Public Participation

Transcript (~45 min @ 1:12)

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

▶ 0:54 Peter D. Mortimer: I am the Chairman Peter Mortimer. We are joined by the Vice Chairman, Gail Inferna, Alderman Michaels-Werco, Alderman John Tramontozzi, Alderman Monica Medeiros, Alderman Robert Boycelle, Alderman Francis Wright, Alderman Mary Beth McAteer-Margolis, Alderman Jennifer Lemmerman, and Alderman Scott Forbes. This meeting is being recorded by MMTV and is available for future viewing on their website or on the City of Melrose website. to open the floor for public participation. Second. All those in favor has made a motion to open the floor for public participation, duly seconded by Alderman Boycelle. All in favor of opening the floor for public participation, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed, hearing none, public participation is now open. Please come to the table in the center of the room, state your name and address for the record. And there is a limit of ten minutes, please. Good evening, Ms. Williams.

▶ 1:55 Speaker 1: So, as you know, I am on the Melrose Women's Commission, and I'm here representing them today.

▶ 2:04 Speaker 1: We sent you a letter earlier today, or an email, with a letter attached, as well as some research that links you to every website of every city. And we also gave you some additional names of people who support the change to city council.

▶ 2:25 Speaker 1: We're here basically today because we are concerned about where this process is with respect to the change of name in terms of whether there is any opportunity now to be heard on the merits of the issues about the name change to city council. particular I realized that Appropriations Committee decisions are not binding but there seems to be a impression that it's pretty much a done deal now and that this matter won't be considered for another ten years and so

▶ 3:14 Speaker 1: what we would like to do is to speak up about this issue and give you sort of the highlights of why we think it's important that the decision be heard in front of the full board so that it gives us an opportunity to talk about the merits you'll recall that our Commission and I'm reading from the language is here to promote constructive action in areas of concern to women and girls in the community and to the foster the advancement of women and girls toward full equality in all area of areas of life so it's our position that this is exactly the type of issue that we would like to weigh in on and that you basically you know allowed this Commission to come into being and that this is well within the purview of the Women's Commission we would appreciate

▶ 4:23 Speaker 1: any time to only give you a presentation of the merits but also to talk with you to engage in a discussion and to answer any questions that you might have initially I think at first glance it looks like this issue is pretty clear-cut it's ministerial and you know there are women here on the board uh alderman literally means um older man in old english so uh changing it to city council would seem as though it would be more accurate and inclusive um hearing the reasons that were given for keeping the uh name Alderman. We realized that there was a bit of misunderstanding and misperceptions about the issue. Alderman Lemmerman and Zwirko did speak eloquently about the reasons for this change, but despite their corrections and best efforts, many of you still voted no. In fact, a majority did so there are a few key points I want to hit most almost all of them were in the materials I sent to you today but one of the main things here was that one of our commissioners Maureen Burnham did some excellent research she actually went to every single website that of cities in Massachusetts there are a total of 55 cities in Massachusetts of those 53 of those 55 53 use the term City Council not alderman and the only ones that continued to use alderman is Melrose we're in that number the remaining two and Somerville so to the extent that people relied upon um the information about other cities i think it's pretty clear that other city the uh the weight of the evidence is in favor of changing the name to city council excuse me the other issue that was of interest was about public support and the how much public support people heard about on the board or who came to them in support of or against and part of

▶ 6:56 Speaker 1: the um one of the things the commission wanted to stress is that there are certain types of issues that should not be put to a public vote you'll recall that in when it came to to getting women the right to vote. It's been almost a hundred years now. They didn't do it by vote because the only people who could vote were men. So, you know, it reasons if there's a rationale then that, you know, people who are in the majority aren't easily going to give up what they already have. So it's up to legislators like you to be thoughtful about the process to consider what else is at play here um to the extent that the numbers were considered even though we don't think they should be dispositive of the issue um i do want to say that as miss alderman lemmerman pointed out it was two to one in favor of changing to um council when we discussed this issue in october at that time i'll note that this issue was brought up independently

