Brookline Select Board Meeting - January 27, 2026

10:30 Good evening. I'm Bernard Green, chair

10:33 of the Brookline Select Board and this

10:35 is the regular meeting uh which will be

10:38 remote of the select board for January

10:41 27, 2026.

10:44 Uh first item is going into executive

10:47 session. I move that the select board go

10:49 into executive session for the purpose

10:51 of approving executive session minutes

10:54 and discussing strategy related to real

10:57 property and discussing strategy related

11:00 to litigation. Uh the litigation and

11:04 real property matters are being held in

11:07 executive session because an open

11:08 meeting discussion of the uh

11:11 acquisition, lease holding or

11:12 disposition of real property or the

11:15 negotiating position of um uh the board

11:19 uh in litigation uh will have a

11:22 detrimental effect on our position and

11:26 the chair so declares an executive

11:28 session therefore to be necessary. Uh

11:31 let's um move to to a vote. All in favor

11:34 please indicate by saying I.

11:36 John Vancoyak

11:38 I.

11:39 Paul Warren

11:40 I.

11:41 David Hurlman

11:42 I.

11:43 Michael Rubenstein

11:45 I.

11:46 Chair votes I. Okay.

11:49 Melanie put us in executive session.

11:52 Okay. I'm going to stop recording and

11:55 move guests into the waiting room.

11:58 Please wait one second.

34:28 Heat. Heat.

1:28:16 Good evening. This is Bernard Green

1:28:19 again, chair of the Brooklyn Select

1:28:20 Board, and this is the open meeting of

1:28:23 the select board for and regular meeting

1:28:26 of the select board for January 27,

1:28:30 2026.

1:28:32 Let's start off with um announcements or

1:28:34 updates from the select board. If you

1:28:37 don't mind, I'd like to start off with

1:28:38 an announcement. Not an announcement,

1:28:40 but uh just an update myself. So,

1:28:44 Michael and I attended the Mass

1:28:46 Municipal Association meeting this

1:28:48 weekend along with many uh staff members

1:28:51 from Brooklyn. This annual meeting is

1:28:54 well worth the time of elected municipal

1:28:56 officials. We learn from the programs

1:28:58 and from the people in different

1:29:00 municipalities who are confronting

1:29:02 similar or unique challenges as are we.

1:29:05 We can learn from those interactions a

1:29:07 lot. Uh the keynote speakers uh or the

1:29:11 keynote speaker on Friday morning was

1:29:13 Timothy Shriber and the speaker of the

1:29:16 women elected municipal officials

1:29:18 lunchon was Tammy Piper.

1:29:21 Both of whom were excellent and talked

1:29:24 about ways to reduce our toxic political

1:29:27 environment nationally. And of course,

1:29:31 what they said applies locally, believe

1:29:34 it or not. Timothy Timothy Shrivever

1:29:37 urged the audience to avoid thinking

1:29:39 that strength is macho and that you can

1:29:42 achieve your goals by fighting fire with

1:29:45 fire rather than strength being leading

1:29:48 with dignity or confronting injustice

1:29:52 with consistent nonviolent action as

1:29:55 reflected in the examples set by Martin

1:29:58 Luther King and the civil rights

1:30:00 movement. This applies to the national

1:30:02 scene we are going through today and in

1:30:05 different ways to how we interact with

1:30:07 each other at the local level.

1:30:11 You know, we have proof that Shrivever

1:30:13 was right in Minneapolis where the

1:30:16 consistent discipline and persistent

1:30:19 nonviolent action of just regular people

1:30:23 on the streets while the big political

1:30:26 stars kept quiet.

1:30:30 people who were outgunned and on three

1:30:32 occasions gunned down, but nonetheless

1:30:36 persisted and forced the Trump

1:30:38 administration to back down to some

1:30:41 degree. We don't know for how long or

1:30:43 how sincerely, but we do know that the

1:30:45 peaceful, persistent, nonviolent action

1:30:48 of the people of Minneapolis and

1:30:50 throughout the country did prevail over

1:30:54 the violence of the Trump

1:30:55 administration, at least for now. But

1:30:58 that's a lesson that I think we should

1:31:00 be bear in mind a as we continue to uh

1:31:04 struggle with um this terrible situation

1:31:07 we're facing in this country. Um

1:31:11 I would um one way that you can find

1:31:16 information from this presentation by

1:31:18 Timothy Shrivever is go to the website

1:31:21 of uh his organization called dignity.

1:31:25 us. I think it's worth it to take a look

1:31:28 at that. Uh I found it very very

1:31:30 interesting, very very helpful and um

1:31:34 you know including information that is

1:31:37 useful uh uh here in Brooklyn as well as

1:31:40 elsewhere. So any other uh comments from

1:31:45 the select board? Uh David?

1:31:50 Yes. I'd like to mention that uh today,

1:31:52 January 27th, marks International

1:31:55 Holocaust Remembrance Day, commemorating

1:31:57 the 1945 liberation of the Ashawitz

1:32:01 Burknau concentration and death camp.

1:32:03 While centered on the six million Jews

1:32:05 murdered by the Nazis, this day also

1:32:08 honors millions of other victims,

1:32:10 including the Roma and Cinti, persons

1:32:12 with disabilities, Soviet prisoners of

1:32:15 war, Poles, LGBTQ individuals, political

1:32:19 dissident, and other religious

1:32:21 minorities. Educational initiatives led

1:32:24 by organizations like UNESCO emphasize

1:32:27 the urgent need to combat rising

1:32:30 anti-semitism and to protect universal

1:32:33 human rights today.

1:32:37 Thank you, David. That's an important u

1:32:40 u thing to mention to people because I

1:32:44 have not seen as much about it in the

1:32:47 press as I would expect to have seen.

1:32:50 So, uh John

1:32:53 Yes, thank you very much. I'm perhaps

1:32:56 our chair is is too modest to have

1:32:59 mentioned this himself, so I'm going to

1:33:01 mention it that um I thought the the

1:33:03 Martin Luther King Day observances in

1:33:06 Brooklyn um as always they have been uh

1:33:09 were once again um you know very well

1:33:12 worth attending uh and uh very fitting

1:33:16 uh especially in the current

1:33:17 circumstances. uh an an excellent

1:33:20 program including um uh two two poet

1:33:26 poetry uh readings or um you know

1:33:29 examples of uh one reading uh and one

1:33:34 performance

1:33:35 um including our um uh own Brooklyn poet

1:33:39 laurate and also the Massachusetts poet

1:33:42 laurate. So you couldn't ask for a more

1:33:45 all-star lineup and I thought it was a

1:33:46 great program. Um, the other one thing I

1:33:48 want to say quickly is someone who I had

1:33:51 the um the privilege to know back in the

1:33:55 day when he was very much involved on

1:33:58 the Brooklyn scene as the head of the

1:33:59 Brooklyn Police Association. Uh, Mel

1:34:02 Seabolt has passed away and his passing

1:34:06 has been noted by some people on the

1:34:08 town meeting member list serve who spoke

1:34:11 eloquently about what he meant to

1:34:14 Brooklyn. He really was an outstanding

1:34:16 public safety official and also um an

1:34:20 outstanding leader of uh the Brooklyn

1:34:23 Police Association. So sorry to read

1:34:25 about the passing of of Mel Seabolt

1:34:29 Paul.

1:34:30 Yep. Uh thanks Bernard. Um I just wanted

1:34:33 to uh give a shout out to all of our

1:34:37 town employees. Uh we just had the most

1:34:39 significant snowfall in a long time. Um,

1:34:44 and you know, I I personally was out

1:34:46 most of the night because I I love the

1:34:48 snow. Um, and I saw DPW uh doing the

1:34:52 work to get our our streets cleared. Um,

1:34:56 working to get sidewalks cleared. I know

1:34:57 there's a there's still a lot to do. Uh,

1:34:59 but it was really an overwhelming uh

1:35:02 amount of snow. Um, and I was heartened

1:35:05 as I walked around my neighborhood and

1:35:07 then did some driving today to see the

1:35:09 number of fire hydrants that were

1:35:11 shoveled out. Uh this is, you know,

1:35:13 something that we sometimes forget that

1:35:15 those fire hydrants are really critical.

1:35:17 Um and the number of people that were

1:35:19 helping neighbors. Um you know, I think

1:35:21 there's there's something going on with

1:35:23 the supply uh of of folks that can come

1:35:27 out and help um you know, people shovel

1:35:30 their driveways or their their walkways

1:35:32 and such. Uh just because we've had such

1:35:35 an inconsistent um uh snow season over

1:35:38 the past few years and there just not as

1:35:40 many people doing it. So, um I just I

1:35:42 want to say thank you to all those who

1:35:44 have uh answered the Facebook calls for

1:35:48 please come and help me shovel my car

1:35:49 out. I did see a lot of neighbors

1:35:51 helping neighbors. Um there's still a

1:35:54 lot of outstanding requests I think on

1:35:56 uh on Brook online where people are

1:35:59 seeing unshoveled sidewalks. I just I

1:36:01 would just ask people be patient. Be

1:36:03 patient with their neighbors. Uh be

1:36:05 patient with the town. It was a huge

1:36:07 amount of snow uh that came down and we

1:36:10 certainly are feeling a crunch of

1:36:12 supply. But overall, Chaz, I just want

1:36:14 to say thank you to you to police, fire,

1:36:17 uh DPW for all all the work that they're

1:36:19 doing. I know they're doing a lot of

1:36:20 work tonight to get ready for school to

1:36:22 open tomorrow. I hope uh to you know,

1:36:24 two days of sledding. Uh I've had about

1:36:26 enough. I'm hoping the kids can go to

1:36:28 school tomorrow. So, thank you so much.

1:36:31 Okay. Uh Chaz, did you want to add

1:36:32 something? I see your hand was up.

1:36:34 No, I'm gonna let John go ahead of me.

1:36:35 Thank you.

1:36:36 Okay, John.

1:36:37 Well, yeah, I apologize. I took my turn

1:36:39 already, but I can't resist adding to

1:36:41 the list here. Um, congratulations to

1:36:44 Brooklyn's own um, craft family, but

1:36:47 also congratulations to every resident

1:36:50 of Brooklyn who is is a true blue uh,

1:36:53 Patriots fan because um, we've got some

1:36:55 exciting an exciting game coming up in a

1:36:57 couple of weeks and not for the first

1:36:59 time that we've been able to sort of

1:37:01 claim a a little bit of association with

1:37:04 the success of the New England Patriots.

1:37:08 Okay. Uh, Chaz

1:37:12 very much. Um, I want to thank Paul and

1:37:14 everyone for the kind words. Um, the

1:37:16 team has really been working very hard

1:37:18 out there. We appreciate everyone's

1:37:20 patience and forbearance as we work

1:37:22 through this. It is a huge undertaking

1:37:24 to get the roads clear and then the snow

1:37:27 has to go somewhere. Uh and that's the

1:37:29 kind of second aspect of this that we're

1:37:31 really working on is getting the

1:37:33 immediate roads clear, then widening the

1:37:35 streets so that everything can get clear

1:37:37 so that the you know people are safe

1:37:39 when they're out on the road. Um and

1:37:41 then clearing out um the large snow

1:37:44 drifts and the sidewalks and so and the

1:37:46 parking lots and all of those things. Um

1:37:48 there's going to be a lot of people

1:37:49 working overnight tonight um after

1:37:51 having worked a long time on the

1:37:53 weekends uh to make this happen. So

1:37:55 thank you all very much. Uh thank you to

1:37:57 the entire team and to the combined snow

1:38:00 response teams from police, fire,

1:38:03 health, buildings, and especially TPW

1:38:06 who are the leaders and coordinators on

1:38:07 this response. So thanks. Um I also want

1:38:10 to flag um in terms of Brookline self-

1:38:14 congratulatory. Um we're finally allowed

1:38:16 to announce this after the Mass

1:38:17 Municipal Association contest. Brookline

1:38:19 won not one but two awards this year. Uh

1:38:22 we won came in first place. We have the

1:38:25 best municipal website uh for a

1:38:27 community of over 60,000 people and we

1:38:29 have the best annual report um for a

1:38:32 town of over 60,000 people. Um this is a

1:38:34 real tribute to um Christina Metaf, our

1:38:37 chief communications officer who has

1:38:40 really taken on this work with um a lot

1:38:44 of um uh uh excitement and also you know

1:38:47 dedication and grace and moving through

1:38:49 this stuff. So, I really want to um

1:38:51 shout out Christina for the hard work

1:38:53 that she did. Um I said when we hired

1:38:55 Christina, I said, "If we don't win this

1:38:56 annual award next year, I'm I'm I'm

1:38:58 filing an official protest. Um and she

1:39:01 she won it." Um so, I'm very grateful

1:39:04 for all the hard work that she's done.

1:39:06 Um really, you know, making our making

1:39:09 our communications more effective.

1:39:10 That's really what this is about. It's

1:39:12 not just a pretty website or a pretty

1:39:13 report. when you read the annual report,

1:39:15 you realize, wow, there's a lot of good

1:39:17 information in here that's very clear,

1:39:19 very concise, and very easy to read. Um,

1:39:21 and that's a tribute to that work. But I

1:39:23 also want to thank Fang Yang, our uh our

1:39:26 IT our CIO. Um, and James Paleo, who's

1:39:29 who our one of our web designers. Um,

1:39:32 their work was and but you know, the

1:39:34 whole IT team, the whole web team really

1:39:36 just an incredible amount of effort um

1:39:38 to make the website what it is now. And

1:39:40 it's still, you know, more more to come.

1:39:42 Um, we're continuing to improve our

1:39:44 processes and our procedures. Um, it's

1:39:46 an ever it's an ever refining process.

1:39:49 So, thanks to everyone. It's really nice

1:39:50 to get these awards. Uh, and it's really

1:39:52 nice to recognize what they mean in

1:39:54 terms of being able to provide clear and

1:39:57 and meaningful information to the people

1:39:59 who live and work and want to come here.

1:40:01 So, thanks everyone.

1:40:04 Okay. Thank you. And thank you uh Aaron

1:40:07 and all the other town departments who

1:40:10 did such a spectacular job. And get

1:40:13 ready for next week because it's coming

1:40:15 again, I hear.

1:40:19 Okay. Um and no other comments. Let's

1:40:23 move on to public comment. Um Melanie,

1:40:26 could you uh open up public comment and

1:40:30 um lay out the rules? And I'd like to u

1:40:34 um read a statement from someone who

1:40:36 asked for public comment but is uh not

1:40:40 in the audience I don't believe because

1:40:41 of a conflicting meeting. Um but Melanie

1:40:46 Okay. Thank you for joining us for

1:40:48 public comment. This is an opportunity

1:40:50 for us to hear your perspective on the

1:40:52 issues in Brooklyn that matter to you.

1:40:54 Each person speaking tonight is limited

1:40:56 to three minutes. You don't need to use

1:40:58 the entire time, but you may if you

1:41:00 like. Once 15 minutes has been met,

1:41:02 there's an opportunity at the conclusion

1:41:04 of the select board's business for

1:41:05 additional comments. Members of the

1:41:07 public sometimes raise questions during

1:41:10 public comment. We may be able to

1:41:12 provide a quick answer to a question,

1:41:14 but are more likely to work with staff

1:41:15 to get a more thorough answer and

1:41:17 respond over email. The on-screen timer

1:41:20 will flash orange when you have one

1:41:22 minute remaining and red when your time

1:41:24 is nearly up. Please conclude your

1:41:26 remarks at that time. If you have more

1:41:28 to say, you're welcome to send an email

1:41:29 to board members expressing your

1:41:31 thoughts in greater detail. Any person

1:41:34 wishing to speak must begin their

1:41:35 comment by identifying themselves with

1:41:37 their full name, either their Brookline

1:41:39 precinct number or street address, and

1:41:41 the specific topic on wish on which they

1:41:44 wish to speak. The board encourages but

1:41:46 but does not require that remote users

1:41:48 turn their video on when commenting.

1:41:50 Since we are remote, anybody wishing to

1:41:53 speak, please use the raise your hand

1:41:54 feature.

1:41:56 Okay. Uh Melanie, can I use the

1:41:58 privileges of being the chair to uh

1:42:01 start off by reading a short statement

1:42:04 that Neil Gordon asked me to read if he

1:42:07 couldn't appear uh on Bill McGory? Um

1:42:11 doesn't appear that Neo is here, so I'll

1:42:12 I'll read it. Uh Neil Gordon, precinct

1:42:15 one town meeting member and member of

1:42:17 the advisory committee. I'm a Vietnam

1:42:20 veteran and a member of Brooklyn Steven

1:42:22 L. F. Rutledge, VFW Post 864. I thank

1:42:26 the select board for adding a resolution

1:42:29 acknowledging our retiring veteran

1:42:30 services director to its agenda. The

1:42:33 draft resolution cites many of Bill's

1:42:35 accomplishments. I'll summarize them by

1:42:38 just saying this. Those who have worn

1:42:40 the uniform know the difference between

1:42:42 those who do their jobs well and serve

1:42:44 with honor and those select few who do

1:42:47 so above and beyond. It's above and

1:42:49 beyond that defines the dedication of

1:42:52 Bill McGory to Brooklyn and his

1:42:54 veterans. For that, I publicly offer him

1:42:56 my personal thanks.

1:42:59 Okay. And um later on I I'll read the

1:43:04 resolution that we uh will vote on for

1:43:07 Bill Morardi. Okay. Okay. Melanie,

1:43:10 we have one person raising their hand.

1:43:13 Um

1:43:19 Okay, you have been promoted.

1:43:23 Hi, thank you so much. My name is Jordan

1:43:27 Garrett. I go by JT over here at 40

1:43:30 Center Street in Brookline. Um, I want

1:43:34 to repeat what Paul said. A huge shout

1:43:36 out to all the DPW workers who've been

1:43:39 working so hard overnight all the time.

1:43:42 That's been great. Um, I would also just

1:43:46 kind of ask this board and DPW

1:43:50 leadership to think every single time

1:43:52 this snow clearing has been talked about

1:43:55 online at this meeting, it's always

1:43:58 streets, then remove snow then

1:44:00 sidewalks, streets, remove snow

1:44:02 sidewalks. Um, there are multiple areas

1:44:05 where the town is respons responsible

1:44:07 for sidewalks that clearing hasn't

1:44:10 started

1:44:12 and that makes certain roadways

1:44:13 completely impassible. We've got

1:44:15 pedestrians out here going into slick

1:44:17 roadways. Um, people with infants and

1:44:21 strollers who have to go around, people

1:44:22 who don't have cars because, you know,

1:44:25 maybe we can't afford the privilege of

1:44:26 having cars over here. So, I would just

1:44:31 really appreciate if the board DPW

1:44:33 leadership could take a second sometime

1:44:35 and think about how could we think about

1:44:39 snow clearing in a way that at least

1:44:43 appreciates the fact that some people's

1:44:45 primary transportation is on foot in a

1:44:48 snow emergency and after a snow

1:44:50 emergency. Thank you so much.

1:44:54 Thank you.

1:44:59 Okay. Any other um public comments? Uh

1:45:03 Melanie,

1:45:04 I don't see anybody raising their hand.

1:45:09 Okay. So, let's move on to um

1:45:13 to our miscellaneous calendar

1:45:19 and start off with question of approving

1:45:22 the meeting minutes from January 6,

1:45:24 2026. Any uh corrections to those

1:45:27 minutes? I send Kate some minor

1:45:30 corrections. Uh any other corrections

1:45:33 that haven't been uh conveyed to Kate?

1:45:37 No. Okay. So, I move approval of the me

1:45:40 meeting minutes for January 6, 2026 as

1:45:44 amended. Um

1:45:46 uh all in favor, please indicate by

1:45:48 saying I. John Vansak. I.

1:45:52 Paul Warren. I. David Pearlman.

1:45:56 Looks like he said Iel Rubenstein

1:45:59 I.

1:46:00 And chair votes I. Okay. Next I'd like

1:46:03 to take item 6B through 6S in omnivous

1:46:08 fashion except for item 6D I think it

1:46:12 is. Um which is the resolution u

1:46:16 commending uh Bill McGraardy which I'd

1:46:18 like to read. Um

1:46:21 uh so let me start off with that

1:46:25 and then we'll vote on all the items

1:46:28 unless someone else would like to pull

1:46:29 something out.

1:46:31 And I want to read this uh because you

1:46:34 know Bill McGroy was an incredible um uh

1:46:38 is an incredible uh staff person here in

1:46:42 Brookline and I'm not sure that everyone

1:46:45 knows all the things that he does other

1:46:47 than MCing Veterans Day and Memorial

1:46:50 Day. Those are just one of the one of

1:46:53 the things or two of the things that uh

1:46:56 he does and people should really know

1:46:58 how critically important the other work

1:47:01 that he performs for veterans and others

1:47:05 uh are. So uh this is a resolution of

1:47:08 Brooklyn Select Select Board expressing

1:47:11 its appreciation to William T. McGory

1:47:13 for his exemplary service to veterans in

1:47:15 the town of Brooklyn for 21 years as the

1:47:18 director of veteran services. Whereas

1:47:21 the Brooklyn Select Board rightfully

1:47:23 honors those Brookline employees,

1:47:26 residents, and other individuals whose

1:47:28 service, civic commitment, and

1:47:30 leadership have been shining models of

1:47:32 public service that have enriched the

1:47:35 lives of residents and enhanced the

1:47:37 civic life of our town. And whereas

1:47:40 William T. Bill McGroy has been a

1:47:43 paradigm of those qualities for 21 years

1:47:46 as the Brooklyn Director of Veteran

1:47:48 Services. And whereas Bill McGraardi

1:47:50 served his country for 26 years

1:47:54 prior to joining the town of Brooklyn in

1:47:57 the Army and the Army National Guard,

1:47:59 achieving the rank of major in the Army

1:48:01 Reserve. And whereas Bill McGor's

1:48:03 military service included deployment to

1:48:06 Fula, Germany on the border with East

1:48:08 Germany as a border officer in November

1:48:11 1989,

1:48:13 the historic period when the Berlin Wall

1:48:15 fell and the border between East and

1:48:17 West Germany was open. And whereas upon

1:48:20 retiring from the military, Bill McGroy

1:48:22 began his public service as veterans

1:48:25 outreach coordinator for the

1:48:26 Massachusetts Division of Employment and

1:48:28 Training and later as director of

1:48:30 veteran services for the city of

1:48:32 Gloucester and beginning in 2005 as

1:48:35 director of veteran services for the

1:48:37 town of Brooklyn. And whereas Bill

1:48:39 McGory as director of veteran services

1:48:41 ran a comprehensive social services

1:48:44 office for veterans and their dependent.

1:48:47 And whereas the invaluable services of

1:48:49 Bill McGory provided to Brooklyn

1:48:51 veterans and their dependent included in

1:48:54 assistance in filing for state benefits

1:48:57 under master law chapter 115 and federal

1:49:00 benefits such as veterans administration

1:49:02 medical care for service connected or

1:49:04 non-service connected disabilities and

1:49:07 compensation as well as general

1:49:10 assistance to veterans readjusting to to

1:49:13 civilian life. Whereas Bill and whereas

1:49:16 Bill McGory also provided assistance in

1:49:18 obtaining financial resources such as

1:49:21 social security benefits, emergency

1:49:23 funds, and unemployment compensation,

1:49:26 social services such as counseling,

1:49:28 educational benefits, job searches,

1:49:30 housing, medical care referrals, and

1:49:32 other social service needs of veterans

1:49:35 or their dependent. and important

1:49:38 support and assistance such as help

1:49:40 obtaining military records and

1:49:42 assistance in obtaining burial

1:49:44 allowances and widows pensions.

1:49:47 And whereas Bill McGroy organized and

1:49:49 led the highly appreciated Veterans Day

1:49:52 and Memorial Day celebrations of the

1:49:54 town of Brooklyn. And whereas Bill

1:49:57 McGory continues to work closely with

1:49:59 Brookline American Legion Post 11 and

1:50:01 VFW Post 864 to support their outreach

1:50:05 to veterans of all generations and

1:50:07 multiple armed conflicts and to connect

1:50:10 them to the services offered by the Town

1:50:12 of Brooklyn's veteran affairs office.

1:50:15 And whereas Bill McGory supported the

1:50:17 town of Brooklyn in multiple ways. In

1:50:19 addition to serving as director of

1:50:22 veteran services, including as acting as

1:50:24 the coordinator of the comprehensive

1:50:26 emergency management plan, serving as

1:50:28 the town's measurer of Wood and Bark and

1:50:31 providing overall support and relevant

1:50:33 advice in a supportive manner to

1:50:36 Brooklyn veterans and other residents

1:50:37 and to staff and leadership of town

1:50:39 departments.

1:50:42 Now therefore, in consideration of the

1:50:45 foregoing on this 27th day of January,

1:50:48 2026, the Brookline Select Board on

1:50:51 behalf of the town of Brooklyn hereby

1:50:53 acknowledges, commends, and expresses

1:50:55 its deepest gratitude to EMTT. Bill

1:50:59 McGraardy for his many outstanding and

1:51:01 sustained contributions to Brookline's

1:51:04 veterans, for his many contributions to

1:51:06 the general well-being of the town and

1:51:08 its residents, and for his meticulous

1:51:11 and diligent work for 21 years as the

1:51:14 director of of veteran services for the

1:51:16 town of Brooklyn. So, sorry for the long

1:51:20 uh reading, but you know, Bill is such

1:51:23 an important uh uh person here in

1:51:25 Brooklyn. I think it's really important

1:51:27 for people who may not know him except

1:51:30 for as I said veterans and V veterans

1:51:33 day and Memorial Day to know in detail

1:51:36 the the work that he has done for

1:51:37 veterans and others here in our town. So

1:51:40 I apologize for the length but

1:51:43 I think there's a good reason. Uh, Paul.

