

[Marks]: And I think it's only prudent that we move forward as a community

[Marks]: and make sure that if the mayor decides, and I agree with Councilor Knight, this is totally under the mayor's purview.

[Marks]: This has nothing to do with the council.

[Marks]: And if Councilor Bears wanted to move this forward, for the past six months, he could have approached the mayor at any given time and had that discussion with the mayor.

[Marks]: He opted to come before a body that has no input, and that's his prerogative.

[Marks]: But unless he already approached the mayor, and the mayor denied him of the sign, which I'm not sure.

[Marks]: But clearly, the city administration has control, as well as the building commissioner of the buildings, and it's not the city council.

[Marks]: But I'm willing, Mr. President, to find out what the rules and regulations are and move that forward.

[Marks]: Mr. President, I did have a resident reach out to me that is employed with the City of Boston.

[Marks]: And they did mention to me that when the City of Boston has a policy in place, that when they put banners up, it's usually a message from the mayor.

[Marks]: And that's how they've been able to work it.

[Marks]: So they put out a message from mayor, whatever it is, and then the message.

[Marks]: And that may be something that could be in a policy.

[Marks]: I don't think anyone's saying no.

[Marks]: I think what we're saying is we'd like to see what the policy is.

[Marks]: And I would disagree with my council colleague if he doesn't think a permit or policy should be in place.

[Marks]: City Hall is one building.

[Marks]: Are we going to do it on the school buildings?

[Marks]: Are we going to do it on the police building?

[Marks]: Are we going to do it in our fire stations, our library?

[Marks]: I mean, we can go through the list of buildings in the city.

[Marks]: So I think it is only prudent to be careful as we move forward, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Councilor Bears?

[Marks]: I don't know anyone that said that this is controversial, Mr. President.

[Marks]: We're asking that we find out what the policies and procedures as an elected body, Mr. President, it's up to us to do our homework and our due diligence.

[Marks]: And before we just vote on something to vote on it, we should find out what the policies and procedures are.

[Marks]: That's how elected officials act in their course of duty.

[Marks]: So no one is dismissing anything and no one is saying there's no value or merit to this.

[Marks]: We're saying we have to do our due diligence.

[Marks]: Mr. President.

[Marks]: Mr. President.

[Marks]: Councilor Morell.

[Marks]: If I'm not mistaken, my emotion, Mr. President was offered first and it was seconded first.

[Marks]: So I'm not sure why you would take up that first, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I would challenge the ruling of the chair.

[Marks]: The first first person to speak might have been the first person to speak.

[Marks]: I don't remember emotion.

[Marks]: If I could just clarify the first motion, Mr. Clerk also mentioned

[Marks]: paper 20-497, which was Councilor Bears' original resolution.

[Marks]: So move to place 2497 on file?

[Marks]: Right.

[Marks]: Motion to receive and place on file the original resolution of paper 20-497.

[Marks]: I prefer we go what we have, Mr. President.

[Marks]: That's what was seconded, and that's what I prefer we go with.

[Marks]: This is on the first one.

[Marks]: Hang on a second.

[Marks]: There's two separate motions.

[Marks]: This is the first motion to receive the paper in place on file.

[Marks]: And the second motion is the request to the mayor.

[Marks]: No, we still have the second part of this vote.

[Marks]: It is a part two minutes.

[Marks]: Mr. President?

[Marks]: Council Marks?

[Marks]: I disagree with my colleague, Councilor Knight.

[Marks]: I believe that this is an appropriate time.

[Marks]: The paper is currently before the council, and if we want to get it properly vetted through the Community Development Board, which would be a public hearing through the Community Development Board, I think this would be an ideal time, actually, to get this particular language vetted.

[Marks]: And then it has to come back to us, and we can have our legal counsel, Kim Scanlon and KP Law,

[Marks]: take a look at the language to make sure it's appropriate.

[Marks]: I'm under the impression that the city of Boston has a similar language, if not exact language, that mirrors this.

[Marks]: And I believe it spells out a concern that we have for clarification that a brew pub would be listed as a restaurant, and that's based on the sale of 25% or more of its beer on site.

[Marks]: And I think that's a great distinction and something that's needed in our community.

[Marks]: And so I would support moving this forward tonight.

[Marks]: Point of information, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Point of information, Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: I thought what was mentioned at the outset that we have to go through this process all over again anyways, because we didn't make the time constraints that were imposed on this council.

[Marks]: So this is nothing more than adding a definition to the current brewing ordinance that we have that's going to probably be vetted once again.

[Marks]: And if anything, Mr. President, this is merely stating that

[Marks]: Food will be 75% of what's sold in the establishment, which would make it a restaurant.

[Marks]: And only 25% can be of a brewing nature.

[Marks]: So it's actually very different than the other definitions, where it heavily relies on the brewing and not the food.

[Marks]: And so this is more food-related than it is brewing.

[Marks]: And I think it fits well into this, because it gives people an option, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I think it will probably be vetted out as we go along.

[Marks]: So I will support it tonight.

[Marks]: knowing that we still have many meetings in front of us, Mr. President, to go forward with this.

[Marks]: Mr. President, just if I could add, we were fortunate enough, and I appreciate all the work Council and I did on this, believe me, and other members of the council, we put a lot of time and effort into this, as well as Mark Rumley, former city solicitor, who actually got this ball rolling as well, Mr. President.

[Marks]: But we were fortunate enough to have a couple of Method residents,

[Marks]: that are in the brewing business to assist us and help us along in crafting this ordinance to make it work for the city of Medford.

[Marks]: So I only see that as a positive that we had the ability to have someone there give us some guidance and there was many times that we asked for guidance to make sure we crafted something that wasn't a Somerville ordinance or Cambridge or Boston but a Method ordinance to see how it worked for us.

[Marks]: And so

[Marks]: I continue to look for advice and assistance and any other assistance I can get from the people that have the expertise.

[Marks]: Because I'm not a brewing expert, I don't know the number of barrels, I don't know anything that...

[Marks]: what I have to do my homework and research.

[Marks]: And from what I see with this, Mr. President, it will be properly vetted.

[Marks]: We're not asking that this be voted on tonight and then become an ordinance, ordained ordinance, in the next several weeks.

[Marks]: We're saying that this has to go through the entire process again.

[Marks]: Unfortunately, we have to do it.

[Marks]: We have to go through the entire process and have another public hearing and so forth.

[Marks]: Even though much of the language has been vetted out,

[Marks]: So I hear what Councilor Knight's saying, but I think we should at least give this the opportunity to be added and then properly vetted.

[Marks]: Mr. President, were you on the

[Marks]: the National Grid one?

[Marks]: You are correct.

[Marks]: This is 20-479.

[Marks]: Okay.

[Marks]: I do have a question.

[Marks]: Yes, absolutely.

[Marks]: Regarding the Eversource, how much of your project is related to the Eversource project?

[Marks]: And if so, what is being done that both of you are working on?

[Marks]: Right.

[Marks]: So when you talk about underground laterals, cables, and wires, is that happening?

[Marks]: Okay, so this is not going to be, is it going to be coordinated with Eversource?

[Marks]: Oh, of course, of course.

[Marks]: Yes, of course.

[Marks]: Okay.

[Marks]: What's the expected time this will take?

[Marks]: That's all the questions I have, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Second.

[Marks]: He was drinking water.

[Marks]: He couldn't have seconded.

[Marks]: He was a ventriloquist.

[Marks]: He definitely didn't second it.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Second.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Mr. President, I move suspension of the rules to take paper 20-355, which is on the agenda tonight.

[Marks]: We have the city engineer here to present regarding safe routes to school project.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And first, I'd like to applaud the Brooks School for, I believe it's been six years for this grant.

[Marks]: And many of the improvements, 99% of them of which I agree with, will do tremendous in traffic calming and making a high street or a portion of high street safer to travel.

[Marks]: So I do support a big portion of this, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Tim, I had a question for you.

[Marks]: We talked about easements.

[Marks]: Also, there are several properties that are privately owned that have private property on city property.

[Marks]: And I was told by yourself that the state was going to put out an agreement that they weren't going to go after property owners that may have encroached on city property.

[Marks]: Could you just give us a little update on that?

[Marks]: Okay, so just so I understand then regarding this current project of St.

[Marks]: Ruth's to school, there will be no property, city resident property that will be taken.

[Marks]: Um, and Mr. President, if I could, I know there, uh, were a number of concerns by, uh, residents, area residents on high street and some of the, uh, budding streets.

[Marks]: Um, the traffic commission, uh, had a meeting, uh, several months back regarding, uh, the taking of parking spots along high street.

[Marks]: Uh, so this project can move forward.

[Marks]: I know many residents voiced their concern, um, naturally.

[Marks]: Parking is at a premium, and let's face it, no one wants to lose a parking spot.

[Marks]: And we as a council voted unanimously, I believe it was several months back, to ask if DOT and the city could get together and see if they can explore some other options where we may be able to save some parking along High Street.

[Marks]: And apparently that didn't bear any fruit, those discussions.

[Marks]: However, Mr. President, at the traffic commission meeting, there were several residents that brought up to the traffic commission whether or not they could take a bike lane.

[Marks]: And during non-peak time, for instance, 7 p.m.

[Marks]: or 8 p.m.

[Marks]: at night, have it revert to parking, area parking from 7 p.m., 8 p.m.

[Marks]: at night to 6 a.m.

[Marks]: or 7 a.m.

[Marks]: in the morning.

[Marks]: And the traffic commission said they were going to look into it.

[Marks]: I had a discussion today with Chief Buckley, and he reiterated his concerns that, first of all, that DOT made it clear that this project had to have a bike lane.

[Marks]: And none of us want to jeopardize a million dollars.

[Marks]: However, I did ask him if the traffic commission was going to explore

[Marks]: possibly turning this bike lane for non-peak hours into parking spots.

[Marks]: And he said they are going to explore that.

[Marks]: So I did get a reassurance from Chief Buckley today that that was under advisement.

[Marks]: The second piece I just want to touch upon, as Councilor Caraviello mentioned, I received a number of emails from people today in support of the project.

[Marks]: And like I said, 99% of this project I do support.

[Marks]: The one concern I have, Mr. President, which I found a little terrifying in several of the emails I received, is residents saying that they now can have their elementary school child use High Street to bike to school.

[Marks]: That really concerns me, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I'm not one to put a rubber stamp on anything.

[Marks]: And the fact that we may be able to get money for this project is great.

[Marks]: And the fact that this project has a big public safety component in it is great.

[Marks]: And the traffic calming component is great.

[Marks]: The one concern I do have, Mr. President, and I know the city engineer said we have more plans to extend our bike lanes.

[Marks]: The reason why we were told at the beginning the bike lane was going to be on that side of High Street was

[Marks]: that it's the safest side because when you have bicyclists traveling, for what we were told, you want them, because they're going at a slower speed, to travel uphill rather than downhill.

[Marks]: And that made it for a safer area and that's why they decided

[Marks]: to make the bike lane go up High Street rather than down High Street.

[Marks]: That was my understanding.

[Marks]: My concern is, Mr. President, if residents feel comfortable now having their child bike to school, especially elementary kids on a very, very busy road on High Street, we have a four-block bike lane that goes up High Street, which is the slow part when you're riding a bike, and all of a sudden it stops at the top by Hastings Lane.

[Marks]: And it goes into the downward slope down High Street and a very winding, dangerous part of High Street, extremely dangerous.

[Marks]: And I think we'd all be negligent if we didn't step up and say, you know what?

[Marks]: If we're going to do the bike lane, for the very least, we should extend this, whether it's part of this project or part of the city project, whatever it might be.

[Marks]: I, in good conscience, have a tough time saying, OK, we'll accept the money, we'll put the bike lane for four blocks, and no one will be the wiser.

[Marks]: Because I foresee a problem, Mr. President,

[Marks]: especially if residents think now we're creating a safe zone for children to ride their bikes.

[Marks]: That is not a safe zone.

[Marks]: And the way it breaks off, Mr. President, if anyone's familiar, at the top of Hastings, then it winds down.

[Marks]: That is a very dangerous area to all of a sudden have a bike lane stop, especially for young kids.

[Marks]: So I'd like, Mr. President, to offer a motion tonight that we as a city, if we're going to move forward with this project,

[Marks]: And I'll leave it up to the city engineer.

[Marks]: I'll leave it up to the traffic engineer to decide when to get to Winthrop Circle and so forth and let them decide the logistics of it.

[Marks]: But I can't have in my conscience to leave a bike path just because it's getting funded for four blocks.

[Marks]: We should turn a blind eye as a city and say, well, that's fine with us.

[Marks]: That's great.

[Marks]: We're not going to turn down the money.

[Marks]: We should step up, Mr. President, to the plate.

[Marks]: And if you're talking about spots, there's no loss of parking spots on that point of High Street that winds down.

[Marks]: That would be an ideal place to continue the bike lane.

[Marks]: And then when we tell parents, we're creating safe routes to school, we're really creating a safe route.

[Marks]: Because four blocks that leads to an area that's a dangerous area is not a safe route, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And so I'm going to offer that tonight as a motion that, you know, I'm going to support this project, but it has to be, Mr. President, that we have our city engineer and we'll ask the mayor, because the mayor presented this paper to us, to give us a commitment that that bike lane will be extended, Mr. President, not in the future, but now as part of this project.

[Marks]: And if the city has to pick up the cost, then so be it, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Mr. President, the reason why I say that, I'm not a traffic engineer.

[Marks]: I'm not a parking engineer.

[Marks]: But clearly, Mr. President, that is not the right thing to do.

[Marks]: And I don't have to be an engineer to make that decision.

[Marks]: Leaving it the way it is is not the right thing to do.

[Marks]: So that's what we have to do as a community, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And if we're going to make it safe, I realize we can't make every road right now.

[Marks]: But if we're going to do this project,

[Marks]: and call it Safe Routes to School, and I have parents that have sent him emails saying, you know, I live near Medford Square, and thank goodness my son can take his bike now to school.

[Marks]: I'm concerned with that, because guess what?

[Marks]: I'm putting my stamp of approval on that.

[Marks]: And I don't feel safe, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And no one's going to tell me otherwise.

[Marks]: No one's going to tell me otherwise.

[Marks]: Point of information on that big paper?

[Marks]: Is that question for me?

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Mr. President, I'd like to leave it open ended because, you know, we may be also talking about the other end of high street as well.

[Marks]: So, you know, as I stated, I'm not a traffic engineer, but really it doesn't make sense for us to put a stamp of approval on something that I don't, I don't believe is safe in particular for elementary school kids to be riding.

[Marks]: So I'm going to leave that open ended.

[Marks]: It's not contingent upon approval, but, um, you know, I hope Tim takes this back to the city administration.

[Marks]: and let them know that something needs to be done immediately there.

[Marks]: Even though there may be long-term plans, something needs to be done immediately with this project.

[Marks]: Okay.

[Marks]: Mr. President, we may have some,

[Marks]: residents that like to speak.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Just a point of information.

[Marks]: Point of information, Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Can this information be put on the government channel as well as community access, or is it already there?

[Marks]: We have some amendments, move for approval.

[Marks]: Yes, Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I can appreciate the intent of this.

[Marks]: However, it's not as clear as what was stated about a longstanding history, because I'd say over the past 20 years, at least 15 or 16 of those years, use variances were not issued by the Zoning Board of Appeals.

[Marks]: And it was just really recent, of recent time,

[Marks]: that the Zoning Board of Appeals started to flex their muscle and issue use variances.

[Marks]: It was also stated that this has never been appealed, or no body or entity has ever appealed this.

[Marks]: In 2016, Mr. President, the Method City Council sued our own Zoning Board of Appeals.

[Marks]: And one part of the suit was that the voting board gave out too many variances, and also that use variances are not authorized in the city of Medford.

[Marks]: That came from a unanimous vote of the Medford City Council.

[Marks]: after we hired a zoning attorney to represent us.

[Marks]: So as early as 2016, June of 2016, we were on record as a council saying, it's illegal what the zoning board did by giving the use variance.

[Marks]: So it's not as clear as was stated.

[Marks]: My hope, Mr. President, is that when we start to go through and codify like we just spoke about in the committee of the whole, that we'll address these issues one at a time.

[Marks]: Not to rush to judgment now to address this, you know What's being asked is to give the authority to an appointed board to do really what should be set forth in zoning regulations and rules by the Medford City Council and to give the authority to an appointed board to go and potentially

[Marks]: two houses down from you, take it from a residential zone to a commercial zone or industrial zone, give them that authority.

[Marks]: I don't want to do that, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I personally don't want to do that.

[Marks]: I think the council should sit down and put together a thoughtful zoning plan, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And we should be the ones that dictate, not pass that responsibility off to the Zoning Board of Appeals.

[Marks]: So this has indeed been challenged by the Medford City Council.

[Marks]: It's not as clear cut as was stated.

[Marks]: uh that uh you know the city solicitor came out with an opinion uh which is great uh mr president i've also been told that it was a ballot question back some 18 years ago and that was uh part of the footnote that is currently part of our ordinance that puts a footnote out there and um

[Marks]: There's a lot to this, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I personally think we should go through the codification.

[Marks]: We should take a look at this and do a thoughtful process, Mr. President, rather than just a knee-jerk reaction at this point.

[Marks]: We waited this long, Mr. President.

[Marks]: The ambiguity has been around for many, many years, no matter who you talk to, because there's two sections that reflect different language within our zoning.

[Marks]: And that's where the problem lies.

[Marks]: And does it need to be addressed?

[Marks]: Absolutely.

[Marks]: Is this the way of addressing it?

[Marks]: I don't agree with this, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I personally think the council took a stance back in 2016 for a reason.

[Marks]: And one of the reasons was to protect neighborhoods, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And we, at that time, felt that the Zoning Board of Appeals didn't have the authority to act and do a use change.

[Marks]: And I still feel that way, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And eventually, that'll be my vote when it comes time that I will not be supporting giving out that authority to an appointed board where the Medford City Council should be doing that, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Mr. President, also when the council is bringing this suit against the Zoning Board of Appeals,

[Marks]: We were also advised by the city solicitor that he felt that we had standing as a city council.

[Marks]: So I mean, you know, if anyone could show me and I've talked to people that have been on the council when this change supposedly took place.

[Marks]: And I can't get anyone to verify that this was ever changed.

[Marks]: So if anyone could show that to me, and in my research, my personal research, I can't find it anywhere written.

[Marks]: I can't find the minutes.

[Marks]: I can't find anything that states when this was changed, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So it's nice to just put things out there, and the fact that papers were offered before the council is meaningless.

[Marks]: Because that doesn't mean anything.

[Marks]: People offer papers before the council all the time.

[Marks]: I disagree, Mr. President.

[Marks]: It actually doesn't mean something.

[Marks]: Because it goes to the motivation.

[Marks]: Councilman Marks has the floor.

[Marks]: Yeah, people offer things, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I have the floor.

[Marks]: Mr. President, people offer things for different motivations.

[Marks]: And I don't know when those papers were offered, for what motivation, and so forth.

[Marks]: All I can tell you, Mr. President, is that I can't find it anywhere that shows that this was voted on by the Medford City Council.

[Marks]: And there's ambiguity in the current zoning.

[Marks]: And that's why we challenged it as a city council.

[Marks]: And don't forget, when we came back with no standing, we appealed February 1, 2018.

[Marks]: The city council unanimously, all seven councilors, voted to appeal the land court decision.

[Marks]: And that was after Mark Rumley's decision that was done in July of 2016, stating that there are allowed uses.

[Marks]: We still went forward, Mr. President, after the land court.

[Marks]: And then for other reasons, it was dropped and so forth.

[Marks]: But we still went forward with what was offered, stating that we didn't believe that a use variance could be issued.

[Marks]: And that's the exact language by the Zoning Board of Appeals.

[Marks]: So we went forward.

[Marks]: So who do we believe?

[Marks]: Do we believe the two papers that came before us that no one voted on?

[Marks]: Do we believe the council that went forward in 2016 and 18 for a lawsuit and land court?

[Marks]: I mean, who, I don't know, who do we believe?

[Marks]: Thank you, Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Councilor Knight?

[Marks]: Point of information, Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: I'd question, what is our position on use variances?

[Marks]: pursuant to the vote 18376.

[Marks]: Mr. President, we have two new councillors.

[Marks]: We have two new councillors, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I myself am not in support of that.

[Marks]: So I don't know what the gentleman's talking about.

[Marks]: Maybe he's referring to councillors from 20 years ago where they stood.

[Marks]: But let me tell you, that's not where I currently stand.

[Marks]: Mr. President, correct?

[Marks]: If that truly was the case, mr President, why are we as a meffitt city council sending them anything?

[Marks]: They're an autonomous body.

[Marks]: Mr. President.

[Marks]: They don't answer to the meffitt city council So why do we if this is so clear as my council colleague is stating?

[Marks]: Why do we have to mention anything to them?

[Marks]: So are they a violation?

[Marks]: Is that what you're saying?

[Marks]: Point of information, Mr. President.

[Marks]: What information, Councilor Marks?

[Marks]: It's as clear as mud, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And for my council colleague just to state that he believed the Zoning Board of Appeals made an error in judgment when they voted on something shows you how unclear this is, Mr. President, because they're all very capable people on that Zoning Board of Appeals.

[Marks]: So it's not as clear as stated.

[Marks]: This is not something, you know, against a colleague or this or that.

[Marks]: OK, I just want to make sure, Mr. President, that when the Zoning Board of Appeals gets together and discusses an issue, a use variance is probably one of the highest standards of variances.

[Marks]: Think about it.

[Marks]: You're changing the use of a particular site.

[Marks]: You're not doing a setback, or you're not doing something about a height limitation, or whatever, topography.

[Marks]: You're talking about changing the use of a property.

[Marks]: That is probably the most sacred part of zoning.

[Marks]: And to say that our Zoning Board of Appeals doesn't understand that, whether you can give or use variance or not, maybe they shouldn't be on the Zoning Board of Appeals if they don't understand that aspect of the zoning.

[Marks]: That's a good point.

[Marks]: That's a very good point.

[Marks]: But the point is it's not clear.

[Marks]: That's the point.

[Marks]: So I would caution my colleagues

[Marks]: You know, we're in the process of changing things now and finally looking after a couple of decades.

[Marks]: Let's do this right.

[Marks]: Let's do this right.

[Marks]: You know, and some of us may have difference of opinion like I do.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Councilor Martz.

[Marks]: It's up to the Zoning Board of Appeals, not us.

[Marks]: There's two conflicting sections in the zoning I think that's what council beers is alluding to right?

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I think any time you can plan ahead of time is prudent.

[Marks]: So I support planning ahead of time.

[Marks]: Don't think for a second that the city administration doesn't have a plan A, a plan B, and a plan C that they're currently working on.

[Marks]: And as I stated last week when we talked to the independent auditor, I remember years over the last several years of recent that we'd get a budget two or three days before it's due.

[Marks]: Now we're a month and a half, and it's like the sky's falling in.

[Marks]: I realize that we're facing some tough times, but I think we have to let the process play out.

[Marks]: The independent auditor also said over the next two to three weeks that we should get some meaningful answers on revenue projections.

[Marks]: And I, as one person, Mr. President, especially now when people are in fear, people are in fear right now, I don't want to put together a worst-case budget just for the sake of putting together a worst-case budget and alarming people because you know what's going to happen, Mr. President.

[Marks]: You're going to have to make tough decisions, as Councilor Knight mentioned.

[Marks]: And with those decisions, you're going to have to mention layoffs, potential layoffs and so forth.

[Marks]: And if we can avoid that, Mr. President, without alarming people,

[Marks]: and get to the numbers we need to get to, why do we have to put together a budget now and alarm people that may potentially lose their jobs?

[Marks]: if that's not the case, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And regarding a bailout, I mean, you know, it is what it is.

[Marks]: I'd ask anyone if they're going to return their stimulus check.

[Marks]: That's a bailout.

[Marks]: You know, people are going to return your stimulus check again.

[Marks]: You know, if the city needs the funds, Mr. President, because revenue projections are down, local aid is going to be down.

[Marks]: then so be it, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And if that's what we have to wait for, then I'm willing to wait, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And, you know, we've waited in the past.

[Marks]: I think we should wait now.

[Marks]: I think we should stay fast.

[Marks]: I think we should see what the administration's working on.

[Marks]: You know, in the past, as I mentioned, when you would talk about a 1-12 budget,

[Marks]: It was always the city administration, Mr. President, that was against the 112th budget, because they didn't want the council to have the purse strings every month, and they didn't want to be accountable to the council.

[Marks]: So every mayor for the past 20 years in this city, when a 112th budget was brought up, they've always rejected it immediately, saying they're not interested.

[Marks]: Now it seems to be the wave.

[Marks]: Now everyone's looking at a 112 budget.

[Marks]: And maybe that's the direction we need to go in.

[Marks]: I don't know, Mr. President, but I think we should wait this out a few more weeks to see what a city auditor says, see where the projections come in, see where the revenue.

[Marks]: Don't forget we extended the taxes to June 1st.

[Marks]: A lot of this is dependent on what tax revenue we experience.

[Marks]: And so far, we were told by the auditor that we're higher than expected, the amount of money we received so far.

[Marks]: I think we anticipate about $29 or $30 million.

[Marks]: I want to say they received $12 or $13 million.

[Marks]: The number escapes me, but to date so far.

[Marks]: So I think we're looking good with the revenue that we anticipated.

