Brookline Select Board Meeting - March 10, 2026
2026-03-10

[1:53] Hey,
[2:02] hey, hey.
[7:55] Hey.
[8:54] I'll be back.
[9:11] Hey,
[9:20] hey,
[9:23] hey.
[16:07] Heat.
[16:11] Hey, Heat.
[16:40] Okay.
[16:49] Oh,
[16:51] let me know and I'll start recording.
[16:53] I'm ready.
[16:54] I didn't get the I didn't get the other
[16:56] half of the
[16:56] recording in progress.
[16:59] We're live in five, four, three, two,
[17:03] one.
[17:04] Good evening. I'm Bernard Green, chair
[17:06] of the Brooklyn Select Board, and this
[17:07] is the regular meeting of the Select
[17:09] Board for March 10, 2026.
[17:14] First item on this agenda is that I move
[17:17] that the select board go into executive
[17:19] session for the purpose of approving
[17:22] executive session minutes and discussing
[17:25] strategy related to a litigation matter.
[17:28] The litigation matter must be discussed
[17:30] in executive session because an open
[17:32] meeting may have a detrimental effect on
[17:35] the litigation position of the town and
[17:37] the chair so declares an executive
[17:40] session therefore to be necessary. So
[17:43] all in favor please indicate by say
[17:45] saying I. Uh John Vancoyak
[17:48] I.
[17:48] Paul Warren
[17:49] I.
[17:49] David Pearlman
[17:50] I.
[17:50] Michael Rubenstein
[17:52] I
[17:52] and chair votes I. The select board will
[17:54] reconvene an open session following
[17:57] following the executive session.
[18:05] Recording stopped.
[20:06] Heat. Heat.
[30:07] Hey,
[30:19] hey, hey.
[36:27] Hey,
[36:32] hey, hey.
[37:40] Yeah.
[38:58] Heat. Heat.
[52:51] Hey.
[57:56] Hey,
[58:06] heat. Hey.
[58:57] Heat. Heat.
[1:10:13] energy.
[1:12:46] Recording in progress.
[1:12:48] We're live in 5 4 3 2 1.
[1:12:53] Good evening. I'm Bernard Green, chair
[1:12:54] of the Brookline Select Board, and this
[1:12:56] is the regular meeting of the Select
[1:12:59] Board for March 10, 2026.
[1:13:06] Let's start off with announcements and
[1:13:08] updates from the select board. I'd like
[1:13:10] to make a couple announcements myself
[1:13:13] and um and then Michael Rubes is going
[1:13:16] to read one of our proclamations
[1:13:19] um and then other people can can make
[1:13:21] comments. So, I'd like to congratulate
[1:13:24] Debbie Hatel Left Heritis. Aren't you
[1:13:27] impressed by the fact I can say her
[1:13:29] name? um for the Black and Latino
[1:13:32] Legislative Caucuses 2026 Blacks
[1:13:36] Excellence on the Hill Award that she
[1:13:38] received. And I might add in n in 2023 I
[1:13:43] received that reward award. Um it was
[1:13:46] during COVID, however, I didn't have I
[1:13:50] didn't have the opportunity to do all of
[1:13:52] the festivities that uh associated with
[1:13:54] it. Uh we're going to prepare a
[1:13:56] proclamation for next meeting as she's
[1:13:59] out of the country right now. Um but
[1:14:02] congratulations to Debbie uh Hats as
[1:14:05] she's called. Um a very important uh
[1:14:10] town resident who is the first black
[1:14:14] female uh member of the police
[1:14:16] department.
[1:14:18] Second, um where is my plaque?
[1:14:25] Brookline Klein got this. Um, on
[1:14:29] Saturday on was it Sunday?
[1:14:32] Was it Saturday or Sunday? Anyway, this
[1:14:35] weekend uh I represented the town of
[1:14:38] Brooklyn at a Boston 250 event at the uh
[1:14:41] Unitarian Universalist uh urban ministry
[1:14:45] in Roxbury. Uh it was a really nice
[1:14:48] program commemorating the uh uh 1776
[1:14:54] um effort by uh Henry Knox who you may
[1:14:58] know of as the person that Fort Knox was
[1:15:01] named after. Uh used to be Secretary of
[1:15:04] Treasury. Uh but in 1776 he took a band
[1:15:08] of folks revolutionaries to Fort
[1:15:11] Ticonderoga to to to uh recover cannons
[1:15:16] and other ordinance that the British had
[1:15:18] abandoned and brought them I think it's
[1:15:21] like 300 miles in the dead of winter um
[1:15:25] over um difficult terrain without modern
[1:15:29] highways of course um and over frozen
[1:15:33] lakes and and rivers.
[1:15:35] to Cambridge and then Roxbury and uh
[1:15:39] Dorchester. And those cannons were used
[1:15:42] to repel the British and and drive them
[1:15:45] out of uh uh Boston. And as a result, we
[1:15:49] have the Massachusetts holiday called
[1:15:51] Evacuation Day, uh repres uh
[1:15:54] commemorating the evacuation of Boston
[1:15:56] by the British. Now, what does Brooklyn
[1:15:58] have to do with that? Well, they came
[1:16:02] whatever route they came to Cambridge
[1:16:04] and to get to Roxbury without running
[1:16:08] into the British, they had to go back to
[1:16:09] Watertown and through Brooklyn into
[1:16:12] Roxbury. So, because we were a stop on
[1:16:16] on this uh trip or or we uh they had to
[1:16:20] go through Brooklyn uh to get to their
[1:16:23] their ult their um final destination. We
[1:16:28] are recognized as having played an
[1:16:31] important part in this very important um
[1:16:36] um event that was uh very significant in
[1:16:41] the American Revolution. Without running
[1:16:44] the British out of Boston, things would
[1:16:46] have been much much different to the
[1:16:49] worst for for the Americans.
[1:16:52] Thirdly, so that that's the plaque that
[1:16:56] we have
[1:16:58] and we'll find some place probably in
[1:16:59] town hall uh to display it and uh I hope
[1:17:03] we can put together some uh other events
[1:17:06] during this year to commemorate the
[1:17:08] 250th
[1:17:10] um anniversary of the beginning of the
[1:17:13] revolution.
[1:17:15] So, finally, um Tommy Vlo, our state
[1:17:20] representative, uh told me about a visit
[1:17:22] by two mayors from Ireland who are in
[1:17:26] Boston for St. Patrick's Day and will be
[1:17:28] meeting with local Irish-American
[1:17:30] residents at Hamilton's on Thursday and
[1:17:33] other non-Irishamean residents like me,
[1:17:36] hopefully. Um uh and we have a
[1:17:40] proclamation which is intended to
[1:17:42] welcome them to Brooklyn and note the
[1:17:46] connections between Brooklyn and Ireland
[1:17:49] which are very significant and very
[1:17:52] educational in that Ireland and this
[1:17:55] city, these two cities in particular are
[1:17:57] dealing with many of the same issues
[1:17:59] that we are here in Brooklyn. uh issues
[1:18:02] of housing, uh environmental issues, um
[1:18:06] what they call diverse, uh they called
[1:18:09] um EDI, uh equity, diversity and
[1:18:12] inclusion um related to the immigrants
[1:18:16] that are coming to Ireland from various
[1:18:19] parts of the world are being
[1:18:21] successfully integrated in many cases
[1:18:23] into their uh society. So this is
[1:18:27] Sorry, we we don't have we don't have
[1:18:28] sound. I'm sorry. Can you give us a
[1:18:29] second?
[1:18:30] Oh my god. Can I repeat that?
[1:18:32] They missed a lot of eloquence there.
[1:18:35] I see Janet Khan is in the audience.
[1:18:38] She'll remember everything I said.
[1:18:49] you looking at?
[1:18:50] You have to go back pretty far.
[1:18:53] Just testing this now.
[1:18:57] Yeah. Just see what we can do here.
[1:19:00] I don't know if it's a problem with Zoom
[1:19:02] or what. Um,
[1:19:07] sorry. Give us one second.
[1:19:12] Can I see the plaque you're giving to
[1:19:15] the uh the visitors?
[1:19:16] No, no, no. This is our plaque given to
[1:19:18] us by Boston.
[1:19:20] Oh, okay.
[1:19:21] Where are we going to put it?
[1:19:22] Uh, well, I I think we should uh set up
[1:19:24] a display case in the first floor for
[1:19:26] historical stuff related to the
[1:19:28] revolution because there are a lot of
[1:19:29] things that
[1:19:32] No, there used to be one um
[1:19:34] just gone too.
[1:19:45] So,
[1:19:50] Okay. Something else.
[1:19:54] Turn this off.
[1:19:58] Okay.
[1:20:00] Turn that back on.
[1:20:03] Does that work?
[1:20:10] So,
[1:20:12] um,
[1:20:14] it's not the same computer. So, Andrea
[1:20:17] was
[1:20:19] fixing this one before. So, the
[1:20:21] microphone for this one is
[1:20:24] same system, whichever that means.
[1:20:29] Should we just try the
[1:20:34] turn it off?
[1:20:48] So, do we want to try this one?
[1:20:51] No. Okay,
[1:20:52] that one seems to be working. That one
[1:20:54] seems
[1:21:00] Let's see.
[1:21:04] Oh, shoot.
[1:21:06] Are we getting an echo?
[1:21:11] Can you guys test your mics? I'm sorry.
[1:21:13] Thank you. Testing.
[1:21:16] Okay. Um,
[1:21:18] captions working.
[1:21:19] Captions are working. People are picking
[1:21:21] it up online. Okay.
[1:21:23] Apologies folks watching at home. Um,
[1:21:26] good news is the the sound in the room
[1:21:28] was captured on big so you don't have to
[1:21:30] repeat everything. Um, it is recorded
[1:21:32] and presented elsewhere. Um, captioned
[1:21:36] appropriately and so forth. So you can
[1:21:37] pick up where you left off. Chair. Um,
[1:21:41] we just need the we need the camera in
[1:21:43] the uh in the room. So, we don't know I
[1:21:45] don't know which one of ours which one
[1:21:47] of those.
[1:21:51] There we go.
[1:21:55] Okay. Sorry for the delay.
[1:21:59] Hold on one second.
[1:22:06] How's that Regina? Can you hear? Is that
[1:22:08] So, is that working? No. Okay. Can I Can
[1:22:11] I see it?
[1:22:21] Yeah. So, I don't know if that's it's
[1:22:23] might be a I don't know what channel
[1:22:25] it's on.
[1:22:37] I love technology.
[1:22:42] Not this technology that my my daughter
[1:22:44] was waving to me on the radio.
[1:22:46] Yeah. Um
[1:22:48] that's good technology.
[1:22:54] Yes. It's not it's not on there.
[1:23:50] Testing, testing, testing.
[1:24:09] Testing
[1:24:11] the
[1:24:20] This is the podium mic. We're testing it
[1:24:23] now.
[1:25:12] Test test test
[1:25:15] Test test test.
[1:25:25] Okay.
[1:25:28] Well, good news, bad news. Uh, it seems
[1:25:38] Wes, can you actually hear me as a
[1:25:41] remote participant?
[1:25:44] Okay, he can hear.
[1:25:46] So, I think we're back.
[1:25:47] Perfect. So, we're just waiting for
[1:26:14] Christmas.
[1:26:29] Yes, sir.
[1:26:59] Okay, Now I'm trying the microphone. I'm
[1:27:01] trying this. Can you hear that through
[1:27:03] there? No.
[1:27:35] Test one, two, three.
[1:27:37] Test test test.
[1:27:50] One drive where this is stored.
[1:27:52] Okay. Test test test.
[1:27:57] speaking from the microphone here. Test.
[1:28:03] Yeah, this is it. Test test test.
[1:28:07] Go. Sorry. Go back.
[1:28:13] Okay. So, go
[1:28:20] see that. You can share it with
[1:28:22] that will email it to her and you can
[1:28:24] change your permissions here.
[1:28:28] Okay.
[1:28:33] Oops.
[1:28:37] And then if you go to this icon,
[1:28:39] no luck.
[1:28:40] And then it can show you what she can
[1:28:42] do.
[1:28:47] Uh yeah, she'll get email. Yeah. Okay.
[1:28:53] Thank you.
[1:28:58] Apologies for the technical delay. Um,
[1:29:01] we are back and you can keep going.
[1:29:02] Sorry.
[1:29:03] How far back do we have to go?
[1:29:04] You don't have to go back. The big was
[1:29:06] picking it up on the broadcast. So,
[1:29:07] that's you're it's it's it's in the
[1:29:10] record.
[1:29:11] Okay.
[1:29:17] So, where we are now, um, let me find
[1:29:20] it.
[1:29:38] Okay, I was mentioning the visit to
[1:29:41] Brooklyn of the two Irish mayors um who
[1:29:46] will be in Boston for the St. Patrick's
[1:29:49] Day uh festivities. uh on the 17th. Um
[1:29:54] and on Thursday, we'll be uh here in
[1:29:57] Brooklyn to meet with local
[1:30:00] Irish-American dignitaries as well as
[1:30:02] other residents at Hamilton's Bar uh on
[1:30:06] Beacon Street.
[1:30:10] So, in in in order to welcome them to
[1:30:13] Brooklyn, uh we prepared a proclamation
[1:30:17] and I'd like to read the proclamation.
[1:30:19] It says proclamation of the Brooklyn
[1:30:21] Select Board. The Brooklyn Select Board
[1:30:24] welcomes Mayor Seamus Ryan of Waterford,
[1:30:27] Ireland, and Mayor Mike Cubert of the of
[1:30:30] Goway, Ireland. Oh, thank you. Oops.
[1:30:34] Okay. For St. Patrick's Day celebrations
[1:30:38] and events
[1:30:41] and I have a Irish welcome statement and
[1:30:47] I don't have the pronunciation right in
[1:30:50] front of me so I'm going to reme try to
[1:30:52] remember
[1:30:54] yes right mele f which means a 100,000
[1:31:01] welcomes so whereas the month of March
[1:31:04] is designated as Irish American American
[1:31:06] Heritage Month, a time to honor the
[1:31:08] indelible contributions, vibrant
[1:31:11] culture, and enduring spirit of Irish
[1:31:13] immigrants and their descendants who
[1:31:15] have shaped the fabric of American life.
[1:31:19] And whereas the greater Boston area
[1:31:21] proudly holds one of the nation's
[1:31:23] deepest concentrations of Irish
[1:31:25] heritage, a legacy rooted in the 19th
[1:31:28] century when many sought refuge in
[1:31:30] Brooklyn following the great Irish
[1:31:32] famine. And whereas though these early
[1:31:36] residents faced significant adversity
[1:31:38] and hardships, they met every challenge
[1:31:41] with resilience and faith, eventually
[1:31:44] rising to positions of political and
[1:31:46] economic leadership and integrating
[1:31:48] their traditions into the very soul of
[1:31:50] our town. And whereas the legacy is
[1:31:53] anchored by enduring institutions such
[1:31:55] as St. Mary of the Assumption Catholic
[1:31:57] Church, which has served as a spiritual
[1:32:00] and communal pillar for generations of
[1:32:03] Brooklyn families. And whereas Brooklyn
[1:32:05] remains a global center for Irish
[1:32:08] scholarship through Boston College's
[1:32:10] Center for Irish programs and Boston
[1:32:13] University's Institute for the Study of
[1:32:15] Irish Culture, ensuring that the history
[1:32:17] and contemporary issues of Ireland
[1:32:19] continue to be studied and celebrated.
[1:32:22] And whereas the town of Brooklyn was the
[1:32:24] childhood home of John Fitzgerald
[1:32:27] Kennedy, the 35th president of the
[1:32:29] United States, whose life and leadership
[1:32:33] uh started at 83 Beal Street and remains
[1:32:37] a powerful symbol of Irish-American, the
[1:32:40] Irish-American journey from immigrant
[1:32:42] roots to the highest office of the land.
[1:32:44] Whereas the spirit of Irish hospitality
[1:32:47] continues to thrive in our local
[1:32:49] gathering places including grano meles
[1:32:52] and Hamiltons which serve as modern-day
[1:32:55] her hearths where stories are shared and
[1:32:57] community bonds are strengthened. And
[1:33:00] whereas on March 12, we are privileged
[1:33:02] to extend a warm Brookline welcome to
[1:33:04] Mayor Seamus Ryan of Waterford and Mayor
[1:33:07] Mike Cubard of Goway, whose visit
[1:33:10] reinforces the living bridge between our
[1:33:13] town and
[1:33:16] the ancestral homelands of many of our
[1:33:19] residents. Now therefore, in
[1:33:21] consideration of the foregoing on this
[1:33:23] 10th day of March, 2026, the Brookline
[1:33:26] Select Board on behalf of the residents
[1:33:28] of Brooklyn hereby welcomes Mayor Seamus
[1:33:32] Ryan of Waterford and Mike Cupard of
[1:33:35] Goway. And if we may use the Irish Gaic
[1:33:39] phrase, we say kad mele f a 100,000
[1:33:45] welcomes to our friends from Gowway and
[1:33:47] Water for uh to be signed by the
[1:33:49] Brookline Select Board. So
[1:33:53] any other comments? I uh Michael.
[1:33:56] Sure.
[1:33:57] Um so uh I also have a proclamation to
[1:34:01] read uh on behalf of the Brooklyn Select
[1:34:04] Board. Uh, the Brooklyn Select Board
[1:34:07] recognizes and congratulates the 2026
[1:34:11] Brooklyn Women of the Year, Gabrielle
[1:34:15] Abby Dean, Alicia Su, and Linda Olsen
[1:34:20] Pelky.
[1:34:22] Whereas the United Nations officially
[1:34:24] recognized March 8th as International
[1:34:26] Women's Day in 1975
[1:34:29] and since 1977
[1:34:32] has invited member states to proclaim
[1:34:34] March 8th as the United Nations Day for
[1:34:37] Women's Rights and World Peace, honoring
[1:34:40] the historic and ongoing struggles of
[1:34:42] women around the world for equality,
[1:34:45] justice, and opportunity. And whereas
[1:34:48] the Brooklyn Commission for Women was
[1:34:50] established by Brooklyn Town Meeting
[1:34:52] with a mission to promote equity and
[1:34:55] justice for all women and girls,
[1:34:57] including all who identify as female.
[1:35:01] And whereas for 21 years, the Brooklyn
[1:35:04] Commission for Women has recognized
[1:35:06] outstanding women in our community
[1:35:08] through its annual Brooklyn Women of the
[1:35:11] Year Award, honoring women who live and
[1:35:14] work in Brooklyn and who have dedicated
[1:35:16] their time, resources, and efforts to
[1:35:19] bringing significant and positive impact
[1:35:21] to our community. And whereas the
[1:35:24] Brooklyn Commission for Women has
[1:35:26] selected longtime Brooklyn residents
[1:35:28] Abby Dean, Alicia Su, and Linda Olsen
[1:35:32] Pelky as the 2026 Brooklyn Women of the
[1:35:36] Year. And whereas Abby Dean is a deeply
[1:35:40] respected public health leader and
[1:35:42] licensed clinical social worker who has
[1:35:45] devoted more than 30 years to Brooklyn
[1:35:47] in her current role as the behavioral
[1:35:50] health intervention and prevention
[1:35:52] program coordinator for Brooklyn Public
[1:35:54] Health and as a counselor at Brooklyn
[1:35:57] High School. She provides critical
[1:35:59] mental health support to students,
[1:36:02] staff, families while mentoring the next
[1:36:05] generation of professionals. And whereas
[1:36:08] through her statewide leadership on the
[1:36:10] opioid recovery and remediation fund
[1:36:12] board and her direction of programs
[1:36:15] supporting mothers and children impacted
[1:36:18] by addiction, she exemplifies
[1:36:21] compassionate leadership and an
[1:36:23] unwavering dedication to prevention,
[1:36:26] equity, and the well-being of the entire
[1:36:28] community. And whereas Alicia Su is a
[1:36:32] retired teacher of the public schools of
[1:36:34] Brooklyn who spent three decades
[1:36:37] teaching primarily at the Amos A.
[1:36:39] Lawrence School and was awarded the
[1:36:42] Earnest R Cav Cavverly Award for
[1:36:45] Excellence in Teaching from the Brooklyn
[1:36:48] Education Foundation in 2008. And
[1:36:51] whereas Alicia Shu is a co-founder and
[1:36:54] steering committee member of the
[1:36:56] Brooklyn Asian-American Family Network
[1:36:58] and is a member of the planning
[1:37:00] committee with the Office of Diversity,
[1:37:02] Equity, Inclusion, and Community
[1:37:04] Relations for the Town of Brooklyn,
[1:37:07] where she co-leads the annual AAPI
[1:37:10] Heritage Month Festival Celebration in
[1:37:13] May. And whereas Alicia Shu is a has
[1:37:17] been a tireless advocate for the
[1:37:19] Asian-American and Pacific Islander
[1:37:21] community in Brooklyn and is widely
[1:37:24] recognized as a fierce advocate and
[1:37:26] loving supporter of educators.
[1:37:29] And whereas Linda Olsen Pelky is an
[1:37:31] urban planner, civic leader, and
[1:37:33] longtime volunteer whose work has had a
[1:37:36] lasting impact on the town of Brookline
[1:37:39] over more than two decades of public
[1:37:41] service focused on planning
[1:37:43] sustainability, open space, and
[1:37:46] neighborhood engagement. And whereas
[1:37:48] Linda Olsen Pelky has served as a town
[1:37:50] meeting member since 2009,
[1:37:53] currently serves on the advisory
[1:37:55] committee and has served on several
[1:37:57] other town committees. And whereas Linda
[1:37:59] Olsen Pelky is the founder and president
[1:38:02] of the Friends of the Mino Rose Garden,
[1:38:05] serves on the board of the Brooklyn
[1:38:07] Greenspace Alliance, previously served
[1:38:09] on the board of the Brooklyn Community
[1:38:11] Foundation, and is the author of
[1:38:14] Exploring the Paths of Brooklyn, a guide
[1:38:16] to the town's historic pedestrian paths.
[1:38:19] And whereas through her leadership,
[1:38:21] scholarship, and tireless volunteer
[1:38:24] service, Linda Olsen Pelky has made a
[1:38:26] significant and enduring contribution to
[1:38:29] Brooklyn civic life. Now, therefore, in
[1:38:33] consideration of the foregoing, on this
[1:38:36] 10th day of March, 2026, the Brooklyn
[1:38:39] Select Board on behalf of the town of
[1:38:41] Brooklyn hereby recognizes,
[1:38:43] congratulates, and expresses its deepest
[1:38:46] appreciation to Gabrielle Abby Dean,
[1:38:50] Alicia Su, and Linda Olsen Pelky, the
[1:38:54] 2026 Brooklyn Women of the Year, for
[1:38:57] their outstanding and sustained
[1:38:59] contributions to the town of Brooklyn
[1:39:01] and its residents and extends its
[1:39:03] warmest congratulations on the occasion
[1:39:06] of their recognition at the Brooklyn
[1:39:08] Women of the Year celebration on March
[1:39:11] 11th, 2026
[1:39:14] signed by the Brooklyn Select Board.
[1:39:17] Thank you, Michael. Any other
[1:39:20] announcements or updates
[1:39:25] members that want to go first?
[1:39:27] Not me.
[1:39:28] Oh,
[1:39:29] okay. I have two quick announcements.
