I have Okay, it's 7:05, so we're going to call the council to come to order. I'll rise and salute the flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Please remain standing for a moment of silence in honor of our veterans, service members, and those who have given the ultimate sacrifice. >> Councelor Condan, you have an additional moment of silence.
>> You should be on. >> Thank you, uh, Council President. I'd like to offer a moment of silence. um for my wife's younger sister. Um she passed away last week
and uh she was always a life of the party, but she met a match on this one. Um she was a great athlete at Malden High School. She's in the Hall of Fame. Um
she played field hockey, basketball, softball and uh she was never one lost for words. U she just she's a wonderful person. She was a wonderful person. She died
suddenly. So, uh, the family was very much shaken up by it >> and, um, there was a tremendous showing at the spat funeral home. Um,
so I hope she's resting in peace with her sister up above. Thank you. >> Say your name. >> Say her name. >> Say her name. That would be Rose Thomasello.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> At this time, the clerk will call the role. >> Council Clone Hayes >> here. Council Condan, >> yes. >> Council Crow, >> here. >> Council Lewong, >> here. >> Council McDonald is not with us this evening. Council Ali,
>> here. >> Council Sega, >> yes. >> Council Simmonelli is not with us this evening. Council Taylor. >> Council Winslow. >> Council President Lahan >> here. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Under the provisions of the open meeting law, for those of you in attendance, please be informed that UMA
Urban Media Arts will be recording this evening's meeting. So, just be aware there will be audio and video recordings of tonight's meeting. Is there anyone else present tonight who is recording in addition to Uma? If so, could you please identify yourself? Okay, seeing none, we'll go on to our
first order of business, which is public comment. Public comment is allowed under council rules. Each speaker is limited to the subject matter relevant to this evening's agenda, and everyone must keep their comments to two minutes or less. Clerk, do we have anybody signed up for public comment?
>> I don't believe we have anybody signed up, but we do have two written correspondents that have come in. >> Okay, let's go ahead and read those. >> Okay, so the first one is Bonnie Gala Gala. Sorry, I got my letters mixed up then.
>> Um 98 Beltran Street. My comments are mostly in form of questions resulting from have read council Jaden Seeker's original complaint on November 19th, 2025. Malden city solicitor Alicia McNail's findings in the attorney general's report in conclusion presented
in on July 8th, 2026. I apologize. I forgot to set the timer. I don't think it's going to be an issue. >> No problem. >> With the length of this um it's short. Question number one, how can it be that despite council Karen Clone Hayes's
attempt to really try hard to not deliberate on the subject of a replacement on the Vogue school committee that she contacted or had contact with eight city councilors via telephone calls, text messages, voicemail messages, a walk hike, and a
missed call unreturned call on the part of two separate counselors. Question number two. After calling council president Amanda Lahan regarding procedure and protocol, why did councelor Cologne Hayes not wait to discuss these issues in the city council
meeting on November 18th, 2025? Question number three. City solicitor Alicia McNeel states that she requested additional time to respond from Jaden Seika who granted that request to 30 days. The response was issued on
December 18th, 2026. However, city solicitor um McNeel also writes that more information was revealed in the city council meeting held on December 16th, 2025, questioning the veracity of the information she was already in possession of. Why then did she not
request some additional time to investigate and interrogate this new information in integrate this new information into her open meeting law conclusions? And question number four, can the city solicitor please articulate what information she learned in the December
16th, 2025 meeting, and can she explain the gap between her conclusions and those of the attorney general's office? Respectfully submitted. Bonnie Gladia, I'm sorry. I don't know why I'm having my apologies to Bonnie.
Um, okay. And then the second one is a communication from Mayor Christensen. Over the past several days, I have been contacted by several residents requesting that I address a series of inaccurate statements made by Councelor
Karen Cologne Hayes in a recent social media post. While I generally do not respond to such posts, the level of inaccuracy makes it necessary to get the record straight. By way of background, the vacancy on the Northeast Metropolitan Regional Vocational School
Committee arose following the passing of Jim Holland on September 17, 2025. On September 24th, after speaking with my office, city clerk Caroline Desadio communicated with the city council to outline a potential process for filling
the vacancy. In that communication, the clerk noted the following. The regional community agreement requires that the vacancy be filled by the school committee and the city council acting jointly. Two, the mayor's office recommended posting the position to gauge interest. Three, the personnel
committees of each body were encouraged to play an active role and the council was advised to consider the process used in Chelsea where the city council took the lead and submitted a nominee to the school committee. On November 13th, nearly two months after the vacancy
occurred and with no substance followup to the city clerk's September 24th communication, I sent a letter to the city council to help move the process forward. In that letter, I recommended Jeff Donahghue for consideration based on his vast experience in the trades,
prior service as a city counselor, and demonstrated interest in vocational education. I explicitly stated that the appointment had to be made jointly by the city council and the school committee and suggested that the council consider following the process used in Chelsea.
