ORDER-2016-138 : Amending Melrose Revised Ordinances, Chapter 202 - Streets and Sidewalks, by adding Section 202-1.1: Reservation of space for city use; rights and privileges of city therein.

Transcript (~5 min @ 14:29)

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

▶ 14:11 John N. Tramontozzi: forward this evening to close public part they have a motion to close by all the more seconded by alderman's work on the motion all in favor aye any opposed seeing none opposed that means our public participation is closed for this evening we have two orders on the agenda force first order is order number two zero one six dash one three eight amending Melrose revised ordinance chapter two zero two streets and sidewalks by adding section two zero two dash one point one reservation of space for city use rights and privileges of city therein this is an order sponsored by vice chairman of this Committee, Francis X. Wright. Alderman Wright, you have the floor.

▶ 14:56 Francis X. Wright Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess initially I'd make a motion to recommend.

▶ 15:00 Speaker 6: Okay. Second.

▶ 15:01 John N. Tramontozzi: There's a motion to recommend this particular order. I trust all members of the committee and those non-voting members had an opportunity to review the ordinance. We do have a motion to recommend by Alderman Wright, seconded by Alderman Mortimer. On discussion now, Alderman Frank Wright.

▶ 15:17 Francis X. Wright Jr.: you mr. chairman this is an order what was intended to do is to require those companies often more often than not utilities cable companies power companies who wish to lay conduit below our public ways and need street opening permits from us because they are tearing up public property our public waste in order to lay their conduit to do one of two things and I've made motions throughout through the years when they've come before us to creep to have this added as a condition and they were there was a matter before us in the last month or so where because it was to one building and it was across a parking lot I didn't make the make it a condition but it reminded me that I wanted to come back and do this and so I filed it and what it will do is when they come before us and they look for a street opening permit and want to tear up our streets to lay conduit for their business use whether it's cable TV Fios electric whatever that space be either reserved within that conduit or that a separate conduit is so called shadow conduit be laid for the city's use one we're giving them the privilege of tearing up our streets to to lay a conduit and two we don't want to see that have to happen again in case we need conduit space in the future and we don't want to do it in bits and pieces and if we can have as a condition of laying conduit for a business use city space reserved and I think we should take that opportunity now and require it of those utilities that come before us looking to lay conduit I think it just makes sense it's not an expense to them of any great import and I think down the road it could serve the city they do put lake on to it with enough space in it that they can rent space in it to other utilities and I think it just makes sense for us to have free use of that space seeing how that conduit is laid beneath public

▶ 17:26 John N. Tramontozzi: property well certainly that seemed logical and reasonable to do that I'm curious out all the men right at bump have you in your research have any have Have you discovered whether or not any other municipalities, or towns, or cities have it?

▶ 17:38 Francis X. Wright Jr.: Yeah, I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman, that's a great point. There are a number of communities in Massachusetts that do already have these types of ordinances on the books.

▶ 17:49 John N. Tramontozzi: Very good. In terms of the legality of it, as an attorney, do you have an opinion as to, or should we consult with the city solicitor? Do I have an opinion?

▶ 17:59 Francis X. Wright Jr.: I have an opinion, yes. My opinion is it's perfectly legal. I'm happy to have it reviewed by the city solicitor. However, I we did make I did make a request for

▶ 18:06 John N. Tramontozzi: City solicitor Van Campen to be present. They render some opinions on these two orders. What is ordinances this evening? But unfortunately was unable to be here, but we can certainly seek that if that's a wish of the committee

▶ 18:23 Francis X. Wright Jr.: Yeah, that's perfectly appropriate and I welcome that. Thank you. Mr. Chairman any further discussion

▶ 18:31 John N. Tramontozzi: so with that in mind we do have a motion to recommend that to to the full board I think we can probably seek the assistance of city solicitor Van Campen at the full board hearing Alderman

▶ 18:50 Scott M. Forbes: Forbes Thank You mr. chairman would be better to place the order or keep the order in committee until we hear back from the from the city solicitor

▶ 18:56 John N. Tramontozzi: not necessarily we do have a motion on the floor from Alderman Wright and it's seconded, truly seconded. Was it seconded by all? I did second it, sir. Unless he wants

▶ 19:07 Scott M. Forbes: to... Just a more or less a point of clarification from me. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

▶ 19:10 John N. Tramontozzi: Understood. But that motion is on the floor. Can we have a vote on that motion? All in favor? Aye. Any opposed to that motion? Good. So we'll just move this forward to the full board, and at that time we can discuss it further and see where it goes from there. Excellent. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.