| Author |
 Topic  |
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 05/17/2009 : 07:50:11 AM
|
Looks like the Ward 1 meeting from a couple of weeks ago sparked a lot of items for this agenda.
1.
I can't say that I disagree with anything that has already been said about using free cash to avoid layoffs. But, beyond that, I think I'll hold off making any further comment on the issue for now. It's too important a decision for the city's financial future to make up your mind on without hearing from all sides. I'll readily admit that I'm definitely leaning in a particular direction but it's not totally out of the realm of possibility that I could change my mind. Truthfully though, it'll be a hard sell.
3.
How do things like employees not getting their longevity payments happen? You'd think the employees would notice at least.
4.
How is it that the only grants that have been submitted to the city council for approval in the last two and half years (as far as meeting agendas and reports go back on the city web site), spanning two administrations, have come from the libraries? You would think that it would be all grants or none. And we know that there have been other grants, including the one to do the Shute Library over. Sounds like I need to do some more research; the city might benefit from doing some research too.
5.
Just so everyone remembers, all that is being done is turning over/advancing the School Department their share of the Medicate Reimbursement money per the Ragucci agreement. One of these times though, I'd really like for them to have an in-depth discussion of this agreement including a review of what its all about, how long it is in effect, whether or not it requires any adjustments after five years and what they would ever do if there weren't enough free cash available to satisfy the request.
6.
Mr. DeCoste stated last week that the Early Separation Incentive program cost the city between $200,000 to $300,000. I'm guessing that amount did not include this transfer. Mr. DeCoste said that there were 22 employee that took advantage of this program. The only detail that we about the positions that were vacated came from the Globe article; they only knew of 17 of those positions. Using their numbers (5 public safety @ $25,000, 4 full-time @ $12,500 and 8 part-time @ $5,000), the cost is $215,000 with five others unknown positions that need to be included in that total.
11.
I thought that this item got sent to the School Committee not the School Department? Let's just hope that cooler heads prevail than what we saw in the local papers.
16.
I hope that Councilor Sierra gets his blue light. I'm tired of this item.
17.
I've said it before, I'll say it again. I just get the feeling that the old high school is just going to become the new issue that just won't go away.
18.
I thought there was already "No Heavy Trucking" allowed on Bow Street?
21.
Sounds like a good idea. The only way to find out what goes on at committee meetings now, a lot of the time anyways, is to actually attend the meetings. Broadcasting them on ECTV would be even better but they couldn't get that done last year.
27. + 28.
I just don't get why Code Enforcement items just don't go directly to Code Enforcement. Putting these items on the agenda just screams face time. I hate election years for that reason.
29.
I know that I'll be in the minority here but I just don't know why a private sale of property belongs on a City Council agenda. Yes, it sticks in my craw too but what's done is done.
30.
I'd classify this suggestion about graffiti as "out of the box" thinking for Councilor Simonelli, even if it is being done in other communities. Good for him. We'll see where it goes, and even more importantly, if it helps the problem.
31.
I wonder what Councilor Bruno's "issue" with the Parks Department is?
32.
Second time in the last few years that the duties of the animal control officer will be discussed in front of the City Council. Isn't that a pretty good indication that there might be something wrong there? |
 |
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 05/18/2009 : 9:22:00 PM
|
I have a headache after that fiasco of a meeting!
"Deb" |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 05/18/2009 : 9:35:02 PM
|
| Sad to say, the only way I could get through that meeting was to look for the humor in it. And I've got to say, I was laughing my @$$ off. Not proud of it though. Still have quite the headache from it. |
Edited by - tetris on 05/18/2009 9:35:33 PM |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 05/18/2009 : 9:40:30 PM
|
Napolitano knows how to push Simonelli's buttons. I think Napolitano does it on purpose and Simonelli falls for it every time.
"Deb" |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 05/18/2009 : 9:55:36 PM
|
Why does P. Napolitano always have to cut him off? I too am starting to think it's deliberate. It's getting obvious.
Just let the man speak. If he's right, he right. If he's wrong, he 's wrong, and HE will suffer the consequence. There was absolutley NO REASON for the "just open the book" insult. Peter Napolitano was out line with that insult. He drew first blood and caused all that commotion over a crossing guard piece. Uncalled for, from all. Sergio screaming like a girl that "he's sick of it" He should just be quiet and mind his business.
