ORDER-2017-82 : Amend Melrose Revised Ordinances, Chapter 228, Sec. 228-15 (B) Water Rate Review Committee as set forth herein. (Amended in Legal & Legislative Committee-Feb. 27, 2017)

Transcript (~10 min @ 26:54)

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

▶ 26:57 Speaker 10: calendar please order number 2017 dash 82 amend Melrose revised ordinances This is Chapter 228, Section 228-15B, Water Rate Review Committee, as set forth herein, amended in Legal and Legislative Committee on February 27th.

▶ 27:15 Speaker 6: This order comes from the Legal and Legislative Committee with a recommendation for passage as amended. My recollection of the amendment was that the city engineer would be a member of the committee, the city treasurer would not. the committee recommended one citizen representative be included in the committee and there was an amendment to indicate that the citizen would be recommended by the president of the Board of Aldermen with the concurrence of the Board of Aldermen I hope I got that right if I didn't please let me

▶ 27:50 Francis X. Wright Jr.: know where I screwed up motion for passage second okay we've got a motion

▶ 27:52 Speaker 6: for passage by Alderman Wright seconded by Alderman Inferna and we have discussion starting with Alderman Search then moving to Alderman Tramontozzi and

▶ 28:05 Michael P. Zwirko: Alderman Inferna oh yeah Thank You mr. president as we stated in the legal legislative committee meeting last week I was in favor of it of at least two citizens as originally proposed I was a quick draw I lost I was gonna make a motion of further amend to strike one citizen for two since there's a pending motion on the floor I just wanted to make that comment I think the conversation we had on Thursday night it was a it was a fulsome one I do support the order those are all the comments I had at this time thank you

▶ 28:35 John N. Tramontozzi: yeah thank you we did have a lot of discussion at the legal and legislative committee and it's specifically on that issue of the citizens I would like to make the motion to add three citizens nominated by the president of the board of alderman confirmed by the uh the board of aldermen and um i would make that motion at this

▶ 29:02 Speaker 6: time second alderman chairman tozy is moving to amend the order that's before the floor to increase the citizen representation from one to three is there's there's a second second alderman Medeiros seconds that motion further discussion

▶ 29:22 Michael P. Zwirko: go ahead i i was under the impression with a motion on the floor another motion couldn't be

▶ 29:29 Speaker 6: forwarded yeah we'll call the vote on the current motion before the board before we entertain votes on subsequent motions Alden Ferney you have the floor

▶ 29:39 Gail Infurna: right thank you very much mr. president yes we did have good discussion last week on this and listening to mr. Moroz this evening I just want to make it a point to say that this is not an issue of trust here I think it's really an issue of working efficiently getting the work efficiently done it's not that we don't trust or at least I personally don't trust the public to make you know to be on this board but we have to work efficiently and the more people you have the more inefficient committee becomes we have an alderman on the on that board on that committee that if anybody in the public has any concerns any thoughts or anything they can go to the ultimate aldermanic representative on that so I I think we have to keep in mind that this is not town government. We do government by representation, and so I'm going to support the original order on this, and we must keep that in mind. It's really not a matter of trust, it's efficiency, and this is not town government.

▶ 30:45 Speaker 6: Okay, I have Alderman Wright, then Alderman McAteer-Margolis.

▶ 30:49 Francis X. Wright Jr.: Thank you, Mr. President. I agree with Alderman Inferna, I too trust the members of the public, but the people who are part of this committee who work here in City Hall work day in and day out on the issues that they're facing, whether they be water, sewer, or fiscal. Bringing the viewpoint of a citizen on board is great. As a matter of fact, other residents of the city are always welcome to attend these meetings, when I've been there they've been allowed to speak so they're they're made cognizant of what's on the agenda they have access to the materials and they can be present and speak so they don't necessarily have to feel like they're part of the board itself and committed to attend meetings as all the Miniferno points out these meetings tend to happen during the day so I think you're limiting the scope of a board when you have have one that's dependent mainly on full-time employees of the city who you know have family and lives of their own and will meet during the day so you're going to bring in people who retirees or otherwise perhaps they have to find time to try to attend meetings on a very important subject which is the water and sewer rates of the city so for that reason I support having an alderman and the resident be part of the committee keeping the member the meetings open to the public which is required by state law and allowing public participation thank you thank you

▶ 32:31 Mary Beth McAteer-Margolis: mr. president I was not I am NOT a member of the legal and legislative so I was unable to vote on this last week but I did indicate that I felt it would be good to have two people on the board I think that three my in my opinion might be a little bit more than necessary the reason I'm looking for two is because I think we can have at the president's discretion someone representing a more traditional homeowner and then perhaps somebody representing multi-families or condominiums I do agree with alderman Rita that we do need our professionals on this they're able to look at the big picture and see the financial and the fiscal ramifications of setting the rate i do think it's important obviously that we need um an aldermanic representative and that we continue to have those meetings open to the public as they have been and the ones i've attended there generally have been several members of the public there and they have also been allowed to speak at this time i'm not going to make a motion to amend because i know already have one motion to amend but um but as i say i should that motion not pass i would be in favor of amending to make it two citizens thank you procedurally we do have a motion that's been

▶ 33:50 Speaker 6: made and seconded to recommend which would have to go forward before other motions could be entertained for a vote so unless there was a withdrawal of the motion to recommend um we'd have to deal with that motion first thank you for the discussion just a point of order motion

▶ 34:10 Speaker 6: recommend requires eight votes is that correct a motion to change ordinance requires eight votes this is a motion to change ordinance which would require eight concurring votes is there further

▶ 34:24 Speaker 6: discussion associate could you call the role please is this on the amendment uh the order

▶ 34:31 Speaker 6: has amended has been a motion to recommend has been made and duly seconded problem brazil excuse

▶ 34:38 Robert A. Boisselle: me we're working on the motion that mr alderman charmentozzi no no we are not we are working on

▶ 34:47 Speaker 6: a motion that was made uh to recommend the order as amended from committee and has been seconded

▶ 34:54 Speaker 7: okay yes alderman forbes yes yes alderman inferno yes yes alderman yes yes alderman mcateen no no arlen maderas uh pardon me this is to accept the committee amendment

▶ 35:07 Speaker 6: yeah this is on the on the order as a matter and it's it could certainly be amended after this

▶ 35:19 Speaker 7: is that no this is a vote on the order as amended up or down no no yes yes no no all of them right yes yes no no president khan yes yes okay the order fails seven thanks mr president

▶ 35:41 John N. Tramontozzi: I make a motion to adopt the proposed amendment as initially amended in the Legal and Legislative Committee, but with the further amendment of three citizens nominated by the President of the Board of Aldermen.

▶ 35:57 Speaker 6: On a point of order. Yes. We've had a final vote on the order, and it's not subject to further amendment unless that vote is reconsidered.

▶ 36:10 Speaker 6: So motion for reconsideration. Motion for reconsideration. Second. only be made by somebody who was on the prevailing side. Alderman Medeiros, you're moving for reconsideration of the vote? Yes. Is there a second? Second. Seconded by Alderman McAteer-Margolis. All those in favor of reconsideration of the vote, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? Opposed. Can I see a show of hands on the opposed, please? Okay, the motion for

▶ 36:40 Speaker 6: reconsideration fails and the order fails Alderman McAteer-Margolis

▶ 37:00 Speaker 1: Mr. President I would move to put forward a new order well in order to put

▶ 37:03 Speaker 6: forward a new order it would have to be docketed and placed on the calendar so

▶ 37:10 Speaker 6: to amend this we can't amend the order you can take no further act it's the ruling of the chair that we can take no further action on this order this