ORDER-2020-89 : City of Melrose Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2021 in the amount of $88,397,961.08 (Eighty-Eight Million, Three Hundred Ninety-Seven Thousand, Nine Hundred Sixty-One Dollars and Eight Cents).

Transcript (~1 h 37 min @ 2:18:20)

Speakers identified by voice; unnamed voices are numbered within this recording. Auto-caption text — verify against the video.

▶ 2:18:17 Christopher Cinella: budget $390 7961 8 cents this order comes from the Appropriations Committee recommendation at this time like to make this motion to reduce the bottom line by two hundred fifty thousand dollars with a new bottom line of eighty eight million one hundred and forty seven thousand dollars nine hundred and sixty

▶ 2:18:51 Christopher Cinella: one I second that motion on discussion madam president I feel that this cut gives the mayor an appropriate amount of money to begin the real work that needs be done in our community on the topic of implicit bias training and just to give a little bit of background this conversation began when i reached out to the mayor prior to last week's meeting and i presented an idea for implicit bias training which the chief presented in january to the mayor there was no buy-in from the mayor at this time and i cannot be more clear that the chief was on board with this and in fact had already gone down this avenue pursuing opportunities and we put it by his training back in january six and a half months before the mayor even took an interest in this topic which was this past thursday night in which this council was notified shortly before that meeting and i will motion later to attach the proposal that was addressed to the chief january 17th to the record for the public to examine so this this motion to reduce the bottom line by 250 000 to give the administration an appropriate amount of money to start the process and on the other hand the mayor's proposal would amount to a 28 investment per city employee amounts to about two large cheese pizzas at a local pizzeria so i would ask you mr mayor and members of this council do we want to make your investment company compared to the cost of pizza or do you want to make a true meaningful investment of a quarter million dollars choice is yours so matters before us now you're muted how's my mouse so we

▶ 2:20:39 Jen Grigoraitis: have a motion before us to reduce the bottom line by 250 000 that has been made by councillor Sonella seconded by Councillor Tramontozzi on discussion. Councillor Migliorelli.

▶ 2:20:56 Shawn M. MacMaster: Can I just ask a point of information? I'm sorry, Councillor Migliorelli, just so I'm clear. The $250,000 reduction to the bottom line, is that an aggregate or is that targeting one or more particular departments? Just so I know. That is an aggregate. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President. My apologies, Councillor Migliorelli.

▶ 2:21:23 Leila Migliorelli: Councillor Migliorelli. Yes, point of clarification through the President. What memo are we referring to in January? And was this memo detailing $250,000 worth of implicit bias training? I'm just a little lost in Councillor Sinella's comments here. To the President, if I may respond.

▶ 2:21:40 Christopher Cinella: Councillor Sinella. This is a quote that the Chief had received in regards to the implicit bias training simulator which i had discussed with them there that's that's so just to kind of prove the point that the chief had already been working on this and was ignored and when we had discussed perhaps swapping the firearms out which we'll be talking about

▶ 2:22:16 Jen Grigoraitis: later on you guys see that too councillor Migliorelli are you so so this proposal was not

▶ 2:22:20 Leila Migliorelli: we're reducing the bottom line the motions to reduce the bottom line by 250 000 but that's not based on the proposal by the chief that was for

▶ 2:22:30 Christopher Cinella: this 20 000 to actually do more than what the mayor is talking about councillor Migliorelli um

▶ 2:22:43 Leila Migliorelli: I'd just like to take a moment to kind of go back because this is all very interesting and something that maybe perhaps could have been addressed at Thursday's appropriations meeting. At that time, I mean, we had or since that time, we've received countless emails, calls, we've heard them, you know, some of them tonight asking, as we heard that night, I was horrified by some of the comments that were made for me. It's not the vote that was so shocking, but the words that were spoken in the virtual chamber that I found to be most disappointing. I think we can say that, you know, we're now all of a sudden $50,000, but my gosh, I was shocked. Shocked by the rhetoric that started that night for anti-police. The discussion kicked off with an inflammatory quote from the New York Police Benevolent Association president, then followed up with such comments such as everyone's trying to shame the police the police are the targets for losing funding despicable acts by bad apples the death of george floyd was horrible but and that last comment really struck me um the version of which was repeated several times and it says we empathize with the struggles of black people but not enough to give up something for it we're cool to sign on to statements saying that we will commit to anti-racism efforts but we're not willing to defy the status quo to do so as i said thursday night we can both criticize and support our public institutions including police are not sacrosanct no one is flawless and everything can be approved um i i cannot cross or make sense of those comments that were made last week and what is before us now it it really seems like a leap here um but let me continue So, the inconvenient truth of progress is that it will come at a cost and maybe that's why progress is so slow. On Thursday night, we had before us a discussion of a $26,000 allocation of free cash, not to cut the police budget. So, the outrage over defunding the police, which was referenced that night, was a false narrative. narrative. The total amount of proposed free cash allocation in the police department was $195,714. That included roughly $169,000 for new vehicles and overtime. $26,000 represented 13% of the overall portion of free cash proposed to go for the police. Never mind the fact that the police department is $5 million, taking $26,000 is hardly a significant step towards defunding the police. also the repeated refrain last week of what changed is a strange question yes the mayor had originally approved the request for 26 000 for guns which was shared with the council previously but before it came time to vote he requested an amendment to respond to the national events ahead of us the proposal for 26 000 was to go towards anti-racism efforts in the city so i guess the answer to what changed is absolutely nothing other than the fact that our cities trying to make progress and regarding those guns prior to april 2020 no officer had discharged their weapon in the line of duty for 30 years over 30 years think about that for the last several weeks we've been debating ad nauseum about the most minuscule line items questioning departments over every little detail to get them to justify their expenses and now all of a sudden when there's a proposal to use free cash not a budget cut for equipment that's not regularly put into use that's just a bridge too far the conversation really needs to shift from thinking that just because there's a proposal to address anti-racism efforts in our city instead of funding new guns that it means that we have we think our police has a problem let me be clear training is not a punishment for poor behavior it's a production to to prevent poor behavior and that's basically what we got on thursday night racism and bias is systemic in order to change that we need to mitigate against it i've taken implicit bias training and it's not out of self loathing but a desire to do better better so again the narrative was spun out of last week's meeting was reckless and inappropriate the proposal was not a reproach of the police it's a small step forward for our city was the mayor's proposal a comprehensive and robust move towards dismantling systemic racism in our city no for the record my vote on monday was not an acceptance of this money that this money would solve all our problems but i do think the proposal is one small piece towards a much needed overall investment in diversity inclusion and equity initiatives my vote was to grab at the money that was put in front of us and take it because we are down to the wire in the allocation of free cash we only have until june 30th and next year's financial situation will be grim and i know as i stated on thursday night we have such a narrow window of attention on this matter because just as quickly as people were gripped by the horror of the murder of george floyd it will float out of the collective consciousness and be replaced by something else So while I certainly hope this isn't the case, history has proven this to be true every single time. So those who criticize the support of the proposal for not thinking big enough, maybe I accepted it because I weighed all of that in my mind. The narrow window of time we had before us and my inherent skepticism that any big change will come from this moment because we've been here before and we will unfortunately be here again. We are not going to solve systemic racism in this city over the course of a few weeks, but we can take a step forward. Just to wrap up, no one around this virtual table has the faintest idea what it's like to go for a jog in your own neighborhood and not be sure if you're going to be attacked because of the color of your skin. None of us knows what it's like to rehearse with their sons exactly what you need to do if you get stopped by the police just to prevent getting beaten or worse. But some of us here do understand fear, the fear of not being safe while walking alone at night. Some of us here know what it's like to be intimidated or gaslighted when we speak our minds and even a smaller number of us knows what it feels like to be the other because the color of our skin or the religion we practice i invite my fellow counselors for a moment to examine their privilege and then consider the content and tone of the conversation last week and i also ask my colleagues again to join us not in words but accident action to make change in our city i think it not only do we need to invest money but that means that we can also create and put forward policies that will be more equitable for our community and that issue goes far beyond any type of training that could be provided if you are going to critique without taking a meaningful step forward yourself then you're no better than the people who are ignoring the societal problem we have in front of us let's be on the right side of history here and i will just then repeat again i i find it interesting that this proposal or the thought or the plan did not come up last thursday night that the rhetoric was started and just allowed to go on i mean it was shocking it was hurtful and it was uncalled for and i think i invite you again to think about how you started and the words that you said and how that they could be perceived and then down to flip and sort of cut the bottom line 250 000 i i just find this is strange thank

▶ 2:29:51 Jen Grigoraitis: you thank you counselor migliorelli i have several counselors in queue however i do want to ask for a for a point of clarification from Councilor Cinella as the maker of the order. It's my understanding that we can't just cut the bottom line but you'd have to recommend which budget lines you're cutting from. So is I just, if you could clarify.