All this disrespect is all over the city yards. We got slapped in the face on that one. It gets sold for DOUBLE the price and a deal that the Mayor HIGHLY supported and spoke over and over about "development" on the site "office condos" "jobs for Everett residents" it was all garbage! Now look what we are stuck with......"restaurant depot"......
Steve Simonelli was trying to say that Restaurant Depot will be the same tax base as an open parking lot. We all loose once again. Napolitano was the one that stood up and said "Oh....we cant get anymore money for that property"
I can go on and on and on. The bottom line is, they all want Simonelli to shut up because they played a part in this fiasco, and Steve Simonelli was one of the very few NO votes. Does anyone really think that Restaurant Depot plans on staying there with Wood Waste right next door causing the cat sized rats?
How's that enclosure going Carlo......remember, it was promised by November. I don't see any construction going on. |
Edited by - Tails on 05/18/2009 10:13:22 PM |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2009 : 12:59:57 AM
|
Sorry, but some of the Mayor's remarks during the retiring Police and Fire presentation just rubbed me the wrong way. And I don't think I was the only one.
Seemed liked Councilor Billy Cardello had some place else that he wanted to be tonight with the way that he was trying to move the meeting along. It was a little absurd. To his credit though, he hung in there while others bailed on the meeting.
1.
Before I comment too much on this, I still want to see the budget and any other documentation that exists about the positions that were restored to the budget. It seems to me that a lot of faith is being put into the hope that the future will be better; but we've been told in the past that FY11 will be even worse. So which is it? I think that it's just another case where it is easier for our elected officials to be reactive rather than proactive. It may bite them (and us) in the butt this time if they aren't careful.
3.
Since when do councilors make amendments to requests for transfers? Plenty of detail on the transfer but the numbers didn't add up, I'm sure it was because of rounding. But, if you going to provide that much detail, the numbers should jive.
4.
Now, we're writing letters of thanks to grant writers? Who do we have thank for letting this "credit" thing out of the bag?
5.
Some actual discussion on Medicaid reimbursement? Will wonders never cease? Just so everybody understands, I'm not necessarily against the schools getting the money. I just want to understand it better and to make sure that both the city and the school department are getting a fair deal.
10.
It was really embarrassing that Councilor Simonelli voted incorrectly on this piece and had to change his vote. There's no excuse for not knowing what piece you are voting on, no matter what your mental state. Maybe it would have been better if Simonelli had left after his outburst.
11.
If it wasn't clear before (I doubt that), the source of the Advocate commentary that slammed Councilor Peter Napolitano is pretty obvious now. If you watched the discussion of the issue at the school committee meeting (it was on early tonight because their budget hearing) and heard the letter read at the CC meeting, the message was the pretty much the same except that the Advocate article didn't include the one real pertinent reason why this can't been done. And that was the only thing that needed to be discussed. I thought that it was ridiculous for Councillor Peter Napolitano to accuse Councilor Simonelli of not doing his homework (which was true) when he hadn't done his on allowable Chapter 70 expenses. But why did Councilor Cornelio feel that it was necessary to get involved in the situation? Within a week's time, both Alderman Marcus and Councilor Cornelio have gotten into it with Councilor Simonelli. What do those two have in common? Hmm. Tell ya what guys; I think that the Mayor is more than capable of taking care of his issues with Councilor Simonelli himself.
12.
I really have a problem when members of the City Council can't grasp the actual point of a piece and spin it off in the wrong direction. It does sound like like there may be too much of a gray area in the way the ordinance is written if the Assistant City Solicitor tells us that it could be open to interpretation though. Common sense to take a roll call vote to lay an item on the table? And why would Councilor Simonelli vote against keeping the item alive when he stated he was for it? And why would anyone vote against giving the sponsor of a piece a chance to better explain it before they actually vote on the piece? I thought that was nothing more than a common courtesy?
16.
Yeah!! I hope that the blue light gets put up....pronto! This item had to be taken first? Who signed in for that?
17.
Wasn't really clear if the R.F. Walsh report has been received by the city yet or not. If it has, maybe the residents of the city would like to see a copy of it as well? It's time to use to use the city web site for something more than just a place to post press releases.
18.
So, how is a bogus sign on Bow Street any different than bogus signs down the Village? I guess the authorization for the Bow Street sign was at least in the works at some point in time.
The paperwork was probably lost a long time ago; but, why does the city have such a history of losing paperwork?
21.
Hey! That's right! I didn't dawn on me that if committee reports get posted on the city web, we'll be able to take attendance. I'm surprised that fact didn't get the piece voted down.