▶ 8:13 Speaker 1: of a um charter review and as i recall there it was tabled uh to appear again at the charter review the charter review committee that ewan stated um basically approved it and the appropriations committee as you'll recall voted against it others had focused on their personal preference about what they like to be called and that's a totally interesting

▶ 8:45 Speaker 1: and at point however it should not again be relied upon to make it should not be the only thing to that should be relied upon to make this decision a lot of

▶ 8:58 Speaker 1: times I think what is overlooked is that none of us got here alone to wherever we are right we rely on the people around us we rely on the people who came before

▶ 9:13 Speaker 1: us at least I hope you know to do something that I can be proud of for future generations um and that's what i think is the folk what is missing here is that the reason

▶ 9:29 Speaker 1: that the women on this board are on this board is because there were other women who came and struggled and got the right to vote there were other women who came and you know joined elected offices and now there are other women who will hope to be in the same position that you are and hope to be even numbers, let's say.

▶ 9:57 Speaker 1: So I think it's important to recognize that your personal preference, great, but it shouldn't be something that you rely upon when thinking about this. The other issue that I want to talk about quickly is the Victorian character of Melrose. There was a comparison of Victorian street lamps and the Victorian characteristics. There's the slippery slope argument where people say, oh no, if we change this, you know, it's gonna become person hole instead of man hole or hue persons instead of humans. The problem with both of these arguments is that there is no consideration of the fact that the name of an elected official is an important one. It is well more, it is easily more important for what someone calls themselves, not only to convey a role, but also to convey to the public who they are. I think explaining, starting from an explanation of what you do spends a lot of time on a basic question that can be fixed if you just call it council.

▶ 11:12 Speaker 1: We don't want to use archaic names to educate people. The fact that there are 53 other cities in Massachusetts who have chosen to go the clear route, I think should weigh heavily in favor of the use of council. Also, this is not a new concept. I think as was mentioned here, it's already accepted that being inclusive is respectful of other people. Respectful people use general terms already that are not gender specific by using terms as firefighter and police officer. Your role as representatives of the citizens of Melrose are just as important and should be respected just as much. as to those people who say why bother with this name change it's so trivial why can't we just keep it the same the bottom line is this was discussed 11 years ago at the last charter review it was it's discussed now it was discussed in october there's a whole lot of discussion for something that doesn't seem to matter and there's a whole lot of discussion and um and people saying no to something that they think is trivial so and when you do sort of a burden and benefit analysis of each side I think the thing that you have to ask is if you oppose this name change and you want to keep it alderman how does the title City Council take away anything from anybody here right I mean Council includes the women at this table. Alder man, older man does not. And I think it's showing respect. That's what it boils down to, showing the respect to your fellow colleagues. And asking

▶ 13:22 Speaker 1: for neutral treatment shouldn't be seen as a way to, as losing a privilege. Because, know the women's right to vote was clearly something that was agreed upon and that we have relied upon in this country to I would say that it's it is

▶ 13:43 Speaker 1: well past time that this issue be changed that this may be changed the point of this name change if you want to talk about what the benefits would be to women is that it would tell women that they have an equal voice at the table not just that they belong here but that they have an equal voice then it's a I

▶ 14:11 Speaker 1: have to say one thing in terms of the Women's Commission it's interesting to note that this body you know accepted the legislation that correct that created this commission yet we were not no one sought our input as a whole um and that was disappointing because i want you to see us as a resource and um we would like to weigh in on these issues so you know in a sense we are here thanks to you but i don't think we have had a voice that has been heard or even you know asked no one's asked us about

▶ 14:53 Peter D. Mortimer: it miss Williams are you reach your 10-minute limit I would ask you now to please wrap up and make your final points other people who are here may share your viewpoints can take their 10 minutes okay to continue points but don't feel like you have to rush out of the chair just please get ready to wrap

▶ 15:12 Speaker 1: it up okay um so in conclusion uh what i'd like to say is that in some ways this issue is a microcosm of what's going on in the country in the sense that there's a lot of anxiety about how things are um going so um i think when that happens you go to local politics and i think it would be really meaningful for a lot of people if our local poli um if our local legislative body would support them in ways that i think have been difficult at the national level