Contrary to councelor Cologne Hayes's claim that this was an attempt to push the matter through, the recommendation was placed on the city council docket, advanced through a public agenda, and handled with full transparency and opportunity for discussion. By contrast,
her own actions occurred outside of the public process and involved communications with the quorum of her colleagues. The attorney general subsequently found that councelor Cologne Hayes violated the open meeting law by improperly engaging with the quorum of the city council. While she is entitled to her
opinion on any nominee, she is not entitled to disregard the law in the process. Her communications included urging colleagues to oppose the appointment, recommending an alternative candidate, and suggesting that the matter be delayed or tabled. In effect,
she actively coordinated efforts to influence the outcome before the issue is heard in open session. Conduct that directly undermines the transparency of the open meeting that the open meeting law is designed to protect. In an apparent effort to deflect attention
from her violation, Council Colon Hayes has mischaracterized my recommendation as an attempt to circumvent the council and bypass an election. That claim is incorrect and unsupported by both the facts and by the attorney general's findings. There was no election. Rather,
there was at best an ambiguous process with unclear procedures as outlined in the regional community agreement for filling a vacancy. With that in mind, I then placed the matter on a public docket accompanied by correspondence explaining my position. Furthermore,
once the then school committee vice chair developed a process involving the city council, I fully supported and adhered to it. It is also important to emphasize that the attorney general's determination did not challenge the existence of a recommendation or of the
procedural framework itself. Instead, it focused on Council Cologne Hayes's improper efforts to influence a quorum outside of a duly noticed public meeting. The law strictly prohibits such premeating coordination regardless of intent. Council Cologne Hayes's claim that she
was merely quote unquote alerting colleagues of the situation and that some council members contacted her, but that the specific matter was not discussed is simply implausible. The attorney general's investigation found
that she went well beyond what is permissible, including attempting to sway votes, personally attacking the character of the nominee, and discussing her position. She also suggested removing the item from the docket quote unquote quietly.
These actions are inconsistent with someone who quote unquote champions transparency and instead reflects an intent to influence the outcome outside of the public process. Residents reasonably expect elected officials to act with integrity, follow
the law, and accept responsibility when make state when mistakes are made. attempting to shift blame through inaccurate representations, particularly considering the attorney general's determination, are inconsistent with those expectations. While I will
continue to exercise restraint in responding to most public commentary, I will not allow demonstrabably false claims to go unchallenged. >> Does that conclude our public comment? >> Yes, President, it does. >> Okay. Thank you to the clerk. So, at
this time, we are going to move to our next order of business. And I'm going to ask our clerk to read the next order of business. And how this is going to work is we are going to summarize the paper. Um, we are going to hear from legal and we are going to save
discussion and questions until the end. Um, as you know, we don't respond to public comment and we are not going to discuss before we have a chance to move through everything that the clerk is able to summarize for us. Is everybody good with that? Okay. >> Okay. So, it is paper number 345-26.
The city council will address the open meeting law determination received on July 8th, 2026 from the attorney general's office numbered OML 2026-76, which found an individual violation of the open meeting law by councel Cologne Hayes regarding the um filling of the
voke school committee vacancy. The attorney general has ordered the release of deliberative communications within 45 days of the date of the determination and further instructs the council after which to certify with the AGO that the release of communication was completed as ordered.
So I'm going to give a brief synopsis. The the AG's determination was seven pages long. I'm not going to read the whole thing as council president said, but I will tell you that um councelor Jane Seika filed an open meeting law
complaint with the council on November 19th, 2025 based on what she thought was improper deliberation outside of a posted meeting. Um the city council responded to that on December 16th, 2025, not satisfied with
the findings of the city solicitor's office, council elevated that open meeting law complaint to the attorney general's office on January 8th, 2026. This is the determination that we just got back this month. Um
the complaint was for an open meeting law against the full city council, but the attorney general's office um stated that following their review, they find that the communication from council Cologne Hayes to the quorum
of the city council constitute an individual violation of the open meeting law, not one of the entire body. So the conclusion states that an individual an individual violation of the open meeting law when council Colon
Hayes deliberated with other council is reaching a quorum of the council. We order immediate and future compliance with the open meeting law and we caution that similar future violations may be considered evidence of intent to violate the law. We also order the release within 45 days of the date of this
letter of any written communications, including emails and text messages exchanged by counselors about filling the vote committee vacancy left by the passing of Mr. Holland. We also order that the council certify to our office that it has released the communications
as ordered, which is why we are here tonight. So, we have a couple of text messages and the transcript of a telephone call. And for clarity, while you're getting that ready, what we need to do tonight is to the only vote that we're taking is
to receive this and to place it on file. And after the conclusion of our meeting tonight as a body, we will need to approve and finalize the minutes of tonight's meeting, which we can do by email. And we will then need to provide those to the attorney general's office
by the 1st of August. Is that correct? >> It's not exactly the 1st of August. I think I don't remember the exact date, but it's basically >> the beginning of August. >> Yes. >> Okay. I do see one question from councelor Ali. Is this process related? Okay. Councelor Omali,
>> I was just going to move to to receive the communication. >> Yep. We can absolutely do that. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Okay. On a motion by councelor Ali, seconded by councelor Luong to receive the communication. We can do a voice vote. All in favor? >> I. Any abstain?
>> Okay. Hearing no. Okay. Okay. So, this is a text message that went from counselor Cologne Hayes to Councelor Taylor on November 17th at 2:40 p.m. Hi Ari, I've been making a lot of phone calls today because I just realized that
Jeff Donahghue was on the agenda for tomorrow and has an appointment to replace Holland for a position on the vote. I strongly oppose this appointment for many reasons, but most recently, he has verbally abused me in public. During the preliminaries for W4 school committee, as I was holding a sign for a
beer, he walked over right in front of my face to intimidate me and cursed at me completely unprovoked. After he walked off, a beer was so shook. And this was in front of a young person as well. Dawn was actually there and I've also reached out to her. We have plenty
of great people in this city that we don't need to appoint someone who has a history of abuse in homophobic and racist comments on public social media. Although I did not agree with what happened with Lette's appointment being taken away due to some social media post.
