Order to Place Override Questions on the November 4, 2025 Local Election Ballot

Transcript (~45 min @ 1:29:22)

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

▶ 1:29:17 Mark Garipay: Maurice is made by Council William second by Council panel. All in favor? Aye. What?

▶ 1:29:26 Mark Garipay: Welcome back. Next up we have orders id. 1, 2, 7, 2 8. Order to place override question on the November, November 4th, 20, 25 local election ballot we have with us. Um, mad Mayor and Gary Golden, our CFO. Mm-hmm. I'll turn the, um, turn it over to you. And we have, I'm sorry, Ken Kelly and, uh, superintendent de lady with us.

▶ 1:29:54 Jen Grigoraitis: Thank you Chair Gareg. Good evening everyone. Thank you for having us here tonight. Um, as always, I'm grateful for your service to Melrose and for your willingness to thoughtfully consider this override proposal for the ballot in November. As the chair mentioned, I'm here tonight with our task force co-chairs, city CFO, Kerry Golden and School Business Manager Ken Kelly, and also in the audience are City Solicitor Phillips and Superintendent dela. I'd also like to thank our two council members who served on the task force President Elli and Chair Repe, as well as School committee Chair Dory Withey and Vice Chair Jen McAndrew. I wanna thank all of them for their dedication to our city for the many hours of work that they put into this proposal that is before you. And for being here tonight. I also wanna thank all the residents who shared ideas with us over the last three months. Please know that your insights were heard and appreciated. The task force convened in February and was charged with getting feedback and making recommendations to me concerning potential override questions. After seven meetings, a public community forum many emails from residents and advice and guidance from legal counsel. Tonight we are presenting the task force's unanimous recommendation during its discussions, the task force engaged in research on options for an override, reviewing the proposals and outcomes of override votes from dozens of towns throughout the region. We carefully considered the Massachusetts Department of Revenue Division of local services model language and guidance for proposition two and a half ballot questions. And we had discussions. We discussed staffing needs and requirements in the city and schools revenue and expense forecasts and anticipated increases to major cost drivers, such as union employee contracts, regional school assessments, pension obligations, employee benefits, school transportation, and special education costs. During our process, Melian shared their concerns and fiscal priorities such as school funding services for our seniors and investment in city buildings and infrastructure like our roads, sidewalks, and parks. As you were just discussing, residents also conveyed very helpful feedback about the mechanics and logistics of a potential override, including wanting us to consider multiple options rather than an all or nothing single override ballot question. Cautioning against pitting different parts of the city in opposition to one another, designating revenues raised by an override to clear priorities and increased transparency. Thank you all for your genuine and thoughtful input. Although many provided feedback and ideas about non override sources of revenue for the city, such as the sale of city land, changes to fee structures and other creative fiscal measures, the fact remains that under Massachusetts law, only one recourse is available to the city to raise revenue. At the magnitude our budget demands the proposition two and a half override. Based on all of this, the members of the task force unanimously recommend a tiered override approach, which enables voters to select the level of services they want to support. And we have put that before you for consideration tonight. Those three options are 9.3 million to stabilize services at the current reduced level. Preventing further job cuts, 11.9 million to partially restore essential city and school services, reversing recent significant job and program cuts and 13.5 million to substantially restore essential city and school services and positions and invest in additional infrastructure. And I know this is a new approach to override, so let me talk a little bit about how it works. Three override amounts are presented as three ballot questions with information on which e on what each level would fund. Voters would vote on each question, yes or no. If more than one question is approved by more than 50% of voters, the question specifying the highest dollar amount prevails. So for example, if two of the three options pass, it is not the one with the highest winning percentage, but rather the highest dollar amount that goes into effect. Unlike the menu option recently employed in both Medford and Winthrop, only $1 amount will go into effect with a tiered override question. The community determines what that is. We recommend this format because it provides multiple options to voters. It also clearly delineates what we can and cannot restore in the event of passage. There is no practical way to turn back the clock to previous years and restore every budget cut. But we can target some of our top priorities for restoration and even reinvestment. It is very important to note that all three options include baseline funding that would help stabilize our community through the end of fiscal year 29. Each option includes funding for the next union contract cycle, three years through FY 29 for all city and school employee union contracts. That's 12 different contracts including teachers, police, and fire. All options include some level of funding for repairs to infrastructure, though higher options would allow more funding for priorities like sidewalk repairs, road work, building maintenance and park improvements. The options all plan for our major cost drivers to continue to exceed 2.5% year over year, including employee and retiree personnel costs like pensions, health benefits, overtime, and medicare insurance, municipal debt, vocational school assessments, school transportation, special education, tuition and utilities. We heard from the community that they want a transparent plan that reflects to the best of our ability to forecast the cost and challenges our community is facing. I believe we have delivered that in this tiered override question approach. Residents also express that they wanna say in determining our path forward together, this tiered option offers detailed and distinct options for the course we will chart together in the coming years. As I know you've heard me say many times, this community must choose to invest in ourselves. Costs continue to rise over and above 2.5%. The cuts we have made over the last several years are not sustainable. And what's to come without additional funding will be even worse. As of today, our budget forecast model indicates that without an override, we will be $4 million short of the revenue needed to maintain level services from FY 26, the budget you have all been discussing with cuts and move it into FY 27 $4 million. While I know every resident has different things that they value and prioritize, it will take all of us deciding that we wanna chart a different path forward for everyone in order to stop the cycle of budget cuts that we are currently in. We must fund our own government. No one is coming to save us. And that is an option available to us under prop two and a half. The option I believe we must employ in which I earnestly recommend and support the language before you, for approval for the ballot in November, represents a set of responsible options for the voters. And I hope you will vote to move this forward and let voters decide this fall. Thank you for all you do and thank you for your time.

