Neither oversight nor treasure at this X? (WMP&I and Google images)

The Springfield City Council gave what appears to be the final greenlight to a major reconstruction of the X intersection in Forest Park at its meeting this past Monday. The approval for takings and underlying funding was not without its fireworks, though. Some councilors objected to the items appearing on the agenda only to have their arms’ twisted to deliver prompt action.

That twisting worked, but was it necessary? It is also unclear that the issues some had with the takings merited a deeper dive. City officials have largely plugged the project as a safety upgrade, but it will radically transform the intersection and environs, if less than originally proposed. However, the debate about its design concluded long ago.

Councilors Malo Brown and Zaida Govan participated in Monday’s meeting remotely.

Concerns about the X intersection takings were previewed during the reports of committee. The Finance, Civil Rights, Environment & Sustainability, Maintenance & Development and Pilot/New Revenue committees offered reports. Finance Committee Chair Timothy Allen said all the financial items on the Council’s agenda had his committee’s support, except the takings.

Cignoli pushed hard to get the takings through, but it’s not -clear they needed more review. (still via Focus Springfield)

As DPW Director Chris Cignoli would later explain, the takings are largely easements for access during construction. The city will take a bite from the CVS parking lot for a roundabout destined for the intersection of Belmont and Commonwealth avenues.

Before the Council got to the takings, however, there were other matters first. The Civil Rights Committee, according to its chair, at-large councilor Tracye Whitfield, reported on a productive hearing pertaining to the inactive voter list. Whitfield said City Clerk Gladys Oyola-Lopez, who retains her position overseeing the Election Commission, explained some of the ins and outs of the inactive list. She urged residents not to be deterred from voting if they land on the inactive list.

The first financial issue of the night was two monthly budget reports. At the request of Comptroller Pat Burns, the Council referred the June revenue and expenditure report to committee. As the last month of fiscal year 2024, it functions as the wrap-up for the whole year. Burns said he anticipates questions. The Council accepted the August report for fiscal year 2025 without debate.

City Solicitor Stephen Buoniconti presented a $1.2 million transfer to the professional service account of the Law Department. This largely funds outside counsel for ongoing litigation. The Council’s Committee of the Whole had met in executive session before the full meeting to discuss eleven separate suits.

Consequently, details were scant at the regular meeting. Buoniconti said the funds in the professional services account were near exhaustion, hence the transfer from reserves. It passed without dissent, although Councilor Govan abstained.

HR/Labor Relations Director William Mahoney presented the city’s contract with the Springfield Police Supervisors Association (SPSA). The union represents about 71 sergeants, lieutenants and captains.

This agreement runs for four years total. The city and the union negotiated this contract, unlike the one the state imposed last year after bargaining went to arbitration. According to Mahoney, this contract almost went to arbitration, too.

The agreement with the SPSA that Mahoney presented sailed through. (still via YouTube/Focus Springfield)

As WMP&I reported, the contract contains higher stipends and annual salary raises of 3.5%. Mahoney clarified that it is actually two contracts. One runs from July 1 of this year through June 30, 2025. The other runs from July 1, 2025 through June 30, 2028.

The Council approved the SPSA pact unanimously.

The Council accepted a $500,000 grant for renovations at Blunt Park and $5 million from the Environmental Protection Agency for further clean up of the Chapman Valve site in Indian Orchard. Another $300,000 grant from the Springfield Library Foundation related to the East Forest Park Branch.

Smaller grants for the Library and Police departments received one unanimous vote of approval. The Council likewise approved payment of $4,395 in bills from a prior fiscal year without dissent.

When the Council turned back to the X intersection, it consisted of the appropriation and the formal taking. The total cost is $569,900, although the full project has a $16 million price tag. Almost all of that is state and/or federal funds.

Cignoli acknowledged that the total number of takings—four permanent partial takings and 128 temporary construction easements—seemed like a lot. However, he attributed this partly to the size of the project. Most expire after six years, well after construction ends in 2026 or thereabouts. Aside from the CVS parking lot, the permanent takings are for signs, he said.

What caused a ruckus, however, was the timing. Cignoli said the city had been spending much of 2024 appraising the property and sending communications to property owners. He had hoped to have this process completed before the Council’s September meeting. It was not and now, Cignoli insisted, the Council needed to act or the project could not go out to bid the next day, Tuesday.

If that did not happen, he suggested, the city could lose the funding and lose credibility in the eyes of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT). The funds were part of a regional allocation that aimed for real construction to begin this year. However, that process dates to 2014.

X-ceptional lack of oversight or X-aggerated concerns? (via Springfield City Hall)

The “ultimatum,” as some councilors called it, rubbed several councilors the wrong way. Ward 6 Councilor Victor Davila, who represents nearly all of the intersection, called the project “a need” not a want. However, he did not like being given the bum’s rush.

“I don’t deal well with ultimatums,” he said, “I hate when people tell me if you don’t do this today, you can kiss it goodbye tomorrow.” Still, he did not seem interested in delaying a final vote.

At-large Councilor Kateri Walsh, however, made a motion to send the items to committee with a second from Councilor Allen.

“We should have the opportunity to question this if we want to question it and we shouldn’t be told that if we don’t do it the project goes away,” she said. “I think that’s very disrespectful to the City Council.”

The actual urgency is hard to pin down, Cignoli’s insistence notwithstanding. MassDOT did not answer questions about how quickly the Council needed to act. Instead, after the meeting, it offered a terse comment stating the obvious.

“The Springfield City Council passed the measure unanimously and bids opened on October 8,” an agency spokesperson emailed.

That was, indeed, the outcome. Davila welcomed a property owner who rents to the Sovereign Bank at the X. He said the changes may lead the bank to not remain. However, Councilor Whitfield indicated the owner had received incorrect information. She, too, panned the demand for speed, yet she said there had already been countless meetings and public input.

Allen wanted to talk it out, and he later said the conversation helped. (still via YouTube/Focus Springfield)

That did not sway Allen.

“Brute force isn’t any way to solve problems,” he said. “People talking about things is how you solve problems.”

Nevertheless, the appetite for delay was not there. Ward 5 Councilor Lavar Click-Bruce recommended the Council approve this and then hold Cignoli accountable for continuing outreach to property owners and adjusting as necessary.

Walsh, noting she could count votes, withdrew her motion and the appropriation and takings passed without dissent. Allen said the debate the Council managed to have was helpful.

The final item before the Council was the return of the solid waste changes Cignoli had presented at the last meeting. The Maintenance & Development Committee had reviewed it, as its chair, Ward 4 Councilor Malo Brown, noted in his committee report. However, the Council wants more discussion on the changes to the fee to pick up mattresses.

Consequently, councilors referred the matter to a joint meeting of the Finance and Maintenance & Development committees.

The Council has faced demands for prompt action from the administration before. Indeed, it was once a common problem. It still perturbs councilors when it happens and rightly so. Here, it did not bother enough councilors to force a delay. Those opposing delay suggested the concerns were neither new nor incorrect. Above all, nothing was as urgent as whatever ticking time bomb was in MassDOT’s hand.

(WMP&I)

Perhaps what troubles councilors most in these situations is the lack of confidence in the truth. Cignoli may not have ever outright lied to councilors, but they have felt other officials have or at least made hard sells in bad faith. The Council’s sound and fury aside, its members can accept when there truly is no other option. Whether they had no choice here is unclear. MassDOT, obviously avoiding an intramural municipal spat, did not provide that clarity councilors may crave.