Sorry. Hang on. Oh, I'm sorry. It's in two different messages. >> That's okay. Take your time. >> Although I did not agree with what did two different screenshots. That's why I'm hesitating. Um although I did not
agree with what happened with Lette's appointment being taken away due to some social media post, I believe this one has more merit as he was verbally abusive to a city councelor in public very recently. The good news is Ryan spoke with Lenny Ayino, the former ward
for school committee rep, and he is very interested in the position. We have both called the mayor and Maria Louise and we're hoping that this can quietly be taped while we review and put forward Lenny's name. I hope you agree with the suggestion. I'm going to try and table
it tomorrow if the mayor doesn't take it off before then. Feel free to give me a call. I'm making the rounds. And then another message that said tabled ug. Sorry for the typos. I was text talking. and the other text message chain. This is a text message from council
clone haste to council simelli. The first one says, "I will call you in the morning." I did to Lenny and he said he didn't want that appointment. Hang on, I'm trying to get that was a comment by
I think that was councelor Simelli. Yeah, they go back and forth. >> And then um expletative what >> we need a process and this is council clone Hayes. We need a process anyway. We cannot just give someone a position. it has to be posted. And then the followup to that was
another text message that said, "Okay, this is the last post of the night, but people are definitely speaking out against Jeff." And this was just posted in Reddit, and I'm sure there will be more to come. Is this someone you're going to vote for working in our schools? in the two screenshots
are of Jeff Donahghue making a comment on February 8th, 2027 that says, "Well, folks, it's that time again when I go into fake book hibernation. See you all in a few months. I thought by now some of you expletives would stop with your
political rants, and that's on both sides of the aisle. I should go away before I actually bite on one of these posts because I know it will go down the wormhole eventually and I will end up punching someone in their expletive spewing pie hole. And I hate prison food
because we all know 99% of the big mouths are the first ones to dime you out. You're welcome and good night. And then there was a second screenshot that was sent in this text chain and it looks like it is from Jeff Donahghue on October 19th, 2021 posted to a Facebook
page called Nickel for your thoughts mold and mass. I hear old Nikki Lennox's fishing old Facebook post. It's a shame he has me blocked. No wor excuse me. No worries, pal. I will always call someone out when treated unfairly. Sorry if my
language melts the outer layers of your emoji. Looks like a snowflake. We all have screenshots. Oh, and did that ethics complaint you were talking about against me materialize yet? Asking for an old friend? We were just starting to
warm up to each other. What happened? Bear with me, folks. And then the final um and it doesn't look like council seelli responded to any of those messages from council clone Hayes. And the last one says, "Hey
buddy, the next time I reach out to you, please remind me and say do not talk to me or trust me, lol." We then have um two screenshots from Facebook showing pictures of Council Colon Hayes and Council Winslow on their
hiking trip um which was discussed in the meeting in December when they had their deliberation face to face. Then we have a voicemail recording transcript that was submitted by Council Clone Hayes to Council Crow's cell phone. It
says, "Hey Peg, it's Karen. I'm calling because I just saw Jeff Donahghue's name on the agenda and I am not pleased at all. So, I've been making some phone calls. I talked to Amanda. I actually called Gary as well. I have serious serious concerns about him being on the board of anything, let alone something
that involves kids in the safety of kids. Jeff's history of his violent behavior, but also he has been verbally abusive to me just as early as the preliminaries that just happened at W 4 where he came up to my face in front of people. So they will also say this and
verbally abused me. And then and I'm thinking of what you all did with Lette when you pulled back somebody who was actually appointed for reasons that were not even as clear as the ones for Jeff with his history of being homophobic as he has written things down that I will now be getting a copy of instead of
embarrassing everybody here. I'm hoping that this gets delayed or tabled or something until we find someone better who does not have a background like this to who does not have a background like this to sit on that. So anyways, I know that was a lot, but if you want to give
me a call back, do so. If not, you can also talk to Gary. Like I said, I left him a message as well. Thanks. And then we today I received an email from Council Winslow who went through his records and double checked all of
his records and um the only one that was relevant to the complaint that we're talking to tonight says this. Caroline, here's my response to your request. Voicemails. I have reviewed my voicemail records. I don't have any voicemails. I do have a phone record of receiving a call from Council Cologne Hayes on
November 17, 2025 at 12:33 p.m. and a call on November 18th, 2025 at 2:12 p.m. to Council Mali. Both of which related to obtaining information about the process to place a member of the Northeast Folk Board, as I explained, to
our legal office. He also then forwarded me a public comment email and a text message that he received from Mr. Donahghue. But those we ran them by the city solicitor's office. Thank you for submitting those council, but they don't they're not relevant to this violation. So, we're going to put that away for
now. Um, and I believe that that's it for the evidence that we have to read into the record tonight. >> Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. So, at this time, I'd like to recognize um our legal staff to
come to the podium. Thank you so much. >> Evening everyone. Alicia McNeel, city solicitor. >> Uh, so I just want to start by talking about the violation and I want to go to the conclusion. I want to go to the end and then we'll go
I want to go back to the beginning. But the end of the AGO's decision says basically says that uh we order immediate and future compliance with the open meeting law and we caution that
similar future violations may be considered evidence of intent to violate the law. So if there are future violations, the AG's office has stated to us that that will be considered intent
intentionally violating the open meeting law. So the open meeting law of the in there's just a couple of things or a few things that I want to address about the open meeting law in violations
in the AG's opinion or decision. It says a meeting is defined in relevant parts as a deliberation by a public body with respect to any matter within the body's jurisdiction.