▶ 1:36:41 Speaker 3: Thank you. Um, are there questions We have,

▶ 1:36:45 Mark Garipay: um, council Hamilton, council melee rally,

▶ 1:36:49 Speaker 3: unless you want, do you have something to say about our, about the task force?

▶ 1:36:52 Mark Garipay: Yes. Council Meley, rally Council Hamilton. Anyone else?

▶ 1:36:59 Speaker 3: Go ahead.

▶ 1:37:01 Leila Migliorelli: Um, thank you, uh, Mr. Chairman, thank you to the mayor and, um, everyone else on the task force. I just wanted to say as one of the two representatives of the council on the task force, um, it was a, it was a very difficult and deliberative process, um, to, in which you can see by the, the summary of the memo. Um, there was a lot of discussion, a lot of back and forth. I think those of you who have served with Councillor Gepe and I know that we are never short on questions. Um, and really kind of put the administration and the schools to task in terms of, um, evaluating data to determine what would be best, um, for the city. I'll say that what I, you know, learned, um, is the sort of complexity of the union contracts, which is something we don't work with in the city council. And, um, trying to layer that into, um, the projections and, um, thinking about infrastructure issues. It was, it was all quite complicated, but I feel like the process was very well thought out. We had plenty of opportunity for feedback, um, questions and answers and, um, really proud of the product that we have, um, in front of us tonight and questions for the community, um, to consider. So thank you Mr. Chairman.

▶ 1:38:20 Mark Garipay: Thank you. I have, um, council Hamilton, consulate Romanul, and I missed a couple. I saw some hands. Come over here. Council Stewart. Council Ver Okay. Council Hamilton.

▶ 1:38:32 Speaker 5: Thank you. Thank you.

▶ 1:38:35 Ward Hamilton: Um, so I think everyone in this chamber probably understands the challenges, um, that municipalities and the Commonwealth are up against with prop two and a half. And those of us here tonight, uh, know better than many and simply put, for folks paying attention at home, we can only increase the tax levy two and a half percent each year. But everybody knows that inflation and escalation is four to 6% a year, sometimes more in recent years. So at some point, logically the rubber hits the road.

▶ 1:39:11 Ward Hamilton: And in my year and a half on the council and, um, involvement with this administration and observation of city departments, including the school department, ic, um, positive things that give me faith and, um, I'm going to be proud to support, uh, this override measure. Thank you.

▶ 1:39:33 Mark Garipay: Thank you. Uh, council, uh, Rahman,

▶ 1:39:38 Devin Romanul: Thank you very much. Um, it's thank you Mr. Chairman. Um, I wanted to, uh, first of all thank the mayor, um, all of your staff, um, every one of my colleagues who served in the, um, with the working group, uh, I really appreciate the briefing and all the detail and, um, am fully supportive. Anyone who's been listening to these hearings, who has been living in our city and understands the, the dynamics that we're operating when the same economic factors that hit you when you go to the grocery store and you look at exit, you know, 11 or $12 or whatever it is the same factors that hit us when we're operating our school systems and DPW and, uh, public safety. And so the thing that I just wanted to comment on and feel free to elaborate more, when, when you and I discussed this was, uh, and it was in your memo, that to restore the, the amount of investment that we have in our city budget just too short years ago is $20 million extra from, uh, so we're not even asking to restore what was there just a couple of years ago. We even, I think you said July 1st. Um, so feel free to elaborate, but I, I was just floored when I heard that number in terms of what we're asking the public to, to claw back here. So, um, anyway, really wanted to thank everyone's work on this, but, um, just wanted to say that that number really stuck out to me because that's tremendous number of teachers and public safety professionals and, um, countless, you know, potholes and crack sidewalks and as you are experiencing the world around you, that is the number that is, um, uh, looms large in my mind.

