Good evening, everyone.

I'm Ben Wheeler.

I use he, him pronouns.

I am the counselor at large, a counselor at large, and the finance committee chair.

It is 6 p.m.

on the dot, and I'd like to call to order the Tuesday, July 7th, 2026 meeting of the Finance Committee of the Summerville City Council.

This meeting of a city council committee will be conducted via remote participation following chapter two of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts' acts of 2025.

We'll post an audio video recording and a comprehensive record of these proceedings as soon as possible after the meeting on the City of Somerville website and local cable access government channels.

We are joined by City Clerk Madeline Latelier.

Clerk Latelier, could you please call the role to establish quorum?

This is roll call, Counselor Link.

Counselor.

Sorry, Councilor Strozo.

Present.

Counselor Hart.

Yeah.

Counselor Scott.

Rosen.

Counselor Wheeler.

Here.

With all counselors present, we have quorum.

Thank you.

We'll be taking up our eight-item agenda in the order posted.

And as a general note, if I pronounce anyone's name wrong or get your title wrong or use the wrong pronouns for you, please don't hesitate to interrupt me.

I want to get it right.

Okay.

So first committee meeting, uh committee minutes.

We have uh minutes from a whole bunch of budget hearing and budget season uh committee meetings to approve.

Um let's take up items one through seven together.

So I will read those.

Item one, 26-0943, approval of the minutes of the finance committee meeting of May 26th, 2026.

Item two, 26-1142, approval of the minutes of the finance committee meeting of June 9th, 2026.

Item 3, 26-1143, approval of the minutes of the finance committee meeting of June 10th, 2026.

Item 4, 26-1144, approval of the minutes of the finance committee meeting of June 15th, 2026.

Item 5, 26-1145, approval of the minutes of the finance committee meeting of June 16th, 2026.

Item 6, 26-1146, approval of the minutes of the finance committee meeting of June 17th, 2026.

And item seven, 26-1149, approval of the minutes of the finance committee meeting of the whole meeting, finance committee of the whole meeting on June 23rd, 2026.

Any discussion on these items.

Seeing no discussion, these items are laid on the table to recommend approval at the end of the meeting.

Uh, with thanks to the clerk's team for putting these minutes together.

And that brings us to the only substantive item on our agenda.

Item 8, 26-0378, requesting approval to accept and expend a 231,635 grant with no new match required from the Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and Security to the police department for a body worn camera program.

Um, so this is an item that we have discussed a whole bunch of different times.

We've gotten some updated uh materials and heard communications from some city staff uh between the last finance committee meeting and this one, much of that in the um the general council meeting.

Uh I wanted to just force first check.

Um, I see that we have Chief Schumaine Benford.

Um, I know we also have um intergovernmental affairs director Ameda Najem Williams.

Uh Director Benford and Director Najum Williams.

Do either of you have anything to add that we have not already discussed uh in committee or in the council on this.

No pressure.

Um, Mr.

Chair through the chair.

Um nothing to add, and I would defer to our director Najin Williams for the comment if any.

Thank you, Chief.

Thank you.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Uh, Najin Williams, Director of Intergovernmental Affairs.

Uh, thank you for the opportunity.

Uh, I would say that the administration doesn't have much additional to add here.

I know that Mayor spoke to this item on the 25th, if my memory is uh still correct.

I believe that's correct.

Um we're still in the haze of many, many a budget council meeting.

So uh forgive me, but on the 25th, um, so we ask is still what was communicated in that memo um and in place of notes that uh this item discharged um from the finance committee for the legation option by the city council on just echoing the dynamic administration's um positioning that we are happy to call as well for meeting in um July to address this item on the tandem with any other items related to the on the camera grants on a lot of the interesting by the happy to answer any questions along the chief then for document of the county.

Thank you so much.

Um I feel like there are a lot of different uh sort of factual things that we've we have discussed that are relevant here.

I don't feel like it necessarily makes sense for me to go down a big list of them, but if we're discussing this and they feel relevant, I might bring you know ask to pause to sort of refer to some of those.

And I also know there was uh a related uh surveillance technology impact report item that was uh discharged from the legislative matters committee without a recommendation that will be on the agenda for Thursday's council meeting.

So just having that stuff um on the table, so to speak.

Um okay, members of the committee, uh any discussion or questions about this item.

Counselor Scott.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

I would just note that in addition to the discharge items, there has been a new version submitted of those items as well by the mayor.

I think this is the third one, and it will be on our agenda uh in the regular order.

Thank you.

Um Counselor Scott, I I was uh watching some of that meeting, and I know uh counselor Davis had brought up some concerns about the thoroughness of the of the content of the surveillance technology impact report.