26.
Sounds like Councilor Billy Cardello may be looking to get the Fire Department more details.
27. + 28.
I'm still of the opinion that pieces that are on the agenda that have already been discussed with or are just going to be refereed to Code Enforcement don't belong on the agenda. However, I will admit that by these two pieces appearing on the agenda, we actually got two pieces some interesting information. I missed the ZBA meeting notice in the Advocate about the proposal to build an 18 unit apartment building at the site of the Man Street fire; I usually try to read those. It's also good news that the city is going to get some attention from the DCR. And the Mayor thought that his last name got butchered a couple of weeks ago?
29.
At first, I thought it was a cop out that the Mayor wrote a letter to handle this piece, even though I agreed with his position. But after what happened, I was glad that he did. Just imaging how ugly that confrontation would have been otherwise.
31.
That what's the Parks piece was about? Really? That belonged on an agenda?
32.
So what Councilor DiFlorio was really looking for was more enforcement of pooper scooper laws? I find that I have to say this almost every week lately. A lot more care and attention needs to be put into the writing of agenda items. |
|
|
|
Splat
Member
11 Posts |
 Posted - 05/19/2009 : 08:41:40 AM
|
"Sorry, but some of the Mayor's remarks during the retiring Police and Fire presentation just rubbed me the wrong way. And I don't think I was the only one."
No you are not the only one... |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2009 : 09:31:28 AM
|
What was with that "standing ovation and gold watch" crap?
"Deb" |
|
|
|
Wildfire132
Member
31 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2009 : 09:34:11 AM
|
| Does Napolitano push Simonelli's buttons or is it possibly the other way around. I know most won't agree with me but I think that there are 2 sides to this. As early as the first meeting last year after pretty much the entire City Council stressed to the new Mayor the importance of keeping the tax rate down, Simonelli asks the Mayor to buy all new vehicles for City Services. I don't know about you but I wanted to know where he thought the money was gong to come from. A few months later on an entirely unrelated piece, he blindsides the Mayor with questions on his relationship with Thibault. Questions we all want to hear answered, but the Council has an agenda to follow and operates under Robert's Rules. You just don't do that unless you put on a piece specifying you want answers to those questions. I know I said this months ago that Millie Cardello stated that both Napolitano and herself spoke to Simonelli on seperate ocassions about what was going on at Wood Waste last spring and he declined their help. He's been standing up and campaigning for a long time and frankly I'm tired of it. I don't know if it's personal or Simonelli just gets under his skin, but Napolitano has never enjoyed the support of his colleagues and the fact that it seems the majority of the CC is just as perturbed with Simonelli so I don't believe it's all Napolitano's fault. The crossing guard issue was done and especially after FFF's editorials in the local papers, it didn't need Simonelli's campaigning. Who doesn't support the need for crossing guards? I've been watching these meetings for years and there's been bad blood between Cardello & Napolitano in the past so why would she support him if he was out of line. Millie, McKinnon & Simonelli are all close friends of Matewskys. Seriously if you connect the dots, all Simonelli is doing is trying to strike a resonant chord with people who aren't happy with the Mayor to build a base from to go after Marcus. It's been going on for over a year. That's fine but don't do it at a City Council meeting. |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2009 : 09:38:44 AM
|
| Exactly what I was referring to Massdee. His supporters love to tell us to give him a chance; it's things like this that make that very hard to do. I was going to say that words escape me in this situation but that's not really true. It's just I choose not to takke it any further than I have. |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2009 : 09:59:16 AM
|
| I used to think that Simonelli was chasing the Wood Waste issue for at least mostly for the right reasons; now, I'm not so sure. A lot of his other actions though have killed any momentum that he may had and have exposed all of his weaknesses. And I couldn't agree more than he shouldn't be doing many of these things in the council chambers. If any bright people in this city are interested in getting into local politics, I'd suggest that they move to Ward 2; they could pretty much have their choice of seats. |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2009 : 10:08:19 AM
|
I agree with some of your post. Simonelli does go off the subject matter often and at times is out of order. I do think you are mistaken about Simonelli and Matewsky being friends. As far as Napolitano and Simonelli, this is not the first time Peter has made a crack similar to last night. In my opinion, Peter knew exactly what he was doing. Peter is the one who started that fiasco that ended in a five minute recess. Of course Simonelli needs to learn to shut his mouth and handle these things differently. Every time Simonelli gets up to speak you can hear Raneiri and B Cardello making their nasty rude comments. If you attend a CC meeting, it is even worse. ECTV's microphones don't pick it all up.