[1:39:32] Um, first, uh, the budget 101 series
[1:39:35] continues next week at the Florida Ruff
[1:39:38] and Ridley School at 6:30 p.m. Uh, we
[1:39:41] invite all members of the community to
[1:39:42] come be a part of that. This will be our
[1:39:44] sixth presentation. We've previously had
[1:39:46] presentations um at U the BHA
[1:39:50] residences, at the Arthur O'Shea
[1:39:52] residences at 61 Pine Street, um, at the
[1:39:55] Baker School, uh, at Potterham Library,
[1:39:57] uh, and online. Um, and it's been a
[1:40:01] wonderful experience so far and we've
[1:40:03] had really great questions uh and
[1:40:05] incisive uh conversations with the
[1:40:07] community. So again, next week, next
[1:40:09] Wednesday, 6:30 p.m. at Florida Ruff and
[1:40:12] Ridley School, the auditorium. Uh, come
[1:40:14] one, come all. We look forward to seeing
[1:40:16] you there. And on a particularly happy
[1:40:18] note, I'm very excited to announce that
[1:40:20] the second annual election sticker
[1:40:23] contest has opened. The finalists are
[1:40:26] online. You can vote for one from each
[1:40:29] of the three age groups. Uh they are all
[1:40:32] excellent and I wish they could all win.
[1:40:35] Um but we will select from those three
[1:40:37] finalists. Uh and they each of them will
[1:40:40] have their sticker printed and then you
[1:40:41] can pick up your Brookline I voted
[1:40:44] sticker when you go to vote. Um you can
[1:40:46] pick up more than one. Uh you can't vote
[1:40:48] more than once. That's illegal. Um but
[1:40:51] you can get more than one sticker if you
[1:40:53] really really want. Um, so please do
[1:40:56] come out and vote. Please do vote for
[1:40:58] the stickers, then come out and vote in
[1:41:00] the election and get a sticker for
[1:41:02] voting in the election. That's it.
[1:41:04] Thank you.
[1:41:06] Any other
[1:41:09] comments or updates? Okay, let's move on
[1:41:12] to public comment. Melanie, please
[1:41:15] introduce the rules.
[1:41:21] Thank you for joining us for public
[1:41:22] comment. This is an opportunity for us
[1:41:24] to hear your perspective on the issues
[1:41:26] in Brookline that matter to you. Each
[1:41:28] person speaking tonight is limited to
[1:41:30] three minutes. You don't need to use the
[1:41:32] entire time, but you may if you like.
[1:41:34] Once 15 minutes has been met, there is
[1:41:36] an opportunity at the conclusion of the
[1:41:38] select board's business for additional
[1:41:40] comments. Members of the public
[1:41:42] sometimes raise questions during public
[1:41:44] comment. We may be able to provide a
[1:41:46] quick answer to a question, but are more
[1:41:47] likely to work with staff to get a more
[1:41:49] thorough answer and respond over email.
[1:41:52] The on-screen timer will flash orange
[1:41:54] when you have one minute remaining and
[1:41:55] red when your time is nearly up. Please
[1:41:58] conclude your remarks at that time. If
[1:42:00] you have more to say, you're welcome to
[1:42:01] send an email to board members
[1:42:03] expressing your thoughts in greater
[1:42:04] detail. Any person wishing to speak must
[1:42:07] begin their comment by identifying
[1:42:08] themselves with their full name, either
[1:42:10] their Brookline precinct number or
[1:42:12] street address, and the specific topic
[1:42:14] on which they wish to speak. The board
[1:42:16] encourages but does not require that
[1:42:18] remote users turn their video on when
[1:42:20] commenting.
[1:42:22] We did not have anybody sign up for
[1:42:24] public comment prior. Is there anybody
[1:42:26] in the room that would like to make a
[1:42:28] public comment?
[1:42:31] Hey, Janet.
[1:42:35] Good evening. I'm Janice Khan, town
[1:42:38] meeting member from precinct 15, a
[1:42:40] member of the town's advisory committee.
[1:42:43] I'm also on the comprehensive plan
[1:42:45] steering committee and most relevant to
[1:42:47] the discussion of the special town
[1:42:49] meeting later this evening, a community
[1:42:51] member of the Chestnut Hill commercial
[1:42:54] area study group. So, in other words, I
[1:42:57] take both a neighborhood and a broad
[1:42:59] townwide perspective into consideration
[1:43:02] when I look at issues. The Chestnut Hill
[1:43:05] commercial area study was intended to
[1:43:07] look carefully at the commercial area
[1:43:09] along Route 9 West in Chestnut Hill and
[1:43:12] to create an overlay zoning to
[1:43:15] incentivize commercial and mixeduse
[1:43:17] development in the entire commercial
[1:43:20] area. And I want to spe to emphasize
[1:43:22] entire commercial area. To date, that
[1:43:25] hasn't happened. Instead, what has
[1:43:26] happened is the creation of zoning to
[1:43:29] incentivize development for one
[1:43:31] developer in one part of the commercial
[1:43:33] area. The community advisory group never
[1:43:35] heard from any other developer,
[1:43:37] including the only other developer in
[1:43:39] the Chestnut Hill commercial 4 um zero
[1:43:43] district who owns enough property to
[1:43:45] create significant development along the
[1:43:47] corridor. The fact is that the community
[1:43:50] advisory group never heard from any
[1:43:52] other property owners and potential
[1:43:54] developers in the commercial areas other
[1:43:56] three districts. The Chestnut Hill
[1:43:58] commercial 3.0, the neighborhood mixed
[1:44:01] use on the both on the south side of
[1:44:03] Route 9 and the transit oriented
[1:44:05] mixeduse on the north side of Route 9
[1:44:07] which is in Brooklyn. It abutstar market
[1:44:11] and um which is in Newton. So it's right
[1:44:13] on the border.
[1:44:15] So the reason I wanted to speak tonight
[1:44:17] is that um I want to just urge you to
[1:44:23] sorry I'm
[1:44:23] to defer this
[1:44:26] special town meeting
[1:44:29] to the fall. So what looks neat on paper
[1:44:34] may in fact have realworld
[1:44:36] unintended consequences of creating
[1:44:39] disincentives for development in a part
[1:44:42] of town that could measurably benefit
[1:44:45] Brooklyn's commercial tax base.
[1:44:48] So I urge you to defer this special town
[1:44:50] meeting to a time in the fall. Let's get
[1:44:52] the Chestnut Hill commercial area study
[1:44:55] community advisory group to finish the
[1:44:57] work it was set up to do. and let's get
[1:45:00] this zoning right for Brooklyn. Thank
[1:45:02] you.
[1:45:07] Okay, any other comments from the
[1:45:10] audience?
[1:45:13] Okay, seeing none, we'll close public
[1:45:14] comment uh and move on to our
[1:45:17] miscellaneous calendar. Uh first item is
[1:45:20] question of approving the meeting
[1:45:21] minutes from February 24, 202.6.
[1:45:25] Any edits, corrections from the select
[1:45:28] board? No. I move approval of the
[1:45:31] meeting minutes from February 24, 2026.
[1:45:34] All in favor, please indicate by saying
[1:45:36] I. John Vancoyak,
[1:45:37] I.
[1:45:38] Paul Warren,
[1:45:38] I.
[1:45:39] David Pearlman,
[1:45:40] I.
[1:45:40] Michael Rubenstein,
[1:45:41] I.
[1:45:42] And chair votes I.
[1:45:44] Next,
[1:45:46] I would like to take items 6B to 6P in
[1:45:51] omnibus fashion. uh unless someone would
[1:45:54] like to pull out anything for uh further
[1:45:57] discussion and I'd like to pull out 6P
[1:46:01] um relative to the Brookline uh um
[1:46:07] community development corporation
[1:46:09] um matter because I see that David
[1:46:12] Cavell who's the interim executive
[1:46:15] director is in the audience. If any
[1:46:17] select board member would like to ask
[1:46:19] him a question before we vote.
[1:46:22] Yes.
[1:46:22] Well, I'm confused because 6P on what we
[1:46:26] have in front of us is the uh
[1:46:28] 6 I.
[1:46:29] Oh, okay. 6 I. Okay. Is that If I
[1:46:32] miserved you, I apologize.
[1:46:33] Question of voting to affirm the housing
[1:46:35] advisory board's February 4th vote to
[1:46:37] recommend with conditions and that's the
[1:46:40] key here. housing trust funding in the
[1:46:42] amount of $822,764
[1:46:47] for the Brooklyn Community Development
[1:46:48] Corporation's renovation project at 154
[1:46:52] through 156 Boilson Street. The select
[1:46:55] board vote would carry the same
[1:46:57] conditions as the HAB vote uh which are
[1:47:00] subject to a satisfactory written report
[1:47:03] on the solar installation from the
[1:47:05] structural engineer to subject to
[1:47:08] inquiring into having insurance for the
[1:47:12] roof as a result of the solar uh panel
[1:47:15] installation.
[1:47:17] Three, subject to delegated approval by
[1:47:20] Brookline staff. I think that's Steve
[1:47:23] Hiken, Roger Blood, Pam
[1:47:30] Goodman.
[1:47:32] Oh, I'm sorry, Pam Goodman.
[1:47:34] and excuse me for deferral of overhead
[1:47:38] fee until completion of the project. So
[1:47:40] those are the condition conditions that
[1:47:42] the housing advisory board imposed on
[1:47:45] this um uh this recommendation for uh
[1:47:49] paying the amount to this amount to the
[1:47:52] housing the community development
[1:47:55] corporation to do some really critically
[1:47:57] important and needed renovations to
[1:48:00] their properties.
[1:48:01] Excuse me. Would the chair please come
[1:48:03] closer to the microphone? It's really
[1:48:05] hard to hear you.
[1:48:07] Sorry.
[1:48:12] So, those were conditions imposed by the
[1:48:14] housing advisory board on um the funding
[1:48:17] of this critically important renovation
[1:48:20] of uh the u uh community development
[1:48:24] corporation's housings on on uh Boston
[1:48:26] Street. Um, and I just wanted to give
[1:48:29] the select board an opportunity to ask
[1:48:32] any questions or raise any issues before
[1:48:35] we vote.
[1:48:37] Paul,
[1:48:37] I had one one question. David, thank
[1:48:40] you.
[1:48:47] First, congratulations on your new role.
[1:48:49] Thank you very much.
[1:48:50] Welcome back to town.
[1:48:51] It's good Well, I would say it's good to
[1:48:53] be here. It's good to be here when it's
[1:48:54] not snowing.
[1:48:56] Uh just a quick question. Um so the
[1:48:58] money is coming out of the housing
[1:49:00] trust.
[1:49:01] Um have you also applied for any CPA
[1:49:04] funds?
[1:49:05] Yes. And we've received some for this
[1:49:07] project.
[1:49:08] Can you tell us about that? How much?
[1:49:10] Sure. So um I can get you the exact uh
[1:49:13] exact figure. It's in the I believe it's
[1:49:17] uh
[1:49:18] 1.1 million.
[1:49:20] Okay.
[1:49:20] Roughly.
[1:49:21] Okay. And is this between the 1.1 and
[1:49:23] this money is this covering you for the
[1:49:25] the project? Is it
[1:49:27] correctly funding or other sources of
[1:49:29] funds?
[1:49:30] Yeah, that's accurate. And I'm happy to
[1:49:31] submit to the select board the um the
[1:49:34] range of sources and uses for this
[1:49:36] project uh which we discussed at the uh
[1:49:38] at the HAB meeting. Um but that's
[1:49:40] accurate. We have a range of sources for
[1:49:42] the project. There's uh American Rescue
[1:49:44] Plant funds. Um there's Community
[1:49:47] Preservation Act funds. Uh and then this
[1:49:49] is the uh supplemental request after the
[1:49:52] discovery uh of the damage that led to
[1:49:54] this request.
[1:49:55] Okay, great. Thank you.
[1:49:56] Could you tell us a little bit about
[1:49:57] what that damage was?
[1:49:59] Sure. Um thank you, Mr. Chair. Um the
[1:50:02] this project we discovered um
[1:50:04] significant termite damage to the
[1:50:06] property after the contractors had
[1:50:08] removed the building's envelope um to
[1:50:11] investigate and insulate the building um
[1:50:14] to make it more climate friendly uh
[1:50:16] which is part of the the point of the
[1:50:18] project. Uh and so after reviewing that
[1:50:21] uh that damage and proposing various
[1:50:23] methods uh that we reviewed with with uh
[1:50:26] our contractors and with the housing
[1:50:27] advisory board uh in our meeting with
[1:50:29] them. Um the this we came up with this
[1:50:32] proposal in addition to other work that
[1:50:35] needed to be done as the project has
[1:50:37] advanced to complete the the
[1:50:40] preservation of the structure and the um
[1:50:43] and the investment of of funds. so that
[1:50:46] this will be a an a property that people
[1:50:48] can enjoy living in for for hopefully
[1:50:50] many decades to come.
[1:50:52] Great. Thank you, David.
[1:50:56] Okay. So, I'm sorry, you have another
[1:50:58] Oh, okay. I sorry. I just want to ask a
[1:51:01] procedural question. You know, I I'll
[1:51:04] admit I'm a little surprised that this
[1:51:05] is on our miscellaneous agenda. Um, this
[1:51:08] is this is a um I'll have to say
[1:51:10] extraordinary amount of money when when
[1:51:12] you consider that we're combining the
[1:51:15] community preservation act funds to the
[1:51:17] tune of more than a million dollars with
[1:51:19] $822,764
[1:51:22] from the affordable housing trust. And
[1:51:25] you know, I fully trust um the community
[1:51:29] preservation act committee to determine
[1:51:31] the use of those funds and the housing
[1:51:34] advisory board to determine the use of
[1:51:36] housing advisory board funds. But when
[1:51:39] the two come together, you know, on one
[1:51:41] project, um uh I feel as though the
[1:51:44] select board should have this as a item
[1:51:47] not on the miscellaneous agenda but on
[1:51:49] our regular agenda. I apologize for not
[1:51:51] saying this until just now. Um so that
[1:51:55] we can sort of take a
[1:51:57] you know big picture look at if we're
[1:52:00] going to be you know net combining this
[1:52:03] many funds from the community
[1:52:04] preservation act with this many funds
[1:52:07] from the affordable housing trust u for
[1:52:10] one building um you know on boilson
[1:52:12] street it's an important building um it
[1:52:15] you know it needs to be the problems
[1:52:17] with the building need to be addressed
[1:52:19] for the sake of the tenants um of that
[1:52:22] property
[1:52:23] But it we're in the in the range now of
[1:52:26] having to question how much do we spend
[1:52:29] um per unit to um not add to affordable
[1:52:34] housing in Brooklyn but simply maintain
[1:52:36] existing affordable housing in Brooklyn.
[1:52:39] I don't know what my personal limit is
[1:52:42] but because we've never had that
[1:52:43] discussion. Um and I think it's a
[1:52:46] discussion we're going to have to have
[1:52:48] because we're going to be facing
[1:52:49] situations like this more than once in
[1:52:52] the future. And we can't end up making a
[1:52:54] decision one way on, you know, on one uh
[1:52:58] request um because we might think that's
[1:53:00] an extraordinary amount of money to
[1:53:02] spend per unit and then come around and,
[1:53:05] you know, make a different decision um
[1:53:07] in the opposite direction uh e even
[1:53:11] though there might not be that that much
[1:53:14] difference when you compare the two
[1:53:16] decisions a as to how much being is
[1:53:18] being spent per unit because I I don't
[1:53:21] know what our limit is on how much we
[1:53:23] spend per unit, but I do know that the
[1:53:26] more we spend per unit, the fewer the
[1:53:29] number of units we are able to provide
[1:53:32] as subsidized housing. So, it's an
[1:53:34] important question and I'm a little
[1:53:36] uncomfortable having to vote on this as
[1:53:37] a miscellaneous item tonight.
[1:53:40] Uh, Michael,
[1:53:41] um,
[1:53:43] hello David.
[1:53:44] Hello.
[1:53:44] Can you tell us how many units, dwelling
[1:53:48] units are in this building that are
[1:53:50] being saved?
[1:53:52] Uh, absolutely. So, this is a six-unit
[1:53:55] property at 154 uh 156 Boilston. It's
[1:53:59] roughly 23 people. Um, so there's a
[1:54:01] number of children, there's a number of
[1:54:03] seniors uh who are in this property.
[1:54:05] Okay. And do you have any sense of what
[1:54:08] the typical replacement cost is for a
[1:54:11] unit such as these in Brooklyn?
[1:54:14] It's fairly high as you as I think as I
[1:54:17] think you're aware. Um the this and
[1:54:20] actually this was something that was
[1:54:21] reviewed um in our submission to the HAB
[1:54:24] and was reviewed extensively um when we
[1:54:26] presented uh at their February meeting
[1:54:29] um which is where this this approval was
[1:54:31] made. Um the cost of for example doing a
[1:54:35] tear down and rebuild would have been I
[1:54:38] don't recall the exact calculation
[1:54:39] significantly higher than the cost uh of
[1:54:42] of this uh renovation project has been.
[1:54:45] Um, and uh I don't I can get you that
[1:54:48] that figure. I can review the uh the
[1:54:50] submission.
[1:54:51] Okay.
[1:54:53] Okay. Um I think we can can vote on this
[1:54:58] tonight. I mean, it's you we're just
[1:55:00] approving a um an amount that the HAB is
[1:55:04] uh providing to this um to this uh
[1:55:07] project.
[1:55:08] Yeah.
[1:55:08] And you know, I agree. Maybe it should
[1:55:11] have been on the regular calendar, but
[1:55:13] that's why I pulled it out so that we
[1:55:15] could have, you know, whatever
[1:55:16] discussion um you
[1:55:18] Yeah. And I app I appreciate that. Um um
[1:55:20] I I I don't have the answer as to
[1:55:23] whether the CPA committee took under
[1:55:26] consideration that HAB would be putting
[1:55:29] in $800,000. I don't know if HAB took
[1:55:32] under consideration that's a committee
[1:55:34] is putting in you know one point but
[1:55:36] that but but you know if any one um
[1:55:40] review is going to look at the question
[1:55:42] of well then if we're combining those
[1:55:44] two funding sources in in one project
[1:55:48] for six units of housing what does that
[1:55:51] work out to per unit of housing and is
[1:55:53] that what we customarily are okay with
[1:55:55] spending per unit of housing you know
[1:55:58] with our our affordable housing funding
[1:56:01] is kind of hard to come by
[1:56:03] and sometimes it can yield great results
[1:56:05] in terms of multiples
[1:56:08] on the investment and I'm not sure we're
[1:56:11] getting one of those great results um in
[1:56:13] this case in terms of the multiple um on
[1:56:15] the investment.
[1:56:16] Okay, Michael.
[1:56:17] Um I did you have an answer to his his
[1:56:21] question?
[1:56:21] Well, I I do I also um am aware that uh
[1:56:24] that Roger Blood is is is uh raising his
[1:56:27] hand and trying to participate online. I
[1:56:28] think he's he's trying to to jump in um
[1:56:31] to to say basically what what I what I
[1:56:34] was going to get out as well. So I want
[1:56:36] to give him an opportunity to
[1:56:37] participate if that's if that's allowed.
[1:56:39] I but I do want to um to respond
[1:56:41] directly to the question. Good. This was
[1:56:43] a um I think you've raised a a very
[1:56:46] important point. Um, and this was uh the
[1:56:49] subject of a number of meetings going
[1:56:51] back to January um with both the CPAC um
[1:56:56] and the HAB um and the result of many um
[1:56:59] negotiations between the two of them to
[1:57:00] to decide and determine how to
[1:57:02] appropriately fund this request. So the
[1:57:06] um the fund it's a very actually
[1:57:07] interesting structure of the funding
[1:57:09] agreement which Roger can speak more to
[1:57:11] but your concerns are are certainly
[1:57:13] noted um and were uh I think addressed
[1:57:17] uh fairly comprehensively by the HAB and
[1:57:19] the CPAC in this um in this process over
[1:57:22] the past couple months.
[1:57:24] Yeah, thanks a
[1:57:26] can we u um
[1:57:30] Pardon me.
[1:57:31] Yeah, could we listen to um Roger Blood?
[1:57:35] Do you um
[1:57:41] Roger, are you unmuted?
[1:57:43] Um I I think I'm on. Can you hear me?
[1:57:46] Yep. Yep.
[1:57:47] Yeah. Um John Slickman Venoyak's
[1:57:50] question is a is a good one. Um and um
[1:57:53] normally the uh the trust funds as uh as
[1:57:56] you know are used um uh and produce u uh
[1:57:59] per per unit cost for u a unit of
[1:58:03] affordable housing in the 100 plus
[1:58:06] thousand range. And um that's because
[1:58:08] there's so many leverage state and
[1:58:10] federal funds that come in on new
[1:58:12] project developments. Um this is a a
[1:58:15] renovation project. The total cost is
[1:58:17] somewhere north of $2 million.
[1:58:20] uh I I think uh perhaps as much as 2.4
[1:58:23] million. There's several other sources
[1:58:25] of funding of relatively small amounts.
[1:58:28] And so that would be around $400,000
[1:58:31] uh a unit to create uh six units of um
[1:58:35] spacious family housing, but uh in a
[1:58:38] 100-y old building. Um the the CPA
[1:58:41] committee um took this on and made a 1.2
[1:58:44] million uh commitment. Um and then the
[1:58:49] um there was a need for more funds for
[1:58:51] things that were only discovered after
[1:58:53] the building was opened up and a lot
[1:58:55] more detail at that point was um
[1:58:57] originally taken back to the CPA uh
[1:59:00] committee which I think was going to be
[1:59:02] willing to fund it but with an annual
[1:59:04] cycle uh the timing wasn't going to
[1:59:08] allow the continuation of the project
[1:59:10] that had tenants involved and was open
[1:59:12] in the middle of the winter. So, um the
[1:59:15] trust um um volunteered to hear the
[1:59:18] presentation and um made the commitment
[1:59:21] of the uh you know the vote to ask you
[1:59:24] to approve the $823,000
[1:59:27] um with an understanding that um the uh
[1:59:30] the CPA u will uh effectively refund um
[1:59:34] effectively it's not going to be direct
[1:59:36] uh uh 400,000 of that um uh from from
[1:59:40] their uh fund. Um but um when we
[1:59:43] received it um it was already partway
[1:59:46] through and the costs were the costs. It
[1:59:48] was the reality on the ground uh with um
[1:59:52] with a project that was partway through
[1:59:54] and needed to needs to get completed.
[1:59:56] Uh, and the cost per unit was something
[1:59:59] we were very aware of. And several HAB
[2:00:01] members, you know, asked the question,
[2:00:03] if we were getting this from scratch,
[2:00:05] would we do a project um for your
[2:00:07] question uh with at a cost of 400,000
[2:00:10] per unit from local funds? And um
[2:00:13] probably probably not, but we weren't in
[2:00:16] in that position to be looking at it
[2:00:18] from that standpoint. So, we're
[2:00:20] recommending it because there will be a
[2:00:22] good outcome. Uh I think as Dave
[2:00:24] mentioned uh I know they did provide
[2:00:26] data to the HAB that the cost of
[2:00:28] producing six new family units would be
[2:00:31] substantially greater um than the total
[2:00:34] cost than what we were faced with to
[2:00:36] complete this project. So that's the
[2:00:38] basis for for our recommendation which
[2:00:40] which was unanimous.
[2:00:43] Yeah. Um Paul.