Just just for my understanding, is the new version, you know, as far as you know, is that what it changes or are there other aspects that are being changed?

My view it does not resolve the issues, Counselor Davis raised, but uh director Najam Williams, I'm sure can give more go more to motive than I can.

Thank you, Counselor Director Najm Williams.

Uh Chair, uh I don't speak for Counselor Davis, but uh good administrators would believe that we couple responsive um to the concerns that we're gonna use in the discussion that we have last week um around the technology specific technology specific surveillance use policy for the body money and uh the surveillance technology, but if there are definitely questions on we are happy to um revisit, but I think we get at this stage the specific the specificity of us was to have that item more clearly with the language of the MOA that was recently and I'm sorry to I don't mean to interrupt you, Director Njun Williams, just in terms of uh a technical comment.

Uh I have no idea if this is an issue on my end, but uh the audio when you were speaking sounds a little muddled in that kind of digital artifact way.

What sometimes when something's not coming through quite clearly, and I I think I got most of what you said.

Uh but um I didn't didn't want to didn't want to let that go by without without a comment.

I don't really have any suggestion for what to do about it.

Sorry.

Sure, same issue on my end.

Okay, thank you, Councillor Link.

Um, uh members of the committee, other comments or suggestions.

Um I also am entertaining motions uh for recommendation, not recommendation.

Uh Councillor Link.

Sure, in my view, I don't think anything has changed um for the finance committee.

Um, um not knowing uh if there's any sort of informal protocol around a chair moving to discharge an item.

Uh I'd be interested to know uh members of the committee's thoughts about discharging this item without a recommendation today.

Counselor Link.

Uh I'm I maintain the same position that I had last time, and that I think it's we're we're um there's not really great grounds to I will start over.

Um I don't believe that we should have discharged, I don't believe that the respect to my colleagues in uh legislative matters.

I I maintain the same position that I had last time in that I think it's we're we're um there's not really great grounds to I will we're we'll start over um I don't believe that we should have discharged I don't believe that the with all due respect to my colleagues in uh legislative matters I don't believe um discharging before um the process was complete was the correct thing to do and I think that um I I am not interested in um you know we talked a little bit before about uh we didn't want to say the words like ramming something through but I think it's um an accurate description at this point um if we're just gonna say that we're gonna discharge everything about this without recommendation so we can talk about it all in two days um before there's been uh public hearing um and honestly with not much time to uh you know review and ask questions um it doesn't seem like we're we're doing our jobs um if we're if we're just gonna let this all go straight through I understand the position of the administration um however uh I think that there's a lot of information that we just haven't um properly discussed um at either the um legislative matters level or at um you know uh as a full council and it just does not seem like the right thing to be doing thank you Council Link Counselor Scott uh thank you Mr.

Chair uh it is clearly the administration's desire to discharge this item uh without a recommendation I don't think that's the job of the committee I think the job of the committee is to make recommendation uh so if you're gonna entertain any motion tonight I think as last time it should simply be a motion to recommend approval and see what our colleagues think about uh I want to appreciate Counselor Link's frustration uh because again it was it's very clearly the opinion of the chair of legislative matters that this is not ready for prime time however uh if the administration would like a vote on this uh I suppose they can have their vote and I recommend beginning with some unless it is your intention to keep this item in committee until the fall thank you.

Thank you counselor Scott Counselor Hart Thank you Chair.

Speaking to the financial implications of this grant I I don't feel comfortable recommending approval because of the expenses even though we have the grant to cover the technology it would still require additional expenses um for the two percent raise um and so given our budget constraints that we've just been through and the um you know difficult choices that had to be made I don't feel comfortable from you know the finance committee recommending approval certainly thank you counselor Hart uh not seeing other hands uh my own perspective is uh very similar to what you just said eloquently Counselor Hart uh the total by my little summary math um from the the latest summary uh memo that we got um is that the ongoing year-to-year cost would be 446 thousand dollars total uh of which about 2500 215 thousand dollars is um is in the the two percent uh salary bump uh 117 I believe if I'm remembering correctly is in the additional position uh I I think the uh body war camera policy that's in the superior uh officer uh union MOA uh is a huge improvement over the the previous version and I think that's something that we should be proud of I think there's a a lot there that would be good if we were to be able to implement body worn cameras and I think in my mind um it's just a just a money barrier right now uh this has been a tremendously difficult financial year there's a lot of things that we sacrificed every department in the city uh made sacrifices and um I think that it's just not the right time to commit to indefinite years and years of nearly half a million dollars a year.

If the vote is not prevailed, then the item is discharged by being recommended not to be approved.