[Marks]: Local receipts are down.

[Marks]: We have to take our time on this, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I think trying to force the hand we've never gotten it since I've been on the council We've never gotten involved with the city administration when they established their budget never Now we're hearing about I want to see the department head's wish list

[Marks]: We've never had access.

[Marks]: That's always been between the mayor and the department heads.

[Marks]: And when the department heads appear before the Medford City Council, we can ask, why is your budget like this?

[Marks]: Do you have a wishlist?

[Marks]: We can ask that.

[Marks]: But that's always been between the administration and their department heads, not the responsibility of the council.

[Marks]: So I can appreciate the fact that we want to try to get ahead of this, but that's not overstep our boundaries.

[Marks]: The administration is responsible for the establishment of the budget.

[Marks]: And that's their responsibility, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So let's let this process play out.

[Marks]: However we can assist, I think we're all willing to do that.

[Marks]: Let's not overstep our boundary.

[Marks]: And let's have a better idea and understanding what revenues we're going to receive before we start alarming police, fire, teachers of layoffs.

[Marks]: Because when you create a budget that's $8 million short, you're going to be looking at bodies, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I can guarantee you.

[Marks]: I've been around for a while.

[Marks]: You're going to be looking at bodies.

[Marks]: And if we don't need to get into those conversations, why do it?

[Marks]: Why alarm people?

[Marks]: People have enough on their mind right now with this COVID-19.

[Marks]: Why tell them that potentially they could lose their job when it's not even necessary, Mr. President?

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Thank you, Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Can we move to second that Mr. President?

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Just if I can add because last week when we were talking about creative ideas, I did mention about the water and sewer enterprise account.

[Marks]: And we have a history in this community of borrowing from that.

[Marks]: And that's at no expense to the ratepayer or taxpayer in this community because

[Marks]: It's an over assessment of the water and sewer rates.

[Marks]: However, you got to be careful that you don't deplete that because it's for infrastructure improvements, but there's several millions of dollars in that account.

[Marks]: that potentially could be used.

[Marks]: Also, Mr. President, back some years ago, just in line with Councilor Bears' mentioning, the council entertained looking at a tax amnesty program, where people in this community owed taxes for many years and weren't paying that they weren't subjected to the interest rates.

[Marks]: And it was a way of bringing in hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars,

[Marks]: opening up a period of time with his amnesty for people that are taxed delinquent to come and pay their back taxes.

[Marks]: And that just may be an option that's explored too.

[Marks]: So there are many options out there that can be looked at, Mr. President, in order to potentially have a savings for this community.

[Marks]: The last thing I'd like to say, Mr. President,

[Marks]: It's great to say, well, let's put together the budget the way it stands now.

[Marks]: If it's $8 million in deficit, let's put it together.

[Marks]: That's going to be, Mr. President, very alarming to people.

[Marks]: And I know my council colleagues don't want to hear that, but it's going to be very alarming to have a public document out there, Mr. President, that's going to show that magnitude of cuts across the board.

[Marks]: And I personally don't want to experience that right now.

[Marks]: I don't think there's a need.

[Marks]: Because I think over the next several weeks, the mayor mentioned to us when we pressured the mayor, and I think we all did, to get a preliminary budget that she was looking at, I believe, Mr. President, you were on board too, the first week in June, I think we got a commitment that she was going to give us a budget.

[Marks]: And in my opinion, that gives us ample time to work with it and see if it's realistic or not.

[Marks]: And also, in my opinion, it's probably the earliest that we've gotten a budget in the past 20 years, even with all this facing us.

[Marks]: So I still think we have enough time, Mr. President, and by then we'll have some of the numbers that the auditor talked about in to give us better projections to see where we stand.

[Marks]: And that number, 8 million, may go up, it may go down.

[Marks]: We don't know, but time will tell, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I support all these initiatives.

[Marks]: Everyone wants additional information.

[Marks]: I just think that we should give the administration the ample opportunity to work with the department heads.

[Marks]: As Councilor Scarpelli mentioned, he's working with the City of Somerville.

[Marks]: He's the department head within the City of Somerville, and he's working with the mayor there to go over his budget.

[Marks]: And that's what I'm saying should be done in our community.

[Marks]: The mayor should be working with the department heads, and if she's able to share information with the council, that's fine.

[Marks]: But eventually we're going to get a budget like we've done for the last 20 years.

[Marks]: And we were never privy to any of that information, Mr. President, ever.

[Marks]: And I don't remember any councilor ever requesting this information either, Mr. President, over the last years that they want to see the wish list from the department heads prior to us getting the budget.

[Marks]: I've never mentioned that or never seen that mentioned as a council resolution.

[Marks]: But hey, maybe this is the time to do so.

[Marks]: But I think we have to let this process play out a little bit.

[Marks]: and see where we stand, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Point of clarification, Mr. President?

[Marks]: No worries.

[Marks]: Okay.

[Marks]: Mr. President, just if I could, there were a lot of requests asked for last week.

[Marks]: And one of the original requests was for the department head wishlist budget.

[Marks]: And chief of staff Dave Rodriguez said he didn't feel comfortable sharing that at that point.

[Marks]: because it was in the early stages and may didn't have a time to look at it.

[Marks]: So indeed, I don't know who asked for it, but someone did ask for a department head wish list budget.

[Marks]: And he didn't think it was fruitful or would have been valuable.

[Marks]: And one of the Councilors said, I'll consider what's valuable to share a department head wish list budget.

[Marks]: And that was what was requested, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So- I was the Councilor.

[Marks]: Council of Marks.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I met with residents of the 9th Street Condo Association several months back.

[Marks]: We met with the city engineer and the traffic engineer.

[Marks]: We came up with a number of recommendations for 9th Street and Brainerd Ave, and some of which has yet to take place.

[Marks]: One is the marking to divide 9th Street.

[Marks]: If you're familiar with the street next to Cappy's,

[Marks]: when you take a right or left onto 9th Street, there's no dividing line.

[Marks]: So it's very difficult when cars are coming off of 9th Street or going onto 9th Street to see the delineation in the road.

[Marks]: So we ask that a yellow marker, paving marker be put down and also that the potholes in 9th Street be repaired or repaved in the interest of public safety.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I want to thank Council Vice President Caraviello for putting this on.

[Marks]: I've received so many calls from Salt Method residents regarding tough square, the inability for any large trucks or buses to take turns.

[Marks]: around that intersection over there, the getting caught midway between.

[Marks]: So I would ask if Council Vice President's are right to amend that we receive a report back from the city engineer and the traffic engineer on the status of that project as well.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: I think I know where you were going.

[Marks]: Yeah, I do.

[Marks]: Don't tell them about the gap.

[Marks]: I heard everything, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Where was I?

[Marks]: Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: This may sound familiar to some of my colleagues.

[Marks]: Several months back, I offered a very similar resolution.

[Marks]: The reason why I bring it up again this evening is the fact that last week when we were discussing the budget, it was mentioned that we could look and potentially save some money with the waste management contract.

[Marks]: which we all, I should say we all, which I thought was coming up at the end of this year for renewal.

[Marks]: And come to find out when the mayor mentioned it doesn't renew until 2023, Dave Rodriguez, the chief of staff, sent us a copy of the amended contract.

[Marks]: I was on the council at the time, Mr. President, and I looked through my records.

[Marks]: I can't find anywhere that the city administration entered into a new renewal with waste management.

[Marks]: Now, I know it happened, so I'm not trying to say it didn't happen.

[Marks]: But at the time, back in 2010, the city administration, and I just want to give a little

[Marks]: history on this.

[Marks]: The city administration, Mr. President signed a nine year eight or nine month contract.

[Marks]: So it's 9.75 year contract with waste management.

[Marks]: Now, in order to enter that contract by state law, anything over three years has to be approved by the council, any contract with a length over three years.

[Marks]: So then Mayor McGlynn approached the council and asked that we approve a 10-year contract, which we did, Mr. President, at the time, because there was some savings in the contract.

[Marks]: Unbeknownst to me, some three and a half years later, into a 10-year contract, the mayor went back and extended the contract another three years, which he was able to do so under state statute.

[Marks]: So it went from a 10-year contract, almost a 10-year contract, to a 13-year contract, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I found it ironic that at the time when the mayor renegotiated, waste management gave us an incentive of $400,000 to renegotiate the contract.

[Marks]: And the only other change, Mr. President, was an increase in the recyclable rates.

[Marks]: So there's a fee that they're processing fee that went up from $50 per ton to $85 per ton.

[Marks]: which would lead someone to believe, why would you be negotiating after you have a 10-year contract for a higher rate for recycling?

[Marks]: It doesn't make any sense.

[Marks]: Unless, of course, you're looking for a quick fix of some incentive money, which the city received.

[Marks]: Putting that all aside, Mr. President, because I'm going to bring that up another time.

[Marks]: I offered a resolution on behalf of Maple Park condominiums because currently right now they only have recycling.

[Marks]: So when the contract was made, apparently the city went around back some years ago to all the condominium associations and said, how would you like to participate?

[Marks]: Would you like bulk pickup?

[Marks]: Would you like recycling?

[Marks]: Would you like trash pickup?

[Marks]: And at the time, the different condo associations chose what they wanted.

[Marks]: Some opted, like Maple Condominiums, Park Condominiums, opted just for recycling only.

[Marks]: Now, several years later, they said, you know what?

[Marks]: We'd like to get into the bulk pickup.

[Marks]: We'd be interested in that.

[Marks]: And other condos have approached the administration previous administrations and they were allowed into different aspects of the program And they are asking now to be part of bulk pickup.

[Marks]: So i'm requesting originally the council if you remember we voted to wait for the city budget to add them or

[Marks]: uh, we voted to wait till the contract ended, which we all thought was too, at least I thought was 2020.

[Marks]: So knowing that, um, we're not gonna, if this doesn't end until 2023, um, that I'm asking now that we don't wait for anything and that the city administration.

[Marks]: add Maple Park condominiums, I believe it's 35 or 40 condos in there, add them to the bulk pickup, Mr. President.

[Marks]: That's all they're requesting.

[Marks]: There's a public list out there that shows you the different condos and what they receive as city services and waste management.

[Marks]: And it's my understanding the city just has to make a call to waste management and ask that this be done for Maple Park condominiums.

[Marks]: So I'd like to do that in the form of a motion, Mr. President, that the bulk pickup

[Marks]: be added immediately to Maple Park condominiums.

[Marks]: I don't remember seeing that, but if that's the case, that's great.

[Marks]: I don't think it's the case because the residents are still calling me.

[Marks]: They were actually asking me about the budget, if we're gonna put it in the budget, and that's why it precipitated this new resolution.

[Marks]: So that may be the case, but I don't know.

[Marks]: By request.

[Marks]: My understanding, it's by request.

[Marks]: That's my understanding.

[Marks]: I'm talking to DPW.

[Marks]: I was told by the condo association that at the time they were instructed by certain type of bins that were compatible with waste management.

[Marks]: And it would have been a great expense to them.

[Marks]: So they figured out rather than buy these new bins They already had bins that they would just bypass the service Now there it's I guess fruitful for them to participate and that's why they want to participate But I think at the time they had to get a certain bin and they weren't willing to do that to fit the you know compatible with waste management, but

[Marks]: These are all great questions, and I don't think we do have a formal approach once the contract is signed.

[Marks]: If condos would like to get back in, and they all pay taxes as was mentioned, they should have the ability to opt back in if they'd like.

[Marks]: So maybe that's something that could be explored by our DPW subcommittee.

[Marks]: Mr. President, while we're in the suspension.

[Marks]: Paper 20-094.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I put this on tonight's agenda because I had several residents that reside in condos, in particular Maple Park condominiums that reached out to me recently regarding waste pickup.

[Marks]: And they asked me the question, which I've actually received over the years from other condo people in the community, why don't they pick up my trash, the city?

[Marks]: We pay the same tax rate that any other good paying taxpayer pays in this community, and we don't get trash service.

[Marks]: So I did a little homework, Mr. President.

[Marks]: We have probably about eight or nine residents from Maple Park, and I appreciate they all came out tonight.

[Marks]: because this issue is very important to them.

[Marks]: But I did a little homework, Mr. President, pulled out the contract that was signed by the city of Medford and Waste Management back in August of 2010, August 25th to be precise.

[Marks]: It was a ten year contract which actually ends this year.

[Marks]: And it's my understanding in talking to DPW, what resulted from the contract back in 2010 was the city went around to all the different condo associations.

[Marks]: And they touched base with each condo association, saying, we're signing an agreement with waste management.

[Marks]: It's going to be a 10-year agreement.

[Marks]: Are you interested, as an association, to have either recycle or trash pickup at your building?

[Marks]: And for a number of different reasons, many associations said, you know what, we are interested in having both.

[Marks]: And the city added their condo to the contract, which I have a copy of all the condominium associations and whether or not they get trash, recycle, a combination or none.

[Marks]: And so at the time, they went around to all the condos.

[Marks]: Some condos, like Maple Park Condo, opted at the time not to do trash pickup.

[Marks]: They currently have recycle pickup, but not trash.

[Marks]: And it was based on, I guess, the board of directors of the condo association, and they decided not to do it.

[Marks]: But within the contract, Mr. President, and I won't read it, it's a lengthy contract, but on page six of the contract under section 12,

[Marks]: It states the contractors shall collect refuse weekly and recyclables every other week from condominiums as listed on exhibit D. And that's what I refer to.

[Marks]: Exhibit D shows you all the different condo buildings and whether or not they have recycle or trash.

[Marks]: It says, Exhibit D, as from time to time may be amended subject to compensation as specified in Section 23.3, condominiums will be required to provide rubbish dumpster and recycling cots compatible with contractor's vehicles at their own cost.

[Marks]: Condominiums that require services greater than specified herein will be directed to purchase additional service

[Marks]: outside of this agreement from a vendor of their choice.

[Marks]: So at the time, Mr. President, Maple Park Condo, and like I said, there are other condos that are in the same boat, decided not to do the trash pickup.

[Marks]: And then some years later, they say, you know what?

[Marks]: At this point, we'd like to start trash pickup with the city.

[Marks]: And I'm being told from the DPW department that in order to do so, if Maple Park wanted to join the contract, they can do it one of two ways.

[Marks]: They can ask during budget period, which is coming up very shortly,

[Marks]: to have the city, because we have a fixed amount every year that we put into the waste management contract, and if we were going to bring on a new condo association, that would increase the contract amount, naturally, that we would have to add to the budget based on the newcomers into the program.

[Marks]: So that would be the first way.

[Marks]: If Maple Park and other condos said, you know what, we'd be interested now in joining, please sign us up.

[Marks]: The city would have to make compensation within the budget to account for that.

[Marks]: The second way, Mr. President, is the way of

[Marks]: The contract ends in 2020.

[Marks]: So it ends this year.

[Marks]: It's a 10-year contract.

[Marks]: It ends this year.

[Marks]: And I'm not sure how this new administration will go about doing this, but I would assume it might be similar to what they did 10 years ago and reach out once again to all the condo associations in the city and saying, would you like to participate?

[Marks]: And we can gather a new list at the end of this contract, which is this year, and have the city fund this brand new list.

[Marks]: I'm being told also in the past, over the last ten years, based on a by request, the past mayors

[Marks]: If an association went to the previous mayors, they would make their case for why they need recycling or trash pickup through the city, and the mayor would grant it or not grant it.

[Marks]: And I've been told that in the past, there have been condo associations that have been granted this additional pickup service through the mayor's office.

[Marks]: So I'm offering tonight, Mr. President, a way that not only Maple Park, but the other condominium associations that I have on this particular list, like Craddock Cove, I think the Regency Condo, Wellington Condo, there's a number of other condos in the city that may opt to participate.

[Marks]: So I'm asking through this resolution, and I'd like to hear from some of the residents also, Mr. President, that the mayor determine how she wants to handle it.

[Marks]: If she wants to do it in this year's budget, we have to make sure that the condos that want to participate

[Marks]: make it known and that we add that to the budget or if the mayor feels best that we wait out the five or six or seven months that are left in this 10-year contract and then just see if anyone else wants to join.

[Marks]: That may be an easier way, Mr. President, but I'll leave that up to the administration.

[Marks]: That's not up to me to decide.

[Marks]: But based on my findings, Mr. President, the contract, in my opinion, does call for allowing newcomers into the contract.

[Marks]: And it does state there'll be an associated cost for a newcomer.

[Marks]: It also states if you have a large condo and you need more than the one pickup, which may be the case in some of the larger condos, that that's added at your own expense.

[Marks]: And that's spelled out in the contract.

[Marks]: But my hope tonight, Mr. President, is really to put everyone on the same playing field.

[Marks]: You know, we all pay taxes.

[Marks]: I've had people in the past say, I pay taxes for school, but I have no school-aged kids.

[Marks]: That's not how we work in the city of Medford, Mr. President.

[Marks]: We all pay a tax.

[Marks]: We all should receive the service.

[Marks]: And there's no reason why the condo associations and people that live in condos and pay the same tax shouldn't get that same service, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Another issue too, Mr. President, if you don't have trash pickup, you're not eligible for bulk pickup.

[Marks]: So someone that lives in a condo that wants to dispose of a bureau or a mattress or something, they're not eligible for the pickup that every other resident is eligible for.

[Marks]: And that's unfair too.

[Marks]: So I'll have residents, one resident told me he had to take his mattress over to his friend's house.

[Marks]: This gentleman is not a spring chicken, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And to have him get in his car and bring his mattress over to a friend's house is unacceptable.

[Marks]: And they should be added, Mr. President, as well to the bulk pickup.

[Marks]: So I'd like to hear with some of, I know Cindy Watson's here, with a number of residents.

[Marks]: And I would offer that in the form of a motion, Mr. President, that either suggestion be entertained by the mayor to ensure that Maple Park Condo and any other condo in the city that opts to enter into the program is able to do so.

[Marks]: Mr. President, just if I could follow up.

[Marks]: I think part of the issue, from my understanding of talking to DPW, is that the city pays hundreds of thousands of dollars a year just for the bulk pickup contract.

[Marks]: And at some point, it was determined that if you didn't have trash pickup, that you weren't going to be eligible for bulk pickup.

[Marks]: And I'm not sure where that decision was made, if it was a unilateral decision or what.

[Marks]: I didn't see it in the contract, but I was told by DPW, if you don't have trash pickup, they're not going to pick up bulk.

[Marks]: And I think that was a way of trimming down the exorbitant cost of the bulk items.

[Marks]: I believe they said they paid $22 an item in the city for bulk pickup, and it's unlimited.

[Marks]: They only do it during the recycle period, so it's every two weeks they do the bulk pickup.

[Marks]: But I think that was a way of cutting cost, and that may have been when they cut the service off to Maple Park during that.

[Marks]: I'm not sure exactly when it happened.

[Marks]: But the reason why I brought up, Mr. President, is to ask these questions.

[Marks]: And have the administration, we have the chief of staff here, Dave Rodriguez, who I'm sure will take this back to the mayor regarding this issue.

[Marks]: Mr. President, and we'll be able to get an answer.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: We can offer those two different options to make, because it could be done in other ways, too.

[Marks]: Those are the two that were stated to me.

[Marks]: Adding to this year's budget, or when the contract turns out, which is at the end of this year, that all the economy associations be out with their options.

[Marks]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: The Center for Citizenship and Social Responsibility, you guys continue to produce.

[Marks]: It's one after another after another.

[Marks]: It's very impressive.

[Marks]: And I like the fact that you're getting donations, you're soliciting organizations, and you're doing it on your own.

[Marks]: You're not saying, hey, how can you help or do this for us?

[Marks]: You're taking the initiative.

[Marks]: And I think that goes a long way.

[Marks]: I, too, would like to see, you mentioned Morrison Park.

[Marks]: potentially doing this in some other parks.

[Marks]: We in the city of Medford are very fortunate to have so many beautiful parks within our neighborhoods, many of which I believe are underutilized.

[Marks]: And to introduce something like the arts and attracting people to the parks, I think goes a long way.

[Marks]: And I appreciate all the effort that you've both put into this, as well as all of your fellow students.

[Marks]: I thank you.

[Marks]: I was not under the impression we were voting for a rule change, so I may have missed that.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: The reason why I state that, I don't know, I was under the impression this was going the way of every other request, either sending it to the Rules Committee or being properly vetted.

[Marks]: And I really don't think this has been properly vetted, in my opinion.

[Marks]: I think it has all good intention.

[Marks]: However, Mr. President,

[Marks]: The filing of a petition by a resident is requesting council action.

[Marks]: And it is, it complies with the open meeting law.

[Marks]: It appears on the agenda.

[Marks]: And from what I gather from this, it does state the following petition shall be reserved only for matters requiring council action per law.

[Marks]: So there may be an item when someone's coming up for council help, but it's not a requirement of the council action.

[Marks]: Not as was stated, special permits, grants of location, sign variance, those require council action.

[Marks]: There's no way around it.

[Marks]: So I think this is kind of a slippery slope, Mr. President, that it limits speech of residents that want to come up and not only come up like they would under suspension, which gives zero notification, but give proper notification and look for council relief.

[Marks]: And that council relief may not be something that's under our jurisdiction,

[Marks]: But something that residents feel that they can get relief from the council by coming up.

[Marks]: And I don't want to limit that, Mr. President, and I think this language would limit that.

[Marks]: So I cannot support that, Mr. President, unless this is properly vetted out to make sure that we're not limiting residents in the ability to come up here and speak or file a petition.

[Marks]: Thank you, Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So this is petitions, presentation, and similar papers, right?

[Marks]: This is what the section it falls under.

[Marks]: So if someone wants to come up and make a presentation that the council has no bearing on, that would come under public participation or petitions, presentations, and similar papers.

[Marks]: Or are we amending or eventually going to amend this to have what my colleagues are stating, having the agenda coincide with what we're trying to do?

[Marks]: So is the issue that it's assigned a number?

[Marks]: Is that what the issue is?

[Marks]: But there's a distinction between a resolution and a petition, correct?

[Marks]: Only a council can file something.

[Marks]: Receive and place on file.

[Marks]: This council's been doing that for 100 years.

[Marks]: And that's how we dispose of things.

[Marks]: So if someone comes up.

[Marks]: If someone comes up and it has no bearing on the council, Mr. President, or doesn't require a council vote, you'll hear that saying all the time.

[Marks]: Receive and place on file.

[Marks]: I just feel that this is, Mr. President, a way of restricting people from coming up, putting something which is valid on the agenda,

[Marks]: it gets signed the number as a petition, not as a resolution.

[Marks]: It's a petition.

[Marks]: They're two very different things.

[Marks]: And a petition is requesting council action.

[Marks]: Now, if they put something on the agenda that they believe requires council action and it doesn't, that's when the council can make a decision to receive and place on file or state clearly that this doesn't require council action and hear out whatever their concern is, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I just don't see the reason

[Marks]: to eliminate it.

[Marks]: I really don't.

[Marks]: I don't see the reasoning behind that.

[Marks]: I don't see how that, how does that increase public participation or make it easier?

[Marks]: Can anyone state that to me?

[Marks]: How does this make it easier for public participation?

[Marks]: How?

[Marks]: How?

[Marks]: If someone can explain that to me, by eliminating this, the ability for some resident to come up and put this in advance on the agenda,

[Marks]: So it's open and notorious, and everyone knows what they want to discuss.

[Marks]: I don't see how that, Mr. President, this enhances anything.

[Marks]: warrants additional discussion rather than just approving a council rule.

[Marks]: It's not often in my years on the council that you ever see a council rule come up, Mr. President, and approve the same night.

[Marks]: I can't recall the last time it happened, Mr. President.

[Marks]: It doesn't happen often.

[Marks]: And I think this hasn't been properly vetted, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I realize that we're looking to address our maybe open meeting violations and so forth.

[Marks]: I'm not sure this accomplishes anything in that realm, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And, you know, I've heard people say this doesn't do anything to decrease public participation.

[Marks]: What does it do to increase public participation?

[Marks]: I haven't heard that.

[Marks]: Mr. President, if I could.

[Marks]: If I could, and this is, I'm not directing this at Councilor Knight.

[Marks]: I'm not taking it that way at all.

[Marks]: I just want to, council rules are very important.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: And I want to make sure that they're properly vetted and you know, public participation as Councilor Knight said, you can come up at any time and speak on anything.

[Marks]: However, what wasn't stated is now under the open meeting law, Mr. President, you may be able to come up, but the council cannot deliberate now under the open meeting law.

[Marks]: So if a resident wants to come up and speak on an issue, someone popped up tonight and wanted to speak on an issue, we can hear them out, Mr. President, but we can't deliberate.

[Marks]: We cannot until they're placed on the agenda.

[Marks]: Hence.

[Marks]: Petitions, presentations, and similar matters appears on the agenda, gives the 48-hour notice that's required by the open meeting law and the Attorney General.

[Marks]: Hence, we can deliberate on something they're discussing, Mr. President.

[Marks]: They're two completely different things.

[Marks]: So if the council feels comfortable with doing away with a section of our agenda that allows people to come up and pre-advance, put on the agenda what they want to speak about, and hopefully have the council deliberate on it, that's petitions, presentations, and similar matters.

[Marks]: If we want to do away with that and say, you know what, the only one that can offer that now is anyone having business that deals with signage and so forth that requires a council vote, or variances, or whatever it might be, that's very different, Mr. President, than a resident coming up.