▶ 15:57 Peter D. Mortimer: i appreciate your time thank you thank you very much are there other members of the public wishing to come forward regarding any member excuse me any matter on the appropriations agenda tonight

▶ 16:09 Speaker 5: good evening miss hammer thank you so much my name is sam hammer at 12 bartlett street I am also a member of the appointed member of the women's Melrose Commission on women I support everything that later Williams our chair just expressed in my disappointment on the recent vote opposing the name change of our legislative board I believe fundamentally that as a society and as our government you can either progress or you can regress this last vote keeps Melrose in the past and on purpose and that is not the direction I wish to take

▶ 16:42 Speaker 5: our community I'm grateful for our local elected officials and your hard work your energy your intentions for representing us all in Melrose you are the ones who have stepped forward to lead us and lead our city and have gotten Melrose to the wonderful thriving community that we are in today I grant we grant you the authority to make decisions on our behalf and that is certainly not easy so I'm very grateful but if we do not raise our voices then opinions do not matter and i believe that the decision you made on this matter to not change the name to city council is not an indicator of where we are as a city today thank you very much

▶ 17:33 Peter D. Mortimer: thank you miss hammer any other members of the public wishing to come forward on any

▶ 17:42 Speaker 4: matter before us this evening good evening good evening everybody my name is maureen burnham i'm limit 72 damon avenue in melrose and thank you in advance for hearing my comments

▶ 17:51 Speaker 4: but i respectfully ask that you reconsider your vote of 724 whereby you rejected the charter

▶ 18:01 Speaker 2: review commission's proposed change to amend the term board of aldermen to city councilor

▶ 18:06 Speaker 4: have you know i was very disappointed to see the way the vote turned out but i was much more

▶ 18:13 Speaker 2: disappointed in the rationale you all provided for your votes specifically no votes

▶ 18:20 Speaker 2: i am strongly in favor of the change and was ready to see our elected officials come to the table

▶ 18:28 Speaker 2: with compelling research that would support a change that deviated from the charter commission and also from the public opinion that we've heard i didn't hear that rather

▶ 18:40 Speaker 4: again I'm sorry I expected to hear when we talked about the quaintness that this name brings to the

▶ 18:48 Speaker 2: table that there was a direct correlation to be drawn to our property values and to our ranking and desirable places to live I didn't hear that I didn't hear that any of you thought we would see a decrease in voter turnout if we change the name or some misunderstanding about the last minute

▶ 19:07 Speaker 2: about a change in name um and i didn't see anything that would you know i think overwhelmingly we heard that melrose was different and i think what we're saying is you know sure are we different but are we different in the right way if we are one of only two cities that does not have a city council are we going to wear that as a badge of honor i don't necessarily think that's so and i didn't hear any rationale that would lead me to believe that that different differentiation provides me any additional value as a melrose citizen or homeowner

▶ 19:43 Speaker 4: rather i think that the reasons that were proffered were emotion based and really evidence

▶ 19:50 Speaker 2: in the version to change and that's okay i think that you know people generally don't like to change small daily changes prove hard for most of us and and i would acknowledge certainly that this group would have the most change if we were to shift a naming convention so what i hope to

▶ 20:05 Speaker 4: do tonight is to treat this as factually as possible and put some facts in front of you

▶ 20:09 Speaker 2: that will hopefully help you to reconsider the way in which you voted simply put the term city

▶ 20:17 Speaker 2: counselor is easier to understand it is a more broadly used term and i do not feel as though

▶ 20:25 Speaker 2: in this day and age it should be incumbent upon you to explain and educate our citizens on what the naming convention means this is the government of the people by the people and for the people everyone should understand what it is that their elected representatives do they teach children city council local local council government in first grade we live in a very diverse population as well with many different languages and I do think that there is concrete evidence that a more broadly understood term would be beneficial I also

▶ 21:08 Speaker 2: think that the term city councillor is more inclusive the lack of female voice in politics

▶ 21:14 Speaker 2: is in fact a major issue it is systemic in our nation our Congress is only 19%

▶ 21:25 Speaker 4: women our son is 21% female there are only six female governors and among