▶ 1:41:11 Jen Grigoraitis: Yes, Absolutely. Um, I think one of the things, and I really appreciate the task forces intentionality around this, was recognizing I think people really want a plan, which is something we are very much working on. We hear that loud and clear, and I'm, the CFO Golden is just about one year into her job, so she's working on it. Um, but wanting to be sure that we are actually looking forward through the entire lifespan of contracts. I know for folks who, you know, are not used to the public sector talking about union contracts can feel atypical. It is the vast majority of our employees. It is our obligation under the law. I think it is also our privilege to recognize, you know, the hard work of our civil servants that are serving our community every day. And it is, it is costly. And so we wanted to make sure that we were looking, we were forward looking about all of our cost drivers to ensure that we are not just promising to add things back and not then able to sustain those costs going forward. I think that's the challenging cycle that we're in when everything exceeds two and a half percent, as Councillor Hamilton pointed out, we are in this cut cycle in order to keep things, you know, keep some things going forward. So we did really try to make sure that the numbers presented first and foremost, stabilize what we currently have and allowed us to move forward through what we know is coming, which is union negotiations with every single union, which is renegotiating our peck agreement with our, um, healthcare split with our retirees and with our unions. Um, and so that we're hopefully able to be stable. And then what were some investments that could come back? I, I, you know, an override in excess north of $20 million, which would be the largest override. And I believe the Commonwealth of Massachusetts felt like not the right thing for Melrose and candidly also felt like an unfair ask to our residents. Um, so I think we, maybe we can't gain background all in one fell swoop. I just don't think that's possible.

▶ 1:42:52 Devin Romanul: Yeah. Well, thank you for, um, you know, widening the aperture of what we're considering and I really hope the public, um, takes the next five months to really have a good faith conversation about what kind of community we want to have and, um, you know, really appreciative of everyone's efforts.

▶ 1:43:06 Speaker 3: Thank you. Council, council Stewart,

▶ 1:43:08 Robb Stewart: Uh, Mr. Chair? Uh, council Vandiver had her hand up before I, so I'll defer to him.

▶ 1:43:11 Speaker 3: Okay. Council Vandiver, sorry.

▶ 1:43:13 Kimberly Vandiver: Oh, thank you Mr. Chair.

▶ 1:43:16 Speaker 4: Um, I, I, I think, uh, you know,

▶ 1:43:19 Kimberly Vandiver: I, I agree with what's been said. I really appreciate the work of the committee and I think we need, we need an override. Um, I, there's, uh, as we consider how the community will view these questions, um, there's almost a missing question 1D, which is $0, right? And $0 override means you just said $4 million of cuts. Um, and I I, I almost wonder if there's some way that we could add that into the wording of the question itself as a, you know, whether that were a 1D UA within each of the others and don't cut $4 million next year. Right. But whatever it is, I, I just, somehow that needs to come through in the discussions that are had and, and when people look at these questions, and I hope, I hope that will, will come through. Thank you. Is

▶ 1:44:07 Speaker 3: That a, is that a question you want an answer to or,

▶ 1:44:10 Kimberly Vandiver: Uh, if you have any comment about, if, if that's something the committee considered, the city solicitor, The city solicit is not ready to jump outta her seat, so I'm gonna let her Do you wanna share? Because Yes, she has a lot of feelings Thank You. From a legal perspective

▶ 1:44:24 Speaker 11: Through, through the chair. Thank you. So I, I was, as the mayor mentioned, um, involved in this process and looking at the, very carefully looking at the language of the questions, um, we are not allowed under DLS guidance to have any advocacy language in the questions. So that includes any mention of maintaining current staffing, preventing future cuts. It really has to only be for appropriating and spending purposes. So for example, what a lot of communities do, what they recommend is if you were going to a cut for positions, for example, um, and then you would put a dollar amount saying to, to fund for positions like for firefighters, for teachers for example, um, to signal that like that money would allow you not to cut, but you can't actually have any language mentioning cutting maintenance of positions, anything like that, that would be considered advocacy. And you're not allowed to have that anywhere on the ballot.

▶ 1:45:10 Kimberly Vandiver: Understood. So, so in theory, if we wanted to make any modification, we could say and fund and we would have to look ahead to what that $4 million Yes. Would lead to in terms of cuts the following year, correct? Mm-hmm. Okay. And is, and that's not something that we have a, a, an idea of what exactly that future additional cuts would be at this point, is that correct?

