ORDER-2020-6 : A Resolution Calling Upon the Administration to Retain an Environmental Specialist to Conduct an Independent Inspection of the Homes Affected by the Brazil Street Sewer Backup

Transcript (~54 min @ 38:16)

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

▶ 38:12 Speaker 3: closed we will proceed now to new business order two zero two zero dash six a resolution calling upon the administration to retain an environmental specialist to conduct an independent inspection of the homes affected by the the Brazil Street Sewer Backup. Alderman McMaster, please.

▶ 38:31 Shawn M. MacMaster: At this time, President Pro Temp Mortimer, I would seek immediate consideration of this matter.

▶ 38:38 Peter D. Mortimer: Alderman McMaster has made a request for immediate consideration. Is there an objection to this request for immediate consideration? Seeing no objection, we will now proceed with this order. Alderman McMaster, you still have the floor.

▶ 38:52 Shawn M. MacMaster: Thank you, President Mortimer. I'd like to thank you, President Pro Temp, for serving in this capacity tonight and for presiding over this meeting. I'd like to thank my colleagues, Alderman Forbes, Alderman Medeiros, and Alderman Zwirko, for joining with me in calling for this special meeting of the Board of Aldermen. I'd like to thank my colleagues who are here. Obviously, it's a summer schedule, and we weren't scheduled to be here, so I appreciate you being here. I'd like to thank all of the residents who spoke, particularly the residents of Brazil Street, and namely the resident from one of the affected homes that came forward. We are here this reason, and this is a resolution I filed based on serious health and safety concerns that have been brought to my attention from the very earliest days of the sewer backup. Not just from the affected residents, but also from their family members. And I think it's important to note tonight that we have residents from three of the four homes who are here. The resident from one of the other homes, the fourth home, is working and trying to get here but had to stay late. Only one resident chose to speak tonight, but I would ask that my colleagues not draw an adverse inference from the one resident who's not here and the others from the two other homes who chose not to speak. Some residents have not spoken at all throughout this situation. Others have already said what they had to say. And frankly, they are spent emotionally and physically from what they've endured over the last 43 days.

▶ 40:46 Shawn M. MacMaster: The fundamental role of government is to promote the general welfare. the primary decree within the field of public health is to do no harm in the case of the health inspections that occurred on Brazil Street we as a city have failed in both regards nothing about the health inspections as described by the affected residents and as confirmed in this very chamber on July 18th by the health director had the welfare of the residents in mind as we heard at that meeting the minimum standard was applied to determine habitability that standard as the mayor explained was based on four determinants working sewer and water working electricity all services that can absorb moisture that had contact with sewage had been cleared and sanitized and that there was a working toilet not one of those determinants account for environmental factors such as toxins bacteria and pathogens now the administration would like us to think that sewer backups are a routine occurrence members of the administration said as much two weeks ago if that's really the case the administration would have to concede by the mayor's own words spoken in this chamber on july 18th that this wasn't just any sewer backup in the In the words of Mayor Inferner, quote, this was an unusual event. The pitch of the pipe, the velocity of the sewage, and the fact that the homes were all built on slabs, all made this an extraordinary case. I want to say that one more time. This was an unusual event. The pitch of the pipe, the velocity of the sewage, and the fact that the homes were all built on slabs all made this an extraordinary case. So this begs the question, if sewer backups are common, and this was an extraordinary case, why then would the city apply the minimum standard for a health inspection? Not to minimize any sewer backup, but this was not a backup that was confined to a utility sink in an unfinished basement. This backup completely destroyed the living spaces of four homes, displacing 11 residents. It ruined their property and it ruined their lives. Their lives have been anything but normal for the last 43 days. A veteran who served in Iraq and Afghanistan forced to sleep on an air mattress in what was once a bedroom that now looks more like a workshop. Three little boys who are suffering from back aches because they've been forced to share a couch as their sleeping space. resident who still has no toilet who's been forced to use the public bathroom at local grocery stores