in oral or written communication through any medium including electronic mail between or among a quorum of a public body on any public business within its juris jurisdiction. So that's defined as
an oral communication and could be defined also as a meeting. Again, a one-way communication from one public body member to a quorum on matters within the body's jurisdiction cons constitutes deliberation for
purposes of the open meeting law even if no other public body member responds. So e the text messages, the phone calls, the emails, if no one responds, it's a one-way communication,
that is considered an open meeting law violation. The open meeting law does not carve out any exception to the definition of deliberation for discussions that do not result in a decision or a vote. And what that means
is that even if there is no deliberation, even if there's not a vote, if there is a one-way communication, a two-way communication, a hub communication, and there's no vote, that is considered deliberation. According to the attorney general's
office finding that private serial communications violate the spirit of the open meeting law um and may not be used to circumvent the intent of the law and
they cite the case McCree va flirty again another violation even without evidence and this is specific to this event this situation even Without evidence that counselors Crowe or Taylor
responded to counselor Cologne Hayes, we find that the voicemail and texts constitute clear evidence of communication between four members of the same public body. My whole point here is really to say that as a body we
just need to be more cautious. Why not heir on the side of caution? We uh the body really really should not be talking about anything. If it's on the agenda and you're going to deliberate, the body should not be talking about
anything outside of coming here. As the AG said, it should be uh the public meeting is just for that. So the public will understand what's going on and things will not happen be behind closed doors. Um, again, I just want to really
stress to the body that as the AG has said before, the AG has did a a very um extensive investigation of this complaint and the AG is stating that if there is another
violation of the open meeting law, whether it's intentional or not, the AG is going to find that it was intentional because they've given very clear instructions and I would strongly suggest that all of us look at this um
decision, highlight the decision as I have so that you understand what a violation is. Um and that's all I want to say. If anybody has any questions for me, I'd be happy to answer them. >> Thank you, Solicitor McNeel.
>> You're welcome. >> Um does anybody have any questions at this time? >> Question. have her answer the questions that were in the >> Yeah. Councelor Councelor Taylor, I'll take you first. >> I just I just to clarify, sorry, thank
you so much for for going over all that. I just want to clarify for my own knowledge. So one-way communication, deliberating on anything, social media, if we're posting our views on social media before a vote, if we're saying how we intend to vote, is that one way
communication? >> There was a discrepancy. I know there was another open meeting law um complaint and there was a discrepancy um where there was mixed communications, mixed opinions, let me say between uh
previous um city solicitor or the legal department and the current legal department. And so to answer your question, yes, that is considered a open meeting law violation. social be we need to be very very very
careful about social media. >> Okay. I just I want to make sure that we're clear on what the guidelines are so that we're not accidentally breaking them and then and then coming back. So, thank you very much for answering that. >> You're welcome. >> Can I ask a followup to that just for clarity um because I I do want to
underscore this. I think social media is both a blessing and a curse a lot of the time. I think and you know as counselors I think it's can be an effective way to let the public know what's going on but I think there's an important distinction between saying hey I have this event coming up
or even hey I've filed this paper and leaving it at that and saying hey this thing's on the docket and I plan to support it is is is that a correct assessment of where where the line would be it's there's a difference between stating something is happening or the
council agenda says x y and the meeting is at 7:00 p.m. tonight versus stating I support the following things or I plan to vote a certain way. It's my understanding is that it's the latter that gets you into trouble because you could reach a quorum in
theory whether we know that counselors are on that platform or not. >> Yes, that is correct. That is correct. I have um done additional research as a result of this um decision and that is correct that on social media if you're
talking about anything if it's within the jurisdiction of this council and it's something that's on the agenda that be could be considered deliberation whether somebody sees it or no one sees it it's the possibility of someone seeing it.
>> Okay. So whether someone has a profile there, whether you see them comment or not, irrelevant. It's the possibility. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you for clarifying that. I think that's important for us to hear and understand. And thank thank you for going down that road a little bit. >> You're welcome. Does anybody else have
any questions? >> Okay. Um C counselor Colon Hayes, I have a follow-up on that as well because this that's is very important because I for transparency reasons put the agenda up every week. So now I want want to make sure [clears throat] this is okay. So, I put an agenda up.
Um, I usually just take out um things that like say pay close attention to this, let's say, and then I link the agenda. Um, sometimes I'll trying to think of it. If there's no vote, like I learned from, you know, a previous case that, you know, I'm not talking about
what we're voting on, but could you say I want feedback from people on how because I always say, give me your feedback. Like, is that okay? I think it's okay to ask for feedback. >> Just don't respond with >> Yes. I think it's okay to ask for feedback. Those are your constituents.
>> Okay. >> Yes. >> Thank you. Thank you, Councelor Leon. >> Thank you. I just wanted to um I don't know if anybody else had the opportunity when they started as counselors but I had the opportunity of doing the mass municipal training and I spent hour
listening to open meeting law >> and you are absolutely correct and with everything you've just said but I encourage when it comes around again >> you know there were plenty of people that were there for the third time in a row so I plan to go back for any updates but I encourage everybody to do just that.