▶ 2:30:10 Christopher Cinella: No, I don't, we can do an aggregate.

▶ 2:30:14 Jen Grigoraitis: Okay, that's not my understanding but perhaps we can seek confirmation on that. All right, Councilor Eccles.

▶ 2:30:22 Jack Eccles: Thank you, Madam President. Actually, that was something that I would like to bring to our attention. I believe we might have the CFO in the audience. I don't know if he's willing to speak. It is concerning to me to be cutting a 2% increase into 1.4% increase. The 2% increase already being the lowest increase we've had in quite some time. So I'm concerned about the lack of specificity and possibly with some clarification from Mr. Del Rosso, I would be helped, but I'm a little concerned Based on the many of the increases are contractual where the cuts would come from. I am concerned that it could be cut by whole city services. So I'm kind of curious as to what a full bottom line cut would have as an impact when disaggregated amongst the various city departments. So it'd be helpful to hear from a member of the administration on this.

▶ 2:31:18 Jen Grigoraitis: Thank you, Councilor Eccles. Madam Clerk of Committees, I can only see the top of your head. I think you're nodding it. Oh, yeah.

▶ 2:31:23 John N. Tramontozzi: sorry city auditor is in the room sorry about that point of water yeah point of order you'd have to get thank you uh madam president you have to make a motion to suspend the rules uh to hear from any of the the uh city personnel at this point correct that was my yeah make a motion to suspend

▶ 2:31:48 Jen Grigoraitis: the rules we have a motion to suspend the rules by councillor eccles second we have a second by by Councillor Migliorelli. Is there any discussion?

▶ 2:32:00 Shawn M. MacMaster: Councillor McMaster. Thank you, Madam President. I'm not, of course, adverse to hearing from Mr. DellaRusso, but I'm just trying to get a sense of, is he gonna be offering his, I mean, he has years of experience, obviously, as auditor, but this sounds like this might be a legal question that may even have to go above Mr. Van Campen might have to be interpreted by the attorney general's office if there's if there's you know some dispute my i i would think and again this is without hearing what what mr de la rusa would have to say is that any cut whether it's fifty thousand dollars or two hundred and fifty thousand dollars in aggregate would seem to me to be more favorable to the administration than a cut that would target specific departments because it would allow the mayor to make that determination so again this is not hearing from without hearing from mr delarusso or getting a legal opinion on this it would seem that it it shouldn't matter if it's an aggregate or if it's targeted at particular departments because at the end of the day the money still exists it's like having uh you know a household where there's so much money you have in the bank but you're budgeting for your Expenses for the year, if you need to tap into that money, it's there and I do hear what council is saying. There's certainly some reason to hear about any. Overall concerns as it would relate to the potential impact on the city and some of the issues that that I've been raising and constantly been raising throughout the last month or so. But I just really a surface level look, it doesn't seem like. it would be unfavorable for any amount if the mayor had the flexibility to determine what to do with that money. So I just say that before we vote. Thank you, Madam President.

▶ 2:33:59 Jen Grigoraitis: Thank you. So we have a motion before us to suspend the rules made by Councilor Eccles and seconded by Councilor Migliorelli. Madam Clerk, can you please call the roll?

▶ 2:34:11 Speaker 1: Councilor McConaughey. Councilor Sinla.

▶ 2:34:16 Speaker 1: No. Councilor Eccles. Yes. Councilor Garipay.

▶ 2:34:27 Speaker 1: Councilor DeMoledine yes Councilor McMaster Councilor McNaught no Councilor

▶ 2:34:50 Speaker 5: Migliorelli Councilor Stewart yes Councilor Thomas no Councilor Tramontozzi

▶ 2:35:00 Speaker 1: no president Grigoraitis yes it's one two three four five six no six no believe one two three four five six yes six no okay so the motion fails so next in

▶ 2:35:11 Jen Grigoraitis: queue we have councillor Thomas president grace do you have me I didn't

▶ 2:35:26 Jen Grigoraitis: have my hand up I thought you had your hand up councillor Thomas so next in Thank you. Councilor McNaught, I will add you next in queue. We have Councilor Jamaleddine.

▶ 2:35:34 Maya Jamaleddine: Thank you so much, President Grigoraitis. I would like to start by apologizing for all our residents and constituents. We failed you. We failed providing, we misled you actually by not providing the real reason why we are proposing or the mayor proposed this implicit bias. We fail to explain that we are not against buying or purchasing guns, but we are prioritizing right now.

▶ 2:36:17 Robb Stewart: Point of procedure, Madam President. What order are we discussing?

▶ 2:36:22 Jen Grigoraitis: So, we are discussing order 2020 dash 89, which is the budget. We have a motion before us to cut the budget by 200, the bottom line of the budget by 250,000 dollars, which has been duly seconded. That is what we were discussing. I will ask counselors to contain their comments to this proposal to cut the bottom line of the budget. Which I believe comes with a recommendation for where it can go.

▶ 2:36:51 Shawn M. MacMaster: Okay, so Councilor McMaster. Just in fairness to Councilor Jamaleddine, I think where she's probably going with this is similar to where Councilor Cinella went and Councilor Migliorelli. I think that is probably making the case for, we can't necessarily separate the appropriations matter that's before us later that I think we've all been prepared to talk about from the motion to reduce bottom line because it it's essentially one in the same thing now considering the counselor um sanella's motion so i think in in fairness to council of Jamaleddine and i would expect uh others i mean one way or the other i'm going to speak on it whether it's now or later but i just i i think that's where council Jamaleddine was going and my apologies council jamalina i don't mean to speak for you but i just wanted to make it clear that i think that's where

▶ 2:37:45 Robb Stewart: you were going and my apologies as well councillor i just i didn't understand if we had gone if we

▶ 2:37:53 Jen Grigoraitis: had moved on or not so again i'm sorry thank you council mcmaster thank you councillor stewart i will turn it back over to councillor Jamaleddine i will ask everyone if to please wait unless it is something absolutely critical until the counselor who has the floor has finished speaking

▶ 2:38:12 Maya Jamaleddine: thank you at this time i would like i would like to explain to our constituents people that voted for us and people that believe and trusted us and put trust in us that we believe in our police department we know that they're trying their best to serve us

▶ 2:38:34 Speaker 3: we these people that serve in the police department are our neighbors

▶ 2:38:39 Maya Jamaleddine: They are people who lived with us in this community. Training is not disrespect. Training is not mistrust. Training is opening the door for those people of color that started speaking up and

▶ 2:38:56 Speaker 3: coming before us and sharing their painful experience with us. Opening the door for them

▶ 2:39:03 Maya Jamaleddine: and tell them that we are here to hear them we are here to understand less than two weeks ago we all stood outside holding signs and promised people of color that we're gonna listen to them we apologize for all the time that passed and we promised them that moving forward we're gonna start listening to them and we failed our first test we failed listening to their concerns is this how we listen to them by buying guns is this our priority right now again we do need guns but we can wait on it what we do need the most right now

▶ 2:39:49 Maya Jamaleddine: is to show them that we are willing to open the door and listen to them. What we

▶ 2:39:59 Speaker 3: need right now is to tell them that we are sorry. We didn't hear you all these

▶ 2:40:04 Speaker 5: years because this topic, and correct me if I'm wrong, were never opened by any

▶ 2:40:12 Maya Jamaleddine: city councilors before. This is the first time and Maru's made the history by opening this topic and telling people of color we are here to listen to you we are trying our best to improve ourselves and start listening to you and that's when people of color trusted us and came forward and said send us tons and tons

▶ 2:40:36 Speaker 3: of emails I am so sorry for all the people of color for for staying quiet

▶ 2:40:40 Maya Jamaleddine: all these years and not coming and not feeling comfortable to come forward and sharing with us their experiences. It was extremely uncomfortable and extremely painful for me to sit in with and holding myself while listening to Mrs. Talwar and other people of color sharing all these experiences and what we did. We are trying to to to fight and show our leadership by saying a 26,000 is not necessary to cut to get to the training this is what we get we're gonna tell

▶ 2:41:30 Speaker 3: people of color you can wait and get more pain and experiences while we buy

▶ 2:41:35 Speaker 3: guns that's how we're gonna protect you or that's how we're gonna protect white

▶ 2:41:43 Jen Grigoraitis: people. Thank you so much. Thank you, Councillor Jamaleddine. Next up, I have Councillor Garipay.

