Finance Committee - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everyone. I'm Ben Wheeler. I use he, him pronouns. I'm a counselor at large and finance committee chair. It is 6.02 p.m. and I'd like to call to order the Tuesday, June 16th, 2026 meeting of the Finance Committee of the Somerville City Council. This meeting of the City Council Committee will be conducted via remote participation following Chapter 2 of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts' Acts of 2025. We'll post an audio-video recording and a comprehensive record of these proceedings as soon as possible after the meeting on the City of Somerville website and local cable access government channels. We are joined by Clerk Madeline Letelier. Clerk, could you please call the roll to establish quorum?

This is roll call. Councilor Link?

Here.

Councilor Schrezzo? Present. Councilor Hart? Here. Councilor Scott? Present. Councilor Wheeler?

Here.

We've had Councilors present. We have quorum.

Thank you. As a general note, if I pronounce your name wrong or get your title wrong or use the wrong pronouns for you, please don't hesitate to interrupt me. I want to get it right. Okay, so beginning with Community Preservation Act appropriations. Item 1.1, 26-0968, requesting the appropriation or reserve of of eight million three hundred sixty seven thousand three hundred forty four dollars in estimated fiscal year twenty twenty seven community preservation act revenue for cpa projects and expenses and i believe we have director of finance and administration for strategy and development alan inacio yes uh direct Sorry, didn't mean to interrupt you. Director Inacio, can you please tell us about this request?

Thank you. Through the chair and yes, through the newly named strategy and development, formerly OSPCD. This is our appropriation order for the forthcoming budget. CPA manager Roberta Cameron will have a brief presentation tomorrow at our budget hearing. But this is the second year where we will be benefiting from the relatively new 3% CPA allocation. And this will be the first year that we will be fully eligible as a 3% community for the state's bonus pool match. So definitely very excited. This is our largest and healthiest CPA budget to date. So again, grateful for passing the 3% surcharge a couple of years ago and looking forward to another robust funding round next year. So with that, I'll open it up to questions.

Members of the committee, any questions for Director Inasio? Councilor Link.

Thank you, Jared. Through you, what percent match or what is the match?

Sure. The projected match rate for next year is 15.5%. Fantastic.

Thank you very much.

Any other questions? Director Inacio, I know that we started using some amount of CPA funds for debt service. Am I right in remembering that was something in the high hundreds of thousands?

Through the chair, yes. We incurred debt service based on a project basis. And next year, depending on... how projects progress, but next year will be the first year that we will have a debt service payment across all three program areas. So we currently have the West Somerville Library is still making debt service payments. We have Clarendon Hill and a 100 Homes, CPA funded projects that are in a debt service schedule. And next year, the Kennedy School, which is funded through CPA,

may begin debt service payments depending on the progress of the construction thank you any other questions from the committee for director nacio about this item i am seeing none oh i'm seeing counselor scott

Just as a quick remark, the encumbering of the future CPA funds by way of debt service is definitely something that was talked about several years ago. And it's something the CPA committee and city staff have to keep a close eye on to make sure that there's still plenty of funds left for new projects in upcoming years. It's not a brand new thing, but it's also not something that we've done a ton of. It's just been to undertake things that normally would require multi-year funding cycles and allowing the CPA money to go farther and bigger.

Thank you, Counselor Scott. Yes, on that, I heard excitement from counselors in other towns about using CPA for these multi-year projects and how debt service can be a crucial part of that. So I'm excited for it. Seeing no other questions or comments, this item is laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the meeting. Thank you, Director. Moving on to item 2.1, parking. Mayor's request 26-0977, requesting approval to execute the fifth amendment to the lease agreement with Dana Family Series LLC for the Grove Street parking lot through June 30th, 2027. And I believe that we have Director of Traffic and Parking, Suzanne Renfret. Director Renfret, if you're here, could you please tell us about this lease amendment?

Good evening. Can you hear me? yes okay um i don't know if you can see me but i'm here um so this lease is for the the parking lot behind the mckinnon's market so it's a year by year lease at this point because at some point they're going to develop that so um the dana family services will continue to do a year by year lease until such time that construction starts on that building thank you director any questions or comments from the committee

Director, I noted that the agreement calls for repair of potholes and other surface damage. Is that something that the city will pay for? And I'm just curious if that's something that's budgeted as part of engineering or part of traffic and parking.

Through the chair, I've already spoken with Director Wiseman and they've already been down and filled the potholes.

Beautiful. Thank you so much. Any other comments or questions about this? I am seeing none, so this item is laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the meeting. Thank you, Director.

Thank you.

All right, moving on to arts. Request 3.1, request 26-0949, requesting approval to increase the special event revolving fund expenditure limit for fiscal year 2026. And I believe that we have Commissioner of Public Works, Eric Wiseman, and Megan Huckenpahler, Director of Finance Administration for Public Works. Hello, yes. Please tell us about this item.

Of course, I'm sorry, my camera's not working at the moment, but I am Director of Finance for the Department of Public Works, Megan Hockenpahler, here to speak on this item. We are requesting approval to increase the cap for the special event revolving fund from $10,000 to $20,000. This is where we take in revenue for groups who are repaying the city when there is a road race. We are putting out barriers, putting out trash cans, and making sure that they have the right of way for streets during that time.

Thank you so much, Director. Members of the committee, any questions or comments about this item? Just for clarity, so this is a revolving fund, so does that mean funds come into it that are earned in things like ticket sales and then funds go out? Pardon me, I'm a bit new to revolving funds.

That's all right. Thank you for the question, Chair. This is just for the cost of putting up the barriers for the time of DPW staff. So we are not hosting any of these events. They are just repaying us for the labor to put up barriers around streets that will be closed as well as any trash cans.

I see. So these events pay city staff and we use this to sort of, you know, let time not be a stress for managing the payment and expenditure?

Correct.

Well, thank you very much. I am seeing a question from Kessler Hart.

Thank you, Chair. I'm just curious about the need. Is it just inflation and the cost of putting on events and the events get bigger and more expensive? Or is there any other reasons?

Great question. Through the chair to Councilor Hart, we are using, we are having a few more folks use this and we did also recently update the fee for service. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Hart. I am not seeing any other hands up. So with appreciation, this item is laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the meeting. Moving on to people operations, item 4.1, item 26-0920, requesting the appropriation of $250,000 from the unreserved fund balance free cash to the unemployment compensation account to remediate a year-end deficit. And I believe we have Director of Human Resources, Ann Gill. Oh, is that not what it's called now? Is it people operations, Director Gill?

Well, HR until July 1st.

Okay, fair enough. Will you please tell us about this appropriation?

Yeah, through the chair to the committee. Yeah, we are falling short this year because of some unanticipated unemployment claims that we've had for the past six months. And this should cover us. We're behind by about $147,000. However, I think the $250,000 should be enough, given that some of the folks who are currently on unemployment perhaps will gain employment.

Thank you, Director. Any questions or comments from the committee on this? Just to clarify, Director Gill, you mentioned this being something that's been ongoing for about six months. I know there have been several people that were laid off recently with the city. The size of this amount, to what degree is this amount related to those claims or an expectation of those claims?

Yeah, those claims will not come in through the chairs. Those claims will not come in until July 1st. People are currently paid, still paid through June 26th. So those claims will hit us in July and further.

I see. So this amount has nothing to do with that yet?

Through the chair, yes. Correct.

Thank you. Any other members of the committee with questions or comments? Councillor Scott?

Just a quick one. You read my mind on where I was going with that. Is the... Is the unemployment compensation account getting an extra bit of juice here to handle the layoffs that we did just have? Are we anticipating another appropriation as part of the budget package here?

Correct. That'll be for the budget year 27. It'll be in the budget, yes. All right. I'll keep my eyes open.

I see. So just to clarify, Director Gill, there will be a separate amount from this that is in the budget book that accounts for that?

Through the chair, correct.

Thank you. I appreciate that. Any other comments or questions from members of the committee? Seeing none, this item is laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the meeting. Thank you, Director Gill.

Welcome.

Moving on to Health and Human Services. There's a bunch of different items and they don't all have the same speakers on them. So we may switch some speakers in and out, just a heads up. Item 5.1, 26-0881, requesting approval of a transfer of $4,966.16. From various Council on Aging Ordinary Maintenance Health and Human Services salaries account to various Council on Aging personal services account. I believe that we have Director of Council on Aging, Ashley Spelliotis, as well as Finance Manager for Health and Human Services, Annette Malik. If that is the case, then Director Spelliotis or Manager Malik.

Sure. Good evening, everyone. Ashley Spliotis, the Director of the Council on Aging. Breaking up just a little bit, so I hope everybody can hear me. But yes, the Council on Aging salary line or personal services has a deficit of $4,966.16. Yes, I think we hear you okay. Great. And we're hoping to transfer money from employee training, police detail, in-state travel, all small amounts to equal the total needed. The amounts are left from year ends that we are not planning to use in their regards to cover the cost.

Thank you, Director. Any questions or comments about this from members of the committee? I am seeing none. So this item is laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the meeting. Thank you, Director. Mr.

Chair, not for nothing, your connection seems to be a little bit spotty. So we're dropping what you say.

I'm sorry, I might turn my video off if people don't mind in the hopes that that would help. Let's try that and please give me a heads up because there's a different wifi option that I could try here. Thank you. If everybody heard, I'll just say again, just to make sure this item is laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the meeting. Moving on to item 5.2, 26-0876, requesting approval to accept and expend a $58,642 grant that requires a match from Metro North Regional Employment Board to the Health and Human Services Department for the YouthWorks Summer Program. And I believe for this, we have Finance Manager for Health and Human Services, Anup Malik. Manager Malik, could you tell us about this grant if you are here?

Thank you. Through the chair, I would like to, Anoop Malik, HHS Finance Manager, I would like to share a little bit of information about this grant with Folks here, YouthWorks is a state-funded youth employment program that helps teen and young adults gain the skills and experience needed to begin their career journey. YouthWorks provides some Massachusetts teens and young adults with first jobs and all with leadership development, skills training, and career exploration. Participants of this program are 14 to 18 years old who are at risk of falling into chronic unemployment through lack of exposure, experience, mentorship, and access to opportunities often paired with poverty. This grant from Metro North Regional Employment Board to Health and Human Services Department, Youth Services Office, the amount of the approval is $58,642. And it will cover a total of 22 teams. We have cycle one and cycle two. So cycle one would cover 16 teams, and cycle two would cover six teams. And we also have a grant match, which is in the form of in-kind from our partners, non-profit local businesses, Groundwork Somerville, Mystic Learning Center, Elizabeth Peabody House, Project Soup, Parkour, Somerville Media Center.

Thank you so much, manager. Any questions or comments from the committee? I am seeing this sounds like a wonderful program. I did have one note. I took a look at the letter that was attached to this item, and I thought maybe that letter was from a previous year. I wasn't quite clear about the dates, and it didn't seem like the amount was close. It was talking about $56,000, not $58,000. I wasn't sure if maybe that was just not the right letter. But the other document has the actual application which I think has all of the pertinent information.

Through the Chair, that's correct. That letter is covering the period FY26, whereas this contract and this grant approval is for FY27. We typically get the contribution letter from ground works when we are in the second half of that particular fiscal year to support our financial requirement back to the funder in this case. So you are correct about that.