>> You took the words right out of my mouth. And I was going to say the same thing. I think I recommended that training to you because it's been so valuable. I think one one of the things I wanted to mention is that I know we do the ethics training. We take that very seriously. Every two years we have to
get reertified. I know our clerk of committees and our HR department tracks that and they give me a report so that I can see that everybody's staying compliant with that. Um it is very light on things like open meeting law. is much more things like um you know personal dealings and what's the limit of gifts
and things like that. Um I wouldn't mind if we started to put even an FAQ or something in our rule book. Anything that we can do on our own to hold ourselves accountable and keep that knowledge in house. I think we need to take this seriously as a body and anything that we can do in this building
for ourselves in addition to making use of resources like the MMA I think is clearly needed. I I >> the MMA. >> Yep. Councelor Long, sorry. Let me put your light back on. >> They went into detail on social media, the the yeses and the nos. They went
into they just went into every part of being a city councelor. And I just thought it was invaluable for the, you know, eight hours I was there. So, >> and that is a municipal organization. It's a statewide organization that all municipalities belong to. That is not, we covered this in our budget
discussions. It's a membership organization, but all electeds are part of it. It doesn't affect our budget. It's not something that, you know, we're automatically members that we're going to as a city be part of that we should just take take up the resources since they're there. Okay. Councelor Winslow.
>> Yeah. Um I guess I'm a little bit confused of why the the couple things that I submitted were not comparted to the record because here's the dilemma for me. Um so when a potentially controversial issue is out there often
we might get individual or uh you know from constituents individual things on that point. Um sometimes those responses might come collectively they might send it to every counselor. So it's not something a counselor initiated. Um here
even Mr. Donn you sent something. So I'm in this dilemma of is this thing being sent to me being sent collectively and suddenly if I talk to any counselor or talk to even respond to that am I violating the open meeting
law because it's on topic and I don't you know um that's that's the dilemma I I feel I I face in this situation that um literally if someone initiates something to me um that's on a topic on the agenda I don't know whether that is
part of some init initiative to get us to talk collectively. Not like I'd say if I responded to say Jeff like Jeff say, "Oh, I'm um Jeff, I like you." Or another one the other one said, "Oh, yeah. I'm very concerned." Um even though that's just back to a
constituent. Am I am I violating open law to even respond to a comment from from anybody about something that's on on the agenda? So that's I'm a little bit confused here. That's that's the type of thing that that's basically the situation I found myself in and you know
it doesn't it's hard to understand um just you know really talking about that so that I I I don't understand the line. >> So your question is why is your communication with the constituent not >> because I I just question here I mean I don't know whether Mr. Donnu's
comments went out to everybody or not. I mean and then like if I suddenly responded to that would that be part of a deliberation. So that's the dilemma that we're facing. Sir, >> council wins. And just just to clarify the record so people understand what we're talking about here, two of the records that council wins speaking of is
one was a text message from Mr. Donahghue asking for your support during the vote and the other one was a an email comment to you, Councilwel, from a constituent speaking against Mr. Donahghue's appointment. The reason why
they were deemed not relevant to this particular violation is because those communications had to do with the appointee and a constituent, not this body, not a quorum of this body. So even if that person emailed everybody on this body, you don't know who they emailed.
They might have been they might have blind copied everybody. But either way, because it was a conversation between you and a constituent doesn't cause an open meeting law violation. And I say because the thing is like my dis talk with councelor Coen Hayes I had no idea
that she did >> talk to other people. So that's that's the dilemma. >> That's the reason why the attorney general said that it was an individual violation and not a body vi it wasn't it wasn't a violation of the entire body because all the other councils didn't know that council clone Hayes was talking to everybody else.
>> That's the difference between a body violation individual violation. I you know I just get concerned like this is very similar to what happened when I was the the work up to when I got elected council president because what happens is some issue gets out there on social
media we start getting comments and it kind of blows up and I I mean I know we have to be cautious um I try you know I thought you know my discussion with councelor colonas was like hey this is on the agenda so we didn't really talk about so talking about not talking about is becomes a deliberation so so that's
my concern concern of just that is the dilemma of actually saying we shouldn't talk about this becomes in a way became part of the deliberation. So it it is um so that that's just you know I'm I'm it is the confusion here of with so many ways to communicate and so many ways
that you know if an issue becomes a big topic you know it becomes beyond our ability as a council or individual some to control that I you know I I mean I definitely hear there was some definitely more bold things than I ever did than that council Hayes did but um
you is is the dilemma as we tried to be respectful um you things are outside of control and we not may not know. So that's I'm just making that statement. But it is that's why I put those in there because I don't really you know in the context of what I did those were
other those are the things that kind of triggered me to you know you know ask a question. So that's all. >> So as far as a constituent contacting you that's different. What the AG is talking about is deliberating amongst
the body the city council. So if a constituent is contacting any one of you and you respond to the constituent that's not a deliberation because it's the constituent is not part of the body. So the open meeting law involves being a
part of the body unless you know for some reason that somebody one of the one of your fellow council council persons are actually telling this person contact all of these individuals. So if you don't know that and you have no knowledge of that, it's that that would
not be a violation. Um that that would not be a violation. >> So I think that's the dilemma is that there's this presumption that that that's happened. I that's what I felt and that's why I put in the memo, you know, and and and I I when I sat down in the interview, that's what I felt. I had no idea that there was anything else
going on. So that is the dilemma. I just putting that on the record. And the AG did address that in the in the decision as it rel related to councelor Simelli u that he said he had no idea and again as
um our clerk Desidario said that's why it wasn't a violation of the entire body because the entire body did not know. >> Okay. Thank you councelor Winsow. Councelor Ali. >> Um my question had to do with clarification on publicly um posting
stuff. So my understanding is that if um you like write an op-ed in the newspaper of general circulation about like your policy positions and the fact like for instance I Ryan Ali support speed humps in and traffic calming in our community
and we'll be like proposing you know papers to address that. Um, obviously I've expressed my opinion about a topic that is going to come before the city council. My understanding that that is allowed >> that that would be allowed. Yes, that's
correct. >> What would not be allowed is I am proposing paper 103 next Tuesday the 18th and I will be voting in favor. >> Yes, that's correct. So, you can talk
about your general priorities and proposals. You can't say, "I'm going to specifically vote on this date in the affirmative." >> Kind of like when you're meeting with like people who are petitioning the city for like development projects. You can you could talk about how you're
generally in favor and want to know more about the community benefits and the impacts it's going to have on the community, but you can't say, "I'm going to support your project on this date." >> Yeah. That's my understanding. >> That's correct. >> Exactly. >> Okay.