1:51:46 Yeah. Uh, Bernard, you missed one

1:51:48 whereas clause. I know you covered a

1:51:50 lot. Um, but you know, whereas Bill

1:51:53 McGuardy is probably one of the nicest

1:51:56 human beings I've ever met. Um, he he

1:51:58 really is just generally a very lovely

1:52:02 person and, you know, we need to include

1:52:04 his daughter in that because she really

1:52:06 helped him a lot um,

1:52:08 you know, annually when when when we're

1:52:10 doing the ceremonies and stuff. So, uh,

1:52:13 you know, thank goodness for Bill, but

1:52:14 he really is a super nice guy.

1:52:16 Yeah,

1:52:17 we all agree.

1:52:20 Okay.

1:52:22 Um,

1:52:24 let's move on then.

1:52:28 I'd like to take items 6B through 6 S in

1:52:33 this fashion. Uh, unless someone wants

1:52:35 to take another item out for discussion.

1:52:39 If not, uh, all in favor of approving

1:52:42 items 6B through 6S, please indicate by

1:52:46 saying I. John Vanscoyak,

1:52:49 I.

1:52:50 Paul Warren,

1:52:50 I.

1:52:51 David Pearlman,

1:52:53 I.

1:52:53 Michael Rubenstein,

1:52:55 I.

1:52:56 And chair votes I.

1:52:59 Okay, that uh ends the miscellaneous

1:53:03 calendar. Let's go to the main calendar.

1:53:05 And the first item is boards and

1:53:07 commissions interviews. Uh we have a um

1:53:12 we have an an applicant for the

1:53:14 commission on diversity, equity,

1:53:16 inclusion, and community relation. Um

1:53:21 uh Zarana Kardashian Zone Jones.

1:53:29 And I'm missing something that I need to

1:53:32 read.

1:53:37 Well, I don't have it in front of me.

1:53:39 Um, as I usually say, let's see if it's

1:53:43 on this.

1:53:45 Bear with me, please. Oh, here it is.

1:53:49 Okay. As I have done before, I'd like to

1:53:51 begin with what I think the select board

1:53:53 should be looking for in candidates for

1:53:55 public bodies. In general, we should be

1:53:58 looking for four things. Does the

1:54:00 applicant have the skills and background

1:54:02 that is required to be successful in the

1:54:04 public body? Does the applicant have

1:54:06 good ideas and perspectives on the work

1:54:08 of the public body? Does the applicant

1:54:11 bring relevant diversity to the public

1:54:13 body to ensure that all communities and

1:54:16 perspectives are represented

1:54:19 in the work the public body does on

1:54:21 behalf of the town? And four, can the

1:54:23 applicant work effectively and

1:54:25 respectfully with other members of the

1:54:28 public body and with the town staff that

1:54:30 will be working with the public body to

1:54:33 evaluate candidates. We will gather

1:54:35 information on these areas from the

1:54:36 application submitted the interview and

1:54:39 from town staff or current members of

1:54:42 the relevant public body.

1:54:46 So, um, with that, let's, uh, start

1:54:50 with, u Miss, um, Kardashian Jones.

1:54:55 Um, let me, hold on. Let me get get my

1:54:59 notes in line here.

1:55:12 Excuse me. Bear with me.

1:55:20 Okay. Um, Miss Kardashians, uh, Jones,

1:55:24 uh, could you please introduce yourself

1:55:27 and, uh, tell us why you're interested

1:55:29 in being a member of the diversity,

1:55:31 equity, um, inclusion, community

1:55:34 relations commission.

1:55:36 Yeah. Um, first of all, I just want to

1:55:38 say um I know like they sound alike and

1:55:42 as much as I want to be a Kardashian

1:55:44 because of economic reasons, I'm not a

1:55:46 Kardashian.

1:55:48 It's okay. Um, my name is Zariana

1:55:51 Kadakashian. You might be better than

1:55:53 Kardashian.

1:55:55 No, no, no. My name is Ziana Mahammadi

1:55:58 Kadakashian. Um, there's no D, it's a K.

1:56:01 Um, Jones, but people best know me as

1:56:04 Zarya Kadakashian Jones. It's a little

1:56:06 easier to pronounce and remember. I also

1:56:09 go by Zarya Jones if you just cannot do

1:56:12 that K name. I get it. I really do. Um,

1:56:15 I have a quick speech. Uh, my grandma

1:56:17 says that she knows I'm going to be a

1:56:18 good lawyer in the future because I

1:56:20 never get tired of my own voice, which I

1:56:22 think means I talk too much. So, I'm

1:56:23 going to try and limit this to a minute

1:56:26 or less, but we'll see. Um, so, thank

1:56:28 you all so much for having me tonight.

1:56:30 Um, I want to start by saying I've been

1:56:32 following the interviews of other

1:56:33 candidates very closely and I've been

1:56:35 genuinely inspired by how many people um

1:56:38 care about Brookline and how many

1:56:40 different paths have brought people

1:56:42 here. Um, one story in particular that

1:56:44 has stayed with me was Masha's story

1:56:46 from a few weeks ago. um hearing Masha

1:56:49 share um about immigrating from the USSR

1:56:52 and how they were able to find community

1:56:54 in Brooklyn, especially alongside other

1:56:56 immigrant communities who were building

1:56:58 roots here at the time, um was really

1:57:01 moving. Um it reminded me of what

1:57:03 Brookline can be um at its best, a place

1:57:06 where people arrive carrying so much

1:57:07 history um and culture and still find

1:57:10 belonging. Um, I want to help ensure

1:57:12 that everyone can have a positive

1:57:14 experience and be embraced by our

1:57:16 community in the way that Masha was. Um,

1:57:19 but Masha's story also stayed with me

1:57:21 because my family's experience here was

1:57:23 very different. Um, my black and brown

1:57:26 family found a home in Brooklyn after

1:57:28 being displaced by a devastating fire

1:57:30 that ruined the two brownstones they

1:57:32 lived in in the south end of Boston. Um,

1:57:35 they moved here in 78 and at that time

1:57:37 were one of two black families in town.

1:57:40 Um, my mother and her siblings remember

1:57:42 very vividly being targeted by white

1:57:44 students called the n-word. Um, having

1:57:47 sticks and rocks thrown at them and

1:57:49 feeling like there were certain parts of

1:57:51 town they couldn't safely go to. Um,

1:57:54 they remember the scrutiny that my

1:57:55 mother faced because of the texture of

1:57:57 her hair. Um, and also because my family

1:58:00 was interfaith, which was not very

1:58:02 common back then. Um those experiences

1:58:06 shaped my mom, they shaped my

1:58:07 grandparents and they shaped how they

1:58:09 raised their children and grandchildren,

1:58:10 including me. Um not as a lesson in

1:58:13 fear, but as a lesson and responsibility

1:58:15 to protect each other, to build

1:58:17 community, um on purpose and to refuse

1:58:20 to accept that harm is just how things

1:58:22 are. Um I was introduced to activism and

1:58:25 civic engagement at a very young age. My

1:58:27 grandfather used to tell me that if

1:58:28 you're not an active participant in your

1:58:30 community, you're doing a disservice to

1:58:32 everyone who came before you, everyone

1:58:34 who fought so you could live, work, and

1:58:36 be seen in the place that you call home.

1:58:38 Um that ethic has guided me in my

1:58:40 volunteering and organizing from

1:58:42 supporting organizations like Planned

1:58:44 Parenthood, Baggley, Jimena which stands

1:58:46 for Jews indigenous to the Middle East

1:58:48 and North Africa. Um the ACLU, the

1:58:50 Trevor Project, and to creating my

1:58:53 community group with my friend Adena

1:58:55 Brookline for the culture. Um that work

1:58:57 has included building community spaces

1:59:00 where people of color and people from

1:59:02 other marginalized communities are

1:59:03 celebrated. um and pairing celebration

1:59:06 with education because we can't honor a

1:59:08 history like Junth without telling the

1:59:10 truth about it. Um and it's also meant

1:59:14 um stepping up in a tangible way local

1:59:16 ways like supporting mutual aid efforts

1:59:18 in Brookline including the community

1:59:19 fridge network that I help manage um to

1:59:22 keep neighbors fed. Um I also want to

1:59:24 name that I bring both lived experience

1:59:26 and a deep commitment to learning and

1:59:28 public service. you have my resume, so

1:59:31 you know my educational background, but

1:59:33 I have an associates in economics. I

1:59:35 double majored in history and polyai at

1:59:37 TUS um with a Middle Eastern

1:59:39 concentration along with some Eastern

1:59:41 European concentration work. Um and I

1:59:43 have an MS in global public policy from

1:59:46 Suffach University which primarily

1:59:48 focused on governance, conflict,

1:59:50 migration, and political economy in the

1:59:52 Middle East. Um, I'm seeking a seat on

1:59:55 the diversity commission in particular

1:59:56 because I will bring to this work a

1:59:58 combination of perspective and practice.

2:00:00 Um, as a black MRAI Jew, which is not

2:00:02 something people have heard of before

2:00:04 really, a member of the LGBTQIA+

2:00:07 community and a lifelong Brooklyn

2:00:08 resident and organizer, I understand how

2:00:10 policy, culture, and everyday

2:00:12 experiences collide, especially for

2:00:14 people who are marginalized or feel

2:00:16 unseen. And I also understand that real

2:00:19 equity is not a slogan. It's a measure

2:00:21 measurable thing that is built through

2:00:23 listening, accountability, and concrete

2:00:25 actions that make people safer, more

2:00:27 included, and more able to thrive. Um,

2:00:30 if selected, I'll always show up

2:00:32 prepared, collaborative, and committed

2:00:33 to outcomes. And I will carry with me

2:00:35 both Masha's story of belonging and my

2:00:38 family story of what it is taken to

2:00:41 demand it. So, thank you.

2:00:44 Thank you. That was pretty thorough. And

2:00:48 I'm sure we still have questions. So I

2:00:51 I'll start off with um with um asking

2:00:54 you you what are some of the issues that

2:00:57 you see uh in terms of cross collabor

2:01:00 crosscultural collaboration in a town

2:01:03 like Brooklyn?

2:01:08 Um can you rephrase that question?

2:01:11 Sorry.

2:01:13 what what are some of the uh issues that

2:01:16 you see uh in terms of impeding or

2:01:20 facilitating cross-cultural

2:01:22 collaboration in in Brooklyn or a town

2:01:25 like Brooklyn?

2:01:27 Yeah. I think the main issue that I have

2:01:30 found is that just no one wants to feel

2:01:34 left out. So even when we have proposes

2:01:36 about celebrating certain holidays or um

2:01:39 cultural convenings, a lot of people

2:01:41 push back against those things because

2:01:43 they're not something that comes from

2:01:44 their similar background or it's not

2:01:46 something that they understand. Um but

2:01:48 also I've just found that we're not able

2:01:51 to have really conductive community

2:01:53 conversations right now, mostly because

2:01:55 a lot of them are taking place online.

2:01:58 Um and it it's just a very toxic

2:02:00 environment right now. And so I'm hoping

2:02:01 by having more cultural convenings in

2:02:04 public that people can start to kind of

2:02:06 break down some of those um guard rails

2:02:09 that we've built up amongst community

2:02:11 members.

2:02:13 Thank you. Uh Paul, you have your hand

2:02:15 up.

2:02:15 Thanks Bernard. Hi Ariana. Thank you for

2:02:18 uh for your application. Um and great

2:02:20 opening statement. I really

2:02:22 Thank you.

2:02:23 Um you have a great background. So, um,

2:02:26 tell me a little bit about like what's

2:02:29 the one or two things you'd love to

2:02:31 accomplish while while being on the

2:02:32 commission? You know, where where's the

2:02:34 gap? I love this idea about in person. I

2:02:36 think we need to get more face to face

2:02:39 than keyboard to keyboard. But, you

2:02:41 know, could you talk a little bit about

2:02:42 that?

2:02:43 Yeah. So, um, there's mostly two things

2:02:46 that I really would like to see happen

2:02:48 if I was selected to be on the

2:02:49 commission. So, the first um is to

2:02:51 helping Brookline build a stronger

2:02:53 coordinated approach to commemorations

2:02:55 and celebrations so that communities as

2:02:57 I said aren't fighting for visibility

2:03:00 over one. Um and so the town isn't kind

2:03:02 of reinventing the wheel each year. Um

2:03:05 you know, War Cardo 15 is a perfect

2:03:07 example of how we can do that. um

2:03:09 centralized planning, clear

2:03:11 responsibility through the ODICR and the

2:03:13 commission and obviously having adequate

2:03:15 funding to celebrate um those

2:03:18 celebrations. And second, I really want

2:03:20 the commission to be known for outcomes

2:03:22 and not just like drama unfortunately I

2:03:25 think has overshadowed a lot of the work

2:03:27 of the commission over the past couple

2:03:29 years. So um things like toolkits and

2:03:32 trainings and system that departments

2:03:34 and community members can actually use

2:03:36 like guidance on inclusive language,

2:03:39 community engagement practices and how

2:03:41 to respond when harm does happen to

2:03:43 community members. Um something that was

2:03:45 super helpful for me which actually came

2:03:46 from the ODICR is the large event

2:03:49 planning guide which I didn't know we

2:03:51 had. Um but that's an example of like a

2:03:53 toolkit, something that we can utilize

2:03:54 to improve community celebrations across

2:03:57 Brooklyn.

2:03:58 Cool. Thank you. Outcomes. I like it.

2:04:02 Uh Michael,

2:04:03 um thank you very much. Sorry, Anna. Um

2:04:08 for your application. Uh

2:04:11 uh

2:04:13 you you've already mentioned the warrant

2:04:15 article 15 and I was going to ask you

2:04:17 about that, but um I appreciate your

2:04:20 inclusive centralized approach to that.

2:04:23 I don't know if you have any other

2:04:25 specific comments about um the

2:04:27 celebration of LGBT

2:04:30 LGBTQIA plus pride month and the number

2:04:33 of holidays that were uh mentioned

2:04:35 within within Ward Article 15.

2:04:38 Yeah, I have so much that I've wanted to

2:04:40 say about this and I'm I'm so glad that

2:04:43 this was passed. It was something that

2:04:44 was really needed in our community. Um

2:04:47 I'm also happy to announce that Brooklyn

2:04:48 for Culture is actually going to host

2:04:50 the first townwide pride events on June

2:04:52 27th. This will be a Saturday, so you'll

2:04:54 hear more about that in the next coming

2:04:56 months. Um, but the thing that I'm

2:04:58 really interested, you know, I just

2:04:59 mentioned something about outcomes. I

2:05:01 really want us to emphasize more

2:05:02 speakers and education angles when it

2:05:05 comes to Pride events. Um, trained

2:05:08 speakers, educators, clinicians, youth

2:05:10 development professionals to offer

2:05:12 guidance on more genderneutral, gender-

2:05:15 inclusive language. Um, and also I think

2:05:18 Pride Month should include education,

2:05:21 just as we've tried to add an education

2:05:22 element to events like Junth, um,

2:05:25 including sex education, which is

2:05:26 something that everybody doesn't want to

2:05:28 touch for some reason, which I think is

2:05:29 weird. Um, but sex, um, education

2:05:32 initiatives that aren't only catered to

2:05:34 or centered on cisgender and

2:05:36 heterosexual people, um, you know, the

2:05:39 article calls specifically for pride

2:05:41 observation and instruction in public

2:05:43 schools. So I think this could be a

2:05:45 really great opportunity to focus on

2:05:47 LGBTQIA plus history and contributions

2:05:50 and I think that we can extend that into

2:05:52 age inclusive and age appropriate um

2:05:55 health education and safety.

2:05:57 Okay. Um and the other question that I

2:05:59 have um and I I was actually inspired um

2:06:04 at the MMA conference when Timothy

2:06:07 Shrivever talked about how we are

2:06:09 judging people all of the time um just

2:06:12 as a part of our relationships. How do

2:06:14 you think about incorporating a person's

2:06:17 intent and a person's impact when

2:06:20 judging their words and their actions?

2:06:22 Yeah, this is a really great question

2:06:24 and and something that we all kind of

2:06:26 have to learn. Um, so I tried to my best

2:06:31 to like hold two truths at once, which

2:06:33 is intent matters, but impact matters a

2:06:35 little bit more in my opinion,

2:06:37 especially in a town like Brooklyn, um,

2:06:40 where our words can affect safety,

2:06:42 belonging, and trust amongst community

2:06:44 members. So I start by listening, you

2:06:47 know, for what the person meant. Um, but

2:06:49 obviously it's not enough just to

2:06:51 listen. You think about who was harmed

2:06:52 behind the statement. What message did

2:06:54 that statement send? Um, will that

2:06:56 statement discourage people from

2:06:59 speaking out against certain things? Um,

2:07:02 you know, obviously it's okay to

2:07:03 disagree with people and have a

2:07:04 difference in opinion, but going

2:07:06 straight to labeling someone as

2:07:07 malicious is a little harmful. Um, so

2:07:09 focusing on accountability, um, you

2:07:12 know, all of our moms say it's not what

2:07:13 you say, it's how you say it. Um, and

2:07:15 for me, um, people might disagree. My

2:07:18 goal is really not to win arguments or

2:07:20 to prove that I'm correct. Um, it's

2:07:22 mostly just to reduce harm, which I

2:07:24 think is something that we need to be

2:07:25 emphasizing particularly over the last

2:07:27 three years or so.

2:07:29 Thank you,

2:07:31 John.

2:07:33 Thank you. Um, and and thank you, Zarya,

2:07:36 for uh for applying for the commission.

2:07:38 Um, I have to say I I have been so

2:07:42 impressed with um the more recent years

2:07:46 uh of the uh Junth observances and and

2:07:50 the celebration at Lorita Ruff and

2:07:52 Ridley. And I wonder if you could just g

2:07:56 give a give folks a little bit of

2:07:57 insight as to how that came together um

2:08:00 and your role in it because I I know

2:08:03 from personal experience you were very

2:08:06 very much in it and um I I was very glad

2:08:10 to see how successful it turned out to

2:08:12 be and if people didn't sort of

2:08:14 experience this themselves. Was it the

2:08:16 most recent one or the one before that

2:08:18 that the temperature was like 99°?

2:08:21 It's been 99 or above the last two

2:08:23 years, so fingers crossed it's not this

2:08:26 year.

2:08:27 The crowds that turned out and they had

2:08:29 fun. I mean, it was really it was an

2:08:32 amazing event.

2:08:34 Thank you so much for that, John. Um,

2:08:36 first I I want to start by just thanking

2:08:40 you all so much for all of your

2:08:41 continued support. um particularly Chaz

2:08:44 and Bernard who had to kind of wrangle

2:08:47 some of us behind the scenes a little

2:08:49 bit but we were able to get on track. I

2:08:51 think that's an understatement. Um but

2:08:54 no um I had been celebrating Junth all

2:08:56 my life. My mother's father is

2:08:58 originally from North Carolina um and

2:09:00 originally from North Carolina and then

2:09:02 spent more of his formative years in

2:09:03 Detroit, Michigan. Um, Junth was always

2:09:06 a holiday that we celebrated and so I

2:09:09 thought that having a Juneenth

2:09:10 celebration in Brooklyn would be really

2:09:12 remarkable for people who haven't been

2:09:14 able to experience a Juneenth on their

2:09:16 own. Um, so I threw the first Junth

2:09:19 celebration back in 2020 before it was

2:09:21 actually a federal holiday. Um, and it

2:09:25 was really great. Um unfortunately, you

2:09:28 know, we did not have as many people um

2:09:30 because we were in the middle still in

2:09:32 the middle of a pandemic, but at the

2:09:33 height of the pandemic, but we had a

2:09:35 really great turnout. Um and through

2:09:37 that, you know, the town of Brooklyn and

2:09:39 um obviously with the holiday becoming a

2:09:41 federal holiday, fingers crossed it

2:09:42 remains a federal holiday, but we shall

2:09:44 see. Um began to celebrate Junth year

2:09:48 after year, and there were multiple

2:09:49 groups that were celebrating Junth in

2:09:52 different um ways. And it just shows how

2:09:55 um much enthusiasm the holiday has

2:09:58 gained over the years. And over the past

2:10:01 three years, Brookline for the Culture

2:10:03 um has been one of the leading

2:10:04 organizations and community groups

2:10:06 helping plan that event. Um there's so

2:10:08 much work that goes into that. I think

2:10:10 we start maybe four to five months. We

2:10:13 actually just had our first meeting on

2:10:14 Sunday. Um we try our best to start

2:10:16 about four to five months before to make

2:10:18 sure that we have everything planned

2:10:20 including safety plans. We have ADA

2:10:23 accessible equipment for people who need

2:10:25 special bathrooms. Um making sure that

2:10:28 if we are going to have a 100 degree

2:10:30 day, which we have had the last two

2:10:32 years in a row, um that we have wet slip

2:10:35 and slides for the kids so that they're

2:10:36 not burning in the summer. Um and yeah,

2:10:39 so there's a lot that goes into all that

2:10:40 and I'm always happy to speak about that

2:10:42 and other programming that we offer and

2:10:44 other events that we plan throughout the

2:10:45 community, but really um it's a big

2:10:47 thank you to the town and um parks and

2:10:50 recck ODICR in particular. Sarah

2:10:52 Kaplan's been really great. So yeah.

2:10:54 Well, and thank you for bringing it off

2:10:58 so beautifully um last couple of last

2:11:00 several years. Um thank you.

2:11:03 Thank you,

2:11:05 David.

2:11:07 Hi, thank you for your application. I

2:11:09 notice in your resume you mentioned that

2:11:11 you have managed over a dozen high

2:11:14 impact projects that increase civic

2:11:17 engagement and strengthened

2:11:19 organizational equity outcomes. I'm

2:11:21 wondering if maybe you'd like to

2:11:23 highlight a couple of those and what it

2:11:25 is you did to achieve it.

2:11:28 Yeah. Um, I mean you all, well you I

2:11:30 don't know if you all I shouldn't say

2:11:32 you all but for most of you you know

2:11:33 that I worked at the Brooklyn Community

2:11:35 Foundation for four years. I actually

2:11:37 just left. Um, my transition to a new

2:11:40 role at the Boston Foundation. Um, but

2:11:42 one of our biggest programs was the

2:11:44 racial equity grant program which aimed

2:11:46 to support the BIPO community following

2:11:49 the CO 19 pandemic. Um, so it was the

2:11:52 first time that we had um something

2:11:54 called participatory grant making. Um

2:11:57 participatory grant making means that

2:11:59 you are taking people from the

2:12:01 marginalized communities that you are

2:12:02 aiming to serve and kind of putting them

2:12:04 into the decision-making chair. Um so we

2:12:07 took a number of BIPO community members.

2:12:09 We um paid them almost like on a focus

2:12:12 group um initiative to hear the direct

2:12:15 feedback about needs that they were

2:12:16 experiencing um gaps in social services,

2:12:20 social networks throughout the community

2:12:21 here in Brooklyn um that they needed

2:12:23 assistance with that their communities

2:12:25 needed assistance with. We took all of

2:12:27 that feedback and we built out the

2:12:29 racial equity grant committee. So again,

2:12:31 bringing people from marginalized

2:12:32 communities, um, putting them in the

2:12:34 decision-making seat, letting them know

2:12:36 that they do have power even in a

2:12:38 community like Brooklyn where I think

2:12:40 the black population is about 1%.

2:12:43 Um, I don't have the exact numbers on me

2:12:46 for the other BIPO communities. Thank

2:12:49 you. 3.7%. Um, so it's gone up a little

2:12:52 bit. Um but yeah, so there's a number of

2:12:55 initiatives that like that that I've

2:12:56 done at the Brooklyn Community

2:12:58 Foundation. I was also the lead project

2:13:00 manager behind our guaranteed income

2:13:02 pilot that we launched in collaboration

2:13:04 with the Brooklyn Housing Authority um

2:13:06 and UP together, which is um a

2:13:09 nationwide um guaranteed basic income

2:13:12 program institution that helps

2:13:13 organizations like the Brooklyn

2:13:14 Community Foundation launch guaranteed

2:13:16 basic income programs. Um, and hopefully

2:13:19 you all will get to see um those results

2:13:22 um through our Arbor reporting um soon

2:13:25 if you haven't already um so that you

2:13:27 can hear about the impact of some of

2:13:28 those programs on our neighbors here in

2:13:31 Brooklyn. So,

2:13:34 great.

2:13:34 Thank you.

2:13:36 Thank you. So, um, Zarya, thank you for

2:13:40 your, um, answers to the questions as

2:13:43 well as your introductory remarks,

2:13:45 which, um, were very thorough and, um,

2:13:48 told us a lot. We will be making, um,

2:13:50 appointments to the, uh, commission at

2:13:54 some point in the future.

2:13:56 We'll let you know.

2:13:58 Great. Thank you all so much um, for

2:14:00 having me and I hope you all stay warm.

2:14:02 It's really cold outside, so

2:14:05 Thank you.