[Marks]: So if we eliminate residents from coming up under this section and require them to come under public participation, we may be telling residents that come up

[Marks]: We can't deliberate tonight, sorry.

[Marks]: We'll see you next week.

[Marks]: Point of information, Mr. President?

[Marks]: Mr. President, so effectively, you're going to have someone in the city clerk's office, with all due respect, making that determination.

[Marks]: Whether it falls under the criteria, which was based over here, limited to special permits, grants, locations, sign variance, and common vituals license, only petitions filed meeting this criteria shall be assigned a council paper number.

[Marks]: All other petitions shall be placed on the public participation.

[Marks]: So in effect, what we're doing is having the city clerk's office figure out

[Marks]: what's going to be a petition and what's not a petition.

[Marks]: And that goes under public participation.

[Marks]: I was just wondering maybe if the council defined this petition was that where was that definition is that just part of our rules or is that part of a definition?

[Marks]: Right, so that definition is not a legal definition.

[Marks]: It's a definition that was created by a legislature somewhere, a town council, board of aldermen, someone that said that only a petition is defined as a council action that only requires action by law.

[Marks]: So that's just a made up, that's a made up term, Mr. President.

[Marks]: A petition is exactly what it is.

[Marks]: It's requesting the council to do something.

[Marks]: Why does it have to be something that's required by law?

[Marks]: I don't understand.

[Marks]: To me, that limits.

[Marks]: Why do we want to limit people to come up?

[Marks]: This is the only... Point of information, council and I. It's about stuff that requires the council to take action.

[Marks]: Point of information.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: If Mr. Krause came up tonight and wanted to do what Councilor Knight was talking about, and he is not in any violation because the open meeting law only applies to deliberative bodies.

[Marks]: Mr. Krause wouldn't be in any violation of bringing up the issue, so he can appear before us and bring up the issue.

[Marks]: However, we would be in violation by deliberating saying, you know what, Mr. Krause, that's a great idea.

[Marks]: That's asked the mayor to get 20,000 for the school board.

[Marks]: So that's why I'm saying, Mr. President, having something, if I could just finish, having something assigned a petition number, Mr. President, is a way of getting around, because a lot of people will come up, Mr. President, and want to speak before us that night.

[Marks]: And they're not in violation, we would be in violation for deliberating.

[Marks]: And I think what Mr. Krause raises is a valid point, even with the numbering.

[Marks]: I think that's a great idea, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I think having the ability to do that and also having public participation, that to me opens up the process.

[Marks]: Eliminating one is exactly what it does.

[Marks]: It eliminates the option.

[Marks]: And I don't see how that is open and transparent and adds to discussion.

[Marks]: I really don't.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Councilor Knight.

[Marks]: Not if they were allowed to do a petition.

[Marks]: So we're no longer a body.

[Marks]: We're individuals.

[Marks]: When someone comes up.

[Marks]: Well, I'm going to do that.

[Marks]: No, no, I'm going to do that.

[Marks]: No.

[Marks]: You can do whatever action you want.

[Marks]: You're an individual Councilor.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I just want to echo my colleagues.

[Marks]: Mrs. Morris was the matriarch of the family and truly was someone that had strong moral values.

[Marks]: And as Councilor Knight mentioned, raised two boys that really impeccable people of character and she will be sorely missed.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I appreciate the fact that Councilman Knight's trying to get creative with the concern about potential loss on street parking.

[Marks]: However, it flies in the face of everything I've spoken about over the last several years regarding properties on Salem Street and Riverside Ave that have turned their front yards into parking lots, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I don't think it's very pleasing aesthetically, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I would hate to see a practice, any practice that promotes such, even though it's called inner core and sounds great, the inner core is the outer core of our city and how our city looks.

[Marks]: And I don't think it does anything for our community.

[Marks]: So I would not support this, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Councilor Caraviello.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Mr. President, we actually have our first request for a suspension of the rules.

[Marks]: A resident that's here tonight would like to speak on crosswalks on Salem Street, which he considers a public safety concern.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Mr. President, if I could, in the interest of public safety, request that this be sent to the Traffic Commission in the interest of public safety, that they review a crosswalk at the intersection of Everett and Salem.

[Marks]: OK.

[Marks]: Mr. President, other people want to speak from the community.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I had the opportunity to work with Patrick for close to a year.

[Marks]: He's the one that welcomed me up to Channel 3, the new facility.

[Marks]: I was one of the first local access programs to air, Mr. President.

[Marks]: He was very professional in my dealings with him.

[Marks]: Always had a vision to expand local community access.

[Marks]: to invite new people into Community Access, to actually, years ago, there used to be a fee to get into Community Access.

[Marks]: There is no longer a fee to join Community Access.

[Marks]: Anyone can go up and start a show.

[Marks]: Anyone can get involved.

[Marks]: Anyone can go out and tape their own and bring it to the station and do editing and so forth.

[Marks]: So I believe the station is on the rise.

[Marks]: Would I like to see more membership?

[Marks]: Absolutely.

[Marks]: But I think it'll come over time, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I think it will come over time that you will see some more local programming and as was mentioned by some of the speakers, you know, we're running an operation in a city of 58,000 people with one person.

[Marks]: If you go to Community Access in Malden, Somerville, they have upwards of 7, 8, 9, 10 people running Community Access.

[Marks]: We have one person, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I think he's doing the best he can with what he has, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I only see good things for Community Access.

[Marks]: I see more community participation.

[Marks]: They are very welcoming in my experience and in talking to other people that have produced.

[Marks]: I've watched Laura's show.

[Marks]: She has an excellent show.

[Marks]: And they are very welcoming up there.

[Marks]: They're willing to pick up the camera and help.

[Marks]: because it's not a matter of just creating a show, it's a matter of editing, having a producer, and Patrick served in all those functions at one point or another to make sure that we were able to get local programs on.

[Marks]: So, you know, does more need to happen?

[Marks]: Absolutely.

[Marks]: Will it happen?

[Marks]: Absolutely, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I have confidence that we're going in the right direction with community access.

[Marks]: Thank you, Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Councilor Bears.

[Marks]: Present.

[Marks]: Mr. President, after we've done signing, can we take paper 20-048?

[Marks]: Thank you Mr. President.

[Marks]: I want to thank Councilor Morell for bringing this up.

[Marks]: I remember last year's discussions and at the time I believe it was two or three people that took advantage of the tax deferral program.

[Marks]: And at the time when we were discussing of raising the income levels and also lowering the interest rate, we thought by taking a step by lowering it from 8% to 5%, we'd see if we attracted more people.

[Marks]: Was that more attractive to people that possibly wanted to do a deferral?

[Marks]: And I think it's too soon to tell now, but over the next several months,

[Marks]: We should see if that was somewhat successful.

[Marks]: And I agree the next logical step is increasing the income levels.

[Marks]: So I agree with that.

[Marks]: I also want to put out there that this is one of several programs that seniors could take advantage of.

[Marks]: The other program that we have is the state circuit breaker tax credit program.

[Marks]: And that's been around for a number of years.

[Marks]: It's 100% through the state.

[Marks]: So it's not a city run program.

[Marks]: And based on how it works is when your tax bill exceeds 10% of your total income, you qualify.

[Marks]: So it's 10% of your total income, you qualify this for this particular program.

[Marks]: And for the tax year 2019, the amount that you would qualify for is $1,130.

[Marks]: So if any senior out there,

[Marks]: is interested, you have to apply for it when you do your taxes, which are coming up.

[Marks]: This is an ideal time to do it.

[Marks]: And that's when you would apply for this through the state.

[Marks]: And you would have to follow their rules and regulations.

[Marks]: But that more or less is, in a nutshell, how do you apply for it and who's eligible.

[Marks]: The other one is the regular statutory exemptions that we have currently in this city right now for, I believe, veterans, disabled, the blind,

[Marks]: and also seniors.

[Marks]: And there may be another one.

[Marks]: I think there may be five or six exemptions.

[Marks]: And the one that I'm speaking about, Mr. President, this council back many years ago, through my resolution, lowered the age from 70 to 65, which actually helped thousands of people take advantage of it, that five-year gap.

[Marks]: And that's something I'm proud of that we did many, many years ago to help seniors in this community.

[Marks]: But the senior exemption, Mr. President, and this is something we have to look up.

[Marks]: It's set up statutorily.

[Marks]: So we can't raise the income levels, but we can ask our state delegation, which we ask a lot of things, if they would look at it on a state level, Mr. President, because depending on where you live,

[Marks]: in Massachusetts, these income levels are way out of whack.

[Marks]: So for instance, your income to be eligible for the senior statutory property tax exemption is not to exceed $24,758 if you're single or $37,137 if you're married.

[Marks]: So those are the two income levels that you can't exceed to be currently eligible for a $1,000 exemption in the city of Medford.

[Marks]: The one nice thing about this program is we get paid for a portion of what we give in exemption back by the state through our cherry sheets.

[Marks]: So we actually get something in back.

[Marks]: So actually, we should be promoting this for our seniors.

[Marks]: They're getting $1,000, and we're also getting somewhat reimbursed.

[Marks]: So we're not fully losing out the $1,000 on our tax roll.

[Marks]: So it's a win-win for the resident and also for the city, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And also, there's the income level I just mentioned.

[Marks]: And regarding estates, you cannot exceed, if you're single, $40,000 in estate revenue or worth and $55,000 for married.

[Marks]: And this does not count your domicile.

[Marks]: So it does not count where you live.

[Marks]: So if you have other assets and so forth that are above the $40,000 for single and $55,000, that's also another criteria.

[Marks]: But this program, I believe hundreds of Medford residents, I can't remember the last count, take advantage of this program every year, Mr. President, and count on it because of the way taxes are going up.

[Marks]: But as I mentioned at the beginning, $24,000.

[Marks]: If someone's making $24,000 and they want to rent in the city of Medford, you wouldn't be renting in the city of Medford.

[Marks]: You wouldn't be able to afford anything else but possibly your rent.

[Marks]: So these numbers are way out of whack.

[Marks]: Maybe if you're living out in Fall River or maybe in Springfield, that may swing it for a single person out there.

[Marks]: Who knows?

[Marks]: Maybe not.

[Marks]: But around here, it doesn't, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I would ask that we as a council, because this has been an issue for years, and it does go up incrementally every year.

[Marks]: So it went up from last year, it was 24,000, it might have been 24,100 rather than 24,700.

[Marks]: So it does go up a certain percentage every year, but it's not enough to be eligible to the masses, which I think in this day and age we all want to get to because many seniors like my mother and many other mothers in here, they may be property rich, but they're money poor.

[Marks]: They don't have the fluidity of having money.

[Marks]: They have a house that's worth something they bought years and years ago, but they don't have the cash to pay for the taxes and everything else that goes up.

[Marks]: The cable bill and you name it, everything goes up every year.

[Marks]: So these are important things that seniors that are low income, seniors in our community need to take advantage.

[Marks]: And if we can do anything, like Councilor Morell mentioned, about increasing the income and asset levels,

[Marks]: I think we should be promoting that.

[Marks]: So I want to thank the Council.

[Marks]: I can hear what Dr. Streller is mentioning.

[Marks]: At this point, because there's only two households taking advantage of this, what we're trying to do, doctor, is increase the number of participants by lowering the interest rate from 8% to 5%, making it more attractive, by increasing the income levels to make it more attractive.

[Marks]: And by the way, that dollar a piece that you're talking about,

[Marks]: has to be realized every year, but we're also getting an interest off this.

[Marks]: So the people that are doing the deferment, if you have roughly an $8,000 tax rate, you're going to be paying $400 eventually when you settle up on that every year.

[Marks]: So really, it's going to come back.

[Marks]: It's not really paid out by the people that aren't taking the deferment because we're gonna get it back through the deferral.

[Marks]: But what we're trying to do is increase the number of people.

[Marks]: So right now, you're right, it's marginal because there's only two people taking advantage.

[Marks]: But that's not the intent, to keep it marginal.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I hate to say it, but here we go again.

[Marks]: This was a promise that was made back in 2014 when then Mayor McGlynn signed the parking contract enforcement with Republic Parking.

[Marks]: And at the time when they were rolling out this program, because it was considered to be somewhat detrimental to the business districts because of the new parking regulations and could have possible impact to business and so forth.

[Marks]: could possibly deter people from using our business districts.

[Marks]: At the time, Mayor McGlynn offered, and I sat on the committee, the parking enforcement committee at the time, offered an olive branch to the Chamber of Commerce saying that $250,000 would be used from the enforcement money received, and that would be $50,000 for each of the five business districts.

[Marks]: That's where it came, all came out of.

[Marks]: And over the last several years, I've brought this up a half a dozen times.

[Marks]: So if you heard this once, you'll hear it again and again, questioning where is this money?

[Marks]: Where is it sitting?

[Marks]: How come it hasn't been allocated to the different business districts?

[Marks]: I know many of them, such as Medford Square.

[Marks]: Salem Street Business Association, West Medford Business Association, have met with their membership, have discussed improvements they'd like to see in the neighborhood, have taken these improvements back to the city administration, and for the last five years, nothing has happened.

[Marks]: So you can feel the sense of frustration, not only with the business owners, but us as a council, because I'm not the only one that has spoken about this, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So, you know, and over the last few years I've heard, well, that was a commitment by the former mayor, and it doesn't mean the next mayor would carry it out, or that was just a one-year commitment.

[Marks]: So I've heard a lot of different scuttlebutt.

[Marks]: And if you look at Method Patch, dated October 2014,

[Marks]: The article is New Parking Enforcement in Medford.

[Marks]: It states, Mayor Michael J. McGlynn signed the parking enforcement contract with Republic Parking System on Tuesday.

[Marks]: The city of Medford hopes the new enforcement will benefit the business districts.

[Marks]: About $250,000 of revenue collected each year will go to improving the business districts.

[Marks]: So that's one.

[Marks]: That's the Medford patch.

[Marks]: So they must have heard it somewhere.

[Marks]: City website, I assume someone from the city typed this in, dated October, again, 2014.

[Marks]: And it says Medford signs parking enforcement contract.

[Marks]: After deliberating and discussing concerns raised by the business community, Mayor McGlynn is recommending the following changes to the plan.

[Marks]: I'm not going to read all the changes.

[Marks]: But this is one of them, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Recommended 250,000 of revenue generated on a yearly basis, yearly basis, to be dedicated to the business district improvements.

[Marks]: So based on what Mayor McGlynn offered back in 2014, we're looking at, because this was the end of 2014, right now we're looking at five years of backlog.

[Marks]: So that's $1,250,000 that was promised to the business districts.

[Marks]: They have yet to receive one red cent.

[Marks]: And they've done a lot of work in their subcommittees putting together plans, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I bring this up tonight for a number of reasons.

[Marks]: The fact that we have a new administration.

[Marks]: And I believe Mayor Lungo-Koehn is fully on board with this, Mr. President.

[Marks]: But I bring it up to revitalize this and to start the dialogue again with the Chamber of Commerce to get this going, Mr. President.

[Marks]: You can go into any one of our business districts, and they need attention.

[Marks]: They all need attention.

[Marks]: And I'm not pointing the finger at anyone.

[Marks]: They need attention, whether it's sidewalks, barrels, you name it, Mr. President, lighting, anything that would increase traffic, increase viability in the business districts.

[Marks]: And the money was there.

[Marks]: So tonight I'm asking, Mr. President, where is the money over the past five years?

[Marks]: So Mayor McGlynn gave the commitment.

[Marks]: I'm not sure because Mayor Burke never really gave a response when I asked this over the last four years, other than the fact that the business districts were working on a proposal.

[Marks]: So at this point, I'd like to know where the money is sitting, Mr. President, and I would respectfully ask, under this new administration, Mayor Lungo-Koehn, that this money, Mr. President, as soon as the plans are presented,

[Marks]: be given out.

[Marks]: And even if we start off with the original commitment of $250,000 and move forward, I think we'd all be fine with that.

[Marks]: And I think the chamber, I won't speak for them, I think they would be very happy to start that off, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And like I said, they have plans.

[Marks]: They did their homework.

[Marks]: They know what improvements they'd like to see.

[Marks]: Whether it's benches, there was a lot of things mentioned.

[Marks]: Power washing sidewalks, putting new lighting, putting some decorations in certain areas.

[Marks]: So new sidewalks in areas that could use it.

[Marks]: So that's my resolution tonight, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I know Mayor Lungo-Koehn's going to follow up with this.

[Marks]: And I feel comfortable moving forward that that commitment that was made in 2014 to the business districts will be kept, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: This has been, as Councilor Knight alluded to, a long ongoing issue in the community regulating these drop boxes.

[Marks]: I want to thank Councilor Caraviello for doing the homework and research on it.

[Marks]: I think it's a magnificent idea.

[Marks]: I would also recommend, in addition to what Councilor Knight mentioned about those amendments which were a concern,

[Marks]: because we don't want to impact fundraising and so forth of any type of school facility and so forth.

[Marks]: But these boxes at the very least, Mr. President, should have some type of ID tag on them.

[Marks]: Who owns it?

[Marks]: Who operates it?

[Marks]: A contact number?

[Marks]: There's nothing on these boxes at all.

[Marks]: No, I just wanted to make those points that at the very least, Mr. President, like I mentioned last time this was brought up, we regulate dumpsters.

[Marks]: If you're doing some home improvement and you want to get a dumpster, we not only regulate it, we charge you a fee, but someone could pop up a dumpster in any open lot outside.

[Marks]: The one on the Fells where I keep referring to because I drive by it all the time, there are five boxes out there now.

[Marks]: It's not about one medium-sized box, there's a large,

[Marks]: Giant box out there with four small ones.

[Marks]: Looked like it had babies.

[Marks]: Four smaller boxes now.

[Marks]: And there's stuff all over the place out there.

[Marks]: And people are constantly dropping things off.

[Marks]: You go out there, anytime there's always items out there.

[Marks]: And it's a safety issue, Mr. President.

[Marks]: What if a little kid climbs in one of these boxes?

[Marks]: You know, we have no way of getting in these.

[Marks]: We have no way of, no contact.

[Marks]: We don't know who's operating them.

[Marks]: It's a real safety concern.

[Marks]: Absolutely.

[Marks]: I want to thank Councilor Caraviello.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: I'll offer it at the time of the committee meeting, so no, no.

[Marks]: Actually, Councilor Bears just reiterated what I was going to state.

[Marks]: I was wondering if Councilor Penta was aware of any community that did have a moratorium that a 40B project was not allowed at.

[Marks]: And that stopped a potential 40B project?

[Marks]: But was there a 40B project offered during that period of time?

[Marks]: Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I want to thank you, Max.

[Marks]: Is it two goals?

[Marks]: Mm-hmm.

[Marks]: You have to wear that proudly around your neck.

[Marks]: Sure.

[Marks]: If I had one of those, I would never take it off.

[Marks]: Believe me.

[Marks]: I'd like to thank you personally for representing our city so well.

[Marks]: And I wish you well in your future endeavors.

[Marks]: And I can tell you there's a local sports team, the Boston Bruins, that can use a goal scorer.

[Marks]: So don't stop here.

[Marks]: Keep moving forward.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Last week, Mr. President, there was a meeting held here at City Hall regarding the 5G network and potential installation in this community by Verizon.

[Marks]: Verizon has petitioned the city for, from my understanding, at least

[Marks]: three to four dozen locations within the community to add these small cell networks.

[Marks]: throughout the community, and we received a letter which I've already read into the record several weeks back from Verizon, dated December 10th, 2019, to then-Mayor Stephanie Burke regarding their applications.

[Marks]: And I won't read the whole letter, but more or less the letter is stating that method is in current violation.

[Marks]: of the FCC rules and regulations which requires the city of Medford after 60 days to either approve or deny small cell applications.

[Marks]: Verizon went on to say that they would be willing to give us an extension until January 20th.

[Marks]: And I am not sure which I will be asking tonight.

[Marks]: where the city stands with these current applications.

[Marks]: But for tonight's purpose, Mr. President, I received a number of phone calls and emails from area residents.

[Marks]: This has been an issue that I've been on top of for the last several months.

[Marks]: And many residents who reached out were concerned not only with a number of issues related to 5G, but also the potential health impact it could have on residents in this community.

[Marks]: So tonight, Mr. President, I will be offering a motion tonight.

[Marks]: But I would like to go through, which was provided to me by a number of residents.

[Marks]: One being Jay Ritchie, who I think is in the audience here, Mr. President, provided this council along with the mayor with an abundance of information regarding health impacts,

[Marks]: ordinances in other cities and towns throughout the United States, and also actions taken by local legislatures throughout the United States as well.

[Marks]: But, Mr. President, local ordinances note various purposes for ordinances, such as preserving visual character, protecting environmental resources,

[Marks]: and protecting residents against adverse health effects.

[Marks]: They take a variety of approaches, such as prohibiting small cells in certain areas, creating application and recertification fees, and imposing aesthetic and administrative requirements.

[Marks]: Under location ordinance suggestions, Mr. President, and what I'm hoping to do tonight is just to start the dialogue because the mayor, in her wisdom, Mayor Burke, when we were approached with these requests originally, there was no city ordinance that governed these.

[Marks]: And I think the mayor did a tremendous job at the time for what resources that she had.

[Marks]: She created an administrative policy that would govern the approach to applying for an application and how the city would handle it.

[Marks]: And also the creation of what the city refers to as the method ad hoc small cell committee, which is the granting authority.

[Marks]: and they may have put together a several page policy, but in my opinion, it was good for the time that it was presented, but it doesn't go far enough.

[Marks]: to add the protections that we need as a community and to have a full-fledged ordinance because Verizon is going to be the first of many vendors that will be before us.

[Marks]: And you can count on that.

[Marks]: So getting back to the local ordinances, location suggestions.

[Marks]: Prohibiting small cell installations in residential areas.

[Marks]: Requiring installations to be certain distance away from residences, schools, hospitals,

[Marks]: Specifying that installations must be relocated when they would interfere with public projects.

[Marks]: Aesthetics and environment ordinances.

[Marks]: These are just a suggestion.

[Marks]: Aesthetic design, noise requirements such as co-location, camouflage, height, and light limits.

[Marks]: The administrative legal suggestions for ordinances.

[Marks]: Requiring that residents who will be within a certain distance of an installation be notified.

[Marks]: instating automatic time limits for permits, requiring annual recertification fees, requiring permittees to defend and indemnify the city for many liabilities arising from permits in the installation, operation, and maintenance of small cell installations, reserving the right to hire independent consultants at the applicant's expense.

[Marks]: What was presented to us, Mr. President, and there were several states, but the state of New Hampshire has proposed a bill which would establish a commission to study the environmental and health effects of 5G technology.

[Marks]: The state of Montana has proposed a joint resolution of the Senate and the House of Representatives urging Congress to amend 1996 Telecommunications Act to account for health effects.

[Marks]: So those are two proposals, Mr. President, that I will be offering tonight that we ask our state delegation submit on behalf of the city of Medford and on behalf of the Commonwealth, because we're not the only city in the Commonwealth that's struggling with this issue.

[Marks]: Mr. President, as we all know, this is an FCC regulation, and in my opinion, they really do tie the hands of local government to act.

[Marks]: And one thing we can act upon is creating an ordinance that will safeguard our residents and also re-insure that

[Marks]: When these installations if and when they do get approved that all the measures are in place mr. President that safeguards our residents So that will be what I'm offering tonight One resolution, I would like to offer now mr. President is be it resolved that the method City Council approve a resolution asking state lawmakers the Federal Communications Commission

[Marks]: in Congress to limit 5G technology deployment in Massachusetts until the health effects are fully understood.

[Marks]: I can't speak for my colleagues, but I can say, Mr. President, many residents that I spoke to, no one's against

[Marks]: new technology.

[Marks]: No one's against advancements in technology.

[Marks]: No one's against having our residents not have the technology that would enable them to use their devices and all sorts of angles and aspects and so forth.

[Marks]: But what we are against, Mr. President, is moving forward without getting the proper answers.

[Marks]: I have asked several times, I was here at the meeting that Verizon held, and Verizon will be the first to come out and say there are no health concerns that they are aware of.

[Marks]: And I got that from every representative.

[Marks]: However, when you go on the internet, you'll see experts saying there are concerns.

[Marks]: So this is no different than a trial when you have two experts, they may be physicians or accountants, say two completely different things.

[Marks]: And on behalf of our residents, Mr. President, we should proceed with caution.

[Marks]: And if that caution is that we take a while to explore this issue and make sure that it's safe, these devices are going to be within 200, 300 feet of residents' homes.

[Marks]: They're going to be in backyards where kids are playing, close to parks, close to schoolyards, close to churches.

[Marks]: So we have to make sure that we do our due diligence, Mr. President, when it comes to creating the ordinance.

[Marks]: The second thing, Mr. President, I'd like to bring up is I happen to have bumped into recently a former member of the Burlington Selectmen.

[Marks]: And the town of Burlington, I would tell anyone interested in this subject, they should really go on their website.

[Marks]: They have an application process, Mr. President, that is literally probably 10 pages long.

[Marks]: And it's a very in-depth process that makes these particular vendors jump through many hurdles in order to proceed.

[Marks]: And from what I've been told by the town of Burlington is there was enough hurdles that they got tired jumping over hurdles.

[Marks]: And the application process is equally, Mr. President, which I have equally as Cumminson, these design rules and regulations, which is about a 20-page report that was issued by the town of Burlington.

