It was a marathon meeting, so I’m going to play around with the order in which I present. The differences between the councilors are coming into focus, and I am delighted that discussions have been informative and persuasive. Let’s get to it, already…
Accomplished
The Council approved second passage of the wetlands ordinances discussed in the 10 March meeting.
The planning board returned their unanimous opinion on eliminating a few odd buffer zones in the marijuana zoning ordinance, and the council agreed, save Councilor Dominguez, who voted against the change. Upon second passage, dispensaries will no longer be forbidden from operating within 500 feet of funeral homes or houses of worship, or 1000 feet of institutions of higher education, colleges, or universities.
The Committee on Government Services put forward two matters: a return to in-person meetings, with hybrid options, and the determination not to appoint a liaison to Salem United. [Edited to reflect reality]: There was one inclusive practice adopted with the return to in-person. Councilors will not be required to stand when speaking. Councilor Hapworth noted [Section 10 of the council rules] that members of the body should be speaking to the issue at hand and leaving personalities out of the equation. The committee reviewed the Council’s history with Salem United and conferred with the city solicitor before determining that appointing a liaison to was not ideal. For example, it could interfere with the city and the organization’s ability to seek out funding. The council voted unanimously on the hybrid meeting, and Dominguez was the sole voice voting against the liaison decision.
The council approved money for radio and vehicle maintenance for the Salem police ($273K); vacation and sick time buy backs for retiring city workers ($200K); advertising to the public for city council business ($30K); services rendered for a sprinkler emergency at Salem police department ($11K, with a note that they are looking into insurance reimbursement); and accepted a $5K donation from Salem Five for tree planting in the Common.
They also approved an intercity transfer (from the city of Salem to the Salem Redevelopment Authority) pertaining to the stairs on the Crescent city lot, which are a city-owned right-of-way and not part of the Crescent lot.
And, finally, there was a robust discussion around spending $80K on a Licensed Site Professional Services report to identify contaminants at Gonyea Park before moving forward with landscape improvements for the green space. The report is required because coal tar was discovered on the plot and remediated in 2011 and the Mass Department of Environmental Protection requires that there be “no significant risk,” before such improvements are made. It was ultimately approved, but Councilor McClain pointed out that there were many contaminated green spaces and cautioned the city to be equitable.
Meetings and matters forthcoming
The council sent a lot to committee, some matters that surely will not see the council floor this year (or even this term, to be honest). They are an ambitious bunch, but look up a the block of text above, they are certainly getting a lot done.
Councilor Cohen requested that the Committee on Government Services (with the Committee of the Whole [COW]) meet to discuss the feasibility of Salem owning and distributing its own electric and gas. Councilor Riccardi wants the Public Health, Safety and the Environment (PHSE) committee to review the environmental impact of road salt (also co-posted with COW). [Side note editorial, this should be an interesting discussion because the alternatives to road salt are plentiful, sometimes humorous, and often quite expensive.] Riccardi also requested a meeting between taxi drivers, the police, and the committee on Ordinances, Licenses and Legal Affairs (OLLA) to discuss rates given the recent gas price hikes. Dominguez requested that a translator be on-hand at that meeting. The foodware and packaging bill that is still in PHSE should be ready for the council floor by the next meeting. (We will be posting the informative video with Councilor Valera on this matter presently!) The green infrastructure ordinance came back from the planning board favorably (6-0), but this one was referred to OLLA co-posted with COW to review the ordinance and work out some of the clarifications requested by the planning board. Gov Services will also consider a petition from a citizen to place a moratorium on events on the Common until it has been able to recover. In three separate, future meetings, the mayor, Superintendent Zrike, and Destination Salem will present to the council.
Traffic and Parking
Believe it or not, the council already approved many of the October resident parking restrictions and temporary meter matters. Because resident parking is only free in some metered locations if you register with the Passport app, the temporary metered spaces matter was referred back to OLLA until the council can determine how technologically challenged residents can benefit from this, as well.
The somewhat controversial matter of moving some of the authority currently residing with city council to the traffic and parking commission is back on the table, and was referred to OLLA co-posted with COW. Councilor Prosniewski voiced his main concern, which is that the ward councilors know their ward best and were voted by the people to handle these sorts of matters. Hapworth pointed out that traffic and parking is problematic in Salem and the council reviews each matter as it comes in piecemeal. Moving some of the authority to this commission could result in a future-looking, systematic review of parking and traffic, because they have the time and remit to do so. This will be an interesting discussion. Councilor Watson-Felt, who is the liaison to the commission, was the one to bring this matter to the floor. Watson-Felt requested a line-by-line review of the Traffic & Parking ordinance to see how the council can move forward.
Mayor Driscoll’s Compensation
Another topic that garnered a lot of discussion was whether or not to approve the 2.5% cost of living raise recommended by the Administration and Finance committee (4-1, with Councilor McClain opposing). As the councilors went around the floor, each one was clear that their opinion was not based on the mayor’s performance, which was lauded numerous times. Councilor McCarthy noted that though the council’s pay is tied to the mayor’s salary (Ed: I hate that so very much), their raise would not go into effect until after the next municipal election. Generally, the opposition to the raise made the points that cost-of-living increases for an executive were unusual (Riccardi) and that Driscoll’s current compensation was slightly higher than comparable positions (Cohen, Riccardi, McClain). McClain also noted that it was their job to ensure that the compensation was fair, and the review of other city mayors showed that it was. Prosniewski expressed his own ethical dilemma with voting to increase their own increase. And, President Morsillo said she would rather see that money funneled into the city workers’ salaries so they can retain talented staff. Two councilors voted in favor of a raise: McCarthy and Merkl; all others voted against. The raise was not approved.
Whew! Thanks for sticking it out with me!
Respectfully submitted,
Jen Lynch