▶ 21:30 Speaker 2: state legislators only 24.8% are comprised of women members that's not

▶ 21:37 Speaker 2: good our female population the United States of America is roughly 50% the

▶ 21:46 Speaker 2: questions are there's a lot of research around why why are we not seeing more

▶ 21:48 Speaker 4: females elected some primary reasons are that they are less likely to feel qualified and they are less likely to review the suggestion from up here so

▶ 22:02 Speaker 2: what I would see to you is that Melrose is made up of 50% women I look around this table I do not see 50% women here and I would like to see that and I think that if we change to a gender-neutral term, we would indeed support those women that would entertain running for elected office. We would make them feel welcome at the table, and we would

▶ 22:31 Speaker 4: show our support as a community. I guess what I really can't understand is why the men and women

▶ 22:37 Speaker 2: at this table would not want to make our city government more approachable and inclusive for

▶ 22:45 Speaker 4: our citizens so I think that that takes me back to change right I think that's

▶ 22:52 Speaker 4: what this all comes down to and I think that we have to make a choice to make a

▶ 22:54 Speaker 2: change and I think that this choice and what drives your choice should not live in the past this isn't a this isn't a vote about what happened in the past or what we want to stay tied to in the past it's not even really about the present

▶ 23:10 Speaker 4: it's about the future we're currently battling horrible challenges on a

▶ 23:14 Speaker 2: national scale relative to the preservation of history versus

▶ 23:21 Speaker 2: considering the many two for whom that history has alienated I think here you

▶ 23:24 Speaker 4: all have a you have a chance to make a different choice I think it would make

▶ 23:29 Speaker 4: very minimal impact to those who are adversely impacted by the change but it

▶ 23:39 Speaker 2: could have a major impact on those who would feel more embraced and empowered

▶ 23:46 Speaker 4: by your choice admittedly I don't know what the next procedural steps are I do

▶ 23:53 Speaker 4: know that a wise man once said that the time is always right to do what is right

▶ 23:59 Speaker 2: and with that I open I open myself up to you guys what's next or how are you able to is there an option for a revote are we able to put it to ballot is there an opportunity to reject this this the change there's a lack of change that was made to the Charter I don't know but I do want you to know this is not this is not an impact less decision I consider myself impacted so if you need to put a face to that thank you very much thank you very much miss Byrne are there any

▶ 24:46 Peter D. Mortimer: other good evening good evening good evening miss Buster hi how are you thank

▶ 25:05 Speaker 2: you I want to thank you all for serving Melrose its citizens and the good of the community and I want to thank you all for listening every time the community comes forward to tell you that you're all doing it wrong.

▶ 25:17 Speaker 2: It's not that important. It's just tradition. It was never meant to discriminate against anyone. It's just historical. Things were different then. It's not meant to exclude anyone. Why bother changing it? It's always been that way. These are all typical reactions to any holdover language or archaic institutions. They are all dismissive of concerns raised, but they're often well-meaning. The good intentions become irrelevant, however, after the issue has been raised as a motion to change and a reasonable alternative has been presented. If the intention, for instance, was genuinely never to hurt, exclude, or isolate, then once an indication of hurt and exclusion has been made plain and a motion of change brought forward, there should be an equally well-intentioned willingness to change and include. As an aside, I should point out that I disagree the name was never meant to exclude. was and it did for centuries in use in Melrose and in many other places before, I guarantee that when those groundbreaking first women that Leda mentioned who served in this chamber were running in Melrose, there were many who would have declared them unfit by dint of their gender. But back to those good intentions, once the request has been made and denied, then the The defense that it's not intended to be exclusive is no longer valid. It has been pointed out that it is exclusive, and if you vote to keep it, then your statement is one in support of exclusive language. It is no longer neutral. If someone does something that really bothers you and it's never been addressed, and then you say, hey, that really bothers me, they can say in their defense, oh, I'm sorry, I never knew. Welch, now you know. It bothers us. Please change it.