▶ 2:41:48 Mark Garipay: Thank you, Madam President. I was going to save these remarks until a little later, but in light of the motion that's before us, I think it's appropriate now. I just want to go over kind of a timeline. Last Thursday afternoon, I received an email at about one o'clock, 102 actually regarding um a sudden change um of the mayor's position for funding the police service weapons unfortunately because we you know we all have full full-time jobs i did not uh i did not get to read the memo just until just before 6 p.m and that's the time our meeting started this is not the first time our mayor's office has submitted pertinent information to this council just hours before a vote that has to be taken. This practice and the practice of that administration must stop. It is not fair to the City Council or to the residents of Melrose. Every one of us should have the time to review all the pertinent information in order to properly prepare to make a well-informed decision. I'd like to ask the Mayor why a topic like this training which he claims to feel so strongly about did not warrant an appearance before him after that sudden change in front of the city council on thursday i want the public to understand my position on implicit bias training i am in full support of this type of training for the whole city all city employees but i believe this needs to be a comprehensive plan by a comprehensive plan i mean the mayor must identify a qualified company review all the curriculum commit to a time frame fund all aspects of the training and implementation mr mayor this is not a time for political grandstanding in our city it's time to bring all stakeholders together and develop an approach that will be the foundation that our community can build on and move towards racial equity over the last four days I, along with other councilors, have received many emails that have questioned my beliefs and my integrity. Many residents have expressed disappointment. I've lived in Melrose my whole life. My family has had a name that with an unblemished reputation in this community until now. I'm disappointed by this administration's unwillingness to partner with all the City Council members on this issue. This has caused division in this council and within our community i think it's time mr mayor you owe this the city of melrose an apology for the way this turned out thank you chancellor mcnaught thank you madam president

▶ 2:44:40 Jeff McNaught: as you all know i like to um speak slowly so that was why i was in favor of suspending uh i think it was rule 13 earlier i forget the number but um i also want to give some background to how we got here and um and interesting that i'm going after council Garipay in this because i have some of the same points to make that he does and first i want to say that i'll vote to cut the bottom line by an aggregate of 250 but i'd go much further than that and i do find the 26 000 that was proposed to be an insult and to be a political stunt and to not contact each and every councilor in advance of that move. Instead, having nine out of 11, a brand new city council grappling with that as we get to our computers. The night of a vote for money that he asked us to vote on. Mr. Mayor, you. You asked us to vote on it just days earlier. That's what people were referring to when they referred to a timeline. It had nothing to do with the brutal murder of George Floyd or anyone else. and I'll state it again there there is there is police brutality and rampant in this country there's a systemic change that needs to happen in so many more institutions than just in our law enforcement institution I'm not gonna reread last week's speech but what the mayor did was got into the end of the room and I don't think it's fair to say with who but a couple of city counselors he drafted this thing it seemed like that day sent it down i myself didn't get to see it until i'm sitting down for the meeting if you look back i'm highlighting making notes thinking what is this i don't i don't understand this what why would you do that to even a seasoned council never mind and a council of nine out of eleven brand new members who have dealt with getting information late not at all I mean I say this I was gonna say that it was unforgivable what was done by our mayor but it's not I won't say that because I want us to work together I really really want us to get by this and I think we've all been put in a horrible position by him he is after all a career politician and the two people who drafted this or or had tough conversations with him are not and um but this stuff needs to be pointed out um we are here we are in this situation and i know that a lot of people are applauding the mayor for trying to give 26 000 out of the appropriation that he intended to give to the police, he's being applauded for that. And I think his intentions were right. I want to believe that. But I do believe he did this for political gain. It was advantageous. It was days earlier. I'm not giving him the benefit of the doubt that certain incidents or more reflection just made him decide to go after that 26,000. It was the last night we had to vote online items except for tonight where we approve the total budget or we don't it was the last night it was a desperate attempt at political game and I'm sorry mr. mayor I have supported you since the moment I first heard you speak but you need to hear these things because sending us information at the 11th hour sending no information other times it's become your signature move with this city council at first i thought he's new we're new um but it's just it happens every time withholding financial information has become part of your signature also it's been it's been pulling teeth throughout what should have been a very very easy budget process for you this year where you did only increase it to two million two and a half million i'm not even sure the exact amount and it was mostly contractual cba raises um and other raises that the super majority of the council wasn't challenging you on we weren't challenging you on giving merit increases to your staff that frankly doesn't get paid enough to begin with so um we were stalled by you we were told that we'd have to wait weeks and then it would take teams of people to come up with the information that mr delarusso graciously provided after working on it over a weekend from a friday to a Monday. And that helped things hum along a lot faster in the budget process. But when

▶ 2:49:37 Jeff McNaught: you did what you did last Thursday and just kind of walked away, you left this council in a really, really bad situation. And look at where we are now. I will bet we all wish last Thursday didn't happen. I know I wish it didn't. I wish I was included on a discussion about what the mayor's intentions were because I think we could have collaboratively all come up with something a hell of a lot better than the situation we're in now.

▶ 2:50:19 Jeff McNaught: I'm not done. I think it's critical that the public understands, Mr. Mayor, that you present the budget, not us, because that came through in a lot of emails that I received this weekend. People saying, why don't you do this with the budget? Why don't you add? We don't get to add money. That's your job. You presented us with a budget on May 14th. You did not include a penny toward any racial equity ideas, brainstorming, training, nothing. It showed up on the last night you could possibly do it for us to vote on, stumble over, and look like fools because we all look like fools. Don't first think that it's not factions of people all over the city saying that the three people who voted no are fools and the eight people who voted yes are fools we all look like fools and that's not our fault that's on you mr mayor and you do owe not just us an apology you owe the community an apology the situation we're in right now is your fault and why don't i care to call you out like this because i'm not a career politician

▶ 2:51:28 Jeff McNaught: i'm not in this to use council Garipay's uh term i'm not grandstanding i'm telling you the truth you left us in a really really bad situation on Thursday and then you went the whole weekend and I think you knew what you did and you still didn't reach out to anyone and say hey I'm sorry

▶ 2:51:52 Jeff McNaught: it went down that way no one I'm not going to complain about the emails that I received from people because I I can't say that I can even attempt to understand their pain and what they're going through and what that yes vote must have felt like but i can say that i should try to

▶ 2:52:09 Jeff McNaught: understand it and i'm not going to cancel any of those people that i do feel like you've canceled me and i ask that you change your mind because i'm open to having conversations with anyone that emailed me and beyond i think i think the whole council is we have to be if we're serious about this again I don't think the 250 is enough I said that in the last meeting if we wanted to be serious and I'm gonna make this call again mr. mayor you need to hire a department you need a director of community engagement and equity you need an assistant director you need staff for them you can't hire someone and say go out there and fix Melrose we have to be serious about this and it's not going to change overnight and that i hope that's what some of the 250 can go towards because that's not going to start a department for you so um i mean i do believe uh even mr miraz was probably pretty accurate when he said we're going to have a few million dollars in free cash in just a few more months again so let's uh let's put the budget where your mouth is mr mayor because you haven't so far um and it pains me to to speak this way um about a man that um i really wanted to be our leader in the city and i think can still do a good job but um you owe us an apology and you and you need to start doing some bridge building within the council um and within the community because i don't think it's just me who knows that you put us in this position i'm getting

▶ 2:53:53 Jeff McNaught: there we do i just we do have other counselors in the queue so do you want to um no i really just want to get through it and then let other people get through what they want to get through um and i'm trying not to believe it or not trying not to beat a dead horse so i apologize it feels that way

▶ 2:54:13 Jeff McNaught: i i think that the biggest part that people need to understand is um the surprise of that memo Thursday afternoon is what put us here and and call on your mayor and ask him why it went down the way it did the answer can't just be that it came to Paul that day or that week that this was the right thing to do I'm just not I'm sorry if you're gonna believe the mayor all the way on this one I've got a couple bridges for sale I really do I'll say it again because I think it has to

▶ 2:54:56 Jeff McNaught: He said, Mr. Mayor, you spoke to a couple of city councilors. You didn't reach out to everyone. Why? I mean, maybe we suspend the rules a little bit because I do think we should hear from Mr. De La Ruzzo after this council's had a chance to talk. Maybe the mayor can explain some of this. Maybe he can convince me as to why I might be wrong on everything I'm saying, but I doubt it.