2:14:09 Okay.

2:14:12 Okay. Next uh

2:14:16 is a grant of location. Uh it's a 7:00

2:14:20 uh hearing. We're a little late. I

2:14:22 apologize. Grant of location for

2:14:25 Edgemont Street. Uh a public hearing. Um

2:14:30 so who is going to This is an NSAR

2:14:33 electric company doing business as

2:14:34 Eversource of course.

2:14:36 Um and they're putting in an underground

2:14:39 conduit on Amory Road or Amory Street um

2:14:45 and uh Edgemon Street

2:14:48 and um

2:14:50 I guess I'll read I'll read I'll read

2:14:52 the question before it's question of

2:14:54 approving the petition of NSAR electric

2:14:56 company doing business as Eversource

2:14:58 Energy for permission to construct any

2:15:00 location for underground conduit on

2:15:03 Amory Street southwesterly. and

2:15:06 northwesterly from the existing manhole

2:15:09 number 9500 at the at the intersection

2:15:12 with Edgemont Street a distance of

2:15:14 approximately 15 ft to Edgemont Street

2:15:18 and in Edgemont Street northwesterly and

2:15:20 southwesterly from Amory Street a

2:15:23 distance of approximately

2:15:26 137 ft to private property at 14 Edgeon

2:15:29 Street. I hope that's informative. Um,

2:15:34 so who do we have from from uh uh

2:15:36 Eversource to speak?

2:15:39 Hello, this is Chanel Grant from

2:15:41 Eversource Energy. Can you hear me?

2:15:43 Yes.

2:15:44 Although if you can speak a little

2:15:47 louder, I think it'd be better.

2:15:49 Oh, okay. Let's see.

2:15:58 Okay. Turn it up a little more.

2:16:02 Okay. Okay. Can you hear me now?

2:16:04 It's a little better.

2:16:05 Okay. So, this is a continuation from

2:16:08 the last hearing. Um, yes, we're

2:16:11 installing 154 ft of conduit from um

2:16:17 the Wesley um manhole 9500

2:16:22 and street on togg street to private

2:16:25 property at number 14 installing 154

2:16:30 conduit.

2:16:31 So, we did hear back from Mr. Ballinger

2:16:35 and they would like to move forward this

2:16:37 project

2:16:39 and we did speak with him and we

2:16:41 answered a lot of his questions and um

2:16:44 they would like to move forward on this

2:16:47 project.

2:16:48 Okay. Mr. Ballinger was a a butter or

2:16:51 not a butter member of the condo

2:16:54 association that raised some questions.

2:16:57 Um and uh Chaz is indicating that uh as

2:17:02 you said they were they were resolved

2:17:03 and um you know we can move forward with

2:17:07 this uh with this grant allocation.

2:17:10 Yes.

2:17:13 Hi uh thank you. Thanks you Chanel. I

2:17:15 just that was I wanted to just get some

2:17:17 clar clarification on this. Typically

2:17:19 these are handled um at you know the the

2:17:23 public hearing the subcommittee whatever

2:17:24 we're calling it. Um, and this was

2:17:26 brought forward. Why was it continued,

2:17:28 Chaz?

2:17:29 So, yeah. So, we held a public hearing

2:17:31 on this and at this public hearing, uh,

2:17:33 a member of the public stood up and

2:17:35 said, "I'm the chair of the, uh, condo

2:17:37 association for this building." And I

2:17:39 don't recall us applying for this. Uh,

2:17:41 and so it was a it came as a surprise to

2:17:44 the condo association that Eversource

2:17:45 was talking about building this upgrade.

2:17:47 And of course, there would be a cost to

2:17:49 the condo association. So, they um, we

2:17:52 said, "Let's put this on hold. Let's

2:17:53 figure let's get to the bottom of who

2:17:55 applied for this and why. Um let's make

2:17:57 sure that the that the building this

2:18:00 build buildings that it's meant to

2:18:00 benefit actually want the benefit. Um

2:18:03 and if so, you know, are willing to pay

2:18:05 the cost and do all of those things.

2:18:07 Maybe, you know, our our guess at the

2:18:09 time was, well, maybe an eager resident

2:18:11 said, "Well, I really want to upgrade my

2:18:13 um the power grid." And um you know, put

2:18:16 in the request to Eversource and

2:18:17 Eversource started doing the work, not

2:18:19 realizing that it wasn't the condo

2:18:20 association making the request. Um but

2:18:22 ultimately my understanding is after

2:18:25 conversations between Eversource and the

2:18:27 condo association as well as with some

2:18:29 of the abutters who are just concerned

2:18:30 about the scale of the project um that

2:18:33 ultimately those concerns were

2:18:34 addressed. But you know we said let's

2:18:37 continue the public hearing so you will

2:18:39 have an opportunity if there are members

2:18:40 of the public that wish to be heard on

2:18:41 this. Um but yes this is one of those

2:18:44 instances where when the licensing panel

2:18:46 encounters something that we can't

2:18:48 resolve or we think that is worth

2:18:50 escalating, we escalate to you. And so

2:18:52 that's where we are here.

2:18:53 So who so who's the requester?

2:18:57 Who's requesting the upgrade? Was it the

2:18:59 condo association or someone else?

2:19:01 So officially the condo association is

2:19:02 now requesting the upgrade. But

2:19:04 Kellyanne Korea is also from Eversource

2:19:06 and she can speak a little bit about the

2:19:07 the mystery here. Although we have to be

2:19:10 we can't you know my understanding is

2:19:11 that Eversource can't necessarily

2:19:13 provide us with the details of of you

2:19:15 know private applications but they can

2:19:16 give us a little bit of the Eller on

2:19:18 this.

2:19:19 Okay.

2:19:19 Okay. Kelly Anne Korea.

2:19:23 Um, hi, this is Kelly Korea from

2:19:25 Eversource. So, basically, um, as it was

2:19:29 explained, the public hearing was

2:19:30 opened. The member of the condo board

2:19:33 didn't realize they were going forward

2:19:34 with it. So, originally what happened

2:19:36 was the association was interested in

2:19:39 possibly upgrading their network and

2:19:42 bringing EV charging stations. So, they

2:19:46 did contact Eversource. We met on site

2:19:48 with our customer care person, our

2:19:50 engineer, their electrician, and a

2:19:52 member of the condo board. So, it kind

2:19:55 of just progressed from there. We went

2:19:57 ahead and designed everything. They've

2:19:59 had some of the paperwork there. Um, I

2:20:02 think it just progressed without

2:20:03 realizing they hadn't actually

2:20:04 confirmed, yes, go ahead and do this.

2:20:07 So, at the public hearing, that's what

2:20:09 was brought up. So, we did ask to have

2:20:12 the hearing continued to the select

2:20:14 board meeting tonight. We had originally

2:20:16 intended to ask you guys to continue

2:20:18 this hearing to the end of February

2:20:20 because they had a condo association

2:20:23 meeting and then an owners meeting

2:20:24 coming up within the next couple of

2:20:26 weeks. However, the condo board

2:20:28 contacted me this morning and said they

2:20:30 did speak with all the owners and the

2:20:32 association has agreed they do want to

2:20:33 move forward with the project. So, I did

2:20:36 also speak with the abutter who had some

2:20:38 questions. I submitted written answers

2:20:41 to those questions also to the town

2:20:43 today. So, I think we've addressed

2:20:45 everybody's concerns as to the scope of

2:20:47 work, what the project is. The board has

2:20:49 agreed they want to move forward. So,

2:20:51 now we're just respectfully requesting

2:20:53 our grant location be approved.

2:20:55 Bernard, can I ask one follow-up

2:20:57 question?

2:20:57 Sure.

2:20:58 Uh, so thanks, Colleen. That's really

2:20:59 helpful. Um, and I can hear you, which

2:21:01 is great. Um, so did the Abutters get

2:21:05 can they also take advantage of the

2:21:07 increase in the capacity here if they

2:21:09 want to do EV charges as well, or is

2:21:11 that a would that be a separate project?

2:21:13 So, yeah. So that was Mr. Franco's

2:21:15 question. The abuter to this property

2:21:17 that appeared at the hearing before. Um

2:21:20 this upgrade will address the condo

2:21:23 units for Thatchmont condominiums. There

2:21:25 will be charging stations in the parking

2:21:27 lot there between the two buildings. As

2:21:30 far as any kind of upgrade to the Amory

2:21:33 condos or apartments that Mr. Franco

2:21:35 lives in, it they would actually have to

2:21:39 contact Eversource and say, "Here's what

2:21:41 we want to do on our property." And then

2:21:42 we would take a look and see what our

2:21:44 network is. Maybe they're fed from the

2:21:46 same manhole we're digging from right

2:21:47 now and the capacity will be there that

2:21:49 we can use those conduits we're

2:21:51 installing now. But if they're fed from

2:21:53 a different direction, a different

2:21:54 manhole on the other side, um it's

2:21:57 that's something we just explore at the

2:21:59 time they ask and it would depend on the

2:22:01 load and what kind of services they're

2:22:03 requesting. I actually did have that

2:22:05 conversation with Mr. Franco and I did

2:22:07 send him the information on how to

2:22:09 initiate an inquiry or a work order with

2:22:11 our company if they are interested.

2:22:13 Okay, great. Thank you.

2:22:17 Okay, unless there are any other

2:22:18 questions from the select board, I'd

2:22:20 like to Oh, I see Michael Rubenstein.

2:22:25 Michael, you're Yeah, I just I just have

2:22:28 a procedural question. Um and that is um

2:22:31 since we are continuing the public

2:22:32 hearing, do we have to like reopen the

2:22:35 public hearing and offer opportunities

2:22:37 for the public to speak now?

2:22:42 Yeah. Go ahead, Jess.

2:22:44 That's that's that's how it works. Yes.

2:22:46 Okay. Okay. Thank you.

2:22:48 Okay. Unless there are any other

2:22:50 questions, um Melanie, let's open up the

2:22:52 public hearing

2:22:55 and let's see if anyone wants to speak.

2:23:00 I don't see anyone raising their hands

2:23:03 to speak.

2:23:06 Okay.

2:23:08 Uh okay. So there no uh no no one

2:23:12 wanting to speak. I will close the

2:23:14 public hearing and um see if the board

2:23:19 has any further questions. If not we

2:23:21 will go for a vote.

2:23:24 Okay. Seeing none, I move approval of

2:23:26 the petition of NStar Electric Company

2:23:29 doing business as Eversource for

2:23:32 permission to construct and a location

2:23:34 for underground conduit

2:23:37 um as was described by uh Eversource.

2:23:43 All in favor, please indicate by saying

2:23:45 I. John Vansoy.

2:23:47 I

2:23:49 uh Dave uh Paul Warren. David Pearlman.

2:23:55 Looks like David's saying hi. For the

2:23:58 record, he said I. Okay.

2:24:01 Michael Rubenstein.

2:24:02 I

2:24:03 and chair votes. I thank you.

2:24:08 Okay. Next item is

2:24:11 Thank you everybody.

2:24:12 Okay. Next, next item is discussion of

2:24:16 fiscal year 2027 budget processes,

2:24:20 timelines, and calendar.

2:24:23 Chaz,

2:24:25 thank you. Um, just wanted to provide an

2:24:27 update to the board uh because I know

2:24:29 there's been um just questions of um

2:24:33 that that go on um in terms of where we

2:24:36 are with the budget uh and the how the

2:24:39 budget process intersects with the work

2:24:41 of the expenditures and revenue study

2:24:42 committee. that's currently ongoing. Um,

2:24:45 as many on the board know, um, the

2:24:48 expenditures and revenue study committee

2:24:49 is currently operating, um, three

2:24:52 separate subcommittees addressing

2:24:54 questions about the town, the schools,

2:24:56 and things beyond the kind of horizon

2:24:59 of, you know, in the immediate next

2:25:00 three years. Um, what are, you know,

2:25:03 called the future subcommittee, you

2:25:04 know, what are what are things that can

2:25:05 be done in the long, you know, long-term

2:25:07 investments that could be made in terms

2:25:09 of fiscal stability for the town. um

2:25:11 those subcommittees are producing um

2:25:14 segments uh of subcommittee reports um

2:25:17 that would come back to the main

2:25:18 committee. The main committee would then

2:25:20 review that uh and produce um its own

2:25:24 you know central report with the likely

2:25:26 with those um subcommittee reports as

2:25:28 appendices um along with any minority

2:25:30 reports and additional information they

2:25:32 may wish to provide. Um the end goal of

2:25:36 that uh and I as as the committee has

2:25:39 continued to discuss there has been some

2:25:40 appetite for that committee uh which was

2:25:43 um not initially intended to be a

2:25:45 standing committee to potent to

2:25:47 potentially um continue on in some

2:25:49 fashion um and potentially continue on

2:25:53 in terms of just oversight and um

2:25:55 providing support um in terms of the

2:25:58 recommendations that it's making uh to

2:26:00 ensure public followup uh what the

2:26:03 community is asking uh is being done. Um

2:26:07 and so that work is continuing. Um but

2:26:09 along with that in parallel is the

2:26:12 traditional budget process that we go

2:26:14 through uh in preparation for fiscal

2:26:16 year 27 which begins on July 1st of this

2:26:19 calendar year 2026.

2:26:22 So

2:26:24 our budget process h will kick off in

2:26:27 earnest I mean our budget process kicked

2:26:29 off in earnest in September. Uh, so

2:26:31 let's be clear, we've been working for

2:26:33 for some time on the the the budget. Um,

2:26:37 and even prior to that, we've been

2:26:38 having conversations about what capital

2:26:40 projects are coming up on the horizon

2:26:42 and so forth. But what really triggers

2:26:45 um, for bylaw purposes, the budget

2:26:49 starting gun is the publication of the

2:26:51 governor's budget. The governor is

2:26:53 obligated to produce a budget on the

2:26:56 fourth Wednesday of January, which if

2:26:58 you're keeping score is tomorrow. Um the

2:27:00 governor previewed that budget in as

2:27:03 much as it applies to towns and cities

2:27:07 uh at the masses municipal association

2:27:09 cont uh conference and then the

2:27:11 so-called cherry sheets were published

2:27:13 that gave us a sense of how much

2:27:15 traditional unrestricted government aid

2:27:17 and chapter 70 funds we're getting. The

2:27:19 chapter 70 funds are intended to fund

2:27:22 schools. Unrestricted general government

2:27:23 aid is intended to fund municipalities

2:27:25 at large. Um, Brookline, as you know,

2:27:28 goes through this process of combining

2:27:29 those funds into general revenue and

2:27:31 then allocating them according to the

2:27:34 town school revenue split, uh, which

2:27:36 gives roughly 59% to the schools and 41%

2:27:38 to the other municipal departments. Um

2:27:42 we once that happens according to our

2:27:44 bylaws we have two weeks um to produce

2:27:48 uh the um uh uh the budget or the budget

2:27:54 book um which is the product of uh the

2:27:57 time administrator team uh and the

2:27:59 budget staff. Um and so we are in the

2:28:02 process of making that happen with the

2:28:04 assumption that the 11th is likely going

2:28:06 to be the date that we're uh moving

2:28:08 forward on that. um publishing that we

2:28:10 tend to publish that both online uh

2:28:12 through open gov and in a um hard copy

2:28:16 book for anyone who wants it. Uh we

2:28:18 published that to the advisory committee

2:28:20 and in the select board, but it is a

2:28:21 public document. It's readily available.

2:28:23 Uh members of the public can look at

2:28:25 that. As part of that document, we will

2:28:28 be framing out an initial recommendation

2:28:33 for a potential budget override. Um,

2:28:36 this is not the final version of an

2:28:38 override. It is not even the final

2:28:40 version of a recommendation of the

2:28:42 expenditures and revenue study

2:28:43 committee. So, I want to be very clear.

2:28:44 We are not trying to step on the toes of

2:28:46 the ANRSC process. It's just that by

2:28:49 law, we have to publish a budget. Uh,

2:28:51 the budget has to balance. Uh, and so

2:28:54 this budget process will really be um um

2:28:57 two um two documents. And I'm sorry, I

2:29:00 just realized um we're not on the 11th.

2:29:02 Um, I actually think we're the deadline

2:29:05 is on the um is over the weekend. So, we

2:29:07 are going to aim to publish um on the

2:29:10 13th, not the 11th. Uh, I apologize. I

2:29:12 misread the the bylaw there. Um, but so

2:29:16 we will be publishing um and then

2:29:19 printing the document over the weekend.

2:29:21 But as part of that, we are effectively

2:29:23 putting two budgets together. Um, one of

2:29:25 these is a budget that we would have if

2:29:29 no override was on the ballot or no no

2:29:31 override passed. Um, and one would have

2:29:35 a recommendation for if there was uh an

2:29:38 override question on the ballot, how

2:29:40 much of that um would go to the town and

2:29:42 what would it fund? Um, as we've been

2:29:45 saying um during the expenditures and

2:29:47 revenue study committee process, this is

2:29:49 not a uh Cadillac override. This is a

2:29:52 This is a Ford Taurus override and this

2:29:54 is a meat and potatoes override um

2:29:58 proposal. Um the town's uh budget the

2:30:03 town's stated budget gap has remained

2:30:06 relatively stable as we've seen numbers

2:30:09 come in. Um the governor's budget has

2:30:11 not provided meaningful relief in that

2:30:14 regard.

2:30:15 um you know the despite the

2:30:17 Massachusetts Municipal Association

2:30:19 flagging that uh in real dollar terms

2:30:22 the um the amount of unrestricted

2:30:25 general government aid has actually

2:30:26 decreased over the last 20 years. Um the

2:30:29 reality of the situation in the state is

2:30:31 that we are in a terrible budget crunch.

2:30:33 Um and so the state is not running to

2:30:36 our rescue. Um and so we are still in

2:30:40 that 2.8 $2.9 million range without

2:30:43 taking um initial sort of um counter

2:30:47 measures. Um but what I will say just to

2:30:49 preview for the community and to you as

2:30:51 the select board

2:30:53 is that as part of this budget we are

2:30:55 going to we're going to shift our

2:30:57 assumptions. There are two big

2:30:59 assumptions that we have not been making

2:31:01 in talking to the public that we are now

2:31:03 going to make in the budget book. The

2:31:06 first is that we will reduce the capital

2:31:09 improvement plan allocation from

2:31:11 revenues from 6.6% which is the policy

2:31:14 target that the select board recently

2:31:16 increased and set back down to 6% which

2:31:19 is what it was beforehand. As a

2:31:21 practical matter, this frees up revenue

2:31:23 that then goes into the general revenue

2:31:26 fund, but it tightens the CIP

2:31:28 considerably, the capital improvement

2:31:29 program quite considerably um at a time

2:31:31 when there are a lot of competing asks

2:31:33 on that program. Um but under the

2:31:36 circumstances we think that that's the

2:31:39 balance that we need to strike. Um and

2:31:42 we will um discuss that more in the

2:31:44 budget book. But I just want to flag for

2:31:46 people that it when we have talked about

2:31:47 our gap of around $2.9 million. Um we've

2:31:51 not been pulling that lever. Um when we

2:31:55 pull that lever, the gap is going to

2:31:56 drop. Um it will come out to something

2:31:58 more like 2.2.1

2:32:01 million. um because that's a significant

2:32:04 amount of revenue that then flows back

2:32:06 through the town school revenue split um

2:32:08 and into the town side of the uh into

2:32:11 both town and the school side. The other

2:32:14 recommendation um that we've not

2:32:16 factored in that we are going to make

2:32:17 the assumption of in the budget book is

2:32:20 that we will hold our op contribution

2:32:23 stable rather than increasing it. Um

2:32:27 our other um um our other

2:32:30 post-employment uh benefits opeds um is

2:32:33 predominantly healthcare for retirees.

2:32:36 Um we are significantly behind uh in

2:32:40 terms of fulfilling our oblig our

2:32:41 ongoing obligations there and so we have

2:32:43 to continue to spend money to in order

2:32:46 to you know get the money necessary to

2:32:48 fulfill those obligations. our our

2:32:51 balance is, you know, around 30%, a

2:32:53 little bit higher than 30%. Um, of the

2:32:56 total amount uh of the of the fund that

2:32:59 needs to be uh fully funded there. Um

2:33:02 but um among other things, one, even

2:33:06 though that sounds dire, it's actually

2:33:08 better than some other communities. Um

2:33:10 two, stopping um holding uh the policy

2:33:14 is to increase by $250,000 every year.

2:33:18 So if we don't do that, um it's not

2:33:21 stopping contributions altogether. It's

2:33:23 not dropping them to zero. It's just

2:33:25 holding at where we currently are. Um

2:33:27 which still means that we are making

2:33:29 payments towards that that liability.

2:33:32 We're just not increasing our

2:33:34 contributions. So we making that

2:33:35 assumption and that frees up on the town

2:33:38 side about $100,000. So again talking

2:33:41 about going down from 2.9 to around 2.2

2:33:46 2 to 2.1 million in terms of where the

2:33:49 gap is. Again, balancing that out with,

2:33:52 you know, we will be tinkering with that

2:33:54 number right up until the book is

2:33:55 published. Um, you know, we continue to

2:33:57 do what we can to evaluate

2:34:01 where we see revenues coming in, where

2:34:03 we see potential expenditures hitting

2:34:05 us, um, you know, where we think our

2:34:09 health care costs are going to be. Um

2:34:12 the big sort of sort of damocles that is

2:34:14 going to be hanging over this budget

2:34:17 process that we are not going to know by

2:34:20 the time this book is published is how

2:34:23 much our health insurance rates are

2:34:25 going to go up. Um we have a a firm

2:34:28 estimate from our consultants that that

2:34:31 number would be around 12% and will be

2:34:33 12% going forward. Um that makes the

2:34:36 assumption that a lot of things stay the

2:34:38 same. um that we are a part of the uh of

2:34:43 the GIC, you know, this group insurance

2:34:45 consortium that really um uh you that

2:34:48 basically pulls together um the risks of

2:34:51 several communities uh and state

2:34:53 entities uh in order to get a more

2:34:55 favorable insurance rate. Um that has

2:34:58 stood us in betterstead than some

2:35:01 communities that are going it alone um

2:35:03 or are part of a different consort part

2:35:05 of different consortiums. Um with that

2:35:07 said, GIC is considering changes to its

2:35:11 programs. The most the largest of these

2:35:13 changes would be to stop um offering um

2:35:17 GLP-1 drugs for weight loss altogether.

2:35:20 Um currently the uh consortium does have

2:35:24 that uh they run it through a program

2:35:26 that ensures that people who want to be

2:35:29 on these drugs or who need to be on

2:35:30 these drugs follow a regime of um an

2:35:34 appropriate healthcare regime and stay

2:35:35 on them for as long as they need to but

2:35:37 also are you know they're held to a

2:35:39 standard. You don't just get the drug if

2:35:40 you want it. Um you have to be uh part

2:35:42 of this program. Um but it's my

2:35:45 understanding that at this point GIC is

2:35:47 considering going the way of several

2:35:48 other um healthcare companies and

2:35:51 stopping coverage um of GLP1s for weight

2:35:54 loss. Uh they would still be covered for

2:35:56 diabetes and other medications that

2:35:58 they're indicated for but not for weight

2:36:01 loss. Um and if that were to happen uh

2:36:03 that would be a significant shift in our

2:36:07 healthcare liability. Um it wouldn't

2:36:10 solve our budget problems. There's no

2:36:12 one silver bullet that's going to solve

2:36:13 our budget problems, but our numbers

2:36:15 would look different. We don't know how

2:36:16 different. Um, but it would bring the

2:36:20 percentage growth in healthcare costs

2:36:22 down. Now, the question is really, is

2:36:24 that benefit worth it? Um, given the

2:36:26 benefits that our employees have seen

2:36:29 from these drugs, the fact that uh, you

2:36:31 know, even as as early as this year,

2:36:34 member, you know, the leadership of the

2:36:36 GIC was saying, look, you pay for these

2:36:37 people now or you pay for them later.

2:36:39 you pay for people who need this health

2:36:41 care now or you will pay for their the

2:36:43 coorbidities of folks who can't lose the

2:36:46 weight um suffering those consequences.

2:36:48 Um and so I don't know where they're

2:36:51 going to come out on that. But I do want

2:36:52 to flag for folks that that is an area

2:36:55 of uncertainty that we are tracking in

2:36:57 the budget and that we will not have

2:36:58 that information by the time we publish

2:37:00 the budget book. Um and so that's just a

2:37:03 flag and we will see where we go from

2:37:05 there. I'm just going to pause here um

2:37:08 before we talk about the rest of the

2:37:09 budget process because I see Paul has

2:37:10 his hand raised. I want to make sure if

2:37:12 folks have questions about where we how

2:37:14 we get to the budget book in the next

2:37:16 several weeks that we can answer those.

2:37:18 Great. Paul, you have a question.

2:37:19 Uh yeah, and Chaz, you may answer this

2:37:22 if if you continue, but um a couple of

2:37:25 quick uh quick questions. I'll I'll give

2:37:28 you all them and I'll be quiet. Um the

2:37:31 first is the six the reduction in the

2:37:34 the CIP in order to fill uh operating

2:37:37 revenue. Um it would be one and also the

2:37:41 the holding the uh the OPED stable and

2:37:43 not adding the 250 per year. Did that go

2:37:47 through the revenue expense committee or

2:37:49 is that have they discussed that? Are

2:37:51 they going to recommend that?