Thank you. Not seeing any further discussion on this. This item is laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the meeting. Thank you. And we will move on to item 5.3, 26-0874, requesting approval of a transfer of $127,358 from various Office of Housing Stability ordinary maintenance accounts to the Housing Assistance Stabilization Fund for housing assistance programs. And I believe we have Director of Housing Stability, Ellen Schachter, as well as Director of Finance and Administration for Strategy and Development, Alan Anasio. Director Schachter or Director Inasio, could you please tell us about this transfer?

I think Director Inasio is going to say a few words and then hand it over to me. Yeah.

Sounds good.

Sorry, apologies for the camera flickering, trying to figure out the order. Yes, through the chair, this is basically just a tactical transfer. This will allow us to preserve some unused funds in the housing stability P&T programs this year that they were not able to use. This will allow us to shift it to a stabilization fund. which we can then appropriate from, come back to the council, appropriate from next year and not be subject to the general fund year-end recapture. And with that, I'll yield the floor to Director Schachter, who'd like to make some more comments about the impacted programs.

Thank you so much to the chair and to city council for giving me a minute to speak to you tonight. I thought it would be helpful both for tonight and to give you sort of a little more context to my overall budget. You'll see tomorrow night, along with the rest of strategy and development. I'll be talking about my general fund budget, but there's a lot of things that go on that you can't see when we're only looking at the general fund. So I did just want to note there are three programs, two programs in one part of a program that are very critical to anti-displacement, which are funded outside of the general fund budget. And those are my biggest, largest rental assistance program, a short-term emergency hotel motel program that we have, And part of the contract for legal services, the contract we have for legal services for tenants facing eviction has moved to the general budget. But the first five months of last year were funded through ARPA. So the level funding that I received in my general budget only is for seven months of that contract. So I was very grateful to Ed Bean and to Alan Anasio coming to them and actually saying, If we don't spend the funds this year, can we hold on to them? And we actually, because we were, everything was funded this year, we decided not to do a citywide mailing and we decided to hold off on spending some of our Lex rental assistance programs because we knew we needed it for next year. So this allocation will enable us to have full funding for our legal services program and some money towards our rental assistance program. Later in the month, you will be hearing another proposal for another source of funding to help round out that really critical rental assistance program that we have. But that would be great if this can be approved tonight, and it gives us some flexibility to be able to keep our programs running next year.

Thank you. Thank you, Director. I'm seeing Councilor Scott.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Of course, this is wonderful stuff, and these programs have really helped out folks that I know, constituents. But I just wanted for folks who might be tuning into the budget for the first time or wondering why we're not talking to departments until midnight tonight, these kind of transfers are very routine end-of-year business where unspent money just gets parked because it can't roll over necessarily. So rather than just... Vanishing at the end of the year. This is a way to make sure that we pay it forward. So there I anticipate there are a lot of these both in our agenda tonight and probably on budget approval evening as well. So that's on the share.

Thank you, Councillor Scott. And I will just add to that. I know sometimes in organizations, including government organizations, there can be a pressure for departments and divisions to spend every last dollar because you don't want to make it look like you need less the next year. And I'm really glad to see that the way that leftover funds like this are being handled is not held against an office for the crime of being thrifty, but you know, used in a stabilization fund, sort of credited towards the work that an office is doing. And I especially appreciate that with the work your office is doing, Director Schechter. Thank you. Any other questions or comments from members of the committee? Councilor Strezzo.

Thank you. No, I just want to comment. And this is our community values in action. And I am really proud of our city. And thank you, Director, and support, of course, of that being and the rest of the administration on this. This matters. This is everything to those who need this. So thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Strezzo. Any other comments or questions from members of the committee on this? Seeing none, this item is laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the meeting. Thank you, Director.

Thank you.

Moving on to item 5.4, 26-1001, requesting the appropriation of $144,235 from the Opioid Recovery and Remediation Stabilization Fund to support various projects related to opioid initiatives. And I believe we have, again, a Finance Manager for Health and Human Services, Anup Malik, and possibly also Director of Prevention Services, Tina Lohs. Manager Malik or Director Lohs, could you please tell us about this appropriation?

Thank you. Through the Chair, we are requesting appropriation for $144,235. This amount will be supporting opioid initiatives for FY2027. This includes a number of different projects, initiatives. as follows, $48,000 would support the public health vending machines, 30,000 would support the sharps kiosk, $38,850 would support the comprehensive data management software for case management, $385 would support the AED device maintenance, the $2,000 would support the pilot transportation and $25,000 will support the detection devices project. I'm happy to take any questions. I would also like to acknowledge Tina Lewis who is joining me from the prevention services as director of prevention services.

Thank you, Director Malik. Councilor Link.

Thank you, Chair. Through you, can we just confirm what a detection device is?

Hi everyone, thank you and through the chair. So our detection device project is looking at devices that are able to detect when there's not motion in a certain area. And when people are experiencing an overdose, sometimes they might pass out or become not moving. And so sometimes in those situations, having a detection device can help save a life. So we are looking into providing these software at the West Branch Library and also at the Summerville Homeless Coalition.

Thank you very much. Not seeing other hands. I just want to follow up on that. This is software that someone could run on their phone or on a computer.

Thank you for the question through the chair. So there are a few different companies that we're looking into at this time. Some of them have a detection software that kind of goes into the ceiling. And then depending on the company, either an alarm goes off or a call gets routed to a designated cell phone to allow somebody to be notified that they need to go check the space.

I see. So this is something that somebody would use in a specific place, not use in their own home.

Through the chair, yes. This would be in public areas that are single stall bathrooms. We're also looking at options for spaces that might have multi stalls as well.

I see that. That certainly sounds useful. And I just want to flag that, that does put my antenna up about the question of surveillance technology, not to try to get in the way of this moving forward and possibly saving some lives, but just recognizing that ordinances around surveillance technology that you have on the books. And yeah, I saw a hand go up and down from Councilor Scott. So my guess was that you were thinking something similar.

Read my mind, sir.

So, oh, please go ahead.

Sorry, through the chair. So thank you for raising that. We can definitely make sure we're within city specifications on that. There are no cameras associated. It's just a motion detector. So it's just detecting like when a light goes on in the room, if you're sitting too long and you have to go like this, it's similar technology.

I see. Thank you. Well, I'm eager to learn more and I'm glad that your office is looking at a variety of different ways to support people. Are there any other questions or? Absolutely. Any other questions or comments from members of the committee? Seeing none, this item is laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the meeting. Thank you, Director Lewis. Okay, we will move on to infrastructure. Item 6.1, 26-0869, requesting approval of a time-only contract extension until September 5th, 2028 for the contract with Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. for the Mystic River Outfall Sewer Separation Design Project. And I believe we have Director of Infrastructure, Rich Raish. Director Raish, could you please tell us about this contract extension?

Good evening, again for your record, Richard Reich, Director of Infrastructure. Stantec is our engineer of record for the Mystic River sewer separation and new stormwater outfall project. This is a long, this is going to be a long project and beyond the three-year maximum that we can assign, so we'll require constant approval for extension. We're currently past the 60% design. This extension will get us through final design and bidding and into construction administration, at which time we'll have estimates for additional services. But our current budget covers us through the end of design and bidding. So we're just extending this contract now to give us plenty of time to get into construction.

Thank you, Director Raish. Any comments or questions from the committee? I'm not seeing any. I want to mention I had the chance to do a walk around several of the streets and the edge of the Mystic River with some city staff who were explaining what the components of this sewer separation project would be. It sounds big. It sounds necessary and urgent. And I think it sounds like it's going to help with the sewer overflows as well as with some flooding issues in the Ten Hills and Winter Hill area.

Thank you, Chip. We are very excited for this particular project. It's what I call a threefer. It reduces CSOs to meet our regulatory requirements. It has great benefits in reducing flood in the neighborhood around Foss Park. And it allows us to renew a lot of infrastructure, some very old pipes that we would otherwise need to rehabilitate and not do those other two things. So it's a good one.

Thank you. I'll also add on to that that already at this 60% point, there's clearly been a lot of thinking about how to minimize disruption on neighbors. I saw city staff explain to some worried neighbors asking good questions about the disruption they'll face, about how it's going to be done in these short segments so that only a small strip of a street is shut down and people are still able to get down the street get around get in and out of their driveways so it's clearly clearly a lot of levels of planning here I appreciate the the thought going into that um okay uh seeing no other hands going up this item is laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the meeting Moving on to item 6.2, 26-0853, requesting approval of a time-only contract extension until December 31st, 2028 for the contract with Sims, Maney, and McKee for owner's project manager services for heating, ventilation, and air conditioning capital projects. So I believe we also have Director Raich speaking about this one.

Thank you, Chair. Yes, this is... a requirement under state law that we have an owner's project manager for major renovations to our buildings. We've got a number of in-flight projects. We've already completed, essentially, the chiller replacements at the JFK School, and we have in-flight chiller replacements at the West School, and boiler replacements at the Healey. Sims has been the owner's project manager for those projects as well. So we want to extend those contracts that they can continue to provide those services. They're very helpful. They essentially do clerk of the works for us, but they also bring in additional HVAC expertise to help us evaluate what our HVAC engineers are saying. And they also give us the capability to bring in third party cost estimators so that we can verify what our engineers are saying about projected costs before we come to you all with our budget requests. So we've been very happy with their performance.

they want to extend their contract specifically to these in-flight projects that they're already familiar with thank you director any comments or questions about this contract extension from members of the committee i am seeing none and so this item is laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the meeting thank you director thank you have a good night uh just a quick check on is my audio coming through okay All right, I'm gonna stay the course and keep my video off and not change a winning game. Okay, moving on to strategy and development. Item 7.126-0875, requesting approval of a transfer of $2,403.70 from the Planning, Preservation, and Zoning Salaries account to the Department of Public Works Highway Overtime account for the Davis Square Activation Project. And I believe we, once again, have Director of Finance and Administration for Strategy and Development, Alan Anasio. Director Anasio, could you please tell us about this transfer?

Thank you through the chair. This was a highly anticipated spring project. So the PPZ team and the PSOF team work closely with the DPW to do some Davis Square activation work, mainly the slip lane. which you may have noticed has been painted and had some other features to it. In working jointly with DPW, we needed some of their staff time for the implementation of this. However, they communicated that they didn't have the overtime budget, which we did in our salary lag. So this is just the salary transfer to their overtime account to make their account whole from our account.

Thank you, Director. Any comments or questions about this item? Councilor Hart.

Thank you, Chair. I just wanted to take the opportunity to thank everybody who worked on this. It looks fantastic. I see a ton of people hanging out there, so just wanted to appreciate that. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Harry. No project. Sorry, I should have let you speak first, Director Inacio. It's okay. It was a fun project. I saw Councillor Link's hand go down. I assume that's kind of a ditto, echoing what Councillor Hart was saying. Wonderful. Well, thank you so much, Director Inasio, and thanks to everybody who worked on this. Seeing no more discussion, this item is laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the meeting. Moving on to mobility, item 8.1, 26-0744, requesting approval to accept and expend a $222,502 grant that requires a match from the Boston Regional Metropolitan Planning Organization to the mobility division for the Blue Bikes State of Good Repair Project. And I believe that we have Director Inasio back again. Director Inasio, could you please tell us about this grant?