▶ 43:48 Shawn M. MacMaster: newlyweds deprived of their honeymoon so the one thing which i agree with mayor inferno on is that this was and is an extraordinary case but a case that should have called for an extraordinary response and an extraordinary health inspection the health inspection and i'm reluctant to even call it that because i don't think it even deserves that characterization was inadequate and flawed considering the extraordinary circumstances on top of the circumstances referenced by the mayor the extent and severity of the backup took longer than 48 hours to clean and sanitize on the saturday following the backup a professional cleanup and restoration firm was still on scene at one of the homes and didn't return to another home until early the following week Sewage remains trapped to this day in an HVAC system at one of the homes. Another home still has floors and walls that were contaminated and have yet to be removed to allow for more comprehensive cleaning. This incident, as you've heard, was categorized as level three contamination by a certified professional restoration firm. Level three contamination, otherwise referred to as black water, is highly contaminated and often contains a variety of microorganisms, viruses, bacteria, and intestinal parasites, all of which can pose serious health and safety risks to the residents. The minimum standard applied by the health director in her hasty inspection was not commensurate to the seriousness of the backup, nor did it account for the critical health and safety considerations, especially when accounting for the four young children ranging from five to seven years old, and the one senior citizen, all of whom by virtue of their age are at an increased risk for health problems due to exposure to sewage contaminants. Let's go back for a moment to June 25th, five days after the incident. I emailed Mayor Inferner and other members of the administration asking how the city would eventually determine the homes as being safe for habibility. Fearing the worst, I wrote, quote, when cleaning and sanitizing has been completed, what exactly occurs to evaluate the contamination of the homes? As it took longer than 48 hours for the homes to be completely cleaned and sanitized, I cannot help but be concerned about toxicity levels. Does an independent environmental scan occur using tools and technology to assess the homes? If so, will that be done before the residents start rebuilding? not what type of assessment specifically has or will be done to evaluate the safety of the homes before investments are made and residents reoccupy them that email went without a response for 15 days and within that time period as you've heard two of the homes were approved by the health inspector as being fit for human occupancy and after having been certified as being safe two separate problems came to light at both of those homes raw sewage trapped inside one home and sewer roaches in another since these problems came to light I have called in the administration twice to retain an independent environmental specialist which Mayor Inferno has declined to do if the administration is so confident in the health inspection that occurred and in light of all of the criticism and scrutiny that it has caused, why not have an independent inspector come in to confirm the health director's findings? Why not bring in someone to validate her work? Now, if the mayor after tonight chooses to do so, and the inspection certifies that the homes are environmentally safe for habitation, that won't necessarily exonerate the health director. That would speak more to the cleaning and sanitizing work that was done combined with a degree of luck. So why won't the administration bring in an outside expert? Well, because the administration is afraid of what the inspection might find. And unlike the independent investigation that occurred for which the mayor hired a private engineering company to report on the reasons for the sewer backup, the type of independent inspection which I'm calling for presents too many unknowns. unknowns that could potentially be an indictment of the city for having initially certified the homes of being habitable and this is what the administration is afraid of because the fact remains that the health director officially cleared homes despite existing problems as being safe for human occupancy the mayor continues to cite the health director's 30 years of experience in the field of public health, but 30 years of experience doesn't make her a sewer epidemiologist or a wastewater epidemiologist or an environmental scientist. That's like me saying that my 21 years in law enforcement, which is also a broad field, would somehow make me an expert in ballistics, in fingerprinting, when the reality is that I know very little about either. A true professional can only have credibility when he or she is able to recognize that they don't know everything that they don't have all of the answers and by not being afraid to seek the assistance of others we heard from the health director that there is no state standard by which to test for toxins and bacteria the mayor has said the same all of this is nothing but a red herring

▶ 49:23 Shawn M. MacMaster: i find the stubbornness of this defensive posture insulting because the standards argument has no merits. Just because a government agency like the Department of Public Health hasn't set standards by which to test for something doesn't mean that scientific standards don't exist. By way of example, the Department of Public Health hasn't set standards to test for pollen levels, but an allergist or another type of doctor can look to the pollen index and determine whether or not the level is high enough to present health implications. The Department of Fire Services hasn't set local standards for fire departments to test for carbon monoxide, but scientific standards exist and are used to help firefighters assess if the levels of carbon monoxide in a home are unsafe. The Executive Office of Public Safety hasn't set investigative or prosecutorial standards by which levels of blood can be measured at a crime scene. The Melrose Police Department, for instance, may respond to a suspected crime scene that has been completely cleaned by someone who committed a violent crime but the police are still able to trace for remnants of blood that can be detect that can't be detected by the naked eye

▶ 50:40 Peter D. Mortimer: alderman mcmaster 10 minutes have elapsed if you could yield the floor at this time you will of course be given an opportunity to speak again i'm sure no alderman will object under rule 13 if you do speak again so if you could uh wrap it up at this point and then maybe you'll have a chance

▶ 50:59 Shawn M. MacMaster: to speak again if if i could just ask respectfully president pro temp for a little latitude i am

▶ 51:05 Peter D. Mortimer: close to to finishing uh do any other all other alderman all right with that sir i would yield my time in order for him to finish all right it takes a m and you can deduct it from my time all right so with that well we'd let you go back but if no alderman have a problem with continuation please continue alderman mcmaster thank you president pro temp mortimer thank you