2:37:53 So we've discussed it with them. Um it's

2:37:55 part of the town subcommittee report

2:37:57 process that's going through now. Um

2:37:59 we're making that assumption because in

2:38:01 several conversations with folks we have

2:38:03 not heard any meaningful objection to

2:38:05 that. We've talked it through. Um but we

2:38:07 are so we're making the assumption but

2:38:08 we are not we again we are not stepping

2:38:11 on the committee process. That is

2:38:12 ultimately a recommendation that they

2:38:14 make. And and the reason why I I I just

2:38:16 raised that and and I know you you you

2:38:18 know this but it's it's it's it's worth

2:38:20 saying that um a reduction in our our

2:38:24 CIP our capital um inevitably ends up

2:38:27 showing up as higher cost of maintenance

2:38:29 either it's for roadways or buildings or

2:38:32 park whatever it is um you know we kick

2:38:34 the can down the road and we have been

2:38:36 making some good progress. I was excited

2:38:38 to support the 6.6%

2:38:40 specifically because of roadways. So,

2:38:42 um, and you don't need to answer now,

2:38:44 but it'd be really helpful to understand

2:38:46 when this comes to us, what are we

2:38:48 giving up? Um, what is not going to be

2:38:50 maintained? What's going to be

2:38:51 maintained less? And if we can forecast

2:38:53 what that may translate into higher

2:38:55 expenses. Um, you know, I I'd hate to

2:38:57 see us go backwards. Um, this bill is

2:39:00 going backwards to me. Um, and then, you

2:39:02 know, the the the I don't the $10

2:39:04 million question. I don't know what what

2:39:06 millions of of dollars question it is,

2:39:08 but um schools is a huge component of

2:39:11 this. And um you know, we're the clock

2:39:14 is ticking on trying to help educate the

2:39:18 community as to the what, where, and why

2:39:20 of of a school potential operating

2:39:22 override. Um where do we stand with

2:39:25 that? Um and and I hope we're not going

2:39:28 to go to the statutory limit of when a

2:39:31 number can be uh can be put forward.

2:39:34 They're great questions. Um I'll try and

2:39:36 take them in turn. Um with regard to the

2:39:39 CIP, yes. Um it is tough um to try and

2:39:43 balance those things out. We are giving

2:39:45 up capacity to do other things. But I

2:39:47 think one of the silver linings to this

2:39:49 is the process that you Paul and Mike

2:39:51 Sandman went through with DPW in terms

2:39:53 of the payment management plan. We're

2:39:56 seeing dividends in that. We're seeing

2:39:58 our money go further. Um whereas before

2:40:01 we were not. Um, you say it's not that

2:40:04 we weren't seeing our money, you know,

2:40:05 work towards it, but it's that we're we

2:40:08 now have a maintenance program for

2:40:10 roadways in particular that we think is

2:40:12 yielding positive results in terms of

2:40:15 the overall condition of our roadways

2:40:18 and not just and you know that then has

2:40:20 a knock-on impact for example sidewalks,

2:40:22 bike lanes, other forms of

2:40:23 transportation. Um, so we are seeing

2:40:26 that benefit. Um, and we want to be we

2:40:30 want to see more data from that process.

2:40:32 This is really the first full year that

2:40:33 it's going to be in effect. This past

2:40:34 year has been the first full year that

2:40:35 it's been in effect. Um, and we want we

2:40:38 want to we want to see how we're doing.

2:40:40 Um, so I agree with you that it's hard

2:40:42 to think of that in terms of lost

2:40:45 opportunity, but I also think um,

2:40:47 efficiencies that we are working through

2:40:50 um are yielding results. And so

2:40:52 hopefully we're mitigating some of that

2:40:54 loss. You know, any dollars that we're

2:40:56 not spending on capital is a hard thing.

2:40:58 Um given the amount of things that we

2:41:00 want to be doing. Um but I will say the

2:41:03 efficiencies are are are bearing fruit

2:41:05 and that's good.

2:41:06 We're certainly not going to efficiency

2:41:07 our way out of 50 to 100 million backlog

2:41:10 in roadway. So Chaz, just if you can

2:41:12 come with a specific list of these are

2:41:14 the things that we're not going to do

2:41:15 would be really helpful to understand

2:41:17 what the trade-off is.

2:41:18 Sure. Um and then you know the other

2:41:21 question is where are the schools on

2:41:22 this? Um the superintendent last week

2:41:24 presented um revised projections based

2:41:27 on reductions in efficiencies that she

2:41:29 wants to make. Um we're still puzzling

2:41:31 out we're we're still working with them

2:41:33 to puzzle out what that means from our

2:41:35 projection standpoint. Um their take on

2:41:38 that is it's roughly a $6.5 million gap.

2:41:41 We need to we just need to to work that

2:41:44 out with them. We need to and that's for

2:41:46 FY27 alone. So, as part of our budget

2:41:50 process, you know, their budget book is

2:41:51 going to publish shortly before ours

2:41:52 does. Um, but we're going to be speaking

2:41:54 with them to just true up those numbers,

2:41:57 make sure everything is correct and look

2:41:59 at and try and project out from there to

2:42:01 FY29. Um, what the number is. So, I know

2:42:05 people have been very anxious to see and

2:42:08 we've been anxious to see where where is

2:42:10 that going to land and what are we going

2:42:12 to, you know, what what is that topline

2:42:13 number going to be? Um, I'm hopeful

2:42:16 based on those conversations that things

2:42:18 are moving in the right direction. I

2:42:19 still think it's going to be a

2:42:20 significant number. I still think both

2:42:22 town and schools is are going to have a

2:42:23 significant number. Um, I don't know if

2:42:25 we're going to get to, you know, the

2:42:28 last override was a $12 million

2:42:30 override. Um, the town's number of 5.3

2:42:33 million is based on the town's number

2:42:35 from last time adjusted for inflation.

2:42:37 The town's number was 4.995. It was

2:42:40 almost 5 million. So 5.3 adjusted for

2:42:42 inflation. um and it's structured a

2:42:44 little differently and we can talk about

2:42:45 that um in the process as the process

2:42:48 continues. Um I think the school's

2:42:51 number is going to be a little higher um

2:42:52 and so we're just going to need to see

2:42:54 what that is and how that ultimately how

2:42:57 that ultimately winds up. But the good

2:42:59 news is we're you know whereas before we

2:43:01 were hearing nothing now we are seeing

2:43:03 concrete numbers and that's that's going

2:43:05 to result in concrete ask in the next

2:43:08 two weeks.

2:43:09 Okay.

2:43:12 John.

2:43:12 Uh yes. Yes. Thank you very much. Um o

2:43:15 on the OPED uh question. Um help me just

2:43:19 to refresh my memory of how this works.

2:43:22 Um we currently are paying $250. We're

2:43:26 putting 2 thou $150,000

2:43:28 into the budget over and above what we

2:43:32 actually owe we think is we're going to

2:43:34 owe in terms of payouts over the course

2:43:36 of a of a year. Is that right?

2:43:38 No. Sorry. So we we set a we set an

2:43:40 amount that we're going to pay out every

2:43:42 so we we have both the amount that we're

2:43:44 paying to satisfy current liabilities

2:43:46 and the amount that we're paying to try

2:43:47 and pay the the back liability. Um as we

2:43:51 pay that back liability, your policy

2:43:53 says every year increase that payment by

2:43:56 $250,000. So you set yourself on a

2:43:59 constantly increasing path towards

2:44:01 paying that liability down. Um, but what

2:44:05 we're recommending through this process

2:44:07 is that you pause that you just you keep

2:44:09 that contribution flat rather than

2:44:11 increase it by $250,000. H

2:44:14 have we actually been making progress in

2:44:16 in seeing the back viability go down?

2:44:20 Yes. Yes, we have. Believe but surely.

2:44:22 Um Yes.

2:44:24 Yes. and and um will will that reverse

2:44:29 at this point if we don't put in the

2:44:31 additional $250,000 a year?

2:44:33 No. Um you know, we continue to to try

2:44:37 and you know, save that save that back.

2:44:39 And I think the other big portion of

2:44:40 this is as just as what Paul said with

2:44:42 the gap in terms of, you know,

2:44:45 conditions. This gap is large and we

2:44:47 know realistically that the biggest dent

2:44:48 that you're going to be able to make in

2:44:50 it is when the pension outstanding

2:44:51 pension liability is satisfied and

2:44:53 that's not going to be for a few years

2:44:54 yet. Um, so we want to pay that down.

2:44:58 Obviously, we want to get closer and and

2:45:01 do what we can. Um but the OPED number

2:45:05 is smaller than the pension number. Uh

2:45:08 it's just that we're further away from

2:45:10 satisfying it. Um and so um we are going

2:45:15 to make progress. It's going to be slow

2:45:16 progress and then when the pension

2:45:18 liability is satisfied, that progress

2:45:20 will increase marketkedly is our hope.

2:45:24 Would not putting the $250,000

2:45:27 additional in put our bond rating in

2:45:31 jeopardy by you know, at all.

2:45:33 We don't think so. Um, you know, we we

2:45:36 are in constant contact with, you know,

2:45:38 Moody's and the other rating agencies

2:45:40 and our our take has continually the the

2:45:43 response that we get from them is that

2:45:45 the name of the game is reserves. Um,

2:45:48 and satisfying your pension liability.

2:45:51 Um, having enough money to be to be able

2:45:54 to withstand a financial shock. um and

2:45:57 being and being mindful in paying down

2:46:00 your larger outstanding liability um by

2:46:02 the deadline that the state has set for

2:46:04 us to do so. Um there is no deadline to

2:46:06 pay down our op liability. Um and so

2:46:10 Moody's, you know, obviously looks at

2:46:12 that. They don't want us to be paying

2:46:13 nothing. Uh they don't want that to just

2:46:15 be sitting there because that then just

2:46:17 it eats into your eats into what you can

2:46:19 pay uh everything else. Um but um you've

2:46:23 you you want to be making progress

2:46:25 towards that but they're not it's not

2:46:28 like with the state where the state has

2:46:29 said by 2040 your pension needs your

2:46:32 outstanding pension liabilities must

2:46:34 Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. U couple more

2:46:37 questions if I may. So um the the

2:46:40 insurance that we offer um through the

2:46:43 GSSE is that do those plans have

2:46:46 deductibles?

2:46:47 Yes,

2:46:48 they do. Um, has any any examination

2:46:52 been made of whether we could cut into

2:46:56 the um increase in the insurance impact

2:47:00 on the budget by raising the

2:47:01 deductibles?

2:47:03 They set the deductibles. Um, we don't

2:47:05 um and that that factors into their

2:47:08 overall, you know, cost increase. Um,

2:47:12 and so we'll we'll I will I I will say

2:47:15 just based on, you know, anecdotal

2:47:17 evidence we're hearing from other

2:47:18 communities and from, you know, just

2:47:19 people around. Co-pays are going to go

2:47:21 up, you know, and and all sorts of, you

2:47:25 know, uh, deductibles are likely to

2:47:27 increase depending on the plan you have.

2:47:29 Um, but that's not a benefit we

2:47:31 typically realize. Um, because it's

2:47:33 baked into the whole it's that that's

2:47:36 part of the plan structure. We don't pay

2:47:38 for we don't see the benefits of that

2:47:39 directly. We pay for the plan. Um, you

2:47:42 know, we pay for 83% of the plan and in

2:47:44 most cases and our employees pay for

2:47:46 17%.

2:47:48 And is is that on the table, the 8317?

2:47:53 We continue to have those conversations.

2:47:54 I am, you know, I I I don't want to get

2:47:57 ahead of negotiations, but I will say I

2:47:59 I continue to have good conversations.

2:48:01 You know, we're we're you know, the

2:48:04 history of this has always been can we

2:48:06 look at this and the answer has been no.

2:48:08 Now the answer is more nuanced. They so

2:48:10 it's not a no. It's a what do you what

2:48:13 are you actually proposing here? What do

2:48:14 you what do you know what is the benefit

2:48:17 you know how how do we sell this to our

2:48:18 how how do we how do we make it clear to

2:48:22 the community and employees that the

2:48:26 benefit here of asking people to take on

2:48:29 a little more in terms of what's get

2:48:31 gets pulled out of your um your your

2:48:33 take-home pay is actually going to

2:48:36 benefit you. So,

2:48:38 those are the questions we're working

2:48:39 through.

2:48:40 Okay. Thanks,

2:48:41 Michael.

2:48:42 Um, so, uh, lifting up on on that

2:48:47 question a little bit, um, can you talk

2:48:49 a little bit about whatever sort of

2:48:53 risks there are or uncertainties there

2:48:56 are with regard to any of our union

2:48:59 negotiations over the period of the

2:49:02 override?

2:49:03 That is a concern. Um, and it's one of

2:49:05 the things that I have been trying to

2:49:08 build risk into the the uh town side of

2:49:12 the override um without necessarily

2:49:15 saying in a clear fashion, you know,

2:49:18 this is, you know, this is this is where

2:49:21 where we are. This is where we think

2:49:22 we're going to be. Um

2:49:25 unlike with the schools and with some of

2:49:27 the other public sector unions in

2:49:29 Massachusetts, if you are a uh public

2:49:32 safety union, if you were a police or

2:49:34 fire um and you reach an impass with

2:49:37 your um your community, you can take the

2:49:40 community to arbitration. Um and that

2:49:43 arbitration is binding um in the sense

2:49:46 that once a decision is made the

2:49:49 community, the town or city that's been

2:49:51 the subject of it can't advocate against

2:49:53 it. They have to take it to its the

2:49:55 approving body and say we recommend you

2:49:58 approve this. Um and only if that body

2:50:02 says no, we're not going to approve this

2:50:04 uh can it not be approved. And in

2:50:06 practice that's it has happened um with

2:50:08 other communities but it doesn't happen

2:50:10 often. Um you know the arbitration

2:50:12 process does mean that in practice um

2:50:16 negotiate you know there there may be uh

2:50:19 situations where an outside body

2:50:22 disagrees with how much money they think

2:50:24 they can that a community can provide.

2:50:27 Um, we try very hard to um argue with uh

2:50:31 arbitrators that it's not appropriate to

2:50:35 consider whether or not a community

2:50:36 would pass an override um in considering

2:50:39 the ability of a community to pay for a

2:50:42 um uh a contract. Um but unfortunately

2:50:45 they have taken that into consideration

2:50:47 in the past. We don't think that's

2:50:48 particularly fair. Um but that's the

2:50:50 reality of the situation. Um, so in this

2:50:53 case, what we've been trying to do is

2:50:54 we've been trying to build what we call

2:50:56 an override stabilization fund into the

2:50:58 budget, which is we know that there are

2:51:00 costs that are not going to come online

2:51:02 in this request until later in the the

2:51:05 three-year cycle. In particular, the

2:51:07 fire contract, um, which that has a long

2:51:10 tail that comes online in FY28. If we

2:51:15 tax to the levy limit as opposed to what

2:51:17 we've done in the past, which is step it

2:51:19 up as we need it um in the first year,

2:51:22 that provides us with a cushion uh of

2:51:24 funds and override stabilization fund so

2:51:27 that if unexpected expenses hit, like an

2:51:30 unfavorable arbitration decision, we're

2:51:32 able to pay for that out of that

2:51:34 stabilization fund and keep the

2:51:36 commitment to the voters saying because

2:51:38 I know one of the one of the concerns

2:51:39 that people have raised about the prior

2:51:41 override is, well, you passed this huge

2:51:43 override. And then the next year you

2:51:45 were making budget cuts. And why were

2:51:46 you making budget cuts? And the answer

2:51:48 was healthcare. And we got a police

2:51:52 contract that was very favorable to us

2:51:54 in terms of what we wanted it to do, but

2:51:55 it cost more than we wanted it to cost.

2:51:58 And it was because the alternative was

2:52:01 to go to arbitration and risk an even

2:52:02 worse deal. Um that would not have

2:52:04 gotten us, for example, out of civil

2:52:05 service, which is really what we wanted.

2:52:07 Um and so that's that's the aim here um

2:52:13 is to sort of a long answer to your

2:52:15 question. I'm sorry, but yes, we know we

2:52:17 we we are taking that into

2:52:19 consideration. It is an important part

2:52:21 of this. It means structuring the

2:52:22 potential override a little differently

2:52:24 and that's one of the big questions that

2:52:26 ENRSC is going to look at and say

2:52:27 whether or not does that play out? Does

2:52:29 that make sense? Does that is that does

2:52:31 those numbers check out? um or should we

2:52:34 recommend what we've done in the past

2:52:36 which is more of a tiered phasing in?

2:52:39 Yeah. Uh David,

2:52:41 similar question to Michael's. You just

2:52:44 addressed uh the implications of union

2:52:46 contracts over the life of the next 3

2:52:49 years on the town side. On the school

2:52:52 side, the 6.5 million figure, is that

2:52:56 including an estimate of any increases

2:52:59 that might result from current

2:53:01 negotiations with the BEu?

2:53:04 My understanding is yes.

2:53:06 Okay.

2:53:10 But that's it. It's an estimate. They

2:53:12 have not settled the contract. Um so,

2:53:18 okay.

2:53:19 Um,

2:53:21 we still have a hand up. David, do you

2:53:23 Okay. Any other uh questions or issues

2:53:26 to discuss?

2:53:27 Bernard, I had one if I may.

2:53:30 Sure.

2:53:32 So, um, if I'm understanding correctly,

2:53:34 uh, it seems to me we're

2:53:38 we're maybe going to be in the position

2:53:40 of having to vote, uh, up or down on

2:53:43 whether there should be an override on

2:53:45 the ballot um, with an amount in it, but

2:53:49 without necessarily being able to

2:53:50 guarantee that that is the amount that

2:53:52 will go on the ballot.

2:53:55 The good news is no. Um I in terms of

2:53:58 the next kind of steps in this um the

2:54:01 expenditures and revenue study committee

2:54:02 is working very diligently towards

2:54:04 finalizing a report as soon as possible.

2:54:07 Um and their target now is early March.

2:54:10 Um you the last possible Tuesday that

2:54:14 you could actually it's not just the

2:54:15 last possible Tuesday it's the last

2:54:16 possible day you could vote to put a

2:54:18 question on the ballot is March 31st.

2:54:21 Tuesday March 31st. It's our goal to

2:54:25 have ENRSC's recommendation to you at

2:54:28 the start of March so that you can have

2:54:30 in hand. You can review it. You can hold

2:54:32 a public hearing. um you can analyze and

2:54:35 have a discussion with those committee

2:54:37 members uh about the process and the

2:54:39 recommendations and then uh ultimately

2:54:42 you can vote if you feel comfortable uh

2:54:45 on the 24th um so that there's room um

2:54:49 in the event that there are additional

2:54:51 decisions that need to be made um and

2:54:53 then if you have if you need to have

2:54:54 that fall back date on whether or not to

2:54:56 put something on the ballot, you have

2:54:57 the 31st, although that would be cutting

2:54:59 it very close. Um and so um the target

2:55:03 date for putting something on the ballot

2:55:05 is the 24th and the aim is that you will

2:55:08 have the the form you know you will you

2:55:11 by by that point the process will have

2:55:13 concluded you will have the

2:55:14 recommendation of expenditures and

2:55:16 revenues you will have conducted your

2:55:18 own analysis on that and you will have

2:55:20 the final say in what goes on the ballot

2:55:23 and at what amount um I will say the one

2:55:27 thing that we can't do on a b in a

2:55:29 ballot question necessarily is structure

2:55:33 it what goes on what goes on the ballot

2:55:37 um can vary it can it can vary and we

2:55:40 can have this discussion in more depth

2:55:41 as we get closer to it um but usually

2:55:44 Brookline's question has been rather

2:55:46 simple which is do you approve of adding

2:55:49 X to the levy limit um for general

2:55:53 government and school purposes yes or no

2:55:55 um and then you know in the just in the

2:55:58 materials and the description and so

2:56:00 forth. We, you know, the advocacy talks

2:56:02 about, you know, do we want that phased

2:56:04 in over time? How is that going to

2:56:06 impact your taxes and so forth, but what

2:56:08 people see in that is a bottom line

2:56:10 number. The last override said, do you

2:56:12 approve of allowing the town to raise

2:56:13 its levy limit by 11.98 million um in

2:56:17 order, you know, X for the schools, Y

2:56:19 for the town in order for that to um and

2:56:24 you know, there was no discussion in the

2:56:25 question itself of how to phase it in.

2:56:27 Um, so I just do want to flag for folks

2:56:29 that the ballot the text of the ballot

2:56:32 question is important uh and how it is

2:56:34 structured um sometimes uh how it's

2:56:37 structured versus how it's implemented

2:56:38 are sometimes two different questions.

2:56:41 Okay,

2:56:42 Chaz, um if the 31st is the last day

2:56:45 that we have to um

2:56:49 put an override on the ballot, is that

2:56:52 uh do you really mean uh April 1st at

2:56:55 5:00 p.m.

2:56:56 Yeah. Or is it 31st at midnight?

2:56:59 March 31st at midnight. At at 11:59 p.m.

2:57:01 is your deadline.

2:57:03 Okay. And how do we communicate to I

2:57:05 guess the clerk that uh

2:57:08 Oh, I think I I believe last last

2:57:10 override you you went all the way to the

2:57:13 wire um or close to it. Um and in that

2:57:17 instance, the clerk was standing by. Uh

2:57:19 I had been in the room. Uh I I gave him

2:57:22 we gave him we gave him the vote and

2:57:24 handed it to him. So it was transmitted

2:57:26 to the clerk at the at the at that exact

2:57:28 moment. So if we need to have that

2:57:30 process um clear, we will make sure that

2:57:33 that's there's no room for doubt there.

2:57:36 Okay. And we can do that before the

2:57:38 meeting ends.

2:57:41 Okay.

2:57:43 Okay. Uh any other questions?

2:57:47 Thank you for a uh thorough discussion

2:57:50 of these issues. We'll be back with more

2:57:53 and your your meeting with the advisory

2:57:55 will uh joint meeting with the advisory

2:57:57 committee uh will be on the 17th of

2:57:59 February. Uh and that's when the budget

2:58:01 book will be presented in full. So

2:58:05 we'll try and make it as entertaining as

2:58:07 possible. Um

2:58:08 can I ask one question, Bernard? Just

2:58:10 follow based on what Chaz just said. And

2:58:12 CHZ that budget book would be

2:58:15 if

2:58:17 the operating override passed

2:58:19 it will have it will have both scenarios

2:58:21 in it. We'll have a yes and a no.

2:58:22 Superior.

2:58:23 It will. Okay. So, have both. Thank you.

2:58:25 Y

2:58:28 Okay. Uh let's move on to uh our next

2:58:31 item, which is the center street lot

2:58:34 update. This should be a quick uh

2:58:36 discussion.

2:58:39 I doubt it.

2:58:42 Um okay. Uh is that going to be

2:58:45 presented by U Meredith?

2:58:53 Meredith, you there?

2:59:03 You're muted.

2:59:07 Sorry.

2:59:08 I think Jessica Doy will be kicking

2:59:09 things off and Mike Sandman and um Chris

2:59:13 Dempsey will be presenting. Oh,

2:59:15 okay. I thought you were going to just

2:59:16 sort of introduce them. That's all

2:59:17 right.

2:59:24 I see Chris Dempsey. How you doing,

2:59:26 Chris?

2:59:28 Mr. Chair, doing very well. Nice to see

2:59:29 you.

2:59:30 I'm glad to hear that.

2:59:37 So, who's going to start?

2:59:39 Jessica's gonna start. We're trying to

2:59:40 get her

2:59:43 We'll get her and Michael Sam promoted.

2:59:45 There we go.

2:59:47 Apologies, I wasn't able to unmute

2:59:49 myself and didn't have access to chat.

2:59:52 Um, so good evening. Uh, my name is

2:59:54 Jessica Doy. I'm senior economic

2:59:56 development and um, long-term planner

2:59:58 for the town of Brooklyn. Um, here

3:00:00 tonight to um, help answer questions and

3:00:04 um, do the slide deck administration for

3:00:08 Mike Samman, who was the chair of our

3:00:10 center street lots committee that was

3:00:11 appointed by select board about a year

3:00:13 ago. Um we've hit the ground running for

3:00:15 the last 12 months or so to complete the

3:00:18 center lot study and are here to um

3:00:23 present the the process that we have

3:00:25 gone through and what our findings are.

3:00:28 So I will turn it over to Mike Sandman

3:00:32 and get this um screen shared.

3:00:38 There we go. Um okay. Uh thank you. Uh

3:00:41 also, um I'd like to make sure that um

3:00:46 my co-chair Shauna Gora Gorine is uh

3:00:50 promoted as well because she is going to

3:00:52 be speaking.

3:00:55 So, if we can take a moment for that,

3:01:15 and

3:01:19 is China there yet? I can't see the

3:01:21 poll.

3:01:23 I'm to have been promoted. Yes. Thank

3:01:25 you.

3:01:44 There we go. Okay. Um, so good evening.