Thank you through the chair. As noted in the body of the item, this is just a grant from the Boston Regional Metro Planning Organization. The key thing to note here is it says that there is a match. However, you'll notice there's no additional appropriation request from the city council. That is because we have the cash match on hand as part of the So basically every community in the Blue Bikes network has like a little account off to the side where the fee revenue that the Blue Bikes system collects, each municipality has like a little kind of like side account where we can do state of good repair, things of that nature, you know, replace equipment, all of that stuff. So in addition to our little bucket, standard bucket we have from the fees collected from the overall network operations, we are also going to pair that with this grant. So that's why there is a match, but not a match request. So there are no additional new city funds required for this.

Thank you, Director. Any comments or questions about this grant? Am I right in remembering this is for 13 stations?

I believe that's correct. There may be some detail to that effect attached in the item, but I believe that is correct.

Okay. I'll be excited to see where they're going to be. It's one of those things where I feel like the more people can just Be confident that there's a blue light station with bikes where they're coming from or where they're going to, the more sort of confidently and fluidly people will use them. So great to see. Okay. Seeing no other comments on this, this item is laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the meeting. Item 8.2, 26-0879, requesting approval to accept and expend a $500,000 grant with no new match required from the Mass Department of Transportation to the Mobility Division for the Western Pearl Street Construction Project. And we have you again, Director Inasio. Could you please tell us about this grant?

Thank you, through the chair, just a bread and butter state grant that we would like to get accepted in advance of the city council recess. It's for the Western Pearl project, kind of Gilman-Squarey area. Happy to circle back with the mobility team if any of the counselors would like any project specifics or detailed specifics for the planned work, but just wanted to get the grant on the books as soon as possible.

Thank you. Any comments or questions on this from members of the committee? That's our link.

I'll just say, thank you, Chair Threed. I'll just say that I'm really excited to see this project and the fact that we have $500,000 less to pay for it is pretty awesome.

I will echo that. Any other comments? Seeing none, this item is laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the meeting. And that brings us to public space and urban forestry. I guess we've touched on PSUF already, but item 9.1, 26-0872, requesting approval of a transfer of $100,000 from the public space and urban forestry capital account to the Street Tree Stabilization Fund for additional fiscal year 2027 tree planting and maintenance. Director Anasio, could you please tell us about this transfer?

Thank you through the chair, similar to the OHS request. And as counselor Scott explained earlier too, this is just a tactical transfer. It allows us to preserve some unused FY26 funds, carry it forward into a stabilization fund. And we were able to decrease our level service general fund ask by a hundred thousand. So just kind of basically a tactical transfer to save some new budget request funds.

Thank you, Director. Any comments or questions from members of the committee on this? Director Aranasio, as a new student of Citi Finances, I'd love just like a little more explanation of that to understand. We were talking to you and Director Schachter before about the sort of use of leftover money stabilization funds that will then later be able to be spent towards those you know those same kinds of areas is this the same idea or is that this something different

Correct. Generally speaking, when we get down to the last, you know, eight weeks or so of the year, we kind of collectively look at our budgets. And if we feel that there are unused funds that we can use for relatively the same purpose or some sort of like purpose, you know, with the approval of the finance director and the auditing team, we can initiate a transfer with city council's approval as well to carry these forward into a stabilization fund, which we will have to come back in FY27 to appropriate out of. But, you know, we can kind of, that allows us to carry these unused funds forward into FY27 rather than, as you mentioned, rush through and spend them in FY26. And, you know, also allows us to budget less in the annual budget process.

Thank you. I appreciate that. Yeah, I appreciate that. Any other comments or questions? I am seeing none. And so this item is laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the meeting. Thank you. Moving on to item 9.2, 26-0871, requesting approval of a transfer of $2,500 from the planning preservation and zoning salaries account to the public space and urban forestry salaries account to cover a year-end budget deficit. Director Inasio, would you tell us about this transfer?

Thank you, yes, through the chair, this is a relatively small one doesn't necessarily happen every year, but this year we happen to have a slightly less grant eligible. project work that we were able to assign staff time to. The planning and preservation department had some vacancy lag that they had. So we just have to make those accounts whole at the end of the year so we don't get, you know, knocked in our year end audit. So this is just the balancing the books and keeping everything clean because we didn't have as much grant eligible project staff time that we could assign as we had projected.

Thank you. Any questions or comments? I am seeing none. So this item is laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the meeting. And thank you, Director. Okay, moving on to fire department, and in particular these are fire department real estate related. Item 10.1, 26-1010, requesting the appropriation of $360,000 from the unreserved fund balance, free cash, to the judgments and settlements account for settlement payments relative to the lease between BMR, Middlesex LLC, and the City of Somerville for the Assembly Square Fire Station at 46 Middlesex Avenue. So I will note that per Finance Director Ed Bean, there is a suggestion to the committee that we might consider discharging this one without a recommendation because the administration plans a new lower appropriation request for the June 25th council meeting. So it sounds like this was put in using the information that staff had at the time. And happily, it looks like we will not need this quite this much amount. So Director Inosio or Special Counsel Catherine Salchert, City Solicitor Amara, does anyone wish to add anything on this one?

Uh, to the chair, this is, this is a special counsel, Catherine Lester Salkert. I think you stated it just, just right.

Okay, thank you very much. And I will get your name right next time. No worries. Catherine Lester Salkert. Thank you so much, Special Counsel. Okay, so with that said, Clerk, do we need to do anything differently to decide to discharge this one without a recommendation? Can we lay it on the table with the intention of discharging it without a recommendation?

We can. We can just take a roll call at the end of the meeting.

Sounds good. Thank you. So this item is laid on the table to be discharged without a recommendation at the end of the meeting. Okay. Item 10.2, related. 26-1009 requesting the appropriation of $18,850 from the unreserved fund balance free cash to the judgments and settlements account for closing costs relative to the purchase of the assembly square fire station condominium unit at 46 Middlesex Ave. So again, special counselor, Catherine Lester Salkert, do you have anything to tell us about this appropriation?

Yes, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to point out that the cost breakdown was attached to the agenda. Hopefully everyone saw that. The bulk of the amount is to pay the premium on the owner's title insurance policy. That was $14,000. And the rest of these are all very standard charges as well. um an escrow fee because the funds will be paid into escrow at the time of the transfer recording fee for our side um courier fee interim title updates and things of that nature all very straightforward but happy to answer any questions thank you so much uh any comments or questions from members of the committee

I am seeing none. So with appreciation that this is getting closed and for everyone's hard work on this, this is going to be an asset to the community for a long time. This item is laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the meeting.

Sounds good. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. Moving on to recreation. Item 11.1, 26-0877, requesting approval to increase the summertime revolving account expenditure limit for fiscal year 2026. Now, I believe that we have Recreation Director Ohamend Shomiten and Finance Manager Linda Yoon. Director Shomiten or Manager Yoon, can you please tell us about this request? Sure.

Hello, I'm Linda Young, Finance Manager for Recreation, and we're asking for a $10,000 increase from $175,000 to $185,000 for our Summertime Revolving Fund. If you're not familiar, Summertime is a summer camp that we run at the West Somerville School. This year, it'll be run from June 29th to September August 14th. And it's an all-day summer camp that we run throughout the summer. And the increased costs this year are directly related to quotes that we've already received from vendors for this summer's programs. They'll be related to field trip admissions, bus transportation for the field trips, and then rental equipment as well for bounce houses that are really popular with the kids. And this fund is funded through

program fees that we collect for summertime thank you so much uh are there any questions or comments from the committee I am seeing none um so thank you so much manager this item is laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the beating Thank you. The next item. Oh, thank you. Excited for the bouncy castles. Item 11.2, 26-1014, requesting approval to repurpose and appropriate $45,000 from the COVID-19 Stabilization Fund to continue the Playworks program at the Winter Hill Community School for the 2026 to 2027 school year. So I believe that we have Dr. Robert Barretta, Somerville Public Schools Chief Financial Officer. We may also have Director of Finance Edward Bean. Officer Barretta or Director Bean.

Yeah.

Hi, take it away.

Thank you so much. Good evening, everybody. uh yes um so these funds have been sorry i'm at my son's little league game right now and he just got a big hit so i got distracted for a second there um in any event it's a good reason it's a good reason um these funds have um have supported structured recess at the winter hill community school for the last few years um after the school was you know abruptly forced to relocate um with the structural issues at the sycamore location And because the Edgerly building doesn't really have great area for recess, it's sort of limited outdoor area there. We enlisted Playworks to support structured recess games. They do cooperative play and it's really been beneficial for the community, greatly reduced disciplinary issues at recess, made recess more appealing for students, which inevitably leads to more fun at school and more learning time. So happy to take any questions.

Thank you so much, Officer Barretta. Any comments or questions from members of the committee? Council Link.

Thank you, Chair, through you, to Dr. Barretta. So I'm really glad that we're doing this because, yeah, it is a very disappointing place if you're a kid, I think, for recess. I'm just curious, are there other things that we can do? Are there other things we can do there? Because it'll be a few more years, this.

Yeah, that's a, sorry, through the chair, Counselor Link, that's a great question. I think, you know, the team there, the leadership team there, you know, Principal Gosselin is really fantastic, I think, and the two deans that generally support the students directly are also really great. And I think they've thought through a lot of ways to, you know, make school generally more appealing for kids. The building and, you know, the Department of Public Works has done a great job upgrading that facility and making it more student-friendly. It's always tricky. As a former principal at recess, you're sort of always limited by the physical space outside. As a principal, I worked with Playworks. They're just really fantastic. They're specialized in their training for supporting structured recess and creating lots of play opportunities. And I have visited recess at Winterville. It's actually very engaging for kids. They're out there doing little soccer drills and stuff. It's really fantastic. But to your point, we're always looking at more ways to, you know, make not only recess more engaging, but the entire school day. So.

Thank you very much. Yeah, it's certainly didn't mean to to for that to be looking at a criticism of any criticism of the physical space and not only just to be clear. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Counselor Link. Officer Beretta, I'm just curious about sort of the background here. The COVID-19 Stabilization Fund is the idea that this is a stabilization fund that, you know, we created during the pandemic era with presumably, you know, ARPA or other funds. I'm just sort of curious what that's for conceptually. And, you know, with absolutely no complaints about being used for this wonderful purpose.

Chair, through you, I think that Adeem would be better served to answer that question.

yes mr chairman yes this fund was established during the uh pandemic uh for a variety of purposes for general purposes deal with emergency situations has funded a whole variety of different things including food insecurity uh emergency measures um but so the the request here is to repurpose um uh this forty five thousand dollars for this particular purpose so the Playworks doesn't necessarily meet the established purpose. So the legislative body can take a vote to repurpose a certain amount of that money. And this is pretty much where at the end of the line on this stabilization fund will only have about, I see about $12,800 left after this appropriation. But I will also note that the previous administration made a commitment um when during this the whole Winter Hill School crisis to fund this Playworks program that would not be on the school budget beyond other sources would do this so we've made that commitment thank you so much for that background director Bean uh any other questions or comments from members of the committee seeing none this item is laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the meeting

And thanks. Now I'm just finding where I am in my notes. Item 11.3, 26-0868, requesting approval to pay prior year invoices totaling $2,500 using available funds in the Parks and Recreation Department Professional Services Account for removal and storage of floating docks at the Blessing of the Bay Boathouse. So for this one, I believe we may have Finance Manager Linda Young again.

