| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Linda M
Member
43 Posts |
Posted - 06/25/2010 : 12:54:48 PM
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN, MONDAY, JUNE 28, 2010, 7:00 PM, PETER J. MCCARREN MEMORIAL CHAMBERS, EVERETT, MA
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1.
A0177-10
To all persons interested in the Petition for a Repair-Auto Body License from M & J Auto Body & Repair at 101 Paris Street.
2.
A0178-10
To all persons interest in the Petition for a Repair-Mechanical and Auto Body License from Brazil-USA Customs at 3 Charlton Street.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM HIS HONOR THE MAYOR
3.
A0179-10 Order/s/Aderman Robert J. Van Campen, as President
Subject to confirmation by the Honorable Board of Aldermen, I hereby appoint Bishop Robert G. Brown of the Zion Baptist Church, to serve as Chaplain of the Everett Police Department for one (1) year ending June 21, 2011. This is an unpaid appointment.
4.
A0180-10 Order/s/Alderman Robert J. Van Campen, as President
Subject to confirmation by the Honorable Board of Aldermen, I hereby appoint Leon Pizzano to the Planning Board for a term to end February 2013.
PAPERS FROM THE COMMON COUNCIL
5.
C0111-10 Order/s/Councilor Rosa DiFlorio, as President
That $10,000,000.00 is appropriated for the purpose of financing the construction of the following water pollution abatement facilities: rehabilitation and/or replacement of sewers, drains, culverts and appurtenances in the Behan and Beacham Street area, including without limitation all costs thereof as defined in Section 1 of Chapter 29C of the General Laws; that to meet this appropriation the Treasurer with the approval of the Mayor is authorized to borrow $10,000,000.00 and issue bonds or notes therefore under G.L. C.44 or any other enabling legislation and/or Chapter 29C of the General Laws. (Passed sent up for concurrence, reconsideration failed)
6.
C0112-10 Order/s/Councilor Rosa DiFlorio, as President
To Appropriate $200,000.00 from Budgetary Fund Balance to the Continuing Appropriation Account - Design Services Beacham Street to pay for design of the sewer lines on Beacham Street, as this design component of the project cannot be included in the loan. (Passed sent up for concurrence, reconsideration failed)
7.
C0113-10 Order/s/Councilor Rosa DiFlorio, as President
To appropriate the amount of $95,000.00 from the General Fund's Budgetary Fund Balance to the Facility Maintenance Electricity and Gas Account due to the cost of keeping the old high school operational. (Passed sent up for concurrence)
8.
C0114-10 Order/s/Councilor Rosa DiFlorio, as President
That in accordance with an agreement entered into on June 2, 2004 by former Mayor David Ragucci, that the sum of $284,000.00 is hereby authorized and appropriated from the Budgetary Fund Balance to the Everett Public Schools Instructional Teacher Salaries Account for Medicaid Reimbursement funding. (Passed sent up for concurrence)
9.
A0004-10 Ordinance/s/Alderman Michael K. Marchese
To add new subsections to the Zoning Ordinances, Appendix A, Section 21A. Adult Entertainment Land Use, (b) Definitions, by inserting the following: (6) Pawn Shops, (7) Piercing, (8) Check cashing, (9) Tattoo Parlors and (10) Gun Shops; to restrict the locations of theses establishments thereby promoting the safety and welfare of the City's inhabitants, and to enhance attractive business areas in the City. (Enrolled in concurrence, sent up for ordainment)
PETITIONS AND LICENSES
10.
A0181-10 Petition for Antique/Second Hand/Collectibles Dealer for Red Light Communications at 608 Broadway from Samuel & Igor Saillant.
11.
A0182-10 Petition for a Dormitory at Pope John XXlll High School, 888 Broadway for one (1) floor consisting of 27 rooms.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
12.
A0140-10
Committee on Finance Report on Order from His Honor The Mayor-To appropriate the amount of $135,000.00 from the General Fund's Budgetary Fund Balance to the Facility Maintenance Electricity and Gas Account due to the cost of keeping the old high school operational; with a recommendation for favorable action.
13.
A0125-10
Committee on Licenses Report on Petition for Mechanical Repair Shop License from Faissal Daaboul D/B/A Main St Auto Center, Inc. at 339 Main Street.
14.
A0163-10
Committee on Licenses Report Petition from Planet Tran, LLC for renewal and expansion of livery garage licenses to 25-50 vehicles for Planet Tran's all-hybrid livery fleet at 3 Charlton Place.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
15.