3:01:47 Uh I'm Mike Sandman, uh chair of the

3:01:50 center street parking lot study

3:01:51 committee, and with me now are, uh

3:01:54 committee vice chair, uh Shauna Gora

3:01:57 Gorfin, uh economic development

3:01:59 long-term planner, Jessica doy, who

3:02:01 you've just met, and Chris Dempsey, uh

3:02:04 whom I think you know well. Uh Chris has

3:02:06 been our consultant and is a partner in

3:02:08 Spect Dempsey. uh uh every uh member of

3:02:14 our committee I want to say committed

3:02:16 really very very thoughtfully. I think

3:02:18 this is one of the best committees I've

3:02:19 ever had the pleasure of working with in

3:02:21 Brooklyn. We we had uh in addition to

3:02:23 that input from hundreds of people

3:02:26 through a survey and a presentation that

3:02:28 filled the Koolage Corner main theater

3:02:31 number one uh last September. Uh and we

3:02:34 came out of this envisioning that a

3:02:36 public private partnership with the

3:02:38 developer uh would be possible uh so

3:02:42 that a developer would incur the

3:02:45 preponderance of development costs for

3:02:47 the concept that the committee endorsed

3:02:49 I believe by a vote of 10 to two uh and

3:02:52 the developer would lease the land. And

3:02:54 we think we have something that's really

3:02:56 exciting for Brookline to work with and

3:02:58 we're asking you to take the first of

3:03:00 several steps further to move along the

3:03:03 path outlined in our report. Shauna and

3:03:06 I are going to be a tag team through 14

3:03:08 slides and then we'll respond to your

3:03:10 questions. So Shauna,

3:03:13 thank you so much Mike. Um it is my

3:03:15 pleasure to present to you this evening

3:03:17 after our committee's year-long study of

3:03:19 the Center Street East and West lots

3:03:21 this evening. We are excited to present

3:03:23 the center street lots final report and

3:03:25 the committee's recommendation.

3:03:27 We're requesting the select board's

3:03:29 endorsement of the side lock design

3:03:32 concept which you'll see shortly and

3:03:34 approval to proceed with the consultants

3:03:37 implementation roadmap. We're also

3:03:39 recommend developing and implementing a

3:03:41 wayfinding system based on the coolage

3:03:43 corner parking study to determine the

3:03:46 actual parking need of whatever is

3:03:48 eventually built here in the center

3:03:50 street lots. Um could I have the next

3:03:52 slide please? Thanks. As one of our

3:03:55 first orders of business um our

3:03:57 committee refined and adopted a set of

3:03:59 five guiding principles which you have

3:04:01 in your agenda packet. Um broadly these

3:04:04 address continued access to the lots for

3:04:08 business owners and other lot users.

3:04:10 Inclusive community engagement,

3:04:13 environmental sustainability, alignment

3:04:16 with Brookline's plans and priorities

3:04:18 including the comprehensive plan. um and

3:04:21 a pragmatic fiscal approach which Mike

3:04:24 alluded to um in terms of a public

3:04:26 private partnership. Throughout our

3:04:28 public engagement process, our committee

3:04:30 and the consultant team identified three

3:04:33 universal characteristics that were to

3:04:35 be incorporated into the design concept

3:04:38 in preserving the available parking

3:04:40 supply, maintaining space for the

3:04:42 Brookline Farmers Market, and enhancing

3:04:45 the overall public realm, including

3:04:47 walkability and ADA accessibility

3:04:49 through Koolage Corner.

3:04:52 Mike, would you like to? Um, so this is

3:04:56 a map of the study area, uh, covering

3:04:59 just under two and a half acres with 192

3:05:02 parking spaces between the two lots. U,

3:05:05 to help orient you, Beacon Street runs

3:05:07 along the lower right. Uh, at the top

3:05:10 are the arcade, CVS, and other stores

3:05:14 uh, facing Harvard Street. And down

3:05:16 toward the bottom is the center street

3:05:18 lot where the farmers market takes

3:05:20 place. Uh, next slide, please.

3:05:25 Um the set of street lots were designed

3:05:27 with pedestrian access in mind and you

3:05:30 can see that there are several through

3:05:32 routes for pedestrians but those routes

3:05:34 are interrupted by parked cars by the

3:05:37 curbs that divide the parking bays. Uh

3:05:40 and even though it's the most widely

3:05:42 used public space in Brooklyn, the

3:05:44 center street lots are the least

3:05:46 pedestrianfriendly

3:05:47 public spaces in the town. Pedestrian

3:05:50 access is really fundamental. It's not

3:05:52 just for people who have uh uh mobility

3:05:56 issues of some sort when we get out of

3:05:58 our cars. All of us are pedestrians. Um

3:06:01 the concept the committee recommends

3:06:03 would restore through walkways for

3:06:05 pedestrians, make those walkways

3:06:07 accessible for all ages, people with

3:06:09 mobility limitations, people wishing um

3:06:12 strollers. So I'm going to let that sit

3:06:15 there just for a second.

3:06:19 Okay, next slide, please.

3:06:22 Uh, the committee recommends that you

3:06:24 Oh, sorry.

3:06:26 I'm sorry. Go ahead.

3:06:27 Sorry, Mike. Oh, sorry. The committee

3:06:30 recommends that that you, the select

3:06:32 board, endorse the sidelock design

3:06:33 scenario through the implementation

3:06:35 phase um asking both for-profit and

3:06:39 non-for-profit developers to respond to

3:06:41 a non-binding request for information.

3:06:44 Our recommendation is based on public

3:06:46 support for this design, numerous

3:06:49 benefits in the areas of housing,

3:06:51 walkability, expansion of our commercial

3:06:53 task space and alignment with the town's

3:06:56 planning and policy objectives.

3:06:59 On the next slide, I just urge you also

3:07:02 to read the two minority reports that

3:07:04 were included in your agenda packet.

3:07:07 These reports are helpful in

3:07:08 demonstrating the wide range of

3:07:10 experiences and perspectives that were

3:07:12 included on our committee.

3:07:17 And this committee now seeks to sustain

3:07:19 the momentum built throughout the study

3:07:21 process, including our walkable line

3:07:24 event at the Koolage Corner Theater last

3:07:25 September, which was attended by over

3:07:28 250 members of the public. That evening

3:07:31 we heard overwhelming support for the

3:07:32 sidelot design scenario which Mike will

3:07:35 present to you now.

3:07:38 Okay. Uh so first of all I want to

3:07:41 emphasize that this is a concept. It's

3:07:43 not a project plan. I'll say that again.

3:07:46 It's a concept not a project plan. It's

3:07:48 not a construction proposal. Lots of

3:07:50 people have asked well you know when is

3:07:51 this going to start? Well this is not

3:07:54 going to start. It it's uh it's been put

3:07:57 together by our consultants. Um it's a

3:08:01 scenario that you the scenario that you

3:08:02 see here preserves all existing public

3:08:05 parking capacity through um a garage at

3:08:09 the uh upper left of the drawing. Uh it

3:08:12 includes a commercial tax base by

3:08:15 providing for residential sorry for

3:08:17 retail uh space at the ground floor

3:08:20 facing the open plaza. So it increases

3:08:22 commercial tax base. It adds housing in

3:08:25 a transit-rich neighborhood through the

3:08:28 building that is on the west lot uh and

3:08:30 the building that is to your right uh

3:08:33 which would be a multi both multi-story

3:08:35 buildings and possibly some rail houses

3:08:37 on the west lot. Uh and uh it adds that

3:08:41 plaza which is exceptional new public

3:08:43 space really in the heart of Brookline

3:08:45 and we're really very interested in

3:08:47 making sure that that in particular uh

3:08:50 is carried through.

3:08:52 Uh next slide please.

3:08:56 Um these are estimated costs provided to

3:08:58 us by our consultant uh for this

3:09:01 particular scenario today. Uh the design

3:09:04 could add anywhere from a small number

3:09:06 to up to a 100 new parking spaces uh

3:09:08 which will be determined when the

3:09:10 concept is turned into a detailed design

3:09:12 and hopefully informed by information

3:09:14 that we get after the uh the wayfinding

3:09:18 project is in place. And again, note

3:09:21 that we're expecting the preponderance

3:09:23 of costs to be contributed by a

3:09:25 developer via public private

3:09:27 partnership. We may even be able to

3:09:29 realize some income from the town uh

3:09:31 through a long-term land lease.

3:09:35 Uh next slide. Uh now that the study is

3:09:38 concluded, the next step is to move to

3:09:41 implementation, which is on the next

3:09:44 slide. Uh what we're requesting from you

3:09:46 tonight uh is select board approval to

3:09:49 proceed with a request for interest

3:09:53 request for expressions of interest from

3:09:55 developers. Um, and we recommend

3:09:58 including the Babcock Street uh lot in

3:10:00 the RFI and so possibly including uh an

3:10:04 one of the other concepts that uh that

3:10:06 came out of the uh the work that our

3:10:08 consultant did sort of a mix of uh the

3:10:12 side lot with uh a a more open plan for

3:10:15 the center street lot. Uh, an RFI will

3:10:19 gather responses from both profit uh uh

3:10:22 for-profit developers and nonprofit

3:10:24 developers to aid in preparation of an

3:10:28 request for proposal for firm proposals

3:10:30 to build something specific um which

3:10:32 would include a private public private

3:10:34 partnership ship and the topics in the U

3:10:37 RFI would be well preferred give us that

3:10:40 your preferred financing your ship

3:10:42 structure uh what kind of zoning and

3:10:44 permitting needs do you need? uh what's

3:10:47 the allocation of parking spaces? What's

3:10:49 the scope of your site concerns? For

3:10:51 example, uh soil and and so those are

3:10:54 the topics that would be included in a

3:10:57 request for information.

3:11:00 Um

3:11:03 the uh the Koolage Corner

3:11:08 uh parking study concluded that there is

3:11:11 sufficient parking in Koolage Corner,

3:11:13 but that a wayfinding system needs to be

3:11:15 created to aid in financing parking

3:11:18 outside and finding parking outside the

3:11:20 center street lot. So we hear a lot

3:11:22 about well there's a lot uh parking

3:11:24 garage under the Marriott but very few

3:11:26 people know about it and the signage for

3:11:28 getting there is almost non-existent. Um

3:11:30 so the committee strongly recommends the

3:11:33 prior priorization of the development

3:11:35 and imple implement of a wayfinding

3:11:38 system which is a to some extent a fancy

3:11:40 word for signs although it needs to go

3:11:42 or could go well beyond that with uh

3:11:44 signs that are responsive to the number

3:11:46 of spaces that are available in a

3:11:48 particular place. and it will provide a

3:11:50 clearer picture of parking demand. Uh if

3:11:53 we see that with a good wayfinding

3:11:55 system, uh there isn't as much pressure

3:11:57 on the center street lot as there

3:11:59 currently is then we can take that into

3:12:01 account in deciding how many spaces need

3:12:03 to be there uh in a future development.

3:12:06 Uh it will inform the appropriate scale

3:12:08 of future on-site parking as I've said

3:12:10 address public concerns about

3:12:12 overbuilding parking which is something

3:12:14 that u that one of the minority reports

3:12:18 emphasized and ensure that the final

3:12:20 designs are really evidence- driven and

3:12:23 are fiscally responsible.

3:12:27 Uh this is the implementation time we've

3:12:30 been working with this uh it was

3:12:32 prepared by our consultants and where

3:12:34 the star is is where we are now. we need

3:12:36 your approval uh in order to go forward

3:12:38 with a request for uh interest from uh

3:12:41 from developers. Uh once that happens uh

3:12:45 presuming that it does uh there's still

3:12:47 quite a process uh public process to go

3:12:49 through uh it represents the quickest

3:12:52 possible timeline uh which means that we

3:12:56 would have a development agreement at

3:12:57 the end of 2027.

3:12:59 Um the center street light committee

3:13:02 study was conducted over the last year.

3:13:05 um done with this phase at least of our

3:13:08 work. Um and if you move forward uh the

3:13:12 uh prep preparation of a request for

3:13:14 information will begin as early as next

3:13:17 month and the RFI would be issued in May

3:13:19 giving developers the summer to respond

3:13:22 before a September deadline. Uh so um

3:13:26 next slide please.

3:13:28 We are um here to take your questions

3:13:30 and uh hopefully

3:13:33 be able to give you whatever information

3:13:34 you need in order to make a decision on

3:13:37 allowing us to go forward.

3:13:48 Bernard, you're on mute.

3:13:53 How did that happen?

3:13:55 Okay. the the wayfairing uh signs will

3:13:58 direct people to parking opportunities

3:14:00 in the Coolage Corner area. Other than

3:14:03 uh the Marriott, what what parking and

3:14:06 other than just on street parking, what

3:14:08 parking options are there in that area?

3:14:11 Um there are several. There's Well,

3:14:13 first of all, the Badcock Street lot is

3:14:14 the is the largest. Um and then there's

3:14:17 one a smaller lot on Webster Street. Uh

3:14:21 and uh

3:14:23 is that the bank lot? Pardon me.

3:14:25 Isn't that the bank's lot?

3:14:27 No, there's a farmer.

3:14:29 There's a tiny public lot there with, in

3:14:31 fact, it has a a charging station at the

3:14:34 back of it. Um, and on John Street, uh,

3:14:38 there's a a small lot. There's there are

3:14:41 some little vest pocket lots, but

3:14:42 Babcock is probably the largest one in

3:14:44 addition to the Marriott. And there is

3:14:47 actually many times when I visited the

3:14:49 center street lot. Rather than make, you

3:14:50 know, two or three loops to find a

3:14:52 space, I'll make one loop and then I go

3:14:54 up center street a little way and

3:14:55 there's parking along center street and

3:14:57 particularly on the side streets between

3:14:59 center and harbor street. Just have to

3:15:01 walk just a little bit further and know

3:15:03 that those spaces are there.

3:15:05 Okay, David.

3:15:07 Uh, couple questions I have. First, what

3:15:11 led the committee to recommend that the

3:15:13 Babcock Street lot be part of the RFI?

3:15:17 Good question. Good question. Uh, the

3:15:18 Babcock Street lot was the subject of

3:15:20 some discussion, I think, two or three

3:15:22 years ago, and in fact, the committee

3:15:24 was appointed to take a look at uh

3:15:28 constructing affordable housing over the

3:15:30 Babcock Street lot. It was a bit of a it

3:15:32 was sort of a follow on to the um

3:15:34 discussion about the lot between Kent

3:15:37 and Station Streets where the the same

3:15:39 concept was considered but or grade

3:15:42 issues and neighboring buildings and so

3:15:44 forth that made that um a difficult

3:15:47 difficult site. So that concept was

3:15:49 carried over. on nothing for nothing

3:15:53 follow was followed up uh on Babcock

3:15:56 Street and Babcock Street wasn't part of

3:15:59 our discussion until towards the end

3:16:02 when we realized that well that might

3:16:04 provide an opportunity for staging uh

3:16:08 construction uh in a way that uh got

3:16:11 people adequate parking space or

3:16:15 a reasonable amount of additional

3:16:17 parking space fairly close to Harvard

3:16:20 uh while the construction was going on

3:16:22 on the center street lot.

3:16:25 So uh staging that leads to my next

3:16:27 question. So during the construction

3:16:29 phase, what would be the plan for

3:16:31 temporary parking? So you're referencing

3:16:34 possibly

3:16:36 uh utilizing the Babcock Street Lot for

3:16:38 staging, but where do people park?

3:16:41 Uh no, no. The Babcock Street wouldn't

3:16:43 be used for staging. The Babcock Street

3:16:45 would be used Babcock Street would be

3:16:46 used for parking. stage and would be on

3:16:48 the center street site.

3:16:49 Yeah. I also I think it might just it's

3:16:52 important to clarify we're several steps

3:16:54 away from actual construction, but part

3:16:56 of the plan that we envisioned is that

3:16:59 whatever happens that if there's a above

3:17:02 above ground parking structure, that

3:17:03 piece gets built first.

3:17:06 Um and so there is a temporary parking

3:17:10 crunch, which I think would happen in

3:17:11 any scenario, even if you're just

3:17:12 improving the lot. But once the parking

3:17:15 structure is in place, that's there as

3:17:16 the rest of the construction goes up. So

3:17:18 you have your parking um available while

3:17:22 the rest of construction continues.

3:17:25 Right. But while that's being

3:17:26 constructed, there are still some spaces

3:17:28 lost. And obviously that's the nature of

3:17:30 construction. I'm just assuming that

3:17:33 when if when this proceeds to the

3:17:35 construction phase, there would be a

3:17:37 plan to try to minimize the amount of

3:17:40 lost parking for area businesses.

3:17:43 construction could take two, three years

3:17:45 certainly. Um I I think it's imp it's

3:17:48 impossible to know for sure what it

3:17:50 would be until we know what else is or

3:17:52 isn't available at any given time,

3:17:53 right? Like so for right now or Waldo

3:17:56 Duran is that could be parking if we

3:17:59 were doing this construction tomorrow,

3:18:00 right? Because they're not building that

3:18:02 right now or we're not doing the

3:18:03 construction tomorrow. I think it's just

3:18:07 we're so many steps away from putting a

3:18:09 shovel in the ground,

3:18:10 right? And then my last question for

3:18:12 now. So, the open space plaza concept,

3:18:15 and I'm definitely a fan of open space,

3:18:17 but just objectively speaking, what are

3:18:19 the opportunity costs by committing to

3:18:22 that much open space? And what did the

3:18:25 committee consider?

3:18:29 Do you want ahead?

3:18:31 Sorry.

3:18:32 Yeah.

3:18:33 Do you want to take this mic or would

3:18:34 you like me to?

3:18:34 Oh, go ahead. you're you're

3:18:37 I think it was pretty clear um early on

3:18:40 in the committee's work that not

3:18:42 preserving space for the farmers market

3:18:44 would be a non-starter. Um there was a

3:18:46 really strong push to preserve a very

3:18:49 longunning Brookline institution and

3:18:51 there's certain space requirements that

3:18:53 they needed. So one way or another that

3:18:55 was going to be necessary. Right now

3:18:57 they occupy the Center Street West lot

3:19:00 for almost half of the Thursdays of the

3:19:02 year. So, we are already you're already

3:19:06 in a sense paying that opportunity cost.

3:19:08 Um, anything else that would go there?

3:19:11 We're talking about more density.

3:19:14 So, I can't um I'm not entirely sure

3:19:18 what you're asking. We wouldn't want to

3:19:19 build a solid block of retail and a

3:19:22 solid block of residential above it. Um,

3:19:26 I I guess I'm not understand what you're

3:19:28 saying in terms of opportunity cost. You

3:19:30 mean as opposed to a playground or as

3:19:31 opposed to more buildings? as opposed to

3:19:33 more park having more parking as opposed

3:19:36 to

3:19:38 so s so of the different plans we looked

3:19:41 at and I'm sorry I can't remember David

3:19:43 if you were at the event at the coolage

3:19:44 or if you had an opportunity to watch

3:19:46 the recording but we did present and

3:19:50 explore um an all surface parking

3:19:54 concept which was known as the grove.

3:19:56 Um, we looked at two different above

3:19:58 ground structure concepts, one of which

3:20:00 was the side lot, another was somewhat

3:20:03 more creative. Um, but I think that

3:20:05 might have scared a few people off. And

3:20:06 we looked at underground parking. If you

3:20:09 do all surface parking, um, and perhaps

3:20:11 Chris Dempsey can speak up about this

3:20:15 one, but if you try to preserve the

3:20:17 number of parking spaces, there's very

3:20:18 limited opportunity to develop anything

3:20:20 else. Um, Chris, could you summarize a

3:20:22 little better?

3:20:24 Yeah, Sean, I think you summarized it

3:20:26 pretty well. Um, everything here is

3:20:30 going to be a trade-off and what we

3:20:32 tried to do across the process is, as

3:20:35 Shauna said, show different options that

3:20:39 um kind of maximize certain things. So,

3:20:41 there was one that had a lot more

3:20:42 housing, one that had uh really much

3:20:45 fewer buildings and was just a service

3:20:47 lot, and a couple that were in between.

3:20:49 And there's always going to be a

3:20:51 trade-off. I think the the committee and

3:20:54 the public responded to the sidelot

3:20:57 because it's a good mix of a lot of

3:20:59 different things that people want in

3:21:00 Koolage Corner. It adds to the amount of

3:21:03 parking in Koolage Corner, not by a lot,

3:21:05 but by a little, and at least preserves

3:21:06 the public parking that's there. It

3:21:09 creates new housing uh and likely uh

3:21:12 mixed income housing. Uh it creates some

3:21:15 new retail space and it creates a really

3:21:18 exceptional public plaza for the farmers

3:21:20 market. And we think that that plaza um

3:21:23 can be home to the farmers market but

3:21:25 can be really much more than that and be

3:21:27 kind of a a center of not just Koolage

3:21:29 Corner but of the entire town and a

3:21:31 space that's used for civic events and

3:21:34 fairs and festivals and musical

3:21:36 performances and theater performances

3:21:38 kind of you name it. It can be an active

3:21:41 square could have a winter market. um it

3:21:44 can have something active going on for

3:21:46 much of the year and become kind of a a

3:21:48 new centerpiece of a a neighborhood

3:21:50 that's already wonderful um but that

3:21:52 could maybe be even better with some

3:21:54 more public space

3:21:59 it David

3:22:01 just one last question sorry so

3:22:03 regarding the additional parking that

3:22:05 would be provided uh what percentage of

3:22:08 that additional parking do you

3:22:09 anticipate would be used by the new

3:22:11 housing units In essence, is it really

3:22:14 additional parking for uh patrons of

3:22:17 area businesses?

3:22:19 Well, we uh I I have to say, we don't

3:22:21 know. Uh we that is we don't know uh the

3:22:24 extent to which we'll need to or want to

3:22:27 provide additional parking for

3:22:29 residences. Uh one of the questions that

3:22:31 we have is well, we're are in perhaps

3:22:33 one of the most transit-rich districts

3:22:35 that one can imagine um unless you were

3:22:38 standing on Washington Street in

3:22:39 downtown Boston. uh and u uh a lot a

3:22:44 substantial number of the residents in

3:22:46 the Koolage Corner area don't have cars.

3:22:48 So, do we need to provide uh one space

3:22:50 for every additional residents? Uh we

3:22:53 don't know the answer to that. It really

3:22:54 depends on the kinds of of of housing

3:22:58 units that are built there to some some

3:23:00 extent, big they are and you know how

3:23:02 many bedrooms and so forth and uh and

3:23:05 how likely you you are to attract um um

3:23:09 uh families. So really can't answer that

3:23:14 question. What we can say is that all of

3:23:16 the parking for uh that exists for uh

3:23:20 business uh businesses now for their

3:23:22 employees uh and for their customers

3:23:25 will be preserved plus some. So uh if

3:23:28 you if you're concerned to add more

3:23:31 parking than um than that uh uh concept

3:23:36 shows, you can add another floor to the

3:23:39 uh the garage. If you're concerned that

3:23:41 we're adding too much parking and we

3:23:43 find that we don't need as much parking

3:23:44 included corner after we analyze uh data

3:23:47 from uh the results of a of a wayfinding

3:23:51 project. Um you can reduce the amount of

3:23:54 parking. There's some flexibility in

3:23:55 there.

3:23:57 Uh Michael,

3:23:58 I think I was next. Bernard, but

3:24:00 Michael, you can go.

3:24:02 Um okay, raise your hand, Paul.

3:24:05 It was up. Oh, it came down. Go ahead,

3:24:07 Michael. Let me put it back.

3:24:09 I think Paul's hand actually was up. I

3:24:11 think it went down as

3:24:13 Go ahead.

3:24:14 Go ahead, Michael. No, Michael. Go

3:24:16 ahead.

3:24:17 Don't find

3:24:18 Okay. Um, so a couple of questions. Um,

3:24:21 the first is when I looked at the the

3:24:23 RFI and you it's you described all the

3:24:26 topics that the RFI would include, one

3:24:29 of the things that I noticed that it

3:24:30 didn't include was any any conversation

3:24:34 about like what would actually go into

3:24:35 the space. So um just in your list and

3:24:39 that may be obvious so you didn't feel

3:24:41 the need to mention it but it I wasn't

3:24:43 sure. Um so my question is from the

3:24:47 committee's perspective when you produce

3:24:48 the RFI are you presuming that all of

3:24:52 the expressions of interest that come

3:24:54 back are going to be expressions of

3:24:56 interest in producing something that is

3:24:59 basically the sidelot uh program with

3:25:03 the housing and the parking and the

3:25:04 plaza etc. or are you expecting RFIs to

3:25:10 come um with sort of other ideas?

3:25:14 And in parallel with that um what ideas

3:25:18 do you expect to get or not get with

3:25:21 regard to the Babcock Street parking lot

3:25:24 if that also gets included?

3:25:26 So

3:25:27 Mike, I can take this one if you want.

3:25:29 Oh, okay. Go ahead.

3:25:30 Okay. So um the RFI is intended to

3:25:33 encourage the developers to look at the

3:25:35 sidelock design sidelock design as a

3:25:37 starting point. Um obviously will

3:25:40 include certain things that we would

3:25:42 consider requirements or needs. Um

3:25:46 parking approximate minimum um that's

3:25:49 farmers market space that there should

3:25:51 be a mix of residential and commercial.