>> I had the same question. Thank you for asking that. I was wondering the same thing. >> Otherwise, people wouldn't know. >> Wait, what? >> Yeah. >> Okay. Councelor Seika. >> Okay. I'm going to be brief, but >> I don't believe >> hopefully. [laughter] No, no, no, no.
Um, so before I get into the details of the open meeting law violation, I want to take a brief moment to address where things stand on a personal and professional level. >> I think you're all set. Okay. Thank you so much. >> Back in March, after seeing many
negative social media um posts or comments, I should say regarding myself and Karen's bickering back and forth during meetings and in general. I decided to reach out to Karen extending an olive branch and suggested a truce so
that we could move forward productively for the betterment of Malden. My desire to work constructively hasn't changed and I stand by that effort. However, I am a little disappointed to see the pattern of blaming rather than
taking responsibility for your actions. Good governance requires accountability, which is why we need to address this matter tonight. And I hope you don't take my constructive criticism in the wrong way. But over the last two weeks,
I have seen many social media posts and videos that I have concerns. And the concerns that I have with all of them are the first one is the koi issue is accountability. It's not politics. Taking ownership. Being an effective
leader isn't about being perfect. It's about taking responsibility when a mistake is made. Rebranding a state law violation as a learning experience while blaming others demonstrates a complete
lack of personal accountability. Respecting the findings, the Attorney General's office conducted an independent objective investigation based on hard evidence. Voicemails, text messages, call logs. Refusing to accept
those findings sends a message that the rules apply to everyone else, but not to yourself. The deflection verse the direct action. shifting the narrative. Whenever a violation or a misstep occurs, the
response shouldn't be to point fingers at other people who have violated the open meeting law, um the mayor, the city solicitor, or us fellow councils. Turning a clear legal ruling into a narrative of personal victimization
distracts from the actual issue. The public's right to open government was compromised. Actions speak louder than words. You cannot in one sentence claim to champion transparency while simultaneously attempting to handle council business
quietly behind closed doors and blaming others when caught. The impact on constituent trust. Pattern of behavior. Residents see through pattern of playing the victim. Constantly shifting the blame creates a
double standard where transparency is used as a convenient campaign slogan rather than a binding standard of conduct. Setting the right example means holding us elected officials accountable to state law. It's not bullying. It's the
fundamental duty of every one of us council members up here to protect the integrity of this body and the public's right to know. Furthermore, publicly posting that you will keep contacting colleague keep
contacting colleagues while counting um your contacts shows a clear attempt to circumvent the open meeting law process. The open meeting law exists to protect public trust, not to be treated as a game of loopholes. My hope for the
future is simple. that not just you, everyone up here if they get found vi in violation um learn from our mistakes, take responsibility for our actions, and hold oursel to the standards our community expects of us. I saw over the
course of the last two weeks, oh, council, the accuser, you know, she violated. I did I violated in 2021 or 2020. Um I was the council president. I sent an email to the license committee. Um,
I might not have been I but I think I was council president that I might misspeak on that but [snorts] um I I sent an email with material for the license committee meeting for the the evening of the um morning I sent the email and I put all the material and
said I just want to make sure everybody has all this information and I said I will not be in support of this petition. And because I said I will not be in support of this petition, I gave my opinion and that means I violated the
open meeting. I didn't call anyone. I didn't try to change anybody's mind. I just gave my opinion. So what councelor Mali is correct. You can write whatever you want. You just cannot give your opinion whether it's on social med. They don't even back then they didn't even
know if any of my colleagues opened that email. They didn't care. But because I sent the email to a quorum of that particular committee, it was deemed an open meeting law violation. And I have since learned never to do that again.