A0174-10 Order/s/Alderman Robert J. Van Campen, as President
In accordance with M.G.L., Chapter 41, Section 91, the Mayor and the Police Chief recommend revocation of the constable license of Mr. Tracy Tinkham due to gross misconduct.
16.
A0119-10 Resolution/s/Alderman Joseph McGonagle and Alderman Robert Van Campen
To revisit issues in the vicinity of Corey Street, including municipal parking lot, that is, speeding, barriers, fence and loud noises.
17.
A0145-10 Resolution/s/Alderman Robert Van Campen
That the Mayor of the City of Everett appear this meeting of the Board of Aldermen to disclose and discuss the Administration's recent feasibility study/analysis of all City-owned buildings under the care and control of the City of Everett.
NEW BUSINESS
18.
A0183-10 Order/s/Alderman Michael K. Marchese
That the MBTA remove the bus stop at 179-181 Elm Street and return it to 173 Elm Street.
19.
A0184-10
BOA Worksheet Monday, June 28, 2010
1.Sponsor: Alderman Michael J. Mangan-That Spruce Street is done over between Jefferson Ave and Dartmouth Street.
Referred to: City Services Director and Operations Manager, City Engineer, Community Development and Mayor Carlo DeMaria
2. Sponsor: Alderman Michael K. Marchese-To remove the cars on City of Everett property located between the Glendale Gas Station and the parking lot which houses Walgreen’s and other stores, as it is becoming an eyesore.
Referred to: Mayor DeMaria, Chief Mazzie and Brian Zaniboni.
Adjournment
Respectfully submitted:
Caroline McCorry
Administrative Assistant/Office Manager
Everett City Council Office
council@ci.everett.ma.us
Meeting Dates:
7/15 6:00 p.m. Committee on Bills & Accounts Meeting
8/16 7:00 p.m. Common Council Meeting
8/23 7:00 p.m. Next Board of Aldermen Meeting
You must be logged in to see this link.
|
 |
|
|
Heisenberg
Member
64 Posts |
 Posted - 06/26/2010 : 3:00:28 PM
|
9.
A0004-10 Ordinance/s/Alderman Michael K. Marchese
To add new subsections to the Zoning Ordinances, Appendix A, Section 21A. Adult Entertainment Land Use, (b) Definitions, by inserting the following: (6) Pawn Shops, (7) Piercing, (8) Check cashing, (9) Tattoo Parlors and (10) Gun Shops; to restrict the locations of theses establishments thereby promoting the safety and welfare of the City's inhabitants, and to enhance attractive business areas in the City. (Enrolled in concurrence, sent up for ordainment)
I’m glad it’s happening but I think it’s a day late and a dollar short. I’d say with the exception of pawn shops and gun shops, Everett has one to many piercing, check cashing, and tattoo parlors, (I’ll also add redemption centers) but I’m glad the good alderman is trying.
15.
A0174-10 Order/s/Alderman Robert J. Van Campen, as President
In accordance with M.G.L., Chapter 41, Section 91, the Mayor and the Police Chief recommend revocation of the constable license of Mr. Tracy Tinkham due to gross misconduct.
I don’t know if anyone else watched the meeting, but there is just something about this guy I don’t like. I’ll watch the meeting and I’ll hear all sides but going on what I saw last time I just don’t trust this guy.
19.
A0184-10
BOA Worksheet Monday, June 28, 2010
2. Sponsor: Alderman Michael K. Marchese-To remove the cars on City of Everett property located between the Glendale Gas Station and the parking lot which houses Walgreen’s and other stores, as it is becoming an eyesore.
Referred to: Mayor DeMaria, Chief Mazzie and Brian Zaniboni.
How about getting the COMMERCIAL vehicles out of the Whitter School parking lot as well??????
|
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2010 : 08:10:36 AM
|
5.
C0111-10 Order/s/Councilor Rosa DiFlorio, as President
That $10,000,000.00 is appropriated for the purpose of financing the construction of the following water pollution abatement facilities: rehabilitation and/or replacement of sewers, drains, culverts and appurtenances in the Behan and Beacham Street area, including without limitation all costs thereof as defined in Section 1 of Chapter 29C of the General Laws; that to meet this appropriation the Treasurer with the approval of the Mayor is authorized to borrow $10,000,000.00 and issue bonds or notes therefore under G.L. C.44 or any other enabling legislation and/or Chapter 29C of the General Laws. (Passed sent up for concurrence, reconsideration failed)
6.