▶ 51:20 Shawn M. MacMaster: alderman forbes the executive office of public safety hasn't set an investigative or prosecutorial standard as i mentioned but the melrose police department for instance may respond to a suspected crime scene that has been completely cleaned by someone who committed a violent crime but as i said the police are still able to trace for remnants of blood that can't be detected by the naked eye so a detective may find small traces of blood for instance let's say in the kitchen of a home but that evidence might not be representative of someone who at some point may have cut

▶ 51:58 Shawn M. MacMaster: themselves while preparing a mail. So it may be more representative of that, but then the same kind of forensic chemical testing conducted in the basement of a house that reveals large traces of blood and blood splatter, there need not be an established governmental standard to tell crime scene investigators that a crime happened in the basement of a house and that a crime didn't happen in the kitchen of a house where blood was found. That determination is based on evidence gathered

▶ 52:25 Shawn M. MacMaster: using investigatory techniques, scientific analysis, and professional judgment. It's no different when it comes to testing in the aftermath of a sewer backup. Environmental specialists don't need bureaucrats to set standards for them or to tell them how to do their job. Environmental specialists exist for a reason. They serve a legitimate purpose. Their job as scientists is to investigate the environmental conditions of a space, and they use scientific standards to do so. They rely on air quality tests, ACP concentration tests, moisture meters, pathogen swabs, borescope cameras, and post remediation verification reports. That's what needs to happen at the four homes on Brazil Street. The 11 residents deserve nothing less. Finally, I would just say that I was troubled by much of what was contained in the statement released by the mayor yesterday. Specifically, the mayor's reference to insurance costs is something that I found bothersome. She wrote, quote, insurance limits what we can and should do. If we provide assistance over and above what our insurance company deems appropriate, we not only defend the purpose of having insurance, but we would expose the taxpayers of Melrose to uncontrollable costs. The Mayor's statement is unambiguous. It says that public policy decisions in Melrose are driven in part by the will of the insurance industry. Are we serious? Maybe it's time that we get rid of our liability insurance then and hold ourselves accountable to the public by setting a line item in our municipal operating budget for self-insurance because the avarice of the insurance industry is never going to have the best interest of our residents in mind. And policy and protocols should never be driven by anything other than to promote the general welfare or by anyone other than elected representatives. Let us tonight make a unified statement that Melrose can and should do better by the victims of the Brazil Street Sewer Disaster. I ask for your support in urging the Mayor to make this happen. Thank you, President Pro Temp. Mortimer.

▶ 54:35 Peter D. Mortimer: Thank you very much, Alderman McMaster. Are there any other aldermen wishing to be heard at this time? Alderman Forbes is first in queue. Alderman Butte, did I see your hand? Alderman Lipper-Garabedian, did I see your hand?

▶ 54:50 Scott M. Forbes: Okay. proceed please proceed alderman forks thank you president pro temp i appreciate the uh comments of my colleague alderman mcmaster i thank everybody for being here tonight as this is a special meeting of the melrose board of alderman what i want to do is just kind of reiterate the comments that i said at our last meeting because i still don't think that they were answered you know any cleaning company in this case that serve pro is contracted to perform the cleanup and sanitation of a home now they're required to do their jobs that are defined by regulations that make up their standard operating procedures so after they clean up these homes and perform that work the question always lingers who certifies that that work was done to code and we haven't gotten an answer on that but we found out at our last meeting that our health director simply accepts the work done is being acceptable and moves on to the next item on her list to deem a home habitable now why are we afraid to collect additional data I mean it's 2019 wouldn't the city want to have additional information that would help them make a well-informed common-sense decision not only to make sure that the homes are habitable but to provide peace of mind to the residents that were affected because you really can't put a price tag on that they want to move back into their homes they want to resume life as normal they want to get back into a routine schedule now that has all been interrupted since this incident

▶ 56:22 Scott M. Forbes: happened and according to the administration's guidelines you could literally have two homes side by side together one was done to the line on code one was done without code shortcuts could be taken but if they look identical and if the report is identical they will accept that report as fact and

▶ 56:45 Scott M. Forbes: move on that is unacceptable if that were my home or anybody's home here wouldn't you want to have somebody to just certify that the work has been done that's not a big ask and again I just want to just you know I was looking at the report as well and I just 12 Brazil Street just pops out at my mind the home is deemed habitable for occupancy on June 28th however there was still sewage in the home through the vent system so on july 2nd the tenant told the health director about this servpro confirmed that sewage still existed in the property at which time the health director reversed her decision and now the property is deemed inhabitable what are we doing the truth