▶ 2:55:25 Jeff McNaught: And again, this is an $89 million budget that we're approving, hopefully approving. um when i saw the 26 000 i saw it as an insult and when i saw where it was coming from i'm being honest it wasn't that i was it was blue the blue line versus black lives matter it was what a slap in the face to take that out of the police department because look what it looks like optics matter mr mayor if we haven't noticed that now we never will um i'll just say that the

▶ 2:56:06 Jeff McNaught: When I first saw the memo, when we first had our vote, when we all went home feeling like total trash that night, and there's nobody who can say that they didn't. I was really mad. It was maddening and now I'm just going to say it's really saddening because we created divides not only within the city council, but within the community. And there's a conversation ongoing now which could have been so much more productive and instead here we are. and that's not on any one of us. I know people think it was because of the vote. It's not, it's because of you. You put us in this situation.

▶ 2:57:01 Speaker 5: Councilor McNaught? Yep. Are you, I do, I have Councilor Tramontozzi. I'm gonna wrap up and again in a moment, Madam President.

▶ 2:57:17 Jeff McNaught: And I wanna say the next thing because I honestly don't know who wrote the memo for the mayor, but I can't get off of how much the language within the memo is, it cancels itself out, it's hypocritical, it's just, it's not a very well-written memo. But there's a line where the mayor says, our actions and policies, it's on the second page, if anyone's looking at it, our actions and policies must reflect the results of our research and discussions and not the other way around. In the paragraph above that, it says, I make this request without having identified a particular vendor or service, knowing simply that we will, in all likelihood, require outside expertise and professional services in order to achieve our goals. So what research did you do? I don't see how any of that makes sense.

▶ 2:58:16 Speaker 5: None of it made sense.

▶ 2:58:27 Jeff McNaught: One moment, Madam President.

▶ 2:58:33 Jeff McNaught: I'll say this. I do not think that the mayor wanted this situation to happen. I don't think he's a horrible person I'm just telling you why we're here that has

▶ 2:58:47 Jeff McNaught: to be said and and we really really if this isn't something I'm just saying and and and this isn't a direct insult at the mayor because I can't do it I don't think anyone here can or that there's anyone on the city's payroll who can you're not the person to shepherd us through this moment you're not we need we do need to hire special expertise and you can't just throw it on the Human Commission to say go ahead and you know find us a good firm that can come in these are quick decisions that are not gonna work out well if we don't have expertise in there and again I don't know if there's anyone on the Human Rights Commission that that can do this work but I also don't know that we can

▶ 2:59:40 Jeff McNaught: have them do that work for the city we need some real help because we we're we're off on the wrong foot here, folks. I mean, it's like Thursday night to me is if we were in a bad car accident

▶ 2:59:57 Jeff McNaught: and the mayor walked away from it and acted like it didn't happen. That's what it feels like. We're all in the car together.

▶ 3:00:05 Jen Grigoraitis: Councilor McNaught, I have two additional counselors in queue who have yet to speak. I just want to be mindful of your colleagues. Sure.

▶ 3:00:21 Jeff McNaught: I would just ask Mr. Mayor that in closing that you'd be more transparent going forward, that you'd be less reactionary. That happens a lot. There's an order tonight that was on the books to get transparency into the Melrose Emergency Fund. That's been requested for approximately a month and a half. No response.

▶ 3:00:45 Jen Grigoraitis: Councilor McNaught, I do want to remind you that we're focused on the budget. I do believe the order related to the Melrose Emergency Fund is outside the scope of this current discussion. Okay, I won't talk about that anymore then. It is related, the relevancy is transparency.

▶ 3:01:02 Speaker 5: I think you see the theme here.

▶ 3:01:09 Jeff McNaught: And again, I just, I ask that people really think about when people discuss the timeline, they weren't saying that minds couldn't change in a matter of days because of what was going on in the world. We know that's not true. We know they can. This just looked like a very poor attempt at some political gain and I'm really sorry that we were all left, you know, holding the bag and, but that's all I have to say.

▶ 3:01:44 Speaker 5: Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councillor McNaught. Councillor Tramontozzi.

▶ 3:01:52 John N. Tramontozzi: Thank you, Madam President and members of the Council. I'll be brief. I'm just saddened that we seem, as a city, to be split and we need to come together. I'm in favor of citywide implicit bias training, but encompassing all the departments in the city, including the fire, police, city council, mayor's office, schools, etc., we need a framework in place. need a broad, widespread, thought-out program of citywide anti-bias training. We need to give the city workers the tools they need. Let's come together. Here's an opportunity

▶ 3:02:48 John N. Tramontozzi: to the council to give the funding that is necessary, that I feel is necessary, and would be available to come from the city general operating account on the free cash that is made has been made available in earmark for this fiscal year so we have the we have the availability to do so let's send the administration the resources necessary to put together this broad sought out program and i believe that the 250 000 uh that we're suggesting is a good framework for the city to develop this program and um and i think the mayor can do so and we'll get the cooperation of all the city workers all the departments and we all can come together and get this in place um so that's all i have to say thank you

▶ 3:03:56 Speaker 5: thank you all thank you council chairman tozy councillor thomas thank you madam president

▶ 3:04:01 Cory Thomas: as i stated thursday night in this virtual city council chamber this council has been very vocal in our united stance against terrible actions of police officers in minnesota that led to the murder of george floyd i firmly believe that americans from all walks of life need to come together now continue to educate ourselves and move forward for the greater good of all regardless of race gender sexuality or religious beliefs i did not hear anyone on the city council say they were against implicit bias training in fact all the counselors that i have talked to are for implicit bias training for all melrose municipal employees the mayor's memo last thursday afternoon called for 26 000 to be transferred to human resource 2 and i quote invest these funds in our department of human resources so we may contract with a vendor to provide the city with the training policy review or recruitment help we may need i agree with mayor broder that there is a need for additional training specifically implicit bias training even though that term was not used anywhere in the mayor's memo mayor broder admitted that the city of melrose had yet to contact any training vendors and that we are asking for assistance with the human rights commission to identify potential vendors and particular needed services the reality is we do not even know if the 26 000 requested last week would be enough to cover city-wide and city-wide implicit bias training for all municipal employees if we want to make wholesale changes to our community in matters of race and tolerance that is what we need implicit bias training for all municipal employees a much larger commitment to 26 000 is needed and that is what i'll be voting in favor for tonight lastly there have been people who have taken this opportunity to watch personal unfounded attacks on myself and other members of the city council while disappointing i'm buoyed by the many who are supportive of our vote because they've taken the time to look at the issue and understand that this is this vote is appropriate and necessary it's not a vote for any anything against for it it's not a vote for or against anything other than supporting the fine members of the melrose police department thank you thank you councillor

▶ 3:06:14 Robb Stewart: Thomas, for the first time, Councillor Stewart. Thank you, Madam President. For the motion that's on the floor, I'm inclined not to support it for the very reason that we are debating some of the issues that we're facing over the last week or so. I know that a lot of us feel the frustration of having received information fairly late in the game um and i do have a prepared statement which i will be speaking to when we get to the police order um but concerning this i feel as though if we force this upon the mayor we're sort of we're doing the exact same thing and i'm not comfortable with that um i'd rather work with the mayor to find out how we can develop a comprehensive plan. I'm not inclined to play his hand and back him into a corner. So, from that standpoint, I think the intention of all of us is fairly on the same page, but we need to figure out how to get there and work a little bit more together in terms of getting there uh because um you know as some of us feel we're getting to be very polarized that's not a good way to govern or legislate uh a budget going forward and i hope that you know after we get through tonight um we're going to be able to work a little bit more constructively all of us including the council the administration uh and uh the you know the the support of all the different perspectives within the community to address some of these very serious issues that we're facing. So, you know, I do appreciate the, the approach, well, not the approach, but the intended outcome of putting together a real program. I just don't think this approach is the right way to go forward. Thank you, Madam President.