[2:00:44] Yep. Thanks Bernard and thank you thank
[2:00:46] you Roger for that explanation and I I
[2:00:48] really appreciate John's uh two points
[2:00:50] which I think I heard. One was these
[2:00:52] larger amounts should probably be
[2:00:53] outside of the consent agenda and I
[2:00:55] appreciate Bernard um you know pulling
[2:00:58] it out and two having us better
[2:01:00] understand the threshold and decision-m
[2:01:02] around the allocation of funds the total
[2:01:05] allocation when we're pulling from
[2:01:07] multiple buckets. But I just I did want
[2:01:09] to say that um that
[2:01:13] there's 23 people living in this
[2:01:14] building and maintaining the the best
[2:01:17] use of our funds honestly is to make
[2:01:19] sure that we don't lose affordable
[2:01:21] housing. Um and this is uh this is I
[2:01:24] think that situation where um it's not
[2:01:26] only losing it, how what would be the
[2:01:28] timeline to be able to bundle money in
[2:01:31] order to create six more units of
[2:01:32] affordable housing? It would be an
[2:01:34] extensive period of time. Um, but I I do
[2:01:36] I really do appreciate uh the questions
[2:01:39] that you raised, but I'm supportive of
[2:01:41] uh of the request to reinforce and
[2:01:43] approve what the HAB has already
[2:01:44] approved.
[2:01:47] Okay. May I just sort of state my point
[2:01:49] one more time just because I don't want
[2:01:51] people to think that I'm you know um
[2:01:53] insensitive to the fact that there are
[2:01:55] people who you know live in those units
[2:01:56] and and this is going to be for the sake
[2:01:59] of excuse me um you know preser
[2:02:02] preserving their um units of housing. Um
[2:02:06] but uh at some point um I just want us
[2:02:10] to all acknowledge that the the money
[2:02:13] can be used for this and that's all well
[2:02:16] and good. um or or
[2:02:19] another example of how we use affordable
[2:02:21] housing subsidies
[2:02:23] uh is represented by 108 center street
[2:02:26] which you know had their um ribbon
[2:02:28] cutting just within the past year and
[2:02:30] offers 54 units of house housing excuse
[2:02:34] me
[2:02:35] and the subsidy there was about 74,000
[2:02:38] per unit. So, you know, you can make you
[2:02:42] have to make choices
[2:02:43] uh in this life and you can either
[2:02:45] choose to take $4 million and use it to
[2:02:49] create 54 units of housing um at $74,000
[2:02:53] per unit um or you know, or you can take
[2:02:57] uh approaching $2 million worth of money
[2:03:00] to preserve six units of housing um and
[2:03:03] and you know, do the math there. I think
[2:03:05] Roger said it comes out to about
[2:03:06] $400,000 per unit. Um, so
[2:03:11] I, you know, I would, I would sure like
[2:03:14] to see us get, uh, 54 units of housing
[2:03:16] for $74,000 per unit the next time. Um,
[2:03:20] and and I think I've made my point about
[2:03:23] having to have some kind of a metric
[2:03:25] when when we start using money to
[2:03:27] subsidize units of affordable housing.
[2:03:30] Yeah. Very.
[2:03:30] And we can do both. Um, and you know,
[2:03:32] one of the problems is we have this
[2:03:35] these these properties on Boilson Street
[2:03:39] um that uh we can either allow to run
[2:03:41] down or fix them and maintain them as
[2:03:44] affordable housing for the 23 people who
[2:03:47] live there. Um, we can't take that money
[2:03:50] and find another site for six units,
[2:03:54] right? Because there aren't any other
[2:03:55] sites that are easily found here in
[2:03:57] Brooklyn. So this is is is a very I
[2:04:01] think it's good to to uh support uh this
[2:04:04] this uh housing uh project uh because
[2:04:09] you know it's something that we have and
[2:04:10] we need to preserve. So
[2:04:13] well we have we haven't even talked
[2:04:15] about the alternatives which would be if
[2:04:16] you could find affordable housing units
[2:04:18] at $74,000 per unit for these families
[2:04:22] and then do something else with this
[2:04:24] property. Um, you know, we're
[2:04:25] discovering that this is a property that
[2:04:27] just it's it's a money pit um in terms
[2:04:29] of how much money it's costing just to
[2:04:31] keep it habitable and and and we're, you
[2:04:34] know, into extraordinary amounts of
[2:04:36] money now
[2:04:37] that we could have been using for a
[2:04:38] different purpose um under a different
[2:04:40] way of handling all of this.
[2:04:43] David
[2:04:44] John, when you say it's been a money
[2:04:45] pit, do you uh do you know roughly what
[2:04:48] the numbers have been? How much has been
[2:04:49] spent over
[2:04:50] Well, you heard it period of time.
[2:04:51] You heard it tonight. I mean, it's going
[2:04:53] to cost us over $2 million just to make
[2:04:56] keep this habitable,
[2:04:57] but in terms of past allocations.
[2:05:00] Oh, I'm not speaking to past
[2:05:02] allocations, just this one. But thank
[2:05:04] you for asking. It's a good question.
[2:05:06] I just we have an answer to that maybe.
[2:05:08] Sorry. Sorry.
[2:05:08] In terms of past allocations to this
[2:05:10] property, past investments.
[2:05:13] So that I am hearing another source of
[2:05:16] audio. Roger, I'm sorry. Could you could
[2:05:17] you mute your audio? Roger.
[2:05:22] Roger, could you mute your your audio?
[2:05:25] We think we're hearing a TV or
[2:05:26] something.
[2:05:27] And
[2:05:29] there you go.
[2:05:29] Thank you.
[2:05:30] Okay.
[2:05:31] Yes. I don't hear anything else. Okay.
[2:05:32] Yes. Um
[2:05:33] trying to figure out what this echo is.
[2:05:36] Keep working on it.
[2:05:37] Uh but so that's a good question and
[2:05:40] thank you. Thank you so much uh for
[2:05:42] asking. I I think there's a number of of
[2:05:47] uh comments that I'd make, but just in
[2:05:49] the simplest respect, I I've certainly
[2:05:52] never seen a calculation that for
[2:05:54] substantially less than this investment
[2:05:57] here, we could build many many more
[2:05:58] units of affordable housing. Indeed, the
[2:06:01] um th this project that BCDC is
[2:06:04] currently undergoing on the the property
[2:06:06] at 154 156 Boilston, that is the product
[2:06:10] of decades of deferred maintenance. um
[2:06:12] that were necessary and and and uh and
[2:06:16] had not been performed. Um it's also a
[2:06:19] result of a deep energy retrofit. The
[2:06:21] the funding for which to replace the
[2:06:23] heating and cooling systems came from
[2:06:25] the Biden administration um and was a
[2:06:27] one-time opportunity um that BCDC took
[2:06:29] advantage of. So the total cost of the
[2:06:33] preservation and rehabilitation of these
[2:06:35] units is higher as a result of removal
[2:06:38] of the prior heating systems and the
[2:06:40] installation of heat pumps uh new
[2:06:42] insulating windows uh and the rest of it
[2:06:45] which is funded by um by clean energy
[2:06:48] programs. So it's I would say it's the
[2:06:51] number one the calculation that we
[2:06:53] presented to the housing advisory board
[2:06:54] and reviewed with with Roger Roger and I
[2:06:57] I think spent I'm not going to guess
[2:06:59] Roger but somewhere somewhere north of
[2:07:02] four hours on the phone um over the over
[2:07:05] the the past couple months um and uh and
[2:07:08] talked extensively about the ways to do
[2:07:11] this project and and and um and mindful
[2:07:14] of course of the of the increased costs.
[2:07:16] But I would just note that this project
[2:07:17] is not si a simple re renovation project
[2:07:21] uh as such for an affordable unit. It's
[2:07:24] it also is overlaid with the additional
[2:07:27] onetime availability of climate funding.
[2:07:32] Y did you want to follow up?
[2:07:34] No, no, no. I said Dave Dave made a good
[2:07:35] point.
[2:07:36] Um I just I I want to just affirm what
[2:07:39] what John is saying, right? when when
[2:07:41] things like this come to us um it would
[2:07:43] be really helpful for us to get a number
[2:07:46] of pieces of information including how
[2:07:49] much what's the total cost of the
[2:07:50] project you know where's the money
[2:07:52] coming from how much is from CIP and
[2:07:55] other sources and then what is the total
[2:07:57] cost per unit that it is costing
[2:08:00] Brookline all money uh versus whatever
[2:08:04] the benchmark is that we try to guide
[2:08:06] these decisions by I think I think it's
[2:08:07] a really valid point John I'm glad you
[2:08:09] raised it
[2:08:09] thank Thank you.
[2:08:12] Okay. U unless there are any other
[2:08:14] comments or questions, I'd like to move
[2:08:16] approval of items 6B through 6P. David,
[2:08:20] I have I have questions on other items.
[2:08:23] Uh it's brief though. So on six,
[2:08:26] by the way, David, thank you.
[2:08:28] Thank you.
[2:08:29] Thank you very much.
[2:08:30] Thank you. So on 6D and 6E, which are
[2:08:34] both uh sidewalk repairs, I noticed that
[2:08:37] the bids came back in very wide ranges
[2:08:40] where for 6D, and this can be found in
[2:08:44] page 25 of our materials, the lowest bid
[2:08:47] was 448,000,
[2:08:49] the highest was almost 814,000,
[2:08:53] and then for 6E, the range was 710,000
[2:08:58] all the way up to almost 1.1 million.
[2:09:00] And I'm just wondering is there any
[2:09:03] qualitative difference between these
[2:09:06] bids because this is a very wide range
[2:09:09] Dan maybe you want to take that.
[2:09:12] Thank you
[2:09:15] in our packets.
[2:09:20] Hi Dan Murphy, director of engineering
[2:09:22] transportation. Uh we often see pretty
[2:09:25] wide ranges and it depends on the
[2:09:27] contractor how hungry they are.
[2:09:29] Sometimes they'll put in bids that just
[2:09:30] are higher and if they get lucky they
[2:09:31] might get it. Um but it's fairly normal
[2:09:34] to see that and we see that among a lot
[2:09:36] of our bidding. Um sometimes they'll get
[2:09:38] sometimes it depends. Sometimes you'll
[2:09:40] see some tight ones but a lot of times
[2:09:41] there there's a big range.
[2:09:42] But in terms of project scope these bids
[2:09:45] were identical.
[2:09:46] Oh yeah. I mean it's it's a bid it's a
[2:09:48] spec. So they're bidden all all been the
[2:09:50] same thing.
[2:09:50] All right.
[2:09:51] And in terms of the uh reputation of the
[2:09:55] companies that place bids, they were all
[2:09:57] reasonable.
[2:09:58] Yeah. We always check to make sure that
[2:10:00] you know it's always biders we wouldn't
[2:10:01] if we found a bidder that we didn't know
[2:10:03] checked and didn't find did good work
[2:10:05] and check their references but we always
[2:10:07] check and most of them are always uh
[2:10:09] contractors what we worked with.
[2:10:11] Okay. Thank you.
[2:10:12] Welcome.
[2:10:13] Thank you.
[2:10:15] Okay. Can we vote?
[2:10:17] Yeah. Are we voting um on all together?
[2:10:20] Yeah. Okay.
[2:10:21] Including the two proclamations that
[2:10:23] were read earlier. All right.
[2:10:24] So all in favor of items 6B through 6P.
[2:10:27] Is it P? Yes. Uh, please indicate by
[2:10:30] saying I. John Vancoyak.
[2:10:31] Hi.
[2:10:32] Paul Warren.
[2:10:32] Hi.
[2:10:33] David Pearlman.
[2:10:33] I.
[2:10:34] Michael Rubenstein.
[2:10:35] I.
[2:10:35] Chair votes I.
[2:10:36] Okay. Next we have a boards and
[2:10:40] commissions interview. Um, and that is
[2:10:44] an interview of uh for the Brookline
[2:10:47] Commission on Disability. Enga Fermenti.
[2:10:50] Is she online or or she's in the
[2:10:53] audience? Please come up and talk to us.
[2:10:57] So, as I've you know said many times in
[2:10:59] the past, what what we're looking for uh
[2:11:02] when we're interviewing candidates is
[2:11:04] things like does the applicant have the
[2:11:06] skills and background that's required to
[2:11:08] be successful on uh in this case the
[2:11:10] disabilities commission. Does the uh
[2:11:13] applicant um have good ideas and
[2:11:16] perspectives on the work of the
[2:11:18] commission? Does the applicant bring
[2:11:21] Wherever you'd like you can
[2:11:23] that's okay. You can you could you could
[2:11:25] sit here if you prefer or you can stand
[2:11:26] at the podium.
[2:11:28] Does the applicant bring bring relevant
[2:11:31] diversity to the public body to ensure
[2:11:33] that all communities and perspectives
[2:11:36] are represented in the work of the
[2:11:37] public body? And I think most
[2:11:40] importantly, can the applicant work
[2:11:42] effectively and respectfully with other
[2:11:45] members of the public body and with town
[2:11:48] staff that will be working with the
[2:11:50] public body. So with that u um sort of
[2:11:53] preface uh please introduce yourself and
[2:11:56] tell us why you're interested in being a
[2:11:57] member of the disabilities commission.
[2:12:00] Uh my name is Eningga
[2:12:02] again.
[2:12:03] It's not you, it's me.
[2:12:04] Oh,
[2:12:06] we've been having a lot of problems
[2:12:07] today.
[2:12:08] So exciting. Um my name is Eningga
[2:12:11] Forment. I moved to Brooklyn
[2:12:14] three years and three months ago.
[2:12:18] um from North Carolina, from Kentucky,
[2:12:21] from California, from Ohio, from
[2:12:23] Michigan. So, I'm pretty familiar with
[2:12:26] how they do it in many places. Um
[2:12:31] I've had a really miscellaneous career.
[2:12:33] I started as a librarian for the State
[2:12:36] Library of Michigan, which also included
[2:12:38] at the time the um National Library
[2:12:41] Services for the Blind and Physically
[2:12:43] Handicapped. I think at the time it was
[2:12:44] just the National Library Services for
[2:12:46] the Blind.
[2:12:48] Now it's the National Library Services
[2:12:49] for the Blind and Print Disabled. So
[2:12:52] progress has been made. Um
[2:12:55] from there I moved to California as part
[2:12:57] of my family life and ended up working
[2:13:02] for Huelet Packard as a librarian. Um,
[2:13:05] as part of that, I became actually one
[2:13:08] of the founding members of the company's
[2:13:12] managers of disabled employees group and
[2:13:15] helped work on the
[2:13:18] post post offer pre-employment physical
[2:13:21] process. Um, at the time HP had 140,000
[2:13:26] employees, about 40,000 of them in the
[2:13:28] California Bay Area and probably another
[2:13:31] 30,000 in the rest of the country. Um,
[2:13:35] from there, thanks to Silicon Valley
[2:13:37] Economy, I ended up in Kentucky where I
[2:13:41] worked for 10 years for the American
[2:13:43] Printing House for the Blind. Um, I did
[2:13:46] a number of things there. I was my
[2:13:48] primary one. I was part of the 800
[2:13:50] number. I did information and referral,
[2:13:53] which I was very proud of.
[2:13:56] Sorry, I was just talking about the
[2:13:57] other day to someone and one of the
[2:14:00] things, one of the questions I got often
[2:14:02] than I would like is I would get calls
[2:14:04] from parents of children who had brain
[2:14:06] tumors. And many times brain tumors in
[2:14:10] children affect the optic nerves or the
[2:14:12] function of the optical centers of the
[2:14:14] brain. And it would be my
[2:14:17] excuse me responsibility to welcome
[2:14:20] welcome them if you can call it
[2:14:22] welcoming to yet another system the
[2:14:25] blindness system and hopefully get some
[2:14:28] useful information to them some
[2:14:31] educational materials for as long as
[2:14:33] their child was able to participate in
[2:14:34] the school system and so forth. Um
[2:14:40] I also worked with what you might call
[2:14:43] celebrities. They're I'm sure you know
[2:14:45] who they are. Um, blind performance
[2:14:48] celebrities out there and they would
[2:14:50] call us for materials because we were
[2:14:52] the central we're in and are the central
[2:14:53] clearing house for braille and large
[2:14:57] print materials in the United States. We
[2:14:59] have a database had a database called
[2:15:00] the Louisie database which is still
[2:15:02] there which is free for the public to
[2:15:04] use to find materials that have been
[2:15:08] produced in various accessible formats.
[2:15:11] Um, now there's an electronic format as
[2:15:13] well, which is excellent. Um, let's see.
[2:15:18] Then
[2:15:20] after I retired, we ended up in North
[2:15:22] Carolina. Uh, Louisville, Kentucky is
[2:15:25] kind of a squirrely place to live. Let's
[2:15:26] just say quality of life was declining
[2:15:28] as they kept paving more and more of the
[2:15:30] city to less and less good effect. And
[2:15:33] um, there I was a pole worker for eight
[2:15:39] years. I came here. I'm a pole worker
[2:15:41] again. I'm also a member of the as John
[2:15:45] Vincecoyak knows
[2:15:48] the age friendly cities group. And um
[2:15:53] I'm relatively late in life to
[2:15:55] disability myself. My husband of almost
[2:15:58] 30 years was blind from birth and I was
[2:16:01] active in blindness
[2:16:05] issues
[2:16:06] during his lifetime of various sorts. um
[2:16:10] and
[2:16:12] sort of overlapping with age friendly
[2:16:14] cities, a number of the issues that were
[2:16:16] coming up. Well, yes, there's a
[2:16:18] designation this is an age friendly
[2:16:20] business, but I use
[2:16:23] many of those businesses. Some of them
[2:16:25] are old favorites of mine, but they may
[2:16:29] be age friendly, but they're not
[2:16:30] necessarily disability friendly.
[2:16:33] And
[2:16:35] knowing that Brooklyn was a town that
[2:16:37] did things unlike other places I lived,
[2:16:40] I just wanted to be part of that. And I
[2:16:43] think it was the MBTA actually coughing
[2:16:46] up money to make the the tea stations
[2:16:48] accessible that got me really interested
[2:16:50] because before it was like, yeah, if I'm
[2:16:52] going somewhere, I look on the map, I
[2:16:55] say, what's the closest tea station? My
[2:16:57] next question is, is that tea station
[2:16:58] accessible? Which many of them weren't?
[2:17:02] And as a result, I've never been to
[2:17:03] Cleveland Circle or any of the
[2:17:04] businesses around there because it's
[2:17:06] such a pain in the butt on the tea and
[2:17:07] there's no bus.
[2:17:09] Okay,
[2:17:12] let us ask you a few questions.
[2:17:13] Sure.
[2:17:14] To get a sense of, you know, what you
[2:17:15] would like to bring to the Disabilities
[2:17:17] Commission. Um, I see you've been in a
[2:17:20] lot of states in the country. I mean, is
[2:17:22] there anything that you've learned from
[2:17:23] what they do or what what people do in
[2:17:26] in other states that would be helpful
[2:17:28] here in Brooklyn? ideas that you can
[2:17:31] sort of steal from them and and and give
[2:17:33] to us.
[2:17:34] Well, one thing I've learned, it's a
[2:17:36] negative thing, and I'm sure you're
[2:17:37] familiar with the phenomenon, is nothing
[2:17:39] is done until something awful happens.
[2:17:43] And um I would like not to see anything
[2:17:46] awful happen. And one thing that a new
[2:17:48] story you may, how could you not
[2:17:50] remember? A few months ago, a a w an
[2:17:53] elderly woman was thrown off a bus
[2:17:56] basically in Boston because she happened
[2:17:58] to have a a a shopping cart, but she
[2:18:03] could have just as been well have been
[2:18:04] me with my walker because there is an
[2:18:07] issue on the tea. The tea has been
[2:18:09] working its butt off and doing a pretty
[2:18:11] good job of becoming accessible.
[2:18:13] But everybody has been ignoring the real
[2:18:16] elephant in the room, which is shopping
[2:18:18] carts, which I brought up at the meeting
[2:18:20] today, John. And nobody really realizes
[2:18:24] what a freaking traffic jam you can have
[2:18:27] on the 66 bus when you have four people
[2:18:30] uh with big shopping carts and one or
[2:18:33] two people with walkers or even a
[2:18:34] wheelchair just trying to get off or on
[2:18:37] the bus.
[2:18:39] And when she was thrown when the woman
[2:18:42] in Boston was thrown off the bus, I was
[2:18:44] like, "Yeah,
[2:18:46] I've seen crowds be very accepting and
[2:18:50] pleasant. I've also seen crowds be
[2:18:52] somewhat hostile. And I've seen crowds
[2:18:54] be pretty hostile to someone who's
[2:18:56] blocking the way. And
[2:19:00] so that's an example of how not to deal
[2:19:03] with things essentially. But Brooklyn
[2:19:07] offers forums the likes of which I have
[2:19:10] never seen any place I've ever lived.
[2:19:11] And part of it is because of the way
[2:19:13] Massachusetts does its governance.
[2:19:16] If this were in
[2:19:18] Orange County, North Carolina,
[2:19:21] you would have Orange County,
[2:19:24] you would have Chapel Hill or you would
[2:19:26] have the Chapel Hill and Carro School
[2:19:28] District,
[2:19:30] etc. So, there are all sorts of layers
[2:19:32] of governance here. It's all in one
[2:19:34] spot, which just blew the socks off me
[2:19:37] when I first moved here. I go, "What
[2:19:39] about the county?"
[2:19:40] Okay.
[2:19:41] I don't want to talk about the county.
[2:19:43] Yeah. It's like, yeah.
[2:19:44] Okay. And in Kentucky, it was the same
[2:19:47] way, only different. So that I think is
[2:19:48] is one of the strengths Brookline has is
[2:19:51] it's one-stop shopping essentially. And
[2:19:54] the but not only that, but the
[2:19:56] departments talk to each other.
[2:19:58] Could can let's ask or allow other
[2:20:01] select board members to ask questions.
[2:20:02] So
[2:20:03] Sure.
[2:20:04] Okay. Michael,
[2:20:06] um thank you very much and thank you for
[2:20:08] your application. Um I'm I'm
[2:20:11] particularly intrigued by your uh the
[2:20:14] work that you've done on the age
[2:20:15] friendly cities and and the the
[2:20:19] commonalities that you have identified
[2:20:21] between the needs of that community and
[2:20:23] the needs of the disab disability
[2:20:25] community. Um, so I'm wondering, you
[2:20:28] know, in this era of um always looking
[2:20:31] for uh more efficient forms of
[2:20:34] government and uh things that we can do
[2:20:36] that help multiple constituencies.
[2:20:39] Whether um you see your role um on those
[2:20:43] two bodies being in any way
[2:20:45] complimentary or uh you that there are
[2:20:48] opportunities to bring those two groups
[2:20:50] together for more effective advocacy or
[2:20:54] or outcomes.
[2:20:56] I was
[2:20:58] a little surprised at the beginning
[2:21:00] because there wasn't much overlapping
[2:21:02] because of the issues that were on the
[2:21:04] table. But as time has gone on,
[2:21:07] what that group does is they bring in
[2:21:09] other departments to talk about things
[2:21:11] like sidewalk repairs. And was it last
[2:21:13] month or the month before they were
[2:21:15] talking about there's a new technology
[2:21:17] for dealing with the irregular the the
[2:21:19] sidewalks that aren't level where they
[2:21:21] basically saw one off and give a rather
[2:21:23] comfortable
[2:21:25] mound as opposed to before where they
[2:21:27] just kept adding asphalt and adding
[2:21:29] asphalt and you had this little mountain
[2:21:31] you had to navigate over. And that was
[2:21:33] you know that was very relevant to all
[2:21:35] of us. And when they talk about um parks
[2:21:37] and recreation comes in and gives a talk
[2:21:39] about an event, they will address issues
[2:21:42] like is there going to be a lot of
[2:21:44] handicap parking? Is there going to be a
[2:21:45] place for the the Ubers and the lifts to
[2:21:48] drop people off and things like that. So
[2:21:51] they are already bringing people in in
[2:21:54] response to issues.