[Marks]: Very in depth, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And then there was a number of correspondence back and forth from attorneys that were hired to discuss the issue on behalf of the town in Verizon, which I won't get into tonight, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I would like to just briefly mention that some of the things that we should be looking at as a community,

[Marks]: And this is not unique to Method, but prior to any installation, a structural analysis should be completed to ensure the pole can handle the additional equipment.

[Marks]: That should be the very first thing either in our policy, which is not there currently, or in our city ordinance.

[Marks]: The city should ask about a host agreement.

[Marks]: When we sign on, Mr. President, to anything happen in this community, the first thing that we usually do is sign a host agreement to make sure that if there are any issues that arise from this, that the city of Medford will be covered.

[Marks]: There should be an agreement in place that requires the removal of these systems when obsolete.

[Marks]: Right now, you can go down any street in our community, Mr. President, and you see dishes

[Marks]: They're on the side of homes.

[Marks]: I have one across the street from me.

[Marks]: It's a two-family, but they have three dishes that have been disconnected for years.

[Marks]: It's just a blight, an eyesore, and there should be a provision in there when they become obsolete, no longer useful, that they be removed, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I realize they're on private property, but I feel strongly about that.

[Marks]: And this is no different.

[Marks]: These will be located on public property.

[Marks]: and public right-of-ways, but when they're no longer useful, they should have a plan to remove them.

[Marks]: The city should establish design rules and regulations that I won't get into, similar to what the town of Burlington did, as well as the application to ensure compliance with city policy.

[Marks]: Verizon should also provide the city with a long-range plan, including future expansion.

[Marks]: We should not be subjected to the one and twosies of these, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Last I spoke to the city engineer, I believe he said there were three or four dozen applications, and there possibly could be upwards to 100 from what he's being told.

[Marks]: And I believe at the very least, as a community, we should know what their intent is.

[Marks]: Is the intent to put 100?

[Marks]: We should know the locations offhand, Mr. President, and we should know if they are the only ones that are gonna be doing this in the community, because in my opinion, they're not gonna be the only ones.

[Marks]: Verizon should also provide a public health, I'm sorry, public health concerns be addressed by an independent study.

[Marks]: So that would be, Mr. President, the city requesting, I know Verizon has done their studies on health and the impact and effects of 5G on residents and so forth, but the city should have its own independent study so therefore we can rely on valid information from a neutral party and not someone that's trying to make a dollar.

[Marks]: And I wish them no

[Marks]: I wish them no animosity, Mr. President, but our job as residents of city council is to ensure the public safety of this community.

[Marks]: And this truly is a public safety issue.

[Marks]: The second point, maybe the third point by now, Mr. President, is that several weeks back, the city, actually probably more than several weeks now, the city had its own public hearing.

[Marks]: And that was conducted by the ad hoc small cell committee.

[Marks]: And the correspondence that went out to residents at the time, and I know this has been expanded since, Ashcroft Road, Dutton Circle, Cedar, Lawrence Road, they received a letter from the city that did not really specify the location.

[Marks]: They received a letter, Mr. President, that wasn't signed.

[Marks]: They received a letter that called for a public hearing at 2 o'clock in the afternoon.

[Marks]: making no consideration for people working, people with kids, people that need childcare, people that may not be able to get there, Mr. President.

[Marks]: There was no copy or scope of the project within this letter.

[Marks]: And they did adhere to the mayor's policy about notification.

[Marks]: And that was to notify residents within 300 feet of the installation.

[Marks]: As we both know, 300 feet would be here to probably the far back of the chamber and maybe a little further outside, Mr. President, in the hall.

[Marks]: It's not much notification to a neighborhood.

[Marks]: I requested, along with this council, it was unanimous, that we increase the notification to at least 500 feet.

[Marks]: That was passed unanimously by this council.

[Marks]: That any other future mailings that go out

[Marks]: that the specific location be mailed along with a copy of the site plan by Verizon, and that all public hearings take place after 5 p.m.

[Marks]: so that we can have more resident involvement.

[Marks]: That was sent to the city administration back, I think it was a month and a half, two months ago.

[Marks]: And, uh, I am not sure if the mayor, mayor Burke at the time, uh, updated the policy that was under her prerogative.

[Marks]: And that's why I think we need a city ordinance.

[Marks]: So, uh, I look forward, Mr. President, uh, to sending word out to our state delegation in the form of, um,

[Marks]: If we want to do council resolution, asking that state delegation.

[Marks]: Bear with me one second.

[Marks]: The state delegation, our state delegation establish a commission to study the environmental and health effects of 5G technology.

[Marks]: So that's the second resolution.

[Marks]: And the third resolution is that our state delegation offer before the House of Representatives and also the State Senate, which would include Senator Jalen, urging Congress to amend the Telecommunication Act 1996, of 1996.

[Marks]: To account for health effects.

[Marks]: So those would be the three resolutions I'd like to offer tonight, Mr. President, as well as you reconvening a meeting so we can start diligently working on our own ordinance to safeguard residents.

[Marks]: And I look forward to hearing what my colleagues have to say and also residents in the community, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Last week's meeting, I also thought was going to be a question answer type meeting.

[Marks]: I know there were a lot of residents that were upset.

[Marks]: It was more of a

[Marks]: just an informational meeting where you can walk around and talk to representatives.

[Marks]: And I'm not sure you're quite going to get that out of tonight's meeting, but I'm hoping after tonight's meeting we will invite Verizon down, we will invite

[Marks]: the Method Ad Hoc Small Cell Committee, who is the granting authority.

[Marks]: We will invite the mayor down, Mr. President, and have our own public hearing here so residents can ask Verizon the tough questions.

[Marks]: And this council, as well as the mayor, as well as this Ad Hoc Committee, can be on the same page.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Every petition comes with a start date.

[Marks]: So the date commences when the 60 day period starts.

[Marks]: So the first batch, and I'm not sure how many were in the first batch, the date that we had as a city was December 20th to act upon it.

[Marks]: Verizon came back because the city did not act and said, okay, we'll give you another 30 days, which brought it to January 20th.

[Marks]: Now, I'm under the impression they still need approval from the city of town, from this ad hoc committee that was created by the mayor.

[Marks]: And when that's gonna happen, we can ask the city engineer who happens to chair that committee what his thoughts are.

[Marks]: But as far as I know, it doesn't just automatically get approved.

[Marks]: Do you prefer separate votes on these?

[Marks]: I prefer separate just in case they all get sent, and then they all.

[Marks]: Different directions.

[Marks]: Mr. President, I'm not sure if I've asked already, but I would request that this council have a public hearing, and invite a state delegation, the mayor of the city of Medford, the Medford Ad Hoc Small Cell Committee,

[Marks]: Verizon, our city solicitor, and Congresswoman Clark.

[Marks]: At a public hearing here, Mr. President, at the earliest that you can call for that and get all the parties together to discuss 5G.

[Marks]: The last one?

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: So the last one was that the state delegation proposed a joint resolution of the Senate and the House urging Congress to amend

[Marks]: the Telecommunication Act of 1996 to account for health effects.

[Marks]: C paper.

[Marks]: So it would be that a state delegation proposed a bill which would establish a commission to study the environmental and health effects of 5G technology.

[Marks]: And the B paper is a resolution from this council.

[Marks]: Be it resolved that the Medford City Council approve a resolution asking our state delegation, the Federal Communications Commission, and Congress to limit 5G technology deployment in Massachusetts until the health effects are fully understood.

[Marks]: And that's the creation of a public hearing?

[Marks]: Correct.

[Marks]: That is correct, and I appreciate that clarification.

[Marks]: It's a public meeting, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I want to thank my colleagues, Vice President Caraviello and Councilor Knight for signing on to this.

[Marks]: All of us that behind this reel, Mr. President, can appreciate the work.

[Marks]: that Carol has done over four decades.

[Marks]: And you couldn't meet a kinder, gentler person.

[Marks]: Always has a smile on her face and willing to help.

[Marks]: And anyone that could stay in this city service for 40 years deserves a recommendation, Mr. President, of great service, believe me.

[Marks]: So I want to commend her and thank her personally for her many years of city service.

[Marks]: And I think we should dedicate this meeting

[Marks]: after Carol for all the years of service, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Gerard was a true family man that lived in this community for a number of years.

[Marks]: Again, someone that always had a smile on his face and was willing to lend a hand if need be.

[Marks]: He is also the father of our superintendent, Dr. Maurice Edouard Vincent.

[Marks]: And he will surely be missed, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I agree with the intent.

[Marks]: I'm not quite sure an executive order, uh, would be the Avenue.

[Marks]: Um, and the reason why I say that is traffic commission is set up by state statute and they're an autonomous, as the councilor mentioned, an autonomous body.

[Marks]: And I'm not sure enough executive directive can change that.

[Marks]: Um, but I think it's,

[Marks]: worthy to ask, or maybe you can ask more of a general question, if the mayor would be willing to reach out to the different boards and commissions to see if she can get a buy-in.

[Marks]: But either way, I support it.

[Marks]: I believe strongly that, as my council colleagues mentioned, that these meetings should be open to everyone to attend, and during the day is just not adequate enough.

[Marks]: So I support it.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: There were a lot of great ideas and priorities brought up during this meeting.

[Marks]: The one thing that I am grateful, and I believe you were the first to bring it up, were the pre-budget meetings.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Because for many years, we were, as a council, I believe, and I won't speak for everyone, but I think there was a sense of frustration once we got the budget.

[Marks]: It was already in ink.

[Marks]: And our only authority was really to cut from the bottom line and not to offer suggestions, like I think many of us have, on ways of improving how government operates.

[Marks]: And I think it's very helpful that

[Marks]: Mayor Lungo-Koehn now is talking about us looking at the budget and potentially April, which has never happened in my 18 years on the council.

[Marks]: And I look forward to actually a preview of the budget where we can have some input before it goes into final status on obtaining some of the priorities and important measures that we see as a body.

[Marks]: There's seven of us.

[Marks]: You know, we're out in the streets, we're listening to constituents, we receive the same emails and phone calls, and what better advice or counsel to have than members of this council when you are putting together the budget.

[Marks]: And that has never happened since I've been on this council.

[Marks]: And I look forward under your leadership, along with this new mayor, to actually sit down around the table and discuss not only the mayor's priorities, but our priorities and how do we incorporate that in a budget process.

[Marks]: I would just add that where the CPA now is in effect in the community,

[Marks]: and one of the options for the CPA money that's available is affordable housing, that that also be looked at, Mr. President, to see what funding is available to assist in low to moderate and affordable housing within our community.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: And I hate to interrupt you, Mr. Superintendent.

[Marks]: It'd be helpful if you can point out timelines.

[Marks]: When was it brought to the principal's office as you make your presentation?

[Marks]: Happy to do that.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Point of information, Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Just if I could, Mr. Superintendent, two points.

[Marks]: The decision that was made that this wasn't a serious incident

[Marks]: Who else was in consultation?

[Marks]: Was the chief of police involved in this conversation?

[Marks]: Okay, and my other point was, at the beginning of your speech, you mentioned that the clip, the magazine clip, potentially had three to four bullets, which is pretty specific to me.

[Marks]: And at any point, did you receive a picture of this, even though the principal stated he did not have the clip, or doesn't recall ever seeing the clip?

[Marks]: At what point did you see the clip itself?

[Marks]: So in your opinion, you just mentioned that you want to make the public feel comfortable.

[Marks]: And in your opinion, finding a magazine clip in a K through 8 school

[Marks]: doesn't rise to the nature of seriousness to notify local police department, notify faculty, notify parents, notify students that there is an investigation that is gonna take place?

[Marks]: You didn't even feel it was at that level where you notify people in the community?

[Marks]: That's debatable.

[Marks]: We've had a bomb incident, Mr. Superintendent, that your own school committee created a policy where serious incidents had to be reported immediately by the administration, which clearly wasn't followed in this case.

[Marks]: There's no debate, Mr. Superintendent, when you find a magazine, Mr. Superintendent, that there is a concern within a building.

[Marks]: There's no debate.

[Marks]: I don't see how you can say that it didn't rise to that particular level.

[Marks]: I would question your judgment if you honestly believe that that doesn't rise to a level where you should be notifying at least public safety officials.

[Marks]: And I say with all due respect, Mr. Superintendent, because we've known each other for a lot of years, but I really don't see how that doesn't rise to a level in this day and age that people should be notified, especially after the incidences that we've had in this community where there's been a lack of notification.

[Marks]: I thought we were past that stage and the best policy is 100% notification.

[Marks]: and then let the administrators and the police do what they have to do, Mr. Superintendent.

[Marks]: So I'd like to clarify that.

[Marks]: Thank you, counsel.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Mr. Superintendent, in my opinion, it's clear that

[Marks]: if this wasn't brought to certain people's attention in the community, this would have never came out in public.

[Marks]: That's my own feeling.

[Marks]: And again, we can talk about best practices, we could talk about additional funding for cameras, we could talk about new policies and procedures, and all that can be negated by one bad judgment.

[Marks]: All that, any policies and procedures in place can all be negated.

[Marks]: And I think that's what happened.

[Marks]: I do think we have policies and procedures in place that weren't followed.

[Marks]: And I know you take responsibility now.

[Marks]: You mentioned about coordinated and uncoordinated efforts.

[Marks]: I would consider what took place an uncoordinated effort internally.

[Marks]: Would you not?

[Marks]: I don't think that was full coordination, but clearly part of part of coordination is notification, correct?

[Marks]: My other point, and I'm not a Johnny come lately on the issue is year after year.

[Marks]: I've been questioning you regarding the rentals of our school buildings, right?

[Marks]: And year after year, we've had debates, many at this podium.

[Marks]: And I'm not going to rehash all the different debates, but I do feel strongly, Mr. Superintendent, you promised me you'd look into this, that many of our buildings are rented out to outside organizations.

[Marks]: that have no affiliation with this community.

[Marks]: We do no background checks.

[Marks]: We have no idea who are entering, exiting, what they're bringing into these buildings.

[Marks]: And in my opinion, when it's mentioned to you, you kind of shrug it off and say, well, we can't crawl up and hide in a ball.

[Marks]: We rent our buildings out.

[Marks]: And I can appreciate that.

[Marks]: But the safety and security of our children and our faculty should come first.

[Marks]: And if it comes to telling a program that they're no longer welcome back in this community because we choose not to rent out our buildings to make an additional 25 or 30 grand a year, which is a pittance, to be quite honest with you, in the scheme of a city budget, to me would lend a lot more peace of mind to parents.

[Marks]: We've had this discussion about the high school.

[Marks]: After 3 o'clock, we don't have one security person on at the high school.

[Marks]: After three o'clock, as you know, there's extracurricular activities, there's after school programs, and there's not one person at the high school that's there for security.

[Marks]: I don't count custodians, I know you do, for security.

[Marks]: I don't count having faculty around that they're security.

[Marks]: And I think that's a real breach of a safe and secure building.

[Marks]: And I just can't see why you can't see that, Mr. Superintendent.

[Marks]: And again, it concerns me about a lack of judgment when it comes to having people.

[Marks]: We don't know what they're bringing into these buildings.

[Marks]: We really don't know.

[Marks]: In this day and age, Mr. Superintendent, I think it's best to err on the side of safety.

[Marks]: And I know you mentioned about Cub Scouts, and that's great.

[Marks]: And we don't want to make Cub Scouts not come into our building.

[Marks]: I'm talking about outside organizations that have no city affiliation, that you don't know who's going in there.

[Marks]: Chief of Police doesn't know who's entering these buildings, and we don't know what they're doing inside these buildings, but they do have access to classrooms, to auditoriums, to cafeterias, and to a host of things within our building, and that's of grave concern, and something that no policy or procedure is going to cover.

[Marks]: We have to take an internal approach.

[Marks]: saying, is this what we really want out of our buildings?

[Marks]: Is it worth the public safety?

[Marks]: Is it worth the wear and tear?

[Marks]: I don't believe so, Mr. Superintendent.

[Marks]: And I don't think we could just shrug our shoulders year after year and say, you know what?

[Marks]: We've had no incidences.

[Marks]: We're doing fine.

[Marks]: This could have been an incident.

[Marks]: If you found some flour, sugar, and frosting underneath the seat in the auditorium, you would say they're baking a cake.

[Marks]: Right?

[Marks]: But you find a magazine with bullets, and you don't think there's any serious nature.

[Marks]: That there's no affiliation.

[Marks]: I really believe, Mr. Superintendent, that someone needs to be held accountable.

[Marks]: Someone needs to be held.

[Marks]: You don't want to discuss particular personnel matters, and I agree, this is not the forum to discuss it, but someone needs to be held accountable.

[Marks]: How can you be cleaning your office the day after this took place?

[Marks]: take a magazine off the shelf and say, oh, this doesn't look like my pocket pen or this doesn't, and discard it.

[Marks]: How does that happen?

[Marks]: Unless your office is a filthy mess.

[Marks]: I don't understand how that happens.

[Marks]: I really don't.

[Marks]: And even if it does look like a cell phone, how many people throw cell phones out?

[Marks]: I mean, I just don't understand.

[Marks]: It seems to me the perfect, and I hate to use the words, the perfect coverup to something that should have been reported immediately.

[Marks]: We're not here to alarm people, I agree with you, but having administrators, having faculty, having parents, having them make that decision whether this is serious or not, whether they want to send their kids to school, is up to them, Mr. Superintendent, and not up to you making an individual, standalone decision on whether you think it rises to an area of such seriousness that people should be aware of it.

[Marks]: I really am very disappointed.

[Marks]: I have to say, Mr. Superintendent, I know you're stepping down soon and I wish you well in your retirement, but honestly, I'm very disappointed in this.

[Marks]: I'm very disappointed that it's taken seven weeks to come out.

[Marks]: into the public and just barely come out, and only because I think people found out about it and raised awareness that it came out.

[Marks]: Otherwise, I think it would have been brushed under the rug.

[Marks]: And it would lead me to believe what else is being brushed under the rug that we should be aware of.

[Marks]: Well, I don't think it's enough responsibility.

[Marks]: But needless to say, at the beginning of your speech, you made mention, and you referenced it, that that building was rented prior to what took place.

[Marks]: And I believe you mentioned that.

[Marks]: And you can correct me if I'm wrong.

[Marks]: You mentioned that to allude that this was probably brought in from somewhere else.

[Marks]: This wasn't a student bringing it in.

[Marks]: This was probably someone that came into our building through a rental.

[Marks]: Is that not correct, Mr. Superintendent?

[Marks]: So that leads you to believe that we should be looking at who's renting our buildings.

[Marks]: Shouldn't that lead you to believe that we do need security, Mr. Superintendent?

[Marks]: Do you have security when you rent these buildings there?

[Marks]: I'm talking about the McGlynn schools.

[Marks]: There's security there.

[Marks]: We could talk as we've done in the past few years until we're blue in the face.

[Marks]: We just don't see eye to eye on this issue.

[Marks]: And I hope it never amounts to anything other than just talk.

[Marks]: But I think we need to take a serious look at, Mr. President, our rentals, which the superintendent told me for the last, I think, four or five budget periods that it's being looked at.

[Marks]: Is it being looked at?

[Marks]: I don't know.

[Marks]: Maybe it's being looked at.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Yes, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Paper of Council Resolution 17-795 was a proposed amendment to Chapter 94, Article 2, Division 1, relative to the expanded notification of certain public hearings.

[Marks]: We received the response back in our packet,

[Marks]: from the Community Development Board dated February 12th, 2018, and I would ask that a Committee of the Whole meeting be set up to discuss this particular response from Community Development Board, and this be a paper review referred to Committee of the Whole.

[Marks]: Mr. President, we received correspondence from the city solicitor in our packet tonight, dated February 16th, 2018.

[Marks]: It's to Mayor Burke from Mark Rumley regarding Council Paper 18041, request for an opinion.

[Marks]: This was, I won't read the whole thing, this was a request of opinion from Council and Knight regarding has the Board of Health exceeded their authority with the regulatory passage of a smoking ban in private clubs?

[Marks]: where an exemption for smoking ban on private clubs is outlined in the city ordinance 58-43.

[Marks]: The correspondence that we received back from the city solicitor stated that he believes that the Board of Health, and I'm not speaking on his behalf, this is how I interpret it, that he believes the Board of Health did exceed their authority in the passage of that smoking ban

[Marks]: and what he refers to membership associations.

[Marks]: And I would ask that this paper, because we were supposed to be following up on this, be referred either to a committee of the whole or some, be open to a subcommittee, whatever the council feels fit.

[Marks]: And if there's any, I think we have someone that'd like to speak on it tonight.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Uh, in the spirit of cooperation, uh, as part of paper 18 0 dash, uh, 0 4 1, there was a B paper and I had a re recent discussion after the city solicitor issued his opinion.

[Marks]: And if anyone recalls the B paper was requesting that, uh, these particular service clubs, or if you want to refer to them as membership associations,

[Marks]: have a dedicated smoking area and we asked that as a B paper.

[Marks]: In my discussion with the city solicitor, he thought it would be wise to put some language within our city ordinance

[Marks]: is requesting that member associations have an alternative, which would be a dedicated smoking area within their facility.

[Marks]: And as Councilor Knight mentioned, that would be up to the membership to decide where, when, and if they want to do it.

[Marks]: But I think that's appropriate that we have a committee of the whole meeting to discuss this issue.

[Marks]: It's a matter of crafting really a sentence

[Marks]: of language into the city ordinance of 58-43.

[Marks]: And I think it would, in my opinion, solve all problems for members that feel they have the right to smoke.

[Marks]: And they do have the right to smoke, in my opinion, but in a dedicated area.

[Marks]: Like any other establishment, we all have workplaces.

[Marks]: There's areas even here at City Hall.

[Marks]: You can't smoke anywhere around the building.

[Marks]: You can't even smoke outside the doors.

[Marks]: There's a dedicated area across about 30 feet from City Hall where is the dedicated smoking area.

[Marks]: And I think that would suit well for Captain Brennan and some of the concerns he raises.

[Marks]: Those numbers that he's mentioning are alarming.

[Marks]: And that's only one particular establishment they're alarming of the number of cases of cancer.

[Marks]: and people that frequent these particular areas.

[Marks]: So I would ask that this correspondence from the mayor be sent to a committee of the whole meeting and to discuss the dedicated smoking area and membership associations.

[Marks]: Mr. President, I would also ask that as far as I know, I know the city solicitor did an opinion, but as far as I know, these particular organizations in the community,

[Marks]: have not received any formal correspondence from the city, whether it's the Board of Health or from the city clerk's office, and I think it's only appropriate to let them know what the opinion is, and if truly they are allowed to smoke now in the building, they should be aware of that.

[Marks]: And it'll be up to the council to get together on this and try and iron out something that's amendable to all parties.

[Marks]: Right, but he's more or less saying if you were stopping people from smoking there now, you can't do that according to his opinion.

[Marks]: Right, and it's important that all the service organizations know that.

[Marks]: I think we can solve this.

[Marks]: I think with the Committee of the Whole meeting, get all the parties together, I think it's common sense.

[Marks]: Committee to the whole, it's possible.

[Marks]: I've been neglecting my duties, Mr. President, even more.

[Marks]: Mr. President, I know on the agenda also Councilor Scarpelli has a similar paper, if you'd like to read that also.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I was recently contacted by a resident that happens to take that bus.

[Marks]: If anyone's familiar, this bus stop is located on South Porter Road at the intersection of Roosevelt Circle.

[Marks]: If you're not familiar with it, it's the picnic bench that's been out there for some time now that is considered the bus stop.

[Marks]: And this particular resident contacted me, said not only is this bus stop kind of in a bad area, being placed around the Rotary at Roosevelt Circle, which is a highly traveled and fast-paced area, but the fact that there's a picnic bench there does not lend itself to public transportation.

[Marks]: and or discourages people from using that as a legit bus shelter stop.

[Marks]: And this particular location would be a prime location for a bus shelter.

[Marks]: to protect residents that use that, I believe the 325 and the 100 bus both go by that location.

[Marks]: And it would protect residents and commuters from the rain and snow and the inclement weather.

[Marks]: It also, Mr. President, in my opinion, would increase ridership at that particular location.

[Marks]: And Rep Donato reached out to me just recently

[Marks]: and said he's been working with some of the residents in that particular area that contacted his office to erect a bus shelter.

[Marks]: And the MBTA told them they do a ridership count, and they recently performed one.

[Marks]: and said roughly 28 people use that particular bus stop.

[Marks]: And the MBTA will not consider a bus shelter unless it's 50 or more people that use it.

[Marks]: But what I think, Mr. President, is the old issue that you have a shelter or a bus stop that's located in really a poor area in regards to traffic flow and so forth.

[Marks]: and safety of commuters.

[Marks]: And it also discourages people from standing there waiting to catch the bus.

[Marks]: So hence why the numbers of ridership may be down based on that current location, based on the fact that there's not a shelter that makes it look like, hey, this is a legit bus stop, rather than you're out there having a picnic off of 93 at a picnic bench.

[Marks]: So I would ask, Mr. President, that

[Marks]: This council send a request to the MBTA to erect a bus shelter at South Border Road at the intersection of Roosevelt Rotary in the interest of public safety, which services riders on the 325 and 100 bus, Mr. President.

[Marks]: We may also have a resident here.

[Marks]: I don't know if Barney's here tonight.

[Marks]: She said she was going to come.

[Marks]: And if we can also listen to Bonnie, who wants to speak on the issue, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Just if I could, and I've brought up this fact a number of times, the MBTA assesses this city, the city of Medford, over I believe it's $3 million a year to operate the MBTA in this community.