▶ 3:08:23 Speaker 5: Thank you, Councillor Stewart. Councillor McMaster.

▶ 3:08:30 Shawn M. MacMaster: Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, members of the Council. Like others, I have prepared remarks. I won't save them because I do think they relate to the motion that's on the table. But before I get into those remarks, I've been taking notes as people have been talking, members of the public, as well as my colleagues, and I just first want to apologize to those who are hurting right now. particularly our communities of color in Melrose, to residents in Ward 5, and to my colleagues and friends, Councilor Jamaleddine and Councilor Migliorelli. Anything that I said the other night, I can't imagine as a white man, like the seven other counselors who voted in support of the police appropriation can imagine how our words were interpreted because we don't we don't come from communities of color we're white men in a privileged society so i i recognize that um and i regret the impact that words or how questions were asked um were interpreted because certainly i don't think it was the intention of anyone to be offensive uh to um those who we are elected to serve and those who place their their trust in us as their uh their leaders um but i do think and this has been referenced by other counselors tonight and i don't offer this as an excuse but more of an explanation is that we really were thrown this this topic was thrown to us at the last minute which did allow um or didn't allow really the adequate time to maybe communicate in a way that recognized what our communities of color are facing and to perhaps have a more constructive conversation and do what I think it is that we all want to do. And the problem is that with what's happening now, which personally, you know, it really has made me sick to my stomach in terms of the division that I think this has caused is that it could have been completely avoidable and it could have been avoidable because all of us know how the mayor's office operates not just this mayor but Council of Tramontozzi and I can attest to the prior administration and Council of Tramontozzi to administrations before the administration before that is that when there's a matter that's important to the mayor there's an issue that the mayor cares about the mayor gives us notice because the mayor wants to get us on board mayors do that that's what and everyone knows this because all of you have been called into the mayor's office in small groups right to talk about things that are important to the mayor or the mayor will call not at the last minute if he even bothers to call and say I want to talk about this and and this was not done in a collaborative collegial way and it has put all of us in a very terrible predicament, has put this community in a horrible position. And I think it, frankly, it's crippled this mayor's term in office. It really has. And I think Consular McNaught is right. Hopefully we can all come together. And I think Consular Stewart was very eloquent in what he said, is that we all want to do what's right for the city. And I think we can come together. That's our responsibility. Our responsibility is not have hurt feelings but at the same time we do have to recognize what played out here the other night and that again caused there to be an issue that shouldn't have been an issue so i just wanted to start with that before i get to my remarks and uh again just reaffirm how how regretful i am at uh you know what has happened in the community and any hurt that anything that i said which certainly wasn't intentional but i can understand um listening to people why it has hurt them, just very apologetic for how those words came off. But Madam President, just in terms of what I was prepared to say is that we have witnessed over the last few days in this city a failure of leadership. Leadership isn't about disingenuously dodging important issues out of political expediency and punting on those issues to City Council. Leadership isn't about putting targets on the backs of other elected officials. Leadership isn't about smoke and mirror campaigns and cheap publicity stunts. Leadership isn't about planting and cultivating the seeds of division in a community. Leadership is about finding sincere and productive ways to solve urgent problems leadership recognizes the value of collaboration and is willing like my battery is running low so if i if i end up getting cut off you know why and i'll attempt to get back on but just to put that out there leadership recognizes the value of collaboration and is willing to work across branches of government to affect change true leaders are willing to accept the political pressure and ultimate consequences of doing what's right and doing it the right way. All the noise that has been created by Mayor Broda's

▶ 3:14:10 Shawn M. MacMaster: actions over these last four days is a distraction to what we all want, racial equity. Mayor Broda's reckless and irresponsible actions have clouded the issue at hand. Make no doubts about it. Turning this into a sideshow of men versus women, white versus black and brown, moderates versus liberals, old Melrose versus new Melrose, and police advocates versus police critics. And now, counselors versus one another, friends versus one another. What I find extremely troubling is that the mayor, who just a few days ago was being questioned for not doing enough on this issue, is being praised. The division that has been caused over these last four days, the venom that is being spewed on both sides of this issue, was purposely unleashed by the mayor to pacify some in this community as a result the mayor has shamefully scapegoated the melrose police department and i make no apologies let me just say for supporting the police and the gun appropriation i apologize for what i regret and the way it was interpreted but i make no apologies for that vote because i feel strongly about it that scapegoat of the police department it pitted neighbors against each other in order to fund a training program that 26 000 won't come even close to funding in the name of implicit bias training eight of us are being explicitly labeled as insensitive and tone deaf to the issue of racial justice i find that shameful mr mayor let's talk about the facts for a moment every single one of us would have reported supported a request for implicit bias training had it been genuine had it not unfairly targeted our police officers had it not been a token amount to appease those in the community who contacted the mayor and we know we were cc'd on all those emails that were sent to the mayor the mayor by his own words in thursday's patch article said that it was his idea not the police chiefs to purchase new firearms but now the mayor has conveniently wrapped himself in the warmth of the security blanket quilted by the misguided notion of defunding or refunding we choose to call it the Melrose Police Department we all seem to know with the exception of Mayor Broder is that training every city employee will be extremely costly at $26 which has been proposed by the mayor we'd be devoting less than $30 for every one employee trained to train one police officer when you account for overtime and backfill because public safety personnel can't be expected to train when they're working a shift will be anywhere between fifty three dollars an hour and eighty seven dollars an hour depending on rank so with forty eight police officers that's the the amount of police officers who we employ for a four-hour training that would be a minimum investment of two hundred and twelve dollars per officer or ten thousand one hundred and seventy six for just patrol officers alone when you add sergeants and lieutenants the total departmental cost for one four hour training would be $21,323. Yet the mayor wants to devote less than $30 per city employee. That doesn't even cover an hour of training for a single patrol officer. Think about that for a minute. If that doesn't demonstrate the spuriousness of his request, I don't know what does. What could the mayor have done if he was sincere about funding implicit bias training? He could have identified a sufficient amount of money in the nine hundred and fifty thousand dollars in free cash He sent down before us the other night, but he purposely targeted the police budget We could have signaled to the public into this council that he'd reassess each department in the FY 21 budget and pursue a series of Transfers that this council would likely approve Let's be with a genuine and sincere investment in this issue must go further It will require tough and uncomfortable conversations, earnest self-assessments, and most importantly, a willingness to do the work that will ensure that equity is valued, achieved, and sustained at every level of city government. So let's not fool ourselves into thinking that this is just about investing in a one-time implicit bias training or that the training is in itself a panacea. This has to be about changing the culture. It has to be about creating a new norm. The conversation needs to also focus on cultural competency, cultural sensitivity, about recruiting for diversity in municipal government, about having city-wide policies that promote and demand equity in government across all city departments, about considering ideas for alternative models of accountability to investigate claims lodged against public employees for any type of misconduct in any city departments. It should be about making sure that our motto of one community to open to all amounts to more than just words, that the identity of this community is not restrained by the city's Victorian ethos, but liberated by our commitment to move forward. I find it hard to believe that we all don't want the same thing. I challenge us to get there. Thank you, Madam President.

▶ 3:19:32 Jen Grigoraitis: Thank you, Councillor McMaster. Councillor Migliorelli.

▶ 3:19:47 Speaker 3: Sorry, I'm going to take my time too. So, let me compose my thoughts.