[2:21:56] Thank you, David. I noticed on your
[2:22:00] resume that you also worked in business
[2:22:02] security systems and that makes me
[2:22:05] curious. Do you look at the purview of
[2:22:08] being on the disability commission as
[2:22:11] more of a physical accessibility issue
[2:22:15] or do you see do you have a more
[2:22:17] expanded vision about anything really
[2:22:20] that can impact that population whether
[2:22:23] it's physical or something from the
[2:22:25] virtual world?
[2:22:26] Well, as as a person who's using this
[2:22:29] and will probably eventually end up in a
[2:22:30] wheelchair. The physical access is super
[2:22:33] important. I mean that's pure quality of
[2:22:35] life. However, as a librarian who was
[2:22:37] also an information and referral person
[2:22:40] and who also did databases, information
[2:22:42] is vital, especially in today's world.
[2:22:45] There's accessible technology that
[2:22:47] people could be unaware of. There are
[2:22:50] systems relating to certain things like
[2:22:53] rehabilitation
[2:22:55] um and whatnot that many people don't
[2:22:57] know about. Um there's funding. For
[2:23:00] instance, uh the laws are different now
[2:23:03] and I haven't dealt with it, but in my
[2:23:06] daughter's time, there was um a disabled
[2:23:10] child, depending on the disability, of
[2:23:12] course, could receive SSI and
[2:23:15] potentially Medicare, depending on
[2:23:17] family funding,
[2:23:19] from birth,
[2:23:21] which a lot of people don't know when
[2:23:23] they struggle when they have a special
[2:23:24] needs child to get what they need to
[2:23:29] give the
[2:23:30] a chance to grow and develop and have a
[2:23:32] normal life.
[2:23:34] And um
[2:23:37] I don't know, having not directly had
[2:23:39] someone involved, how the school system
[2:23:42] and the social workers handle that in
[2:23:44] Brookline. It sounds like they're doing
[2:23:46] a pretty good job, but there's always
[2:23:47] room for improvement there because
[2:23:50] systems overlap, technologies overlap.
[2:23:54] Um they're all distinct systems, but
[2:23:56] you've got to know how to to work them
[2:23:58] in order to maximize your benefits.
[2:24:02] Thank you. Uh any other questions?
[2:24:05] John?
[2:24:05] Well, I just want to make uh the comment
[2:24:07] as someone who has had the pleasure um
[2:24:10] and the privilege of serving on a uh the
[2:24:13] Council on Aging, but also on the age
[2:24:16] friendly cities committee where um
[2:24:17] Eningga is a member. Um,
[2:24:21] uh, I think you said you've been here
[2:24:23] four four years in Brooklyn, right? I
[2:24:25] mean, you're
[2:24:26] three three years, three books.
[2:24:27] Yeah. You're She's such an outstanding
[2:24:29] example of someone who, you know, comes
[2:24:32] to a place that's new to her and then
[2:24:34] immediately plunges into showing up at
[2:24:37] the Council on Aging, showing up at the
[2:24:39] age friendly cities committee and always
[2:24:42] with something to contribute, you know,
[2:24:44] as we all witnessed tonight. So, I'm not
[2:24:46] going to I don't want it to go to your
[2:24:48] head and uh
[2:24:49] you know, so I'll stop there, but um uh
[2:24:54] thank you for for what you're what
[2:24:55] you're doing. As you know, to to some of
[2:24:58] us like me to have been here for only
[2:25:00] three years still feels like you're a
[2:25:02] newcomer, but you you sure have plunged
[2:25:04] into a lot of activity in Brooklyn and
[2:25:06] that's a great thing.
[2:25:07] Oh, Brookline feels like home.
[2:25:09] Good.
[2:25:09] And I want to keep it that way for as
[2:25:11] many people as I can.
[2:25:12] Good. Good.
[2:25:13] Okay. Thank you, Jeff. Okay, we will uh
[2:25:16] be making the appointments to uh the
[2:25:19] disabilities commission at a later
[2:25:21] meeting, but I appreciate your
[2:25:23] application and u your very informative
[2:25:27] uh discussion before the board here
[2:25:28] tonight.
[2:25:29] Thank you.
[2:25:36] Okay, next uh MWR sewer bond. um
[2:25:41] question of approving the MWR financial
[2:25:43] assistance and loan agreement package to
[2:25:46] fund the town's water and sewer system
[2:25:49] and authorizing the town administrator
[2:25:51] and director of finance to sign and
[2:25:53] execute the agreement on behalf of the
[2:25:55] town. But before we start, I want to say
[2:25:58] that each select board member should
[2:26:00] have read through the bond documents,
[2:26:02] particularly the certificate for the
[2:26:04] $773,000
[2:26:06] bond and for the $2 million bond in
[2:26:09] which we certify various things related
[2:26:12] to the bonds. And uh Lincoln provided us
[2:26:15] with a memo listing the facts that we
[2:26:19] are certifying and certifying to us that
[2:26:22] those facts are all true. And uh I think
[2:26:25] it's important for us to know that and
[2:26:27] to also know that we can we can and we
[2:26:29] do rely on that certification by Lincoln
[2:26:34] and that we can reasonably rely on the
[2:26:36] expertise that the treasurer and others
[2:26:38] represent in putting the bonds together
[2:26:41] in compliance with all applicable laws
[2:26:43] and regulations. Um, reasonable reliance
[2:26:47] requires, however, among other things
[2:26:49] that we have read and asked questions
[2:26:52] about anything that we don't understand,
[2:26:54] which, you know, we should do here at at
[2:26:56] uh tonight's meeting. Um, and I think
[2:26:59] that's important because, you know,
[2:27:00] we're signing our lives away in a
[2:27:03] certain sense or we're signing uh
[2:27:05] certifying very very important and um
[2:27:09] significant things and we can't do it
[2:27:11] without uh really understanding what it
[2:27:14] is we're certifying to and and whether
[2:27:16] you have to know ourselves uh you know
[2:27:20] the particular facts or whether we can
[2:27:22] rely on other people the experts uh in
[2:27:24] our town departments and others. So with
[2:27:27] that, Lincoln, tell us what
[2:27:29] Thank you, Chair Green. Yeah. No, and
[2:27:31] thank you for bringing that up. As you
[2:27:32] say, these are important things that we
[2:27:35] are certifying to and I I I appreciate
[2:27:37] you bringing everybody's attention to it
[2:27:38] and obviously very happy to answer any
[2:27:41] questions that the board may have about
[2:27:43] what you're certifying and what you're
[2:27:45] attesting to. Um so uh what uh as as
[2:27:50] Chair Green mentioned, what what what
[2:27:52] you have before you is um the what has
[2:27:56] become the town's annual borrowing.
[2:27:58] We've we've consolidated it to do both
[2:28:00] the water and sewer borrowing from the
[2:28:01] MWA at the same night each evening for
[2:28:04] efficiency sake. Um and what is before
[2:28:08] you are those two borrowings. One uh for
[2:28:11] the sewer system in particular to reduce
[2:28:14] inflow and infiltration in in the town
[2:28:17] sewer system. As Chair Green mentioned,
[2:28:20] this is a $3.1 million award of which uh
[2:28:24] 75% $2.3 million is a grant and the
[2:28:28] remaining $773,000
[2:28:30] is a no interest loan. Um and then the
[2:28:34] remaining the the other $2 million uh
[2:28:37] proposed borrowing is um for the town's
[2:28:40] water system to to remove um uh the
[2:28:45] remaining lead service lines within the
[2:28:47] 10 the town's water system the the
[2:28:49] service lines between the water main and
[2:28:53] um businesses and homes. Um the uh as um
[2:28:59] so as the chair said uh there are a
[2:29:02] series of documents that you're signing
[2:29:04] and and of which two of them are
[2:29:06] certifications with this list of
[2:29:07] certifications of facts that myself uh
[2:29:11] the board and where appropriate the town
[2:29:13] clerk are attesting to. So happy to
[2:29:16] answer any questions about that or uh I
[2:29:18] know um the water and sewer division uh
[2:29:22] uh lead Jay Hershey's online to answer
[2:29:25] any specific uh questions about the
[2:29:27] projects. Great.
[2:29:28] David, do you have
[2:29:29] Yes, I have a couple questions. So, not
[2:29:31] to uh knock the proverbial gift horse in
[2:29:34] the mouth, I'm I'm a little curious
[2:29:36] about the uh generous terms as he put it
[2:29:40] in the memo. What is the MWR getting out
[2:29:42] of that?
[2:29:44] Well, I think so. I know J Jay may have
[2:29:47] more to say on it, but but certainly
[2:29:49] with the inflow and infiltration um a
[2:29:51] reduction in um the amount of material
[2:29:55] that's going through its its plant out
[2:29:57] at Deer Island. Um you know, and I think
[2:30:00] that's in the interest of of the whole
[2:30:02] system. And I don't know if Jay, you
[2:30:03] want to add anything as to to that
[2:30:06] question.
[2:30:18] He should be able to co-host.
[2:30:26] Could you try to speak louder?
[2:30:27] Is there any way to turn him up? Is that
[2:30:29] us or him?
[2:30:30] Or turn up your mic.
[2:30:35] No, barely.
[2:30:44] Okay, we'll we'll be quiet and listen.
[2:30:47] Read the transcript.
[2:30:48] Oh, that's an idea.
[2:31:08] As you mentioned,
[2:31:31] You can't get a better deal than that.
[2:31:33] Um,
[2:31:34] so I hope that answers your question and
[2:31:35] hopefully you can hear me.
[2:31:37] Yep.
[2:31:37] Much better all of a sudden.
[2:31:39] Yes. Thank you. Another question I have,
[2:31:41] it's bit specific, but section 18, the
[2:31:45] equal employment opportunity. I'm just
[2:31:47] curious about how these benchmarks were
[2:31:50] determined in terms of the uh minority
[2:31:54] workforce
[2:31:55] hour goal of 15.3% and for a female
[2:31:59] 6.9%.
[2:32:01] Are those just common numbers for
[2:32:05] categories in these types of agreements
[2:32:07] or how is that determined?
[2:32:09] Uh that's a good question and I I think
[2:32:11] that's in all of the MWA
[2:32:14] loan applications. So, it's something
[2:32:16] that they set and we're required when we
[2:32:18] put it out to bid to make sure it's
[2:32:20] clear to the prospective biders that
[2:32:21] they're going to have to abide to those
[2:32:23] conditions.
[2:32:25] All right. Thank you,
[2:32:28] Michael.
[2:32:29] Um, I have a question uh about something
[2:32:33] you said earlier. Um, that this was
[2:32:35] something that we do annually. Um, and I
[2:32:37] realize that these are 10-year bonds, so
[2:32:40] with equal amounts over 10 years. Have
[2:32:42] we been doing this for more than 10
[2:32:44] years? So, are there other bonds that
[2:32:46] are rolling off as these are rolling on?
[2:32:51] Yes, they they do come off, you know,
[2:32:53] after we pay them in full. And this
[2:32:56] program, at least on the sewer side, is
[2:32:59] part of a 16-year program, and we
[2:33:01] anticipate wrapping it up in 2032. So,
[2:33:06] you know, roughly halfway through the
[2:33:07] program. So, some of the money that we
[2:33:09] have been borrowing is coming off, but
[2:33:11] yeah, we continue to to acrue some debt,
[2:33:14] but it's so worth it in the long run.
[2:33:17] You know, we're going to get a tight
[2:33:18] system. Not only is it a tight system,
[2:33:20] but it's also protecting the asset. Um,
[2:33:23] lining and sealing the manholes just
[2:33:25] extends the the life of the asset um
[2:33:29] much longer than you would by not doing
[2:33:31] any preventative maintenance or rehab
[2:33:33] work.
[2:33:36] Thank you.
[2:33:38] Okay. Any other questions?
[2:33:43] Well, seeing none, we can move to our
[2:33:45] votes.
[2:33:48] Ready?
[2:33:49] Okay. Um, I'm not going to read the
[2:33:51] entirety of the vote language in our
[2:33:53] packet, but the uh operative bond
[2:33:56] operative parts and if bond council, who
[2:33:58] I assume is listening in, objects, they
[2:34:01] can say so. Um but uh you know the uh
[2:34:06] total language is in our packet in the
[2:34:08] materials in our packet if you want to
[2:34:11] read them in more detail and the things
[2:34:13] I'm leaving out are basically the
[2:34:15] numbers uh you know the annual payments
[2:34:18] um that that we're going to be making
[2:34:20] under the bonds. So, first I move
[2:34:22] approval of the sale of the 773,000
[2:34:26] sewer bond of the town dated March 16,
[2:34:30] 2026 to the Massachusetts Water
[2:34:32] Resources Authority payable in the
[2:34:35] principal amounts and in the years
[2:34:37] stated in the vote language in the
[2:34:39] select board's publicly available packet
[2:34:41] of materials for this meeting. Um, and
[2:34:44] we're going to actually sign the bond uh
[2:34:47] later on this evening. So all in favor
[2:34:49] please indicate by saying I. John
[2:34:51] Vanscoyak
[2:34:52] I.
[2:34:53] Paul Warren
[2:34:53] I.
[2:34:54] David Pearlman
[2:34:54] I.
[2:34:55] Michael Rubenstein
[2:34:56] I.
[2:34:56] Uh and chair votes I.
[2:34:59] Um okay. Next I move approval
[2:35:02] very briefly. Yes. Just a friendly just
[2:35:04] a friendly reminder to everyone to
[2:35:05] please sign on on your way out to make
[2:35:07] sure we can get these to um the
[2:35:09] appropriate parties tomorrow. Thank you.
[2:35:11] Sorry to interrupt now. And these are
[2:35:13] promisory notes. not our not us
[2:35:16] promising but the town promising you
[2:35:19] know payment uh you with bonds.
[2:35:22] Uh so next I move approval of the sale
[2:35:26] of the $2 million water bond of the town
[2:35:29] dated March 16, 2026.
[2:35:32] um to be payable without interest on
[2:35:35] February 15 of the years and in the
[2:35:38] principal amounts stated in the vote
[2:35:41] language in the select board's publicly
[2:35:43] available packet of materials for this
[2:35:45] meeting. Uh any questions I guess not
[2:35:49] all in favor please indicate by saying
[2:35:51] I. John Dean Skoyak
[2:35:52] I.
[2:35:52] Paul Warren I
[2:35:54] David Pearlman
[2:35:54] I.
[2:35:55] Michael Rubenstein
[2:35:56] I chair votes I. Next, I move that the
[2:36:00] select board authorize the town
[2:36:02] treasurer or other appropriate town
[2:36:05] official to execute on behalf of the
[2:36:07] town a loan agreement and a financial
[2:36:10] assistance agreement with the
[2:36:12] Massachusetts W Water Resources
[2:36:14] Authority with respect to each of the
[2:36:16] foregoing bonds. Um, unless there any
[2:36:20] questions, all in favor, please indicate
[2:36:22] by saying I.
[2:36:24] John Vancoyak,
[2:36:25] I.
[2:36:25] Paul Warren,
[2:36:26] hi. David Pearlman.
[2:36:28] I,
[2:36:28] Michael Rubenstein,
[2:36:29] I,
[2:36:29] and chair votes I. Finally,
[2:36:33] I move approval of the following in
[2:36:36] accordance with the vote language in the
[2:36:38] select board's publicly available packet
[2:36:40] of materials for this meeting. One, that
[2:36:43] any certificates or documents relating
[2:36:46] to bonds may be executed in several
[2:36:49] counterparts, each of which shall be
[2:36:51] regarded as an original and all of which
[2:36:54] shall constitute one and the same
[2:36:56] document. Two, that all action taken to
[2:36:59] date by the town and its officers and
[2:37:02] agents to carry out this financing,
[2:37:05] including the execution of any
[2:37:07] applicable agreement by the treasurer or
[2:37:10] other town, I'm sorry, or any other
[2:37:14] official of the town are hereby
[2:37:16] ratified, approved, and confirmed. And
[2:37:20] three, that each member of the select
[2:37:22] board, the town clerk, and the town
[2:37:25] treasurer be and hereby are authorized
[2:37:28] to take any and all actions and execute
[2:37:31] and deliver such certificates, receipts,
[2:37:34] or other documents as may be determined
[2:37:36] by them or any of them to be necessary
[2:37:39] or convenient to carry out or to carry
[2:37:42] into effect the provisions of the
[2:37:44] foregoing votes. All in favor, please
[2:37:47] indicate by or any questions about that.
[2:37:52] Okay. All in favor, please indicate by
[2:37:54] saying I. John Benoyak,
[2:37:55] I.
[2:37:55] Paul Warren,
[2:37:56] hi.
[2:37:56] David Pearlman,
[2:37:57] I.
[2:37:58] Michael Rubenstein,
[2:37:59] I.
[2:37:59] Chair votes I.
[2:38:01] And those are our votes. We have
[2:38:03] approved the bonds and we will sign
[2:38:05] them.
[2:38:05] Thank you.
[2:38:06] Later on tonight. Thank you.
[2:38:07] I have one I have one question, chair.
[2:38:09] Um there's also a grant
[2:38:12] uh as part as part of this arrangement.
[2:38:15] Are we going to accept that grant at a
[2:38:17] later point or we have we already done
[2:38:19] that or do we need to do that?
[2:38:21] You're you're accepting the grant uh as
[2:38:24] part of the award in the award document?
[2:38:27] I see. Okay.
[2:38:28] Yeah.
[2:38:28] Thank you.
[2:38:31] Thank you. Okay.
[2:38:34] Next, boards and commissions annual
[2:38:36] reports presentation of the zero
[2:38:38] emissions advisory board. Uh their
[2:38:41] annual report to the select board.
[2:38:44] who is going to be doing that. Okay,
[2:38:49] come up, introduce yourself and uh tell
[2:38:52] us about Zap.
[2:38:55] Okay,
[2:38:59] we need we need need a bigger podium.
[2:39:01] Let's see if this works. Something's
[2:39:04] going to fall. Uh, good evening. I'm
[2:39:06] Nick Caramelo.
[2:39:07] Right into the mic.
[2:39:08] Okay, thanks, Nick.
[2:39:10] Good morning. I'm Nick. Good Good
[2:39:12] evening. I'm Nick Carmelo, uh chair of
[2:39:14] ZAB, and I'm here to do the uh annual
[2:39:16] report for the Zero Emissions Advisory
[2:39:18] Board.
[2:39:19] Great. Thank you.
[2:39:20] More into the microphone.
[2:39:21] Yeah, real close. Yeah,
[2:39:23] I'm too tall.
[2:39:25] Yeah.
[2:39:27] Um do you have a question?
[2:39:28] Can you put your computer on top of
[2:39:30] whatever else is there?
[2:39:32] Well, it's more just his closest to the
[2:39:34] mic. He can't
[2:39:34] Well, yeah. If you put the computer down
[2:39:37] on the
[2:39:38] bottom,
[2:39:39] you may be able to
[2:39:40] He has slides. You don't
[2:39:41] I I sent the slides in.
[2:39:45] Actually, Alexander sent them in
[2:39:46] in the packet.
[2:39:47] The packet.
[2:39:48] Yes.
[2:39:53] Because they weren't separated. It's not
[2:39:55] voted on that laptop. He can't share his
[2:39:57] laptop.
[2:39:57] Okay, that's fine. But you have access
[2:39:59] to it. Can you walk
[2:40:00] lift it up?
[2:40:01] No.
[2:40:02] Hold on. Let me
[2:40:04] I could try to share it
[2:40:06] here. I can
[2:40:07] It's It's in the packet.
[2:40:09] I can pull it up on the presentation
[2:40:11] station.
[2:40:12] Page 145. Your packet.
[2:40:17] I've got it.
[2:40:19] I can share it.
[2:40:24] Thank you.
[2:40:25] Okay.
[2:40:25] As always,
[2:40:28] share my screen.
[2:40:32] You want Could you promote me? Sure.
[2:40:35] Sorry.
[2:40:37] All
[2:40:56] right.
[2:41:04] Okay.
[2:41:06] Go ahead.
[2:41:07] Okay. Thank you. Um, so if you can move
[2:41:09] to the agenda slide, please.
[2:41:11] Sure.
[2:41:13] Um, we're just going to go through the
[2:41:14] this is the agenda for today just to go
[2:41:16] through some uh our status, major
[2:41:18] initiatives, policy achievements, some
[2:41:20] challenges, and just looking ahead and
[2:41:22] we'll have some time for questions at
[2:41:24] the end if you would like. Let's move
[2:41:27] into the um status slide. Um so um last
[2:41:32] year we uh welcomed three new members uh
[2:41:35] Bill Heinman, Patricia Korea and uh Alan
[2:41:38] Levton uh who brought you know valuable
[2:41:40] focus uh in transportation, municipal
[2:41:42] law and regulatory matters and
[2:41:44] engineering respectively.
[2:41:47] Yes, I'll try. Um the sustainability
[2:41:50] division um also welcomes some new
[2:41:52] members. uh Shelley Dean who's just
[2:41:54] started in June of 2025 as deputy
[2:41:57] director, program manager Katie Weather
[2:42:00] seat seat who started in September 2025
[2:42:03] and we also um welcomed I think Caroline
[2:42:06] Stout is that right? um in December as a
[2:42:10] community first partnership. Um so it
[2:42:13] was a year of growth for both the
[2:42:15] sustainability division and also for ZAB
[2:42:17] and it's really important for us because
[2:42:19] um I think we had struggled in past
[2:42:21] years to make progress without staff
[2:42:23] support. It's been very helpful to have
[2:42:25] additional members on the board.
[2:42:29] Next slide.
[2:42:32] our major initiatives for last year. Um
[2:42:35] uh we went through a large process for
[2:42:38] the climate action and resiliency plan.
[2:42:41] Um the resiliency portion of this is not
[2:42:44] really a ZAB focus but we participated
[2:42:46] in the whole process. Uh there was
[2:42:48] substantial outreach to the community um
[2:42:53] which was le led by the sustainability
[2:42:55] division. Zab's role was largely a
[2:42:58] advisory role. We helped develop a uh
[2:43:01] prioritization framework um which has
[2:43:03] been used to prioritize the
[2:43:07] goals, strategies and actions in the KRP
[2:43:09] which is now in draft format and um
[2:43:12] which has been transitioned to the
[2:43:14] sustainability division for their
[2:43:16] ownership so that they can take it from
[2:43:17] here and use that framework to uh
[2:43:21] prioritize both current init current
[2:43:24] efforts but also future efforts as the
[2:43:26] the uh sort of zero emission
[2:43:29] uh
[2:43:34] arena changes which is changing quite
[2:43:36] quickly. Um the other big effort for
[2:43:40] this last year was um we presented last
[2:43:42] year that we were going to focus on two
[2:43:43] things as initiatives. One which one of
[2:43:45] which was municipal solar and the second
[2:43:48] thing was um Berto the municipal solar
[2:43:51] initiative um was an interesting and as
[2:43:56] a roller coaster for last year. Um, it
[2:43:58] started as a a uh ZAB initiative where
[2:44:01] we looked at and analyzed municipal
[2:44:03] solar and how it could be an effective
[2:44:06] uh tool for both reducing our greenhouse
[2:44:09] gas emissions but also a uh a tool for
[2:44:14] um making the town money through the
[2:44:17] year with a lot of advocacy from
[2:44:19] specifically Sergio Modilani. Um and
[2:44:22] then at the end of the year as part of
[2:44:24] the futures subcommittee to the
[2:44:26] expenditures and revenue committee um we
[2:44:30] managed to move the solar initiative
[2:44:33] from a very theoretical thing to a
[2:44:36] um a plan which the sustainability
[2:44:38] division um and DTPW put together which
[2:44:42] has two tracks a near-term ITC capture
[2:44:45] track. So the ITC is going away um very
[2:44:48] soon u by December 2027 and we will be
[2:44:52] able to ideally capture some portion of
[2:44:54] the ITC that will help pay for the solar
[2:44:56] that we'll put in our roofs which will
[2:44:58] in turn help pay for electricity in the
[2:45:01] town of Brooklyn. Um it will also
[2:45:04] obviously help us with our zero
[2:45:06] emissions goals. There's a second track
[2:45:08] which is a longerterm expansion.