[Marks]: And we all pay for it as riders.

[Marks]: We pay through the sales tax.

[Marks]: There's a percent that goes towards

[Marks]: the operation of transit in this state.

[Marks]: And I think, Mr. President, I believe we're in the top maybe five or six in assessment in this state from the MBTA.

[Marks]: That money comes right off our cherry sheet.

[Marks]: So it's money that goes right out of

[Marks]: the city coffers, and it's based on services they're providing.

[Marks]: And I would state, Mr. President, that we need to take a long, hard look at many of our bus stops, many of the shelters that do exist in the city, the creation of not just

[Marks]: this shelter, but many other shelters in prime locations.

[Marks]: In the square, you have bus stops that hundreds of residents wait on a daily basis to take the bus there, and there's no shelters.

[Marks]: You know, I think the T has to do a better job, Mr. President, in this community, and I'm hoping, like Councilor Scarpelli, that we get a quick response to this issue.

[Marks]: And also, Mr. President, based on the fact that

[Marks]: We're one of a few communities that are paying such a heavy fee to have bus transportation, which is great.

[Marks]: I like John Falco.

[Marks]: take the bus every day also.

[Marks]: But I can tell you, Mr. President, the access that we get in this community is not just for Method residents.

[Marks]: We're paying a hefty fee to make sure people from all surrounding communities that jump on our express bus and all the other transit methods that we have, we're paying for their ridership as well, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I think, really, we need to make sure that the MBTA sees fit to make sure this community is getting its fair share.

[Marks]: Roll call vote, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Vice President Mox.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I can't support this resolution tonight based on the fact that I agree with my colleagues that this is something that hasn't been approved by the council as of yet.

[Marks]: And I'm not going to partake in something that is going to tell residents that they can get out of something that the council is going to vote on.

[Marks]: Um, and in my opinion, what we should do,

[Marks]: and I've stated this from day one, Mr. President is, uh, the energy and environment committee where this was sent at one point in this process, um, had a public hearing on it and we asked the city solicitor to attend.

[Marks]: And one of the questions, and it was actually my question was whether or not we can file a home rule petition on behalf of this city and change the legislation, which, uh, is everyone is opted into the program.

[Marks]: And, um,

[Marks]: automatically and change it so you can opt into the program.

[Marks]: And according to Mark Rumley, and I don't want to put words in his mouth, he spoke to House Counsel

[Marks]: at the statehouse and they believe that we could file a home loan petition.

[Marks]: And that is my number one concern.

[Marks]: In my opinion, when you get into utilities, that's between a homeowner and the utility company, not between the homeowner, the utility company, and the city of Medford.

[Marks]: I don't think we have any business getting involved, to be quite honest with you.

[Marks]: I realize this is a good intention to reduce our carbon footprint.

[Marks]: I realize that supposedly there's a cost benefit to by aggregating everyone together.

[Marks]: And so I realize what the intent is.

[Marks]: But I, as one member of the council, don't feel that everyone should be opted in automatically to a program.

[Marks]: And if this is such a great program,

[Marks]: It's going to be overwhelming.

[Marks]: People will be knocking on the door here at City Hall to get involved and say, I want to opt into that program.

[Marks]: Let the program work.

[Marks]: Let the program work.

[Marks]: So that would be my recommendation.

[Marks]: Mr. President, that eventually, when we do discuss this again, that we file a home rule petition to reverse it, Mr. President, because the state legislature made a mistake, in my opinion.

[Marks]: Maybe it wasn't a mistake.

[Marks]: Maybe it was intentional that they realized that, you know, a good majority of the people aren't going to opt out of the program, leaving them in the program, and that's where they're going to get their numbers from.

[Marks]: That's why they intended it and crafted the legislation that way.

[Marks]: I don't believe that should be the case.

[Marks]: I believe we should give residents of this community an option.

[Marks]: If they want to opt into the program, then so be it.

[Marks]: You can opt into the program, and I hope you save money, and I hope we move forward to reducing our carbon footprint, Mr. President.

[Marks]: There's also a section that I understand within this legislation that also allows a community to purchase more green energy.

[Marks]: And you can do it on a one-to-one basis, but the community can decide as a community, saying, you know what, the 15% that we're required to buy, you know, we want to up it to 25 or 30%.

[Marks]: Now that's going to be a cost to everyone else in the community.

[Marks]: And you can opt out of that also.

[Marks]: But now you say you can opt out of the program.

[Marks]: And if you happen not to opt out of the program, then if you don't want to pay the additional green energy, you have to opt out of that.

[Marks]: That's be up front with the people.

[Marks]: Let them choose whether they want to partake in this program.

[Marks]: And I could support that, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I can't support this resolution tonight because we haven't voted on any type of aggregation the way it stands.

[Marks]: Was there a number six on that?

[Marks]: No, I, okay.

[Marks]: I thought a number.

[Marks]: Yeah, no, they were saying if I'm not mistaken, as part of what council Longo just spoke about, um, I think I offered the motion during that meeting that, uh, as part of their detailed plan, that they also include, uh, the water hookups throughout the entire route.

[Marks]: And we asked that that be provided to us at our next meeting.

[Marks]: And I think, uh, representatives from Eversource said,

[Marks]: We can't possibly get that information this quickly and so forth, but it was still a request of this council to get a plan of each hookup that they're going to be crossing over or under, water hookups.

[Marks]: Last week.

[Marks]: Okay, so we're not gonna, are we gonna get the next paper before next Tuesday's meeting?

[Marks]: When we ask,

[Marks]: I mean, Eversource was before us.

[Marks]: We asked Eversource to produce some information.

[Marks]: But we may not get that information before next Tuesday.

[Marks]: This issue is coming up again, correct?

[Marks]: Yes, it is.

[Marks]: So we may not get that information prior to next Tuesday's meeting.

[Marks]: That's an issue.

[Marks]: That's why I thought this was part of the paper that we were reading that included everything.

[Marks]: Vice President Mox.

[Marks]: I appreciate Councilman Light sharing that information and knowing that any approval comes before the mayor and also the council as a two-pronged approach, it would be very helpful maybe in future projects

[Marks]: that the administration sit down with this council and say, you know, we're crafting an MOU, memorandum of understanding.

[Marks]: You have partial approval of the streets.

[Marks]: What are your thoughts?

[Marks]: And that would have been helpful, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So now we're after the fact negotiating with the utility company that has already entered into an agreement with the city administration.

[Marks]: And in my opinion, I think we have every authority, otherwise it would be just a rubber stamp body just approving things to put conditions on this, Mr. President, that make sense to the rate payers and the tax payers of this community.

[Marks]: When you have a project coming into a city that has zero benefit to this community, I say zero benefit.

[Marks]: and 100% disruption, I think we have every right to stand up on behalf of the residents of this community.

[Marks]: So I look forward to speaking with the city solicitor on this.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: As the financial steward of this community, as we are as a body, and the mayor is coming before us requesting $200,000 of taxpayers' money, I would ask that the administration answer a few questions regarding this money, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Well, if the administration appears before the podium, Mr. President, I'd be more than happy to relay my questions.

[Marks]: So the mayor is presenting a paper, Mr. President, a financial paper, and not one person could take the time out of their schedule to come up before the council to answer a question regarding taxpayers' money.

[Marks]: I just want the record to reflect that, Mr. President.

[Marks]: that not one person from the city administration was here last week, and they had ample opportunity because it was tabled for a week, or here tonight, Mr. President, to answer one question on behalf of the taxpayers of this community.

[Marks]: But, Mr. President, I still will ask my questions.

[Marks]: I posed last week, and many of them, as representatives from the Brooks Estates quite eloquently stated, is not under the ability wig to answer why we don't have a capital plan in this community.

[Marks]: And I can appreciate the fact that representatives from the Brooks Estates, all volunteers that have been doing tremendous work to keep that

[Marks]: building and the carriage house afloat for so many years, and actually moved towards the rehabilitation of the manor and the property, have done great work, Mr. President.

[Marks]: My concern, and I reiterated this last week, is not with the Brooks Estates, is not with shoring up a building that I witnessed just recently as a building that's on the verge of collapse.

[Marks]: I agree with that.

[Marks]: I don't think anyone else could go over into that area or that building and say this building is not going to come down very shortly.

[Marks]: I think we all agree with it.

[Marks]: My concern, Mr. President, is why don't we have a game plan in this community on capital improvement?

[Marks]: This is one issue.

[Marks]: There are a laundry list of issues that we need a capital plan for.

[Marks]: Last week, I mentioned the fire departments.

[Marks]: Each fire station has dire need, Mr. President, for upgrades and renovation in the fire stations where our brave men and women spend seven days a week, 24 hours a day.

[Marks]: That is one aspect that needs a capital plan.

[Marks]: We're not going to be able to do that work within the confines of our budget.

[Marks]: And I think we can all appreciate that.

[Marks]: Over the last several years, every member of this council has spoken about the poor condition of our sidewalks and our roads.

[Marks]: And based on over the years, that information, this city has put zero dollars for road replacement in the budget.

[Marks]: $0.

[Marks]: The only money we get for road replacement is through Chapter 90 money through the state.

[Marks]: It's about $980,000 a year, which is not going to be enough to start even remotely replacing and repaving the streets we know we need in this community.

[Marks]: We're never going to get ahead of the game in the way we're doing business.

[Marks]: We need a capital plan to address roads and sidewalks.

[Marks]: We have yet to get any capital plan regarding roads and sidewalks.

[Marks]: We talk about tree stumps.

[Marks]: Do we have to bring up the list again of tree stumps in this community that we just either don't have the will to take them out or don't have the funding to take them out?

[Marks]: It's one or the other.

[Marks]: I would hope it's the funding and not the will to take these out, Mr. President.

[Marks]: But that's another capital plan we need to move forward on.

[Marks]: Catch basins.

[Marks]: Talk to the DPW commissioner.

[Marks]: Go down any street.

[Marks]: I'd venture to say, and this is just off the top of my head, 50 to 60% of our catch basins that are capturing rain runoff water and taking it out to the Mystic River are imploding.

[Marks]: And they're sinking into the ground.

[Marks]: We're not addressing these.

[Marks]: It needs to be a capital issue.

[Marks]: It needs to be a capital issue that we have to move forward to.

[Marks]: Traffic calming measures.

[Marks]: We just had a meeting about the revitalization of Method Square and the master plan, much of which calls for traffic calming plans on main street and high street and Salem street.

[Marks]: We have many other streets in this community, upwards of 600 streets in this community that need the same traffic calming approaches.

[Marks]: But yet, we put nothing in the budget, or very little, I should say, to address these very important pedestrian safety issues.

[Marks]: We need a capital plan.

[Marks]: We're moving forward on a new library.

[Marks]: That's great.

[Marks]: We'll probably need a capital plan for that, a portion of that.

[Marks]: You know, we're moving forward on a police station.

[Marks]: We're probably gonna need some type of capital plan moving forward on the police station.

[Marks]: There are a lot of issues that we need a direction from this administration.

[Marks]: The easy way out is to keep on allowing this administration to sit back and not give us a capital plan and take each issue one at a time.

[Marks]: That's our vision for this community.

[Marks]: When there's a need, we'll take the issue.

[Marks]: The carriage house is going to fall down.

[Marks]: Let's take some money out of free cash.

[Marks]: We'll repair that.

[Marks]: We'll wait till the next emergency.

[Marks]: We'll take care of that.

[Marks]: If we don't have a game plan in this community, we're never going to move forward.

[Marks]: We're never going to move forward.

[Marks]: And whether this is the carriage house or any other issue in this community, I've preached about this for years now.

[Marks]: And members of this council, I think, can agree that we've all asked for capital plans over the last several years.

[Marks]: And there have been few in coming by the last administration and this current administration.

[Marks]: So I'm not going to continue to work piecemeal.

[Marks]: If we want to ask the administration

[Marks]: To start looking at some of the needs we have in this community, I think we have to put our foot down at some point.

[Marks]: The easy thing is just to prove everything.

[Marks]: We have over $8 million in free cash.

[Marks]: The coffers are open.

[Marks]: Just keep on approving it.

[Marks]: That's the least resistance.

[Marks]: That's just to prove everything.

[Marks]: But guess what?

[Marks]: Someday, those coffers are going to be closed.

[Marks]: Times aren't going to be as good.

[Marks]: We're not going to have a reserve of $8 million in free cash.

[Marks]: And the decisions are going to get tougher and tougher.

[Marks]: And that's why we need to have a game plan to tackle the most important issues, the pressing issues.

[Marks]: So tonight, Mr. President, I'd like to find out what is the vision for the Brooks Banner?

[Marks]: We had a group that did Yeoman's work, and we heard about it last week.

[Marks]: Back in 2012, they created a master plan for the Brooks Estates, and how the Brooks Estates is gonna be able to be self-sustaining and reinvest back into the Brooks Estates.

[Marks]: And part of that vision was to use the carriage house as the economic engine, as a function hall, to generate money that we could put into road repair.

[Marks]: I said this last week, and I hope people from the Brooks Estates don't get offended.

[Marks]: You need a four-wheel truck to get up to the Brooks Estates.

[Marks]: And if you make it up there in a four-wheel pickup truck, you're lucky.

[Marks]: That's how bad that road is.

[Marks]: It's awful.

[Marks]: It needs over a million and a half dollars of repair and underground utility.

[Marks]: There's a lot of work that needs to take place up there.

[Marks]: What's the vision?

[Marks]: We were presented with the vision in 2012.

[Marks]: And what did this council do?

[Marks]: We sat on it.

[Marks]: Five years later, now we're talking about buckling up the carriage house.

[Marks]: Let's put an envelope over it and let it sit there for another five years.

[Marks]: That's our vision for the Brooks Estates.

[Marks]: That's what we're doing for historic preservation in this community.

[Marks]: Let's bring the plan out again.

[Marks]: Let's discuss the plan.

[Marks]: Let's see what our direction is.

[Marks]: If it's the druthers of this council not to approve the plan,

[Marks]: again or not to ask for additional information, then so be it.

[Marks]: But to wait five years and then put a band-aid approach to just putting a capsule over the building, yes, it will preserve the building.

[Marks]: But we're still in the same spot we were, Mr. President, the same spot.

[Marks]: We're not moving forward.

[Marks]: As Mr. Lincoln eloquently said last week, this is a city-owned building, no different than Chevalier.

[Marks]: The city has to step up to the plate and take ownership.

[Marks]: And ownership is not putting a band-aid on a much larger problem.

[Marks]: So that would be my question to the mayor, or if your staff was here, what's the vision for the building for future use?

[Marks]: Do you have the same vision that the Brooks Estates has?

[Marks]: Completely restore two buildings, the Shepherd Brooks Manor and the Carriage House for public benefit, restore historic landscape, open space, natural habitat, capture the historic look and feel, promote biodiversity, improve habitat values, create the necessary economic engine to ensure long-term self-sufficiency of the property?

[Marks]: Is that the mayor's goal?

[Marks]: That's what I'd like to know, Mr. President.

[Marks]: We're putting $200,000.

[Marks]: Is that the mayor's goal?

[Marks]: Is the mayor going to come up with a capital plan that includes the Brooks estates?

[Marks]: These are the questions I think we, as the financial stewards in this community, should be asking.

[Marks]: And the quick knee-jerk reaction, I've talked to a lot of people, I got a lot of emails, Tommy did a great job, got a lot of emails from residents of this community, and actually it enlightened me on a lot of issues.

[Marks]: And I found myself, which many residents said, that's compromise.

[Marks]: We need to secure the building.

[Marks]: I agree.

[Marks]: You know, we had a member of this council five years ago that said, let's tear down the building and build a new one.

[Marks]: I mean, that was the thought five years ago.

[Marks]: I don't know how they're going to vote now, but maybe they have a change in heart.

[Marks]: But I would ask Mr. President that this be a condition on the paper that the city administration present the council within the next six months

[Marks]: After approval tonight, a capital plan addressing the city needs.

[Marks]: You will have my vote tonight if we can get that.

[Marks]: I think that's a simple request.

[Marks]: We can move ahead with the $200,000, and we're asking as a council, which we should be.

[Marks]: I think that should be unanimous.

[Marks]: Madam Mayor, present us with a capital plan.

[Marks]: You have six months to do so.

[Marks]: Present us with a capital plan.

[Marks]: Let us know your directions.

[Marks]: Let us know if it includes the Brooks Estates.

[Marks]: because these are the decisions we have to make as a body.

[Marks]: And I'm prepared to make a decision either way tonight, but I thought if the people I spoke with that sent me emails and through my phone conversations, that this would be a great compromise to move the paper forward and also have an understanding that, Madam Mayor, we're gonna hold your feet to the fire.

[Marks]: We're going to make sure you're accountable.

[Marks]: You may not want to come out with a list of things that you want to accomplish, because then we can measure you by that.

[Marks]: So you may not want that on record.

[Marks]: But guess what?

[Marks]: We as a city need to have that on record.

[Marks]: We need that to move issues forward in our community.

[Marks]: So that would be my condition on this paper, Mr. President, that the administration present the council within the next six months, after approval tonight, a capital plan addressing all city needs.

[Marks]: It's not a condition to spend your money.

[Marks]: It's a condition.

[Marks]: If I could have my mic.

[Marks]: This is first of all a financial paper and the council has purview over whether we approve it or not.

[Marks]: So we can put a condition on any paper.

[Marks]: Secondly, we do it all the time with the utility companies.

[Marks]: When they come in and they ask us to do work and open our streets up and they only want to repave the little area that they do work on, we put conditions of approval based on the fact that they have to do curb to curb restoration.

[Marks]: So we put conditions all the time.

[Marks]: This is no different.

[Marks]: I had a conversation with the city solicitor.

[Marks]: I won't speak for him, but this is no different than any other paper requesting us to approve something.

[Marks]: We're saying we will approve this, but you also have to do this.

[Marks]: So I don't think there's any problem putting a condition as I just mentioned.

[Marks]: So you want a vision for the whole city or just the Brooks Manor?

[Marks]: Capital plan addressing the entire city's needs.

[Marks]: Capital plan.

[Marks]: Mr. President.

[Marks]: I apologize, I have not had an opportunity to read the records.

[Marks]: I'm hoping it'll be my New Year's resolution.

[Marks]: Mr. President, if we could.

[Marks]: I just want to thank Mr. President.

[Marks]: Over this weekend, Saturday and Sunday, we had a very important democratic moment in this community where we had a recount.

[Marks]: And there were many, many volunteers that spent eight to nine hours on both Saturday and Sunday.

[Marks]: And I just want to thank all the volunteers that allowed this process to move forward.

[Marks]: And I want to thank this city

[Marks]: for being a great city to live in, Mr. President.

[Marks]: The 35th regular meeting of the Medford City Council will be called to order.

[Marks]: Clerk, call the roll.

[Marks]: Present.

[Marks]: Five present, two absent.

[Marks]: Please rise to salute the flag.

[Marks]: 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.

[Marks]: Motion to suspend the rules, to take papers under suspension.

[Marks]: Councilor Del Russo, all in favor?

[Marks]: paper 17-seven five one offered by Councilor Knight be resolved.

[Marks]: City solicitor in conjunction with the chief of police and building commissioner provide the council with a draft ordinance establishing safety standards, regulating the commercial display and storage of firearms, ammunition and firearm accessories in the city of method.

[Marks]: Council night.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Councilor Knight.

[Marks]: Second by Councilor Falco.

[Marks]: Councilor Del Russo.

[Marks]: I support this as a conversation, uh, started Mr. Chairman.

[Marks]: On the motion.

[Marks]: All those in favor?

[Marks]: Aye.

[Marks]: Opposed?

[Marks]: The ayes have it.

[Marks]: The motion is adopted.

[Marks]: Motion to take papers in the hands of the city clerk.

[Marks]: Second motion.

[Marks]: Do we have any other papers?

[Marks]: Right.

[Marks]: So papers in the hands of the city clerk.

[Marks]: I think there's three more.

[Marks]: Under suspension 17-752, administration refund taxpayers in the city council, November 14th, 2017.

[Marks]: I'll move after this.

[Marks]: Councilor Knight.

[Marks]: Councilor Dello Russo.

[Marks]: You want to refer to subcommittee?

[Marks]: Audit and finance.

[Marks]: Is that?

[Marks]: No, that's moving along.

[Marks]: So the motion on the floor is by Councilor Knight to have this submitted to the city administration.

[Marks]: Opposed?

[Marks]: Before we send it to the administration?

[Marks]: All those in favor?

[Marks]: Aye.

[Marks]: Opposed?

[Marks]: The ayes have it, the motion is adopted.

[Marks]: Papers in the hands of the clerk offered by Councilor Marksby resolved that the sidewalk in front of one 10, one 12,

[Marks]: Warren Street be replaced in the interest of public safety?

[Marks]: Move approval.

[Marks]: Motion for approval.

[Marks]: All those in favor?

[Marks]: Opposed?

[Marks]: The ayes have it.

[Marks]: The motion is adopted.

[Marks]: Offered by Councilor Marks, we resolve that the electronic speed sign be placed after Winthrop Circle heading toward West Medford Square on High Street in the interest of public safety.

[Marks]: Thank you, Councilor.

[Marks]: On the motion, all those in favor?

[Marks]: Aye.

[Marks]: Opposed?

[Marks]: The ayes have it.

[Marks]: The motion is adopted.

[Marks]: Offered by Councilor Marks, be resolved that the street pole number 4354 at 41 Mangles be replaced in the interest of public safety.

[Marks]: Move the pole.

[Marks]: All those in favor?

[Marks]: Aye.

[Marks]: Opposed?

[Marks]: The ayes have it.

[Marks]: The motion is adopted.

[Marks]: Motion to revert back to regular order of business.

[Marks]: All those in favor?

[Marks]: Aye.

[Marks]: Opposed?

[Marks]: The ayes have it.

[Marks]: Motions, orders, and resolutions 17-750 offered by vice president Mox, be resolved that the construction work on Harvard street from main street to Benton road be discussed.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Um, we all received, uh, uh, several emails regarding the, uh, national grid, uh, is determined that a gas main on Harvard street for main street to Benton road will be replaced.

[Marks]: Um, starting Monday, November 13th, uh, which was yesterday lasting four weeks, taking a place Monday through Friday from 7.00 PM to 5.00 AM.

[Marks]: That was the original request.

[Marks]: uh, since then, uh, there's been some, uh, emails going back and forth, uh, that the work will now take place during the day.

[Marks]: And, um, I have yet to get confirmation from chief Sacco who needs to make that decision.

[Marks]: But, um, the concerns I've heard from residents, and I know many of my colleagues have, uh, was really the lack of notification of residents in the area and the lack of input from any residents.

[Marks]: Some residents found out through finding a flyer on the street that this work was going to take place.

[Marks]: And many homes in the area that directly abut this and whose bedroom windows are located within 20 feet from potential construction at night naturally would have some grave concerns about sleep disruption during a four week span.

[Marks]: I know there's a number of residents

[Marks]: here that would like to speak on the issue, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And again, I would ask that this project be duly notified through Reverse 911 in the city, Mr. President, alerting residents when this work will take place, how long the work will take, and when it will be done.

[Marks]: If it's going to be during the day or the evening is extremely important, Mr. President, that residents are aware of this.

[Marks]: So at this time I'd open the floor if anyone from the direct abuttance would like to speak.

[Marks]: Mr. President, if I could, and I want to thank the residents for coming up tonight.

[Marks]: Um, where, where this is a non emergent job.

[Marks]: Um, I know it's dealing with a gas line.

[Marks]: Uh, I think it's crucial that, uh, the city and I'm not going to point the finger at

[Marks]: uh, the utility company.

[Marks]: It's the city that represents the residents of this community, not the utility company.

[Marks]: The city should have a clerk of the work assigned to the project.

[Marks]: Residents should be aware of exactly who in the city is the contact person for every project that's taken place in this community.

[Marks]: And, uh, if a traffic plan, as, uh, uh, Mr. D Antonio mentioned, uh, is out there,

[Marks]: Everyone should be aware if they're going to be closing off certain sections, if they're going to be diverting traffic, everyone in that area should be aware, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I have yet to hear anyone that's aware of anything that's going on with this project.

[Marks]: Also, the fact that it is not an emergency project, to me,

[Marks]: The city should be sitting down with National Grid and talking about mitigation.

[Marks]: What can we do?

[Marks]: You know, we realize lines get older and so forth and need replacement.

[Marks]: I don't think anyone doubts that.

[Marks]: But on behalf of the residents of this community, we should be able to sit down with these utility companies and request certain things, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I know on Harvard, uh, you know, we've talked about broken sidewalks at nauseam, uh, up and down Harvard street.

[Marks]: Wouldn't it be nice to be able to go to the utility company and say, you know what, uh, because of the inconvenience, we would ask that you replace, you know, 30 different sidewalks on Harvard.

[Marks]: Um, you know, to me that that's a no brainer that that should, those discussions should be happening between the city and the utility companies.

[Marks]: And, uh, I think all they're doing is approving things and no follow up.

[Marks]: and we're seeing it time and time again.

[Marks]: So I would ask Mr. President in the form of a motion that a clerk of the works be assigned to this project immediately and the residents be notified who in the city is going to be the contact person for this particular project.

[Marks]: The traffic plan be provided also, Mr. President, whether it's on the website so city residents can view it or that the director butters receive a copy of the traffic plan

[Marks]: And also that, going forward, that the city discuss mitigation.