▶ 3:19:52 Leila Migliorelli: Well, I'm in 100% agreement that the 26,000 isn't enough. I'm still a little confused by some of the conversation that's going on right now, because it seems like the anger and fury The councillors are sharing tonight are in regards to the mayor's memo and his quick turnaround. I also received not a lot of time with this memo, maybe a little bit sooner than all of you. Maybe I'm feeling there's some implications here that perhaps I was involved in drafting it. I was not. I was contacted by the mayor out of somebody who was actually Proactively contacted him about doing this training. I've been talking about this since I was on the campaign. Have any of you, I don't under, I feel like I'm equally frustrated frustrated with both the mayor and. Everyone else here, no one else has stepped forward. It just seems like. You're blaming the mayor and I don't know where all of you have been with your proposals either. So. Shame on everyone then, I guess. It's still not. I thank you, Councillor McMaster for your apology. I appreciate it. I think that to say that Mayor Broder caused some of you to use the words that you used on Thursday night is sort of a little bit ridiculous. We could have had a conversation that night. I was ready for a conversation to kind of get into the weeds of this. i would have welcomed a conversation for any of you to say you know this isn't enough let's go back and forth but it led out of the gate um with just a complete anti-police stance and put the rest of the counselors on a sort of defense mode you didn't give us an opportunity to have a conversation it was speech after coordinated speech after coordinated speech to to do this and it was it it it stifled the conversation so well i you know critiques of mayor broder side that's your beef with with him that mine is the sort of the inflammatory language you all used to get there and i think while we have this you know interesting proposal to cut across the budget i would i wanted i asked the mayor have been asking the mayor when i asked from him i think maybe three weeks ago is can you find the money can you please find the money for this i don't know if anyone else did i asked him that this is what he came up with i in good faith assumed that this is this is where it is and frankly i'm sorry i i get the that we don't want to harm our police i don't want our police harmed i wouldn't have voted down the entire order um the guns it just seemed to me we we're gonna have to make tough choices someone is going to have to lose something so i ask everyone to think who who do we think is going to lose here are we just saying that the police can't lose are you prepared to tell our kids that they can't lose who's going to lose and if you want to put that back on the mayor and have him do that work that's one thing but if we're having a discussion here we really need to look at ourselves we've been going through this budget for the last month we've been looking line by line everyone is the majority of the council has been motioning to move the bottom line i think under the assumption that this budget is tight so what do we do i spent time today going through the free cash assessments and sort of struggling with the ones that we have in front of us where can we cut i've gone through the line items again looking where can we cut i don't to me it seems like you're all focused on the mayor broder's political stunts but this seems like a political stunt backwards too i i would love to have a conversation have any of you gone through you know motion to cut the bottom line 250 000 fine but But have you looked, is there anything you feel like that could be cut? Do you really feel like our students can suffer this loss? Where do you wanna look for this? So to me, yes, 26,000 isn't enough. Are we looking at items that maybe we don't need? Maybe I would say the guns fall into that category. Maybe other things fall into that category as well. But please, I just ask you to take some accountability for the language used and realize that that did hurt people that hurt your fellow counselors and that's not mayor broder's fault that's the language you chose to use that night so um welcome to continue conversation i would rather move past this conversation about language and mayor broder and get to get to talking about the topic at hand thank you thank you councillor

▶ 3:24:25 Jen Grigoraitis: Migliorelli i'm gonna okay we uh councillor mcmaster was having some technical difficulty and he's back but i cannot believe i'm going to say this but this is the hits of 2020 keep on coming i believe according to the city clerk we are about to run out of disk space for recording this meeting um so which i i find very concerning and i'm sure you all do as well so i wanted to bring that to everyone's attention um and i'm not entirely sure what our options are other than to motion to adjourn and continue this conversation otherwise we would run the risk of the meeting not being recorded Madam

▶ 3:25:10 John N. Tramontozzi: President yeah we have a motion on the floor now let's let's at least do that rule on that motion and then we'll take the next step so we do have other

▶ 3:25:18 Jen Grigoraitis: counselors in queue for discussion before we move so my concern is that we run out of disk space before i don't know how we track the disk space um that so i'm happy to continue until we run out but there are other counselors in queue so we're not i don't believe we're ready to move on that motion so i'm just checking with the city clerk if um president

▶ 3:25:39 Speaker 1: Grigoraitis right now i just was checking just because this has gone so long and i know that this platform has limited disk space we're not i haven't received any notification that we're um close but when i looked we have just about 10 of the amount left so i just don't want to you know i prefer to just give you a heads up now but i think you as soon as you can continue until it stops recording um if you would like okay if you can please interrupt if you can please

▶ 3:26:11 Jen Grigoraitis: interrupt us if it stops recording all right thank you counselor eccles can i just add one

▶ 3:26:17 Speaker 1: thing i'm sorry i have something from the i.t director he said 20 minutes possibly just he's not sure though sorry for interrupting all right thank you councillor eccles thank you madam

▶ 3:26:30 Jack Eccles: president um so it seems that we're we're approaching two issues here and it would be nice to be able to reframe the discussion around the motion on the floor right now so right now as councillor Migliorelli just pointed out we're talking about the mayor's communication style and we've heard a lot about that that is irrelevant to the 250 000 cut that has been proposed to the budget that is what we're talking about and that is why i motioned to suspend the rules to hear from the city cfo i think it would be very helpful to understand how that would impact or whether or not it is legal to do such a process for example on june 14th or may 14th we started this budget process with the mayor presenting to us and we have since gone line by line by line and department by department and analyzed each expense when we cut 250 000 down the bottom line we essentially give the administration unilateral control to reappropriate those funds and i'm not even sure that they're allowed to do that that is why i wanted some input from the city cfo or the city solicitor because i think that i am concerned that as we try and disaggregate these cuts they will affect essential city services i think that when we're talking about the order further down the agenda um that's enough that's another discussion and i think that maybe there are some regrets from the vote and i think that mayor broder was forthcoming in the fact that 26 000 was not enough i don't think to compensate but of 26 000 being insufficient we should cut 250 000 from the bottom line from the budget um without hearing from the administration first. I don't know how it's going to affect the schools. I don't know how it would affect the different departments of whom we've all heard from every single department head. And as Councillor Migliorelli mentioned, move the bottom line time after time. We've had people concerned about raises for non-contractual employees. Those cuts would essentially be evened out by this investment, which is fine by me. But I think that it's interesting when disaggregated where these cuts are going to end up and that is a concern of mine and i'm not inclined to support this motion as a result i think that we're talking about two different issues here we're talking about the free cash appropriation for the police and we're talking about a 250 000 cut from the bottom line of the budget and that's what we're talking about right now and i think that that's an important way to frame this discussion is that we can fund on the implicit bias training, and we should, but I'm not sure giving the administration unilateral, unilateral, you know, I don't even know how it works, honestly. I don't know what happens when you cut $250,000 from the bottom line of the budget. That is why we go through for a month, department by department by department, and make cuts, because we are thoughtful about the expenses in each department. It is a waste of everyone's time to wait for that entire process to be over and then cut $250 from the bottom. In what seems to be a situation of being frustrated from hearing from our constituents about an order that was on the agenda on Thursday, I have taken the time to reflect and discuss with constituents about that order, and I was planning on having a discussion about that order specifically. So now we're going to talk about funding implicit bias training by a bottom line cut of a budget that was already bare bones, where the school department already was not able to make the investments in social emotional learning that they wanted to. We are cutting off of the bottom line of a budget that we have seen from the DPW director and the superintendent, cuts have already been made. I don't know where the administration goes with their $250,000 cut, and I don't even know if they're allowed to do that. That is why I suspended the rules to try and hear from the CFO. So at this time, I'm not inclined to support this motion. And I think that another thing is that the mayor, while I was frustrated to receive that memo at 1 p.m., I was at work until 5.30. I think that it's frustrating. And if anyone wants to file an order to discuss the mayor's communication with the city council, I think that that would be beneficial for everyone. I don't think cutting off our nose to spite our face by cutting $250,000 from the bottom line of the budget, specifically because we were upset about the ongoing of thursday i've heard so much about discussing that order on thursday when right now we are discussing a 250 cut from the bottom line of the budget that is what this discussion is about and i think that the mayor was forthcoming in saying that investing in police firearms right now while in this while the city is in the midst of determining how how to respond meaningful to the ongoing systemic barriers black people and other people of color face would be misguided it was not that the mayor thought that 26 000 was going to abolish racism in melrose it was that the mayor thought that a firearms investment was not appropriate we as the city council have the decision power to say that we disagree with them and that's what we ended up doing and we were going to take another vote tonight on that same thing so we don't this isn't about the mayor we this is the city council and we are discussing the budget and later we'll be discussing free cash appropriations so i think that to make this all about the mayor and his communication style right now we're talking about free cash appropriations and a budget and i would prefer to debate the merits of the budget and the free cash appropriations and at this time i will not be supporting a 250 000 cut off of the bottom line thank you