▶ 27:14 Speaker 2: I also want to address briefly the word quaint. I grew up in Vermont. We in Vermont hear that word a lot, mostly from summer people. It's not a compliment. It means we're adorable, we're cute, we're unsophisticated, we're a bit primitive.

▶ 27:38 Speaker 2: We're like a return to the past, but we are not representative of a part of the modern world. That is not true of Vermont. It's dismissive, and it's reductive. It's also not true of Melrose, and I wouldn't want it to be. We'll be charming. We'll be welcoming. We'll be successful. We'll be wonderful. Let's not be quaint. Thank you.

▶ 28:04 Speaker 3: Thank you, Ms. Bosco.

▶ 28:09 Speaker 3: Ms. Driscoll, thank you.

▶ 28:15 Margaret Raymond Driscoll: welcome thank you I want to thank you for the opportunity to share my views tonight and to the Charter Review Committee for its substantial work and thoughtful recommendations and for your thoughtful analysis of what you have before you this evening just as a note that I am here as a Melrose resident an almost 10-year elected school committee member I do not speak for the Melrose school committee but only for myself so I had sent you an email earlier today and I'm grateful for your reading of that so I won't go through it I just had a couple quick points one is voting I hope to keep the mayor on the school committee I really believe that allows the mayor to hear and participate in the discussions that affect a majority of city dollars in addition comments the mayor may make allow other school committee members and the public a window into the bigger impact that decisions around areas like school facilities collective bargaining and the budget can have on the schools and on the community that insight is fundamental to supporting good decision-making in the interest of student learning as well as the responsible use of taxpayers money as the mayor is only one vote on the committee he or she can make no determinations alone and therefore there's no opportunity to commingle the executive and legislative branches so I would certainly support keeping the mayor on the school committee I would encourage you to direct copies of notices to the school committee chair and the executive secretary of the committee as that is a roles and responsibilities type of decision so I would encourage that and lastly I just like to share that removing the language in section 4 5 with respect to detailing to some extent what the school committee is chartered with doing would be wise I think that the language reflects some of the main responsibilities but as alderman Medeiros and alderman MacMaster Margolis will recall the mass Association of school committees does provide us with the mass general laws that affect schools it was too heavy to lift so I didn't bring it to the table many of the many of the items in there reflect the minutiae of duties that we have and it's interesting that in the current city charter section 2 5 designates the powers of the Board of Aldermen it's very brief and very very encompassing indicating that you'll abide by the laws and and the duties as assigned to you and I think including some kind of language to that effect would be not only parallel as we are also an elected body but would reflect the intention because by including some things you by definition exclude others so I would encourage a change to that kind of more general language that might invite the community to come look at our website read our policy manual and learn more about what we do which we're always hopeful that people will do so with that I thank you again for your time and all good success in the good work that

▶ 31:41 Peter D. Mortimer: you're doing thank you Thank You mr. school are there any other members of the public wishing to come forward at this time not yet good evening miss