[2:45:09] Excuse me. Um I don't like uh acronyms.
[2:45:14] ITC means investment tax credit.
[2:45:16] Investment tax credit. Yes, that's
[2:45:18] right.
[2:45:18] I was gonna say
[2:45:21] um and if I'm speaking too quickly, let
[2:45:24] me know. I just don't want to take up
[2:45:25] more than five minutes. Um there's a
[2:45:27] long-term expansion. So, as part of this
[2:45:29] effort, this plan that Tampa put
[2:45:31] together, uh we're looking at planning
[2:45:33] and sequencing for 17 additional sites.
[2:45:36] Um and that's something that will be
[2:45:38] happening next or starting now but going
[2:45:41] into next year. Um I think
[2:45:47] we had some working groups established.
[2:45:48] So we were planned to establish a
[2:45:50] residential working group and a
[2:45:52] commercial working group. We
[2:45:53] successfully established the uh
[2:45:55] residential working group although we
[2:45:56] had to wait for the the community first
[2:45:58] energy advocate to join. Um so we really
[2:46:01] had the first meeting of that in January
[2:46:04] of this year. We established a Berdo
[2:46:07] working group which is a precursor to
[2:46:08] the commercial working group for deep
[2:46:10] analysis of Berdo and to look into that
[2:46:12] to determine whether or not that was
[2:46:14] something that the town should do.
[2:46:18] Uh next slide policy achievements and
[2:46:20] key votes. Um some policy achievements
[2:46:23] and to be clear these are mainly driven
[2:46:25] by the uh the sustainability division.
[2:46:28] We have a municipal decarbonization
[2:46:30] roadmap adopted. Zero emissions vehicle
[2:46:32] policy adopted. Washington Street
[2:46:34] complete streets supported and climate
[2:46:36] leaders application submitted.
[2:46:39] I don't know if we've heard yet. We have
[2:46:41] not. Um we had 10 key votes. 10
[2:46:44] substantive votes were taken, six
[2:46:46] directed towards the select board.
[2:46:50] Next slide. Challenges and lessons
[2:46:52] learned. Um we one of the votes we
[2:46:56] directed towards the site board was not
[2:46:58] taken up by the slight board. Um
[2:46:59] principally because it was not a
[2:47:01] townspecific policy. It was more of a
[2:47:03] state policy. Um we should probably not
[2:47:07] have made that vote. Um we have since
[2:47:09] then I have since then established uh
[2:47:12] regular communication with Tommy Bull to
[2:47:14] just kind of check in on state
[2:47:16] initiatives and policies to make sure
[2:47:17] that we're we have some coordination.
[2:47:20] Um the um
[2:47:23] mass safe programs face legislative
[2:47:25] challenges and we and we uh we had a
[2:47:28] vote go forward on that and we had a
[2:47:31] challenge with the their December GEP
[2:47:33] vote which required a special board
[2:47:35] meeting of the slight board on December
[2:47:37] 23rd which we thank you for. Apologies
[2:47:39] that we did not have better visibility
[2:47:42] into that. Um the other challenge was
[2:47:45] Berto complexity. Um just there was some
[2:47:49] concern from the community. There was a
[2:47:51] lot of complexity around Berto and it
[2:47:54] was a great learning but it was a
[2:47:55] challenge.
[2:47:56] Nick, can you take a couple seconds to
[2:47:58] explain what Berto is?
[2:48:00] Yes. So
[2:48:00] thank you.
[2:48:01] Berto is the building emission reduction
[2:48:05] ordinance
[2:48:06] um that is has been implemented by
[2:48:09] principally Boston Cambridge.
[2:48:12] um also additionally by Newton in a
[2:48:14] lesser form and some other
[2:48:15] municipalities.
[2:48:17] The goal of Berdo is to um have a
[2:48:24] alternative compliance payment for uh
[2:48:27] buildings that do not meet environmental
[2:48:30] standards. And the there are sort of
[2:48:33] three categories of buildings that are
[2:48:36] generally looked at. one of which is
[2:48:37] commercial buildings, one of which is
[2:48:39] large uh residential buildings and then
[2:48:42] kind of everything else. And each town
[2:48:45] has taken a different approach. Each
[2:48:46] town and city has taken a different
[2:48:48] approach to those. And so what we did in
[2:48:49] the burden analysis is we looked at what
[2:48:51] was appropriate for a town like
[2:48:53] Brooklyn, what might be politically
[2:48:56] acceptable, what the impact would be
[2:48:58] from an environmental perspective, what
[2:48:59] the costs might be. And we use that
[2:49:02] initiative as a
[2:49:04] template for the prioritization
[2:49:06] framework to better understand how that
[2:49:07] could be applied to other initiatives.
[2:49:11] Is that helpful? Okay. Um and then the
[2:49:15] final challenge is a very obvious one
[2:49:16] which is the uh should say
[2:49:21] the investment tax credits are expiring.
[2:49:24] uh we are trying to take what advantage
[2:49:25] we can and again we thank the
[2:49:27] sustainability division and the DPW for
[2:49:29] working with us on the municipal solar
[2:49:31] initiative.
[2:49:33] Looking ahead to 2026 um we are looking
[2:49:36] at the carp finalization and adoption.
[2:49:38] We had a
[2:49:40] um a draft sent out recently and it's in
[2:49:45] good shape I think. Um once that is out
[2:49:48] we'll obviously be working on those carp
[2:49:50] goals, strategies and actions. I would
[2:49:53] note it's a 10-year plan. We have three
[2:49:55] different uh tiers of goal, strategy,
[2:49:59] and actions. Uh the intention is over
[2:50:01] the next 10 years that we should be able
[2:50:03] to hit all three. Uh so all of the items
[2:50:08] in there, but we're trying to prioritize
[2:50:10] those that we can hit first because
[2:50:13] they're more important based upon the
[2:50:14] framework. But we also recognize that we
[2:50:16] might not be able to get to some of
[2:50:17] them. So we may in fact start picking
[2:50:19] things from tier two or tier three as
[2:50:21] appropriate.
[2:50:22] Um the other things we'll be focusing on
[2:50:24] are the municipal solar implementation
[2:50:26] although that's mainly in the hands of
[2:50:28] the sustainability division and DPW and
[2:50:32] probably more looking at the track to
[2:50:33] municipal solar planning and community
[2:50:35] engagement.
[2:50:37] Um we'll also be continuing to work on
[2:50:39] the residents working group and try and
[2:50:41] evolve the commercial working group into
[2:50:44] um try and start the commercial working
[2:50:45] group uh evolving from the Berto working
[2:50:48] group
[2:50:49] and then we can go to discussions and
[2:50:51] questions. Before any discussion or
[2:50:54] questions I do have a very long
[2:50:56] narrative which I've put together which
[2:50:58] I didn't send out with the packet but I
[2:51:00] will be sending out if anyone wants to
[2:51:01] read it. So if any of your questions are
[2:51:03] not answered they will probably be
[2:51:05] answered in that packet.
[2:51:07] So, thank you,
[2:51:09] David.
[2:51:10] So, you talked about uh that one of the
[2:51:12] goals was to take full advantage of the
[2:51:14] inflation reduction act incentives. Now,
[2:51:17] my understanding is that originally uh
[2:51:20] so that included a 30% residential tax
[2:51:23] credit on solar. It was initially set to
[2:51:26] expire in 2032.
[2:51:28] when the uh big beautiful bill as it's
[2:51:31] called passed that moved the expiration
[2:51:34] date to December 31st 2025. So we're
[2:51:38] already past that expiration date. So
[2:51:40] were there additional grants that were
[2:51:43] sought
[2:51:44] that was for residential. So we're
[2:51:45] looking at I think for the town we have
[2:51:47] two dates. We have um any uh project
[2:51:52] placed in service by July 3rd or or
[2:51:56] something of this year would be
[2:51:58] eligible. Okay.
[2:51:59] I don't think we're going to hit that
[2:52:00] date.
[2:52:01] Um being placed not placed in service uh
[2:52:03] where the project has started. So that
[2:52:05] would include basically making a
[2:52:06] commitment to someone who is going to do
[2:52:09] the project, a financial commitment or
[2:52:12] projects which completed by December
[2:52:14] 31st, 2027 will be eligible for between
[2:52:17] 30 and 40% depending upon the source of
[2:52:19] the solar panels
[2:52:21] and that's specific to commercial.
[2:52:24] Um it's it the town can take advantage
[2:52:27] of it.
[2:52:27] The town
[2:52:28] is the important part.
[2:52:29] All right.
[2:52:31] And that is part of the plan that the
[2:52:33] sustainability division put together um
[2:52:36] for
[2:52:39] this year that this the phase one and
[2:52:40] phase two. This is they're phase one is
[2:52:42] trying to take advantage of those
[2:52:43] credits and save the town some money,
[2:52:45] get some federal funding.
[2:52:46] Okay.
[2:52:49] Any other questions?
[2:52:52] Can I just
[2:52:52] Sure.
[2:52:53] Just uh Nick, first thank you so much.
[2:52:55] Um is this your first or second time in
[2:52:57] front of us? Second time.
[2:52:58] It's my second time. It's
[2:52:58] your second time. Well done. Very
[2:53:00] efficient. Um, so just to be clear, we
[2:53:03] started Berto investigated and then
[2:53:05] we're we're not going to pursue it. Is
[2:53:07] that my read of this?
[2:53:09] Um, I think it's unfortunately.
[2:53:11] Yes.
[2:53:12] A bit a bit more complicated than that.
[2:53:14] Uh, Berto turned out to be uh priority
[2:53:16] two. So it's not in the top tier of
[2:53:19] things that we would focus on.
[2:53:20] Okay.
[2:53:20] This is a 10-year plan where we hope to
[2:53:22] hit everything in the carp, which would
[2:53:25] include Berto.
[2:53:26] Yeah. Um when the city of Boston started
[2:53:29] their Berto initiative, it took years
[2:53:31] for them to get it moving forward. So
[2:53:33] it's not an overnight thing. It's not
[2:53:35] like something we we switch on.
[2:53:37] Um if we look at out 10 years and we try
[2:53:40] and you know kind of work back from that
[2:53:41] 10-year period and we say we want to
[2:53:43] have something like Berto in place,
[2:53:45] it is likely that we need to start
[2:53:46] working on the next couple of years in
[2:53:49] some form.
[2:53:49] And to be clear what Berto I know you
[2:53:51] explained it, but in simple terms, Berto
[2:53:54] places a requirement on large buildings
[2:53:57] either large commercial
[2:53:58] Yep. or
[2:53:59] or large and or large residential or
[2:54:01] everyone
[2:54:01] and they have and they have to measure
[2:54:03] their energy consumption and at some
[2:54:04] point they start getting dinged for not
[2:54:07] reducing their energy consumption.
[2:54:08] Correct. Essentially
[2:54:09] that that is a flavor of it. Yes. So um
[2:54:12] I think what ZAB determined was that um
[2:54:15] we would probably recommend we would
[2:54:18] likely recommend something which focused
[2:54:19] on commercial buildings first because
[2:54:21] that's what everyone else has done. And
[2:54:23] we also were looking at uh ways to
[2:54:29] trying to look at ways to incentivize
[2:54:31] people to do things in other ways.
[2:54:32] We don't need to dig into I just want to
[2:54:33] make sure that it's kind of it's a tier
[2:54:35] two. So it's
[2:54:35] it is a tier two.
[2:54:36] Okay. Thank you.
[2:54:40] Okay. No other questions. Thank you Nick
[2:54:42] for presentation. It's very formative.
[2:54:46] We need to know what ZF's doing. Thank
[2:54:48] you. I I will send out the longer
[2:54:50] narrative and if you want to get to
[2:54:52] sleep, you can read it.
[2:54:53] Thank you.
[2:54:54] We will need it. Thank you.
[2:54:56] Okay.
[2:54:58] Next, uh we have grant of location, a a
[2:55:01] grant of location for the MBTA.
[2:55:04] Um
[2:55:06] and I have to read some stuff.
[2:55:10] The next items on tonight's agenda
[2:55:12] relate to the MBTA Green Line C branch
[2:55:15] accessibility project along Beacon
[2:55:18] Street. The MBTA is working to upgrade
[2:55:22] several stations in Brooklyn to meet ADA
[2:55:24] accessibility requirements. Mhm.
[2:55:26] The select board approved amended grants
[2:55:29] of location for two stations earlier
[2:55:31] this fall and tonight we are considering
[2:55:34] the remaining five stations that require
[2:55:36] amended grants of location in order to
[2:55:39] construct the accessible platforms and
[2:55:42] related improvements.
[2:55:45] The board received a full project
[2:55:48] presentation from the MBTA on February
[2:55:50] 24th and the transportation board
[2:55:53] reviewed the plans on February 25th and
[2:55:57] voted in support of the parking and lane
[2:55:59] reduction required for the project.
[2:56:03] This evening, the select board will
[2:56:05] consider three related items.
[2:56:10] We will have a public hearing and
[2:56:13] possible vote on the amended grants of
[2:56:15] location.
[2:56:17] Uh we will also address supporting
[2:56:19] transportation board direction to staff
[2:56:22] regarding the U-turn movement near Hall
[2:56:25] Street
[2:56:27] and we will discuss a memorandum of
[2:56:29] understanding between the MBTA and the
[2:56:32] town.
[2:56:36] So let's start off with the first item
[2:56:40] uh which is the public hearing on the
[2:56:41] MBTA's request for amended grants
[2:56:44] location for
[2:56:46] um following station Hall Street St.
[2:56:49] Paul Street Summit Avenue
[2:56:52] Brandon Hall Fairbanks and Dean Road.
[2:56:56] And we'll start with a presentation from
[2:56:58] the MBTA describing the requested grants
[2:57:01] of location.
[2:57:06] Who wrote this?
[2:57:26] Good evening. Like to thank the select
[2:57:28] board for having the MTA again. Um I'm
[2:57:30] joined by Gwen Dun Levy, deputy chief of
[2:57:32] integrated transit programs, who is
[2:57:34] leading the green line program in this
[2:57:36] project's construction. Uh it's very
[2:57:38] exciting to be here this evening for a
[2:57:39] critical milestone uh to get the seabs
[2:57:41] fully accessible.
[2:57:45] Tonight we're seeking an amendment to
[2:57:47] the grant of location. As was discussed,
[2:57:49] this is a grant of location that dates
[2:57:51] back to 1897
[2:57:53] and allows for the C branch to operate
[2:57:55] today and will allow us to modernize the
[2:57:57] C branch going forward. We'll cover the
[2:57:59] stations that are being improved, the
[2:58:01] timeline, and provide a recap of our
[2:58:04] recent work with Brooklyn's various
[2:58:05] boards and committees.
[2:58:07] Excuse me. And could you identify
[2:58:09] yourself for the record?
[2:58:11] Thank you. Got ahead of myself. My name
[2:58:12] is Matt Conover. I happen to also be a
[2:58:15] resident
[2:58:16] and do work for the MBTA.
[2:58:18] Maybe I'll walk home tonight because
[2:58:19] it's a pretty nice night.
[2:58:22] Uh so, as I was saying, tonight we will
[2:58:24] uh seek that amendment to the grant of
[2:58:26] location. We'll cover the stations that
[2:58:27] are being improved, the timeline, and
[2:58:29] provide a recap of our recent work with
[2:58:31] Brookline's various boards and
[2:58:32] committees. We'll conclude by detailing
[2:58:34] a specific a specific amendment to that
[2:58:36] grant of location.
[2:58:39] So, currently there are nine
[2:58:41] inaccessible stations on the C branch.
[2:58:43] This project will upgrade all of those
[2:58:45] stations by widening and raising the
[2:58:47] platforms to accommodate mobility
[2:58:49] devices by removing platform
[2:58:50] obstructions, installing platform
[2:58:52] lighting and signage, and upgrade
[2:58:54] pedestrian crossings to the platforms.
[2:58:56] As part of this project, we will combine
[2:58:58] Brandon Hall and Fairbank Street into a
[2:59:00] single station that will accommodate the
[2:59:01] new type 10 trains and can serve will
[2:59:03] allow them to serve all the stations
[2:59:05] along the line. We will also close Kent
[2:59:07] Street station due to its proximity to
[2:59:09] Haw Street.
[2:59:20] Pardon me. So those uh issues that I
[2:59:22] described on the stations are shown here
[2:59:24] on the screen. You can see that there's
[2:59:25] limited protection from traffic.
[2:59:27] Stations are overcrowded, platforms are
[2:59:29] narrow, uh we have limited way finding
[2:59:31] and steep slopes. There are also various
[2:59:34] issues with obstacles in the way such as
[2:59:36] poles and trees and then a lack of
[2:59:38] lighting. And as I mentioned, we would
[2:59:39] address those.
[2:59:46] I feel like this is the wrong deck here.
[2:59:50] Excuse me. I apologize to the board.
[2:59:51] This is the incorrect deck.
[2:59:54] I can give that one again, but it is
[2:59:55] pretty long.
[3:00:09] This is not the right item.
[3:00:11] We can do it without a deck, too. It's
[3:00:13] going to be harder for your part.
[3:00:15] I don't think so.
[3:00:21] We have the deck in our packet.
[3:00:24] We have your
[3:00:30] Oh, see I'd be the last without Gwen.
[3:00:32] Thank you.
[3:00:36] Is the screen sharing here though? No.
[3:00:50] want to use a lifeline or
[3:00:52] definitely
[3:00:56] always stay humble when it comes to
[3:00:57] technology. I saw the audio stuff. I
[3:00:59] didn't say anything.
[3:01:08] All right. Here we go. Now we're on
[3:01:10] track.
[3:01:12] So, this project is the result of
[3:01:13] extensive collaboration between the MBTA
[3:01:16] and the town of Brooklyn. Through
[3:01:17] numerous engagements with residents,
[3:01:18] elected officials, and stakeholders,
[3:01:20] we've developed a project that will
[3:01:22] deliver significant improvements and
[3:01:23] minimize impacts. Over the last few
[3:01:26] weeks, we've secured feedback and
[3:01:28] support from the tree planting
[3:01:29] committee, the commission on
[3:01:30] accessibility, the transportation board,
[3:01:32] the select board, and the public as we
[3:01:34] finalized the project design plans. We
[3:01:37] will return to Brookline in April for a
[3:01:39] pre-construction meeting at which time
[3:01:41] we will describe the actual construction
[3:01:42] details and plans. Construction will
[3:01:45] start shortly after the marathon in late
[3:01:47] April.
[3:01:52] With the received approval from the tree
[3:01:53] planting committee and the select board,
[3:01:56] this project will remove 50 young trees
[3:01:58] and 46 mature trees. This includes the
[3:02:00] construction of two ramps at Brandon
[3:02:02] Hall which is required for equal access
[3:02:05] and compliance with accessibility laws.
[3:02:08] The MBTA has set aside dedicated funding
[3:02:10] which with which will use to replant 98
[3:02:13] trees along the Beacon Street corridor.
[3:02:15] Any remaining funds that are available
[3:02:17] will be used for additional trees at the
[3:02:19] town's discretion.
[3:02:23] With the received approval from the
[3:02:25] transportation board, the project will
[3:02:26] update five crosswalks, 11 track
[3:02:28] crossings. We will retain all existing
[3:02:31] accessible parking spaces, but we will
[3:02:33] remove 22 parking spaces, two angled
[3:02:35] spaces, and 20 parallel spaces. And
[3:02:38] along Beacon Street eastbound, one lane
[3:02:40] will be removed at Haw Street to
[3:02:42] accommodate the new station and the
[3:02:43] accessible curb. At the direction of the
[3:02:46] transportation board, Brooklyn Town
[3:02:48] staff will conduct a traffic analysis to
[3:02:50] investigate the best use of the
[3:02:51] remaining lanes and how to provide
[3:02:53] access in that area. So, with that
[3:02:55] summary, I will provide
[3:02:58] the technology to Gwen, who is obviously
[3:03:00] much better at it than
[3:03:04] Thank you, Matt. Uh, my name is Gwen
[3:03:06] Dunvy. I'm the deputy chief of
[3:03:08] integrated transit programs. I oversee
[3:03:10] the green line transformation group
[3:03:11] which uh manages a holistic group of
[3:03:13] projects modernizing the green line. I'm
[3:03:17] sure I'm familiar to a lot of you
[3:03:19] already as I've done a few of these
[3:03:20] presentations. Um but we're going to go
[3:03:22] through and look at the details of the
[3:03:24] different grants locations at the
[3:03:25] various stations uh that we're
[3:03:27] discussing today. Starting with Dean
[3:03:29] Road.
[3:03:31] As Matt mentioned, the existing grant
[3:03:32] location dates back 130 years to 1897
[3:03:37] when it was signed. Um that grant
[3:03:39] allocation was um pretty simple. It
[3:03:42] granted the MBTA 20 ft of space in the
[3:03:45] center of Beacon Street to run the
[3:03:47] trains back and forth. It encompasses
[3:03:49] basically just the tracks. Uh it has not
[3:03:52] been amended since then. So all of the
[3:03:53] stations that currently exist are not in
[3:03:56] a grant of location. Um shown on this
[3:03:59] slide we have that 20 foot strip uh in
[3:04:02] purple which is labeled here as well as
[3:04:05] the locations of the existing platforms
[3:04:07] and their sizes. Uh the other thing that
[3:04:10] we highlight here is the existing
[3:04:12] shelter at a number of stations
[3:04:15] including this one. They're existing uh
[3:04:17] similar to bus style shelters uh that
[3:04:19] are going to be removed by this project
[3:04:21] and new shelters will be added to the
[3:04:23] various platforms uh with this project.
[3:04:27] Uh moving on to the uh proposed
[3:04:30] additions to the grant location shown
[3:04:32] here blue. Um we will be asking for
[3:04:34] grants location at the two new station
[3:04:36] platforms west of Dean Road um both for
[3:04:40] the inbound and outbound. Um both of
[3:04:42] these are about 2,000 square feet, a
[3:04:44] little less um and encompass the station
[3:04:47] platforms and their walkways.
[3:04:51] Uh moving to our last slide on Dean
[3:04:53] Road, we highlight both those same grant
[3:04:56] locations with the existing in purple
[3:04:57] and the amended grant location in blue.