▶ 57:31 Scott M. Forbes: is that 12 brazil street never should have been cleared for occupancy in the first place if we simply walk in peek into rooms do the eyeball test and simply check the box I mean is this the standard that we want to have when clearing a property that was labeled a heightened category 3 sewage backup I don't think so the health director never to call never bother to call Servpro before going through the property which is a failure in her protocol it was only after being informed of the issues by the tenant that there was sewage underneath the home and the vents so again if you have no data certifying the home is free of contaminants how can anyone make a well-informed decision or determination that it's okay to move back in i cannot answer that i'm not sure if anybody in this room can answer that but we have an opportunity to do something here this evening i support this resolution wholeheartedly because i think it's the right thing to do thank you thank you alderman forbes alderman Bewtra please thank you um first i just wanted

▶ 58:41 Manisha Bewtra: to acknowledge that i i apologize that i was not here on the july 18th meeting i was um again although that was a regular committee meeting night i don't think we were expected to have a committee meeting i was away for a very close friend's wedding i did submit questions regarding order 2020-4 which are appended to the minutes and to the meeting order but i do want to with a little latitude i'll watch my time just summarize some of my thoughts from that and then kind of about tonight's resolution specifically um i do believe that there were some missteps from from this administration on the response uh that we saw in brazil street i don't feel enough compassion was shown and there was a lack of on the ground presence the day it happened and in the many days following uh it's really unfortunate how slow this administration was to inform us the alderman to um the on the ground response to the community to having a protocol with speaking with the press and to inform the broader public across melrose on what is going on on the ground i think particularly not notifying the ward alderman and the president of the board of aldermen immediately by phone and then the rest of us thereafter within a few hours of this happening was very i just find really unfortunate um

▶ 1:00:21 Manisha Bewtra: and I think a lot of I did watch the full three and a half hours so I thought you know there were some interesting questions raised about how we've responded to other backups and other issues so I do agree that we you know need to think about how we're going to be ahead of these potential future backups and having a clear protocol and just generally a better protocol for how we as the mayor's office and the Board of Aldermen are communicate with each other but also how we communicate with the broader public I understand sort of the issues on kind of the city and the admission of fall but I do think that we have room for improvement in our communications and constituent services protocols I do think that the memo from the mayor's office today was helpful and I I if there is more information that the mayor's office can share in terms of details on on these inspections that have happened please provide them I think it's I'm it's unfortunate that there's no one here from the administration to kind of speak to some of the things in the memo but I do appreciate that we received that I think it seems like it required a lot of

▶ 1:01:46 Manisha Bewtra: pressure from us as the aldermen from the residents of Brazil Street and the broader community to be able to even get all of these responses and I want to see that change I do think that the that you know I do think some of the allegations I heard of some of the professionals working in City Hall are a bit troubling I understand where they're coming from I think for me there is value in that professional expertise but I do think that there's room for improvement in bedside manner if we want to use like a medical analogy that was this was an incredibly devastating situation and and I think all involved all the department heads involved really needed to have that compassion I think there's been a really solid case made for make doing these environmental inspections but I do have some questions as to how we will go about that given that there isn't a clear-cut set of measures in terms of how will determine that the the homes are safe to inhabit again and a timeline for how long that would take to find someone independent so I guess my questions to Alderman McMaster perhaps and maybe through our discussion here tonight are you know do we have we done some research on who might be able to do this and I do think a lot of the public trust has been eroded and my concern is doing this independent investigation I'm worried might not really I think it will go some way towards restoring that trust but it concerns me too that that because this isn't something that can be necessarily scientifically pinpointed that it may raise more questions and not necessarily fully satisfy satisfy folks in the community that said I also see this as kind of like if you go to a doctor and you get a diagnosis all of your friends yourself even the doctor themselves might say once you get a second opinion and I think that this is an opportunity for us to get a second opinion as a way of getting some more data some more information on what really happened in these four homes and for us to I guess pursue a path forward I do want to see a really clear scope of work so that some of those may be a conversation with the the residents of those four homes alderman McMaster and the mayor's administration maybe together can put together this sort of like here's what we want to see delivered so that we'll feel satisfied that the work was done and and I guess just to conclude my comments on another note one of the things I found really heartwarming in tonight's comments from residents and as well as the comments from July 18th is seeing how tight-knit the folks on Brazil Street have maybe become through this incident but from just hearing from Alderman McMaster and other folks from that from that block I guess or the short street the the lemonade stand that happened right away and everything in terms of active residents that have participated in public process here prior to this incident it's just really great and heartwarming to see the way the community has banded together on that in that neighborhood and I think to reflect on some of the comments we heard from those residents I think those really are the values that we as Mel Rose are really all about and I think I think I hope that we can restore that public