[Marks]: When a project of this size comes in and it's going to be an impact to the community through traffic, through noise, through disruption of everyday quality of life, as was mentioned, you get the holidays coming up.

[Marks]: You know, these are the things that we should be using as leverage with the utility companies to get them, Mr. President, to do curb to curb, as we've talked about, restoration,

[Marks]: rather than just restoration in the area where they're digging, new sidewalks, new handicap ramps, improved lighting, whatever it might be.

[Marks]: But this is the time to hit up these multi-billion dollar companies.

[Marks]: on behalf of the residents of this community.

[Marks]: So I would offer those three initiatives, Mr. President, in the form of a motion.

[Marks]: Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: We received the correspondence, um, from the, uh, city solicitor, uh, to Mayor Burke regarding council resolution.

[Marks]: 16-seven eight three.

[Marks]: Uh, this was a resolution I offered well over a year ago that the city and the city, the city council and their wisdom, uh, asked that, uh, an ordinance be drafted up by the city solicitor who I am very grateful, uh, took the time to draft this up.

[Marks]: Um, I would like to send this particular paper to the subcommittee on business and economic development, uh, just for the edification of the viewing audience.

[Marks]: Uh, this is a consumer protection ordinance.

[Marks]: And if I could just read it briefly, Mr. President, please do.

[Marks]: It says dear mayor Burke and the above caption resolution, the city council requested that the city solicitor draft an ordinance requiring any retail or wholesale business, which is made aware of an incorrect store price that has the ability to communicate with the customer through the offering of a store savings card or other method method be required to refund or credit

[Marks]: all customers who purchase an item marked incorrectly.

[Marks]: It goes on to say the code of mass regulations already requires prompt payment be made to customers who have been overcharged and the store owners maintain a price accuracy and missing price report.

[Marks]: This takes it one step further, Mr. President, and I think it really is a consumer-friendly ordinance

[Marks]: And I'm not aware of anyone in this state that has an ordinance like this.

[Marks]: But once a store is on notice of an incorrect price, you can go up and talk to the store manager and they'll reimburse you the difference.

[Marks]: Some stores will even give you the item for free.

[Marks]: What I'm asking, Mr. President, we take it one step further.

[Marks]: In this day and age with technology and store cards and

[Marks]: credit and debit cards and everything else, that store, once they're on notice that a price is incorrectly marked, they should be able to go through that day's worth of receipts and see who else bought that item and maybe wasn't savvy enough to pick up on the incorrect price.

[Marks]: And then they reach out to the customer and either a debit credit, their debit card or their charge card, or send them out, uh, the difference in the meal, Mr. President, um, on the difference,

[Marks]: uh, and price that was incorrectly marked.

[Marks]: Um, Steve, uh, Champoli, who's our, uh, director of seal of weights and measures, uh, reviewed this language and, uh, his, I don't want to quote him, but he said he can't wait to get this enacted so he can start enforcing it, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Um, so I would ask that it be sent to the subcommittee for, uh, its due diligence and vetting and, uh, eventual passage.

[Marks]: of this very important consumer-friendly protection ordinance, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Second, Mr. Chairman.

[Marks]: Mr. President, just if I could, just for the education of the viewing audience, Mr. Champoli is responsible for all scales in the community, as well as pumps.

[Marks]: And if you look at any of the gas pumps, it should have a dated sticker on it that shows that it was re-inspected

[Marks]: uh, not only for accuracy, but also the octane level, uh, is checked at the pumps too.

[Marks]: So if you provide that information, uh, we can definitely add that to his list.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: I didn't have a chance to review them.

[Marks]: Mr. President asked that they'd be tabled for one week.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I received a call from a resident on Emerson Street who said because the street is cut through, cars are speeding down and where we purchased recently

[Marks]: two electronic speeding signs.

[Marks]: I would ask that one be placed on Emerson street.

[Marks]: Uh, and in addition, uh, the city has moved from the 30 mile hour speed signs to now the new ordinance, which is 25, which was enacted by this council and by the traffic commission.

[Marks]: I thank the chief who's here tonight, uh, that, uh, additional signs be placed on our secondary roads, Mr. President, um, that, uh, alert residents of the new, uh, speed, which is 25 miles an hour.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Um, this has been on the sidewalk list for some time now.

[Marks]: And, uh, the resident asked me to, uh, try to expedite, uh, because of trip and fall concerns.

[Marks]: So I would just ask that this be sent to, uh, Mr. Karen's and DPW in the interest of public safety.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Residents are probably aware on the Somerville Method line in South Method, there's been an issue for a number of years with rodents and the city embarked upon

[Marks]: a program which monitors and sets out traps in particular areas, and now I'm receiving complaints in the Wellington area, some of which may be due to the bridge construction that's going on and some of the other development, but I've been getting a number of complaints of rodents in the Wellington area, and just recently I received two phone calls

[Marks]: on north Medford up at the top of the heights where they're seeing rats in the area, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I would ask that the city immediately set up some type of monitor or activity

[Marks]: to try to nip this in the bud, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: There was some road work done on Mangles and that surrounding area and some construction equipment has been left

[Marks]: alongside the road for a period of time and residents are concerned and would like to see the equipment move, Mr. President.

[Marks]: We're probably all familiar with this particular intersection at 9th and Middlesex.

[Marks]: It's right at the entrance to Cappy's on Middlesex.

[Marks]: And some time back, the council actually pushed our state delegation to get a working blinking light.

[Marks]: We tried to get a full set of lights there, but we were instructed by the state, because of the proximity to the intersection of Wellington, that that wouldn't be feasible by the state traffic engineer.

[Marks]: And now I'm asking, Mr. President, if anyone

[Marks]: has ever had to traverse there, they'll realize that the light blinks, but no one stops.

[Marks]: And to get across, you're taking your life in your own hands.

[Marks]: So I would ask that this be sent to our state delegation where Middlesex is a state road, requesting that the addition of a pedestrian crossing button be added to the blinking set of lights.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. Vice President.

[Marks]: So, Mr. President, this Saturday I was at the car park and I had a number of residents that were attending a birthday party in the taut lot come up to me and said, do you realize when you're coming up Fulton Street that you where the street branches off that there's no indication that you're going into an actual parking lot, which is car park and cars are still going at the same clip as if they were on Fulton Street.

[Marks]: And it really is a very dangerous situation.

[Marks]: Um, their suggestion, which I think is great.

[Marks]: And I know we have the chief here, uh, would be to put at least some, uh, warning signs that you're entering a parking lot.

[Marks]: This is no longer a road.

[Marks]: And secondly, uh, I'd like to see a race crosswalk, but I know we have those, uh, movable, uh, speed bumps that the city is putting around the community, uh, in a way to chief, would you mind coming up?

[Marks]: We'd like to put you on the spot chief.

[Marks]: Just if you could address, do you know what I'm talking about when you come up?

[Marks]: Is, is there a way that we could kind of address maybe some signage and possible speed bump?

[Marks]: I know race crosswalk is expensive,

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Um, I received a call from a resident on Emerson street who said, uh, because the street is a cut through, uh, cars are speeding down and, uh, where we purchased recently,

[Marks]: two electronic speeding signs.

[Marks]: I would ask that one be placed on Emerson street.

[Marks]: Uh, and in addition, uh, the city has moved from the 30 mile hour speed signs to now the new ordinance, which is 25, which was enacted by this council and by the traffic commission.

[Marks]: I thank the chief who's here tonight, uh, that, uh, additional signs be placed on our secondary roads, Mr. President, um, that, uh, alert residents of the new, uh, speed, which is 25 miles an hour.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Thank you Mr. President.

[Marks]: Um, this has been on the sidewalk list for some time now.

[Marks]: And, uh, the resident asked me to, uh, try to expedite, uh, because of trip and fall concerns.

[Marks]: So I would just ask that this be sent to Mr. Karen's and DPW in the interest of public safety.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Um, residents are probably aware, uh, on the Somerville Method line in South Method, there's been an issue for a number of years with rodents and, uh, the city embarked upon, uh, a program which,

[Marks]: monitors and sets out traps in particular areas, and now I'm receiving complaints in the Wellington area, some of which may be due to the bridge construction that's going on and some of the other development, but I've been getting a number of complaints of rodents in the Wellington area, and just recently I received two phone calls

[Marks]: on North Medford up at the top of the heights where they're seeing rats in the area, Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I would ask that the city immediately set up some type of monitor or activity to

[Marks]: try to nip this in the bud, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Councilor Del Russo.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: There was some road work done on Mangles and that surrounding area, and some construction equipment has been left

[Marks]: alongside the road for a period of time and residents are concerned and would like to see the equipment move, Mr. President.

[Marks]: We're probably all familiar with this particular intersection at 9th and Middlesex.

[Marks]: It's right at the entrance to a Cappy's on Middlesex.

[Marks]: And sometime back, uh, the council, um, actually pushed our state delegation to get a working blinking light.

[Marks]: Uh, we tried to get a full set of lights there, but we were instructed by the state because of the proximity to the intersection of Wellington, that that wouldn't be feasible by the state traffic engineer.

[Marks]: And now I'm asking, Mr. President, if anyone has ever had to traverse there, they'll realize that the light blinks, but no one stops.

[Marks]: And to get across, you're taking your life in your own hands.

[Marks]: So I would ask that this be sent to our state delegation where Middlesex is a state road, requesting that the addition of a pedestrian crossing button be added to the blinking set of lights.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. Vice President.

[Marks]: So, uh, Mr. President, this Saturday I was at car park and, um, I had a number of residents that were attending a birthday party in the taut lot come up to me and said, do you realize when you're coming up Fulton street, uh, that you, where the street branches off that,

[Marks]: There's no indication that you're going into an actual parking lot, which is car park and cars are still going at the same clip as if they were on Fulton street.

[Marks]: And it really is a very dangerous situation.

[Marks]: Um, their suggestion, which I think is great.

[Marks]: And I know we have the chief here.

[Marks]: uh, would be to put at least some, uh, warning signs that you're entering a parking lot.

[Marks]: This is no longer a road.

[Marks]: And secondly, uh, I'd like to see a race crosswalk, but I know we have those, uh, movable, uh, speed bumps that the city is putting around the community, uh, in a way to chief, would you mind coming up?

[Marks]: We'd like to put you on the spot chief.

[Marks]: Just if you could address, do you know what I'm talking about when you come up, Fulton?

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Is there a way that we could kind of address maybe some signage and possible speed bump?

[Marks]: I know race crosswalk is expensive.

[Marks]: Mr. President, let this be sent to the traffic commission.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I want to thank my council colleague for bringing this up.

[Marks]: Um, I brought up an issue, uh, probably about a month and a half ago regarding, uh, the meeting that took place on March 20th in this city, uh, where national grid had a community public meeting at the McGlynn middle school and, um, come to find out, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Currently, according to the figures we received from National Grid, we have no grade 1 or grade 2 leaks in the community.

[Marks]: Grade 1 is eminent threat of explosion.

[Marks]: Grade 2 threatens health or property.

[Marks]: And grade 3, we have over 260 leaks in this community.

[Marks]: And even though it's no threat to health and property, Mr. President, there still are leaks in the community.

[Marks]: And these particular leaks over time naturally become larger leaks.

[Marks]: And from what I found out from National Grid is that they currently don't prioritize grade 3 leaks, which we have over 260, because they receive no reimbursement on grade 3 leaks.

[Marks]: So they prioritize grade 1 and grade 2 leaks and nothing on grade 3.

[Marks]: If we can make it part of the report also, Mr. President, and I think it was part of the report several months back.

[Marks]: I don't know if we got a response or not.

[Marks]: I don't recall seeing a response.

[Marks]: What we can do with the grade three leaks, should we be petitioning National Grid, even though they don't prioritize them, that they come into the community and start working on these low-level grade three leaks, which to me is alarming when you have close to 300 leaks that they're aware of in the community.

[Marks]: And those leaks could be decades old.

[Marks]: And, you know, I'm concerned about that equally.

[Marks]: I want to thank my colleague for putting this on tonight.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Council Member O'Karn.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I want to thank Councilor Falco also.

[Marks]: This seems to be a recurring theme in the community.

[Marks]: that we're hearing about pedestrian safety, cars speeding throughout our neighborhood and on our neighborhood streets.

[Marks]: I could just tell you firsthand, Mr. President, that when we implemented the pilot program for raised crosswalks, I personally like raised crosswalks better than a speed bump.

[Marks]: Speed bumps are very temporary in nature, and I don't think they accomplish the same goal as a raised crosswalk.

[Marks]: When we did the pilot program, Mr. President, back some four years ago, Mayor McGlynn at the time said we were going to do three raised crosswalks.

[Marks]: And that was back some four years ago.

[Marks]: We've only implemented one on Winthrop Street.

[Marks]: But I could tell you firsthand that a raised crosswalk in that particular neighborhood and in many other neighborhoods would work wonders on traffic calming, slowing down traffic,

[Marks]: in particular areas.

[Marks]: Now that coupled with widening sidewalks, putting up blinking lights, increasing signage in the community, that definitely has an impact also.

[Marks]: But we, you know, we can't sit back and talk about complete streets.

[Marks]: We've heard complete streets over and over again.

[Marks]: I read articles in the paper.

[Marks]: That's great, we're making some initiatives on some of the major roads and with $500,000 we're hitting up several neighborhoods and providing some traffic calming initiatives.

[Marks]: But we also have to, we can't ignore the neighborhoods.

[Marks]: because I've been on the council a number of years.

[Marks]: The concerns I hear over and over again, a lot of them are on main roads, but much, much more, Mr. President, are in the neighborhoods.

[Marks]: And that's what I'm hearing over and over again.

[Marks]: And this is not rocket science.

[Marks]: There's ways of calming traffic down.

[Marks]: There's very simple ways, there's very cost effective ways of doing it.

[Marks]: Sometimes it's merely just, I know the city of Cambridge does it, they paint what looks like a 3D mural in the street.

[Marks]: So when a car approaches, it looks like there's something impeding them from going forward because of this 3D image that's in the road.

[Marks]: And it's a very unique way of having at least people that are driving to be alert when they come up to an area.

[Marks]: And it's not expensive to do, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And, you know, in my opinion, we fall short of the mark in this community when it comes to pedestrian safety.

[Marks]: And in my opinion, Mr. President, you know,

[Marks]: There's money out there.

[Marks]: We have over $8 million in free cash to move some of these initiatives forward in the neighborhoods.

[Marks]: And it'll benefit not only the community in general, Mr. President, it'll send a message out to the people driving on our streets, many of which are just cutting through, Mr. President, that we're not going to tolerate this any longer.

[Marks]: And it sends a message out, Mr. President, when you take back your roads.

[Marks]: Several months back, this council voted to reduce the speed limit from 30 miles an hour to 25 miles an hour on all non-posted roads.

[Marks]: We have yet to see, that was several months back, one sign be erected that says the new speed limit of 25 miles an hour on our streets.

[Marks]: So, again, we've done a pork job in communicating what was a vote of this council and eventually passed by the Traffic Commission.

[Marks]: And also, Mr. President, something that would send a message to people that are coming through our community that you have to reduce speed when you come onto Medford streets.

[Marks]: So I appreciate Councilor Falco for bringing this up tonight, Mr. President.

[Marks]: You know, I hope more is done with this new traffic engineer that's going to be approved in the budget to really address neighborhood concerns of improvement of public safety and pedestrian safety in our community.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. Vice President.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Vice President Marks.

[Marks]: Just if I could amend the paper, if Councilor Falco doesn't mind, just popped in my head.

[Marks]: Doonan Street is a four-way stop.

[Marks]: I'm getting complaints from neighbors that no one is actually adhering to the four-way stop at all on Doonan, and people just going by without coming to a stop at all.

[Marks]: So if we could have Sergeant Hartnett in the Traffic Division go out and take a look at that particular area, Mr. President, that would be helpful.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Yes, yes.

[Marks]: It's a four-way stop.

[Marks]: Are we still under suspension?

[Marks]: Right.

[Marks]: Can I add something to the suspension while we're talking while we're under a suspension and vice president marks.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. This is an important item.

[Marks]: That's the only reason why I wanted to bring it up.

[Marks]: Um, several weeks back, uh, through this council, we requested that the city solicitor talk to Paul Moki, the building commissioner, and also Ed Finn regarding a proposed wireless communication ordinance that was proposed back in 2011.

[Marks]: uh, before this method city council.

[Marks]: And, uh, we got a response in our packet.

[Marks]: I think everyone has a copy tonight of, uh, the ordinance that was drafted back in 2011.

[Marks]: Uh, this ordinance also includes, uh, language that was inserted by a national grid at the time, uh, to amend our ordinance, Mr. President, to allow

[Marks]: wireless communication on the polls.

[Marks]: But this ordinance, Mr. President, is directly related to what many people may have saw on the local news just recently.

[Marks]: The MBTA right now is trying to generate some additional revenue.

[Marks]: And they're providing a service to their commuter rail customers that they'll be able to have internet access on the train for a nominal fee, I guess.

[Marks]: And in order to provide that service, they need to erect cell phone towers throughout

[Marks]: many communities that the commuter rail goes through.

[Marks]: And I happened to catch it on Channel 5, and this council voted on it actually a couple months even prior to it coming up.

[Marks]: But most of the communities where the commuter rail goes through, they're going to be erecting cell phone towers.

[Marks]: In the city of Medford, there's already two requests.

[Marks]: for cell phone towers, one on Tyler Ave and one on Charnwood Road, which are directly within neighborhoods, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And the ordinance that was offered back in 2011 would prohibit cell phone towers from being erected in any area except for industrial and commercial zones.

[Marks]: And right now, all you need is a building permit and an electrical permit.

[Marks]: and you can erect a 74-foot cell tower in your backyard.

[Marks]: It's as easy as that.

[Marks]: So the ordinance, Mr. President, which I think we have to meet pretty immediately on, I'd ask that it go to the subcommittee on zoning and ordinance, or unless the council sees fit to have a committee of the whole on it, I would venture to say this language is ready to go.

[Marks]: This language, in my opinion, has been vetted out thoroughly.

[Marks]: I think it does deserve to be vetted out more by this council.

[Marks]: But at this point, Mr. President, I would ask, through a vote of this council, that this particular correspondence dated June 8th from the city solicitor regarding wireless communication and facility ordinance be sent to either the Zoning and Ordinance Subcommittee or Committee of the Whole, Mr. President, for further discussion and quick action, because this is a very important issue.

[Marks]: I would take your recommendation, Mr. President.

[Marks]: We'll do the best we see if we can get it done before the summer session.

[Marks]: Can we take a vote on that, Mr. President?

[Marks]: This be sent because it's a paper that... Yes, we can.

[Marks]: On the motion by Councilor... Roll call vote, Mr. President.

[Marks]: This council, I think it was back a couple of months ago, took a vote to ask that another monitor be added to the city.

[Marks]: I don't think we gave a location, but at the time we asked.

[Marks]: The key to this issue, Mr. President, you know, we could talk all we want until we get our congressional delegation to stand up.

[Marks]: It was just mentioned by Councilor Falco and Milton.

[Marks]: You know, Milton didn't do it on their own.

[Marks]: It was Congressman Lynch that stood up in the federal government, Mr. President.

[Marks]: He got the FFA to have a meeting, FAA to have a meeting, Mr. President, and they acted upon Congressman Lynch.

[Marks]: And I hate to say it, Mr. President, but that hasn't happened in this community yet.

[Marks]: We haven't seen that level, Mr. President, of congressional delegation intervening on behalf of the city.

[Marks]: Another thing, and I don't want to rehash old news,

[Marks]: It's great, we have two great representatives on that community advisory committee now to Logan Airport.

[Marks]: And during those meetings, these local cities and towns all have a representative that sits so they can be at the table and they can add input.

[Marks]: when Logan Airport and the FAA are making decisions.

[Marks]: And for over five years, Mr. President, and this council brought it up over and over again, for over five years, Medford's representative on that committee was a no-show.

[Marks]: Medford was not representative.

[Marks]: I went and I pulled all the minute meetings

[Marks]: And it showed you where people and what communities were attending those meetings.

[Marks]: And Medford was a no-show for years, Mr. President, while a lot of this discussion and dialogue was happening.

[Marks]: It's great now that the mayor's on board.

[Marks]: It's great we have two excellent community advisory members.

[Marks]: But for years, we were not at the table, and this city was not representative.

[Marks]: And that was a problem, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I hope we're able to get around that now with our congressional delegation.

[Marks]: And I know with the renewed interest now in the Community Advisory Board and those particular two gentlemen who are very knowledgeable on air traffic and other issues, I believe we will be represented now.

[Marks]: But I think part of the problem was we were a no-show, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Correct.

[Marks]: No, late to service.

[Marks]: Late to service.

[Marks]: Vice President Box.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Mr. President, I offered a resolution, I think it was back three months ago, asking the city administration if we could just get an update on the property formerly known as the Hegner Center on Maple Park Ave.

[Marks]: As we all know, that particular property was deeded over to the Hegner Center back some many years ago with the express purpose of using it for persons with disability.

[Marks]: And once that building was no longer being used for that,

[Marks]: express purpose, it should revert back to the city, according to the documents that were signed.

[Marks]: The Hegner Center was taken over by Bridgewell.

[Marks]: They provide very similar services, and Bridgewell back, I think it was a year, year and a half ago, decided that they were gonna sell the building.

[Marks]: And this is a building they never owned, never paid a dollar for, and I believe it was up on the market for some $560,000 or right around that, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And it was this council that took a vote asking the city solicitor to step in on behalf of the city.

[Marks]: And after his due diligence, indeed, that building was vacant for some time, Mr. President, and it wasn't being used for

[Marks]: its intended purpose of aiding and helping people with disabilities.

[Marks]: And the city solicitor was able to negotiate the building back to the city of Medford.

[Marks]: So now we have a building, Mr. President, in my opinion, could be repurposed for a number of uses.

[Marks]: I think at the time this council voted,

[Marks]: to potentially put the Medford Arts Center in there or maybe the Medford Arts Council and create an art center in that particular area.

[Marks]: Residents across the street and the condos are very concerned because they see activity going on in the building and they're not quite sure what's happening.

[Marks]: So I think both myself and Councilor Lungo-Koehn, and she'll speak for herself, but put this on tonight, Mr. President,

[Marks]: so we can get a direction on where we're gonna go with the building.

[Marks]: The longer it sits vacant, we all know what happens to vacant buildings in this community, it's gonna get into disrepair.

[Marks]: And not to say that building doesn't need work anyways, but we have purposes that we could use for that building.

[Marks]: And I would ask that we sit down with the city administration.

[Marks]: We asked for a response, Mr. President.

[Marks]: We really didn't get a response.

[Marks]: I think it's time we sit down with the city administration and the committee of the whole and directly ask what is the intent and what is the city going to use that building now that it's back in the city hands, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Vice President Mox.

[Marks]: Just so I understand, because the councilor just said something that, it's one thing to have a camera in place that may capture an incident that took place, but Councilor Light just mentioned about maybe cars that are going through intersections.

[Marks]: Is it the intent to use this camera to catch people speeding or going through stop signs?

[Marks]: Yeah.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Mr. President, if I could, I don't have a problem with the way you just explained it, but you can also accomplish that by doing traffic studies, which we've done in the community.

[Marks]: You know, if it's a helpful tool, I don't see a problem with it.

[Marks]: I'm not sure if we have the manpower to monitor these particular cameras, how it would be done.

[Marks]: We seem to not be able to do the very basic things in the community, and I'm not sure how we're going to monitor cameras

[Marks]: throughout the community to make improvements.

[Marks]: But I guess it's worth exploring.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I don't want people to think I'm opposed to cameras and doing all that good stuff.

[Marks]: I just think there could be a potential abuse if we don't know what they're being utilized for.

[Marks]: Secondly, Mr. President, I think it's been maybe three years that we've asked, this council has requested the administration for a camera on Commercial Street in particular because of the dumping

[Marks]: that goes on there, TVs, refrigerators, over and over again.

[Marks]: One camera we asked for on Commercial Street, and to date, it hasn't happened.

[Marks]: So I'm in favor of cameras on every corner, on every street.

[Marks]: It's not gonna happen, Mr. President.

[Marks]: We can't get one on Commercial Street for dumping, which is another use, maybe, for the cameras.

[Marks]: Catch people that are dumping stoves and refrigerators on a city street, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: That stop sign, for some reason, I don't know what happened, but half of it's missing.

[Marks]: So it says op, whatever that means.

[Marks]: The other thing, Mr. President, Columbus Street, there's three barrels that the crossing guard has to pull in and out every day so kids can cross across the street, Mr. President.

[Marks]: It's a makeshift way, in my opinion, to provide public safety for our students, and I ask that a permanent sign be erected, Mr. President, showing where kids cross, that a full-fledged crosswalk be painted and kept up with, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: That's a Memorial sign that is across Middle Oaks Bakery.

[Marks]: at the corner of Main and Bow.

[Marks]: It is no longer there.

[Marks]: I'm not sure what happened.

[Marks]: Maybe when a sidewalk or a street was replaced, the sidewalk, the sign is missing.

[Marks]: At tonight's budget meeting, we had Ernest Lindsay, the Director of Veterans Affairs, and I posed the question to him, and he was also gonna look at it, but I'd ask that we send also a communication to the mayor by this council to have it researched, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I want to thank Councilor Falco for bringing up the subject.