No matter what any of the Councilors think of each other, it should not be so blatantly apparent at the Council Meeting. Every member should be treated with respect. After all, the residents of their wards voted them in. I feel every rude comment that comes out of Raneiri and Cardello's mouth is disrespecting the people of Ward 2 who voted Simonelli in office.
For the most part, I get extremely frustrated with Simonelli but I do feel his heart is in the right place. I do not think his antics at the meetings have anything to do with campaigning. I think it's Simonelli being Simonelli.
I, also, have been watching and attending these meetings for years. In my honest opinion, the crap with Simonelli didn't start until he stood up for the people of Everett on the Wood Waste issue.
They all need to learn some respect for each other. As you said, the meeting isn't the place for this. Peter should have talked to Simonelli privately after the meeting instead of tossing out his comment. There is enough blame to go around for all of them.
"Deb" |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2009 : 10:19:43 AM
|
Peter would never say that to anyone else about "7th grade civics” and "It's as easy as opening a book"..... Peter does that because he gets away with it and everyone backs him because it's Simonelli.
Sorry...........but both times he has come out with these rude comments, he too has been proven wrong. So he's no better, he's actully worse, since he's the one spewing out insults to a fellow council member. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2009 : 10:29:31 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wildfire132
Does Napolitano push Simonelli's buttons or is it possibly the other way around. I know most won't agree with me but I think that there are 2 sides to this. As early as the first meeting last year after pretty much the entire City Council stressed to the new Mayor the importance of keeping the tax rate down, Simonelli asks the Mayor to buy all new vehicles for City Services. I don't know about you but I wanted to know where he thought the money was gong to come from. A few months later on an entirely unrelated piece, he blindsides the Mayor with questions on his relationship with Thibault. Questions we all want to hear answered, but the Council has an agenda to follow and operates under Robert's Rules. You just don't do that unless you put on a piece specifying you want answers to those questions. I know I said this months ago that Millie Cardello stated that both Napolitano and herself spoke to Simonelli on seperate ocassions about what was going on at Wood Waste last spring and he declined their help. He's been standing up and campaigning for a long time and frankly I'm tired of it. I don't know if it's personal or Simonelli just gets under his skin, but Napolitano has never enjoyed the support of his colleagues and the fact that it seems the majority of the CC is just as perturbed with Simonelli so I don't believe it's all Napolitano's fault. The crossing guard issue was done and especially after FFF's editorials in the local papers, it didn't need Simonelli's campaigning. Who doesn't support the need for crossing guards? I've been watching these meetings for years and there's been bad blood between Cardello & Napolitano in the past so why would she support him if he was out of line. Millie, McKinnon & Simonelli are all close friends of Matewskys. Seriously if you connect the dots, all Simonelli is doing is trying to strike a resonant chord with people who aren't happy with the Mayor to build a base from to go after Marcus. It's been going on for over a year. That's fine but don't do it at a City Council meeting.
My opinion is Napolitano should mind his business. He had no right to cut Simonelli off. You mention the tax rate, new vehicles, and all these things that Simonelli is doing wrong.
It’s not Peter Napolitano’s place to be correcting anyone like that. That’s up to the President, not him. We have enough loud mouths on the other side of the room that try and control meetings. Millie can handle it, having Peter’s insults and little jabs only adds fuel to the fire.
The bottom line is there would not have been a blow up if it was not for the insult. I agreed with Peter’s recommendation to the school department. I had no idea where Simonelli was going with that, perhaps he misunderstood it, but don’t insult the man. He deserves more respect than that.
|
|
|
|
Marie
Senior Member
114 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2009 : 11:29:36 AM
|
Napolitano comes off as a rude pompous ass. Simonelli was speaking. Napolitano was out of order and Millie Cardello should have stated so. It was her responsibility to put Napolitano in HIS place and tell HIM he was out of order. If Napolitano had done his homework on the crossing guard piece, it would have never even made the agenda. Napolitano is not as good as he thinks he is. He has one of the biggest ego's on the Common Council. I guess he doesn't know that there is no "I" in team.
Napolitano's actions is what started last nights shouting match. The blame can be put squarely on Napolitano's shoulders.
Simonelli had the class to apologize.
Of course, Napolitano did not.
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Com Council/2009