And I I I tried to I I air on the side of caution when it comes to anything. I may talk to one person up here or two people. like I don't talk much about anything anymore because to be honest with you I'm not quite sure who I can
and cannot trust up here and you should you know you everybody should kind of have that same logic in the back of their mind and you know councelor Winslow said he didn't know you talked to everyone and that's why the AG's
office decided to give it an individual violation and not you know the full body because there's been plenty of times this whole entire body has gone down for something that others have done. Not particularly, you know, myself or yourself or whoever, but because we're a
body, we get the violation as as one particular violation. So, I just moving forward, Karen, I would like just it's easier to just say, "Yeah, I did it like and end it like kind of because I was trying to be quiet over since I got this
response from the AG's office. I really did try not to bring light to it. You brought it to yourself when you posted the video. Like I think you kind of made it a little bit worse for yourself and people were attacking you because you tried to bring it to light.
But and I was trying not to do that. Like I I just >> I get it. But you know, I'm just trying to give you a little constructive criticism. It just I heard from people, oh she, you know, she's never going to learn a lesson. You, you know, because
you [snorts] post the video and you're like, oh, well, councelor Crow and council spat and council see violated. And that wasn't even an open meeting law violation that I violated. I had nothing to do with that particular one. So, I just I I want to continue to move
forward with you and and call you for things and you vice versa and show up to my events. I I I truly since March I feel it's it's been a weight lifted off of my shoulder with me and you and I'd like to continue that. But I just moving
forward I I would really you know I will share with you what I wrote if you'd like but I do you know I just I think think that moving forward we really really have to do better for for this community. We're never going to move forward. Like the last six months I I
don't know I've had this aha moments. I I want like peace. Like I don't want all this back and forth baloney. Like it it's exhausting and it's not the Malden that I know and love and and want to continue to see. Like it it's getting
bad. Like people people don't like you because you believe a certain thing. Like I I saw a post that I'm dancing to Craig Spaphor's tune. I I think I have my own tune. I don't think I dance to a tune of council former counselor's bad.
I think I I I dance to my own tune. I don't want to dance in the shadow of somebody else. So, I I just I want every all of us to get along. It's been a lot easier, like I said, the last few months and I hope to continue. But I just, you
know, hopefully moving forward, you know, we can figure this all out. So, thank you. Thank you, Councelor Seika, Councelor Clon. >> Thank you. So, I wasn't going to say uh much tonight because I did address um my
constituents uh already in a video like you said and um I posted then a written um explanation because that is how I work. We all work differently here. I understand that. Once I heard about this, I got the call. I was in New York
so I didn't have the time to do things. All I thought about was I can't wait to get something together and explain to my constituent was what's happened. Um, and to get that out there, everybody here has different ways of doing this. Um, and first I just want to say I I do
appreciate, you know, JD, we have been it's been wonderful. We had a great relationship before. We both acknowledge we had no idea how this even happened. So, I appreciate that and we will still move forward. So, I do hear what you're saying. I'll take it to heart. Um, but people um react differently to things. I also had tons of people calling me
saying, "Thank you very much for bringing that up." um they loved um what I said. So, you know, most likely anyone who doesn't like me now are just not going to like me even more and and put that out there. But the people who know me, this is how and who I am. I I put
out things that I want to be transparent about and that is a real thing. So, when I just messed up, you're right about counting. I literally mean that. I don't know how other way you could take that, but I really was thinking, I know I'm allowed to talk to some people. I'm not
skirting anything. I know this is not supposed to be on the agenda. So, the immediate first person I called was the council president saying, "Why is this on the agenda?" I don't want to go through all these details cuz I said I wasn't going to do this tonight, but I do want to real like let everybody know here. It wasn't a willy-nilly thing.
This was very, very hard for me. I was distraught when I saw the name. I was bullied verbally. Yeah, the fear was a lot and I admit that I I was making calls very quickly to people about what had happened to me
when I saw an agenda. But aside from that that I learned so much now about how, you know, who to contact and I mean it when I said counting because I was like, "All right, I can call three people and then be done." But I didn't I learned so much now that yeah, someone who doesn't answer and even you have how
this could happen. So, I'll be extremely more careful. And what I was trying to get out there was not that I'm going to be calling up breaking a meeting law. But I wanted people to know, and if you're listening now, I'm still going to try and do my job to the best of my ability. And sometimes that it does mean
I'm going to have to call one of you and I'm still going to do that. Um, but learning exactly what we can say and you know where to because we need to move forward. We need to get things done. Um, so I'm not sure if that's coming out right, but it's not like, oh,
I don't care what happened. It's more like please know we are allowed to talk to people. Like I don't want people thinking that we're never like what what Council Winsel was just saying blows my mind here that um how worried about having someone email
us and now is that an open meeting law violation? like there's not that's a lot to talk about and I like talking with my constituents. You know, I like putting stuff out there about um what what is going on in the city council. So, I will
do that, but I'll just be more, you know, careful about yeah, what's going on. But anyway, thank you very much. And um my apologies for bringing you all out here um this uh this summer night. And trust me when I say I have learned. I have learned and I'll do better. Thank
you. Thank you, councelor Cologne Hayes. I see one more light from councelor Ali for the second. >> I move to place on file uh both the determination and the attachments. >> I'll second that. >> You did. >> I think you made the motion actually.