▶ 1:05:43 Speaker 3: trust through this resolution thank you very much alderman Butcher alderman

▶ 1:05:49 Monica C. Medeiros: Madero's please thank you thank you at our last meeting we learned that the city administration applied the minimum standards for to determine habitability of these homes this is a situation where I think we should be going above and beyond as a city we should take every possible step any and all steps that we can to ensure the health and safety of these residences and to ensure that the people who live there that the residents feel safe to come home so to me this is simple it's the right thing to do and I support this resolution Thank You

▶ 1:06:32 Peter D. Mortimer: alderman Medeiros alderman chairman Tosi please thank you first I want to

▶ 1:06:40 John N. Tramontozzi: i i do appreciate alderman mcmaster's a representation of his ward and specifically the residents of brazil street and i appreciate his concerns that in representing the the citizens there and coming forward with a resolution

▶ 1:07:06 John N. Tramontozzi: um but i think we've got to look at this as the bigger picture and as one of public comment mentioned that this has brought light to the fact that we have to look at the city and its infrastructure and we we need to look forward that look towards how we can fix our infrastructure so that this problem never occurs again I feel terrible about what has happened we all do no one what would can appreciate and understand and live through what these residents of brazil street have lived through and it's a it's a terrible situation we would never want this to happen again and i would hope that the administration going forward will put together a plan for public safety and and and review our sewer system and the see what plan of action they have going forward and making some necessary repairs i think that's what we have to look at and that's what we're missing in this whole thing that's a bigger picture and the reason i'm saying that is because

▶ 1:08:15 John N. Tramontozzi: um i have troubles with with the resolution uh the resolution of this issue itself uh regarding brazil street has and should be between our city representatives through our insurance company and the homeowners representatives insurance companies i'm familiar with the insurance business as an attorney and i've dealt with insurance companies yet you there is a principle you must cooperate with your insurance companies and assist them in their investigation and the adjustments that are necessary to the claim you also have to mitigate your damages in the city and our administration has done so through their insurance company and i don't i'm not going to reread the the administration's letter dated June 31 2019 which is part of the record here but you can see that the city has gone out of its way and has paid towards the cleanup and has paid towards for lodging over and above and has worked with their the the city's insurance company and the homeowners insurance companies have been working with the city's insurance company as well and to the point where from what I understand regarding number 18 Brazil Street the there's a signed settlement and a check has been issued at number 12 an offer has been extended to the owner and it's just we're just waiting to hear back at number nine the renter has signed a release and a check was issued at number nine an offer has been extended to the owner and we're just waiting to hear back from the owner the number twelve the renter has signed the check release and has received compensation and number 13 the city insurance is still working with the owner that's what you have to have here to be accomplished I am NOT convinced that the that we need a guy this country in the city in the state doesn't need another independent counsel looking into this situation we need the the the insurance companies to work together um and um and i think that can be accomplished and i cannot support the uh the resolution as worded uh i i can support half of it uh and i have a a an amendment that i'd like to offer uh which would allow me to support it and And if it's supported by anybody else, that's fine, but I'll make a motion to amend the resolution after everybody's had an opportunity to speak about it, and I'll hold off on that for the moment. Unless you want me to introduce it now.

▶ 1:11:14 Speaker 3: It's your choice.

▶ 1:11:16 Speaker 7: Yeah, I'll do that then.

▶ 1:11:16 Peter D. Mortimer: As procedurally, if somebody makes another motion after you yield the floor, your time may have passed. i understand so so it's it may it may be now it may be not possible later if someone makes another

▶ 1:11:33 John N. Tramontozzi: motion that gets seconded and is before us right so at this time i'd like them uh to make a motion to uh amend the language therefore be it resolved and add in and i and i have it typed up and i can distribute it to everybody to get the actual wording but i'll read it therefore be resolved We, the members of the Board of Aldermen, do hereby urge the administration, through its insurer, Trident Insurance, and the homeowners and or occupants individually or through their respective insurers, of the four homes involved in this incident to work together in a timely manner to settle or mitigate the damages done so as to return the homes to their habitable condition as existed prior to the happening of this incident. further we the members of the board of aldermen request the administration to provide this board with status reports every 10 days hereafter that's the extent of my proposal to amend the resolution with that amendment i could support it but i cannot support it as

▶ 1:12:37 Peter D. Mortimer: worded at this point thank you uh alderman chair matosi for offering that amendment And Madam Clerk, Madam Clerk, did you both get the language? Do you both have it? All right, you have hard copies. I have hard copies. For our clerks.