[Marks]: I know this has been a bone of contention in this community for a number of years.

[Marks]: The fact that there are many board and commission meetings,

[Marks]: that are taking place on.

[Marks]: hours that are very difficult for residents to attend.

[Marks]: There are meetings happening during the day that most working people are unable to attend and to have a video stream or a place where you could click on a PDF file and get a copy of the minutes and also a recording of what took place is extremely helpful and something that I've supported for a number of years.

[Marks]: In order to make this successful, we need to get a buy-in from the administration because as we heard,

[Marks]: that it would be great to have the council meetings recorded.

[Marks]: We'll record it on Tuesday nights.

[Marks]: They replay us on Thursday and Friday on local access.

[Marks]: But in order for this to be successful, Mr. President, it has to be a buy-in from the administration that all the boards and commissions fall into this also.

[Marks]: So we know when the Zoning Board of Appeals has a meeting.

[Marks]: We know when the assessors meet.

[Marks]: We know when the Liquor Commission meets.

[Marks]: We know when the park board is discussing maybe a park in your area.

[Marks]: That is vital, Mr. President, to have, as Councilor Falco alluded to,

[Marks]: transparency in this community.

[Marks]: So, we asked that in the format of a question, and I don't know if we got a response, Mr. Clerk.

[Marks]: We asked that the mayor be fully supportive of the agenda and minutes concept with all boards and commissions and school committees.

[Marks]: Okay, so we haven't sent this out.

[Marks]: So, Mr. President,

[Marks]: That's important that we receive full support from the administration in order to move this forward.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: But Councilor Dello Russo.

[Marks]: Mr. Vice President Marks.

[Marks]: With all due respect, the gentleman's up there giving his opinion.

[Marks]: That's under public participation.

[Marks]: He requested through the proper channels.

[Marks]: If we're going to go point-counterpoint on everything he says, Mr. President, I believe that's very unfair.

[Marks]: So I would ask that the gentleman be given his time allotted to him, Mr. President.

[Marks]: He followed the process to speak.

[Marks]: If you don't agree with it, you don't agree with it.

[Marks]: But to do point-counterpoint is not beneficial, Mr. President, at this point.

[Marks]: Before you read the records, this past Thursday, we had a groundbreaking in the city of Medford.

[Marks]: Myself, Council President Caraviello, and Councilor Lungo-Koehn were present.

[Marks]: We had a groundbreaking, Mr. President, for the first ever dog park in this community.

[Marks]: And I want to personally thank Mr. President

[Marks]: uh, the pause for method group.

[Marks]: Uh, here was a group of five or six citizens that had a common cause.

[Marks]: Uh, one night, two and a half years ago, they got together, um, and decided that, um, it would be nice to have a full fledged dog park in the community.

[Marks]: One in which dogs can exercise, socialize, and they felt there was a need, Mr. President,

[Marks]: They never once approached the city administration.

[Marks]: They went out on their own.

[Marks]: They found $250,000 in grant money from the Stanton Foundation.

[Marks]: They went out on their own, Mr. President, and found a consultant that does dog park design and design parks in Somerville and Arlington and met with this particular consultant and started the ball rolling, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And, uh, this past Thursday after two and a half years of, uh, fundraising, dog washes, uh, the method day where they had raffle prizes and, uh, come and bring your dog to a picnic and so forth.

[Marks]: Um, I'm proud to say, Mr. President, as part of,

[Marks]: uh, pause for method that, uh, we will have a full fledged, uh, park in our community, one with a small dog and large dogs.

[Marks]: Um, it will have a full irrigation system, lighting, uh, exercise and obstacle course for the, uh, animals.

[Marks]: And, um, again, this is truly, uh, uh, you know, uh, when people say, oh, you can't fight city hall, you can't get things done.

[Marks]: This was truly a groundswell of just residents getting together and moving a very important issue.

[Marks]: I believe last year, Mr. Clerk, correct me if I'm wrong, we licensed about 350 dogs, about 400 dogs in the city.

[Marks]: We estimate through doing some of our own homework that there's over 7,000 dogs that reside in this community.

[Marks]: So there's a need for the park, Mr. President,

[Marks]: And I want to thank the committee members, Jim Silva, Patty Flynn, Gary DiStefano, Diane Gittner, and John Sidon, who, like I said, spent countless hours, still spending countless hours, in putting this together.

[Marks]: I want to thank the McGlynn administration, who actually heard about it and got interested and saw that this group was a working group and wanted to accomplish something.

[Marks]: and came on board, and then Mayor Burke followed through on her end, Mr. President, along with Delicia Hunt.

[Marks]: So I just want to thank this group of citizens, and I'm proud that we will have our first park.

[Marks]: It's going to be located in between the Andrews and the McGlynn School along Riverbend Park.

[Marks]: And as I said, it's going to be a state-of-the-art park and something I think we can all be proud of.

[Marks]: Present.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: This is the issue that I've had concern with for a number of months now regarding the original estimate that the city hired an outside consultant to come in and give us an estimate on the contaminants at the DPW yard.

[Marks]: The estimate was off by, I believe it was 500,000.

[Marks]: The estimate was off by 500,000, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I know we had many discussions with Louise.

[Marks]: She's answered them all.

[Marks]: I am in opposition of this paper.

[Marks]: And I want to explain my position, why I'm opposed to this, for the fact that...

[Marks]: The city went out and hired a consultant to come in and provide the city with facts and figures on what it would cost to remove the contaminants at the DPW yard.

[Marks]: And to be off by $500,000 on a project that was originally estimated at, what was the amount?

[Marks]: It was about $500,000.

[Marks]: So they were off by $500,000.

[Marks]: So the project ended up costing us

[Marks]: A million dollars, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I'm not sure, would we pay this outside consultant?

[Marks]: So we paid $150,000 to an outside consultant to ask or to let us know what it was going to cost to remove the contaminants.

[Marks]: They said $500,000.

[Marks]: We started the project, it was closer to $1 million.

[Marks]: So we lost $500,000 on that and we paid $150,000 for a consultant that gave us bogus information.

[Marks]: So it's actually $650,000 in net, which I have a real problem with that.

[Marks]: And I realize that the remedial treatment of what was under there may have differed based on what they found and so forth.

[Marks]: I have a tough time thinking.

[Marks]: It's almost like being a meteorologist.

[Marks]: You could be right 50% of the time, and you're doing a good job.

[Marks]: And I don't understand why we'd pay a consultant to come in over $100,000 and be off by 100%.

[Marks]: It just doesn't sound right to me, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And for those particular reasons, I cannot support this particular funding

[Marks]: for the cleanup, Mr. President.

[Marks]: No.

[Marks]: I just wanted to thank the subcommittee that was sent to Councilor Knight and under his leadership on that subcommittee.

[Marks]: They vetted this even further, the paper that we received from the administration.

[Marks]: And I wanted to thank that subcommittee for their due diligence on this.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I offer this resolution tonight due to a meeting that I attended last Wednesday that was offered by the Medford Police Department, and it was their monthly community meeting they have the first Wednesday of the month.

[Marks]: Myself, Councilor Lungo-Koehn, and Councilor Caraviello were present at the meeting.

[Marks]: That particular meeting was of utmost importance because they were discussing

[Marks]: the issue of the shooting that took place in South Bedford a few weeks prior to that.

[Marks]: And they, at the meeting, and I won't speak on behalf of the police department, let residents know that this is an ongoing and active investigation that's taking place and that they're putting all their resources into finding out exactly what happened and that a step up in patrol was going to happen also within that area.

[Marks]: as well as some recommendations that were offered by the chief about to increase lighting in certain areas in that particular vicinity, and also the fact that additional cameras within the police department would help to help solve some crime within our community.

[Marks]: But, Mr. President, I offer this resolution tonight because at the meeting,

[Marks]: One of the officers spoke up and directed his comments towards members of the city council, stating that it would be helpful, because other surrounding communities do it, if they could have what I would refer to as a revolving account that's within the police department.

[Marks]: I mean, the account, in my opinion, could be within DPW.

[Marks]: It could be here at City Hall.

[Marks]: But to have a revolving account that

[Marks]: Fines, when people are caught doing graffiti, fines of whatever is issued will go directly into the revolving account and can only be used for appropriation to remove graffiti within our community.

[Marks]: I also had the opportunity to look at some of the surrounding communities.

[Marks]: And I noticed that the city of Somerville has a program which they handle similarly with an account.

[Marks]: But they take it one step further on their website.

[Marks]: They also offer, which I'm going to add to my paper tonight, Mr. President, is that graffiti knows no age, no sex, no orientation, no, you know, people vandalize for whatever reason.

[Marks]: It was mentioned that it's done on private property.

[Marks]: As we know, it's done on public property.

[Marks]: As we experienced, it's done in parks.

[Marks]: And it's done throughout the community.

[Marks]: And the fact that someone may tag a public building, it's easy to city contacts.

[Marks]: I know in the past, Mr. President, you work at the sheriff's office.

[Marks]: They've been gracious enough to come out with their itty graffiti machine and clean the graffiti.

[Marks]: But if it's done on private property, some communities have city ordinances that require homeowners to remove the graffiti within a certain amount of time.

[Marks]: And that adds insult to injury, in my opinion.

[Marks]: The fact that you're at home, someone tags the outside of your vinyl siding, and the next day you receive a call from the city saying

[Marks]: You have 10 days to remove the graffiti.

[Marks]: You may not have the means to remove it.

[Marks]: You may need to have the graffiti remain on your house for a period of time for insurance purposes and a whole issue of items.

[Marks]: And why I bring this up is the city of Somerville has a contract, and it's right on their website, and I have copies if anyone wants to see it.

[Marks]: And it's removal of graffiti agreement and release of liability.

[Marks]: And I won't read it, Mr. President.

[Marks]: It's a page long.

[Marks]: But it goes over the fact that if the city is willing to go onto private property and remove graffiti from the side of a home or a garage or wherever it may be, that the homeowner will hold the city free from liability, and they'll remove the graffiti at no expense to the homeowner.

[Marks]: And I thought that's a great idea, Mr. President, to eradicate graffiti in a community.

[Marks]: I know the city of Malden also, just recently in March, they introduced a new service that they provide to residents.

[Marks]: And they modeled it after the city of Boston.

[Marks]: And it's modeled after the Citizens Connect smartphone application.

[Marks]: that the city of Boston currently uses.

[Marks]: And Malden just started this in March.

[Marks]: And they stated that, as an example, if a resident sees graffiti on the street, they would normally call or email the Department of Public Works.

[Marks]: Now a resident can simply take a picture using their smartphone.

[Marks]: With one click, the request is automatically sent to the department.

[Marks]: Once the graffiti is removed, the resident is notified on their smartphone.

[Marks]: that the issue has been resolved.

[Marks]: They stated also in their press release, we are already seeing great results from the program.

[Marks]: Since its release, we have had 576 requests to the DPW.

[Marks]: Not all were graffiti.

[Marks]: These are just requests to DPW.

[Marks]: And 543 were resolved with the balance slated for spring repairs.

[Marks]: That equates to 94% of all issues being resolved via the new application.

[Marks]: And most were fixed within 24 hours.

[Marks]: This is a great, great application.

[Marks]: It's a great way to connect residents of this community to City Hall.

[Marks]: And also, it goes on to say that they thanked, at the time, Mayor Menino and the city of Boston for their leadership on the initiative.

[Marks]: And also, which I found quite interesting, they thanked Governor Patrick and Lieutenant Governor Murray

[Marks]: for offering funding for the applications so communities could take advantage of this technology.

[Marks]: So apparently there's grants or money out there that we can obtain as a community to not only have a revolving account, which is my request, but to also implement something similar to this Connect phone, smart phone.

[Marks]: I know Somerville uses, I think it's 311, Smart 311, I believe it is.

[Marks]: 311 to allow residents to contact the city.

[Marks]: They get a response back immediately saying that their request was accepted, the date and time.

[Marks]: And then, within a period of time, they're contacted by the city with updates.

[Marks]: It's just a great way of doing business.

[Marks]: And I would ask, Mr. President, that we not only have the administration look into setting up a revolving account

[Marks]: exclusively for the purpose of graffiti removal in our community.

[Marks]: We also look into this particular Citizens Connect smartphone application to allow residents the expanded means of communicating with the community.

[Marks]: Also, Mr. President, I received a number of e-mails because of this resolution, and one resident who asked if they can appear before the council

[Marks]: Couldn't make it tonight, but will be before the council in the near future, is applying for a mural funding from the Medford Arts Council and also from the Senator Charles E. Shannon Community Safety Initiative.

[Marks]: And from what I understand, it's going to be very similar to the mural at the Medford Hillside.

[Marks]: And they're looking to put a mural.

[Marks]: I don't want to let the cat out of the bag, because this woman has done a lot of work on this.

[Marks]: But somewhere in South Bedford, they already received approval for a mural.

[Marks]: And this, in my opinion, will go a long way to covering up a wall that is typically, this particular wall that she's referring to, has been tagged a number of times.

[Marks]: And it will go a long way to beautifying the area and also making it less inviting for someone to come out and use that to tag Mr. President.

[Marks]: So I would ask that the paper be amended.

[Marks]: to include the expansion and implementation of the Citizens Connect smartphone, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I look forward to the mayor's response on this.

[Marks]: Mr. President.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: just read over the email that we all received, too, regarding the mayor signing the contract.

[Marks]: And, you know, I find it ironic, Mr. President, that in the mayor's opening statement, he said the city's goal is to provide the best possible parking experience for its citizens.

[Marks]: And you would think, Mr. President, over the last several years that this would have been a goal of the administration.

[Marks]: There was a spotlight, I believe it was done by Channel 5 about six months ago regarding the lack of enforcement for resident permit parking in the community.

[Marks]: It didn't exist at all.

[Marks]: So at that point, the mayor wasn't trying to provide the best experience for citizens in our community.

[Marks]: He also said in his statement that the objectives of this program are to deter illegal parking,

[Marks]: to ensure timely turnover of parking spaces, to benefit and enhance the business districts, and to create a friendly environment for consumers.

[Marks]: Mr. President, what was asked for back in 2009 was to enforce existing signage.

[Marks]: That was the recommendation back in 2009, to enforce existing signage and be consistent

[Marks]: which never took place in this community.

[Marks]: So if we had consistent enforcement throughout the community, there would be no need to hire an outside company from Tennessee to outsource it to Tennessee.

[Marks]: We all know the contract is based on performance.

[Marks]: And that will result, not could, it will result in very aggressive ticketing in this community.

[Marks]: it will result in aggressive ticketing in this community.

[Marks]: So if the mayor was really intent on putting the best possible parking experience for citizens, all along, he would have provided consistent enforcement by our own in-house personnel to move these cars along.

[Marks]: I agree with that.

[Marks]: However, I don't agree with hiring an outside company, Mr. President.

[Marks]: It also goes along to state that one of the benefits of this particular program, and I'll quote it, it says, the chamber also acknowledged that there are several beneficial aspects of the plan, such as the user-friendly kiosk.

[Marks]: I've been talking to residents, I've been talking to business owners throughout the community, it's a hot topic, and I haven't heard one resident so far say, you know what,

[Marks]: I don't mind getting out of my car in West Method, walking four or five car lengths, which may even be a little further because there's hydrants and there's bus stops and everything else within this community crosswalks, putting my plate in the kiosk,

[Marks]: putting my time in the kiosk, putting my money in the kiosk, and going in the West Method Spa and getting a newspaper and going back to my car.

[Marks]: I haven't heard one resident say that they feel that's a benefit, that they feel that that's a good idea.

[Marks]: Mr. President.

[Marks]: So, I'm not quite sold on the use of kiosk on the streets.

[Marks]: I don't know any other community in this surrounding area that use kiosk on the streets, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I don't believe it's user-friendly.

[Marks]: And I believe, as was mentioned at our meeting a couple of weeks ago, that if you happen to be stopping in one of our business districts and you happen to have your kids with you, or you happen to be taking your elderly mother to a doctor's appointment,

[Marks]: It's not user-friendly to walk several spots to put money in a kiosk, Mr. President.

[Marks]: It was also mentioned that the mayor was willing to settle or compromise with the business community in giving free spots throughout the community.

[Marks]: And that was very admirable of the mayor, but let's break it down for a second.

[Marks]: This plan calls for 1,000 parking spots, roughly 1,000 parking spots.

[Marks]: The mayor, under his new proposal that he just signed, is allotting two parking spots for 30-minute free parking in five of the business districts.

[Marks]: So that's 10 spots.

[Marks]: That's 1% of the total parking spots.

[Marks]: So this great, grandioso plan that the mayor came down and

[Marks]: decided with the business owners who were all advocating for some sort of free parking, albeit limited free parking, but some sort of free parking.

[Marks]: Now, the mayor was gracious enough to give us 10 spots citywide.

[Marks]: So if you happen to be in Method Square, there may be a spot down by the CVS, down by Carlene's.

[Marks]: And there may be a spot on the east side, all the way down by City Hall.

[Marks]: Those are your two spots for free parking.

[Marks]: Doesn't seem like a lot to me, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I don't think it's what the business owners intended on.

[Marks]: Secondly, Mr. President, this council asked several times, and recently a couple of weeks ago, to hold a public hearing.

[Marks]: to allow residents, business owners, anyone interested to come up and address the council, address the mayor, address the administration, address this company from Tennessee, and the mayor refused to hold a public hearing.

[Marks]: He kept on going back saying, don't forget, there was a public hearing in September 2009.

[Marks]: Mr. Mayor, that was five years ago.

[Marks]: Things change in five years.

[Marks]: There are new residents in this community over the past five years.

[Marks]: There are new business owners in this community.

[Marks]: There are new challenges facing our residents and our business owners.

[Marks]: And to go based on a hearing that took place five years ago, the mayor must have his head stuck in the sand.

[Marks]: So there was no input from this council, and I speak for myself.

[Marks]: And I'd like to know if any member of this council was able to effectively make change in the mayor's proposal.

[Marks]: I'd like to hear it.

[Marks]: Because every time I offered something, the mayor just poo-pooed it.

[Marks]: Oh, that can't be done.

[Marks]: We can't do it like that.

[Marks]: This was the mayor's proposal from the start.

[Marks]: No one had any input, the business owners, nor the residents of this community, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I know the mayor, in his statement, keeps on going back, saying the business owners and the chamber are on board.

[Marks]: What about the 56,000 residents of this community?

[Marks]: What input do they have?

[Marks]: They're the ones that traverse the businesses.

[Marks]: They're the ones that go to the schools and the churches and the medical appointments in this community.

[Marks]: Why do they have no input, Mr. President?

[Marks]: You know, I don't know why the mayor decided to craft this program in a vacuum.

[Marks]: He crafted it, as he stated three weeks ago, with members of his departments.

[Marks]: That who has ultimately made the final decision.

[Marks]: Members of his department heads made the decisions.

[Marks]: And then once the program went out for RFP, request for proposal, and came back, the mayor was about to sign it.

[Marks]: And he thought better of it and said, let me have the council do a committee of the whole meeting.

[Marks]: where business owners came down, the ones that did know about it came down, and they offered many suggestions.

[Marks]: And I talked to a business owner tonight that was at that meeting, not gonna state his name, and he wasn't aware of the mayor just signing this, but I asked him, is that acceptable, two spots?

[Marks]: And he said, absolutely not.

[Marks]: And he thought he was gonna have some input.

[Marks]: And he had no input at all.

[Marks]: So I don't know who the mayor met with, as Councilor Penta mentioned, but this was a decision made strictly by the administration.

[Marks]: If the mayor was so concerned about providing such an experience for parkers in this community, why did he let resident permit parking go for so many years without enforcement?

[Marks]: But he collected the fee for the permit.

[Marks]: He didn't let that go, Mr. President.

[Marks]: He made sure he collected the fee, but he didn't provide the enforcement.

[Marks]: The mayor allowed people to park from Winchester and Arlington and West Bedford for years and take the commuter rail in, and take the buses in.

[Marks]: He allowed them to park in Bedford Square and Haines Square for years, Mr. President, without enforcement.

[Marks]: So, you know, I'm not sold on this program, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Councilor Caraviello just mentioned the fact that

[Marks]: retired police officers possibly doing the role in-house.

[Marks]: I offered back some years ago, Mr. President, to look at having crossing guards who I spoke to the union president, said they would be more than happy to do that task.

[Marks]: They already have uniforms.

[Marks]: Many of them are already trained.

[Marks]: And at the time, it just fell on deaf ears to take this in-house.

[Marks]: The mayor went off, signed it, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I wish him well on this, but I wish there were more public hearings.

[Marks]: I wish that there was more input from the community and from business owners in this community, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I wish we had some time.

[Marks]: We waited this many years.

[Marks]: I wish we had some time to really sit behind the table like we did a few weeks ago and really iron out some of the differences.

[Marks]: And we really didn't have that opportunity.

[Marks]: And I think the mayor fell short of the mark on this proposal.

[Marks]: And it's going to come back.

[Marks]: At some point, when the aggressive enforcement starts, it's going to come back.

[Marks]: And the mayor is going to do everything he can to hide behind the issue, like he did in this letter, stating, if you read half the letter, half it's about the council votes.

[Marks]: What member behind this reel voted on the proposal?

[Marks]: We voted to allow the mayor to enter into a 10-year contract because of state statute.

[Marks]: My vote wasn't predicated on what was involved within that proposal.

[Marks]: My vote was to allow them because all three bids came back for 10 years.

[Marks]: So at the time, the mayor presented it to us saying, I can't negotiate at all because I don't have the authority to go and negotiate anything over three years.

[Marks]: You have to give me the ability to negotiate.

[Marks]: And that's what this council did.

[Marks]: We never voted on the terms of the agreement.

[Marks]: Not one time did we ever vote on the terms of the agreement.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I appreciate Mr. White being here on behalf of the chamber.

[Marks]: You just mentioned that you've participated in the process all along.

[Marks]: Other than the meeting we had a few weeks back, Jonathan, what other participation has the chamber had in crafting this particular proposal?

[Marks]: So just so I understand, if he was

[Marks]: The mayor was consulting with the past executive director.

[Marks]: Why were so many business owners caught off guard of what actually was in the proposal?

[Marks]: And I'm not quite sure that I buy the fact that the chamber has had so much input in this proposal because the input really didn't take place until three and a half, four weeks ago.

[Marks]: And as you mentioned, this has been a process since 2009.

[Marks]: This has been an ongoing process for five years.

[Marks]: So I guess why all of a sudden in the last three weeks was it that the chamber was invited to the table to give input when supposedly there was open dialogue and input from

[Marks]: the chamber for the last five years.

[Marks]: I don't understand why he took such a direction.

[Marks]: If there was that much input for the last five years from the chamber, I would have think some of the issues would have been addressed.

[Marks]: And really, the issues that I hear from business owners weren't addressed, still really aren't addressed, but weren't really talked about until three weeks ago.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: For those that are not aware, there are many petitions circulating the community right now for support.

[Marks]: of a dog park in this community.

[Marks]: We were promised back in 2011 by the mayor that he was going to implement a dog park somewhere within our community.

[Marks]: And I am asking now for a complete itemization of the money that the mayor supposedly accepted from J.F.

[Marks]: White bridge construction, which was mitigation money.

[Marks]: back in, I believe, 2012.

[Marks]: And also, September 2010 was the Medford Jingle Bell Committee.

[Marks]: They had a dog show and raised money for the dog park.

[Marks]: Also, the Doggie Fun Run at Hormel Stadium, which was in 2013 and just recently held in 2014.

[Marks]: 14, and also the Boston Volunteer Solutions Incorporated donated $1,766 to develop a dog park.

[Marks]: And I would like a complete itemized list of the different groups and organizations that have donated the money, when it was donated, and how much is in that account as it currently exists, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I just want to thank my council colleague, Councilor Knight, for those kind words.

[Marks]: And, Mr. President, you know, I recognize, and I think many people behind this reeling, because we've all supported it, the fact that there's a need in this community, the fact that we have space in this community,

[Marks]: The fact that money's been raised in this community, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I think all three combine to a reason why we need this park.

[Marks]: And I, as one person, believe that we can no longer wait for this in our community.

[Marks]: It was promised back three years ago.

[Marks]: It's a great way to exercise, socialize your dog.

[Marks]: People meet.

[Marks]: You know, Somerville last year licensed over 7,000 dogs.

[Marks]: in Somerville.

[Marks]: Method licensed, I believe it was about 425, 400 dogs in this community.

[Marks]: So I think it shows you, Mr. President,

[Marks]: When you have a community that has support for a dog park, support for initiatives like that, that people come out, they'll license their dogs, they'll get active, and that's healthy in a community.

[Marks]: And I think other surrounding communities that do have dog parks, Melrose, Somerville, Cambridge, Boston, Brookline, Arlington, Malden, Billerica, that have dog parks experience this, and our residents, I believe, are losing out on this experience as well as

[Marks]: the need to exercise their dogs, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Anyone interested in passing out petitions or putting them in businesses can contact myself.

[Marks]: or, you know, maybe do it collectively.

[Marks]: Any Councilor, right?

[Marks]: Right.

[Marks]: I mean, you know, we're, we're trying to organize and like Council Knight said, it's grassroots and it's very difficult to get the list of, we did get a list of everyone that pulled the dog license.

[Marks]: We're in the process of trying to contact people and eventually where the hopes are, Mr. President, that we're going to present all these petitions on a dog rally here at city hall.