Hello, through the chair, I'm Linda Jung, finance manager of recreation. And, um, as the memo states, this is for a past UN voice from 2023 for removal of voting docs, um, at the blessing of the Bay boat host by the mystic river, uh, at the beginning and end of each season, we, um, outsource the installation removal of the docs to dental giant. This invoice happens to be missed that year, but we've updated our contact information and our mailing address. So this shouldn't be an issue in the future.

Thank you. Any questions or comments from members of the committee?

Council Link? Yeah, put me in line two, please.

Certainly will. Council Link?

Yeah, through the chair, you said that the contact information was updated. Are we updating the contact information to something that is generic and

So our mailing address for invoices is recreation underscore invoices at SomervilleMA.gov instead of whoever the facilities manager at the time was. And our mailing address also is now the current address, 167 Holland Street, instead of the former address at 8 Bonaire Street.

Okay, cool. Yeah, I definitely, it's this kind of thing because of many departments having issues with this in the past. Definitely interesting. raises a little flag to me. So I just want to make sure that we're actually making stuff so that it having stuff addressed to places that we can expect to find it long term. Yeah, okay. Sounds like the emails, right? That's, I do worry if it's going to the TAD building, and then we move from the TAD building, we might have this problem again in five years.

But we've tried to move towards just electronic invoices going forward. Obviously, there's still some vendors that prefer to send things by mail. But as for anyone that we can, we've reached out to and asked for electronic invoices.

That is reassuring to hear. Thank you very much. Thank you, Councillor Link. Councillor Strezzo.

Thank you. Thank you. So I understand this correctly. We pay Gentle Giant to pull the docks at the end of the season and store it for us?

Yes, exactly. At the end of the season, at the beginning of each season, they install the docks and by the end of the season, they'll remove the docks and then store them for us. We don't really have a space. We do have a boathouse, but it's too small to hold anything. So they hold it for us.

Okay. They're providing a service for us as well, but community partners, corporate sponsorships, etc. What typically does this cost per year? Because it says prior invoices. So um pardon pardon me hello i know i forgot i'm i'm i'm on screen here but forgive me mr chair mr chair through you i forgot my roberts rules of order for a second here um good counselor yeah thanks uh uh mr chair through you to um our finance director of uh rec park and personal rec um Yeah, so what is the typical charge? Because you said it's like a collection of a few of them. So if I may, is this a couple?

Annually, it should be about $5,000 each, $25,000 each for installation and then $2,500 for the removal. Okay.

Okay. Okay. Okay. I got you. So, so just season spring season is 2,500. And then at the end of this season, it's another 2,500. But gosh, golly, there's a lot of high school students and a lot of kids and families and all kinds of people. And it very much is a wonderful thought. So. I don't know. Maybe we could maybe talk collectively of. a bunch of corporate sponsors stepping up to help with this and help us because we sure are in a budget crunch this year and every bit counts.

I think that's an option that we definitely want to explore, not just with this, but just anything that's recreation related. But we also want to be compliant with state law. So we're working closely with procurement and legal to make sure that we're within compliance with state and local regulations.

Exactly. And that's why I didn't say anyone in particularly specific, but potentially maybe plural. Yeah. But when we talk about this, it sure is enticing to just think about all of our community partners willing to step up and help our city and help our youth and help our families and our community members have a great time collectively. And we sure can shout from the rooftops all the great deeds they're doing for our community. But thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Strezzo. Any other comments from the committee on this? Seeing none, this item is laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the meeting.

Thank you.

Thank you. Moving on to financial management, item 12.1, 26-1017, requesting the appropriation of $196,086 from the Salary and Wage Stabilization Fund to various departmental other lump sum payment accounts to fund a collective bargaining agreement with Summerville Municipal Employees Union Unit D. uh and i believe we have um there's a couple people who are on my list who might be here so we heard earlier from director of human resources and gill i believe that we have director gill here we may also have uh assistant city solicitor matt sirigu yes uh good evening chair through you labor council matt sirigu uh this appropriation

is to fund a third major cost item in the collective bargaining agreement recently ratified by SMU Unit D. This component funds the vacation payout aspect of that MOU where this is kind of a longer term project. We're attacking through collective bargaining to pay out high vacation balances and no longer have employees carry over large vacation balances from year to year. that's the component of this mou that this this appropriation will fund and if there's any questions from the council i'm happy to take them thank you so much uh city solicitor uh are there any comments or questions from members of the committee council link

Thank you. Through you, Mr. Chair, does this completely pay off all of the vacation balances or are they the ones that we want to get rid of anyway?

Council, Committee Chair, through you, it pays off balances through 2024 and then beginning in fiscal year 2025, employees are eligible to carry over up to three weeks of time, but that's it. That's the cap. and there's no process for mayoral approval or any other heightened carryover. So it doesn't mean people are at zero. It just kind of cleared the decks at a certain point in time and then imposes a three-week cap. Great. That's what I understood.

Okay. Just confirming.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Councilor Link. Any other members of the committee have questions or comments on this? Well, I'll just say it sounds like this was, you know, the type of negotiation that we like to see where the city's sort of exposure to risk is being handled wisely in the long term. But we are respecting this employee's bargaining unit with people's interests. know time that they have earned through through years of labor and i'm glad to see this agreement thank you city solicitor okay um seeing no other comments or questions this item is laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the meeting Item 12.2, 26-1035, conveying information regarding changes in positions in the fiscal year 2027 budget. So just as background, this was discussed in a previous council meeting, and we referred it to the Finance Committee. And I believe that we have Chief Administrative Officer Kimberly Wells here, able to speak and possibly answer some more questions about this. Are you there, CAO?

I am indeed, Mr. Chair. Thank you so much. Through you, I think that most of this information has already been discussed with the committee and hopefully is largely self-explanatory, but I'm certainly happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, CAO. CAO, what do people call a CAO for short? Officer?

I think CAO is the shortened version of it. That's a great question. I don't think we should go with chief. That feels weird.

All right. Well, CAO Wells, it is. Members of the committee, any further questions or comments on this item?

Sir, I think I might move to use chief. No, in all seriousness, Mr. Chair, I appreciate that the administration provided this information. It's something that a great many people have been asking questions about. So it is helpful for folks to understand and be able to see at a glance where the changes happen. How you feel about those changes is a different matter entirely, but I'm just glad the information is public and is part of this council's agenda so that it'll always be part of the brother program. So thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Scott. Any other comments or questions? I'll just echo what my colleague said. Sometimes it can feel a little awkward to me, just personally, if we have access to some information and there's a long time until there's a sort of publicly communicated version of that information. And I'm always glad to see a short window there um so that people who have questions can can get a sense of what's going on you know just like anybody else who uh who might be privy to to that information earlier so thank you for putting this together uh not seeing any other comments or questions uh for the committee I believe that we can mark this one work completed work yes that's correct Okay, sounds good. Thank you, and thank you, CAO. Moving to item 12.3, 26-0948, requesting the approval of the expenditure limitations for departmental revolving funds for fiscal year 2027. So for this one, I know we have you again, CAO Wells. We might also have budget manager Michael Mastroboni. And I just also want to mention on this, we've talked about several of these expenditure limitations for revolving funds already. Is that right?

Mr. Chairman, that's correct. Oh, thank you, Director Bean. Yeah, I'll be speaking on this. We gave Mr. Mastroboni a night off tonight. Yeah, so the legislative body annually, by law, votes an expenditure cap on the departmental revolving funds. So this is a process that happens at budget time every year. So there are nine departmental revolving funds. You've heard there's only been three changes in the expenditure limits. Two of them you've heard tonight. Summertime revolving going from $175 to $185. special events going from 10,000 to 20,000. And the third one is the Vaccine Revolving Fund, which is going from 60,000 to 70,000. Otherwise, the remaining six remain the same spending caps that were approved back in this fiscal year, fiscal year 2026.

Thank you, Director Bean. Any questions or comments on this change from the committee? Counselor Scott?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is the kind of transparency and process that I'm used to after 10 years of doing this, nine years of doing this, which, you know, just, Hey, I think it's really useful for people to understand, but it also just still tickles me from last night where we were hearing about a very different kind of revolving fund that was going to be set up for the arts council or for the armory building. And so I, Director Bean, can you help me again with what the difference is between these statutory revolving funds that we set a limit for and have some visibility into every year? whatever that other fund is. Can you tell me what the author is for that fund?

Yeah, through you, Mr. Chairman. Sure. These are departmental revolving funds that were established in the Chapter 44, 53 and a half. So there are restrictions, as you say, there's a spending cap. So these are considered statutory revolving funds. The school department has a whole variety of statutory revolving funds as well that the school committee approves. So we are able to set up other types of revolving funds, no problem being transparent in terms of You spoke of the armory one. That would be an example. You've got the rental income. You've got to receive that, and you've got to create an entity where the expenditures can be funded from that revenue. That's not eligible to be an enterprise fund, by the way. We have other funds that, of course, are enterprise funds, but the law doesn't allow you to set up an enterprise fund for this. We did consult with DOR on this, and it's It's not a statutory revolving fund, but it is a revolving fund that's set up. But certainly no problem, as you know, ever reporting revenue expenses for that. Happy to provide all that information whenever needed.

Sure. I think it might be helpful just because I wasn't aware that we could set up revolving funds that weren't authorized by that statute and then governed by it. So if we can just set things up all over the place willy nilly, then maybe I'll have to do some thought about it. I appreciate the voluntary offer to report those things, but I'm not going to be a counselor forever. So I might want to put something on the books that just says we're going to report on it. For a year. Would that be onerous or do you think that'd be?

No, no, no, of course not. Of course it's not onerous. But of course, you know, the beauty of this is we don't want these things on the general fund. You want revenue to meet expenses. So that's the key. That's a key consideration here.

It certainly could be. I mean, I've got my own feelings about government trying to run as a business, but that said, I understand the importance and the purpose here. So thank you, Mr. Chair, for your indulgence. I'm all set.

Thank you, Councilor Scott. I see Councilor Link.

Thank you, Chair. Just to kind of continue a little bit on what Councilor Scott was asking, and I appreciate what that little... which is exactly what I was curious about. So just for my own clarity, so there's this kind of revolving fund and then is there, are there, there's the whatever classification the arts and armory building is gonna be. And are there, how many different categories of revolving fund are there? I guess my question.

The statutory, excuse me, Mr. Chairman, statutory, these departmental revolving funds are statutory. The School to Committee has many more than we have on the city side, all specific statutes in the Mass General Laws creating them. Recreation has a statutory revolving fund as well. So many of their activities revolve. uh, revenue, uh, for some of their programs that flow through a revolving fund and their expenditures on that as well. Um, you know, that's pretty much the, uh, the Arts Council lottery is essentially a revolving fund as well. That's statutory as well. Um, you know, we have the armory here and, uh, we may be acquiring the, um, the Ralph and Jenny Center as well. That's been talked about. So we probably would be thinking about a revolving fund there as well to collect the revenue from that, from there as well. So it's all cash basis as well. You can only expend with the revenue you have in the till and any revolving fund. You can't run deficits.

Wonderful. Okay. Thank you very much. I really appreciate that information. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Link. Any other comments or questions from members of the committee? Seeing none, this item is laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the meeting. And that brings us to this section that I, for lack of a better word, called oversight. Item 13.1 26-1026 that the city clerk informed this council as to the final status of item 25-0905, a unanimous vote in favor of adopting chapter 329 of the acts of 1987 on May 22nd, 2025. Do we have city clerk Courtney Henderson?