▶ 1:45:34 Jen Grigoraitis: Not at this time. I mean, I think you all know all too well, since you're in the budget process, the options for where $4 million would be eliminated is pretty challenging and none of them are pleasant. So I certainly wanna, wouldn't wanna present that publicly. First of all, that's ultimately the decision of this body. Um, and not me, but we certainly know that there's very few places that are left as an option, Right? Absolutely. I, yeah, and I, I understand that, that, um, kind of line of reasoning. I just, I, you know, I don't want to get to a point where people vote against the override and then say, wait, I didn't know that we were about to lose X, Y, and Z. Right? And so how we like balance those priorities. I think our, our hope we were actually talking about this, um, this afternoon is that, um, when you all are back from your summer recess, is to really spend some of our meetings in the fall actually starting to talk about the FY 27 budget with you all and what some of those options would look like for exactly the point that you're talking about so that the community understands what's before us. We, we recognize that by the time we put a document before you all in May, the process is largely complete. So I, we certainly, there's a lot of options we wanna talk about, including some of the things that residents mentioned. Like, do we need to consider selling land that the city currently owns? Do we need to talk about adding in parking fees? These are all things that folks have brought to us. They're not gonna create the level of revenue that we need, but it doesn't mean we shouldn't also consider other good ideas. Right? Absolutely. Thank you. Thank

▶ 1:47:01 Mark Garipay: You. Um, okay, so next up I got Council Stewart, council Ty, council Williams. Council Jamal, council Stewart.

▶ 1:47:11 Robb Stewart: Thank you Mr. Chair. Um, thank you Madam Mayor, Ms. Kelly, Mr. Kelly and Ms. Gold, appreciate you being here. Um, I do wanna call out and thank, uh, uh, council Garipay and President Elli for all the work that you did, um, on behalf of the council. I we appreciate you representing us, so thank you for that. Um, and I feel as though we are pretty well united in what we want to accomplish, uh, as a council. So, um, thank you for everyone. Um, what I look at when I read and I read, I read the question over several times and I, I think that there should be, and this is, uh, a suggestion, a recommendation that we really need to communicate very, very clearly what this is. 'cause there could be confusion, right? Um, at for example, um, you know, one, somebody could vote for the second, but not the first and the third, and someone could vote for the first and not the second and the third. And even though they would potentially be totally foreign override, we could be missing the opportunity on establishing what we're trying to accomplish here. Do you understand what I mean by that? Yep. Right. I mean, ideally, uh, you have 51% voting for all three and then you're done. Right? But that's in the, that's in the ideal world. Um, so I think we, we need as an administration, as a community to be really clear on how, how that vote works. Mm-hmm. Uh, because I, I think it, there could be a level of confusion, uh, for certain, you know, I think most people here understand exactly how it works here. But I think there may be a certain population that is just not as aware. They may show up to the voting booth that day and not even know mm-hmm. What's going on. And we don't want to be in the position where we could lose potential votes on level one or level two only because they thought they only had to pick one and they voted no, only the other two. You understand where I'm coming from on

▶ 1:49:16 Jen Grigoraitis: That? Absolutely. And I think we'll definitely be focusing on a lot of voter education through the, um, city so folks understand what's on the ballot, how do they inform themselves about what the impacts and the options are, and also making sure folks know where to vote and when and that they're registered.

▶ 1:49:30 Robb Stewart: Yeah. And, and Mr. Bell had a great marketing saying, right, A place to grow up. A place to grow old. There. There you go. There's your marketing campaign. That's, there you

▶ 1:49:40 Speaker 10: Well, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

▶ 1:49:42 Mark Garipay: Um, councilor Choice. Um, thank you,

▶ 1:49:45 Manjula Karamcheti: Uh, chair Guera pe uh, first I also wanna express gratitude to the task force and to the city for doing the hard and difficult work of putting, um, this together, um, into both of you as well, representing the city council, um, to be a fly on the wall in all of your meetings and all of the discussions. I just really appreciate it. 'cause I know it's hard. I know it's been hard to sit here as a counselor listening to cut after cut on the city side and the school side. Uh, we all do this because we love the city and we care about the residents. Um, and to see us struggling and suffering is, is really hard to be a part of. So your work together gives me hope that we, that we can do something for our city together. I just have two questions. Mm-hmm. Um, the first question is just related to all the questions. I'm wondering if you could explain for one a, one B, one C. They actually, the date is July 1st, 2025. So could you just help us understand and for, for the community why that date? 'cause what we are sort of in the process mm-hmm. And that date will have passed when voting happens. So can you just explain why that date is what it is?

▶ 1:51:06 Speaker 8: Sure. Yeah. So, um, what that means is effective 7 1 25, um, we would have the ability to raise the levee limit. Um, and so what happens is annually your first two tax bills, um, are based on estimated, uh, taxes. And then when the tax rate is certified in November, um, that's when the final tax rate is set. So what would happen is, um, if this overhead would pass, uh, we would come back with an amended budget and it would allow us to collect those revenues retroactive to seven one, um, 25.