>> You he made the motion to receive. >> I thought it was to receive and place on file. Are we >> It's recorded as received and placed on file. >> Oh, okay. >> We might be good. >> I only heard the >> Thank you for being so thorough. >> Okay. >> I I don't want to belabor. I just want to say from the chair that I think I'm
I'm hearing a desire to get us a open meeting law training. >> I think I think everybody >> Yeah. A refresher can't hurt. >> Absolutely. >> And I do want to just also reflect on the fact that I'm also hearing concern that we don't want constituents to stop reaching out to us. The responsibility
is on us to govern ourselves. Please don't stop emailing counselors. Please don't stop inviting us to events. We are allowed to come to events. We can't go off in the corner and talk about city business. That's our responsibility to do that and to mind ourselves. So, I hear you, Councelor Winsow. I hear that
concern. Um, we are going to do better and we are going to work on this and we very much take this seriously. And, um, you know, the last thing I'll say is I know as council president I try to have an open door, open phone call policy. I know a lot of you do call me to talk about the docket every week. I would
just say that one of the things that our clerk and I have talked about is that the clerk is also there for to talk through the agenda. If you have questions, if you feel like you want to talk to your colleagues or a colleague about something on the agenda and you're concerned about deliberating, you can
call the clerk instead of calling me. That's an option that folks have. I mean, I I want to be here to address concerns and to talk through the agenda and to answer questions, but um let that not be a barrier to us having a concern like this come up again. much as I want to be open for you. Yes, councelor Ali.
>> Yeah. So, I I did only receive and I I just out of an abundance of caution, I I would like counselor see is correct. Um I would like to take the motion to place on file because usually you receive it have the conversation and then place it on file at the end of the conversation >> that way. We can >> we don't do it that way. We always
receive and file like every time there's a committee report on the agenda, it's always one vote to receive it and place it on file. if you'd like to take another vote. >> I think it's usually because we don't have a deliberation about it, but yeah, I mean, um, I just I would want make sure >> I don't mind redoing it. The script says to receive in place on file, and that's
what the clerk's minutes say we did. I don't mind redoing it because I definitely don't want to come back and have another meeting about it. >> I just [laughter] Yeah. So, I move to place on file. >> I agree. >> Okay. Do we have a second? [clears throat] Councelor seconded by councelor Sika. All in favor of placing
on file? I Okay, that is placed on file. Thank you. Uh, next order of business, >> personal privilege. >> Does anybody have personal privilege tonight? >> Of course, we're on. >> Yes. Thank you. Um, really quickly, next
Thursday, August 6th down Lynen Park is our annual color party from 6:00 to 7:30 p.m. Everybody bring a white wear a white shirt or light colors. So, the colors that you throw up in the air are more visible when you get completely
covered in beautiful pastel colors. And 6 to 7:30 down Lynen Park, the annual color party. Thank you. >> Great. Thank you, Council Enzo. >> Yeah, a couple things. Um, tomorrow evening at least
6 o' >> Who is that? Somebody unmuted themselves. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, um, there is a community meeting about the proposal for cannabis shop [snorts] by beneficial batonicles. So, that is tomorrow night at 6 o'clock and Malden PD. Then on Saturday, Baldin
Overcoming Addiction is going to be having its annual family event um at Lincoln Common. I believe that's at 10 10 o'clock. So um come out for that. That's always a nice time. Great way. >> Okay, great. Um Councelor Ali, >> I just want to remind the residents that
uh Tuesday, September 1st is a primary. It's before Labor Day. Uh so summer won't be over. So make your plan whether that's early voting or mailin ballots or voting on on on uh on September 1st. Thank you. Thank you, Councelor Ali. Councelor Crow, >> just really quickly since none of you are going to say it that there is a
softball tournament this Saturday as well [laughter] um at it is taking place at Windon um park. The park [clears throat] is up at um the event, but the first game is at 10:00 and the proceeds that they're raising for is for Down syndrome. And I
know a couple of my colleagues are going to be um playing softball, so come and [laughter] come and support them. >> Thank you. >> No council business will be discussed on the field. >> Are we recessing? >> Yes. Do we have a motion to recess to
the call of the chair? >> Okay. On a motion by councelor see, seconded by councelor Crow. All in favor. >> What about? >> Oh my lord. I'm sorry. >> Oh my god. That's next week. >> Okay, councelor Conan, you have the
floor. Thank you very much. >> I believe this is a 95th >> uh 96. >> It's 96 >> St. Roco's feast. Um
recently we've lost some people that >> really when you think about St. Rockos, you think about them, but they unfortunately they won't be there. Uh but it's always a good time. It's a great
tradition. Uh there'll be a parade with the uh saint uh Sunday starting at 1. Um Jewish mover and her husband Sheldon do a terrific job along with Peter
um the chef. I call him the chef from uh Melrose Wakefield. But um come down, people show up, people come from other communities just to be there, you know, and there's
fantastic entertainment. Uh they got wildfire Friday night. I know Dave Russo is there Sunday night, so everybody's welcome. It's usually a great time. Look
forward to seeing everybody. And this young lady will be sitting next to the saint. [laughter] >> She calls herself the saint. So, >> but uh
please come down. >> All right. Wouldn't miss it. Thank you, councelor Conman. >> All right. I've made a motion. >> Okay. We have one more light. Just a quick one because nobody announced it. So I was like, "Okay, um I'm not going to be here over the weekend, which is a bummer for many things, but Malden
Overcomes um day is um Saturday, August 1st, 11 to 3 at Lincoln Commons. Um I always make that, so I'm kind of bummed. I'm going to miss that. Um I'll be away." But anyway, that was it. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. We do have a motion and
a second to recess to the call of the chair. All in favor? >> I Okay. Yeah. Yeah.