▶ 1:12:52 John N. Tramontozzi: I'll be happy to distribute it too if anybody's interested.

▶ 1:12:57 Peter D. Mortimer: Do all of the Aldermen feel they have completely apprehended and comprehended the proposed amendment? There's hard copies. Everybody feel like you want hard copies?

▶ 1:13:30 Peter D. Mortimer: Alderman Tramontozzi has proposed an amendment. The amendment does require a second before we proceed. Is there a second? The amendment fails for lack of a

▶ 1:13:52 Peter D. Mortimer: second. All right, so you still have the floor, Alderman Tramontozzi.

▶ 1:14:01 John N. Tramontozzi: Well, I'll yield the floor at this time then. Thank you. Thank you very much,

▶ 1:14:07 Peter D. Mortimer: Alderman Tramontozzi I think we have Alderman's Worker that I see your hand

▶ 1:14:10 Michael P. Zwirko: Thank You mr. president Pro Tem I first just for some housekeeping purposes today we did get additional correspondence from the mayor's office which I believe was cited by Alderman Tramontozzi I move now to add those

▶ 1:14:24 Peter D. Mortimer: correspondences to the order thank you very much I think it already is in IQM

▶ 1:14:29 Speaker 3: two there's one there was a first one there was yesterday afternoon there was

▶ 1:14:32 Peter D. Mortimer: corrected email that was sent out right oh yes we've all seen that is that an iqm2 yet a new one no all right okay thank you uh alderman Search has made a procedural motion to add the most recent correspondence from mayor inferno second to the record and iqm2 duly seconded by alderman boyce cell all in favor of said procedural motion please say aye aye any opposed hearing none that updated correspondence will be added to the record please proceed alderman's worker

▶ 1:15:05 Michael P. Zwirko: you have the floor Thank You mr. president pro tem I'll be brief I just wanted to say I do support this resolution and I support the efforts by Alderman McMaster in representing his ward and the residents of Brazil Street it's a pleasure to see most of you here this evening you know my hope with this resolution really is is to reignite conversations clearly there are some affected homeowners here that don't feel that the standards either set by the insurance company or the standards set by the city are adequate enough let's have a conversation if we don't know what standards should be set talk to them what would be acceptable by you for us to employ or hire a service to meet the standards that you would like so that we can get you back into your homes as soon as possible it's a simple conversation to have that's all you need to do my hope is that with passage of this resolution it's enough momentum to get that conversation to occur so that we can get to a resolution thank you mr. president pro tem those are all my comments thank you very much alderman

▶ 1:16:09 Robert A. Boisselle: Suarco alderman Boisselle please this has been an interesting evening in from all the aldermen who have discussed the situation I have one concern in the be a resolved section the term comprehensive inspection in the private sector

▶ 1:16:27 Robert A. Boisselle: comprehensive inspection can mean a great deal and it'd be nice to understand what are you looking for in a comprehensive inspection just for air quality you could have what they call a whole air sampling which is anything from grab bags to air to solid cultures and chemical and even chemistry You can have active air sampling, which is basically continuous sampling, but that's a long delay because you're just gathering data, data, data, until you, over a certain time period, you do an analysis of that data. You can have passive sampling, which is basically you walk into, like the fire department has, when they go into their situation, they have their equipment. that's what they call the read instrument that can tell you the concentration of a particular gas methane gas in a room and so forth and also you have what they call impingement sampling this is where you're actually sending the air sample into a bubbler which contains chemicals which will give you an analysis it will turn color or when you do spectrometry experience with it or even flame ionization and there's a lot of chemical terms and and diagnostics that can be used here so it'd be interesting to when you go for an investigation you come with specific situations you're looking for if you're looking for swab testings for fecal contamination that's what you should ask for you don't you're going to get a whole series of any types of other types of bacteria and there are standards that are out there that you may be violating which has no disease involvement but you have a lot of you have a lot of this type of bacteria in the house especially if you have roaches in your home if you're spraying that you have insecticides who've already contaminated the site with insecticides or pesticides at this point you got to be careful with that so my recommendation is that this resolution goes through we make sure we know what we're doing because you're going to get a lot of information in a comprehensive investigation of data and you have to tighten up the standard to get that and you should be prepared to answer that and the question is who's going to be responsible for this individual or company and there are many companies out there to do comprehensive inspection and examinations and there are individuals who do what they call home inspections where they put the rate on device on there in your cellar and they leave it there for two months and you get a result and do an analysis with that but the question is who in the administration will be overseeing this investigation is it going to be DPW is Is it going to be the health department, or is it going to be the city solicitor, or is it going to be an independent individual who's monitoring the monitor at this point? So let's be careful when we're ready to do the investigation to be prepared to answer questions on what to expect and what we want to find and what we should be finding or not find to make this home habitable. And also, we may want to have a certificate of occupancy, a CO from the Inspectorial Services to go along with this. Really, the inspectorial services are really the people that say you can go into your house and live there at that point because they look at the health, the construction, electrical, plumbing, and everything else. And there's a whole series of inspections that you have to go through to get that certificate of operation. So that should be included with the final product. Thank you, Pro Tem. Thank you, Alderman Boycelle. Alderman Lipper-Garabedian please thank you President Portimer and all my