3:25:53 But we're truly hoping at this phase

3:25:55 that the developers will be encouraged

3:25:58 to think more broadly themselves and to

3:26:00 present other options that are of a

3:26:02 similar scale for the space. Um perhaps

3:26:04 help us think about things we hadn't

3:26:06 thought of before and understand what is

3:26:08 currently out there in the building

3:26:10 community. Um, in terms of including the

3:26:13 Babcock Street lot with part as part of

3:26:16 the RFI, we want developers to think

3:26:18 about that space as well. Incorporating

3:26:21 the Babcock Street Lot and Center Street

3:26:23 together as a unified project could

3:26:26 promote, for example, mixed income

3:26:28 housing throughout all of the sites,

3:26:30 which is a wonderful way to enhance

3:26:32 community rather than putting affordable

3:26:34 housing over here and market rate over

3:26:36 here. It's great to have it all mixed

3:26:38 together. um allow the developers to

3:26:41 also let us know where they think

3:26:43 parking would be most effective um both

3:26:46 from a fiscal sense and in terms of

3:26:48 keeping the space active and engaging.

3:26:51 Um and we think this a great way to

3:26:53 bring Babcock Street online and a

3:26:55 reasonable time frame instead of kicking

3:26:57 it down to be affordable housing at some

3:27:00 point in the future.

3:27:02 Does that answer your question?

3:27:04 Uh yes. Um the second question I had had

3:27:08 to do with the with your uh

3:27:10 recommendation around the wayfinding. Um

3:27:14 uh it seems like uh you're you're trying

3:27:19 to get information from uh the

3:27:22 wayfinding uh implementation to inform

3:27:26 the RFI and the RFP process. So I just

3:27:30 have a timing question. So, for example,

3:27:32 uh do you know if uh if the wayfinding

3:27:36 is potentially budgeted for fiscal year

3:27:38 27, what the costs would be? You know,

3:27:41 how um how those details would be needed

3:27:45 uh needed to be worked out. Um, and if

3:27:50 if you can't get the wayfinding

3:27:52 information,

3:27:53 how will that impact your ability to um

3:27:58 evaluate the RFIs and the RFPs? Because

3:28:01 you know if some developer says oh you

3:28:03 don't actually need this much parking or

3:28:05 oh you actually need a lot more parking

3:28:07 and you need the wayfinder uh uh

3:28:10 implementation to validate those claims

3:28:14 and you don't have that then how do you

3:28:15 sort of process your way through through

3:28:18 that conundrum.

3:28:20 So I think it's a twoperson answer. Um

3:28:22 Jessica do you want to

3:28:24 handle the budget piece first and I'll

3:28:25 do the other

3:28:27 part. Sure. Um, so I would say that the

3:28:30 reason we're specifically calling out

3:28:32 the wayfinding as one of the things that

3:28:33 we want to do first is throughout the

3:28:35 entire community engagement process as

3:28:37 well as throughout all the committee

3:28:38 meetings, the biggest conversation piece

3:28:40 has been whether or not we really need

3:28:42 this much parking. We have Brooklyn's

3:28:44 vision zero and other goals that we're

3:28:46 trying to reach where we really want to

3:28:47 make it more walkable, a little less

3:28:49 cars on the road for um gas emissions

3:28:52 and things like that. So if we implement

3:28:54 this way finding which was a big

3:28:56 recommendation within the Koolage Corner

3:28:58 parking study and seems to be coming out

3:29:01 the same way for the Brooklyn Village

3:29:03 Square studies that we're wrapping up

3:29:04 this year. Um it would be a great way to

3:29:07 tell whether or not we really need more

3:29:10 parking or the same amount of parking or

3:29:12 if it's just a matter of people being

3:29:14 more aware of what already exists. Um,

3:29:17 based off of the parking data that was

3:29:19 collected by our consultant, Catech for

3:29:21 that parking study, it seemed as though

3:29:24 based off of when they did the parking

3:29:25 counts during the school year on a day

3:29:27 that wasn't a big festival or the

3:29:29 farmers market that we do have

3:29:31 sufficient parking if you include some

3:29:33 of those side streets that um could be a

3:29:35 little bit more residential but do fall

3:29:37 into that 2-hour town parking rule that

3:29:39 we currently have in place. Um, in terms

3:29:42 of timeline, the sooner we can do this,

3:29:45 the better. Um the planning department

3:29:48 um through economic development did

3:29:50 submit a ones up for growth application

3:29:52 through the state last year um through

3:29:55 the application process that was due in

3:29:57 June and we would have been awarded in

3:29:59 October, November of this past fall. We

3:30:01 unfortunately weren't selected. There

3:30:03 was a very large number of applications

3:30:06 and wayinding is one of the largest ones

3:30:09 for this particular smaller grant within

3:30:11 the mass development programming. Um

3:30:13 it's for $30,000. We are going to try to

3:30:16 do that again. The reason we want to

3:30:19 suggest select board move something

3:30:21 forward is the $30,000 would just be for

3:30:23 a specific commercial area, not for the

3:30:26 entire town and it would just be the

3:30:28 development plan phase. So no

3:30:30 implementation, no sign fabrication or

3:30:33 anything of those of that nature. It

3:30:34 would just be for developing a plan for

3:30:38 one commercial area. In this case, we

3:30:39 would be focusing on coolage corner

3:30:41 since that's where our our project is.

3:30:44 Um, and the timeline for that, we

3:30:46 wouldn't be able to get started until

3:30:47 about a year from now. Um, because the

3:30:49 application is now open due in June. We

3:30:53 would be awarded in October and November

3:30:56 this fall with a contract and starting

3:30:59 date of between January and February of

3:31:01 2027.

3:31:03 So, that would delay us and that would

3:31:05 just be for planning and we wouldn't

3:31:08 wrap that up until summer next year or

3:31:10 so. So, it's usually about six months

3:31:11 depending on how big the area is and how

3:31:14 fast they can move the process along. If

3:31:16 we do it ourselves through our own

3:31:19 allocation for the entire town, um so if

3:31:23 we do it just just as cool as corner, it

3:31:25 would be $30,000 for the plan. If we do

3:31:27 townwide, it would be that times the

3:31:30 number of commercial areas we have

3:31:31 because it would branch out to include

3:31:33 the rest of the town would be about

3:31:35 $100,000.

3:31:36 the fabrication piece for actually

3:31:39 creating the signs. If you're looking at

3:31:40 just the granulated standard um traffic

3:31:43 signs that we have up for stop signs and

3:31:45 things like that kind of material, it's

3:31:47 about $300 per sign. And that's just to

3:31:50 fabricate, not to actually install these

3:31:53 signs. Um and that would also depend on

3:31:56 whether or not we were doing more of the

3:31:57 big town lot signs if we wanted to have

3:31:59 the more intricate parking lot signs.

3:32:02 Some people have mentioned throughout

3:32:03 the community engagement. They would

3:32:04 love to see how many spots are actively

3:32:07 available if that's possible. Um that's

3:32:10 something that um has been a little bit

3:32:14 more complicated given that we live in

3:32:15 New England where we have a lot of

3:32:17 weather um weather situations like this

3:32:20 past weekend where um having the things

3:32:22 that go underneath of the con the um the

3:32:25 asphalt that would actually signal

3:32:27 whether or not a space is available

3:32:28 might be more difficult in terms of

3:32:30 being able to do that on the side

3:32:31 streets, but could be something we could

3:32:32 do in parking lots. Um, so

3:32:37 we're looking at $100,000 if we do it

3:32:39 townwide for just the planning,

3:32:42 $300 per sign for fabrication, and then

3:32:46 if DPW internally can install, that

3:32:48 would save on cost, but if we need to

3:32:50 hire somebody externally, um, that would

3:32:52 depend on their individual fees.

3:32:54 Okay. Okay. I would recommend

3:32:57 so

3:32:58 I think there's probably I think there's

3:33:00 probably about as much uh as we

3:33:03 information as folks can can absorb, but

3:33:05 I Let's see if we've answered that to

3:33:07 the

3:33:08 Yeah. Yeah. No, I I thank you there.

3:33:10 You've obviously have a lot of this

3:33:12 information. It's really helpful. Um I

3:33:14 would I would I would urge you in your

3:33:18 timeline to include the wayfinding

3:33:21 pieces um so that we know sort of how

3:33:23 those interle. Um

3:33:25 so can I I just I do want to just speak

3:33:27 to that very briefly. Um, if I and I

3:33:30 know that Jessica gave you a lot of very

3:33:32 good detailed information in terms of

3:33:33 cost, but you also asked about how it

3:33:35 fits in. And I think it's important to

3:33:37 note that the RFI phase of this, which

3:33:41 is really just gathering information

3:33:42 from developers and getting a sense of

3:33:44 what can be done there, should be done

3:33:46 in parallel with the wayfinding. We

3:33:48 shouldn't be putting that off because

3:33:50 let's say we come, they come back with

3:33:52 something that's similar to that sidelot

3:33:54 plan and that's where we ultimately

3:33:56 land. There's parking flexibility built

3:33:58 in there and our RFI that we put out can

3:34:02 even include and the request to

3:34:05 developers, let us know if we want to

3:34:07 reduce parking by 100 spots or 50 spots,

3:34:09 if we want to increase by 100 or 50

3:34:12 spots from what the number we gave you

3:34:13 here, how would that affect other parts

3:34:15 of your suggested plan? So, I think we

3:34:19 can gather that information while we're

3:34:21 also improving parking access. And then

3:34:24 all of that data comes together when we

3:34:26 get to the RFP phase. And nothing is

3:34:28 nothing is fixed in terms of parking

3:34:31 until the developer locks in a plan.

3:34:33 Okay. Um I I have one other question,

3:34:36 but I want to let the other board

3:34:37 members answer.

3:34:41 Did you have something you want to say?

3:34:43 Um wayfinding is in the CIP town by

3:34:46 wayfinding. We realize that that's a

3:34:48 priority and we are funding it. So it is

3:34:51 really important for us. um particularly

3:34:54 after the Washington Street discussion

3:34:55 and the wayfinding there, we're funding

3:34:58 wayfinding projects through revenue and

3:35:02 through capital improvements wherever we

3:35:03 can. So that's going to be part of our

3:35:08 process moving forward regardless of

3:35:09 this.

3:35:11 Thank you.

3:35:12 Okay. Um Paul, you had your hand up for

3:35:15 a long time. That okay, John?

3:35:18 Oh, absolutely. No, absolutely.

3:35:21 Thanks. I think when you unmute

3:35:22 yourself, your hand comes down

3:35:24 automatically. It assumes you're

3:35:25 speaking. So, um, thank you. So, um,

3:35:29 there's a lot of information here.

3:35:31 You're starting to make my brain hurt a

3:35:32 little bit. Um, and I'm hoping we can

3:35:34 keep it high level. Um, I first I do

3:35:37 want to say I'm not in a a sense of

3:35:39 rushing to get 30 grand for a wayfinding

3:35:42 study. Um, without thoughtful

3:35:43 consideration about what what's being

3:35:45 proposed. Um, could someone put the the

3:35:49 diagram up that shows the Center Street

3:35:51 lot, the Babcock, you know, the whole

3:35:53 picture? Um, because I'd like to speak

3:35:55 to that for a minute and it'll help

3:35:57 orient my question.

3:35:59 You're looking for the slide that shows

3:36:00 the where the uh lots are today.

3:36:03 Yeah, the lots with the parking garage,

3:36:05 the the multiple housing develop

3:36:08 concept. Okay, sure. Yeah. Jessica, can

3:36:11 you can you get that out?

3:36:19 Keep going. There's one where the It's

3:36:21 There you go. Uh yeah, that one there.

3:36:23 Okay. And we And uh Babcock Street's not

3:36:26 on there, right? That would Oh, you lost

3:36:28 it.

3:36:30 There you go. Okay. And Babcock Street

3:36:33 is is on the north portion.

3:36:36 That's right. It's It's beyond the uh

3:36:38 Yeah. Be slightly Well, actually barely

3:36:40 see the top of the

3:36:41 Oh, yeah. So, I'm going to ask a

3:36:43 sequencing question. Um, and I don't

3:36:46 mean to turn you upside down on this,

3:36:47 but it is a sequencing question. Um, so

3:36:50 based on what you're asking is you want

3:36:52 an RFI for um, and I forget what this

3:36:57 you call this. Is this the south lot?

3:36:59 What's the one that you're

3:37:00 asking? These are this is the east and

3:37:03 west center lot, both of them together.

3:37:05 Okay. So So the one where the farmers

3:37:06 market currently is today. need like an

3:37:08 RFI for that for housing and some

3:37:10 commercial on the first floor and then

3:37:11 also at the same time housing and

3:37:13 potentially commercial for Babcock.

3:37:15 That's correct.

3:37:16 Those two lots must be considered

3:37:18 together.

3:37:18 Okay. Okay. So, my question is that

3:37:21 here's my concern. Uh my concern is we

3:37:24 get that and we never get the rest of

3:37:26 it. Okay. That that you know the thing

3:37:29 that's most attractive to me frankly on

3:37:31 this entire picture is that beautiful

3:37:33 parking garage. Okay. The

3:37:35 Oh, no. Those are all together.

3:37:37 So, Paul, you're um um So, when we talk

3:37:42 about the center street lots, the the

3:37:44 core of the RFI is the big open center

3:37:48 street lot that we now have right back

3:37:50 of CVS, the arcade, and the west lot

3:37:53 where the farmers market is. Badcock

3:37:56 Street is an add-on.

3:37:58 Okay. Okay. So, so you're actually

3:37:59 getting an RFI for the entire project,

3:38:02 not for just

3:38:03 the east and west are together. They

3:38:06 must be considered together.

3:38:07 Okay.

3:38:08 So, even if we and this is what you see

3:38:11 in the picture here, for example, is the

3:38:12 center street west lot. Though, that

3:38:15 housing might not have any parking

3:38:17 attached to the house. that might be

3:38:19 only for people who want to walk across

3:38:21 the street to their garage or have a no

3:38:23 parking spot housing, but it's only part

3:38:25 of the project with that lot.

3:38:29 So, a developer either says, "I believe

3:38:31 we can have no parking residential or I

3:38:35 will provide the spots over here or I

3:38:36 have some other suggestion for where

3:38:38 they go."

3:38:39 Okay. So, let me So, let me I just want

3:38:40 to make sure I'm clear. I'm sorry. I'm

3:38:42 asking a very basic question.

3:38:43 Oh, it's fine. Um, so is there a is

3:38:46 there a scenario where we end up with

3:38:49 the Babcock Street lot developed and the

3:38:52 West lot developed and the center street

3:38:55 parking lot stays the same?

3:38:57 No, because the center street lot

3:38:59 parking has the the center street

3:39:01 parking has to be dealt with first. The

3:39:03 garage is the first thing that happens.

3:39:06 Okay. Thank you. That's that's it was

3:39:08 unclear the way you talked about it. It

3:39:10 seemed like the the two the West uh lot

3:39:13 and the Babcock Street were first going

3:39:15 to be going being done together. Okay.

3:39:18 So, maybe just make that really clear.

3:39:20 Um it confused me. So, uh I'm sorry

3:39:23 about that. Um but I do I do like uh I I

3:39:27 know there's a minority report and I

3:39:29 respect uh the the individual who wrote

3:39:32 it, but I do think um it's critical that

3:39:35 we maintain access to parking. Um, and

3:39:39 frankly, at least what we have are a

3:39:40 little bit more because I do think

3:39:41 adding the housing units, while we we do

3:39:44 we would hope that people would walk.

3:39:46 Um, a lot of them will still have cars.

3:39:49 Um, it's just the way it's just the way

3:39:50 it is. Um, and so I I do uh I I would

3:39:54 encourage uh that that parking garage

3:39:57 does get built. And again, it's my it's

3:39:59 one of my favorite things on the

3:40:00 picture. So,

3:40:01 John,

3:40:04 thank you very much. Um, could I just

3:40:07 ask for a refresher as to how many units

3:40:10 of housing are we talking about in this?

3:40:12 That's the next slide.

3:40:15 Well, how about we go to the next slide?

3:40:17 Yeah, that that's that's why I said

3:40:18 that, John.

3:40:19 So, this this is an these are all

3:40:21 estimates. And again, the sidelot design

3:40:24 concept is just a concept. I think Mike

3:40:27 made that very clear. But in terms of a

3:40:30 broad plan, this would have been

3:40:32 somewhere between 80 to 100 housing

3:40:34 units. It depends on are you doing

3:40:37 mostly studio and onebedroom? Are you

3:40:39 doing mostly two and threebedroom?

3:40:41 Um and that number of parking spaces you

3:40:44 might recall the current total number of

3:40:45 parking spaces across both lots is 192

3:40:50 and that includes a significant number

3:40:51 in the west lot that are reserved for um

3:40:56 employee permits for various area

3:40:58 businesses. So this design has a range

3:41:02 of 300 to 335 spots. I think we got to

3:41:05 that number by having a one spot per

3:41:07 unit estimate for the residential, but

3:41:10 that doesn't have to be exactly where it

3:41:13 lands.

3:41:14 Thanks. Thanks, Shann. And I see on that

3:41:16 very same slide, uh, estimated cost $29

3:41:20 million. Is that the cost of building

3:41:22 the garage?

3:41:23 No, no, that's the project cost.

3:41:25 Project cost most that we expect would

3:41:28 be largely absorbed by the developer as

3:41:30 part of the public private partnership.

3:41:32 Well, well, yeah, I'm sorry. I'm getting

3:41:34 your answers are leaving me more

3:41:35 confused. Project cost um to Brooklyn.

3:41:39 No, no. The project cost of constructing

3:41:42 what you see on that on the previous

3:41:44 slide, the whole package.

3:41:45 Just just to just to clarify that and

3:41:48 sorry to jump in.

3:41:49 Yeah, that's the estim that's the

3:41:51 estimated cost of the the parts of

3:41:54 construction that would end up being

3:41:56 owned or controlled by the public. So

3:41:59 that includes the parking structure with

3:42:02 the assumption that the town would still

3:42:03 own or control the parking structure

3:42:05 that um Paul was mentioning as well as

3:42:08 the public plaza um but not the cost to

3:42:12 construct the housing or retail which

3:42:14 would be borne by the developer. We also

3:42:17 expect the developer would bear much or

3:42:20 all of the cost of the public components

3:42:22 of this as well in exchange for the use

3:42:25 of the land. Um, but this estimate is is

3:42:28 basically the parking structure and the

3:42:30 plaza is essentially what you're getting

3:42:32 for that number.

3:42:33 Okay. Could you make that clear going

3:42:35 forward?

3:42:36 What?

3:42:37 I'd just like to make it clear going

3:42:39 forward because this this uh slide

3:42:43 doesn't say that.

3:42:45 Well, and I'm still confused because um

3:42:48 I I I've heard it said that it it is the

3:42:51 cost of constructing the garage and it

3:42:54 will be a garage on public property and

3:42:58 a and a and a publicly managed garage.

3:43:01 So, who's paying to build this public

3:43:04 garage on public property if not

3:43:07 Brooklyn? So the uh the the the whole or

3:43:11 the whole concept, John, is that um

3:43:14 there's a substantial piece of land

3:43:16 there, almost two acres. Um if a

3:43:19 developer were to try to acquire that

3:43:21 two acres, the cost would be enormous.

3:43:24 Um instead, they're going to be leasing

3:43:27 that land at a very low cost. Um, and in

3:43:31 return they're expected to put the money

3:43:33 that they would otherwise have to put

3:43:35 into purchasing land into building that

3:43:37 garage.

3:43:39 So there, if you're asking

3:43:42 how much is Brookline going to need to

3:43:44 pay, it's a very small amount uh related

3:43:49 to assessing what um what uh developer

3:43:54 proposes uh doing, I'm sure, some um

3:43:57 some uh investigative work of its own to

3:44:00 make sure that we're uh doing the right

3:44:03 thing in terms of uh you know, we will

3:44:05 need consultant to help help us with

3:44:07 zoning and so forth, But um and there

3:44:10 may be some costs around the edges of

3:44:14 the project itself, but we're expecting

3:44:16 the vast majority of the uh of the cost

3:44:20 to be borne by the developer, including

3:44:22 the cost of the public garage and the

3:44:25 public.

3:44:26 Okay.

3:44:27 But for Brookline to participate in

3:44:30 this, has anyone worked out a budget as

3:44:33 to what it will cost us?

3:44:37 Um, I think it's a little it's a little

3:44:39 early to do that except to say that it's

3:44:41 going to be an extremely small amount in

3:44:44 comparison to well, not just in

3:44:46 comparison. It's going to be a very a

3:44:47 very manageable amount. The it's the

3:44:49 same sort of package as we uh offered to

3:44:52 the Marriott when the Marriott was

3:44:54 constructed. We owned the land. They

3:44:56 built the hotel including a garage that

3:44:58 they promised to give access to where

3:45:00 they promised to give access to the

3:45:02 I would just add to Mike's answer uh

3:45:05 Mike's answer to your question John that

3:45:08 um that is why we have recommended to go

3:45:10 to the next step of a request for

3:45:12 information because we don't have

3:45:15 perfect insight into the economics of

3:45:18 every single developer out there public

3:45:21 uh public developer private or I should

3:45:22 say private developer nonprofit

3:45:24 developer affordable housing developer,

3:45:26 they know their costs and their

3:45:29 potential uh proforma much better than

3:45:32 we do. And so by going to them and

3:45:34 saying what would this look like for you

3:45:36 and having them come back to us, it

3:45:38 gives us a much better sense. It is

3:45:40 entirely possible that the result of the

3:45:43 RFI says that there are no developers

3:45:45 interested in doing this at all and the

3:45:47 only way it would be done would be with

3:45:49 a large subsidy of tax dollars. And that

3:45:51 probably ends this conversation and

3:45:53 that's up for you to decide, not for us.

3:45:56 But that could be the outcome. We don't

3:45:57 expect that based on the the sort of

3:46:00 basic economics you see here. You could

3:46:02 imagine a developer being pretty excited

3:46:04 about being able to construct 100 units

3:46:07 in an incredibly desirable neighborhood.

3:46:09 We all know how amazing Kage Corner is

3:46:11 as a neighborhood and what that could

3:46:13 generate in value. and they the town

3:46:16 then gets to own a big chunk of that

3:46:18 value and turn it into a public parking

3:46:21 garage which we know many merchants have

3:46:23 been asking for for many years.

3:46:26 Okay. Um, thank you for those answers.

3:46:29 Uh, I I need more time if you don't

3:46:31 mind, Bernard, because I've got more

3:46:33 questions here. Um,

3:46:36 I I I'll tip my hand. I I'm not ready to

3:46:39 vote on this tonight and I'm not ready

3:46:41 to vote on this for a lot of reasons.

3:46:44 Um,

3:46:46 and one of them was just explained, we

3:46:48 don't really know what it will cost us

3:46:50 to continue to pursue this for a while.

3:46:54 And pursuing it for a while could end up

3:46:57 uh with us eventually dis uh finding out

3:47:01 that there are no no developers

3:47:03 interested in doing this. And meanwhile

3:47:05 we will have invested a fair amount of

3:47:08 money you know planning department time

3:47:10 that's money um in this um but we

3:47:14 haven't been told how much money and how

3:47:17 much time. Um

3:47:19 then we've also been sort of assured

3:47:21 that this is the result of uh a really

3:47:25 extensive public process that came to a

3:47:29 very con uh clear conclusion as to what

3:47:32 the people of Brooklyn want. And I, you

3:47:36 know, I don't question anything that's

3:47:38 been said so far as to what occurred

3:47:41 during the public process, but I would

3:47:45 have to say that's unlike any public

3:47:47 process I I I've ever sort of witnessed

3:47:51 with as much at stake as making

3:47:54 decisions about the future of the key

3:47:59 parking lot in our key

3:48:03 commercial area in the town, which we

3:48:06 are either going to at some point in the

3:48:09 future, if any of these plans are

3:48:10 realized.

3:48:12 um essentially take away virtually all

3:48:14 of the surface parking for cars, which

3:48:18 is very successful right now at feeding

3:48:21 customers into the retail operations all

3:48:26 up and down Harvard Street and on that

3:48:28 section of Beacon Street and instead

3:48:31 offering people uh parking in a garage.

3:48:35 Uh that's a huge decision to make and

3:48:37 I'm not aware of any clear survey that

3:48:40 has been done as to how many of the

3:48:43 customers that use that that center

3:48:46 street parking area surface parking area

3:48:50 every single day, every single week,

3:48:53 every single month, every single year

3:48:55 would come back and still shop at

3:48:57 Koolage Corner if they had to park in a

3:49:00 garage. So that's an open question as

3:49:03 far as I'm concerned. May maybe we'll

3:49:05 we'll gather some evidence on that, but

3:49:08 we haven't gathered any evidence yet.

3:49:10 Um, and then I want to cite something

3:49:12 which I I sent a request to a couple of

3:49:15 people. Could you get this up on a slide

3:49:17 while I talk? Um, and uh I don't know if

3:49:20 they were able to do it, but what it is.

3:49:24 Okay. So, I'll wait for you to just put

3:49:26 it up there. Um, what it is is an

3:49:30 example of how the event at the Kulage

3:49:32 Corner Theater was promoted.