[3:05:00] Along with pointing out the four
[3:05:02] walkways leaving the station platforms
[3:05:04] in both directions and the two station
[3:05:06] platforms. Um one thing people may
[3:05:09] notice looking at this is that the
[3:05:11] platform widths are different at
[3:05:13] different stations. Uh there are two
[3:05:15] main reasons for this. The first is some
[3:05:17] platforms do have uh catinary poles.
[3:05:19] Those are the poles that hold the power
[3:05:21] wires uh for the powering the trains. Um
[3:05:26] and those cause the platforms to shift a
[3:05:28] little bit in width. The other is that
[3:05:30] the tracks are not exactly 20 ft wide.
[3:05:32] So parts of the grants location in some
[3:05:35] cases are including part of the platform
[3:05:38] and in some cases the tracks are very
[3:05:40] very close to the edges of that those
[3:05:42] grants location. the platforms appear a
[3:05:44] little wider and that is why there's a
[3:05:46] little variability in platform widths
[3:05:48] between these different stations.
[3:05:52] Uh the next up is Fairbanks Street
[3:05:55] Brandon Hall consolidated station and
[3:05:57] that will be in the location of roughly
[3:06:00] the current Brandon Hall station a
[3:06:01] little west of that. Um here we have our
[3:06:04] existing grant location again in purple
[3:06:06] that 20 foot wide strip where the tracks
[3:06:07] are located as well as the two existing
[3:06:10] platforms um and the locations of the
[3:06:13] existing shelters in this area.
[3:06:17] Looking at our future grants locations,
[3:06:19] we have the two new platforms uh located
[3:06:22] close to where Brandon Hall is now, as
[3:06:25] well as grants locations for the two
[3:06:26] accessible ramps that are being added to
[3:06:28] on the slopes for people with
[3:06:31] accessibility needs to be able to make
[3:06:33] their way down um from Beacon Street
[3:06:35] westbound to Beacon Street eastbound and
[3:06:37] where the station platforms are. Um this
[3:06:40] is because we need to provide equal
[3:06:42] access for everyone. Uh and as there are
[3:06:44] two stairs to make your way down um to
[3:06:47] the lower side of Beacon Street, we are
[3:06:49] adding those two ramps.
[3:06:52] Um similar to before, we highlight the
[3:06:55] exact location of those platforms as
[3:06:57] well as showing the ramps uh with the
[3:06:59] new grant amended granted location we
[3:07:02] are requesting in blue and the existing
[3:07:04] granted location in purple.
[3:07:09] Next up, we have Summit A. again with
[3:07:11] that 20 foot strip of purple that is the
[3:07:13] existing grant of location uh and
[3:07:16] highlighting the existing shelter and
[3:07:18] the two existing track platforms uh for
[3:07:21] the inbound and outbound sides on Beacon
[3:07:24] Street eastbound and westbound. Um in
[3:07:27] this location uh the platform will be
[3:07:29] shifting slightly to the west. uh
[3:07:32] specifically the outbound platform will
[3:07:34] be while the inbound platform will
[3:07:36] remain in roughly the same location all
[3:07:38] will be although it will be shortened uh
[3:07:40] a bit.
[3:07:42] Um here we show the updated grant to
[3:07:45] location that we are requesting with
[3:07:47] those two platforms just east of Marian
[3:07:50] Street. Um these are roughly 2500 square
[3:07:55] square feet and 2,000 square feet uh for
[3:07:57] the westbound and eastbound respectively
[3:08:01] highlighted in blue.
[3:08:03] And the final configuration showing the
[3:08:07] platform width as well as the walkways
[3:08:11] that will be uh included uh platforms in
[3:08:14] blue again and the existing grant
[3:08:16] location in purple.
[3:08:20] Next is St. Paul Street. Uh again
[3:08:22] showing the existing condition with that
[3:08:25] 20 foot grant to location in purple and
[3:08:27] the existing platform locations with the
[3:08:30] existing inbound platform to the west of
[3:08:33] St. Paul Street and the existing
[3:08:35] outbound platform to the east as well as
[3:08:39] the existing shelter.
[3:08:43] Uh in the future configuration, both
[3:08:45] platforms will be to the east of St.
[3:08:47] Paul Street. um a outbound about 1,400
[3:08:50] square feet, the inbound about 1,800
[3:08:53] square feet, and those are shown in
[3:08:55] blue.
[3:08:57] Uh and then moving to our final St. Paul
[3:08:59] Street slide, we highlight those two
[3:09:02] platforms as well as the walkways that
[3:09:04] are included in that grantification of
[3:09:06] longer walkways.
[3:09:10] Uh Kent Street is a little different as
[3:09:12] Matt had mentioned. Uh this station will
[3:09:14] be closed uh due to its proximity to Haw
[3:09:17] and St. Paul. Um, so the existing grant
[3:09:19] location as I had mentioned earlier does
[3:09:21] not include the existing platform. So
[3:09:23] there will be no change to the grant
[3:09:24] location. But at this location and all
[3:09:27] the other places where we are moving
[3:09:29] platforms and we will be leaving behind
[3:09:31] an area where a platform used to be and
[3:09:32] there will be no new platform. Um, we
[3:09:35] will be removing the asphalt of the
[3:09:37] platform so that trees can be planted,
[3:09:39] grass can grow. Um, and we will not be
[3:09:41] making any changes to the grants
[3:09:43] location in those places as there's no
[3:09:44] nothing existing. There's nothing to
[3:09:46] really change at those locations.
[3:09:51] Lastly, we have Haw Street highlighting
[3:09:53] again that 20 foot strip that is our
[3:09:55] existing granted location and the two
[3:09:58] current track platforms as well as the
[3:10:00] existing shelters at this location.
[3:10:03] Um, moving to our requested granted
[3:10:05] location in blue, we have the inbound
[3:10:09] and outbound platforms both around 1900
[3:10:11] square feet. Um and the final
[3:10:14] configuration highlighting the four
[3:10:16] walkways to exit the platform and the
[3:10:18] those two platforms themselves uh all to
[3:10:22] the west of Paw Street.
[3:10:27] Um to summarize where where this all
[3:10:31] ends up, we have the total square
[3:10:33] footage of the granted location for each
[3:10:35] of the seven stations as well as Kent
[3:10:39] Street, uh which will not be asking for
[3:10:42] an amended granted location totaling in
[3:10:44] about 30,000 square feet total for all
[3:10:48] seven of those stations.
[3:10:51] And with that, like to open it up to any
[3:10:53] questions anyone may have.
[3:10:55] Okay, any questions from the board?
[3:11:01] I knew you'd have a question.
[3:11:02] I actually don't have a question. I have
[3:11:03] a compliment.
[3:11:04] Oh, okay.
[3:11:05] Would that be okay?
[3:11:05] Yes, that's fine.
[3:11:06] Am I authorized to give a compliment?
[3:11:08] Always authorized.
[3:11:09] Um, so Michael and I have had uh the
[3:11:12] pleasure. It's usually been a pleasure
[3:11:14] to work with the MBTA and staff and, you
[3:11:18] know, committees and Brian. Um, and I
[3:11:22] was skeptical going into it. I admit
[3:11:24] working with the MBTA when I was asked
[3:11:26] to participate like what am I getting
[3:11:27] myself into? Um but I will say it's been
[3:11:30] a pleasure. Um the willingness of the
[3:11:32] MBTA to partner. Um I know it it's it's
[3:11:36] probably it wasn't seen publicly because
[3:11:38] the public wasn't behind the scenes kind
[3:11:40] of seeing these things. But you did make
[3:11:43] a lot of concessions and you were
[3:11:45] cooperative. Um you sometimes
[3:11:47] begrudgingly made changes, but you made
[3:11:49] the changes. Um I think to the benefit
[3:11:51] of our community, certainly for the
[3:11:53] benefit of our community, we had a
[3:11:54] interview tonight for the disabilities
[3:11:56] commission who raised issues of
[3:11:58] accessibility. Um and uh it's so
[3:12:02] important for our community to have
[3:12:04] accessible transportation and access to
[3:12:06] the tea. But this is coming at a high
[3:12:08] cost. Um you know, we don't discount the
[3:12:11] loss of mature trees, uh the tree
[3:12:14] canopy. um we are making significant
[3:12:16] sacrifices uh to partner with you to
[3:12:19] grant this location. Um but I personally
[3:12:22] think it's it's worth it. Um I look
[3:12:24] forward to the trees growing back and
[3:12:26] getting bigger and hopefully we'll leave
[3:12:27] enough room for them to grow and not
[3:12:29] have to uh impede the tracks like they
[3:12:32] have in the past. But I just want to say
[3:12:33] thank you to everybody who's been
[3:12:35] involved. Um it was a tremendous amount
[3:12:39] of work to have this uh have this get to
[3:12:42] this point. Um, I just want to assure
[3:12:44] you, um, and it's I' I've really enjoyed
[3:12:46] being part of it. So, thank you so much.
[3:12:50] Okay. Any other questions?
[3:12:52] We're we're just discussing 11A at this
[3:12:55] point.
[3:12:55] Yep.
[3:12:55] Yeah. Okay.
[3:12:59] Okay. If there are no other questions
[3:13:00] from the select board, let's open up the
[3:13:02] meeting or the uh public comment period.
[3:13:05] So, we have Alyssa P has signed up. I
[3:13:08] don't see her online.
[3:13:10] She's right.
[3:13:12] You have two hands online.
[3:13:14] Um, Alisa Plazanja, precinct 8. Uh, two
[3:13:17] weeks ago, you received a petition from
[3:13:20] 176 Brookline residents asking you to
[3:13:23] take action on three items related to
[3:13:25] this project um for the seaine. You
[3:13:29] declined to act on Brandon Hall
[3:13:30] Fairbanks, but you didn't respond to the
[3:13:33] other two issues raised in the petition.
[3:13:36] So, I'm here tonight to ask you to
[3:13:38] respond to them, please. The first was
[3:13:41] um will you commit to more comprehensive
[3:13:45] ecological restoration? So this is above
[3:13:47] and beyond the replanting that the MBTA
[3:13:50] will be um providing. So there are spots
[3:13:53] along the way that are currently barren.
[3:13:54] So to the extent that the tea is really
[3:13:56] just replacing what might be lost, would
[3:13:59] you will the town of Brookline look to
[3:14:02] expand the plantings beyond what the
[3:14:05] MBTA is doing? The second question is,
[3:14:08] will you ask the MBTA for their
[3:14:09] commitment that they will not harm any
[3:14:12] wildlife during this work? This question
[3:14:14] may be an issue of just clarifying
[3:14:16] terminology as the MBTA has stated on
[3:14:19] the record that they will comply with
[3:14:21] all state and federal environmental
[3:14:23] regulations, but it's my understanding
[3:14:26] that state and federal law does not
[3:14:28] protect common species such as squirrels
[3:14:31] and non-migratory birds such as house
[3:14:34] sparrows and starings. Since there are
[3:14:36] 55 mature trees slated for removal,
[3:14:39] that's including the other two stations
[3:14:41] that you've already approved. It
[3:14:43] certainly seems quite possible, given
[3:14:46] that we're entering nesting season and
[3:14:47] that the work here isn't going to begin
[3:14:49] until April that some of these trees may
[3:14:52] contain nests with baby sparrows,
[3:14:54] starings, or baby squirrels. And as a
[3:14:57] result, merely complying with the law
[3:14:59] could lead to baby animals being killed
[3:15:00] if the tree in which their nest is
[3:15:02] located is removed. Now, I would hope
[3:15:05] that neither the select board nor the
[3:15:07] MBTA would want any innocent baby
[3:15:09] animals to be harmed as a result of this
[3:15:11] project. So, will you ask the MBTA for
[3:15:14] their explicit commitment that no
[3:15:16] nesting animals of any kind will be
[3:15:18] displaced or harmed as a result of this
[3:15:20] work as we asked you in the petition?
[3:15:22] Thank you.
[3:15:30] There's nothing we can do tonight
[3:15:33] in response to that. So,
[3:15:36] yes.
[3:15:39] Okay. Who's next?
[3:15:40] Um, we have Sean Lynn Jones online.
[3:15:50] Hello. Can you hear me?
[3:15:52] Yes, we can.
[3:15:54] Well, I I I know there are some issues
[3:15:57] with microphones and uh I hope I can be
[3:16:01] heard or at least the transcript can be
[3:16:03] read. I'm Sean Lynn Jones and uh I am
[3:16:07] president of the Brooklyn Greenspace
[3:16:09] Alliance and um I'm also a town meeting
[3:16:12] member from Precinct 1. I live at 53
[3:16:14] Mona Street.
[3:16:16] Um it has been difficult to follow this
[3:16:19] meeting through the multiple means. I'm
[3:16:21] trying to follow it. But I do want to
[3:16:23] offer a couple of comments. First, um,
[3:16:26] thank you to, uh, the MBTA for their
[3:16:30] patience, their presentations, and thank
[3:16:32] you to all the town staff who've been
[3:16:34] working on this for well over a year
[3:16:37] now. Uh, I've been particularly
[3:16:39] concerned about tree loss associated
[3:16:41] with this project. And um I think in
[3:16:44] every case except for Fairbanks and
[3:16:46] Brandon Hall, there's been a good
[3:16:48] compromise to preserve trees, provide
[3:16:51] the accessibility we need, and improve
[3:16:53] these stations in in many ways. Uh I
[3:16:56] just want to make a couple of points
[3:16:58] tonight. I know that item 11 C on the
[3:17:02] agenda calls for a memorandum of
[3:17:03] understanding. I don't know in that what
[3:17:07] that would look like. It doesn't seem to
[3:17:08] be posted on the website, but I recall
[3:17:11] when the select board previously voted
[3:17:13] on grass locations for the Anglewood and
[3:17:17] um tapen stations, uh John Vansko
[3:17:20] suggested that there be a condition that
[3:17:22] basically called upon the MBTA to uh
[3:17:26] adhere to its commitments in return for
[3:17:28] the town granting the locations. I hope
[3:17:30] that in theouou that could be included
[3:17:33] uh as well as perhaps some of the
[3:17:35] provisions that the previous speaker
[3:17:36] mentioned regarding the overall
[3:17:38] ecological restoration here. Uh this is
[3:17:41] going to be a complicated project with
[3:17:43] many dimensions. I hope that the trees
[3:17:45] can be protected where they need to be
[3:17:47] protected, replanted where they need to
[3:17:49] be replanted and additional steps will
[3:17:52] be taken uh to manage this from an
[3:17:55] environmental standpoint. There'll
[3:17:57] obviously be a lot of uh transit and
[3:17:59] traffic and parking impacts during the
[3:18:01] construction project which would be
[3:18:03] covered by theou.
[3:18:05] Now I'm not sure uh to what extent this
[3:18:08] is also a public hearing on the question
[3:18:10] of the hall street design which is also
[3:18:13] on the agenda for this meeting as item
[3:18:15] 11b. Um, I attended the transportation
[3:18:19] board uh meeting, I believe on February
[3:18:21] 25th, and there was a very productive
[3:18:23] discussion of how to retain that U-turn,
[3:18:27] inbound U-turn at Hall Street for the
[3:18:30] benefit not only of the neighbors, but
[3:18:31] for other users who uh needed to turn
[3:18:35] around without having to go well out of
[3:18:37] their way. Um, I came away encouraged
[3:18:40] that the U-turn would be maintained.
[3:18:43] It's right in my neighborhood and I hope
[3:18:45] that that will be possible um through
[3:18:48] staff work to come up with the design
[3:18:50] that uh preserves trees, modernizes the
[3:18:54] station, makes it ADA compliant and
[3:18:56] keeps that um inbound uh U-turn in a
[3:19:00] fairly functional way. Uh so those are
[3:19:03] my only comments at this point. I've
[3:19:05] spoken previously, but again, I would
[3:19:07] like to thank everyone who's worked on
[3:19:09] this for so long, and I hope that we can
[3:19:12] still make a little progress on some of
[3:19:15] the issues that the other speakers have
[3:19:16] raised and nail everything down in theou
[3:19:20] so that commitments are clear and
[3:19:22] commitments are respected as this goes
[3:19:25] forward. And I look forward to seeing
[3:19:27] the conclusion of this project and the
[3:19:30] final result. Thank you very much.
[3:19:35] Next is Cara Peterson.
[3:19:39] Hello. Um, do you need to have my video
[3:19:41] on or is it okay if I stay off video?
[3:19:44] It's fine to stay off.
[3:19:46] Okay, thank you. Um, so I'm Cara
[3:19:49] Peterson. I'm a Beacon Street resident
[3:19:51] uh who lives between Brandon Hall and
[3:19:53] Summit Stations. Um, I've also spoken
[3:19:55] previously, specifically at the last
[3:19:57] meeting. Um, and I want to state my
[3:19:59] support for Shaun's points, um, and
[3:20:01] Elisa's request for more specific
[3:20:04] wildlife protections and to ask the
[3:20:06] board to protect existing and nesting
[3:20:09] wildlife at Brandon Hall and Fairbanks.
[3:20:11] Specifically,
[3:20:13] Alisa asked that you respond to her
[3:20:15] queries. So, I'd like to ask that you
[3:20:17] also right now tonight respond
[3:20:19] specifically to her queries as long as
[3:20:23] well as to local residents petition that
[3:20:26] we circulated. got quite a few
[3:20:28] signatures on and I have not heard
[3:20:30] addressed by the board. I would really
[3:20:32] like to hear your thoughts about that
[3:20:34] and points um that you can consider and
[3:20:39] advance
[3:20:41] um the cause of environmental
[3:20:44] protections for those specific stations.
[3:20:47] Um, and also the petition concerns
[3:20:51] local unhappiness with the removal of
[3:20:54] the trees at Brandon Hall and Fairbank
[3:20:56] Station. Um, I agree that the MBTA has
[3:20:59] made concessions. Um, but I have not
[3:21:02] heard from the board um any points about
[3:21:05] the things that we have raised. Um,
[3:21:07] that's a little disappointing. as a
[3:21:09] local resident, I would like to hear
[3:21:11] from um the local officials about what
[3:21:15] else can be done to enhance these
[3:21:17] protections. So, thank you very much. I
[3:21:19] appreciate being heard.
[3:21:22] Okay. The uh board as a board will not
[3:21:25] uh respond or or make um commitments.
[3:21:28] However, individual board members can
[3:21:30] express their opinions on variety of
[3:21:33] subjects as they want.
[3:21:35] I can't hear you at all.
[3:21:36] Well, pardon me.
[3:21:38] I can't hear you at all.
[3:21:42] What's going on here?
[3:21:43] We We're having audio issues on the
[3:21:46] Zoom. We encourage folks if you're
[3:21:47] having trouble hearing on the Zoom. Um
[3:21:50] you can go to B.I.'s YouTube stream. Uh
[3:21:53] that should be that should have audio
[3:21:55] functioning. Um but again, we're we're
[3:21:58] trying to speak into our microphones and
[3:21:59] be as loud as possible here. Um, and we
[3:22:02] will do our best to keep up the volume
[3:22:04] in this room. But if you are having
[3:22:06] trouble hearing on the Zoom broadcast,
[3:22:08] please tune in uh either on your cable
[3:22:10] channels, if you have cable to B.I.
[3:22:13] Brookline Interactive Group, or on
[3:22:14] YouTube. Uh, regardless of where you
[3:22:16] are, uh, you can access the live stream.
[3:22:18] Uh, and that has audio that is
[3:22:20] functioning normally, and you should be
[3:22:21] able to hear the proceedings as they go
[3:22:22] on. Thank you.
[3:22:25] Can you hear me now?
[3:22:26] Well, now we've moved on from the
[3:22:27] speaker.
[3:22:28] Okay.
[3:22:30] Um, I see Brian Kaine had his hand
[3:22:32] raised.
[3:22:34] Please go go to the podium.
[3:22:39] Thank you very much. Uh, Brian Kaine, I
[3:22:41] have the great honor to chair the
[3:22:42] transportation board and work with some
[3:22:43] amazing uh, DPW transportation
[3:22:46] officials. Um, and uh, due respect, uh,
[3:22:50] you're pretty persuasive when you need
[3:22:52] to be. Uh, and so I think a lot of the
[3:22:55] um the concessions that were made are
[3:22:58] due in large part to to to what you uh
[3:23:01] yourself and Michael put forward, Paul.
[3:23:03] So, thank you for that. Um, as as I
[3:23:06] mentioned the last time we did this, um,
[3:23:08] Brookline has won these negotiations and
[3:23:11] it's really important that we not lose
[3:23:13] sight of what this is at the end of the
[3:23:15] day. This is an accessibility project. I
[3:23:17] mentioned at the last transportation
[3:23:19] board meeting that I actually wrote my
[3:23:20] graduate school application about making
[3:23:22] the sealine accessible and that was 20
[3:23:24] years ago. I was with a group of folks
[3:23:26] uh some of them were in wheelchairs,
[3:23:28] some of them weren't and and we were
[3:23:29] trying to get ourselves back from
[3:23:30] Washington Square to their hotel. It was
[3:23:32] a holiday in at the time. Not sure what
[3:23:33] it's called now. And uh we had to wait
[3:23:35] so long to individually crank up that
[3:23:38] ramp for every single person that a
[3:23:40] couple of the folks couldn't make it and
[3:23:42] had some accidents. And it was it was
[3:23:44] really robbed them of their dignity. And
[3:23:46] um you know I I sort of decided then and
[3:23:49] there that this is something that we
[3:23:50] needed to do as a society. I had didn't
[3:23:52] live in Brook light at the time. I I had
[3:23:54] no idea I'd be doing this. But look at
[3:23:56] the end of the day this is an
[3:23:57] accessibility project. We're going to
[3:23:58] make each of these stations accessible.
[3:24:00] Moving towards having the tea being 100%
[3:24:02] accessible uh hopefully in the next
[3:24:04] decade. It it'll be a first for a major
[3:24:06] transportation public transportation
[3:24:08] system in the country. and the the the
[3:24:10] steps that this town is going through to
[3:24:12] to do its part are incredible and are
[3:24:15] very important and I really am grateful
[3:24:17] to each of you um on the dis tonight for
[3:24:20] for doing that and and for taking the
[3:24:22] time to do that. Um unfortunately I have
[3:24:24] a 9:00 meeting for my day job so I I
[3:24:27] won't be around for the next part. So
[3:24:28] let me just say real quick about Haw
[3:24:30] Street. You you you saw the language of
[3:24:33] our vote. Um, we have every intention of
[3:24:35] retaining the U-turn at Haw Street as
[3:24:38] long as it is safe to do so. We have
[3:24:40] directed staff to look at every single
[3:24:42] traffic study and do everything that
[3:24:44] they can they can think of in terms of
[3:24:46] signaling, in terms of smart signaling,
[3:24:47] and in terms of infrastructure to retain
[3:24:49] that U-turn. And if it is possible to do
[3:24:52] in a safe way, we will do it. That is
[3:24:54] the intent. And I think the the vote
[3:24:56] language is really clear on that. So,
[3:24:58] that is a commitment I'm happy to make
[3:25:00] tonight to you folks. we will retain it
[3:25:02] if it is at all physically safely
[3:25:04] possible to do so. Uh with that again uh
[3:25:08] Paul just want to echo your comments.
[3:25:10] This was a a long process but it was a
[3:25:12] good process and I am very grateful to
[3:25:14] the folks uh behind me from the tea. Uh
[3:25:16] some of whom I see far too often in
[3:25:18] other public meetings for this.
[3:25:19] Brookline does things in a unique and
[3:25:21] special way but I think we ultimately
[3:25:23] get a better product for it and I think
[3:25:25] this is a great example of that. So
[3:25:27] thank you very much folks.