[Marks]: And hopefully we'll have enough interest and enough participation to show the mayor that this is something, and I think the mayor agrees, but he's working slowly on it, that there's a need out there, and the need is eminent, and there's no reason to wait.

[Marks]: Councilor Marks.

[Marks]: Mr. President, I thank my Councilor colleague for bringing this up.

[Marks]: And I think actually Councilor Knight hit the nail on the head on the fact that the ball's in our court.

[Marks]: And if we want to have a public hearing here, if we want to have a committee of the whole meeting, if we want to have a subcommittee meeting, I personally prefer the fact that the Water and Sewer Commission has come up before the podium, as was just stated,

[Marks]: and present to us the plan.

[Marks]: Because honestly, I think we've all advocated for a tiered system for a number of years, and I wasn't aware that potentially they would mesh, if you live in a three-family, all three together, and then they would divide by that.

[Marks]: I wasn't aware it would work that way.

[Marks]: But these are the things I think that we have to listen to.

[Marks]: And regarding where the tier falls, if it's 0 to 800, or 800 to 1600,

[Marks]: At any point you decide on, there's going to be a cutoff.

[Marks]: So if it was zero to 1,000, what about the people that are 1,001?

[Marks]: So I don't think you can really go too much on that.

[Marks]: And as was mentioned, the tier system that we push for as a council, and don't forget, the council also pushed for, and it's been implemented, a second meter outside to save on your sewer bill.

[Marks]: That was another initiative by this council pushing

[Marks]: I think the TAD system will eventually promote, as was mentioned, conservation in the community, but also make people mindful of the fact, because the water and sewage, you feel like you have no control over.

[Marks]: Let's face it.

[Marks]: You go to the restroom, you've got to flush your toilet.

[Marks]: You've got to take a shower.

[Marks]: You've got to drink water.

[Marks]: You've got to wash your lawn.

[Marks]: There's basic things that you need to do with water.

[Marks]: And this is the first time that someone may have control over what their bill is actually going to look like.

[Marks]: So if you wanted to conserve and fall into a different range, then you could do that.

[Marks]: You'd make every effort to do so.

[Marks]: And I think we'll end up.

[Marks]: saving as Councilor Knight mentioned in the long run, people money, save money in this community.

[Marks]: And the fact that we have, as Councilor Penta just mentioned, $8 million, I am shocked to hear $8 million.

[Marks]: I know it was $6.5 million or right around $6 million not too long ago, but that account is growing exponentially.

[Marks]: You know, every member of this Council has stated

[Marks]: That count was never intended to be this pot of gold, Mr. President.

[Marks]: It's for infrastructure improvements and to offset water and sewer rates.

[Marks]: And God knows we need a lot of infrastructure improvements.

[Marks]: You know, the water and sewer that's, the water that's seeping into our old drain pipes, our old sewer pipes, that's costing us millions of dollars to treat as raw sewage.

[Marks]: As Councilor Penton mentioned, INI, the, I mean, the leak detection program, that's also costing the rate payers of this community millions of dollars.

[Marks]: These are the things that that $8 million should be going into.

[Marks]: We have illegal catch basins right now that are directly connected to the sewer system.

[Marks]: So when it rains, that water goes out, and it's just groundwater, and it's treated as raw sewage, costing us millions of dollars a year.

[Marks]: We know where these catch basins are.

[Marks]: We have $8 million.

[Marks]: Why aren't we doing anything to improve the infrastructure, Mr. President?

[Marks]: This has been a bone of contention that I've spoken about for years, Mr. President, and now we have money sitting in a fund.

[Marks]: Why don't we use it for infrastructure improvements?

[Marks]: I know some attempts have been made, and we've made some progress in that direction.

[Marks]: of improving inflow and infiltration and also leak detection.

[Marks]: But at the rate we're going, we're never going to get ahead of the bell curve.

[Marks]: We're never going to get ahead.

[Marks]: And residents are going to be looking at their bills saying, someday this is going to be more than my tax bill.

[Marks]: And the way we're going, this is not my statement.

[Marks]: It's been stated 100 times before this council that someday your water and sewer bill

[Marks]: will be more than your taxes.

[Marks]: And people will be looking to point the blame.

[Marks]: And all they can point to that is the fact that we've done very little as a community to improve our infrastructure.

[Marks]: We've done very little to improve it.

[Marks]: We do take advantage of 0% finance loans every so often and so forth.

[Marks]: But we're never going to get ahead of the hundreds of miles of pipe that exist underneath our roads.

[Marks]: unless we start being proactive.

[Marks]: Every year, take up a certain hotspot.

[Marks]: We know the hotspots are where there's a lot of leakage and so forth.

[Marks]: We know where the hotspots are that are accepting groundwater.

[Marks]: We know where the leaks are.

[Marks]: We know where all the issues stand, Mr. President.

[Marks]: However, because it's underground, you know, out of sight, out of mind, the old saying.

[Marks]: You know, the administration tends to put that on the back burner.

[Marks]: And they like to have that little nest egg out there so they can say, well, our bond rating is low because we have these reserves.

[Marks]: I don't think we should be using the rate payers' reserves out there if we're not going to the intended purpose, which is infrastructure improvements and to lower the rates, just to say we can get a better bond rating.

[Marks]: That's not the intent of that account.

[Marks]: And the intent is definitely not to build an $8 million surplus on your hard-earned money, Mr. President, my hard-earned money, and every other taxpayer in this community that's working to make a buck.

[Marks]: We should be holding $8 million in reserve, Mr. President.

[Marks]: I thank my colleague, Councilor Penta, for bringing this up.

[Marks]: Mr. President.

[Marks]: Also, in addition to the city solicitor, can we also invite the city engineer at the meeting?

[Marks]: And did you mention Councilor Penter as the chair?

[Marks]: Right.

[Marks]: I would ask the chair then if, uh, I think you would need at least two hours in a meeting like this.

[Marks]: Uh, cause I think sometimes in an hour you're hard pressed to get the questions and answers.

[Marks]: And, uh, so I would ask that, uh, if my colleague would try to plan a two hour meeting on a Wednesday night.

[Marks]: He's a paid consultant, so I think we're going to- Well, he came up with the rates, I'm sure, so.

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: These were two separate

[Marks]: trip-and-fall accidents on Carolina Street.

[Marks]: One, the woman was taken to the hospital.

[Marks]: She broke her nose.

[Marks]: She did some damage to her jawbone.

[Marks]: And the other woman fell down.

[Marks]: I believe had some leg damage, Mr. President.

[Marks]: But both sidewalks are above, actually, the curb.

[Marks]: So when you step up onto the sidewalk, you hit the lip of the sidewalk, rather than just go onto a flat plane.

[Marks]: And they really, in the interest of public safety, need to be done immediately, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: As we all know, and Jean's been very vocal over the years, Jean has been a staunch advocate of the police department.

[Marks]: So even though her statements went in many different directions, I think where it lies with Jean is

[Marks]: She's always been a supporter of public safety and the men and women in the police department.

[Marks]: Also, Mr. President, while we have her here, and I know it's getting late, but Jean has attended a meeting in Washington and has done yeoman's work on all sorts of disability issues and VA issues.

[Marks]: And I'd like to hear- Councilor Marks?

[Marks]: I just would like, Mr. President, if Jane could fill us in on her endeavors with the VA and the disabilities and what she just recently did in Washington.

[Marks]: Mr. President, I just would like to thank Jean on behalf of all Method residents for her work and diligence with the DAV and all the great things that she does.

[Marks]: That was very interesting to hear.

[Marks]: Thank you, Jean.

[Marks]: Mr. President, uh, you know, year after year after year, we speak about this time of the year about repainting our crosswalks, which is a major public safety issue in this community.

[Marks]: year after year after year.

[Marks]: Some years, it takes several months.

[Marks]: Some years, it takes just a few months.

[Marks]: You know, Mr. President, it would only make sense from a standpoint of public safety in our community to install thermoplastic crosswalks.

[Marks]: Painted crosswalks last one year, if that, and then you're back again painting them immediately if you get to it.

[Marks]: Thermoplastic crosswalks, their life expectancy is three to five years.

[Marks]: They're highly reflective, much better than paint, so you can see them from a distance when you're driving, and you can see if someone's in the crosswalk from a distance, and they're slip resistant also.

[Marks]: We wouldn't have to discuss these issues every single year, when are we gonna get out and paint?

[Marks]: We gotta get our whole crew at DPW out to paint the crosswalks.

[Marks]: Wouldn't it be more efficient, not only for public safety reasons, but more efficiency to have a crosswalk painted once every five years rather than five times?

[Marks]: It doesn't make any sense, Mr. President.

[Marks]: It really doesn't make any sense.

[Marks]: Thermoplastic crosswalks are a little more expensive.

[Marks]: But you know what, the state uses them on the highway.

[Marks]: They use them for a reason, because studies have been done to say this is a far better way of marking intersections and crosswalks.

[Marks]: And if we're really all interested about truly public safety concerns, we would all be pushing for thermoplastic crosswalks.

[Marks]: And we wouldn't have to talk for another five years.

[Marks]: But year after year after year, it gets brought up.

[Marks]: We hope the city gets out.

[Marks]: And then we find out there's 40 in this area that weren't done, another 40 in this area, another 40 in this area.

[Marks]: And then we do a piecemeal.

[Marks]: And by the time we're done with them, the snow starts to come down.

[Marks]: That's what happens every year.

[Marks]: I don't know what it's going to take to get a handle on it.

[Marks]: It's no secret, Mr. President, thermoplastic has been in existence for years.

[Marks]: Federal, state highways, they all use thermoplastic.

[Marks]: Painting is a thing of the past.

[Marks]: It's almost as bad as marking your streets that need to be swept with paper pamphlets.

[Marks]: It's almost as archaic as marking your streets with paper pamphlets when you have to do street sweeping.

[Marks]: So I don't know, Mr. President, maybe we should be putting a resolution together as a council saying, you know what, Mr. Mayor?

[Marks]: We want to see, if it's too late this year, so be it.

[Marks]: The budget's coming up very shortly.

[Marks]: We're going to start discussion budget in June.

[Marks]: We should be pushing for thermoplastic crosswalks if there's a cost.

[Marks]: associated with you, I know there's a cost associated with it, that should be in the budget and then we won't have to discuss public safety issues year after year and we can focus our time on issues of importance.

[Marks]: Well, safety is important, but when you have your crosswalks painted, then you can look, with thermoplastic, then you can look at other issues.

[Marks]: You don't have to keep on refocusing your attention on the same issue year after year after year, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Mr. President.

[Marks]: I just want to mention what my colleague mentioned.

[Marks]: The pilot program is for raised crosswalks.

[Marks]: I'm mentioning about thermoplastic crosswalk, which is very different than a raised crosswalk.

[Marks]: Although I support both initiatives.

[Marks]: Just want to set the record straight on that.

[Marks]: Mr. Clerk, call the roll.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Uh, at this weekend's memorial, uh, ceremony, I had a resident come up to me and hand me a list of, uh, 13 names of just residents in his area, uh, of people that support a dog park.

[Marks]: And, um, if you look at the list, Mr. President's Lowell court,

[Marks]: Rockwell Ave, Pool Street, Evans Street, Middlesex Ave, Chipman, Burnside, Lawrence,

[Marks]: Hurlcroft, Spring Street, Central Ave.

[Marks]: These are residents, Mr. President, name and phone number of people that support a dog park just in a small general area off of Central Ave.

[Marks]: A small area that this gentleman went out and just got a number of signatures of people that support a dog park.

[Marks]: You can take this list.

[Marks]: and a hundred fold throughout the community, people are wondering where this dog park is.

[Marks]: It was several weeks ago that I offered a resolution and Mr. Clerk, I don't know if it's been answered or not by the mayor, asking for the status of the dog park.

[Marks]: Where is the dog park?

[Marks]: I don't believe we got a response back from the mayor and that was voted on this council, by this council, seven weeks ago.

[Marks]: I don't know what's happening, but if the mayor's gonna make statements that he received mitigation and what the mitigation is and so forth, then at the very least, residents should hold him accountable to what was stated.

[Marks]: If part of the mitigation for the Bridge Fast 14 project was a dog park, then where is the dog park?

[Marks]: Is there a location, Mr. Mayor?

[Marks]: Who's working on this?

[Marks]: Did you create an advisory committee?

[Marks]: What's going on?

[Marks]: All we want is a status.

[Marks]: I know things don't happen overnight, but all we want is a status.

[Marks]: So for those thousands of pet owners in this community that want a place that their dog can run free, because that's what a dog park is.

[Marks]: When you take your dog to a local park now, they have to be leashed.

[Marks]: They can't run free.

[Marks]: This would be similar to the dog park that's in Somerville, the dog park that's in Cambridge, and all the surrounding communities that do have currently dog parks right now.

[Marks]: This would allow them to exercise and run their dogs.

[Marks]: We're not asking for anything other than what the mayor said he negotiated.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Thank you.

[Marks]: Council Marks.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: And I appreciate what Carol Rosen had to say.

[Marks]: A lot of that makes sense.

[Marks]: However, in order to accomplish some of what Carolyn spoke about, you need to have seven independent Councilors.

[Marks]: And that's key to the process.

[Marks]: If people aren't going to be independent behind this reeling, then it does break down to just a political process.

[Marks]: Does the mayor have his votes?

[Marks]: And then he pushes his initiatives through.

[Marks]: You know, tonight, Councilor Penta mentioned to the mayor at the very end, I don't know if anyone else heard, Councilor Penta asked, he said, Mr. Mayor, because this project now, you're asking for an additional million dollars, I'd like for you to sit down and create a priority list.

[Marks]: Is that what you stated, Councilor Penta?

[Marks]: And the mayor said, I'm not gonna sit down and put together a priority list.

[Marks]: He said, we can afford to do everything.

[Marks]: That's exactly what the mayor said.

[Marks]: We can afford to do everything.

[Marks]: So it's great, Carolyn, I can agree with what you're saying, the fact that we need to sit down and so forth, but if you have the mentality that we're hearing from the administration that there's no priority list, there's no list based on what we can afford to do, because according to the mayor, we can afford everything.

[Marks]: And not only can we afford everything, we can afford to do it right now.

[Marks]: Not that we should have done it over the last 20 years.

[Marks]: You know, when the DPW building was condemned years ago, the police station has been a pit for years.

[Marks]: A pit for years.

[Marks]: The high school pool's been down for seven years.

[Marks]: And the associated cost we heard about, the additional 1.2 million, was further deterioration.

[Marks]: So because we didn't do, as you mentioned, Councilor Caraviello, why don't we do this seven years ago?

[Marks]: Because we waited, it cost us an additional several hundred thousands of dollars.

[Marks]: And as Carolyn mentioned, and I mentioned it last week.

[Marks]: Well, that was part of it, was further deterioration.

[Marks]: Also inflation.

[Marks]: Now there's an inflationary index regarding construction.

[Marks]: So if the mayor took the cost from a 2007 architectural report that was established saying the report's gonna

[Marks]: uh, the pool is going to cost us 2.3 million.

[Marks]: The mayor could have looked up the index.

[Marks]: I've got someone in the building department look up the cost of construction work done in 2007 compared to construction work done in 2013.

[Marks]: And he could have said, counsel, I know the figure has increased by three, $400,000.

[Marks]: Now that's still not an exact figure, but I know there's an additional three or 4,000, three or $400,000 built into this.

[Marks]: But when he came to us several months back,

[Marks]: As I stated to the mayor tonight, one of the first questions, Mr. Mayor, you originally asked us for $2.3 million.

[Marks]: And at the time, you knew there was accessibility issues.

[Marks]: At the time, you knew there was inflation.

[Marks]: You knew all this already, Mr. Mayor.

[Marks]: Why would you come to us for $2.3 million?

[Marks]: And he said there was no way of figuring this out until a secondary report was done.

[Marks]: And the only thing I can think of now is, we're all on board with the DPW yet.

[Marks]: Is that the figure that we voted on?

[Marks]: Is that the figure that we're going to end up costing for the DPWR?

[Marks]: Or is it going to be double or triple that?

[Marks]: Because that seems to be the process how it works.

[Marks]: I don't know how every other entity and every other company and business and municipality does it, but it just doesn't make sense.

[Marks]: as someone was quoted in the paper saying.

[Marks]: You know what, Mr. Mayor, if that wasn't a fair and accurate estimate, then why give one?

[Marks]: Why come out?

[Marks]: Because it was the politically correct thing to do?

[Marks]: Come out ahead of time and say, okay, we got the pool on target now, and I'll go back and get a million dollars somewhere down the line?

[Marks]: We heard that tonight.

[Marks]: We were told by the administration tonight

[Marks]: that once we do the pool, spectators, mothers, fathers, grandparents, sisters, brothers, can't watch their kid swimming and meet.

[Marks]: There's nowhere for spectators to sit down.

[Marks]: It's such a beautiful facility once it's done.

[Marks]: There's nowhere for spectators to sit.

[Marks]: And we heard from the mayor, which is par for the course, we'll handle that after.

[Marks]: We'll take care of that after.

[Marks]: similar to the field of dreams and the accessibility issue at the field of dreams.

[Marks]: We'll make it accessible after the fact.

[Marks]: We all know what happened with the field of dreams.

[Marks]: You can't continue to operate a city in this fashion.

[Marks]: And I agree with councilor Penta, you know, we've been asking for this priority list for a long time now, several years.

[Marks]: And finally the mayor came out with chart the course.

[Marks]: And he gave us a list, not in any particular order, he refused to give it any order, a list of projects that need to be done.

[Marks]: And we heard tonight the lack of maintenance seems to be the Achilles heel with this community.

[Marks]: No maintenance, no maintenance, no upkeep, and everything deteriorates.

[Marks]: We don't even know what the pool right now, who's gonna manage the pool?

[Marks]: You saw the equipment in the basement.

[Marks]: You saw those tanks that house the sand and the overflow for water, giant tanks that are six feet in circumference, 10 feet high.

[Marks]: You think someone's going to go down there like you're changing your pool and look at the chemicals and dip a little cotton swab in there and say, oh, everything looks fine?

[Marks]: You need constant 24-hour, seven-day-a-week maintenance and someone that knows how to handle pool maintenance specifically.

[Marks]: And there's no mention of it at all.

[Marks]: We heard how the pool may generate money.

[Marks]: Oh, don't worry, the mayor said, this pool's gonna generate money.

[Marks]: And he referred to other communities that generate money with their pool.

[Marks]: Just the business we wanna be in.

[Marks]: Just the business we wanna be in.

[Marks]: Let's rent our total facilities out to generate money.

[Marks]: And not put a nickel back into the wear and tear and the upkeep.

[Marks]: And in five years from now, we'll be discussing this pool again.

[Marks]: It's all it's going to take.

[Marks]: We'll be discussing this pool again.

[Marks]: These are the issues we have to look at.

[Marks]: And I agree with Carolyn.

[Marks]: I agree with members of this council and we should have the paperwork and so forth.

[Marks]: But let me tell you, without seven independent Councilors, none of this is going to happen.

[Marks]: It's always going to be political.

[Marks]: And Carolyn, you're right.

[Marks]: What happens is they pin person against person, organization against organization.

[Marks]: None of us are opposed to having a swimming pool at the high school.

[Marks]: I swam in the pool when I was at the high school.

[Marks]: It's a great asset we have as a community.

[Marks]: We're lucky to have a pool of that size and caliber within our confines.

[Marks]: We're very fortunate.

[Marks]: But we can't continue to operate this way.

[Marks]: We can't continue

[Marks]: year after year after year to look back and say, well, what are we going to accomplish right now?

[Marks]: These have to be done long-term, long-term systematic approaches to capital improvements.

[Marks]: You can't do everything in a year or two.

[Marks]: This is 20 years worth of neglect, 20 years of neglect and lack of upkeep, and we want to accomplish it in one or two years.

[Marks]: That's what we're looking to do, one or two years.

[Marks]: It can't happen.

[Marks]: We can't afford, we can't sustain spending of that nature.

[Marks]: People are struggling now.

[Marks]: And the last thing they want is their taxes to go skyrocketing.

[Marks]: You know, we're in a rock and a hard place.

[Marks]: We already, seven of us already took a vote on the pool.

[Marks]: We already said we support

[Marks]: having a pool at the high school.

[Marks]: We even think it's a priority, and we're going to move forward.

[Marks]: And then to come back several months later and say, you know what?

[Marks]: There are some additional costs of $1.2 million.

[Marks]: The total project was $2.3 million.

[Marks]: You come back with $1.2 million.

[Marks]: How outrageous is that?

[Marks]: I could see $50,000, $75,000 for different costs.

[Marks]: Another million too.

[Marks]: And the phone calls I'm receiving is, geez, how come the council's not supporting the pool?

[Marks]: How come you don't want the kids?

[Marks]: My son or daughter has to get up at five in the morning to go swim somewhere else, and I have to drive them.

[Marks]: And I sympathize with the parents, because they've been doing this for seven years.

[Marks]: However, what I explain to the parents is, the council's on board with the pool.

[Marks]: As I stated to the mayor tonight,

[Marks]: I thought there were going to be people swimming in there right now.

[Marks]: That's why we took the vote.

[Marks]: And now we're being told it's another million, too.

[Marks]: And then the locker room is a different issue.

[Marks]: And he found, miraculously found funding for the locker room.

[Marks]: So it's not going to cost us much for the locker room.

[Marks]: I don't know, Mr. President.

[Marks]: You know, at some point, something has to give.

[Marks]: And the administration was up there in full force tonight.

[Marks]: It's funny.

[Marks]: We have the bond initiative before us to vote on the actual expenditure and not one department head shows up.

[Marks]: Not one person from the administration.

[Marks]: We call for a meeting on site at the pool.

[Marks]: We couldn't get in the room.

[Marks]: There was so many people from the administration up there.

[Marks]: It was mobbed with people from the administration.

[Marks]: And they were quick to come to the mayor's defense when things were mentioned.

[Marks]: They were quick to say, oh, that's not true.

[Marks]: There's nothing in the report, as Diane McLeod said tonight.

[Marks]: There's nothing in the report in 2007 that talked about accessibility.

[Marks]: And I said, there most certainly was something in the 2007 report.

[Marks]: You should take a further look at it that mentioned, if you do the construction of the pool, it's going to trigger off accessibility issues.

[Marks]: So be on notice that you're going to have additional cost.

[Marks]: And the city was on notice.

[Marks]: The city knew about these additional costs back in 2007.

[Marks]: But we have department heads saying, there was no mention of that.

[Marks]: We weren't looking for accessibility issues.

[Marks]: Actually, they mentioned tonight that when the project came out, all they were looking to do was the pool and the surrounding platform around the pool.

[Marks]: And I mentioned to the department head, why didn't we look at something else?

[Marks]: Well, that's what we looked at.

[Marks]: And I said, you looked at it because that was what you asked the architect to look at.

[Marks]: You asked them to look at that specifically.

[Marks]: That's what we're going to pay you to do.

[Marks]: You give us the results on this.

[Marks]: What do we need for a pool and a platform?

[Marks]: So it was the administration that said, we're not going to look at accessibility issues in the bathroom, in the locker rooms.

[Marks]: They're the ones that commissioned the report, not this council.

[Marks]: So the only reason why the locker rooms weren't looked at in 2007 was because the administration, at that point, maybe didn't feel it was necessary to talk about accessibility.

[Marks]: Or maybe felt by talking about accessibility, you're going to inflate the project, the cost of the project.

[Marks]: And maybe you can't fly a project for 3.5,

[Marks]: million, but you could fly a project for $2.3 million.

[Marks]: These are the things.

[Marks]: And that's why, when I said last week, and I still stand by it, we should have been presented with a close estimate, the closest possible estimate.

[Marks]: No smoke and mirrors.

[Marks]: The closest possible estimate, Mr. President, so we could vote on it as a council.

[Marks]: If we thought it's too expensive, as Councilor Caraviello mentioned, let's go back and look at some other proposals.

[Marks]: Maybe we don't have to do X, we'll do Y. We'll do Z and Y, whatever it may be.

[Marks]: But we were never given that opportunity.

[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President.

[Marks]: Question.

[Marks]: So is this your first owner's license and method?

[Marks]: But it's your first, you've never had an owner's license before in the city.

[Marks]: Have you driven in the city before?

[Marks]: Yes.

[Marks]: He has an owner's license now, currently.

[Marks]: And this is the addition?

[Marks]: Two and three.

[Marks]: So where does that lead us now with the number of ono?

[Marks]: And where are you going to be operating out of?

[Marks]: 40 Canal Street?

[Marks]: And I assume you're gonna hire, you're gonna look to hire people to drive these cabs?

[Marks]: Roughly how many drivers would you need to have to?

[Marks]: Two drivers?

[Marks]: Mr. President, I've, in the past several weeks, not voted for operator licenses.

[Marks]: The owner licenses I will support, and as soon as the magic number of 50, or if we plan on reducing it, is met, then I think that issue will be resolved.

[Marks]: However, the operator license right now I will not support.

[Marks]: Uh, but this gentleman is not asking for an operator license.

[Marks]: You're asking for an owner's license.

[Marks]: And until we get a new ordinance on the, on the board, uh, and look at the application form that's in front of us.

[Marks]: So, uh, we can tackle the issues that, uh, have been confronting this community with, uh, taxi operators operating outside of the community.

[Marks]: Um, so I will support this here tonight, uh, for the taxi owner license.