3:49:35 And I won't expect people to be able to

3:49:37 read that. I can tell you one thing

3:49:39 right away. It doesn't even mention the

3:49:41 word housing. Um, the the event at

3:49:44 College Corner, it was titled A More

3:49:46 Walkable Brooklyn, and it featured the

3:49:48 very talented, and I mean that

3:49:50 sincerely, um, Chris Dempsey and Jeff

3:49:53 Spec. And at the beginning, and I give

3:49:55 them credit for this too, they ask the

3:49:58 audience, "How many of you are here

3:50:01 expecting uh you know a talk about sort

3:50:03 of urban design issues and a more

3:50:06 walkable Brooklyn and more walkable

3:50:09 cities, which is the area of expertise

3:50:11 for these this team um in addition to

3:50:15 other areas of expertise." And about

3:50:18 half of the crowd, if not more than

3:50:20 half, said they were there for a talk on

3:50:24 Walkable Brookline um uh and and the

3:50:28 other half, you know, uh slightly less

3:50:31 than half, that's my recollection of it,

3:50:33 said that they were expecting to hear

3:50:36 something about a plan to redo the

3:50:38 Center Street lots. So in this crowd of

3:50:42 I don't know some 200 um half weren't

3:50:45 even expecting to come there to weigh in

3:50:47 on on the future of the center street

3:50:49 lots and then in the course of one um

3:50:52 brief evening they were shown four

3:50:56 visionary plans

3:50:59 for the center street lots and asked to

3:51:01 vote that those were the only four you

3:51:04 know choices they were given and sure

3:51:06 there turned out to be one that was

3:51:08 preferred uh over the others. But that

3:51:12 isn't the way we usually do public

3:51:13 engagement.

3:51:15 uh with a lot of people, some of whom

3:51:17 weren't even from Brooklyn and many of

3:51:20 whom didn't even know they were coming

3:51:22 to a meeting that would decide that

3:51:25 there might be a uh a whole process set

3:51:28 in motion that could result in uh

3:51:32 complete transformation of the Center

3:51:34 Street parking lots, including a parking

3:51:36 garage instead of surface parking, and

3:51:39 including a lot of housing that we

3:51:41 haven't sort of had any kind of clear

3:51:45 hearing. The select board certainly

3:51:46 hasn't had any kind of a hearing to ask

3:51:49 the people of Brooklyn, do they think

3:51:52 that the public properties uh of the

3:51:55 center street parking areas should be

3:51:58 made available to developers

3:52:01 um a at the at the cost of losing the

3:52:05 surface parking there and replacing it

3:52:07 with a garage. So, you know, I'm not

3:52:11 going to say that any of the I'm not

3:52:13 going to say what the answer to any of

3:52:15 those questions could turn out to be.

3:52:17 I'm just pointing out we haven't done

3:52:19 the real process that that is a familiar

3:52:23 process in Brooklyn of giving people all

3:52:26 the details of what we are suggesting

3:52:29 might ultimately be done and then making

3:52:32 sure that that they all weigh in uh not

3:52:35 just a random group of people who showed

3:52:37 up for a talk. uh at the Coolish Corner

3:52:39 Theater. Uh all the people, all the

3:52:43 stakeholders, all of the commercial

3:52:45 property interests in the area, all of

3:52:48 the people who shop there, both by car

3:52:50 and on foot. I I didn't see that happen.

3:52:53 So, as a select board member, I'm sorry.

3:52:56 I'm just not ready to, you know, give

3:52:58 this the thumbs up to go to the next

3:53:01 step tonight. And and for starters, the

3:53:04 next time we discuss it, I would like to

3:53:05 see a budget

3:53:11 U do you want to respond anyone?

3:53:14 No, not a bit. Thanks.

3:53:15 Okay. Uh I think uh Paul is next.

3:53:19 Thank you. Thank you, Bernard. Um and

3:53:22 and I I you know, John did raise some

3:53:24 some I think some valid points. Um but I

3:53:29 I had uh two quick questions and then

3:53:31 I'll I think I'll I'm going to comment

3:53:33 on what John said. Uh the first question

3:53:35 is on the slide, you don't have to put

3:53:37 the slide back up, but it said 80 to 100

3:53:39 housing units. Is that between the three

3:53:41 residential developments? That would be

3:53:44 So that's a total. Okay.

3:53:45 Well, when you say, for clarity, when

3:53:47 you say three, what are you talking

3:53:49 about?

3:53:49 Well, so in my head,

3:53:50 it does not include Babcock. That's just

3:53:52 the two center street.

3:53:53 Oh, okay. It's just the two cent.

3:53:55 None of these include Babcock. That was

3:53:57 sort of a

3:53:58 What do we think Babcock might Do we

3:54:00 have an idea? Who knows? All right.

3:54:02 We didn't look into that. We just

3:54:03 thought it would be a good idea.

3:54:04 But it could be another could be a

3:54:05 developer say something.

3:54:06 It could be another 40 or 50. So you

3:54:08 could have 150 housing units

3:54:09 potentially.

3:54:10 It could be it could be 20. It could be

3:54:11 50.

3:54:12 Just we don't know.

3:54:13 Trying to get it in my head. Okay. Uh so

3:54:15 that's the first thing. And then do you

3:54:17 have a sense of um this my second

3:54:20 question then I'll have a comment that

3:54:22 you know using public land for market

3:54:25 rate housing or h how do you envision

3:54:27 this uh type of housing? Certainly, we

3:54:30 wouldn't want it to be luxury housing,

3:54:31 but do you have an idea of what the what

3:54:34 uh this public private partnership might

3:54:37 be able to support?

3:54:38 So, I think part of what we're looking

3:54:40 again for is for the developers to let

3:54:42 us know what they would need in order to

3:54:46 make it viable. And I think we do want

3:54:48 to, and this is part of where Babcock

3:54:49 comes in, is we want there to be a mix

3:54:51 of affordable in there and market rate

3:54:53 is market rate. And I mean, luxury is

3:54:58 all the way at one end, but there's nice

3:55:00 housing also. And then we don't know

3:55:02 whether it's one-bedrooms, it's

3:55:05 efficiencies, it's something families

3:55:07 could live in.

3:55:08 Yeah. I just I just I guess I just I

3:55:10 worry that it'll be interesting to see

3:55:12 what comes back, but I worry that any

3:55:14 developer is going to want to put luxury

3:55:15 housing there.

3:55:16 So, we can certainly certainly the RFI,

3:55:19 I imagine, can include a list of our

3:55:22 priorities and indicating

3:55:24 Yeah.

3:55:25 What we want to see there, but this is

3:55:27 to help us craft an eventual request for

3:55:32 But you did but you did say that one of

3:55:33 the guiding principles of this is

3:55:35 consistency with the comprehensive plan.

3:55:38 And it's very clear out of the

3:55:39 comprehensive plan. We don't need a lot

3:55:41 more luxury housing, right? We don't

3:55:43 need two and three million condos or

3:55:45 apartments that are renting for, you

3:55:47 know, $6,000 a month. we need we need

3:55:50 more middle inome workforce housing

3:55:52 smaller units and afford and frankly

3:55:54 some deep restricted affordable units.

3:55:56 So just that's really coming clear out

3:55:58 of the the comprehensive plan. So I hope

3:55:59 that will be kept front and center. And

3:56:01 then just my comment my comment about

3:56:04 John's feedback and I really appreciate

3:56:05 what John's saying. Um, I do think that

3:56:08 that some of the process caught people

3:56:10 by offguard. Like I thought it was more

3:56:12 going to be a presentation about themes

3:56:14 of walkability and I frankly I didn't

3:56:16 attend. Um, and housing was not a point.

3:56:19 I don't think that that we toss

3:56:22 everything out though. Uh, we don't toss

3:56:24 a baby out with a bath water. There is a

3:56:26 concept uh that is probably as good as

3:56:29 any other concept that might come up for

3:56:31 a vision for that area. Um, and I'm not

3:56:34 certain a request for information would

3:56:37 commit us uh to doing anything. It's if

3:56:40 anything, it's to educate us and also uh

3:56:44 the the development community about what

3:56:46 could be possible. And as Chris said,

3:56:48 which I think is correct, you know,

3:56:50 we're going to quickly find out whether

3:56:51 this is feasible or not. Um, and I think

3:56:53 that's that's a good way a good way to

3:56:55 test it. Um I assume that anything that

3:56:59 gets done there would still need

3:57:00 approval of the select board and also

3:57:02 going some of it would need to go

3:57:03 through town meeting. Correct.

3:57:05 It would need town meeting. Um so um I'm

3:57:09 I'm not as although I completely

3:57:11 understand what John's saying that some

3:57:13 people didn't know to show up because

3:57:14 you weren't talking about parking, you

3:57:16 were talking about walkability. Um I

3:57:18 wouldn't necessarily give up on the idea

3:57:20 of asking the development community for

3:57:22 feedback.

3:57:25 Michael.

3:57:26 Um, so thank you. Um, first, um,

3:57:32 uh, I I I take John's point about making

3:57:35 sure that we're being prudent about, uh,

3:57:38 the money that we're spending. I, but I

3:57:40 also think that, you know, in terms of

3:57:43 budgeting out this process and

3:57:45 understanding sort of what this

3:57:47 eventually will cost the town, that we

3:57:49 can take that process in steps. So for

3:57:52 example, the relevant question at this

3:57:54 moment might be what is the expected

3:57:56 budget just for running the RFI,

3:57:58 collecting that information and and

3:58:02 going forward. That would be that would

3:58:03 certainly be useful information. Um I

3:58:06 agree I I think that's relatively short

3:58:09 money. Um but we should we should just

3:58:11 have a good understanding of that. Um

3:58:14 second um I wholeheartedly agree with

3:58:17 Paul in the sense that um we have gotten

3:58:20 some information. We are looking to get

3:58:23 more information through this RF RFI

3:58:25 process especially in terms of economic

3:58:28 viability. Um I will um and and I think

3:58:33 gathering that information sooner rather

3:58:35 than later will actually make us uh more

3:58:38 efficient in terms of of what's moving

3:58:40 forward. Um, I think that the timeline

3:58:43 that you've laid out actually between

3:58:45 the RFI process and the zoning warrant

3:58:49 article, um, I suspect that's actually

3:58:51 where you have more risk that that's

3:58:53 going to take more time. Um because once

3:58:55 those RFIs come back and you look at

3:58:59 those RFIs and determine what the zoning

3:59:01 is that you're going to need to put into

3:59:03 this very sensitive space, then a lot

3:59:05 more people are going to um come out of

3:59:08 the woodwork and have opinions and

3:59:10 thoughts and perspectives on on the

3:59:12 zoning. So, um I'm not sure that you've

3:59:15 actually left enough time for for that

3:59:18 phase of the process, though I realize

3:59:20 that that process has to follow a

3:59:22 cadence because it has to go to town

3:59:24 meeting in May or November um typically

3:59:27 and um so so you're sort of uh caught a

3:59:31 little bit within that structure. Um,

3:59:34 one other comment that I would make, um,

3:59:36 and and I'm speculating here to some

3:59:39 degree, but you had mentioned that there

3:59:42 was the possibility of for-profit or

3:59:45 nonprofit responses to this RFI. Um, and

3:59:48 one of the reasons why I asked about

3:59:50 sort of what the what the range of

3:59:52 flexibility was on the design is that I

3:59:55 have trouble imagining that a nonprofit

3:59:59 developer, particularly somebody who's

4:00:01 focused on um, affordable housing, um,

4:00:05 would have the capacity or necessarily

4:00:09 the interest for building such a large

4:00:13 garage structure and sinking that much

4:00:15 money. Um, on top of

4:00:19 the the cost of the affordable housing

4:00:22 because affordable housing developers

4:00:24 typically have very complicated

4:00:26 financing stacks anyway, just with

4:00:28 something even something as simple um as

4:00:32 uh the the project that was next to KI

4:00:35 that had senior housing on top of uh

4:00:38 some ground flooror commercial. you

4:00:40 know, the financing stacks there and the

4:00:42 requirements then for town

4:00:44 contributions, etc. are really really

4:00:46 complicated and um I expect that adding

4:00:49 a garage um to that uh process um is

4:00:54 going to is going to sort of uh knock

4:00:56 out those uh those developers from uh

4:01:00 consideration. I would be happy to be

4:01:02 proven wrong, but it wouldn't surprise

4:01:03 me if most of your RFI feedback was for

4:01:06 for-profit developers.

4:01:10 interesting point. Thank you.

4:01:11 Okay. Pardon me.

4:01:14 I that's that's an interesting point and

4:01:16 interesting perspective uh about

4:01:18 nonprofits. I appreciate that.

4:01:20 Okay. David,

4:01:27 sorry about that. So, I also agree with

4:01:29 Paul and now Michael. I think it would

4:01:32 be prudent to proceed with an RFI so

4:01:34 that we're in a position to make more

4:01:37 informed decisions about the future of

4:01:39 the center street lot and viability for

4:01:42 proposals such as or appro or concepts

4:01:45 such as what's been presented to us

4:01:48 tonight. Uh there are certain details

4:01:50 that maybe I'd want to change but at

4:01:52 this stage it's more about information

4:01:55 gathering uh understanding viability

4:01:58 more broadly. We're talking a lot in

4:02:00 town about economic development

4:02:01 opportunities, about revenue generation,

4:02:04 about increasing housing, and this fits

4:02:07 into that. And I don't think that taking

4:02:10 a pause on mere information gathering is

4:02:14 going to help us. I I think we would

4:02:17 actually lose some important momentum if

4:02:20 we didn't take the step of pursuing an

4:02:22 RFI. that doesn't require us to proceed

4:02:26 if we don't like the uh responses that

4:02:28 we receive or that we find that it's not

4:02:30 viable. Uh that being said, there's

4:02:32 something that John mentioned and maybe

4:02:34 Chris would be in the best position to

4:02:36 answer this that I found intriguing,

4:02:38 which was regarding the difference

4:02:40 between garage parking and surface

4:02:42 parking from the perspective of uh both

4:02:46 business owners and customers. Are there

4:02:48 studies as to whether people prefer

4:02:52 surface parking and are somehow maybe

4:02:54 intimidated by garages? Is it just about

4:02:57 price structure?

4:03:00 Yeah, it's agree.

4:03:01 Can I can I add something to that? And

4:03:04 that is um differences with respect to

4:03:07 seniors and people with disabilities.

4:03:10 are they more likely to want to park on

4:03:12 a a surface lot as opposed to, you know,

4:03:16 a high-rise parking lot, too.

4:03:18 So, these are really great questions and

4:03:20 Bernard, I'm glad you brought up the

4:03:22 question of accessibility. Um, Mike sort

4:03:25 of mentioned this. His phrasing is a

4:03:26 little different than the way I describe

4:03:27 it, but I think um I'd like to sort of

4:03:29 restate it. Uh, I I believe the Center

4:03:33 Street Lots is the least accessible,

4:03:37 widely used public space in Brooklyn. If

4:03:41 um the the lack of ADA accessibility of

4:03:44 the Center Street lots uh were existed

4:03:46 in a building, we would not allow it in

4:03:49 Brooklyn. We would close that building

4:03:50 down until improvements were made. Um,

4:03:53 but because it's a parking lot, we seem

4:03:55 to hold it to a lower standard. And um

4:03:57 I'm fortunate to work in Koolage Corner

4:03:59 in the arcade building. So I walk

4:04:00 through their center street lot

4:04:02 basically every day, twice a day. Um and

4:04:05 am regularly seeing people who utilize

4:04:08 wheelchairs who are driving in the main

4:04:10 park the main driving area because there

4:04:12 are very few curb cuts and no pedestrian

4:04:14 paths. Um many of the sidewalks have

4:04:17 telephone poles or light poles in the

4:04:19 middle of them. So there's no way that a

4:04:21 wheelchair can get through. So, no

4:04:22 matter what the town does, uh we would

4:04:24 recommend action to address

4:04:26 accessibility. On the more specific

4:04:29 question of the pros and cons of a

4:04:31 surface lot versus a structured parking

4:04:33 lot and people's preferences, um I

4:04:36 haven't seen a particular study on that.

4:04:38 I think uh it the answer is sort of it

4:04:40 depends. Uh there are certainly times

4:04:42 where it will feel more convenient to

4:04:44 park in a surface lot and not not have

4:04:46 to navigate stairs or elevators. Uh, on

4:04:48 the other hand, on a um a snowy day or a

4:04:51 rainy day, it might be really nice to

4:04:52 park your vehicle um under a structure

4:04:55 and not have the rain pouring on you.

4:04:57 You'll have better lighting in a surface

4:04:59 sorry, in a structured parking lot um

4:05:01 typically than a surface parking lot.

4:05:03 So, there's there's really pros and cons

4:05:05 and no definitive way to say it, but

4:05:06 it's the kind of thing that I think the

4:05:08 community can have a conversation about,

4:05:10 you know, if the select board decides to

4:05:12 advance the conversation um in many

4:05:14 other public forums.

4:05:18 Okay. Uh Meredith, but uh first uh can

4:05:20 can we say that uh if we issue this RFI

4:05:25 that we can um specifically identify um

4:05:30 uh information that we want to make sure

4:05:33 uh is included in the answer. um such as

4:05:37 the issue of uh middle and low-income

4:05:39 housing or affordable housing that

4:05:41 someone mentioned uh uh uh issue of

4:05:44 preserving parking um you know which a

4:05:47 number of people have raised

4:05:48 particularly uh given that this is going

4:05:51 to be a destination location and you

4:05:54 know people are going to be coming from

4:05:56 all over hopefully uh so you know

4:05:59 cutting back parking doesn't seem to be

4:06:01 consistent with that idea uh and of

4:06:03 course you know needs of senior seniors

4:06:05 and um people with disabilities.

4:06:12 Yes, certainly. So, um I I did just want

4:06:14 to jump in and um to your point, Chair

4:06:19 Green, and um you know, the excellent

4:06:21 point about uh you know, preferences

4:06:23 around housing types and affordability

4:06:25 in moving forward with the RFI, you

4:06:27 know, there'll be this process and we'll

4:06:29 be sort of making the rounds to various

4:06:30 boards and committee to get input on,

4:06:33 you know, what are some important pieces

4:06:34 of criteria that we really want to

4:06:36 underscore and make sure that developers

4:06:38 address in the RFI. Um, and I think

4:06:40 we've talked about some of those this

4:06:42 evening. So, that will certainly be part

4:06:43 of that process. And then there were

4:06:46 also some questions just in terms of the

4:06:49 costs associated with moving forward

4:06:50 with this process. Um, so I we I would

4:06:54 ballpark somewhere in the neighborhood

4:06:55 of 30 to $40,000 for some um consulting

4:06:59 support services to help us prepare the

4:07:01 RFI. Um but you know it will largely be

4:07:04 a lot of planning staff time in um

4:07:06 facilitating those conversations with

4:07:08 boards and committees and working with

4:07:10 the consultant to get the RFI prepared

4:07:12 and out the door. Uh and um you know I

4:07:16 also think it is important you know

4:07:17 there was an extensive amount of work. I

4:07:19 know we've talked a lot about the

4:07:20 walkable city event which was very

4:07:22 successful well attended um and I I hear

4:07:24 sort of the feedback um criticisms in

4:07:26 terms of some of the event promotion.

4:07:28 that was one piece of a much broader

4:07:30 community outreach engagement process.

4:07:32 Um, and so I um I did just want to um

4:07:37 reassure everyone that there was a you

4:07:38 know robust engagement, multiple rounds

4:07:40 of surveys and a lot of information for

4:07:43 the committee to consider um as they

4:07:45 sort of honed in on the sidelot option.

4:07:47 Um

4:07:49 and

4:07:51 uh and then also just to reassure um

4:07:53 because I I hear where John is coming

4:07:56 from particularly as the select board

4:07:58 representative on the small business

4:07:59 development committee about being very

4:08:00 protective of that critical parking

4:08:02 resource that you know supports our

4:08:04 small business community. There is a

4:08:06 Koolage Corner uh merchant association

4:08:08 representative on the committee uh and

4:08:10 uh David Lashinsky

4:08:12 uh president of the Koolage Corner

4:08:13 Merchant Association has also been very

4:08:15 invested in this process um and is

4:08:17 encouraged by the direction that the

4:08:19 project is moving um forward with. So um

4:08:22 you know we're very sensitive to the

4:08:24 needs of the business community and um

4:08:26 in terms of feedback that we would be

4:08:27 looking for developers from it would be

4:08:29 the potential to phase the project to

4:08:31 minimize the amount of parking that

4:08:33 could be taken offline and disrupt

4:08:34 business operations.

4:08:36 Um, so and then just the last point, a

4:08:38 lot of community engagement. There is a

4:08:40 certain amount of momentum and community

4:08:42 awareness that I do think it's important

4:08:43 for us to capitalize on and try to push

4:08:46 this process forward and get additional

4:08:48 information um through the RFI process

4:08:51 so we can come back and answer some of

4:08:52 these very good questions about, you

4:08:54 know, what are we talking about in terms

4:08:55 of budget and implications for the town.

4:08:58 Okay, I think John had his hand up next.

4:09:04 Um thanks again and thanks again to

4:09:06 everybody for the for the answers. Um I

4:09:09 think they're all very good answers. Um

4:09:12 I will uh comment simply on one of them

4:09:16 which was uh you know the the question

4:09:20 of the garage versus surface parking. Um

4:09:24 it's not just a question of garage

4:09:25 versus surface parking. It's also a

4:09:28 question of garages, you know,

4:09:31 categorically

4:09:32 as uh the way forward um for cities or

4:09:38 the way of the past. And there's a lot

4:09:42 of reason to believe maybe it's more the

4:09:44 way of the past than the way forward. Um

4:09:46 and in fact, when this came before the

4:09:48 transportation board uh recently, um I

4:09:53 hope Brian doesn't mind if I quote him

4:09:55 on this. You know, Brian Kaine, the

4:09:57 chair of the transportation board, said

4:09:59 it flat out. I'm not a fan of garages.

4:10:03 So, uh, and he and he explained why. Uh,

4:10:06 and you know, are are we going to

4:10:09 actually invite in, uh, Brian to discuss

4:10:12 why he made that statement at the

4:10:14 transportation board discussion of this?

4:10:17 And are we going to explore a little bit

4:10:18 further? You know, the whole question of

4:10:21 whether a garage is going to end up

4:10:25 being, you know, sort of a dinosaur um

4:10:27 and a very expensive one at that. Even

4:10:30 as we are reading headlines daily of the

4:10:35 uh neglect that plagued the alewife

4:10:39 garage and has led to a ridiculous

4:10:41 situation where millions and millions

4:10:43 have been spent trying to figure out how

4:10:46 to salvage that garage 30 or 40 years

4:10:49 after it was first open. Um you know do

4:10:51 we want to invest in a garage at this

4:10:54 point in in Brooklyn's march to the

4:10:57 future? It doesn't look very forward

4:11:00 thinking to me. So anyway, I'm I'm

4:11:02 raising these questions only because I I

4:11:06 don't like the fact that we're being

4:11:07 asked for a decision tonight when we

4:11:11 routinely say at our meetings, well, we

4:11:15 brought up something new tonight and we

4:11:17 had a chance to introduce it, but we're

4:11:20 not going to vote on it tonight. And

4:11:22 there's a good reason for that. And this

4:11:24 is huge. This is really huge. and we

4:11:27 shouldn't be voting on it the first

4:11:29 night that we actually are presented the

4:11:32 the proposal. Um I think there's a lot

4:11:35 more people we need to hear from and we

4:11:37 need to proceed a lot more deliberately

4:11:39 in this.

4:11:41 Hey, Michael.

4:11:42 Um so

4:11:44 um I'm actually surprised at the idea

4:11:46 that the select board would vote on this

4:11:49 uh the night of the night of this

4:11:51 presentation. My recollection from

4:11:53 having been on the select board is very

4:11:55 often you take the these sorts of things

4:11:57 under advisement and you vote in the

4:11:59 following week.

4:12:00 Yeah, I think that's

4:12:01 and that that's certainly

4:12:05 fine as where as as far as we're

4:12:06 concerned. Um I do want to come back to

4:12:09 the question of public uh engagement. Um

4:12:12 there was a survey that uh was basically

4:12:16 advertised on um

4:12:19 on notice boards in uh in College and uh

4:12:22 in the Brooklyn in Brooklyn. I believe

4:12:25 and elsewhere. Uh and uh uh I don't

4:12:28 recall the number of people who

4:12:30 responded to that survey, but uh Chris,

4:12:32 you you may have that in your head. Uh

4:12:34 but

4:12:35 it's it's n 9 uh sorry 783 responses. um

4:12:40 93% of them were from one of Brooklyn's

4:12:44 three zip codes and the other 7% were

4:12:46 from surrounding communities.

4:12:48 Okay. So that gives us a sense of the

4:12:50 level of public engagement. 700 people

4:12:53 is not 66,000 or 62,000 whatever we

4:12:56 have. I'm not quite sure how broad a net

4:12:58 one can cast for these things. But I do

4:13:01 want to emphasize that we uh heard u

4:13:03 from a lot of people who live in

4:13:06 Brooklyn come to Kulage Corner um use

4:13:10 the center street parking lot. Uh so uh

4:13:13 that's important to to recall.

4:13:17 But Mike, if I may, those 700 were not

4:13:20 shown the same four uh visions that the

4:13:24 audience at the College Corner Theater

4:13:26 were shown, right? That wasn't a survey

4:13:28 that tested whether they would prefer

4:13:31 this plan that we're talking about

4:13:33 tonight.

4:13:34 No. Uh you're right. Uh that was uh the

4:13:36 questions were how do you use the lot?

