ORDER-2018-121 : Amending Rule 48 of the Rules of Order of the Melrose Board of Aldermen

Transcript (~10 min @ 1:04:48)

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

▶ 1:04:37 Francis X. Wright Jr.: At 8.34, I apologize. I clearly brought the wrong reading glasses tonight, so I'm struggling a little. We have four items before us this evening. The first order is Order 2018-121, amending Rule 48 of the Rules of Order of the Melrose Board of Aldermen.

▶ 1:05:10 Michael P. Zwirko: a motion on that uh i would offer uh this i was the the maker of this particular order i i would make a motion uh or i would move excuse me that uh this uh be recommended for passage out of the

▶ 1:05:26 Francis X. Wright Jr.: legal and legislative committee second the motion okay um president Zwirko has uh moved for passage seconded by alderman mortimer um president Zwirko and just to give a little bit background on this

▶ 1:05:34 Michael P. Zwirko: the president typically before if any new members of the board of aldermen are elected in the previous election historically speaking there the board of aldermen has held a non-binding caucus in which they elect a president for the following year that election generally speaking has historically occurred in december as a non-binding election because of course the new members of the Board of Aldermen are not yet fully sworn in members of the board and therefore can't actually take a vote that would hold this change which strikes out particular language and places some would actually remove the non-binding election for board president in December and hold only one meeting which would occur in January at a time when the any new members of the board as as well as existing incumbents are sworn in for their next term so that is simply just the change to rule 48 for background purposes any further

▶ 1:06:44 Kate Lipper-Garabedian: discussion sure thank you president's worker for bringing this forward and for giving a good summary I mean I'd certainly defer to the veterans on the board on this question who have gone through perhaps more than one caucus which is what I've gone through and I know that the most recent events were very unusual and singular and how things played out I mean there was some value to me as a new member and coming in December and sort of sitting at the table and having a sort of sense of what was coming in terms of a quasi orientation which we don't have otherwise I know the school committee also does something similar where prior to their first formal meeting in January they did I think prospectively select a chair but I do believe after a quick look at some of the other city charters that this is not very common to have a caucus so I'd be interested in hearing from others but I'm certainly open to

▶ 1:07:45 John N. Tramontozzi: this change. Alderman Tramontozzi followed by Alderman Medeiros. In my opinion the december caucus has outlived its usefulness in uh purpose and i think this is an appropriate change

▶ 1:08:02 Monica C. Medeiros: that's it thank you thank you i'm not a voting member of this committee uh however and i appreciate the sentiment here i i do think there is some value to the caucus uh you know we've been through been through quite a few of them now and although you know this past year was certainly tumultuous and it's not a binding vote that we take I do think it is helpful to have some idea of who the probable president will be come January and have that person have some time to meet with department heads talk with some of the other members and sort of make a plan for the next year this year has been like I said very tumultuous again it feels like here we are in in March almost April and sort of just getting going so I do think there is some benefit to it this year had as an exceptional circumstance but so when this comes before the four bullet board I don't expect to support thank you any

▶ 1:09:09 Manisha Bewtra: other comments um lost my train of thought for a second so one concern I would have is you know like in this unlikely scenario where maybe there were 11 new members what would happen then I think you know some of the benefit of having the caucus in advance are that you have that extra time to kind of it's a non binding vote but you have the extra time to acquaint yourself with the various board members additionally I mean I did I did personally find it a little awkward to come in before I had been sworn in so I can kind of see it either way but I do have some concerns about having the nomination in the

▶ 1:10:01 Scott M. Forbes: election on the same day thank you mr. chairman I can kind of see this going both ways as well I know that last year was probably the well it was the first time in my experience where the caucus didn't go or the actual vote didn't go the same way as the caucus did however the candidates do have to announce themselves within a certain amount of time so even if we didn't have that caucus per se we still kind of know who the players are going to be and I would believe that anyone that would want the position of president of the board is going to do their due diligence, reach out to department heads, and have those conversations beforehand. So I kind of agree with Alderman Tramontozzi, where the caucus may have simply run its course. We still have the appropriate amount of time. The only difference is that we haven't really come out and said who we're going to vote for a month prior. So I think we're still going to all prepare ourselves the same way, and like I said, the are going to have to come out and and make that announcement in the same time frame so there will be plenty of time for discussion in deliberation so um i could i could very much uh easily support

▶ 1:11:15 Speaker 1: this order thank you mr chairman any other comments i have a comment um i've been through

▶ 1:11:18 Francis X. Wright Jr.: 13 of these caucuses and I believe they have value because if we have a caucus

▶ 1:11:30 Francis X. Wright Jr.: then we have an opportunity to not only select although non-binding the next president but the next president has an opportunity then to have you know four weeks including over the holidays so it's it's really less time in some ways to plan for the coming year selectors committees his or her committees select his or her chairman and vice-chairman it allows the people on the board and anyone coming on the board perhaps to make the incoming president aware of their availability or their interests with regards to those committees so I I think it has value. I think last year was very unusual. I doubt it's gonna repeat itself. It hasn't occurred to my knowledge and certainly my memory in the past 100 years and it probably won't occur again for another 100 years. But I think that an opportunity to plan ahead,

▶ 1:12:34 Francis X. Wright Jr.: an opportunity not only for the president but all of us to anticipate what we're going to be facing come January and hit the ground running gives it value so those are my comments

▶ 1:12:52 Manisha Bewtra: any other comments one more question I guess is there a requirement that the inauguration be held on the same night as the first meeting of the Board of Aldermen because that I mean again this year was unusual but I think that also that lack of sort of time in between if there was an election a nomination and election the same evening and if the intention is to announce committees I could see that potentially being challenging as well but that's all thank

▶ 1:13:34 Michael P. Zwirko: you anyone else move the motion mr. president oh I guess I do mr. chairman thank you just very briefly are the dates and times of the oaths are in the city charter which determines the inauguration so thank you mr. chairman

▶ 1:13:49 Francis X. Wright Jr.: thank you okay we have before us a motion to amend rule 48 of the rules of order of the Melrose Board of Aldermen by removing the the caucus from the the

▶ 1:14:08 Speaker 1: activities of this board all in favor aye this is just how many members

▶ 1:14:15 Speaker 1: voting at least all in favor aye opposed opposed it's a 2-2 I believe

▶ 1:14:25 Francis X. Wright Jr.: all the minimum it's not here was myself voting I believe that was a 2-2 vote so

▶ 1:14:40 Francis X. Wright Jr.: because you could move to request a roll call we'll have a roll call vote Alderman Mortimer aye Alderman Bewtra aye Alderman Letter Garabedian no

▶ 1:14:53 Francis X. Wright Jr.: Alderman Zurichow yes Alderman Now I'm sorry it was a 3-2 vote 3-2 vote to

▶ 1:15:02 Speaker 1: recommend my apologies I can't count that's why I'm not an accountant Mr. President thank you

▶ 1:15:11 Francis X. Wright Jr.: Waldemar Lemberman is absent understood okay so that will be recommended to the full board