Hi, Mr. Chair. Yes, I am here.

Thank you, Clerk Henderson.

Mr.

Chair. Councillor Scott?

It is customary to go to the maker of the motion first.

All right. Well, I see no reason to break with custom. Are you the maker of the motion, Councillor Scott? I am. Councillor Scott, would you please tell us about this order?

Here we are. All right, thank you, thank you. So yes, I put in this item because there was a lot of public confusion that we were told that we would not be able to actually support, as a city council, we would not be able to support the school committee's recommended budget because we hadn't adopted this chapter 329 of the acts of 1987. And that if we wanted to, then the city council should have moved, should have voted to adopt it. which did trigger my memory a little bit here. It turns out we did exactly that in 2025, last year. So I personally thought this was a solved problem. So having it come up again this year and being told, no, no, no, the mayor can do what the mayor wants to do, and the school committee can't do anything about it, and the city council can't do anything about it, led me to ask the question. And I directed that question, I believe, to CAO Wells and Clerk Henderson. So I know they have prepared the answer. I'd just like to get it out on the record for everybody. So thank you for giving me a moment to introduce the item.

Thank you, Councillor Scott. Clerk Henderson.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Councillor Scott, for setting the scene here. Yes, we have prepared a response, and that is that item has been vetoed by the previous administration. Part of Chapter 329 of the Acts of 1987 requires the mayor's signature on it. So while the City Council did vote unanimously to adopt that section, It was not approved by that current administration. And so therefore it was, um, it did not move forward and that's where it currently stands now.

Uh, Mr. Chair, could I, could I ask a few clarifying questions here?

Please go for it.

All right. Thank you. Uh, so. Interestingly, interesting to use the term veto. When most people use the word veto, they think, oh, well, that's an executive saying no, and then a presumption that the legislative body could override that veto. So when a, just procedurally as the clerk, when the mayor actively vetoes something, that would be something that you would inform the city council of, correct?

Mr. Chair, yes, through you, Mr. Chair, yes, that would, would be something that the mayor would submit in writing. I do have, I was able to locate the letter that the previous administration had addressed to council detailing why they did not agree with adopting chapter 329.

But it wasn't an actual veto though, correct, Clerk Henderson?

I would have to do research or consult law. I did see that Attorney Amara did raise her hand. I don't know if it's related to that. Okay.

Yes. I see City Attorney Amara. City Attorney Amara, do you have perspective on this?

Yes. Thank you, Chair Wheeler. The statute requires approval by both the City Council and the mayor. So... Veto is not really the word that is accurate for this particular item in that. If the mayor vetoed the approval of what the city council did that just. invalidates or attempts to invalidate what the council did. Here, the statute requires affirmative approval by both the legislative and executive body and the mayor's office did not approve. So you did not have both parts of the statutory requirement in place to have it be adopted. That's why it was not adopted.

Yeah, thank you for that comment. Solicitor Amara, and I think that's an important thing for folks to understand. You know, we did receive a letter on May 20th from Mayor Ballantyne just saying they don't support, she did not support the adoption of that special act, but I guess I for one read that and went, well, that's tough because it was passed unanimously. And I just presumed that it would go into effect. So this one weird trick is an interesting one. Solicitor Amara, my question would be then if the city council were to pass the same thing again this year, it would still not go into effect unless the mayor approved it, correct?

Correct. It's still the same statutory scheme, still requiring approval by both the executive and the legislative branch and other parts of the statute would apply that even if it were to be done in record time by both branches, it couldn't go into effect for this budget hearing.

That's right. That's right. Because the rest of the statute says it takes effect the first of the next month. So I appreciate you putting that one on the record. I just, Mr. Chair, I want to make sure that was crystal clear so that members of the public can direct their anger and their frustration in the correct place. This is a choice. that was made and I certainly, as much as I am fond of our current mayor, I have a hard time given the course that he's chosen to follow with regard to the school committee's budget recommendation, I have a hard time thinking that he would approve giving up that level of executive power, particularly in light of the next conversation we're gonna have. So I just wanted to make sure this is very clearly a separation powers issue and one in which the balance OF THE ELECTED LEGISLATURES THE SCHOOL COMMITTEE AND THE CITY COUNCIL IN THE BALANCE OF POWER EFFECTIVELY DON'T HAVE ANY SO THANK YOU MR.

CHAIR FOR YOUR INDULGENCE THERE AND THANK YOU OF COURSE FOR SOLICITOR AMARA AND CLERK HENDERSON THANK YOU COUNCILOR SCOTT THANK YOU CLERK HENDERSON AND THANK YOU CITY ATTORNEY AMARA I FOR ONE APPRECIATE THE VERIFICATION IMMENSELY Are there any comments or questions from any other members of the committee? Okay, seeing none, I think we can mark this order work completed. And that brings us to our next question.

Please, please go ahead. Just a quick question. The email memo that I received with this answer, is that something that can be attached to this item? So when folks want to come find that in the future, they can find that in writing here?

Clerk Henderson.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through you to Counselor Scott. Unfortunately, the memo that, and I think you're referring to the memo that was drafted by City Attorney Amar. Is that correct?

There was definitely one about the next item. On this one, I'm not certain that there was a PDF memo drafted.

Okay. So then, yes, for that other document, it can be submitted as a separate communication and we can link that.

Oh, okay. So we can't attach it to this item. I have to submit it as a communication at the next meeting and then link it to this item.

Correct.

Okay. All right. Will do. I'll put that on my list of things to do, Mr. Schiff.

Thank you, clerk. And thank you, counselor. Okay, moving on to the next item, item 13.2, 26-1025, that the city attorney advise this council on the mayor's compliance with section 6-4 of the Somerville Charter as it relates to the submission of the fiscal year 2027 budget, particularly, quote, the school budget as adopted by the school committee. City Solicitor Amara, would you please speak to this order?

Chair Wheeler, with all due respect, I believe Councilor Scott said he has to go first because he wrote, he submitted the request.

Touche. Touche. Thank you. I need to be a quicker study. Councilor Scott, would you like to speak to this order to begin?

I would love to, Mr. Chair, and to be fair, as the chair of finance, 99% of the items that you process as chair are mayor's requests sent from the mayor. So it's not something that happens very often. I'm sure next year, if you're head of some other committee, you'll get to practice it. So this is kind of the other side of the coin we just were talking about. Um, when being told that, well, uh, chapter three 29 and the exit 1987 never went into effect. and functionally can never go into effect because no executive is going to be willing to give up any of their power, I asked the city attorney for an explanation of Section 6-4 of the Somerville Charter. Section 6-4 of the Somerville Charter very clearly says that the mayor will submit to the city council the school budget. as adopted by the school committee. Now, on the plain reading and language, that would seem to indicate that the approval of the school committee, the adoption of the school committee is a prerequisite to submitting something to us. So first I was wondering if procedurally we were in the wrong because a vote to adopt the budget had not been taken by the school committee before it was presented to the city council. And then my other question was, well, wouldn't this explicitly allow the school committee to provide us, to provide a different budget, to adopt a different budget, which would then, by our charter, be required to be presented to the city council? Now, as one of the legislators that drafted the document, and as the chair of the charter committee, which wrote that document and reviewed every word of it, through some very lengthy public meetings that are available on video. I'm very clear on what was intended there, but I was curious to see what our city solicitor would have to say on it to make sure that we can be on the right side of the law. So a memo was prepared. I hope it has been attached to this item because it was a separate PDF memo, but I would love for Solicitor Amar to tell us in the public what that answer is.

City Solicitor O'Hara, would you like to respond?

One moment. I'm just trying to alternate between my screens. We believe that the budget as submitted by the mayor is lawful and was properly put before you. Since that time, we have also gone back and read and reviewed the minutes and the tapes of the Charter Commission in an effort to understand what they were the main goals were and the main goals as set forth in the charter, even though there was discussion about not finding the existing process particularly effective all the time, that in the interest of putting a charter forward, the main goals were to ensure that there were more timely submittals so that there was more room for participation by the council, by the public, that the mayor would have a budget presented by the school committee, which is the quote-unquote department head for the school department. They are like any other department head. They submit their requested budget to the mayor. The mayor has to provide a budget, an operating budget for the entire city to the city council. And the main thing was to try to push back timelines, particularly so the council would have more time to review the budget and wouldn't be crunched at the end of the year. That's our understanding. To that end, Sorry, I apologize. To that end, they put in place the charter provision, which is consistent with the state law. And it really was a requirement that the school committee as the department head was responsible for submitting its proposed budget to the mayor. And the mayor has to include the school committee budget as part of the operating budget. It's not a separate and distinct, it never has been and never was intended to be because there's only one big pot of money. So that's what was happening. At the time the mayor submitted his proposal, the mayor who is a member of the school committee had attended the, if I get this right, the finance committee, which was meeting as a committee of the whole, where at that meeting, the school committee voted to approve the amount requested by the superintendent, but to also increase that amount by roughly, I believe it was 600 plus thousand dollars. That was not a proper vote at the time by the school committee because it was not a vote of the school committee as a whole. And that's been, they did this same problem happened last year and the school's attorney informed them, you need to have a vote. So the mayor in submitting his budget took the information he had, which was what was expected to be approved and which ultimately was and has been approved by the school committee and which has been communicated to the council that the school committee has now acted. So all the information that was presented to the council is consistent with what the goals of the charter were and is consistent with what was put forward by the school committee. So all of the information has been presented to the council in as timely a manner as is possible. And the mayor submitted his budget in as timely a manner as is possible there in, in, And in my opinion, in the law department's opinion, it is a completely lawful budget presentation.

Thank you, City Attorney. As far as I'm concerned, you still have the floor, Councillor Scott. I can also come back to you.

Thank you. I appreciate that. I'll make way. I just want to clarify that... What I think I heard there is that, you know, the school committee made a procedural boo-boo and, hey, you know what? Everybody does that. That's something we've had to go back and fix procedural mix-ups on the city council plenty of times. But that was because they didn't take a vote in the full school committee meeting as a whole. They had taken it in another committee. So they cleaned up the procedure. That's fine. I guess my larger question is just specifically, there was the assertion made that there's only one big pot of money. That's not true. The state law really separates what can be done with each pot of money and who has control over the exercise and use of, and allocation within those two big pots of money. They're very distinct and separate, but I am still stuck on the plain reading So the school budget shall be submitted to the mayor on or about May 15th. Okay. I'm hoping that that was done. But the budget that was submitted to the mayor on or about May 15th was not the one adopted by the school committee. It was the one prepared by the administration, by the school's administration. And I think that's an important distinction. So let's remark, can you speak to the distinction between the superintendent, which is administration, versus the school committee, which is the legislative elected body.