[3:25:29] Thank you. We have another raised hand.
[3:25:31] Okay.
[3:25:32] Jocelyn Murphy.
[3:25:36] Thank you. This is Jocelyn Murphy. I'm a
[3:25:38] precinct 16 town meeting member and a
[3:25:40] member of the advisory committee.
[3:25:42] Speaking for myself,
[3:25:44] um I I would like to reiterate it's very
[3:25:46] difficult to hear. Um and of course if
[3:25:49] turning big on doesn't really repair the
[3:25:51] problem because then there's an echo. So
[3:25:54] um it has been very hard to hear folks.
[3:25:56] But I I really just want to echo and
[3:26:00] support what Alisa Pongja and Cara and
[3:26:03] Sean said about trees in general, but
[3:26:07] also about nesting
[3:26:10] um animals in particular um owls and
[3:26:14] squirrels and the other creatures that
[3:26:16] live in these trees. It's a tremendous
[3:26:18] number of trees that are being removed.
[3:26:20] I 100% support accessibility on the tea,
[3:26:24] but my concern is that a number of
[3:26:27] citizens have asked meeting after
[3:26:29] meeting
[3:26:31] whether the MBTA will take steps to
[3:26:34] support the animals that are likely
[3:26:36] nesting in these trees and really never
[3:26:38] got an answer. So, I respectfully
[3:26:40] disagree that there's nothing the select
[3:26:42] board can do. You can, this is a public
[3:26:45] hearing and there are MBTA folks here
[3:26:47] and you can ask them what steps they
[3:26:50] plan to take to support the wildlife
[3:26:52] that reside in the trees that are about
[3:26:55] to be or will be soon cut down. Thank
[3:26:57] you.
[3:27:06] Okay. Any any more?
[3:27:08] Okay. And as I said, we will not as a
[3:27:11] board uh make a commitment uh but
[3:27:14] individual board members of course can
[3:27:16] can ask questions and uh uh seek uh uh
[3:27:20] answers from the MBTA or others. So
[3:27:25] um
[3:27:25] thank you chair. I I hope someone on the
[3:27:27] board will ask that question.
[3:27:28] Okay. Well, we'll see if switch over to
[3:27:30] big so I can hear you. Thank you.
[3:27:32] Someone will
[3:27:35] uh Okay. Wait. Um, anyone else wanting
[3:27:38] to speak? May I'll close I will close
[3:27:42] the public hearing and uh u ask the
[3:27:46] board if there are any further comments.
[3:27:48] I see John had his hand up first. Yes.
[3:27:52] Well, I think everybody heard the
[3:27:53] question that Joselyn asked, so I put
[3:27:55] that to our MBTA representatives. Uh,
[3:27:58] what is your response to that question?
[3:28:02] Well, there were two to fairness there
[3:28:04] was two questions. Well, you you Paul,
[3:28:07] you go ahead and enumerate them.
[3:28:09] Well, so one was the the question about
[3:28:10] wildlife and then there was also a
[3:28:12] question about I think some other, you
[3:28:14] know, green space that could be enhanced
[3:28:16] and I I believe we probably have a plan
[3:28:18] for that with some extra tree plantings
[3:28:20] that we might be able to speak to. But
[3:28:21] this this issue of nesting animals, has
[3:28:24] this been brought to your attention? I
[3:28:26] do you have a
[3:28:27] We certainly saw we received a copy also
[3:28:29] I believe the select board the the
[3:28:31] petition that was mentioned uh as the
[3:28:32] MBTA has stated and was stated here
[3:28:34] tonight. We do follow all the
[3:28:35] environmental regulations that we are
[3:28:37] required to do. So we worked with MASDOT
[3:28:39] and had an environmental biologist come
[3:28:40] out, assess the situation, give us best
[3:28:42] practices, tell us what we need to do,
[3:28:44] and then we will also have um an
[3:28:47] environmental individual from the MBTA
[3:28:49] will be on site during all this. Now,
[3:28:51] can the MBTA guarantee no animal will be
[3:28:53] harmed in this? We absolutely cannot. I
[3:28:55] think it's unreasonable to expect that.
[3:28:56] In fact, I not to be facitious, but
[3:28:58] honestly, people will say we need pest
[3:29:00] control because of rats whenever we do
[3:29:02] work. And so we treat and we know that
[3:29:03] that has a tendency to harm wildlife
[3:29:06] too. Birds eat the dead rats and then
[3:29:07] that has a perpetual impact. So we're
[3:29:09] being realistic here that we are going
[3:29:11] to do construction but we have best
[3:29:12] practices in place. We have treatments
[3:29:14] that uh mitigate that that reduce those
[3:29:16] impacts but we cannot make the
[3:29:18] commitment that no wildlife will be
[3:29:19] harmed but we can make the commitment
[3:29:20] that we will work handinand with the
[3:29:22] experts to do it the right way and do it
[3:29:24] the safest way possible.
[3:29:26] Right. Thank you.
[3:29:27] The the shrubs I'm sorry I'm calling
[3:29:29] them shrubs. I shouldn't jump to that
[3:29:30] thing. But we have committed to the
[3:29:32] town. we have uh funding available. If
[3:29:34] those funds remain after doing the tree
[3:29:36] planting along Beacon Street that was
[3:29:38] described, we are happy to plant where
[3:29:40] the the town directs us to do so. Okay,
[3:29:43] Michael.
[3:29:44] Um, just following up on the tree
[3:29:47] question, um, I I know that there's
[3:29:50] particular concern about nesting
[3:29:52] periods, and I'm wondering whether you
[3:29:54] can speak to the schedule, um, of the
[3:29:58] projects to understand when the trees
[3:30:01] would be coming down in the course of
[3:30:03] the projects.
[3:30:04] Yeah, it's our understanding and again,
[3:30:06] the environmental experts have uh, let
[3:30:07] us know that the springtime is the peak
[3:30:09] nesting time. As I mentioned, we would
[3:30:11] start in that late April period, but I
[3:30:13] don't mean we're going into full
[3:30:14] construction at that point in time.
[3:30:15] We're starting to do some early work.
[3:30:17] We're doing some site assessments. We're
[3:30:18] doing some cings. We're figuring out
[3:30:19] exactly everything that's going on. And
[3:30:21] so, under their guidance, those trees
[3:30:23] will not come down until later in the
[3:30:24] project. Now, there may be some trees,
[3:30:25] small trees without nest in them that
[3:30:26] certainly can come down, but we will not
[3:30:28] take those larger trees with those nest
[3:30:30] until the environmental regulators tell
[3:30:31] us that that is safe to do.
[3:30:33] Thank you, Paul.
[3:30:36] And I know the thanks for the answer.
[3:30:38] That's very helpful. And I'm not an
[3:30:40] environmental specialist. Neither are
[3:30:43] you and I don't think they're here. But
[3:30:44] do you have a sense at all about what
[3:30:46] what is the the regulations or the
[3:30:49] guidance with respect to let's say
[3:30:50] there's a nesting sparrow uh in a tree
[3:30:52] that you need need to take down? Would
[3:30:54] you not take that tree down if there was
[3:30:56] a nest? Do you wait until it's empty? Do
[3:30:58] we do we have that understanding of the
[3:31:00] details? I
[3:31:01] I don't have those details. As I said,
[3:31:02] they they have a a window and I think,
[3:31:04] you know, they're trying to to solve a
[3:31:06] very large complex problem by giving us
[3:31:08] parameters that say that if you do it
[3:31:10] within this zone, this window in this
[3:31:13] time, you're highly unlikely to disturb
[3:31:15] anything. And so that's what we target.
[3:31:17] But we can't see every tree, every limb,
[3:31:19] every branch, some nest are hidden. So
[3:31:21] it is impractical. I'm sure that
[3:31:23] certainly if we observed one, we would
[3:31:24] do whatever we could. But the int but
[3:31:26] the intent of of the guidance or the
[3:31:29] regulations is to uh minimize or um you
[3:31:34] know um not have harm happen.
[3:31:36] Correct.
[3:31:37] You're not just you're not just taking
[3:31:38] the tree down without checking and Okay.
[3:31:41] All right. Thank you,
[3:31:43] John. Uh I'm curious about something and
[3:31:45] I apologize for not having asked this
[3:31:47] question earlier in the process, but I
[3:31:50] visited uh those two stops uh just
[3:31:53] within the past week or so and at each
[3:31:55] stop where there is a stair there is an
[3:31:58] MBTA there's a there's a lift for um to
[3:32:03] make it handicapped accessible but it's
[3:32:05] obvious that in each case the lift has
[3:32:08] been neglected severely over the years
[3:32:11] and is in you know complete state of
[3:32:13] disuse and uh and probably need of total
[3:32:17] replacement. Are lifts no longer
[3:32:19] acceptable under the ADA as uh uh
[3:32:24] providing access?
[3:32:26] So those lifts uh actually came up in my
[3:32:28] very first meeting when I started
[3:32:29] working on this project and those are uh
[3:32:31] actually town assets. So I don't have
[3:32:33] any information about the lifts or when
[3:32:35] they quit working, but you're correct.
[3:32:36] They have not worked since I moved here
[3:32:37] over seven years ago.
[3:32:38] They're town assets.
[3:32:40] Correct. As are the stairs.
[3:32:42] Yeah. But no, the the those lifts, those
[3:32:44] styles are not considered uh compliant
[3:32:46] for ADA purposes simply because they do
[3:32:48] fail too often. They break down. So
[3:32:50] that's why the ramps are required.
[3:32:52] Elevators are allowable, but elevators
[3:32:54] are much more disruptive uh and would
[3:32:56] require more significant construction
[3:32:57] and tree loss than the ramps do.
[3:32:59] Do you have any stations where there are
[3:33:00] lifts these days?
[3:33:02] No.
[3:33:03] No. Okay. Interesting.
[3:33:06] I mean, just in case people are
[3:33:08] wondering about lifts, we've had one at
[3:33:10] my church which has been usable for 20
[3:33:12] years. Um, I'm not sure why, you know,
[3:33:15] they can't be usable. I if they're not
[3:33:17] comply if they don't if they don't
[3:33:18] comply, I mean, they don't comply, but
[3:33:21] um, you know, the these were not usable,
[3:33:23] I assume, long before there was a change
[3:33:25] in the compliance rules because u, you
[3:33:27] know, they're just all rusted out and
[3:33:29] you know, uh, and you know, m mechanical
[3:33:33] junk at this point.
[3:33:36] Okay,
[3:33:37] Bernard. Sarah's raising her hand
[3:33:39] online.
[3:33:39] Okay, Sarah,
[3:33:44] is she promoted?
[3:33:46] Yes.
[3:33:49] Hello. Um, I'm the town's ADA
[3:33:52] coordinator, community relations
[3:33:53] specialist. I'm also a person who uses a
[3:33:55] wheelchair. And I can tell you
[3:33:57] personally, John, that those lifts are
[3:34:02] not reliable.
[3:34:04] and also very embarrassing to use.
[3:34:08] People take pictures of me when I in
[3:34:10] those lifts. They um and then also like
[3:34:14] you have to train staff and new staff
[3:34:16] come on all the time and people don't
[3:34:18] know how to use them and is I've been
[3:34:21] stuck in those lifts before. They're not
[3:34:23] reliable ways to get on and off the tea.
[3:34:28] Yeah. Thank you. Uh yeah, and and I I I
[3:34:31] didn't mean to imply that they should be
[3:34:32] used if they're no longer sufficient for
[3:34:34] compliance. Um you know, on the other
[3:34:37] hand, I think um they're their their
[3:34:40] evidence of how what was once deemed,
[3:34:42] you know, a solution uh is no longer a
[3:34:45] solution and and in fact, they haven't
[3:34:47] even been maintained. So,
[3:34:51] okay.
[3:34:53] Anything else?
[3:34:55] So, I have a proposed vote. Actually,
[3:35:00] it's more of a statement. So, I'm going
[3:35:01] to try to create a vote out of it. I'll
[3:35:05] read the statement first. Uh to deem
[3:35:08] that public necessity and convenience
[3:35:10] require granting the MBTA an amended
[3:35:12] location on Beacon Street in the areas
[3:35:15] of Hall Street, St. Hall Street, Summit
[3:35:18] Avenue, Brandon Hall Fairbanks, and Dean
[3:35:21] Road stations for the purpose of
[3:35:23] operating operating the so-called C
[3:35:25] branch of the green line and approved
[3:35:29] conditioned on the asurances the MBTA
[3:35:31] has provided the town during development
[3:35:34] of the C branch accessibility project.
[3:35:36] An amended grant of location
[3:35:38] substantially is shown in the plans and
[3:35:41] documents provided by the MBTA and filed
[3:35:44] herewith. with the final plan and
[3:35:47] language of the location to be developed
[3:35:49] by the MBTA and approved by the town
[3:35:52] administrator and that this amended
[3:35:54] location so shall supersede prior grants
[3:35:57] of location in substantially the same
[3:36:00] area of Beacon Street for substantially
[3:36:02] the same purpose. So um let me turn that
[3:36:07] into a motion. Uh I move approval of the
[3:36:10] grants of location uh as described by
[3:36:13] the MBTA in its presentation here uh and
[3:36:17] as motivated by the uh prior uh
[3:36:20] statement uh at Hall Street, St. Paul
[3:36:23] Street, Summit Avenue, Brandon Hall
[3:36:26] Fairbanks and Dean Road
[3:36:30] and Yes.
[3:36:30] And does that include the statement you
[3:36:32] read earlier conditioned conditioned on
[3:36:34] with the asurances?
[3:36:36] Yeah.
[3:36:36] At the end. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Okay.
[3:36:39] All in favor, please indicate by saying
[3:36:40] I. John Vancoyak.
[3:36:42] I.
[3:36:42] Paul Warren.
[3:36:43] I.
[3:36:43] David Pearlman.
[3:36:44] I.
[3:36:45] Michael Rubenstein.
[3:36:46] I.
[3:36:46] And and chair votai.
[3:36:50] Erin Jude, commissioner of public works.
[3:36:52] Just wanted to ensure that that includes
[3:36:54] authorizing the town administrator to
[3:36:57] sign on behalf of the select board.
[3:36:59] Uh, is is that in here? Yes,
[3:37:01] it was in the motion. It was in what you
[3:37:02] read.
[3:37:02] Yeah. Yeah.
[3:37:04] So, I'm incorporating that statement
[3:37:07] into the vote.
[3:37:09] Excuse me.
[3:37:10] Okay. Um, next we'll consider the uh
[3:37:14] Hall Street U-turn discussion and a
[3:37:17] possible vote there also.
[3:37:21] Is that you, Erin? Commissioner Chu.
[3:37:25] Good evening. Erin Chute, Commissioner
[3:37:27] of Public Works. So, we have uh our
[3:37:30] sustainable transportation engineer Dan
[3:37:32] Martin online if you would like him to
[3:37:35] review the HA U-turn with you and the
[3:37:39] analysis that the town will do. If you
[3:37:42] heard enough from uh chairman Brian
[3:37:45] Kaine in terms of the transportation
[3:37:48] board's vote and uh the actions that
[3:37:50] we're going to take and their
[3:37:52] commitment, then um we're we're open for
[3:37:56] questions. I I know that you have other
[3:37:58] items on your agenda tonight. So, um
[3:38:01] open to your direction. If you'd like a
[3:38:03] few slides for us to talk about haz,
[3:38:05] we're prepared to do that. Um if you're
[3:38:08] comfortable with uh the transportation
[3:38:11] board's uh vote, uh that those are the
[3:38:15] actions that we'll be taking.
[3:38:16] Well, what people want to do, but I'd
[3:38:19] like to hear I'd like to see your slide.
[3:38:21] Okay.
[3:38:22] All right. Uh so we have Dan Dan Martin
[3:38:25] will share his screen
[3:38:27] and um he's staffed from our engineering
[3:38:30] and transportation division
[3:38:36] and Dan will have to make sure
[3:38:37] board members um so just to go over the
[3:38:40] transportation board directed us at
[3:38:41] their last meeting um to look at the
[3:38:45] Beacon Street Hod Street station
[3:38:47] particularly the eastbound lane
[3:38:49] configuration and they wanted us to um
[3:38:52] make a commitment to maintain the U-turn
[3:38:54] movement by looking at um these
[3:38:57] configurations. And some of them may
[3:38:59] include a Beacon Street Eastban has a
[3:39:01] shared through U-turn lane and then one
[3:39:04] through lane. Or another option could be
[3:39:06] a Beacon Street exclusive um U-turn lane
[3:39:09] and one through lane or maybe moving the
[3:39:12] left turn lane to another intersection
[3:39:14] like a Kent Street. And what we're going
[3:39:16] to do is look at those options and then
[3:39:19] um present back to the transportation
[3:39:21] board in the neighborhood the um
[3:39:23] operational changes and the impacts
[3:39:25] these might have and we'll select the
[3:39:27] preferred solution. And then just to
[3:39:30] kind of outline what this looks like,
[3:39:31] this is what the current proposed um
[3:39:34] plan looks like. There's two through
[3:39:36] lanes and the U-turn is restricted.
[3:39:39] And then for the option, we're going to
[3:39:41] look at if it's um a through and left
[3:39:45] turn lane with a through lane.
[3:39:48] And then another option could be an
[3:39:50] exclusive turn lane, but only one
[3:39:51] through lane.
[3:39:53] And then this would be an option to
[3:39:55] relocate a left turn at Kent and Powell.
[3:40:01] And if you have any questions, I'm here
[3:40:03] to answer them. And
[3:40:06] any questions from uh Paul?
[3:40:08] I just have one. I just want to I have
[3:40:09] one comment. I know this came up late uh
[3:40:11] as a result of the public comment
[3:40:13] period. Um and we heard quite a bit
[3:40:16] during that time from a couple of
[3:40:17] speakers and also um in response to uh
[3:40:20] the heranging I got from folks that live
[3:40:23] in the neighborhood of Amory and Cottage
[3:40:25] Farm uh limiting access. So, I just want
[3:40:27] to thank you for uh for this and also
[3:40:30] for uh for the transportation board
[3:40:32] approving uh you know a review of the
[3:40:35] options uh to see if we can maintain uh
[3:40:39] simplified access to that neighborhood.
[3:40:40] So, I I thank you for doing that.
[3:40:44] Okay. Uh Michael,
[3:40:46] um I just have one question in terms of
[3:40:49] timing. um the
[3:40:52] given the grant of location and the
[3:40:54] schedule of the T I'm just wondering
[3:40:56] what the timing is uh within DPW or the
[3:41:00] transportation board in terms of doing
[3:41:02] that evaluation and what the process
[3:41:04] will be for making a determination and
[3:41:08] then acting on that determination.
[3:41:13] We're going to be um working with our
[3:41:15] traffic consultant VHP and um presenting
[3:41:18] those options. We expect that analysis
[3:41:20] take about 2 months. And then um we're
[3:41:23] hoping once the um preferred lanes are
[3:41:27] picked, we'll try and work that into the
[3:41:29] lane configuration, the pave markings,
[3:41:31] the signage required, and have that in
[3:41:33] place before the project's completed.
[3:41:38] Okay,
[3:41:40] any other questions?
[3:41:44] And this is not a hearing.
[3:41:47] Okay. Um,
[3:41:51] are we ready to vote?
[3:41:53] Seems like it.
[3:41:54] Okay. So, um, I move that the select
[3:41:58] board by its vote, uh, concur with the
[3:42:01] transportation board's instruction to
[3:42:03] DPW transportation staff to provide new
[3:42:06] cross-section lane arrangement options
[3:42:10] before project completion for eastbound
[3:42:13] Beacon Street at Haw so that the
[3:42:16] transportation board may consider
[3:42:17] retaining a U-turn option.
[3:42:21] That clear?
[3:42:25] All in favor, please indicate by saying
[3:42:27] I. John Vancoyak,
[3:42:28] I.
[3:42:29] Um Paul Warren,
[3:42:30] hi.
[3:42:31] David Pearlman,
[3:42:32] I.
[3:42:32] Michael Rubenstein,
[3:42:33] I.
[3:42:34] Chair votes I. Thank you. And finally,
[3:42:40] item 11 C, memorandum of understanding
[3:42:43] with the MBTA. The final item relates to
[3:42:46] a memorandum of understanding between
[3:42:48] the MBTA and the town of Brooklyn.
[3:42:51] Because Beacon Street includes shared
[3:42:53] right-of-way areas and overlapping
[3:42:56] infrastructure responsibilities, the
[3:42:58] town and the MBTA have been working to
[3:43:01] clarify responsibilities related to
[3:43:04] maintenance and operations along this
[3:43:06] corridor. This agreement established
[3:43:09] establishes clearer expectations
[3:43:12] regarding responsibilities for trees and
[3:43:15] landscaping,
[3:43:16] street lights and parking meters,
[3:43:19] sidewalks, and related infrastructure,
[3:43:22] snow removal responsibilities at
[3:43:24] stations, platforms, and within the
[3:43:27] right away. The goal is to ensure that
[3:43:30] both the MBTA and the town have clear
[3:43:33] operational responsibilities and access
[3:43:37] for maintenance moving forward. So any
[3:43:40] uh discussion
[3:43:43] of this item
[3:43:46] that's going to be entered into
[3:43:50] commissioner you want to talk a little
[3:43:51] bit about thank you uh Erin Chute
[3:43:54] Commissioner of Public Works. Um, so as
[3:43:57] the board knows, the MBTA operates uh
[3:44:00] the green line within the public's right
[3:44:02] ofway under a grant of location and
[3:44:04] areas around the stations and platforms
[3:44:07] um where uh our responsibilities
[3:44:09] naturally meet. Uh over the course of
[3:44:12] this project, DPW staff have been
[3:44:14] working closely with the MBTA's C branch
[3:44:18] right of way and operations teams to
[3:44:20] improve coordination and day-to-day
[3:44:22] operations.
[3:44:24] Theou is intended to capture those
[3:44:26] working understandings in writing so
[3:44:28] that both organizations and future staff
[3:44:31] have clear guidance moving forward. At a
[3:44:34] high level, the agreement will clarify
[3:44:36] that the MBTA is responsible for
[3:44:39] operation and maintenance of its
[3:44:40] stations, platforms, track beds,
[3:44:43] associated station infrastructure, while
[3:44:45] the town remains responsible for the
[3:44:47] roadway, sidewalks, drainage trees,
[3:44:50] traffic infrastructure, and other
[3:44:52] municipal assets, parking meters within
[3:44:54] the public right ofway. Uh, one area
[3:44:57] we're looking to uh clarify is snow
[3:45:00] removal. uh snow operations occur
[3:45:03] simultaneously across all MBTA and town
[3:45:05] assets and the agreement will outline
[3:45:08] which organization clears u platforms,
[3:45:11] ramps, track crossings, public
[3:45:13] sidewalks, roadway crossings and
[3:45:15] connections to the broader pedestrian
[3:45:17] network and bus stops. And the the
[3:45:19] intent is to ensure that both
[3:45:20] organizations can maintain their
[3:45:22] infrastructure efficiently
[3:45:24] and the public experiences a continuous
[3:45:26] and safe accessible path during winter
[3:45:29] operations. So theus is intended to me
[3:45:32] memorialize certain operational
[3:45:34] commitments also associated with the
[3:45:36] construction of the accessible platforms
[3:45:39] as that project moves forward. The
[3:45:41] language of theou is currently being
[3:45:44] refined by town staff working with town
[3:45:46] council and the MBTA. What we're asking
[3:45:49] the board to authorize this evening is
[3:45:51] the ability for the town administrator
[3:45:53] in consultation with DPW and town
[3:45:55] council to finalize and execute that
[3:45:58] operational agreements once the language
[3:46:00] is complete. And this is really intended
[3:46:03] to be an operational agreement between
[3:46:05] the two organizations so that our staff
[3:46:07] on both sides can continue to coordinate
[3:46:10] efficiently and maintain both the town
[3:46:12] and the MBTA infrastructure uh in a
[3:46:15] clear and consistent way going forward.