▶ 1:20:48 Kate Lipper-Garabedian: colleagues for being here tonight and thank you very much to the residents who came to speak tonight as well as a few weeks ago and to those who have sent us written comments as well I believe in support of this resolution I don't have a lot to say because I think it's really mostly been said I support this resolution I think that using standard operating procedures for an incident that makes national news is insufficient I think about how I would feel if I were in one of these homes and it has always been a nightmare of mine with a finished basement and two young children about the possibility of a backup so I can only imagine what it what it would be like and based on my own empathetic feelings about this the the the work that we heard has been done and some obvious glaring emissions that occurred during it there does not seem to me to be any reason why we wouldn't be as aggressive as possible in ensuring that our neighbors feel confident to return to their homes and the memo that we received yesterday from the mayor didn't provide me with sufficient data to to be able to to feel differently about that saying that testing is not supported by scientific standards or that these tests have no merit without any citations without any you know resources that I could read and deep dive deeply into was insufficient for me to outweigh what I would you know the experiences that I'm hearing from my neighbors the evidence that the work that has been done to date missed some things simply having a memo which certainly I appreciated the updates about each house in some regard but that's that's not enough just to state that without giving me more to read and to and to better understand why we would say that an additional investigation would not be appropriate at this time. And I think that I'll yield the floor.

▶ 1:23:06 Peter D. Mortimer: Thank you very much, Alden Lipper-Garabedian. Alderman McMaster, please.

