Brookline Select Board Meeting - January 27, 2026
2026-01-27

[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.