▶ 31:55 Speaker 4: Shattuck good evening Alderman Mortimer my name is Alice Shattuck I live at 140 Grove Street in Melrose I came tonight to address just a few points regarding the proposed changes to the city charter the first one I want to talk about is the proposed change to the name of the Board of Aldermen the the proposed changed to City Council I've spoken before about this publicly on social media and to others including to aldermen on this board and I've been pleased that the board has voted to uphold this historic name at every opportunity I think it's a special name I think it's a beautiful name I think aesthetics matter in communities I really do and as a woman I'm also slightly offended by the suggestion that keeping the name alone is holding women back in some way clearly there are women on this Board of Aldermen women do have the right to vote nowadays women have the right to speak to their elected representatives and they do many of them are vocal we've seen a hundred percent women speaking in the public comment period tonight which is wonderful making their opinions known and I think that the the votes of the Board of Aldermen including at every opportunity 75% of the women aldermen who serve on this board reflect the fact that they have spoken to many women and that many women feel that the aesthetic issues and the historic issues to them personally I know to me do outweigh an imagined impact on our personal confidence I I personally do not feel any impact on my confidence, and I know that many other women feel the same way. I don't think that the facts presented by the Commission on Women have been entirely inclusive. Certainly, we're one of two cities remaining that has the name Board of Aldermen. We've also been one of a pretty small number of cities that ever had the name Board of Aldermen, so it's always been a somewhat unique name. There are also hundreds of boards of selectmen in this state and in surrounding states that have not changed their names which again is sort of a peculiar New England thing that does confuse a lot of people who come from other parts of the country and don't know what town form of governments are compared to city form of governments it is sort of a historic thing and it speaks to our history in this part of the world even the name senator comes from a similar root word it means it comes from the Council of Old Men that was serving in ancient Rome and we still use it in our institutions today and that is because just like we look at the buildings in Washington DC the beautiful white buildings that we look at and the names of some of our institutions we take them from historic representations that we feel have inspired some of our ideals nationally and here in Melrose and And certainly Melrose as a city owes a great debt to our Victorian forebears that founded this city and that created the place where we all live. Were they perfect? No, they absolutely were not. And I think that we have come a long way. We have women serving on the Board of Aldermen. I think it's great, but I think changing the name does nothing positive for anyone. And I think it is destructive to the past and is destructive to our history. I think that the time of the Melrose Commission on Women would be better spent maybe educating the public and bringing up some of the historic contributions of women in Melrose, including on the Board of Aldermen, when the name, as it has been, was the Board of Aldermen. What about women presidents of the Board of Aldermen, of which there's at least one that I know of off the top of my head? I think those would be really useful ways that would highlight some of our history and also bring women to the forefront and let women know that they do have an important and valuable voice. the table um as i said i have spoken about this before and i'm pleased with the votes that have been taken so you might ask why am i back here again saying the same things well i was somewhat distressed to discover that on facebook the melrose commission on women which is a commission that's funded with taxpayer dollars has been running paid advertisements to gin up support for this name change. They've been using money out of their city-funded budget to run advertisements to ask people to support this change, to come to meetings and talk about it, to add their names to lists in order to create an exaggerated support for this because they know that it's not something that has originally been supported by large numbers of the public. And while I appreciate efforts to educate, I think that form of paid lobbying is an inappropriate use of taxpayer dollars. And I was distressed enough about it to come, I just got back from vacation literally today, and I wanted to come to this meeting and talk about it because I found it really somewhat upsetting and inappropriate. And I wanted the Board of Aldermen to understand that if a bunch of people suddenly show up with a sudden desire for this name change, that part of that is because there was a lobbying effort funded by the taxpayers and I do intend to pursue a public records request to find out how much money was spent on it and what the parameters were to determine who would be advertised to by these ads because I don't know if people know but when you do Facebook ads you select who's going to be advertised to and all that so I do think that's also an important topic of conversation to talk about when we're discussing this issue the other thing that I wanted to mention briefly was I wanted to make a quick point about the having the mayor on the school committee I do think it's great that our executive branch and legislative branch work together closely that the mayor does have input to the school committee I know he has a lot of insight on the city budget that he can provide them but I don't think that the school committee is prevented from hearing any of that insight and input on the basis of the mayor not having a vote on the school committee and furthermore I researched a little you know which communities have this and which don't and what I've found is that having the mayor more involved in the school committee is something that's generally found more in large cities with more troubled school systems and then it's used as a tool by the city to create more of a top-down approach to the school system to really reform and change the schools and and make a shift towards you know reforms against unions things like that places like New York where you know the mayor is actually appoint the school committee things like that that's the the type of city that generally is putting the mayor on the school committee and in towns that don't actually generally have mayors that tend to be the types of communities around here where I think the Melrose schools aspire more to be we actually don't have that we have more of a bottom-up approach where we do have members of the public coming forward volunteering to serve on the school committee and bringing expertise out of the public and from parents and teachers and community members rather than the top-down approach so that was my input on that I really appreciate everyone's time tonight and I look forward to more discussion of that thank you thank you

▶ 39:31 Speaker 3: Good evening, Ms. Shattuck.

▶ 39:36 Peter D. Mortimer: Good evening, Ms. DeLillo.