▶ 1:51:49 Jen Grigoraitis: So folks would see the whatever dollar amount should one win it reflected in the tax bill that they receive in January Yes. Of 2026.

▶ 1:51:57 Speaker 8: Yes. January, 2026.

▶ 1:51:59 Manjula Karamcheti: And is it accurate to say that then if an override does pass, we wouldn't have to wait correct till the next fiscal year to start bringing things back and hiring or whatever we determine correct. To vote

▶ 1:52:14 Jen Grigoraitis: We would actually be obligated to provide this body with a supplemental budget? Similar to the conversation we had, I think Ms. Vanderberg, you had asked the question, um, a couple weeks ago, this would be a time when we would come to you all with a revised budget. We can talk about what that process looks like if you wanna do seven weeks of budget hearings or not. But we, we would go through line by line, um, you know, where we're proposing for the monies to go. Obviously the, um, schools would go through a process where the superintendent would make a recommendation to the school committee. And so all of that would happen in the public domain to be added into the budget. It will be, um, time sensitive. 'cause we, ideally we need to do that before the tax recap, which occurs in December. So it will be a, um, busy November. So we'll, you know, certainly be doing some preparation, um, in anticipation of that. But that's what it will allow us to begin to collect those revenues, but also to put those revenues back out into the community during the next, so

▶ 1:53:06 Manjula Karamcheti: We'll be able to restore more swiftly mm-hmm. If, if one of the levels passes. Correct. Wonderful. Thank you. And then my other question was just, um, because there are sort of three levels, will there be some kind of ca calculator that residents can access to be able to understand sort of the impact for them personally?

▶ 1:53:28 Jen Grigoraitis: Yes, that's a great question. We will definitely get that set up and available. I know we've had that for past overrides. Um, and I think it's, we can coordinate it through the division of local services, so you can put your particular parcel in and see what the tax impact is. The broad rule of thumb for Melrose is that for every million dollars of an override, ask for the average house. So there'll be folks that are above and below this number. It is a hundred dollars, uh, per year tax increase. So if, um, like a $10 million override would be a thousand dollars annual tax increase for the average home.

▶ 1:54:05 Manjula Karamcheti: Thank you so much. And I just, one comment, I will make it quickly. I know that the residents in our community have asked for transparency, and I just, I feel that the way you've presented information, um, it has been very transparent and, um, I just appreciate that. I think the, the trust of the folks involved, um, just it matters and I think you've been very clear and straightforward, so I really appreciate that. It's, it's noticed. Thank you.

▶ 1:54:38 Mark Garipay: Thank you counselor. Um, counselor Williams.

▶ 1:54:42 Speaker 10: Thank you. Uh, hello.

▶ 1:54:43 Ryan Williams: And thank you to everyone, everybody said thank you a million times. So I'll say it again. Thank you. Yeah, you're welcome. I, I think in particular, in particular, I think that the work done by both the committee as well as the mayor's office has created a lot more conversation in the public about very specific municipal finance conversations. I mean, you know, there was a blog that came out this morning. There were folks writing little micro blogs about this all the time. And there's, I mean, a really thorough understanding that folks have of the different levers of, of municipal finance. And I say this because of how important it is, um, for people to understand that, you know, certain cost centers are more exposed to inflation. And you've done a great job of putting the collective bargaining, ag bargaining agreements in here and making sure that people understand that a lot of this money is going to fund those, uh, those positions. And I've, of course, I've, you know, talked a lot about wanting to see teacher salaries, um, healthy in Melrose and, and also, uh, city staff salary is healthy in Melrose. So, you know, I think it's necessary and it's needed. Um, and I'm very supportive and, uh, I'm gonna vote for, vote for this, and then I'm gonna organize and knock doors for it, and then I'm gonna vote forward to the ballot. Um, but I wanted to ask a couple of specific questions about the, but the language of the question, um, to help me understand like what we're asking people to understand and, and also for my own benefit so that when I'm talking to people, I can understand it better. Mm-hmm. So, um, so we have three options and I want to know the 9 million option. You said this keeps us going through fiscal year 29. It was like July one, June 30th, 2029. Mm-hmm. Right. So about four years. Um, and we've talked before about how, you know, one of the paths for Melrose is to have an override every four or five years that will keep us, um, competitive and help us recover some of the losses we've had. Uh, so if people, if they were to choose to vote for this lowest option, that would still solve the issue of not needing future budget cuts for at least four years. That's the, the theory,

▶ 1:56:53 Speaker 8: Yes. Assuming everything comes in where we estimated.