That's exactly right. The school committee gets to submit its proposed budget to the mayor, just like any other department head gets to submit its own budget. They submitted a budget. The mayor is not required to put in that dollar amount and it does not say he has to put in that dollar amount. This is consistent with the Lemonster case. This is consistent with what prior practice had been and what is consistent with the fact that the mayor has to put in one budget for everyone, and it does include the school committee budget. And our read of this is when you take the language as a whole, and when you look at what the statute was designed to do, it was primarily designed to give everyone more time to have budget information before them it was not designed to change what had been and what is existing practice and the mayor has the authority to submit the budget and that is his obligation under state law and under this charter if the charter also goes and and specifically states that you know We can't go against state law, right? So the mayor cannot decrease the amount of a school budget to a level that would not allow the school department to fulfill its obligations under its statutory requirements to provide each student with a public education, right? There is no indication that that is the case here because the budget that it was submitted is higher even than the budget that was passed last year. So the school committee budget, and no one has questioned, but that the school can meet its statutory minimum requirements. If the mayor were to say zero money for the school, then yes, you're correct. State law would say, you gotta let them meet that statutory requirement. That's not the issue here. But when there's one pot of money, the school committee can't hijack the budget and say, we want everything for us and leave nothing for the rest of the city. The constituents in the city still needs to run. We still need to have snow plowing. We still need to have potholes filled. We still need to have a budget. That's why the mayor takes the budget information from all department heads, and it's clear that the school committee, because the school committee is responsible for taking the money that is appropriated to the school department and deciding how it feels it should best be spent in the school department. No one else can make that decision for them. And that's completely consistent with how things have been. It's consistent with the language of the statute and the other provisions of the statute. Even in preserving the right that if you wanted to go under that special act, which is a quote unquote general law, and change the process like this council tried to do unsuccessfully last year, the charter still allows that as an option going forward. But this is consistent with um, the rules of department of labor with the requirement that the mayor has to submit one budget for the city. And there is no indication that when you read this as a whole, that it was designed to do anything other than make it clear that the school committee is the department had authorized to submit a budget to the mayor and the mayor has to include that information. The mayor couldn't just put a number up there and not put forward the information.

Thank you, City Attorney and Councillor Scott. I'm guessing that you have some more. I just want to note that Councillor Strezzos had her hand up. Any comment I know is going to be on this matter? Can I come back to you?

I definitely want to yield. I just want to correct one thing, which is I wrote this sentence, and it's on the page. It was from the slides of the May 10th of 2023 city council meeting. So I know what my intent was. But I'll yield to Councilor Strezzo and come back to it later, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Councilor Scott. Councilor Strezzo.

Thank you, colleagues and Mr. Chair. And I don't have a question. I just have a comment. And goodness, colleagues, we're not deliberating tonight. But it seems with all this conversation that we really don't have a choice but an up and down vote on this school budget. Be it as it may. That's all.

Thank you, Councillor Strezno. I'm happy to come back to you, Councillor Scott. I have just a question on this topic for the city solicitor. So suppose the charter language were the most unambiguous it could possibly be. And it said in five different ways, all consistently that the mayor has absolutely no wiggle room, no choice, but to wait until the school committee has approved a budget and that budget and only that budget can be, you know, representing the school's portion of the city budget. Just suppose in a hypothetical way. would that, if that were in the city charter, would that hold legal sway or would the Lehmister case and state law supersede it? Oh, sorry, city attorney, I think you're muted.

I apologize. I think a couple of concepts are getting... mixed together first of all that's not the situation we have here um and then you're mixing sort of two concepts that one is that if i understand correctly if the city council didn't submit a budget the mayor couldn't lawfully present a budget That would make no sense. And I can't imagine there being any situation where that would be the case because then it would be throwing state law and finance, municipal finance on its head and would put the city at grave risk for trying to go forward starting July 1. I can't imagine that something like that would ever be passed. If there were language...

I'm sorry, Counselor Strezzo. Respectfully. I understand. I'm just going to let City Attorney Amara finish. But City Attorney, if you could wrap up your response soon.

I was just going to say that if there was specific unambiguous language that said they had to put in the exact dollar amount provided by the school committee, I would look at that perhaps differently. I'm not going to sit here and automatically say my result would be different or the intent would be different or the result, but you would need language at least that strong. to even attempt to throw the entire world of municipal finance on its head. And we don't have that before us. So I can't answer those hypotheticals any better for you.

Thank you. I appreciate that, City Attorney.

Yes, please forgive me. So is not trying to interrupt. This is why these virtual rooms are just a weird space for all of us. Including me. Sorry, Mr. Chair, through you too, Director Amara. Please forgive me. I did not intend to interrupt you, but I did want to put on the point. Way back machine, 2020, first term retro folks, some of these colleagues here, we did reject that first city budget that in the pandemic might what? Totally going retro. First couple months, possibly first month on the council. First budget season. We did reject that, the mayor's budget, entirely. I believe it was unanimous, if I may, through Mr. Chair, through you to Councilor Scott. He is nodding his head yes. Okay, that is all I have to say on that, but thank you very much for all this feedback and a lot of thinking to do. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Strezzo. Councilor Scott, do you have more thoughts and comments?

I do. To the solicitor's first point, her answer to the first part of your question, There would never be a situation where the school committee refused to provide a budget that would throw the whole thing into works because the charter has very specific language that the school committee must provide a budget by a certain date. Failing to follow the terms of the charter turns everything. To use a phrase from Counselor Bill White many years ago, we would descend into chaos, right? We only voluntarily are a society that follows laws. We choose to make these laws we have to follow, right? And there are remedies in the event that a school committee does not provide a budget by a date certain, the mayor has remedies underneath state law. So that said, to the second point of your question, Councilor Wheeler, would this language in our charter be preempted by state law? We have an example where we know the answer to that question. For the city of Somerville is able to have our condo conversion ordinance, which provides certain tenant rights, because there was a special act of the state legislature way back when. Now, the state legislature subsequently, that was a home rule petition. The state legislature subsequently passed different language that is actually more restrictive. And so cities and towns all over the Commonwealth can't do as much as we do in our condo conversion ordinance. But because this is a special act, a home rule petition, it pertains. It's more specific. So in this case, what's interesting is that rather than go through a charter change process through an elected commission or any other method, Mayor Curtis Toney chose to pursue this through a home rule petition process, which means our charter, as it exists, is a special act of the state legislature, which, you know, to my mind, would make it, would give it primacy. But I understand that it is the city solicitor's opinion that that's not what I meant when I wrote that sentence. I think that's That's a challenge for me. But even if at taking my personal challenge out of it, I would say that this once again brings up balance of power questions. This was the slides of May 10th were actually some of the final slides. It was one of the final meetings of our charter commission because there were thorny issues that still needed to be resolved about both balance of power and submission timelines for the budget, I will point out that we received this year's budget later than we have received other budgets. So if the intent was to ensure that we are provided the budget in a timely manner, it failed. The earlier timelines that I was proposing at the time did not pass my colleagues, a vote of my colleagues to be adopted in the charter. And so we are where we are. Perhaps an amendment to the charter is in order to clarify this condition that we are in. However, I would point out once again that it would be a home rule petition, which would require the mayor's signature. So we are left, again, in a balance of power situation where the city council is being told by our lawyer, by our attorney, Celestra Mara. You've said many times you are our lawyer, and I take you at your word. Um, we are told once again, the city council has, has no power. Uh, so, uh, to my colleague at largest point, uh, the nuclear option, uh, maybe the only option left to us. Uh, this is, um, I think becoming dangerously close to the riot being the language of the unheard. So. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Solicitor Amara, for this explanation. The memo that you did submit was a PDF. Can I ask Clerk Henderson if that can be attached to this item?

Thank you for the question. Mr. Chair, that cannot be, that memo cannot be added. It would have to be the same way that you submitted but do it for the previous item. So you would have to submit it through a new item, and then we would link it.

May I offer a possibly different solution? Excuse me, sorry. Committee clerk.

Please go ahead, clerk.

We could add it as a handout to the meeting, but Clerk Henderson is correct in that it will not be linked to anything. It will just be on this as a handout. If you would like to do that, you can send it to... You could send it to orders and resolutions so we can make sure that gets attached.

Sure, I'll send it as a handout to attach it to the item. I'll submit a separate one.

Thank you. Counselor Scott, I also see a hand from IGA Director Amanda Nedgem-Williams. Director?

Good evening, Mr. Chair. Amanda and Adam Williams, Director of Intergovernmental Affairs. It is the administration's plan to submit this as a communication for the council meeting next week so that this will then go back and be attached to the item. So I'll take that task on for you, Councillor Scott. No worries. We'll make sure that it gets attached to the item.

I love it when you take things off my action item list, Director and Madam Williams. Mr. Chair, I think I'm all set.

Apologies, I just want to clarify, nothing can be attached to this specific item, but we can link the items just so there's no confusion.

Thank you, clerk, for that clarification. um okay it sounds like we are at the end of discussion on this item uh so this will be marked work completed uh with thanks and appreciation to everybody who participated in that illuminating discussion um mr chair i saw did i see some hands come up and then go back down from colleagues i'd love to hear anybody else's thoughts on this i've heard my own enough all right are there any other members of the committee who have thoughts on this matter before we move on

Chair, I'd raise my hand for, I guess, two reasons. One, I wanted to point out that it could be added as a handout because I've run into that situation myself already. But also, I guess, just I will say that my ordinary human brain, I think, to steal a phrase from the chair, reading Section 6-4 is also that we would anticipate that we would have the uh school committee's approved budget as part of the budget i i do understand the um the challenge that that creates in terms of they could just in theory um create a budget that is you know the same size as the city's budget and that would obviously pose some problems um that side, uh, it's just the way that I read it was that, that this was our, our kind of way to solve this, um, this thorny issue of the fact that we've got, um, chapter 329 that can, you know, dangling in front of us, but, um, always out of reach, uh, which seems, um, not to be the intent. I'm sure people who wrote it, um, and, uh, Yeah, it is a disappointing situation. I really do want to find a way as a city that we can have a check and a balance. I realize we're in a strong mayor system, but strong mayor doesn't have to mean that the only power is the mayor. So there should be a check and a balance.

Yeah, that's it. Thank you, Chip. Thank you, guys. So, Link, that's our heart.

Thank you, Chair. I just want to appreciate all my colleagues for this discussion and the questions. And yes, I've learned a lot in this discussion and definitely kind of concur that it does, you know, for the sake of representing our constituents in the city and the democratic process, seems that we should have more of checks and balances in this process. So, I appreciate it.

Thank you, Councilor Hart. Any other comments from the committee? Okay. And thank you, Councilor Scott, for the heads up. I want to make sure that we are hearing from everybody who has something to say. So that's appreciated. So again, this item will be marked work completed with appreciation for everybody who participated in discussing it. Moving on. Department of Public Works. Okay, so we have, I believe, still Director of Finance and Administration Megan Huckenpahler. We may also have Commissioner of Public Works Eric Wiseman. And Director and Commissioner, I would like us to take up items 14.1 through 14.8 together as they all relate to snow removal. And then we can take up the prior year invoice item 14.9 after that. Does that sound good?

That works for us. Thank you.