4:13:38 What do you you know what are your ideas

4:13:40 about what are the the good things and

4:13:42 the bad things about the lot. So that

4:13:44 was the beginning of a collection of

4:13:47 information, a collection of

4:13:50 of of data from people um in order to

4:13:53 form uh the we actually looked at five

4:13:57 different concepts uh for the the lot

4:13:59 and this is the one that emerged both

4:14:02 within the committee and then out of the

4:14:05 250 plus people who came to the Kors

4:14:08 corner theater. Um when we started this

4:14:10 process, I personally thought and I

4:14:13 think that I can speak for Chris as well

4:14:16 to say that what we expected was that um

4:14:19 the uh end the end result would be a

4:14:22 proposal to um improve the existing

4:14:26 surface lot and there is something

4:14:28 called a concept called the grove that

4:14:31 uh is in the report that um that Spect

4:14:34 has prepared that uh uh that uh does

4:14:38 exactly that that was not what the

4:14:41 committee wanted. It was not what we

4:14:43 heard uh from the uh from the public in

4:14:46 the in the outreach that we did. So, uh

4:14:49 we didn't start with the idea that oh

4:14:51 well, we're going to come in with a

4:14:53 garage. The garage was sort of born out

4:14:55 of the the process collecting

4:14:56 information and input and the process of

4:14:59 discussion uh in the committee.

4:15:02 Did did the survey ask the 700 people if

4:15:05 they wanted a garage?

4:15:07 No, I I asked that question.

4:15:09 So I I have the data I have the data

4:15:11 right in front of me.

4:15:12 Thanks Chris.

4:15:12 We we asked many questions. Um John is

4:15:16 right that we did not ask about the

4:15:17 options because the options had not been

4:15:19 developed yet. The purpose of the survey

4:15:20 was to try to get a broad sense of the

4:15:22 community's feelings so that we could

4:15:24 then use that information to develop the

4:15:27 different options that we put in front

4:15:29 of the committee and then again in front

4:15:30 of the public at the event. Um but um of

4:15:34 the for the question that is maybe most

4:15:36 relevant here. We asked what would be

4:15:38 your top priority for the lots if they

4:15:41 were changed. What would be your top

4:15:42 priority? Um and 47% of those 783

4:15:46 respondents said green space, open

4:15:48 space, and public plaza. 22% said

4:15:51 housing, 9% said retail, and 7% said

4:15:56 more parking. And so the I think we were

4:15:59 in some ways we were not surprised that

4:16:01 the sidel lot was the preferred option

4:16:03 of both for the committee and the public

4:16:05 at the event because it does have a mix

4:16:06 of those things. It creates an

4:16:08 exceptional new public space. It also

4:16:10 creates more housing. It also creates

4:16:12 more retail and at least in some

4:16:14 scenarios depending on how you allocate

4:16:15 that parking it creates more parking.

4:16:17 So, it seems to achieve all the

4:16:19 different priorities that were stated as

4:16:21 the top priority by those 783 survey

4:16:24 respondents, again, 93% of whom were

4:16:26 proclined residents.

4:16:28 Chris, was there a question about um

4:16:30 keeping the current level of parking?

4:16:34 Um so, uh 5% of respondents said do not

4:16:38 change anything.

4:16:40 So,

4:16:42 flat out don't change anything. Right.

4:16:45 Correct.

4:16:46 Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. All

4:16:48 so, uh, just a quick question then a

4:16:50 comment. Um, and I'll ask Chris. Chris,

4:16:53 are we um given the number of parking

4:16:56 spaces that we have today, the proposal,

4:16:59 are we adding, keeping the same or

4:17:01 decreasing the number of parking spaces?

4:17:03 The the total number of parking spaces

4:17:05 would be increased

4:17:07 by um, you know, roughly a 100 spaces,

4:17:10 maybe a little bit more. But then you

4:17:12 have to account for the fact that this

4:17:13 would require some new housing because

4:17:15 you would need the developer to make

4:17:16 some money to want to build the parking

4:17:18 garage. So the total number of spaces

4:17:20 increases.

4:17:22 The question of how many of those spaces

4:17:23 are available to the public is not

4:17:25 clear, but the committee did make

4:17:27 preserving parking a real priority in

4:17:29 its process. And we heard loud and clear

4:17:31 for merchants that they do not want to

4:17:33 lose parking. And so the sidelot

4:17:35 preserves the parking that's in place

4:17:36 today.

4:17:37 Gotcha. Okay. So, uh, and just here's my

4:17:39 quick thoughts. And again, I really

4:17:41 appreciate John uh his perspective in

4:17:44 that um you know, he John often helps us

4:17:47 be cautious. Um which I I I greatly

4:17:50 appreciate um his questions. Um I will

4:17:53 say on every committee I've served um

4:17:56 there's been criticism. You didn't talk

4:17:58 to enough people. You didn't talk to the

4:18:00 right people. You did the meetings at

4:18:02 night. You did them in the morning. Uh

4:18:04 you asked the question the wrong way.

4:18:06 You didn't smile when you asked. I mean,

4:18:08 whatever it is, right? There's it's just

4:18:10 the way it's the it's the nature of

4:18:11 committee work. Um the re look I don't

4:18:14 know every single person that's on this

4:18:15 committee, but I know we were thoughtful

4:18:17 about appointing it. Um you know they

4:18:19 they bring they many of them bring

4:18:21 unique perspectives. They're all well

4:18:23 thought of. Um you know Chris and his

4:18:26 team are are well respected. um you know

4:18:29 and and not everything comes to a 63,000

4:18:33 resident vote as to what we we do depend

4:18:35 upon our committees and the adviserss

4:18:38 that help our committees to make the

4:18:40 best recommendation based on the

4:18:41 information that they gather. Um is it

4:18:44 perfect? It's not perfect. It's never

4:18:45 perfect. But you know this committee,

4:18:48 right or wrong, they're putting forward

4:18:50 the recommendation that they think makes

4:18:52 sense. I don't know yet if I agree with

4:18:53 it. Um, but I do think it's low risk to

4:18:57 go out and issue an RFI to get more

4:19:00 information about whether this whole

4:19:02 thing, this scheme is even, you know,

4:19:04 uh, feasible uh, from a financial

4:19:07 perspective for our vision. We may we

4:19:09 may get feedback and say, "You're nuts.

4:19:11 We can't do it." And we'd have to go

4:19:12 back and and rethink it. But, um, we

4:19:16 don't need to vote tonight. I don't I I

4:19:18 didn't think we're going to be voting

4:19:19 tonight, but I do want to say that I'm

4:19:21 reasonably comfortable uh in in

4:19:24 supporting the issuance of an RFI based

4:19:27 on the work. You know, this is not a fly

4:19:29 by night committee that just pulled

4:19:30 something out of their hat. Um they

4:19:32 certainly went through a process. It

4:19:33 wasn't perfect, but you know, it's

4:19:35 pretty darn good. Um so, you know, I'm

4:19:38 I'm supportive of issuing the RFI and

4:19:40 we'll see what we get back. Um and I'm

4:19:42 happy to vote tonight. Probably not, but

4:19:45 you know, a later date. Now our our

4:19:47 typical uh pattern is to uh give

4:19:51 ourselves an opportunity to digest what

4:19:53 we've heard great

4:19:54 and come back later on with um you know

4:19:56 our thoughts and and a decision. Um

4:20:01 okay with that uh are we going to get a

4:20:04 I guess a draft or summary of the RFR

4:20:07 before um we meet next?

4:20:10 No, we uh what we're looking for is

4:20:12 permission to um to go ahead and and

4:20:16 write an RFI. Um I think uh I would say

4:20:21 I guess I'm asking you know are we going

4:20:23 to get a sense of you know what is going

4:20:26 to be uh the sort of the thrust of the

4:20:30 RFR

4:20:31 before? Well, I I hope that we've uh I

4:20:33 hope we've given you that tonight in the

4:20:36 sense that um we've uh Shauna described

4:20:40 the key things that will be in the RFI.

4:20:42 We talked about uh including uh some uh

4:20:46 uh some direction in terms of the kind

4:20:48 of housing that we're looking for. Um

4:20:51 and the fact that we're here's the

4:20:53 sidewalk concept, but think more broadly

4:20:56 uh if you'd like or just respond to the

4:20:58 sidelock concept. So, um I hope we've

4:21:01 given you the broad outlines of it, but

4:21:03 uh I I kind of imagine that you would

4:21:05 want to um

4:21:09 Well, I guess

4:21:10 and then come back and have you line

4:21:12 edit it. I think you'd go out of your

4:21:13 minds with that.

4:21:14 Yeah.

4:21:16 Make sure that we we memorialize the

4:21:18 concerns that people have raised

4:21:20 somehow. Um so that uh you have

4:21:23 direction in terms of drafting the RFR

4:21:26 RFI. I think we can certainly give you a

4:21:29 summary back of what we've uh what we've

4:21:30 heard and what we uh will into the RFI.

4:21:34 That's

4:21:35 okay.

4:21:35 Yeah.

4:21:36 Yeah. Michael, you have your hand up

4:21:37 again.

4:21:38 Uh yeah, I ju I just wanted to add to to

4:21:41 your comment uh chair um with regard to

4:21:44 one of the reasons to delay the vote and

4:21:46 that I I'm noticing that there are a

4:21:48 number of members of the public who are

4:21:50 interested in this. Um, and the other

4:21:52 thing that delaying the vote does is it

4:21:54 gives those members of the public an

4:21:57 opportunity to send the select board

4:21:58 feedback um, as well. Um, and so that is

4:22:02 another uh, thing that the select board

4:22:05 can weigh in in terms of this

4:22:08 information which I personally uh,

4:22:10 deeply appreciate.

4:22:12 Yep. Great. John, you have your hand up

4:22:15 still?

4:22:16 I'm afraid I do, but I promise this will

4:22:19 be brief. I I I I I worry that people

4:22:22 might be a little confused about the

4:22:25 results of that survey that has been

4:22:26 mentioned. And I'm looking at a pie

4:22:29 chart from the survey and I'm just going

4:22:32 to quote it back for everybody. Uh 10%

4:22:36 answered uh it says, "Choose which

4:22:38 option best describes your perspective

4:22:40 on the Center Street lots." And 10%

4:22:43 said, "I don't think the lots should

4:22:46 change at all." 10%. Um, the next group,

4:22:50 uh, 8% said, "I think the lots should be

4:22:54 renovated to be nicer parking lots." The

4:22:57 next group, um, 49%

4:23:01 said, "I'm open to the concept of

4:23:04 changing the lots, but not at the

4:23:06 expense of less parking." That's 49%.

4:23:10 And then the final group, uh, 33%

4:23:14 I'm open to the concept of changing the

4:23:17 lots and would be okay with some parking

4:23:21 going away to accommodate other uses.

4:23:24 Other uses, that's all. So, I urge

4:23:28 people to look at the survey um because

4:23:30 and I think we need to hear more about

4:23:32 the results of the survey. Maybe we

4:23:35 could um, you know, review them at our

4:23:36 next meeting. But I also think we should

4:23:38 hear from the minority members of the uh

4:23:41 committee. Um two two of whom filed

4:23:44 minority reports. And I would love to

4:23:47 hear from Brian Kaine. I'm sorry to keep

4:23:48 putting the pressure on Brian Kaine, but

4:23:50 you know I think he made an important

4:23:52 statement and I think we should hear it

4:23:54 um and explore it a little bit.

4:23:59 Okay. Um you want to hear from the

4:24:02 minority report tonight or you mean our

4:24:04 next meeting? Uh it it's up to you. It's

4:24:09 up to the chair and the other members of

4:24:10 the committee. I should of the select

4:24:12 board, I think.

4:24:13 Yeah.

4:24:17 But what do people think? I' I'd like to

4:24:19 end the meeting.

4:24:20 Yeah.

4:24:22 Well, Bernard, I I think in fairness um

4:24:26 to our colleague John and also to I

4:24:29 think that those who wrote the minority

4:24:30 reports um you know, since we've heard

4:24:33 so much from from the committee, it

4:24:36 would be helpful uh personally for me

4:24:39 tonight just like you have it all in my

4:24:41 head be it may explode, but I'd like to

4:24:43 have it all in my head at once. Um can

4:24:45 can can each can each speaker of the

4:24:47 minority report give you know a three to

4:24:49 five minute summary of what what their

4:24:52 report is about? Um you know this can't

4:24:55 go on for another hour. So if we could

4:24:57 get a quick summary from I think there's

4:24:59 two

4:25:00 we have a summary.

4:25:01 Well the verbally

4:25:03 okay good that's fine. Uh wait Sherry uh

4:25:06 Gersinfeld has her hand up and who are

4:25:09 you?

4:25:13 Is that a member of the committee,

4:25:15 Michael?

4:25:16 No.

4:25:17 Okay. Well,

4:25:18 uh, we're not taking public comment, so

4:25:20 No.

4:25:21 Okay.

4:25:22 You do have, um, members who submitted

4:25:25 minority reports here, though.

4:25:26 Yeah.

4:25:26 Okay. I see Marian Freriedman Gersian.

4:25:29 Um, do do you want to speak? Uh, Marian.

4:25:33 Yes. Um, so my concern was one Chris had

4:25:37 raised about accessibility.

4:25:40 um the light stansions whatever this

4:25:44 process if it goes forward will take a

4:25:46 few years and I think we should be

4:25:49 thinking about doing something now I'm

4:25:52 very concerned about accessibility and

4:25:54 the parking garage although I think we

4:25:56 need more parking we did not the I'm not

4:26:00 sure whether the um professionals who

4:26:02 are in 1330 Beacon are part of the

4:26:05 merchants association or not but I think

4:26:09 their customers, their professional

4:26:11 offices, a lot of acupuncture, physical

4:26:14 therapy as well. Dentists um are people

4:26:19 who want be a long walk, not uh from the

4:26:25 parking garage to that build to the

4:26:27 entrance to that building. So, I think

4:26:30 we they need to be put in there. Um I I

4:26:33 agree with the need for more

4:26:36 stakeholders. And finally, my main

4:26:38 concern was um the public private, you

4:26:43 know, how you do it and still make sure

4:26:45 you have affordable housing and that you

4:26:48 don't have a parking. You're not funding

4:26:52 the thing out of very high price parking

4:26:55 rates. This is not This was done by the

4:26:58 economic development committee, but Kage

4:27:01 Corner is also a residential

4:27:03 neighborhood. Um, we depend I live in a

4:27:08 building. There are eight 19 units on my

4:27:10 building. None of us have parking. We

4:27:12 depend on the parking lot for our

4:27:15 visitors for daytime parking and for

4:27:18 overnight parking. And just because it's

4:27:22 snowing, I think we have to have a year

4:27:24 round perspective. There's not going to

4:27:26 be parking on Wellman Street for another

4:27:29 month unless the town decides to haul

4:27:31 the trash away. I think uh it was

4:27:34 plowed. The parking spaces are just

4:27:37 covered with snow. They're not it's not

4:27:39 going to melt soon. Um so I think the re

4:27:42 the impact on residents

4:27:45 um needs to or needs to be considered.

4:27:49 But I mainly uh I'm concerned about

4:27:52 accessibility.

4:27:55 Um I think we could have parking garage,

4:27:57 but we also need some surface space. And

4:28:00 I'm concerned about the winter. I mean,

4:28:01 I really think we have to think of this

4:28:04 as four season. What does an open space

4:28:07 mean on a week like today?

4:28:11 All right. Thank you. And can I um can I

4:28:14 add and maybe ask Chaz,

4:28:18 can we do something about the

4:28:19 inaccessibility of that lot? I mean, I I

4:28:22 I

4:28:24 don't usually think about it, but when

4:28:25 Chris raised this, um I mean, I had

4:28:29 problems when I was uh hobbling around

4:28:32 after my hip replacement. So, I can

4:28:35 imagine what, you know, people in

4:28:36 wheelchairs or um others are facing. And

4:28:40 I think what Marian is saying is that,

4:28:42 you know, that that should be something

4:28:43 we should try to do as soon as possible.

4:28:46 And it's really separate from from

4:28:48 everything else. And then I think the

4:28:50 question is

4:28:52 money. I know

4:28:53 money and and and time and efficiency

4:28:56 and also the sense of if you make more

4:29:00 spaces accessible that require wider

4:29:02 spaces and there's less there's not

4:29:03 enough space on the surface to do all of

4:29:06 what the community is asking. Community

4:29:08 wants more parking in that lot.

4:29:09 Community wants more accessible parking

4:29:11 in that lot. Um those two are

4:29:15 incompatible. Um if you you want wider

4:29:19 spaces. I know you know it's it's

4:29:21 incredibly important if you are

4:29:22 wheelchair bound or if you are using

4:29:24 some sort of mobility assistance um you

4:29:27 can't park in a normal space. Um

4:29:30 especially not those narrow spaces in

4:29:31 the center street lot. Um and so

4:29:34 thinking about how that works in

4:29:36 practice is is really important. But

4:29:39 then the question is, do you want to do

4:29:41 that now and spend money, a lot of money

4:29:44 to do that, or do you want to spend

4:29:48 money thinking more holistically about

4:29:50 that space? And that's really what the

4:29:52 point of the Center Street Lot Committee

4:29:53 has been is do you want to think

4:29:54 holistically about that space? And I

4:29:56 think what Marion is saying, and I think

4:29:58 it's a it's an entirely valid point, is

4:30:00 we've thought holistically about that

4:30:01 space, and what we want is this

4:30:03 immediate investment. That is one point

4:30:05 of view. and then the other point of

4:30:07 views are expressed in the other

4:30:08 minority report and in the committee

4:30:10 report. Um, and that's really what's

4:30:12 before the board is thinking about what

4:30:15 that basic next step is in terms of get

4:30:18 gathering more information. So, could we

4:30:21 do something immediately? Could we

4:30:23 repaint that lot? Yes. Um, it would

4:30:27 require a study

4:30:29 or give access curb cuts and not curb

4:30:32 cuts but give you know, pardon me.

4:30:36 Yeah. Uh

4:30:39 or make it easy for for wheelchairs, for

4:30:42 example, to get up on the sidewalk.

4:30:45 I mean, simple things like that.

4:30:48 Yes, we could we could do that. But it's

4:30:50 also you got to realize a curb cut is

4:30:52 never as simple as people think it is,

4:30:54 right? It is it is a significant

4:30:56 investment in time and money and effort.

4:30:59 And if that's going to go away in the

4:31:01 next 5 years,

4:31:04 is is that is that the highest and best

4:31:06 use for the people who need it? Um

4:31:09 because if for the people who need it,

4:31:10 if it's just a temporary solution,

4:31:13 um and I mean if the answer is yes, then

4:31:16 yes, we can do it. But I think that's

4:31:18 the level of consideration that we need

4:31:20 to have here.

4:31:22 Okay. Mary, did you have your hand up?

4:31:25 wanted to say there are handicap spaces

4:31:27 and they are wide enough. It is the

4:31:29 crosswalk. It is the sidewalk that

4:31:32 disappears that you can't get from one

4:31:34 sidewalk to the other. That's all.

4:31:38 So Bernard, I just wanted to add I mean

4:31:40 it might be worthwhile and Chaz, I

4:31:42 totally I I hate to put money in it and

4:31:44 throw it away. It's in five years, but

4:31:46 if if maybe we could have someone look

4:31:48 at it and say, "What's the lowhanging

4:31:50 fruit here? Are there a few tweaks that

4:31:52 we could make? Does it need to be

4:31:53 beautiful? Does it need to be granite?

4:31:55 But is there something that we can do

4:31:57 to, you know, to to improve line, you

4:32:01 know, uh crosswalks,

4:32:04 ramps? Not a huge investment. I know

4:32:06 it's it's still money that you'd throw

4:32:08 away, but um it might be helpful because

4:32:11 I do think that this process has

4:32:12 highlighted a real serious issue in that

4:32:14 lot. Um and frankly, it I feel dangerous

4:32:18 when I walk through that lot. Um and I

4:32:20 don't have limitations. So maybe we

4:32:22 could take a look at it and say what,

4:32:23 you know, what can we do on uh quick and

4:32:26 dirty, so to speak.

4:32:27 We're happy to do that. And I I think

4:32:29 that's that's a that is a great point.

4:32:30 Um

4:32:32 we don't we don't view those investments

4:32:34 as as, you know, intory or anything.

4:32:37 It's really important for folks to be

4:32:39 able to get around. I mean, you heard

4:32:40 that comment from the public commenter,

4:32:42 you know, someone who we haven't seen

4:32:44 here, you know, show up and say, "Hey,

4:32:46 listen. Can you keep the sidewalks clear

4:32:48 for people who need it?" Um, we take

4:32:50 that seriously and so happy to do that.

4:32:53 Okay, great.

4:32:56 Okay, unless there's any anything else

4:32:59 that

4:33:01 Len Holy, I apologize.

4:33:04 Yeah, Len wrote the uh one of the

4:33:07 minority reports.

4:33:08 He's waving and putting his thumb up at

4:33:09 the same time. That's

4:33:12 okay. And Len, go ahead.

4:33:23 Does he need to be promoted?

4:33:27 Promoting him now.

4:33:33 Hello, my name is Glen Woolly. I'm a

4:33:35 town meeting member of precinct 11 and

4:33:37 member of the transportation board. But

4:33:39 speaking on behalf of myself,

4:33:42 we already have a parking garage with

4:33:44 141 spaces at the Courtyard Marriott

4:33:47 that is frequently over half empty. To

4:33:50 build this garage is an investment. Is

4:33:53 this an investment that we want to make

4:33:54 and continue to pay for in the future

4:33:56 with replacement and refurbishment

4:33:58 costs. Brian Kaine said that this cost

4:34:02 could potentially be up to 60 to 70

4:34:04 million.

4:34:06 I'm in favor of more housing and more

4:34:08 green space, but we should maximize the

4:34:11 use of our available parking first

4:34:13 before building a garage.

4:34:21 Thank you.

4:34:24 Um, is uh

4:34:27 the other minority uh

4:34:31 report person?

4:34:32 No, no, that was Marian.

4:34:34 Oh, no. Um it was Lynn Wley and um

4:34:37 someone else who

4:34:38 Mosha Bedaka and Len Holy jointly

4:34:41 submitted one minority report.

4:34:44 Okay, great.

4:34:46 Okay, uh we're sort of at the end. Why

4:34:48 don't we take public comments because I

4:34:50 see a hand that's been up uh for quite a

4:34:53 while. Um

4:34:56 Sherry Gersonfeld,

4:35:00 Jazz, can you promote her? You got her

4:35:03 and your three minutes will begin when

4:35:04 you're ready.

4:35:06 Yeah, three minutes.

4:35:10 Okay. Thank you. Um I uh I'm actually

4:35:13 the wife of Mosha Beniba who can't be

4:35:17 here tonight because he's in a different

4:35:18 uh time zone that doesn't permit him to

4:35:21 be awake right now. Um, so, um, I'm not

4:35:25 speaking on behalf of him, but I, um, I

4:35:30 just want to like really encourage all

4:35:32 of you, if you haven't already done so,

4:35:34 to read, um, Mosha and Len's uh,

4:35:39 minority opinion. And it's not um just

4:35:43 that they are opposing the construction

4:35:48 of a multi-level garage in this very

4:35:52 unique parcel of land in right in the

4:35:55 heart of Kulage Corner. And I I know one

4:35:59 of you I guess Mr. Warren referred to it

4:36:02 as a beautiful parking garage. I mean I

4:36:05 have to really take issue with that. I I

4:36:09 I think it's a travesty. I I speaking

4:36:12 for myself now. I think it's a travesty

4:36:15 to be putting that in this space, which

4:36:20 could be so much more. Um but just

4:36:22 getting back to the minority opinion, um

4:36:25 Len and Mosha also each offer an

4:36:29 alternative um vision of what could be

4:36:32 done with this space. And I I just

4:36:36 really think it behooves everyone uh and

4:36:39 and their their um their alternative

4:36:42 visions were not considered by uh the

4:36:45 committee or the consultant and were not

4:36:48 presented to the public. And I think

4:36:52 that um you should all consider them be

4:36:57 and and think about what really could be

4:37:00 done with this space which is uh owned

4:37:03 by the town and should be used for the

4:37:06 benefit of all Brooklyn residents, not

4:37:10 just people who drive their cars or who

4:37:13 like to park there um or who want to buy

4:37:16 a condo and live in the heart of uh

4:37:19 Kulage Quaner and um and especially

4:37:23 um for the younger and future

4:37:25 generations who are, you know, going to

4:37:29 be stuck with a parking garage that it's

4:37:32 going to be a really long time before

4:37:34 that'll come down. Um and um and the

4:37:39 younger generations are not even going

4:37:42 to have as much demand for parking um

4:37:45 because they're not getting driver's

4:37:47 licenses at the same rate that all of us

4:37:50 were. They aren't driving cars. They're

4:37:53 taking transit. They're using ride

4:37:55 sharing. There's going to be autonomous

4:37:57 vehicles. And um I think you probably

4:38:02 need to hear from a lot more younger

4:38:04 people about what they'd like to see

4:38:06 have done with this uh this land. I mean

4:38:11 we don't have a town square in Brooklyn.

4:38:14 Um there you know there are ways that

4:38:17 this land could be used even retaining

4:38:22 some

4:38:24 times up.

4:38:26 Okay. Thank you.

4:38:27 Thank you. But anyway, please just read

4:38:29 uh the minority opinions.

4:38:31 Got it.

4:38:34 Okay. Um anything else in the slight

4:38:37 board? If not, uh I will end this

4:38:40 meeting.

4:38:42 Thank you.

4:38:58 Recording stopped.