▶ 3:32:05 Jen Grigoraitis: madam president thank you councillor eccles councillor stewart councillor stewart yeah

▶ 3:32:14 Robb Stewart: there we go just trying to find my unmute button thank you thank you madam president i just uh really quickly a point of clarification i believe that if we do cut 250 000 from the budget that 250 000 does not become available for spending elsewhere it just means this is this is my understanding you need to get confirmation on this but my understanding is is it's just that the city has $250,000 less that they can spend. So the point of that motion would be that, you know, he would have to go, the mayor and his administration would have to go find $250,000 and that's it. It's not like that money could then be used for anything other, any other purpose, it's gone. So that's that's how I and have interpreted it and we should be mindful of that. I wish also confirmed. Thank you

▶ 3:33:16 Speaker 5: Thank You councillor Stewart councillor Jamala Dean

▶ 3:33:19 Maya Jamaleddine: Thank You madam president. Um, I would like to say that I agree with all my counselors at my fellow counselors that The whole whole city Department's needs implicit bias But let me tell you As I included in my resolution that the mayor have, have started and devoted the next two weeks to focus on our city departments and to, as I mentioned. All right, bear with me, or the city departments would be devoting the next two weeks to focus on how city services can contribute to creating a more racially just and equitable community. Is the two weeks enough? I don't think so. Is the $26,000 enough? I don't think so. But is it a good start? Yes, indeed. That's what we need. We need to show people of color that we are willing to start by correcting ourselves. And who do we start with? do we start with a school that currently we don't see nationwide any problem with it but we do see nationwide a problem with the police department so to set a good example and to show a good leadership we start with where other cities and other towns are having this problem and we show them that we are ready to face anything we are willing to correct ourselves even if we don't have the problem although the email showed otherwise but we are willing to correct

▶ 3:35:12 Maya Jamaleddine: ourselves and we are willing to learn that said I wanted to thank counselor McMaster for acknowledging and for apologizing thank you so much for having the courage and correcting because all of us are we're not flawless and we are we all make mistakes and it is good and show good leadership to acknowledge that and try to correct it however I want to tell you that this is lesson one an implicit bias to show that we didn't buy by so by asking these questions you didn't know that the impact of people of color the impact of your questions on people of color and if we had this implicit bias we would know and we wouldn't ask these questions so I would like to take this as a moment of learning learning moment and start by correcting ourselves and reflect on what we did and hopefully we'll be able to get the right decision I think we should not waste our time to go after and accuse each other or go after the mayor I think we all have a good dwell. We are learning. I am not here to defend any one of us Neither the mayor, but I think we all have good. Well, and we are learning from our each other mistakes So let's move on and show our community a good leadership Really reflect and show our community. We are united and work toward it. Thank you so much

▶ 3:36:53 Speaker 5: Thank You councillor Jamala Dean councillor McNaught

▶ 3:36:56 Jeff McNaught: thank you madam president and councilman jamal dean and councilman Migliorelli i i want to say that i agree with a lot of what you said um and i think most of us here do um not all of us here do we want to work together we want to get past this um my personal feelings on how we got here are just that um it's not uh an insult against anyone in this virtual room um but i do want to say uh And we did move bottom lines multiple nights saying we could revisit them at the end. We did mention that many times. We said, okay, well, we can move it now and we can revisit this at the end. So I don't want the public to be under the impression that we never committed to taking a hard look at things again in the end. And that really meant the whole budget. So it looks like the technology is striking down on us again. so I'll be very brief I'm I'm I would support this 250 I would also support if we need more time maybe tonight was the wake-up call that we all needed I'd love to buy a cup of coffee and talk about things but maybe the right thing to do is adjourn and ask the mayor where we can find more than $26,000 or really what a better plan is because there is a better one and that's all I'll say because I don't eat up all the cloud storage thank you Thank You council

▶ 3:38:36 Shawn M. MacMaster: McNaught councillor McMaster Thank You madam president I think everyone has raised very valid points tonight if the motion were to go forward I'd be inclined to support it because I do it shouldn't be a matter of twenty six thousand dollars or two hundred and fifty thousand dollars but i'd rather make an investment in a quarter of a million dollars and frankly had two a quarter of a million dollars come before us i think we've all shown an equal commitment to this issue to want to fund it um what i think what is concerning is that and i understand what what council of Jamaleddine is saying but i'm not comfortable uh signaling to the public that will fund twenty six thousand dollars for implicit bias training that amounts to seedlings that we're not able to flourish and that's what concerns me i think that sends a very dangerous uh message to the community that we're making an investment um and even if even if we do that and even if that puts the mayor in a position where he has to come up with it i'd rather you know use um the really the power of this council the mayor will come back with something better because right now it's it's 250 000 from the bottom line or it is essentially um the the appropriation that was before us which i think all of us think is is Is not adequate, so that is, I think what we have to consider that the option is, if we don't go forward on this motion, I think the appropriate thing to do is to say to the mayor, you figure out to us. How you are going to fund this in a way that does the topic justice. because consulate mcnaught said earlier 250 000 probably isn't going to be enough i agree but i don't know what that number is and i think we can figure that out we also have to be mindful that that you know the training we do for some department not going to be necessarily the same implicit bias training that we do for the police department these trainings will need to be customized for the audience so we need to figure out that point as well and i'm not suggesting that the mayor is going to come before us and say that he has all the answers but he has to give us us something better than $26,000 that is earmarked out of the police, because we can't do justice to this topic, which is something that we all want to do. So I think that's the option. Come back to us with something that is genuine, with something that we can all get behind, with something that can bring us as a council together, can unify us, and hopefully start to make things better for this community and mend the fracture that what the mayor's done has caused. So I think that's the other option here. We hold the budget. We hold it. The ball is in the mayor's court. Send us something that is genuine. Send us something that is thoughtful and let's all get behind it. Let's all support it. Who wouldn't support it? And the last thing I would say is that when it comes to the number, the Council of Tramontozzi has identified a minimum. And I know this is a separate debate, but let's just think about this. A minimum, because we didn't get all the information we asked for, of $150,000 in salary increases. So if every city employee did not get a salary increase, not including those that we are contractually obligated to give out, if we didn't give out those salary increases that are completely discretionary on the mayor, we'd have a minimum of $150,000. If we didn't give out the sick leave incentive, that is it's a bonus that the human resources director conceded to that in response to the request for information that I sent is it's not a conversion. It's not, you know, you don't use use time and you lose that time and you get paid. Essentially what it is, is you get to keep your time and you still get $600 per employee. So if we look at the six hundred dollars per employee, noncontractual employee, if we look at a minimum of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars, we can get there in a way that doesn't affect city services. All it does is affect salary increases. So, you know, the mayor

▶ 3:42:52 Speaker 2: should look at that. Thank you, Madam President.

▶ 3:42:56 Jen Grigoraitis: Thank you, Councilor McNaught. Is there anyone wishing to Councilor Eccles?