Okay. All right. I've got some reading ahead of me. Item 14.1, 26-0903, requesting approval of a transfer of $400,000 from the Department of Public Works sanitation rubbish removal account to the snow removal account to cover expenses from the fiscal year 2026 winter weather season. and item 14.2 26-0899 requesting approval of a transfer of 300 000 from the department of public works sanitation recycling account to the snow removal account to cover expenses from the fiscal year 2026 winter weather season and item 14.3 26-0898 requesting approval of a transfer of 300 000 from the department of public works custodial salaries account to the snow removal account to cover expenses from the fiscal year 2026 winter weather season And item 14.4, 26-0897, requesting approval of a transfer of $150,000. the department of public works ground wages account grounds wages account to the snow removal account to cover expenses from the fiscal year 2026 winter weather season and item item 14.5 26-0896 requesting approval of a transfer of 110 000 from the department of public works building wages account to the snow removal account to cover expenses from the fiscal year 2026 weather winter weather season And item 14.6, 26-0893, requesting approval of a transfer of $455,000 from the Department of Public Works Highway Wages Account to the Snow Removal Account to cover expenses from the fiscal year 2026 winter weather season. And item 14.7, 26-0885, requesting approval of a transfer of $125,000 from the Department of Public Works Administrative Salaries Account to the Snow Removal Account to cover expenses from the fiscal year 2026 winter weather season. And item 14.8, 26-0922, requesting the appropriation of $1,624,494 from the unreserved fund balance free cash to the Department of Public Works snow removal account to reduce a year-end deficit. Okay, Director Huckenpahler, could you please tell us about these appropriations and transfers?

The chair, of course. All of these together are combined to cover the remaining balance for the snow season, which was extraordinary. We have not seen snow like this since 2015. And so we spent quite a bit to remove snow and keep the streets plowed for the residents of Somerville. Under state law, this is one line that is allowed to exceed its original appropriation and these end of year transfers are so that we can cover that deficit and make sure that we are paying that off. The transfers going in are all from salary lag within the various DPW divisions that's created by just regular vacancies of folks who are not in filled positions. You'll see two lines coming from our sanitation departments that are also costs that we are able to transfer because we did not need to use the total budget. We budget conservatively in sanitation as well because we are always making sure that we have enough in case of emergency there. These are going to close out the snow removal line and allow us to put the winter weather season to bed. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Director. Okay. Are there questions or comments from the committee on these? I am not seeing any. I think just a reflection of our appreciation for the extraordinary work this winter season. Thank you so much, Director Huck and Pollard. So with that said, these items are laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the meeting. And that brings us to item 14.9, requesting, sorry, 26-0998, requesting approval to pay prior year invoices totaling $41,257.05 using available funds in various Department of Public Works accounts for various services. Director Hockenpahler, could you please speak to this invoice?

Sure. So there's a number of prior year invoices from fiscal year 25 that I am happy to go through. The first one we are looking to pay is for Greystone. This is for rental of the property to lay piping along the commuter rail. This is in the amount of $315. We have an amount of $1,148.72 as a solar credit that we pay back to a company called Select Energy for solar credits created at the high school. Similarly, we have another solar credit coming in to a company called SunWealth for the amount of $2,115.91. To Northeast Electrical, we have a prior year invoice totaling $891.53. Again, for electric bills, we have Standard Solar paying them for two accounts, prior year invoices for solar credits totaling $21,178.05. Allegiant Access, we are paying them for repairs to doors of the East Branch Library. This was a voided payment that was issued electronically and never reissued as a check when they had trouble accessing their payment. This is in the amount of $1,423.84. Always Green Landscaping, we are paying for work on Lincoln Park in the amount of $14,040. And then to an employee of the Department of Public Works for a reimbursement of their licensure, $144. Thank you, Director.

Any comments or questions from members of the committee on this? That's a link.

Thank you, Chair, through you. This is just more curiosity. Is there a way that we, are we just kind of, is this the cost of doing business? Is there not, I'm guessing there's not really a good way to avoid getting these kind of late, like, oh, hey, six years ago or whatever it might have been, you forgot to pay us. Yeah. Or, oh, whoops, we forgot to bill you. Is there no way to kind of avoid that and make our budget a little more predictable?

Ulu, Chair, thank you for the question. This is $41,000 out of an almost $40 million budget in fiscal year 25, which means if we look at the over... 11,000 invoices paid by our clerical staff. That's a 99.9% accuracy rate. And this is the 0.1% that gets missed. I can go through them individually, you know, in some cases with the solar credits. Okay. Okay.

To the chair. It was more of just a general question, a high-level question. I do not need to drill down on any one of these specifically. Thank you. It was more just about, like, it sounds, I guess, actually, so just for clarification, was this us missing paying them or them missing billing us?

Thanks for the question. Yeah, in most cases, it was vendors not getting invoices to us directly. In one case I mentioned with the repairs for the East Branch Library doors, they were issued a payment electronically. They were never able to access those funds, to not reach out through the proper channels to get that check reissued. And in some cases for the solar credits, you know, we are collaborating with them to get the documentation from Eversource. on how much solar was generated. And so we get the discount on our Eversource bills and then we reimburse the solar credit companies.

Thank you very much. And just to be clear, this was not meant to be like a criticism of your department. It was more just my own edification and curiosity. Thank you. Understood.

Appreciate it.

Thank you, Councilor Lake. Councilor Scott?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just a historical perspective here. Past due invoices are definitely a part of the cost to doing business in my experience. However, I will say, boy, has this gotten a lot better than it used to be in terms of both the volume and magnitude of the prior year invoices. Sometimes Something's always going to slip through the cracks, but I very much want to appreciate the work that's been done to minimize how many of these we're having to deal with. That said, you know, Mr. Chair, customarily An item is attached or a document is attached to these items that summarizes the prior invoice amounts and dates and then has actual copies of those invoices submitted to the council. I know I might be the only person in the city of Somerville that looks at those. But I definitely do. I do my homework. So maybe I'm missing it because I've been known to miss things in Legistar, but I don't see those here and I don't believe we ever got them.

Councilor Scott, I do think that while there is not an attachment, the text tab has a description of each of these. And I appreciate you pointing it out because I missed that list too. I tend to just pay attention to the attachments and not so much to think to look for much content in the text.

OK. So we have the explanation here, but not necessarily the photo documentation. All right. Well, then, just as a matter for practice, I love a text somewhere here because that actually helps folks who want to find out what happened and why in the future. But I do also like having those documents attached here. So maybe in the future when we're prior to your invoices come up, we can attach those image files. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thanks again to Director Huckabee.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I may have forgotten to check that those attachments should be made public. I will work to follow up and get those invoice attachments to you to view as well. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Scott, and thank you, Director Hockenpahler. I am not seeing any other comments or questions from the committee. And so this item is placed on file to recommend approval at the end of the meeting. Laid on the table. Sorry. Oh, sorry. You're right. I'm not looking at my notes, and my brain is doing something else. This item is laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the meeting. Thank you. Okay, and that brings us to an item that we have seen before. This police department item 15.126-0378 requesting approval to accept and expend a $231,635 grant with no new match required for the Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and Security to the police department for a body worn camera program. On this one, Back when I was making the agenda together with Intergovernmental Affairs Director Amanda Najum-Williams and discussing whether to schedule this one or not, I was thinking that even though we've been informed that the administration intends to introduce an item with a lower grant total that will supersede this one, I thought that having this one here could give an opportunity to ask any questions and get answers with the Cerro Police Department. I will say there was some discussion in last night's meeting about body-worn cameras, which made me think maybe it was not as necessary for us to have this one here. But here on the agenda, it is. and so um i first i just asked uh do we have uh director of finance administration for the police department emily wisdom and or police chief shuman bedford here with us I see Chief Benford and Emily Wisdom. Okay, thanks. So I know we've done some discussion on this. There is an opportunity here for any members of the committee to ask questions about this grant. I know we've had quite a bit of discussion and I think we will going forward. But is there anything that any members of the committee want to ask or say now? I see Councilor Scott.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I simply, I was hopeful that this item was on our agenda, so just place it on file. And I believe that is the appropriate disposition if the administration is going to be submitting some different request. Clearly this request is no longer moved. So I would just say, I just moved to place this on file, sir.

Thank you, Councillor Scott. There had been a suggestion that we discharge this without a recommendation. I could use a little help understanding if there's any distinctions there that matter. If we place an item on file in committee, does it sit in committee? Does it go back to the broader council? I guess I'm a little confused about what happens then.

Procedurally, sir, that motion to place on file becomes a part of the recommendations of the committee. I see. Submit your committee report. The council, by accepting it, accepts all the actions, which then places that item on file, shoves it in a bin forever. It's still on the record as an item that we discussed, and so the record of it is still maintained, but no action is taken on it. So that I would prefer that simply because discharging this without a recommendation puts a live item back before the city council. And I don't think that's anybody's intention. And frankly, it would give me heartburn if that was attempted. So that said. If we move and place it on file tonight and somebody disagrees with that procedurally and wants to resurrect this item, the item can be severed from your committee report at our next city council meeting. So there is a remedy to it if somebody does want to go that far.

Thank you for that clarification, Councilor Scott. I saw IGA Director Amanda Najum-Williams turn on her camera. Is that an indication of having something to add to this discussion?

To you, Mr. Chair, not at this moment. I'll let Chief Benford and Director Wisdom speak, and I can chime back in if needed.

Okay, thank you. Chief Benford and Director Wisdom, do you have anything to add on this item as distinct from the broader matter of plotting war on cameras?

Sure. I thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the full committee. I just want to, again, thank Emily for being here tonight after a long night, as well as all the committee members. And we'll look to defer over to her to give just a tad bit of context with regards to where we stand on the numbers and the status of the grant itself. So I will pause there and defer over to Director Wisdom. Thank you, Chief. Director Wisdom?

At this time, this grant of $231,000 is still in committee, so it has not been accepted. And it is, I believe, still an ongoing discussion. To summarize, the total of the grant would cover the initial cost startup for the first year, as well as a partial payment towards the second year of recurring costs.

Mr. Chair, are you muted out there?

Through the chair. Thanks, Counselor Scott. I was like, did I not talk?

No, no, we have direct wisdom.

Thank you so much.

He's off camera. Sorry, my internet has a hiccup.

All right, what sounds like the chair is having difficulties here. We'll give the chair a few minutes to try to resolve those difficulties.

Can folks hear me again? Okay.

Oh, we got your back, sir. Got your back. Woo, just in time. I was about to seize the wheel.

All right. Thank you very much, Vice Chair. Appreciate that. I think I heard the first half or so of what you were saying, Director Wisdom. Just to clarify, and sorry if this became clear to everybody else while I was out in internet la-la land, but is there an intention to replace this item with another item with a lower note? I'm seeing a hand from IGA Director Nigel Williams.

To you, Mr chair, thank you for the question and the clarification is that we're not going to be submitting a new item with a different number associated with the grant. So that 231 635 is still the number. The hope was that we could explain a bit how we plan to implement this. with the update from the SPSOA, the Superior, I'm going to butcher the acronym right now, but the Superior Officers, and explaining what that would look like in terms of implementation. But it is the hope of the administration that should we get this grant and the council approves this expending of these funds, that we would purchase all the technologies available at that time with the grant, the full amount.

I see. Okay. Sorry. There have been some discussions I had had with IGA earlier where I had the impression there was going to be a new item submitted with a different grant application amount. So I'm updating my information. That is not the case. This is the grant before us. I just want to name that we are back in the mix with this somewhat awkward collection of different items in different committees that relate to the question of adopting body-worn cameras, none of which by themselves is the entirety of us doing it or not doing it. And I understand some things are complicated. That is the nature of this set of items. But it does confuse things a little bit, I think, for our decision-making that... whether this item could be carried out uh depends in part on the surveillance technology impact report for example in another committee um and uh not seeing uh an immediate comment in response to that why don't we continue and and go to some of the members of the committee here and um Councillor Scott, because you were speaking on this a moment ago, I might skip you, go to Councillor Hart and come back. Okay. Councillor Hart.