C0112-10 Order/s/Councilor Rosa DiFlorio, as President
To Appropriate $200,000.00 from Budgetary Fund Balance to the Continuing Appropriation Account - Design Services Beacham Street to pay for design of the sewer lines on Beacham Street, as this design component of the project cannot be included in the loan. (Passed sent up for concurrence, reconsideration failed)
I predict that this will pass the BOA. I hope the members of the BOA did some of their own research through the State and make an informative vote. |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2010 : 5:07:15 PM
|
| I will be paying close attention to tonight's meeting and who votes in favor of this $10 million bond. |
|
|
|
just wondering
Senior Member
387 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2010 : 5:28:57 PM
|
| Why not show up in person at the meeting. That will let your alderperson know that you are concerned. |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2010 : 7:19:20 PM
|
| My alderman already knows that I am concerned. |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2010 : 9:37:20 PM
|
| It sounds like the BOA did some research on bond issue. |
|
|
|
just wondering
Senior Member
387 Posts |
Posted - 06/29/2010 : 10:18:43 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by massdee
It sounds like the BOA did some research on bond issue.
Not sure what that means. It sounded to me like they got all of the answers to their questions. There was nothing left to ask and nothing left unanswered.
To me, it sounded like Alderman's DiPerri, McGonagle, Sachetta and Van Campen were all successful in playing politics. The sad part is that us taxpayers get to pay the bill for their game. With a single vote, they have cost the city atleast $1,000 per day in DEP fines. And that isn't even the worst part. With the ability to get a 1% loan no longer an option, each additional % point is going to cost us $571,000 over the life of the loan. That seems like a high price to pay to make a political point. |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 06/29/2010 : 10:42:54 AM
|
I'm not so sure they were making a political point. I think they were trying to make sure the City of Everett wasn't on the hook for work being done on private property and for the City of Chelsea. That was what I took away from the meeting. I believe if the Administration had been able to get something in writing from the private company and the City of Chelsea the bond would have passed last night.
Just because someone disagrees with an issue it does not make it political. We have elected officials so we can hear all sides of an issue. It's the check and balance of our political system. |
|
|
|
just wondering
Senior Member
387 Posts |
Posted - 06/29/2010 : 11:05:12 AM
|
I heard multiple times last night that if a written agreement could not be reached with BMT, the culvert work would not be done. I also heard multiple times that if an agreement with the City of Chelsea could not be reached, the sewer spurs coming off the mainline in Chelsea would not be part of the project. That is exactly how it should be done....and exactly how the BoA wanted it done. The mayor and BoA were in agreement on this. I know they were in agreement because I watched the meeting.
The BoA's desire to micromanage the Mayor's office (that is the political point you are conveniently overlooking) will cost the taxpayers (including me and you MassDee) at the very least, a half a million dollars. On top of that, the potential for raw sewage backing up into taxpayers homes and streets still exists.
I know you are going to come back with 'We need assurances that BMT will payback their part of the loan'....I would then say to you 'If BMT continues to have trucks falling into a collapsing culvert, they may find it more appealing to move their operations (and their tax dollars) elsewhere' Given its location, how long do you think it would take for that land to turn into a scrap metal yard? |
|
|
|
card
Senior Member
117 Posts |
Posted - 06/29/2010 : 12:17:02 PM
|
| well just wondering do you blame us???? we need assurance in this frail state we are living in why should we the taxpayers pick up the 5.5 million, here is a thought get off the computer and go get the grants to help fund the project you would be more productive that way, Carlo your boss made deals and don't say otherwise, and he was shut down last nite, at least the alderman are looking out for us and not the mayor. you on the other hand are not to be trusted anymore everything you speak will be taken with a grain of salt from here on end |
|
|
|
cozulady
Senior Member
165 Posts |
Posted - 06/29/2010 : 12:56:05 PM
|
| I watched the meeting because I wanted to see how it all played out. Every question asked was answered. The BOA had the option of bonding only $5.5M for the required work and to leave out the BMT. Even if we bonded the entire $10M, we were not obligated to spend all of it or give any of it to BMT. It would be there to complete the necessary drainage issue and any funds not used would be returned to the state. No interest would be charged on any unused portion. Also, the use of the funds would not be until late fall 2010 or early spring 2011. Now, we will still need to fix the problem but at a higher percentage rate thereby costing the taxpayers of Everett even more money. Yes, I agree that it was not presented in a timely manner (for whatever reason), however shooting it down completely may cost us more in the long run. Let's see what happens. I hope that some of you that are glad that it was killed live in the area and have to deal with the problem personally. |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 06/29/2010 : 1:01:23 PM
|
Backing the City Council into a corner and forcing them to make a "take-it or leave-it" decision is a long-standing political tradition in this city. Mayor DeMaria readily admits that he didn't like it when it was done to him when he served on the City Council. Yet, if you go back and check the City Council agendas for the last three Junes, you'll see that he has done nothing but continue that tradition.