▶ 1:23:13 Shawn M. MacMaster: Thank you, President Pro Temp, mon amour. I just wanted to address a couple items that were brought up by my colleagues first. Alderman Bewtra asked questions about the standards, and I guess what I would say to that is that environmental science is an academic and a professional field, and that scientists who work in the field can interpret unsafe levels and determine really what those levels mean through data and through analysis. And I think the two public health professionals and medical doctors who are here spoke to that to some degree, that there's a way to look and ascertain if levels are unsafe. as I said in the other examples I brought up. You don't need governmental standards for pollen, for an allergist to say the pollen level is unsafe, for governmental standards for carbon monoxide to say that carbon monoxide is unsafe at a certain level. And a number of other examples that I could come up with, and I just chose to focus on three. They can look at or be directed by a moisture meter that says that the moisture in a home is over 60%. going to you know homes may have some level of moisture and some levels of of mold but if it reaches a certain level a scientist who works in the environmental science field can say that's not safe and then they work in concert with a contractor to point to where those problems are and it might call for you know pulling up um thresholds there are still thresholds and and other structural components of the homes that haven't been taken down at some of the homes. I know Alderman Forbes has been in one of the homes with me. There's still a lot of work to be done. There was a resident last night who was removing a couch. And this is actually a resident removing a couch, which is the poorest item, from a home that was deemed fit for human occupancy, pending one thing, the installation of a toilet. one of those four determinants that were cited by the mayor and the health director points to any item that absorbs any type of moisture is unsafe and this is 42 days later there was a couch being removed yesterday and that was a home in which i was in that night where sewage had seeped into as one of the residents said in a different home every room was impacted i don't think people really understand and the administration understands the size and scope of this these are very small homes imagine every every area of your home infiltrated by sewage and this isn't hyperbole completely destroyed so i think um you know they they can test for that and they'll be able to say what it means you know they can find mold and say well that's natural mold you're going to have some mold in your bathroom you're going to have some mold in your basement you know there's going to be some moisture but they'll say what the remedy is you need to bring in a humidifier or a dryer you need to have better ventilation you need another air source so so that can be done I think it is important for the environmental inspector to work in concert with a contractor I think if we and I anticipate this is going to pass tonight based on what I've heard from my colleagues I think just having somebody come in and picking an arbitrary date doesn't work I think you know there's one home that is it has been deemed fit for human occupancy that is very very far along in the rebuilding process and was the home that was hardest hit but that home is where it is in the rebuilding process because the owner of the home is very handy as a contractor he can do that type of work so that may present a problem in the sense of there's some work that's been done in the in those homes 13 brazil street and they're represented uh here tonight and did not speak they spoke at the last meeting um there was just a surface level cleaning so there's there's still tiles that need to be pulled up and the the walls need to come up above the studs and there's still work that needs to be done uh you know in the hvac system at another home and at 18 brazil street i mean the bathroom's not not done in 18 brazil street there's still some questions about the floor there's a threshold that clearly if you look at the threshold you know there can be uh sewage that's seeped under there so i think the environmental scientist is going to be able to determine what those levels are if those levels you know are normal or if they're unsafe if they're unsafe based on what data based on what levels and then be able to work in concert with the homeowners and with the uh and with the contractors um i do think um alderman boyce made some good points um as did alderman Zwirko i think what we can do is i'm not i'm not sure it's necessary to although i'd consider it um change the word comprehensive i think if if the the administration is willing to collaborate with this board uh and we could uh as alderman Zwirko said come up with criteria um that the the the residents are comfortable with and maybe even work with you know our neighbors on brazil street who are medical doctors and public health professionals and try to you know determine you know what alderman Boisselle said well what are we really looking for so we don't go on a wild goose chase or so they're not we're spending so much money that we're finding all types of things that we don't need to know um i don't think the resolution you know needs to say that i think um if the if the administration is willing to collaborate with us and i'm not sure that it will because this hasn't been a collaborative process but that's going to be on the administration to decide um to my my good friend uh alderman Tramontozzi um for whom i have great respect and affection and he's been very helpful to me throughout my first year on on the board uh and i've reached out to him multiple times and i've asked him procedural questions and i've asked him for his advice uh and um and i appreciate what he says but i i just and he is an expert in insurance i don't doubt that um and if i needed some legal advice in the insurance field i may call alderman Tramontozzi but um my my concern is this is where i respectfully disagree is that insurance companies have their bottom line in mind plain and simple they make business decisions they don't make human decisions that are driven by compassion and by justice and i think it's important just to state publicly and i've had you know conversations with the the four homes the individuals who live there agreeing to settlements and i don't know the details of the settlements i have no idea because i've made it very clear from the beginning that questions about about settlements whether it's insurance or law that is beyond my purview my role has been to be a neighborhood support and an advocate so i have no idea other than what the mayor has represented in the email and the fact that some of the residents have said that the insurance companies have reached out to them i know nothing about the the nature of the settlements but what i would say is that just because somebody agrees to an insurance settlement doesn't mean that they're happy or satisfied it means that they feel like they won't get anything better there's no room for negotiating with insurance companies it's take it or leave it plain and simple so people are are eager to move on they're eager to fix their homes they're eager to go out and buy new property everything in these homes were destroyed they have nothing as somebody said i think it was alderman Medeiros people are homeless or alderman Peter people are homeless so they they feel like you know whatever was offered is at least enough where they can start to move on because this has been 43 days they don't want this in the news anymore i don't think any of us want this in the news the administration doesn't want it in the news but the reason that we're here is not because of the residents it's not because of me it's because of concerns that haven't been addressed that's why on june on june 25th if the administration responded and said you know what sean we hadn't thought about that thanks for bringing that to light let's talk about that what would that look like and made a decision then two issues may not have surfaced and then maybe there could have been you know some data that was produced early on to really figure out what these homes even look like from a forensic standpoint so you know they they want to move on um i think that's that's all i have to say i think i addressed the points that my my colleagues brought up and i appreciate everyone's input thank you

▶ 1:31:37 Peter D. Mortimer: thank you alderman mcmaster seeing no alderman wishing to be heard at this point the order is

▶ 1:31:41 Shawn M. MacMaster: before us mr. president pro temp I would make a motion for passage at this time recognizing that this is a full board meeting I don't believe this needs to be sent anywhere and I would make a motion for passage if that passes favorably what I would do then at that point is make a motion to place on file well it's

▶ 1:31:58 Peter D. Mortimer: it's respectfully it's it's one of the other if it passes then it's then it's

▶ 1:32:06 Shawn M. MacMaster: that's the end of it so I would make a motion mr. president pro temp at this

▶ 1:32:10 Peter D. Mortimer: time for passage second all the McMaster has made a motion for passage of this order duly seconded by alderman Forbes seeing no further discussion we're ready to call for the vote all in favor please say aye aye any opposed opposed all right the is this order does pass it required six to pass and that's the