▶ 3:43:00 Jack Eccles: I would just like to say kind of again, I don't believe that a hard look at the budget is a $250,000 cut off of the bottom line. I think a hard look at the budget is what we've been doing for the last month, going line by line, department by department. And I think that when we talk about a hard look at a budget or a thoughtful way to cut the budget, I don't think that is $250,000 off of the bottom line. I think that if we all as a council affirmed our values that we didn't feel that it was necessary to cut non-contractual employees. And maybe we've had some changes of heart. To me, I just think that a thoughtful look at the budget is not a $250,000 cut off the bottom line. I do think, and this is kind of a separate procedure, if we wanted to talk about the mayor resubmitting something, I know something that is actually 100% confirmed in precedent is that if we were to deny all free cash orders on the agenda tonight, plus $2 million, he would have to submit and maybe be able to resubmit with an appropriate amount, whatever he deems or we deem appropriate for implicit bias training. If we were to go through and deny them all, there's enough time in the fiscal year for him to reformulate and possibly come up with enough money to fund implicit bias training or some other type of anti-racism effort. I think I am personally uncomfortable having not heard from the CFO and not knowing where these cuts are going. There's no accountability when we take the bottom line off of this budget. There's no one to say, and that's why it's written in Mass General Laws and our city charter that the budget goes through the city council, department by department and line by line. That's why we do this. And so there's no accountability when we send it back to the administration. And I don't think many of us even understand how that process works. I have never heard of it happening in in city history. If somebody would like to share a precedent for this. I will happily listen, but I think that what 1 thing we're thinking about, and when we think about being thoughtful, and when we think about proposing new things. The 250,000 are cut off the bottom line is not thoughtful if we wanted the free cash orders to be resubmitted. We could do that. And that would be something where the mayor could come up with more money than just $26,000. He could revisit with his department heads in the short time left in the fiscal year. That's just a suggestion because I don't feel comfortable cutting off of the operating budget. And to go to the councilor Stewart’s point, I don't even know if those funds are available when we cut off the bottom line of the department. And I don't know if any of us do, if someone would like to speak to that, I'm happy to hear it. But I think that, you know, when we talk about cutting off of the bottom line, We don't know where it's going to come from in the whole reason that we have a city council is to prioritize and analyze, you know, things like the budget or free cash out allocations. So we could, we could, we could ask the mayor to redo the free cash allocations because after tonight, if we were to approve all of those, the free cash balance is zero. If we approve all four or five free cash orders on the agenda tonight, but there is about for my back of the napkin calculation, $915 million in there that we could ask the mayor to resubmit with them with an amount of money that felt sufficient um but at this time i'm not inclined again having not heard from a member of the administration having not i don't i don't having not heard any real set precedent for cutting off the bottom line and not an individual department i'm not inclined to support this because again i would like there to be some accountability from the administration i i don't know where those cuts are going to come from when when we send it back. So thank you, Madam President.

▶ 3:46:48 Speaker 5: Thank you, Councilor Eccles, Councilor McMaster.

▶ 3:46:51 Shawn M. MacMaster: Thank you, Madam President. I'm sensitive to the issues Councilor Eccles raised. I think it is a thought and a measured approach, but we are where we are right now. And that's not, if the motion was withdrawn, then I think we could look at something differently, which what I would suggest is that the mayor provide us a memo with at least at least 48 hours notice explaining to us the options and what he proposes i'm not comfortable of not voting on the free cash appropriations without knowing plans i'd like to know plan a plan b plan c i'd like it to be in a memo and i don't want it sent to me in the afternoon before our next meeting if we have a next meeting when i get home and log on after work and try to interpret all of it and with the topic that was before us in the firearms thankfully it's a topic that i can speak of because of my professional background had it been something else i wouldn't have been able to to you know be as prepared and ask the type of questions but i'm not comfortable on a finance issue that might be you know council with senella or or others you know absorbing information at the last minute which has been indicative of this administration so i the option that i think and again if if the motion goes forward i'm supporting it if the motion is withdrawn i think we we have to demand as a council and our president can advocate for us a minimum of 48 hours notice for a memo and that will allow us time to prepare and to ask questions of the the auditor in the city solicitor and frankly i don't want to hear from the mayor on this i want to hear from them because i'm i am tired of the politics and like councilman mcnaught said we're not in this because we want to be career politicians we'll take whatever political consequences come with the decisions that we make. We want to go to bed at night, and I've said this before in this chamber, Consul Tramontozzi knows it, is put our heads on the pillow, at least I do, and I think you all do, and sleep with a clear conscience. So this is not an easy question before us. We want to do what's right, but it can't be a forum where the mayor comes in and says just what he wants to say. He's come before us, and I know he's new, and I give him the benefit of the doubt, but he's not an expert on this he's conceded to that so we should hear from in the future the city solicitor in the auditor and if we have questions for the mayor himself then we can hear from the mayor but that that is the best way I think to do this you know again it goes forward I'm supporting it I have no problem if the motion is withdrawn and if it is I think that's what we what we demand of the administration thank you madam president Thank You councillor McMaster councillor

▶ 3:49:41 Mark Garipay: If the motion is withdrawn, I think we have to hold the administration accountable to come back with some concrete answers. I mean, we have a mayor, that's their position, that's their job, they're supposed to manage the budget. So, if we do hold it to Councilor McMaster's comments, we should require them to come back in front of us. with concrete information and ideas on how to make this happen. Thank you.

▶ 3:50:14 Jen Grigoraitis: Thank you, Councillor Garipay. Councillor McNaught.

▶ 3:50:19 Jeff McNaught: Thank you, Madam President. I just want to say I share the same sentiment. I'm fine with holding the budget for now and asking for a new plan. I think we've made our point that we wanted something more serious, right, as a council. Everyone's acknowledged that 26 isn't enough. Some of us have acknowledged that it's a start. I want more of a start, but I was initially inclined to vote for the 250, but Councilor Eccles has made some great points and Councilor Stewart, and if we're unsure of what happens with that when we cut it, I think the responsible thing to do would be to wait. And before we run out of cloud space, again, I hate to keep talking about that, but it's going to happen. happened before um i think that we should make some sort of uh whether we're going to remove the motion a motion to adjourn but we've got to act quickly because we want this to be recorded and there's still 57 other attendees in the room watching this so um i'll stop there that's my

▶ 3:51:30 John N. Tramontozzi: piece i will withdraw my motion just a point of order yes council chairman um the law requires us to act on the budget within 45 days of the of our receipt of the budget and i'm sorry i'm not good at the calendar math but uh maybe we can but through the to the president that

▶ 3:51:49 Jen Grigoraitis: asked yeah clerk where we at yeah and i believe counselor sanella when he planned out the appropriations committee meetings thoughtfully added in some time to ensure that we so i I feel relatively confident. We're not at 45 days, but if I'm happy to have that confirmed, I'm getting a head nod from the clerk of committees.

▶ 3:52:06 Speaker 1: I believe it is the 25th of June.

▶ 3:52:11 Jen Grigoraitis: If I'm doing my math correctly. Thank you. And thank you for that point of order, Councilor Tramontozzi. So I believe, Councilor Sinella, you were looking to withdraw your motion.

▶ 3:52:17 Christopher Cinella: Withdraw my motion based on hearing back from the mayor on what his plans are, and the fact that we're supposedly gonna run out of cloud space.

▶ 3:52:28 Jen Grigoraitis: So, we, so the motion has been withdrawn and I believe the will of the council is for the administration to come to us. And I would argue council McMaster give us more than 48 hours, even more than 40 hours notice with a different plan. We will obviously need to schedule an additional council meeting to do that. This was our last schedule meeting. So we will work to get that. Scheduled I am going to ask the clerk for an update update on the cloud space or whatever it is.

▶ 3:52:58 Speaker 1: Point of procedure, I believe Councilor Tramontozzi was the seconder on that motion, if that's correct, and he would also need to withdraw.

▶ 3:53:09 Jen Grigoraitis: Yes, I would withdraw the second. Thank you. So we've had Councilor Sonnella and Councilor Tramontozzi withdraw their motion and their second.

▶ 3:53:21 Speaker 1: How are we on storage space? So far I've not gotten any notification. Um, I will tell you that the last time I received notification, they're out of this space for hours. So, um, we can continue. I just, I don't know at this point. I'm still getting. The same, it's not, it doesn't go down in, um. Minute increments, it's just a file size. So.

▶ 3:53:51 Shawn M. MacMaster: Um, I don't know, I don't have the agenda in front of me, but if it's just a free cash appropriations, it might be official to adjourn because I'm sure that 950,000 dollars would be part of whatever the mayor may may propose to us. Also want to just recognize for his motion and consulate trim and shows you for. you for what was just second I do want to commend a council of Sonoma me and I haven't necessarily been on the same page our first term together on on multiple issues but I do think it is an act of courage to be able to say let's make a genuine investment and I think there's been some tough talk here tonight but I think it's been fruitful in that we're at a better place where we want more than twenty six thousand dollars and frankly it's two hundred fifty thousand is the right number maybe maybe not maybe it should have been more as councillor mcnaught said uh if it wasn't for council of sanella uh at least um raising that um i don't think we'd get to the point where we can really begin the work that needs to get done so thank you uh councillor

▶ 3:54:57 Jen Grigoraitis: thank you councillor mcmaster council uh madam clerk uh i just received notification from the

▶ 3:55:01 Speaker 1: and the IT director that we should adjourn now.

▶ 3:55:09 Jen Grigoraitis: Okay, so given our pending technical issues, I will entertain a motion to adjourn. Motion to adjourn. We have a motion to adjourn by Councilor McNaught, seconded by Councilor Stewart. Madam Clerk, can you please call the roll?