Thank you for the help with that clarity.

I guess that is a little simpler.

Um okay.

Um I've been doing a little reviewing of the procedural rules.

Uh right now I am entertaining discussion about this motion.

Uh I would also entertain a motion to a motion for the previous question, which would have us do the vote right away.

I believe this is the right procedure.

Uh counselor Link.

Uh on the motion, I I agree with that.

We should um we should vote to approve with my intention to um reject.

We you know, we were told that we don't have, you know, like when it comes to intervention is at schools, we don't have two two nickels to rub together.

Um, and I think that you know it uh we clearly if we just if we don't have the money, we don't have the money.

Um and uh, you know, I think the other piece for me is that you know something that is expensive and has a um a clear and provable value um is worth considering.

I think we don't have we we know we do not have um a civilian oversight body.

We know that to get one um that actually has teeth, so it's a meaningful body, um, we have to negotiate contracts.

We have don't have any of the things that we actually need.

I'm I'm for body worn cameras, but I am not for body worn cameras uh in on with the current parameters.

So I I would um I would like to to vote.

Thank you, Counselor Link.

I'm not seeing any other hands.

Um Counselor Strezzo.

I'm going to weigh in.

Um as I've said, I uh first when we have because we have been discussing this for at this point, what five months now um since this grant has come forward.

So this has been a lot of conversations and meetings and executive sessions on this.

Um and also a lot of thought processes even before this with the uh civilian oversight for all that uh some of us were here for numerous years ago.

Uh I also feel that um whatever the decision is that a decision has to be made, and um however you feel about that is fair, and I respect that.

And I am going to circle back and remind everyone that we are holding to 81,000 constituents in our city, and however we personally feel about uh police or et cetera, that it is our constituents and their safety and their um their day-to-day lives and how it impacts them.

And with that, we know that uh with uh with the civilian oversight board and with other uh steps that we know that body worn cameras um can be helpful and have ever been a wrongful death or anything happen.

Um as I I think that um it it provides a transparent body worn cameras provide a transparency to our community healing.

And um again, just centering on transparency.

This has been an ongoing conversation for some of the counselors who have been on in our city for a while on this.

This isn't just a new conversation or a new thought processes.

Um and the values of our community, of course, are very important.

But I want to center us back to the fact that uh we are beholden to our constituents, all of us all of them.

Um and the I I think that just uh as I've said before.

I think that just whatever the the process is, yay, nay, whatever, um, needs to be made.

I don't um this is a grant and it's uh a time sensitive grant and all this.

Um I want to hear uh Mr.

Chair, you were you put forward a motion uh that this be discharged from committee.

Is that correct?

Was that a motion you made?

I I was just entertaining motions any any which way, but there is a motion on the floor from Councillor Scott to recommend approval of this item.

Um I think I think that uh it would be fine to just recommend a discharge from from committee.

So and uh of course, I suppose that if it just stays in committee, then um I'm gonna keep listening to uh what um you all on this committee think on this, but I think uh it would be perhaps uh a to just uh a better solution is to just uh discharge from committees entirely and put it before the entire council for that vote instead of uh recommend for approval.

Thank you, Councillor Streso.

Counselor Link.

Thanks, Chair.

Uh um, can I just second the motion and we can vote?

Absolutely.

I believe we don't need a second, but a second is no problem.

I think there's a need for a second, but uh Mr.

Chair.

Um so what does the clerk say about um a second motion?

Well, I guess if it's oh no, no, I I think there's no procedural question.

Um a second is not necessary.

Oh no, no, no, no, no, that's second other motion.

That's not what I mean.

I mean uh a second motion in addition to uh recommend for approval, recommending it being discharged from committee.

Um I think of course if it's not discharged from committee, then it just essentially dies that the no decision is made either way.

Well, I I think I think what is possible here is um if you or any other member of the committee um wanted to sort of challenge that maybe what we don't want to do next is vote on approval of this item.

Um I think you could uh call the question, um call for the previous question on this.

We'll have a roll call vote on whether or not to take the vote on approval.

If we do choose to take the vote on approval, then we'll take the vote on approval.

If we don't choose to take the vote on approval, um, then I think we can entertain other motions.

Uh I've done done a little bit of of more research about this procedure.

Um is that something that you wish to move or shall we continue discussion?

Well, if most of most of the counselors in this room have said that they want to keep it, uh Chair, may I just step in here?

Please, please, clerk, go ahead, clerk.

You have the floor.

Not sure if I and apologies if I misunderstood what you were saying, but calling the question stops the debate, and we have to vote on the motion on the floor currently.

So it would be counselor Scott's motion to recommend approval.