▶ 39:40 Speaker 4: I'm going to be brief because Ms. Shattuck spoke about most of my points. So as far as the changing of the name, when I was approached back in the fall about the name change, it never had a connotation that we were doing it because it related to women or ma'am. It was an understanding, maybe my misunderstanding, that the topic was people didn't understand Board of Aldermen. And I think if it remained at that, the conversation would have been okay. But we have turned that into a gender issue. And when it becomes a gender issue or any issue like that, you're going to get people up in arms all over the place. There's good data.

▶ 40:37 Speaker 4: If you left it at 53 cities, have city councilor, okay, well, that's something to consider. But the moment we started talking about gender, I'm offended. I'm offended as a woman that that comes up, and in fact, there are two new women running for office. There's probably more than that, but for Alderman, right? There's two new. It didn't thwart them from doing it. It didn't thwart you guys from doing it. i think board of alderman i don't think man at all i think a governing body and so we've taken what what was what i thought simple right is should we change it to city council or because it's easy to understand and we made it a huge issue again it sort of divides this city we keep making these

▶ 41:29 Speaker 4: issues you do represent all of us one side versus the other right but we keep i feel like we keep dividing this city because we make issues out of things that aren't issues so for me i don't agree

▶ 41:41 Speaker 4: with a name change i'm offended that it's become a gender issue i do not need to be nobody needs to stick up for me nobody needs to fight for me nobody needs to stand behind me i will stand on my own and definitely the board of aldermen is not going to stop me from being the best me i can be that's not it's not who i am and if if as a woman the name alderman makes you less then then that's on you because it's it's a name it's a name um second um On the mayor on the school committee. I do agree with with mr. Shattuck Although I do very respect is Driscoll but I do think I've heard a lot that First of all, the appearance of it is that there's you know, he sits there So that there's a conflict of interest. That's what people think right conflict of interest He's sitting on the school committee making decisions for the school committee Making decisions on that big budget So one its appearance. Welch, you might say well appearance shouldn't matter but it does matter of course it matters um and there was a comment made that somebody said it is uncomfortable to make a decision to raise your hand

▶ 43:06 Speaker 4: against something the mayor is proposing and that's unfair that's unfair to the people who

▶ 43:13 Speaker 4: sit on the school committee is if they feel or if anyone even if one feels that they can't raise their hand and say something different then we fail as a school committee um it's there are good points made right it's a big part of the budget and he has insights and all that you can get that without him sitting on that that committee so that's it thank you very

▶ 43:46 Peter D. Mortimer: much thank you mr lillo are there any other members of the public wishing to come forward

▶ 43:54 Peter D. Mortimer: who is that from please motion to call alderman's work always made a motion to close public part

▶ 44:01 Peter D. Mortimer: excuse me what what would you like to do please i just want to correct the record

▶ 44:11 Peter D. Mortimer: about mcw using um taxpayer funds um you have exhausted your 10 minutes and other people have had their opportunity

▶ 44:22 Peter D. Mortimer: but they haven't used their whole 10 minutes this is something that hasn't happened this generally is not a place where we debate back and forth um i'm a little bit flummoxed i don't

▶ 44:36 Peter D. Mortimer: I don't know if this has happened. This isn't a debate session. You're definitely out, no offense. You're done. Alderman's work, please.

▶ 44:45 Michael P. Zwirko: Just a point of order. There's a motion on the floor by the members of the board that it- To? To close public participation.

▶ 44:52 Peter D. Mortimer: There's a motion on the floor to close public participation made by Alderman's Worker. A great point of order by Alderman's Worker. It was duly seconded by Alderman Boisselle. On discussion, this is a debatable motion. Is there any Alderman who wishes to opine on this motion made by Alderman's Worker and seconded by Alderman Boisselle at this time? Seeing no Alderman wishing to discuss the issue, we will then call for the vote on the motion to close public participation. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, public participation is now closed.

▶ 45:48 Peter D. Mortimer: Thank you, one and all. Also, Alderman McAteer-Margolis just pointed out, we're still free to receive emails. This issue is not final, and anybody who wants to send emails to the Alderman, we're certainly welcome to receive them at any time. That's a great point, Alderman McAteer-Margolis. Thank you very much.