It's also a long standing tradition for the city's administrations to only share with the City Council information that they want them to know when they feel that they need to know it. The fact that the administration entered into a consent agreement with the DEP two years ago means that they knew this day was coming; but, they were the only ones that did. And this wasn't the only piece on the agenda like that. The report on city buildings has been available since last July but was only made available to the City Council in the last month or so.
And when faced with situations like this in the past, the City Council has usually relented and let the administrations have their way. So why would the current adminstration think that this situation would be any different? And because of that, I don't believe that the administration did a very good job of addressing all of the details that they needed to in order to "sell" these projects to the Board of Aldermen.
Instead, what the Board got again was essientially the same request to "Trust me" that didn't work when the administration was looking for approval to sell the old High School . That didn't work then; why would anyone expect for it to work now? It begs the question of whether or not this administraion actually learns from its mistakes.
In the current economic situation, it is tough to swallow the state mandating a $5.5 million project or being forced to face a possible hefty fine. But I could actually have actually supported this project if the City Council felt comfortable that all the "i's" had been dotted and all the "t's" had been crossed. I could even support borrowing the money to fix culvert if the appropriate agreements had been negotiated and were in place.
I think that the city has lost a golden oppotunity to borrow the money needed to do these projects at a very low interest rate. If you're a DeMaria supporter, sure you are ready to lay this at the feet of the Board of Alderman. But we'll never know what would have happened if the administration had submitted a complete package for these projects, now will we? |
|
|
|
just wondering
Senior Member
387 Posts |
Posted - 06/29/2010 : 1:04:34 PM
|
It's already been established that I am not employed by the city. And yes, I do blame you. You and people of your ilk are partially to blame for the inefficiency of municipal government. You make a statement like 'here is a thought get off the computer and go get the grants to help fund the project' as if all you have to do is apply for a grant and the money is given to you. You make those statements as if no one has ever thought of getting a grant to do this work. Are you aware of some secret grant program that may have been overlooked? A point was made last night about our state and federal representation being called upon to help us out of this mess. Congressman Markey has been unsuccessful in securing funds for this project. A project that has been around in some form for atleast 3 and maybe 4 administrations. How much longer should the city hold out for our state and federal legislature to provide some relief? Absent of that relief, the city was presented with 2 very appealing opportunities....a 1% loan and the opportunity for a private business to participate in the repayment of the project cost. I suspect that any mayor would have jumped at the chance to solve a 10 year old problem in this way. Holding out for a ficticious grant could cost the city a million dollars in the long run. In the meantime, sewage will occasionally overflow. I'm guessing you don't live in those areas so you can overlook that little problem. One that will hit home is that every time you take a trip down to King Arthurs for a lap dance or over to the porn trailer for your favorite video you will continue to run the risk of breaking an axle, flattening a tire or snapping a tie rod.
The ever present danger of raw sewage backups, gasoline tankers falling into sinkholes and flooded city streets should have been more than enough reasons to take advantage of the opportunities presented to the city. |
|
|
|
just wondering
Senior Member
387 Posts |
Posted - 06/29/2010 : 1:25:36 PM
|
'Instead, what the Board got again was essientially the same request to "Trust me" that didn't work when the administration was looking for approval to sell the old High School . That didn't work then; why would anyone expect for it to work now? It begs the question of whether or not this administraion actually learns from its mistakes.'
The request to 'Trust Me' didn't work....but that doesn't mean it shouldnt have worked. The BoA shot down the mayors request regarding the high school. Instead, they demanded a public meeting for abutters to voice their concerns. I attended that meeting. I heard nothing new from residents that wasnt already discussed or considered to be common sense. You present the mayors 'Trust Me' stance as a learning experience for the mayor. I disagree. I think it should have been a learning experience for the BoA. Absolutely nothing came from delaying the declaration of surplus property. Nothing new was learned by the BoA. Yet here we are....for no good reason, delaying the sale and continuing to write checks for maintenance. In the case of the old high school, the decision by the BoA to not trust the mayor has already backfired. We continue to pay for maintenance and at the same time send a strong message to potential developers that we really aren't ready for new development.
Higher interest rates for the sewer/culvert project, loss of a private business partner and delaying the declaration of the old HS as surplus property will cost us millions of dollars. While that may not have been the BoA's intent when deciding to micromanage.....it is certainly a biproduct of their actions. Shouldn't they atleast take that into consideration when they make these decisions?
|
Edited by - just wondering on 06/29/2010 1:27:43 PM |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
BOA 2010