So that is what's on the floor.

My understanding is slightly different um from that is procedurally correct according to Robert's rules.

So calling the question does not allow you to introduce a second motion when one is currently on the floor.

We have to address that.

To achieve what you would like to achieve, though, we could do similarly what happened in a previous meeting.

You can take a roll call vote on this item.

Someone can ask to reconsider the vote.

We have to take a roll call on that to see if it passes or not, and then we can someone can make another motion to discharge without recommendation or discharge to not approve, whatever you choose, but um my reading of Robert's rules and the uh city council rules.

Um are uh counselor Scott, I'm seeing I'm getting the sense that you have a procedural point comment to make about this.

Um you have an actual city clerk here to express procedures.

Counselor Strasso, I appreciate that.

Um I just reminding the whole committee, I have the floor right now.

Uh Counselor Scott, do you have a procedural comment on this?

Uh yes, Mr.

Chair, if you're willing to entertain it.

Um I certainly am.

Uh what the clerk has said is certainly the uh the custom is uh for somebody to simply call the question in the practice and past practice of the city council.

That is a prompt to the chair to uh call for the roll call vote.

However, that is not a binding uh motion or instruction that is simply something that as the chair, you are allowed to make motions yourself.

You are also at any point allowed to conclude discussion uh on the matter and call it to a roll call vote.

So uh counselor link's uh request to call the question was a request to you as the chair to call for a roll call vote.

However, according to Rule 16 of the city council, uh a motion uh has been made and a question is under debate before the city council.

No other motion is uh shall be entertained except for a series of them, one of which is a motion for the previous question.

Right that is a mechanism by which members of the committee can force the chair's hand to end discussion.

Uh and a motion for the previous question recalls a simple roll call vote, as you said, at the moment with no discussion uh about whether or not to call for a roll call vote on the question itself.

So thank you.

I agree with that interpretation.

Great.

Okay.

Um one bit I wasn't quite clear on is uh counselor link.

Was it your intention to call for the previous question?

Uh I I do not believe I said that, but I would happily say called I would happily do that now.

Okay.

There's a motion to call the previous question.

Uh clerk, could you please take a roll call vote on uh calling the previous question, ending debate, and moving forward with a roll call vote on approval.

Sure.

And this is roll call.

Counselor Link.

No.

Hold on.

Uh half minutes.

I'm calling the previous question on on should we do a vote on approval?

Sorry.

Oh, wait, sorry.

So on the vote on the roll call on the previous question.

Counselor Link.

Right.

Yes.

I think I think there may be a point of order question from uh some members of the committee.

Uh apologize, clerk, if you would pause.

Counselor Strezzo, do you have a question of procedure?

Yeah, thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Just quickly call uh or to repeat back what specifically we are voting on yes or no.

Thank you.

I appreciate that.

I I should be making that more clear.

We are just voting on whether we should stop debate on this and move forward with a roll call vote on approval.

So this is not about approval.

This is about whether we should stop debate on this and move forward with a roll call vote on approval.

Counselor Scott, do you have a procedural question as well?

Or comment?

Oh, okay.

Sorry.

It's a hand.

Uh thank you.

I apologize for interrupting you, Clerk.

Uh, please proceed with the roll call vote on roll call, counselor link.

Yes.

Counselor Strozo.

Yes.

Counselor Hart.

Yes.

Counselor Scott.

Yes.

Counselor Wheeler.

Yes.

Okay.

So you've all voted to end debate and take a roll call on the motion for approval on agenda item eight.

Counselor Link.

No.

Counselor Streso.

Uh sure, yes.

Counselor Hart.

No.

Counselor Scott.

No.

Counselor Wheeler.

No.

With only one counselor in favor.

This item fails.

It'll be discharged with the recommendation to not approve.

Thank you, everyone.

And I appreciate your patience on the procedural aspect of that as well.

Um, as well as all the points people made about the substance of this weighty issue.

That brings us to the end of tonight's agenda.

Do I hear a motion to uh recommend approval of the items on the table?

Uh those are all minutes items and then to adjourn.

I see uh counselor link is recommending approval of the items on the table and then to adjourn.

Uh could the clerk please uh if it's necessary, read the agenda item numbers of the items up for a recommendation.

If it's not, don't uh and call the roll on recommending approval of those items and adjournment.

Roll call on approval for agenda items one to seven and on adjournment.

Counselor Link.

Yes.

Counselor Strazo.

Yes.

Counselor Hart.

Yes.

Counselor Scott.

Yes.

Counselor Wheeler.

Yes.

Those items are accepted and we are adjourned.

Thank you all.

Have a good night.