▶ 1:56:57 Ryan Williams: Yeah. And so this, this sort of leads me to my next question about like, I think that past override efforts have been, um, maybe not as specific on some of these costs and taking hard looks at the forecasting on them. And I think that this is one of the areas that we set ourselves apart. And I wonder with the specific number of employees listed in this question, is there a risk that we create for ourselves where because of hiring issues or, uh, wage increases or any other kind of external factor that maybe people vote for a big override and they see 17 school, five public works and two police, but then three years from now we've actually only hired five school and two public works. And so, you know, what's the thinking behind having the specific number of employees in this question? And I, and I preface this because I'm looking at the DLS site, um, for all of these other overrides, and by the way, there's been 25 overrides since Stoneham failed in Massachusetts and nine of them have failed, and 14 of them have passed. So, you know, it's happening everywhere. Some of the numbers are very big, 6 million, you know, 8 million. Um, but very few of them have very specific language around, you know, we're gonna hire five teachers. Some of them do, some of them say two firefighters or three firefighters, but a lot of 'em, you know, Belmont just says supplement the, the capital budget. Mm-hmm. Supplement the town budget Natick said the same thing, you know, to, to, um, fund the operating of capital budget. So what's the thinking behind adding these specific job numbers, and do we see a risk in, in having that level of specificity for something that's kind of maybe a little out of our control?

▶ 1:58:47 Speaker 4: Do you want me Yeah, go.

▶ 1:58:50 Jen Grigoraitis: So, I mean, I think yes, there's, there's always risk. I mean, I will caveat that these numbers, I think we've really looked at the known cost drivers for our budget, the things that you all are constantly hearing about that, you know, special education, transportation, all of those things. What is not factored in here is should the federal government significantly change how it chooses to fund states. So I, I do wanna caveat that. Um, I think we've done some other efforts in partnership with the council to prepare for some of that. But, you know, if the way government is funded from the feds on down is completely upended, that is not reflected in here. And I'm not actually sure we could act, you know, actively prepare for that in a reasonable way. I think, um, the task force landed on this language because we felt this was the level of specificity that we hear from residents. They wanna see. I think there can be different norms in different communities. And, you know, you mentioned Belmont. I think that that's a community that does fairly regular overrides and just how that, that language goes on. Um, I will say that when we did, we did look back at every override that's gone on a ballot in Middlesex County since I think either 2018 or 2019, most of them use the standard. What we've seen in Melrose, the single question with a lump sum, with varying degrees of detail about what's in there. This, to us, felt like it let the public know what the intentions were with these funds. I mean, you know, I'll use everyone's favorite caveat. Obviously, if there's a global pandemic, I think we would wanna think about, you know, we may be shifting some of our priorities, but again, all of these funds have to be placed into a line item in a city or school budget, which means that that is happening in public in conversations with this body and or the school committee. So I think there will always be, you know, it's like every other tax dollar that we have, the, um, privilege of being stewards of where we have a public discussion about the priorities and where that money is gonna be spent.

▶ 2:00:39 Ryan Williams: Yeah, and I think you, you raised a fantastic point that, um, a lot of this is trying to hit a lot of moving targets. There are a tremendous number of levers and dependencies in municipal finance. On school side, it's ridiculous, but on the city side, there's a lot as well. So I think, you know, when, when voters are reviewing this and looking at the, at the questions, um, they should be thinking about it in terms of that long term lens. You know, the intention is to hire these positions. The intention is to bolster these operations. And then the, the details of how that gets worked out is going to be the longer, harder work of coming before the school committee, coming before the council talking about what's necessary, what our priorities are. So anyway, again, just thank you for a very thorough job, and to everyone who, who worked on this, um, for getting a really robust conversation started around this, I think it's gonna be very, very helpful.

▶ 2:01:32 Speaker 4: I'm really excited that there's community conversations about municipal finance seem very happy. Me too.

▶ 2:01:40 Speaker 2: Councilor Jamal. Thank you g thank you both for, um, all the amazing work, uh, that you've done, um,