Thank you, Chair. I just wanted to clarify. Back a month or two or longer, maybe, we had a memo, I believe, from the police department detailing the costs over the you know, year one, year two, year three. And I just want to clarify, we have not yet seen a memo that would, with those numbers revised. Is that correct?

Go ahead, Amanda.

Please go right ahead.

Through you, Mr. Chair, to Councillor Hart. So there was an item that was submitted last week, but it was sent to Ledge Matters with those updated numbers. But the information is out there, so we can still speak to that. But it was sent to Ledge Matters, so the updated numbers were provided.

Okay. Thank you for reminding me where to find that. I appreciate it.

Thank you, Councillor Hart. Councillor Scott.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll admit to being baffled by this because I had heard the same information you had, which was that the city would be coming back to with a different grant amount for reduced funding to try to pursue the Superior Officer's pilot program. However, that said, we are still in the same situation we have been in previously, which is that the City Council can in no way accept this grant because that would be in violation of our laws. We have the Surveillance Technology Impact Report and the technology-specific use policy that must be adopted by the city council before we can accept this grant. So given that, I mean, if the committee would like to take a vote to simply reject this grant or to place the item on file, which would functionally do the same thing, we can do that. But if it is the intention of the administration to come back under this same item, then I would think procedurally the correct thing to do would be to place the item on or to leave the item in committee so that at a future time, Once those technology impact reports and surveillance, tech-specific surveillance use policies have been adopted by the City Council, then this committee can vote out that item with a recommendation and put it before the entire City Council. So just procedurally, that's how it would be correct to proceed in my opinion, Mr. Chair.

would just submit that another possible approach could be to discharge this item without a recommendation with the expectation that it could be taken up by the whole council along with surveillance technology impact reports. But I do agree that that would There's a bunch of forms and forums of sort of punting the item forward, and I'm not sure. Please go ahead.

No, Mr. Chair, I have discussed the scheduling on body-worn cameras. There is a public hearing before accepting those technology impact reports and tech-specific use policies that was discussed. requested by a petition and sent to legislative matters. Right now, it's looking like that is going to be scheduled for September. Discharging the item at this point, I think does nobody any good unless it's the administration's intention to try to ram through an illegal approval of this, or rather to try to ram through approval of those use policies and impact reports prior to that public hearing. Sure.

I would just make the distinction between illegal and – Unsafe. Impolitic.

Right. Well, no, obviously they could discharge – the items, they could request somebody to discharge those items from legislative matters and attempt to push it through all in one city council meeting prior to our recess. But I'd have to tell you.

I would, I do contest the use of the word push. If items are before the council and the council votes on it, I think that is a fair thing to do when it's done within the law. But I take the point that that can be done in a way that from some perspectives is rushed and from others isn't. And I'm not saying this with any prior assumption about this item. I just want to make sure that we're describing the situation accurately.

Well, perhaps we can ask our Intergovernmental Affairs Director here, is it the intention of the administration to try to discharge these surveillance technology impact reports and surveillance specific use policies and get them approved prior to that public hearing?

And I want to recognize that IGA Director Nadja Williams has had her hand up before, so please feel free to say what you were, you kind of talked about before as well as responding to Officer Scott's question.

Thank you to you, Mr. Chair. So what I wanted to just state is that we can certainly accept the funds, but we cannot spend those funds until, as Councillor Scott had mentioned, the surveillance tech use, the STIR and the I think there's another document that the acronym, again, is escaping me, is approved. And that is not the administration's intent at all to circumvent any of the processes that are in place. So we want to go through all of the procedures that are necessary to be able to spend those funds. But from a legality standpoint, it is the understanding that we can accept those funds, but we cannot spend those funds until all of those additional steps are are taken. And I think to the questions that Councillor Scott had about the public hearing, the administration's understanding of the public hearing is that a public hearing can happen at any time. The votes are not required to be had for that public hearing to take place. But the administration is in support of having the public hearing and the conversations TO ENSURE THAT ALL THE VOICES ARE HEARD ON THIS TOPIC IN TIME, BUT IT IS STILL THE PREFERENCE THAT THIS ITEM BE DISCHARGED WITHOUT THE RECOMMENDATION AND HAVE IT LAID ON THE TABLE FOR THE UPCOMING COUNCIL MEETINGS AS UNFINISHED BUSINESS.

THANK YOU, DIRECTOR. COUNCILOR SCOTT, I'M GOING TO CALL ON COUNCILOR LINK. YEAH.

Thank you chair. I think it would be an entirely inappropriate to accept funds that we may not be able to actually use. So I'm not sure why we're even having this discussion, especially given that our previous understanding was that we weren't even going to be looking at this particular amount. But I just proceed like in terms of not procedural sick called process in terms of process, open, transparent, democratic process where Um, you know, the, the public has a right to have a voice, um, and, uh, has actually exercised that. Right. Uh, I think that it would be incredibly inappropriate for us to try to move this along. Um, absent that.

Thank you. That's what Scott.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would just once again, draw your attention and. city staff's attention for that matter, to section 10-65 of the code of ordinances, surveillance technology impact report and technology specific surveillance use policy. The second sentence in that ordinance says the city may seek but not accept funds for surveillance technology without approval of city council, provided the city shall notify, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. This is kind of bonkers to me. I agree. So I'm going to make a motion to keep this in committee, Mr. Chair, and then we can have a vote on that motion if you like.

On that motion, and... I'm trying to remember the order of precedence here to remind myself whether deliberation is allowed. Your impression is it is? Okay. Thank you.

I'll check to be sure.

I appreciate that. Okay. yeah in terms of timing um it seems as though the role of the finance committee in deciding this question from a financial point of view um continues in the sort of awkward state of not being able to fully take up that question without knowing what the kind of ultimate resolution of the stir is, as well as with respect to appreciation for the public hearing. As I understand it, part of the time pressure here is sort of one of relationship with some of the state grant making agencies. Are there any other aspects of time pressure director and engine Williams that that bear on this.

THROUGH YOU, MR. CHAIR. TIME HAS ALWAYS BEEN OF THE ESSENCE ON THIS ITEM. HOWEVER, THE ADMINISTRATION RECOGNIZES THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE'VE HAD WITH THE COUNCIL AND WITH THE COMMUNITY THAT WE DO NOT WANT TO RUSH A PROCESS. WE HAVE BEEN IN COMMUNICATION WITH THE STATE ON THIS POINT TO KEEP THEM UPDATED AS BEST WE CAN AS TO WHERE WE STAND IN THE PROCESS AND EXPLAINING ALL THE PROCEDURES THAT WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH TO ACCEPT AND SPEND THESE FUNDS. At that time, I guess, again, I would just make the case on behalf of the administration that even if this item were discharged and laid on the table, it is not making a decision exactly at this time. It still has space for further discussion. We're just in the hopes that we can keep this moving in a productive manner.

Thank you, Director. Councilor Scott.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to let you know that I was wrong. And it's a nice thing, I think, to every once in a while say, I got it wrong. In particular, Rule 16 of the City Council says, when a question is under debate before the City Council or a committee of the City Council, presiding officer shall entertain no motion but, and then provides a list of which to lay on the table is the second one. says these motions shall be decided by a majority vote of those presence. And the first two shall be decided without debate. So.

Okay. Thank you.

And I interrupt you, sir, but no, I understood.

And I take it that keeping a committee, which seems to be one of these designations that it's not always explicitly laid out separately, but it, it sounds like that's essentially a form of laying on the table. And I'm not hearing any disagreement, at least from the clerk. Okay, well, then without further deliberation, clerk, could you please call a roll call on keeping this item in committee?

Yes, roll call on agenda item 15.1. requesting approval to accept and expend a $231,635 grant with no new match required from the Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and Security to the Police Department for a body-worn camera program to be kept in committee. Councillor Link? Yes. Councillor Scherzo?

Sure.

Councillor Hart? Yes. Councillor Scott?

Yes.

Councillor Wheeler? Yes. With all councillors in favour, that item will be kept in committee.

Thank you, Clerk. Okay. Well, it sounds like having this item on the agenda today made sense after all. And I appreciate everyone's participation. And Chief Benford and Director Wisdom, I appreciate your sticking this one out after last night. And I'll buy you both a cup of coffee at some point as appreciation for these late nights.

Right back at you. We appreciate it. I know it's been a long night and a long couple of weeks for you and the team as well, so we appreciate it. Okay. Thank you. Have a good night. Thank you.

Okay, everyone. So that brings us to unfinished business. This item had previously been kept in committee, but the agenda for this meeting was created before that was done. But we will eventually be able to just have it Wait until the right cut night since I have learned the right designation for this. Item 16.1, that the collective salaries of licensing commissioners be increased to $15,180 with the chair receiving $5,180 and licensing commissioners two and three receiving $5,000 each annually. So this item will be kept in committee. And that brings us to the end of tonight's agenda. So clerk, we have, if I'm remembering correctly, two items on the table marked to discharge without a recommendation. Is that right? Or am I now getting lost? We have items marked for approval. We have this item that is being kept in committee and then Did we have others that we were describing?

I'll just run through and you can match what I have and let me know. I have 15.1 and 16.1 kept in committee. I have to be discharged with no recommendation agenda item 10.1. And then I have to mark items work completed 12.2, 13.1 and 13.2. And then I have the remaining items, which I will read out when we do a roll call to be marked.

marked as approved okay thanks yes now looking back that looks correct to me appreciate it uh okay um what would make sense to start first to uh take a roll call on approval of the items on the table if you would like to start with them absolutely i can do that okay please

All right, so approval of agenda items 1.1, 2.1, 3.1, 4.1, 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 6.1, 6.2, 7.1, 8.1, 8.2, 9.1, 9.2, 10.2, 11.2, 11.3, 12.3, 14.1, 14.2, 14.3, 14.4, 14.5, 14.6, 14.7, 14.8, and 14.9. Councillor Link. Yes. Councillor Schrezzo. Yes. Councillor Hart. Yes. Councillor Scott. Yes. And Councillor Wheeler. Yes. Those items are approved. And then.

Thank you. Oh, please go ahead.

And then a roll call to be discharged with no recommendation. Agenda item 10.1. Counselor Link.

Yes.

Counselor Scherzo.

Yes.

Counselor Hart. Yes. Counselor Scott. Yes. Counselor Wheeler. Yes. And then to be discharged as work completed. 12.2, 13.1, and 13.2. Councillor Link.

Yes.

Councillor Scherzo. Yes. Councillor Hart. Yes. Councillor Scott.

Yes.

Councillor Wheeler.

Yes.

We have accounted for all items on this evening's agenda.

Thank you so much. Do I hear a motion to adjourn? You bet.

Motion.

I hear several councillors move to adjourn.

Go with Councillor Hart.

Including Councillor Hart. Councillor Hart moves to adjourn. Could the clerk please read the roll call on adjournment or take the roll call on adjournment.

And on adjournment. Councillor Link.

Yes, please.

Councillor Scherzo. Yes. Councillor Hart. Yes. Councillor Scott.

Yes.

Councillor Wheeler.

Yes.

And with that, we are adjourned.

Thank you all very much and have a great night. Good night, everyone.