▶ 2:01:47 Maya Jamaleddine: For so many months, uh, right now. And I know that it's not the end. Um, I'm gonna share my experience as a parent. There is not even one day at my house that we didn't hear from one of my kids. Uh, my teacher is not returning next year. Mm-hmm. Every single night we have around the dinner table a conversation that one of the teacher is not coming next year. And it's, it's impacting, um, our kids and our youth, uh, wellbeing, and it's impacting their, um, academic. It's, uh, it's really, um, and, and we still not in next year. Mm-hmm. So I can only imagine how, uh, next year is going to be if we don't pass this override. So I truly, uh, hope that everyone who is listening and everyone who will watch this, uh, will understand the impact that's going to happen if we don't pass this override. Um, I will also share as a, uh, employee of, so for another town that is also trying to, uh, pass another override and, uh, the, the major cuts that's being, uh, happening in schools and all the activities, um, and the struggles that, um, um, parents and, and youth are sharing. Um, I wanted to thank the youth that came tonight and shared their stories and, and voiced their concerns to us. It really, uh, means a lot. And I feel, um, embarrassed that we had to, to bring them to these meetings to advocate for themselves rather than, uh, being granted for them and, and knowing that we can provide the minimum possible for our youth. Um, I, uh, probably this is a question that could be for both of you or also for the school department, um, for those, um, that are now being compensated because we removed one of the, uh, positions or one of the, you know, uh, whether, I'm gonna give an example. Um, the principal at the high school who is going to be the principal also for the middle school going to be compensated. Uh, my understanding, um, now if this override passes, how is going to be, how is this going to be handled?

▶ 2:04:31 Speaker 5: So I think I understand your question. You're asking about the, the principal, um, compensated for running the two schools. Yes. So that is built into our FY 26 budget right now. That is not contingent on the override, um, passing. So, um, that's been built into our budget extensive talks this spring about how that model would look discussed many models, and that's where the one we landed on. So that's built into the FY 26 budget currently.

▶ 2:04:57 Maya Jamaleddine: And, and if hopefully the override passes, um, that compensation will be, um, taken back. If we hire, if we fill, uh, that position as principal for middle school,

▶ 2:05:11 Speaker 5: If that position was filled, you know, that's something we would explore. We always base staffing funding on student and student need district needs. So we would, we would examine that, and that would be, that wouldn't be something that I would decide in isolation. That would be something that the administration would talk about and make a decision on that moving

▶ 2:05:26 Maya Jamaleddine: Forward. So no decision is made right now. Nothing is clear, but we will be deciding, or you guys will be deciding moving forward, uh, once the override passes.

▶ 2:05:36 Speaker 5: Yep. All, all, all funding decisions are, are based on student need, district needs. Yes.

▶ 2:05:41 Maya Jamaleddine: And do we have already the finalized numbers of all these compensations?

▶ 2:05:47 Speaker 5: So we have for next year, we have a settle contract for teachers and paraprofessionals. Those are our two biggest, um, collective bargaining agreements. And we do have those in place for next year past that we do not have, uh, we are not currently negotiating with them past next year.

▶ 2:06:02 Speaker 2: Okay. Thank you. Thank you.

▶ 2:06:05 Mark Garipay: Uh, I have Council ra then Councillor Brisky. Yes.

▶ 2:06:09 Cal Finocchiaro: Thank you so much for your presentation. And I just, again, wanna thank both of you for spending so much time in that task force. You know, um, you have day jobs and city council, so I'm sure that took up a lot of time. So we appreciate that. Um, and I just keep on coming back to this one question, and I don't even know how to get across, but I think for, and I'm just making a general statement, but for the residents that are sort of questioning this, like, I keep come coming back to why, if we had plethora amount of funds in the city, why would we dedicate so much time and resources, task force, you know, looking for funds, ways to fund the city, and why would we cut so many jobs? I mean, there's an issue here with, with, with funds, right? We're not doing this just because we wanna do this. It obviously, I think there's like 40 other communities around in Massachusetts that are going through something like this right now. I think you said 25 just tried to pass, uh, 14 pass. Um, so I think people, if they just think about that, you know, this is, this is not fun. We're not, this is not something we wanna be doing. Right? Um, and the city needs money, so, and this is the way we, this is the really the only way that we can, um, get the amount of funds that we need for the city to either go along as we are or kind of get better to put in basic terms, right? So, um, I think really that's kind of what I come back to a lot of times, like why we wouldn't be doing this if we didn't have to.

▶ 2:07:45 Speaker 5: Very true.

▶ 2:07:47 Mark Garipay: Thank you. Uh, councilor Osky.

▶ 2:07:50 Speaker 5: Yeah. Uh, thank you to both of you and the task force and everything. And, uh, thank you specifically to Maya for bringing up the issue of the middle school. Um, you know, uh, the budget is sort of what we value. And when I heard we were cutting the middle school principal, I was, wasn't shocked because I knew that we needed to pass the override before, but I was definitely not happy about it in the context of how middle schools function and, um, understanding that we have to make a cut and that, you know, um, you know, the, uh, principal at the high school is amazing, but the idea that we're gonna have a thousand middle schoolers, um, you know, my kid being one of them, um, with a shared principal, if that doesn't emphasize the need for this override, I can't imagine what would, uh, 'cause they create middle schools specifically for a reason because the kids are no longer, um, elementary age and they're no, and they aren't ready for high school. Like one day they will have a teddy bear and the next day they'll have a boyfriend or a girlfriend because that's the way middle schools are. And to manage that, uh, it takes a special disposition and it takes, uh, a group of special people and we have those people in place, but now we're losing them as Maya pointed out, and we're losing them in drastic and dramatic fashion, which really isn't, um, what Melrose is about in any fashion. Um, and so the idea that, um, this doesn't pass would be shocking to me. Uh, so this is just more of a comment than a question that I am happy that you brought that up, and I am glad that, uh, we're moving forward in the direction. I really can't wait till November. Thank You

▶ 2:09:49 Speaker 3: Councilor Hamilton for the second Time. Thank you.

▶ 2:09:53 Speaker 5: Um, I didn't thank everyone the first time.

▶ 2:09:55 Speaker 8: I apologize.

▶ 2:09:58 Speaker 5: We're good. Thank you all. Um, don't forget the

▶ 2:09:59 Mark Garipay: Two that were on the committee.

▶ 2:10:01 Ward Hamilton: I'd like to especially thank yes, president Elli and chair Repe for your leadership and, and on, truthfully, like, I think those were two ideal folks to assign to that committee. So thank you. And I know, I think I can speak for our fellow counselors when I say that, um, between the two of them, we all have a lot of confidence and faith in their abilities. Um, I feel like I'd be remiss if I didn't ask. So we have three questions with big lump sum numbers. As we, as the, um, override campaign gets underway, will we see an understanding of like how those break out, uh, because there are differences, um, from one question to the next. So I guess not really a question that you have to answer, but a, a comment, my observation would be that it would be very helpful for the community to understand other than a lump sum number, what's the difference between a maintenance, uh, and repair budget for DPW? That's roads and sidewalks, road sidewalks, buildings. Mm-hmm. Those types of things. I understand the sensitive nature of the, um, numbers for the bargaining unit, and I'm confident that we'll find a way to, um, you know, give, not give up that information while at the same time, um, having that level of transparency for our voters.

▶ 2:11:21 Speaker 1: So thank you. Thank you. Thanks.

▶ 2:11:24 Speaker 3: Thank you. Anyone else?

▶ 2:11:26 Mark Garipay: If I could just, um, give my experience of being on the, on the committee. Um, I think, uh, someone that knows, I usually pretty outspoken. So, uh, we had a, I'm, we had a lot of, a lot of discussion. I mean, I went from, I changed my opinion three different times. Um, it was great. Hear, hearing all the feedback from, from, uh, everyone else on the committee. We did. We didn't always agree on things. Um, but I think it was, uh, it was good to get everyone in a room and, and actually have a conversation and respect everyone's opinions. I think it was, um, I think it was very important. I think it's a huge step forward for this process. Um, to Counselor Williams'. Point on, I was going back and forth between one number and one question and, and three, and I just thought over the, my history in Melrose, we've had probably five to six overrides and one is passed, and I think maybe it was time to look at it a little differently. So, um, I was happy, um, with where we, where we ended up. And, um, I was happy to be on that, on that committee with my fellow school committee, city employees and President Elli. Uh, but the mayor, thank you. You deserve a lot of credit. But the heavy work went to Kerry, the CFO and Ken Kelly. They did yeoman's work numbers changing 'em. So behind the scenes, the city owes, both of you did a gratitude coming up with these numbers and, and I appreciate it when I was in there. So thank you very much. Appreciate

▶ 2:13:05 Speaker 5: It. If I could just add, city Melrose is very lucky that CFO Golden is here. She is, um, a wealth of resource for, um, municipal finance. I learned things from her all the time. It really is, um, her leadership that's been very helpful through this process. So City Melrose is very lucky that she's here.

▶ 2:13:21 Mark Garipay: And you've done yeoman's work and done a great job since you've, you've been with us for three years. We've been through it. Yeah. Councilor Comm Chaney.

▶ 2:13:30 Speaker 11: I was just gonna make a motion to recommend Second. Second.

▶ 2:13:33 Mark Garipay: We have a motion to recommend id 1 2 7 2 8 late order to place override question on the November 4th, 2025 local election ballot. It's made by Councilor Machete, seconded by Councilor Stewart.

▶ 2:13:52 Speaker 3: On discussion. Madam Clerk, will you please call the role?

▶ 2:13:54 Speaker 8: Yes. Councilor Jamine? Yes. Councilor Occhio? Yes. Councillor Hamilton? Yes. Counselor Rum Chetty? Yes. Counselor Reky. Yes. Counselor Romanul. Yes. Councillor Stewart? Yes. Councillor Vandiver. Yes. Councillor Williams? Yes. President Elli? Yes. Chair Garipay? Yes. All in favor