[3:46:17] There have been a lot of improvements in
[3:46:19] communication, a lot of it brought about
[3:46:22] because of this project. And so it's
[3:46:26] really an opportunity for us to put that
[3:46:28] in writing for clarity uh for the
[3:46:31] future.
[3:46:34] Great. Thank you. Any questions?
[3:46:38] Are we ready to vote?
[3:46:39] Michael,
[3:46:40] a couple of questions. Um the first ju
[3:46:42] just to clarify um does thisou
[3:46:45] cover the sea line specifically or is it
[3:46:49] broader through the town given that we
[3:46:52] have other lines and bus stops etc.
[3:46:54] So this the sea line is unique in um
[3:46:58] that it's our asset with this um grant
[3:47:01] of location sort of down the the spine.
[3:47:04] So theou is intended to cover the sea
[3:47:07] line specifically with the caveat that
[3:47:10] snow removal will be clarified across
[3:47:12] town.
[3:47:13] Okay. Um and the second question I have
[3:47:15] is um in those cases where for whatever
[3:47:20] reason the the MBTA needs to um replace
[3:47:25] the sealine with bus service along
[3:47:27] Beacon Street. um are those conditions
[3:47:30] also covered in theou so so so that
[3:47:34] responsibility for maintaining those a
[3:47:37] alternative bus stops are maintained in
[3:47:40] those cases
[3:47:41] so the contacts and the communication
[3:47:45] will be outlined in theou but we work
[3:47:48] very closely with the MBTA when they
[3:47:50] have alternate alternate service and we
[3:47:52] will continue to do that
[3:47:54] okay thank you
[3:47:57] Okay, I think we're ready to vote. So,
[3:48:00] I'd like to move that the select board
[3:48:03] authorize the town administrator
[3:48:07] to finalize and execute the memorandum
[3:48:09] of understanding with the MBTA regarding
[3:48:12] maintenance, construction, and
[3:48:14] operational responsibilities
[3:48:16] within the Beacon Street Green Line
[3:48:19] Corridor in consultation with town
[3:48:21] council and the commissioner of public
[3:48:23] works. All in favor, please indicate by
[3:48:26] saying I. John Vancoyak
[3:48:28] I
[3:48:28] Paul Warren
[3:48:29] hi
[3:48:29] David Pearlman
[3:48:30] I
[3:48:31] Michael Rubenstein
[3:48:32] I
[3:48:32] and chair votes I thank you everyone
[3:48:35] thank you very much and it's one sort of
[3:48:38] brief and final comment I really want to
[3:48:41] acknowledge the tremendous work that has
[3:48:43] gone in for well over a year from the
[3:48:45] department of public works staff you
[3:48:48] have staff um that are here tonight you
[3:48:50] have staff online incredibly committed
[3:48:53] to trying to get this right and
[3:48:57] understand the complexity of all of the
[3:48:58] issues. I want to thank the select board
[3:49:01] um both Michael and Paul for your
[3:49:03] participation as we talked through um
[3:49:05] the various issues and also for um our
[3:49:10] chair uh Brian Kaine of the
[3:49:12] transportation board. And I want to
[3:49:14] recognize the MBTA staff um for the time
[3:49:17] and care that they've taken to engage
[3:49:20] with the community here in Brooklyn.
[3:49:22] Working through a public process along a
[3:49:24] corridor as visible and historic as
[3:49:27] Beacon Street is not easy, and their
[3:49:28] team has put in a great deal of effort
[3:49:30] to listen, respond, and refine the
[3:49:32] project. It has been a really careful
[3:49:35] balance with really thoughtful people
[3:49:37] for an important project for Brookline.
[3:49:40] So, I thank you for um working through
[3:49:43] this significant project with us and I
[3:49:46] want to thank staff from public works
[3:49:48] and from the MBTA. They are all truly
[3:49:51] remarkable professionals in what they
[3:49:52] do.
[3:49:53] Thank you.
[3:49:54] All right. Thank you.
[3:49:55] Thank you.
[3:49:57] Okay. I'd like to propose a five minute
[3:49:59] break.
[3:50:00] How about 10?
[3:50:02] Or 10?
[3:50:03] Oh, no.
[3:50:04] Five.
[3:50:06] Thank you everyone.
[3:50:06] Five should do it.
[3:50:09] Five minutes.
[3:50:11] Okay. Wait,
[3:50:12] you can be late.
[3:50:14] We'll wait for you.
[3:50:19] Yes.
[3:50:20] Yeah.
[3:50:21] I really kind of don't like this. I'd
[3:50:24] like to see if you can
[3:52:43] Hey,
[3:52:55] bang.
[3:58:22] So that was the
[3:58:29] It happens.
[3:58:32] I think so. But we're going to we're
[3:58:34] going to see.
[3:58:37] Yes. So So now now this is
[3:58:39] Yeah. I'm sorry folks for you're hearing
[3:58:41] overhearing our testing here. We'll go
[3:58:42] off mute in a second.
[3:58:46] See now I've got them both on DVS
[3:58:48] receive one.
[3:58:50] So now let me try
[4:01:34] ready.
[4:01:38] We're ready in live in five, four,
[4:01:41] three, two, one.
[4:01:44] Okay, we're back
[4:01:46] and uh continuation of our meeting. Uh
[4:01:49] next item on the agenda is the
[4:01:51] department budget reviews. Um
[4:01:56] select board members uh have received a
[4:01:58] memo um that uh is what was sent to
[4:02:02] departments to guide their presentations
[4:02:06] um and is essentially uh what we should
[4:02:08] use in guiding our questions. Um
[4:02:14] so and we've used this in past years.
[4:02:17] So, um, we're starting off with the
[4:02:20] select board and I see Charlie Young is
[4:02:25] on the screen there.
[4:02:28] So,
[4:02:29] good evening, Bernard.
[4:02:31] Yes. Thank you, Chair Green. And, um,
[4:02:33] thank you, Select Board members and
[4:02:35] folks online for bearing with us through
[4:02:37] the audio troubles tonight. It's
[4:02:38] wonderful to finally hear your voices
[4:02:41] um, loud and clear. I'm going to try to
[4:02:44] be brief tonight. So, I'm Charlie Young.
[4:02:46] I'm the assistant town administrator for
[4:02:48] finance and I have the pleasure tonight
[4:02:49] of representing the uh select board's
[4:02:53] office uh budget for FY27.
[4:02:59] So, um hopefully you are all seeing my
[4:03:02] screen and what you're looking at here
[4:03:04] is the budget by the numbers for the
[4:03:06] select board's office. Um in FY27 the
[4:03:09] budget is just over a million dollars.
[4:03:11] Uh most of which is in salaries is in
[4:03:14] personnel. Uh the personnel line is
[4:03:16] increasing with steps. Uh but not shown
[4:03:19] here is that we are losing our ARPA
[4:03:21] budget staff and support by the end of
[4:03:23] FY27.
[4:03:24] We are taking a reduction in our outside
[4:03:27] services line item here. Um that is
[4:03:30] pretty substantial. That is to meet the
[4:03:32] to help meet the town deficit. Um there
[4:03:35] is a slight increase built in here for
[4:03:37] our boards and commission software going
[4:03:39] up. Uh supplies are level funded in
[4:03:41] FY27. We do find ourselves transferring
[4:03:44] money into these accounts out of
[4:03:46] personnel or other lines that have
[4:03:47] surplus um to meet increasing costs
[4:03:50] there, but we're holding it steady. Uh
[4:03:52] notably, the the other category is
[4:03:55] remaining level as well. Um this is uh
[4:03:58] notable because we're able to retain the
[4:04:00] Mass Cultural Council Arts Grant
[4:04:02] matching funds that were added there as
[4:04:05] PA part of the last override cycle. Um
[4:04:08] finally the capital uh category is
[4:04:10] increasing just to u meet the cost of
[4:04:13] leased computer equipment. So overall a
[4:04:16] very uh modest increase of.3%.
[4:04:22] Great. Thank you. Any question? Yeah. Go
[4:04:25] ahead.
[4:04:26] I'll I'll I'll take questions at the
[4:04:27] end. We'll we'll
[4:04:28] Oh, no. I I interrupted you. Why don't
[4:04:30] you continue?
[4:04:31] Sure. Thanks. Um so uh the the guidance
[4:04:34] sent out to departments talked about our
[4:04:36] uh a few accomplishments from the
[4:04:38] current fiscal year. Uh since around the
[4:04:40] beginning of summertime, we've been
[4:04:42] working with the select board to develop
[4:04:43] their roadmap um which is a series of
[4:04:47] goals and strategies for uh for
[4:04:49] accomplishing policy objectives over the
[4:04:51] next uh few years in town that will be
[4:04:53] coming together in the next month. U
[4:04:55] we've also been administering the
[4:04:57] expenditures and revenue study committee
[4:04:59] whose work is concluding very shortly.
[4:05:02] um which has you know been a a
[4:05:03] significant hall for the office and I
[4:05:05] think um a good accomplishment. Um and
[4:05:08] finally this hangs uh mostly on
[4:05:11] Christina Metaf's shoulders. The
[4:05:13] recognition that we received from the
[4:05:14] Mass Municipal Association for our annu
[4:05:16] our exemplary annual report. We thank
[4:05:19] Christina for her work on that. So a few
[4:05:22] goals for FY27. Um we you know namely
[4:05:26] this office will be working on
[4:05:28] implementing the goals and strategies
[4:05:29] within the select board's road roadmap
[4:05:31] and so we can talk about our long-term
[4:05:33] goals all we like but most of those are
[4:05:35] going to be defined by what comes out of
[4:05:37] that work product. Um and so we'll we'll
[4:05:39] be spending a lot of time on that. We'll
[4:05:41] be closing out our our ARPA spending as
[4:05:44] of December. Um all of that spending
[4:05:47] needs to be complete and those projects
[4:05:48] need to be complete. Um we'll be
[4:05:50] wrapping up uh what was $40 million and
[4:05:53] over 120 projects internal and external
[4:05:56] um in ARPA funding. Um finally, we're
[4:05:59] going to continue our efforts to
[4:06:00] digitize and streamline the licensing
[4:06:02] process, but I want to highlight here
[4:06:03] that the road map itself discusses
[4:06:06] looking for efficiencies. And so, not
[4:06:08] only in the area of licensing, but I
[4:06:10] think we'll be looking for other areas
[4:06:12] we can create uh efficiencies and
[4:06:14] streamline things for staff and
[4:06:16] residents um and board and committee
[4:06:18] members. So, there's just a few of the
[4:06:21] of the um stats we're going to use to
[4:06:23] track our our streamlining of licensing.
[4:06:26] We just implemented those this year and
[4:06:28] so hopefully next year we'll start
[4:06:29] having actual data we can report out to
[4:06:32] the board.
[4:06:34] Continuing right along, the office has
[4:06:37] nine total FTEEs. And what we're showing
[4:06:39] you here on this pie chart is that we
[4:06:41] really don't have any groups of
[4:06:42] employees. We're mostly a a group of
[4:06:44] several specialized folks that are each
[4:06:47] doing each working in their own areas.
[4:06:49] Um we're a very lean staff. Um we are
[4:06:53] losing our ARPA funded grant
[4:06:54] administrator at the end of FY27. Um so
[4:06:58] no plans to change staffing at this
[4:07:00] point. you know, referencing the
[4:07:02] guidance that was sent out to
[4:07:03] departments, we no plans to change
[4:07:05] staffing at this point, but we are
[4:07:06] losing that position. Um, and digitizing
[4:07:09] licensing is one of those examples of
[4:07:11] trying to provide efficiencies without
[4:07:13] needing to add staff in order to achieve
[4:07:16] those. So, that's something that that
[4:07:17] the the guidance mentioned as well, you
[4:07:20] know, talking about where we're we're
[4:07:21] looking to create efficiencies. And we
[4:07:23] think that we're we're making good
[4:07:24] progress there.
[4:07:27] And so, um, finally, um, not to breeze
[4:07:31] through everything too quickly, uh, the
[4:07:33] board asked about a couple of things or
[4:07:35] perennially asked about a couple of
[4:07:36] things, which was increasing demands and
[4:07:38] what we would do without budget
[4:07:39] constraints. And so, the the highest
[4:07:42] increase in demand that we have seen is
[4:07:44] really in fiscal oversight. The uh, the
[4:07:47] last fiscal year close was was a
[4:07:49] difficult one with a couple of
[4:07:50] significant overtime deficits in public
[4:07:52] safety. Um this year we have a
[4:07:55] significant snow and ice deficit. We've
[4:07:57] had the issue with the transfer station
[4:07:59] floor. We're talking about potentially,
[4:08:01] you know, we'll obviously have another
[4:08:02] fire overtime deficit. Um and so these
[4:08:05] these fiscal years are requiring more
[4:08:07] and more um effort and work at least
[4:08:09] from our end of the office, Melissa and
[4:08:11] I's end of the office and monitoring
[4:08:13] deficits, monitoring spending issues and
[4:08:15] concerns. Um utilities are also a
[4:08:18] concern this year. we're seeing, you
[4:08:20] know, as a result of geopolitical
[4:08:22] conflicts, rising costs. Um, and then
[4:08:24] we're we're also getting this feedback
[4:08:26] that, um, board and committee support is
[4:08:28] an area that we're seeing increased
[4:08:30] demand. Um, and and I I also list
[4:08:33] communications here. This is partly ADA
[4:08:35] compliance and and and partly community
[4:08:38] outreach demand, but you know, more of
[4:08:40] our time and maybe that is we're victims
[4:08:42] of our own success in that in that um
[4:08:44] situation, but more of our time is going
[4:08:46] to to outreach and and communications.
[4:08:50] So, uh without budget constraints, what
[4:08:52] would we do in our office? Would our
[4:08:54] priorities change? Um my sense is that
[4:08:56] we wouldn't change our priorities, but
[4:08:58] we could significantly expand our
[4:09:00] capacity. You know, I mentioned earlier
[4:09:01] that the department has several
[4:09:03] specialized folks. Each of those, in my
[4:09:06] opinion, could be its own division. You
[4:09:07] could have a division of community
[4:09:09] engagement. You could have a division
[4:09:10] that's dedicated to finance, that's
[4:09:12] dedicated to budget projections. Um, you
[4:09:15] know, and of course, we would expand on
[4:09:17] professional development. We could we
[4:09:19] could really expand on what we do with
[4:09:20] department heads on a quarterly basis to
[4:09:22] provide training to the department and
[4:09:24] division heads. And of course, we could
[4:09:25] ramp up resident services to the to to
[4:09:28] the levels I think that people really
[4:09:30] idealistically would like to see. Um,
[4:09:32] and so that is the select board's budget
[4:09:35] for FY27. I want to take a moment to
[4:09:38] shout out um our office staff, Kate,
[4:09:40] Michelle, Nicole, Christina, Tyler,
[4:09:42] Jillian, Melanie, Melissa, and Chaz um
[4:09:45] who all make it a great place to work
[4:09:47] and who all uh come to work um as highly
[4:09:51] professional public servants um ready to
[4:09:54] work hard for the town of Brooklyn. And
[4:09:55] so I truly appreciate them all. And
[4:09:57] Chaz, if you have anything you'd like to
[4:09:59] add here, um please feel free. But I
[4:10:03] will leave this screen up for a minute
[4:10:04] and I will be glad to take any
[4:10:06] questions.
[4:10:08] Just want to echo Charlie's thanks to
[4:10:10] the staff, the whole team. Um it's a
[4:10:13] really great team. Uh we're we're
[4:10:14] incredibly lucky to have all these
[4:10:16] folks. Um folks who have been here for a
[4:10:19] long time, folks who are new to us.
[4:10:21] Welcome Ellie. Um and um it's you know
[4:10:26] folks who who are you know here in in
[4:10:28] meetings front and center but you know
[4:10:29] folks like Michelle too and and Kate who
[4:10:32] are not often seen um but do a huge
[4:10:34] amount of work. Um and so I just want to
[4:10:36] thank everyone um really just a great
[4:10:38] great group of people.
[4:10:40] Great. Uh David.
[4:10:42] So I have a few questions regarding
[4:10:44] specific line items and this is not to
[4:10:46] critique it's just more curiosity. So, I
[4:10:49] see that there's one line under salaries
[4:10:51] for uh clothing uniform allowance, and
[4:10:55] I'm just curious who in the select board
[4:10:57] office has uniforms and if you could
[4:10:58] just elaborate on that.
[4:11:00] That is a uh a collectively bargained
[4:11:03] line that I think um is going to the
[4:11:06] whatever clerical whoever is cler class
[4:11:09] is cler clerical in our office. Um, I'd
[4:11:12] have to I'd have to look at who that is
[4:11:14] specifically, but um, it's a, you know,
[4:11:16] it's a small dollar amount and this is
[4:11:18] something you'll see in virtually every
[4:11:19] department budget that has clerical
[4:11:20] staff.
[4:11:21] All right. And I see that's being cut in
[4:11:23] half. It it it so last year fiscal year
[4:11:26] 1,100 that's going down to 550. And then
[4:11:29] some other examples of significant drops
[4:11:31] that I noticed, uh, printing services
[4:11:34] going from 3,518
[4:11:37] to 500. So, a seven-fold decrease.
[4:11:41] Subscriptions from about $8,400 to just
[4:11:46] over $100. And then, uh, tech service
[4:11:50] basically cut in half, a little more
[4:11:52] than half, 47,000 down to 20,000. Uh so
[4:11:55] in terms of these changes, were there
[4:11:58] any significant modifications from a uh
[4:12:03] service provision perspective that the
[4:12:05] select board needed to take in order to
[4:12:07] make these reductions?
[4:12:09] So this really reduces uh what will
[4:12:12] happen as a result of this uh David and
[4:12:14] this is a great question. So thank you
[4:12:15] for asking. Um is really a reduction in
[4:12:18] our flexibility in these line items. So
[4:12:21] in other words, one of the the the
[4:12:22] professional technical services align
[4:12:24] item is often used for department head
[4:12:26] recruitment. Um you know, printing
[4:12:28] services is when you know we need
[4:12:30] something in excess of what our in-house
[4:12:32] printing um office can provide. Uh and
[4:12:35] so it we we aren't going to see an
[4:12:37] immediate service reduction as a result
[4:12:39] of these things. But I do think you may
[4:12:41] hear from us asking for transfers more
[4:12:43] often, looking for money more often in
[4:12:46] in especially in the case that we had to
[4:12:48] do multiple department head recruitments
[4:12:49] in a year. Um, you know, this it's
[4:12:52] really what this comes down to is a loss
[4:12:54] of flexibility in the department. And I
[4:12:56] can say from experience that we're we're
[4:12:58] already basically strapped as as hard as
[4:13:01] we can be. um you know getting requests
[4:13:04] from Christina to be able to do you know
[4:13:07] something interesting for for example
[4:13:09] for a town event and we don't have the
[4:13:11] money to do that. Um and so that's
[4:13:14] really what these lines are impacting.
[4:13:16] All right because for example with
[4:13:18] printing services and I I had this issue
[4:13:20] just last night both of my uh at home
[4:13:23] office printers decided to malfunction
[4:13:25] were giving me a hard time. I checked
[4:13:27] with uh Kinko Staples how much it would
[4:13:30] cost and they wanted 80 cents a page and
[4:13:32] I had to print quite a voluminous
[4:13:35] amount. So I said forget it. I'll stick
[4:13:36] it out and just stay up longer and try
[4:13:38] to figure out what's going on with my
[4:13:39] printers. But I see that for the entire
[4:13:41] select board office $500 for the whole
[4:13:44] year that's really going to cover it.
[4:13:47] Well, um it's a good question, David.
[4:13:50] The answer is yes, we'll make it work,
[4:13:52] right? Um and I think the the longer
[4:13:56] answer is um that line item may have
[4:13:58] been a little bit stale. We may actually
[4:14:00] have been been spending more out of
[4:14:02] professional technical services. Way the
[4:14:04] budget is voted all of the services line
[4:14:06] items. Everything under the category of
[4:14:08] services rolls up to one number. Um and
[4:14:11] so uh printing services I think probably
[4:14:14] is our is maybe our copier contract. Um,
[4:14:17] and so we're probably cutting out a
[4:14:19] surplus that we had there that was being
[4:14:21] used for professional technical
[4:14:22] services. I mean, if I if I just pull up
[4:14:24] my sc the slideshow for one second
[4:14:27] again, I don't want to take up too much
[4:14:28] time. Um, you know, you'll notice that
[4:14:30] out of the services line item, we had
[4:14:33] 66,000 in spend last year. I mean, and
[4:14:35] that is largely due to Brookline
[4:14:38] Interactive hybrid services we were
[4:14:40] paying out of this line item that are
[4:14:41] coming out of ARPA this year. Uh but but
[4:14:45] for example that's you know that's the
[4:14:47] kind of thing that's happening here
[4:14:48] where we may have spent less on printing
[4:14:49] and may have spent more on professional
[4:14:52] technical services for example. So yeah
[4:14:54] so the the short answer is we'll make it
[4:14:56] work.
[4:14:57] Are there any important subscriptions
[4:14:58] we're losing going from $8,388
[4:15:02] worth of subscriptions to 125?
[4:15:06] We uh not off the top of my head. David,
[4:15:09] I think that we are phasing out um some
[4:15:12] memberships um but not as a but not as
[4:15:16] as a result of this cut. So I I can't
[4:15:18] think of any off the top of my head.
[4:15:19] And the reason if you can remember
[4:15:22] the reason I ask that I understand that
[4:15:24] we're talking about relatively low
[4:15:25] dollar amounts compare in comparison to
[4:15:28] the entirety of our budget. But to the
[4:15:30] extent that some of these line items
[4:15:33] have broader financial impacts in terms
[4:15:36] of efficiency of completing certain
[4:15:39] other services, I I just want to make
[4:15:41] sure that we're not being uh pennywise
[4:15:44] pound foolish with some of these.
[4:15:46] Yeah, I understand that. I think that
[4:15:48] maybe this is state house news.
[4:15:51] This is state house news. You know, it's
[4:15:53] Massachusetts newswire service for state
[4:15:55] material.
[4:15:56] I found I find it helpful. I find it
[4:15:58] useful. But I also find that when news
[4:16:01] needs to reach me from the state house,
[4:16:02] I can there are other ways for me to
[4:16:04] reach it. Like it's it's nice to have.
[4:16:06] It's nice to be able to stay on top of
[4:16:08] things, but in this scarce environment,
[4:16:11] I'm you know, it's it's a nice to have,
[4:16:13] so I'm cutting it.
[4:16:17] Michael,
[4:16:18] um thank you very much, Charlie. Um I
[4:16:21] have a couple of questions. Um the first
[4:16:23] question is um
[4:16:26] given that we are losing the grant
[4:16:28] administrator
[4:16:29] um can you give us any sense of what the
[4:16:32] grant revenue is that that person was
[4:16:35] responsible for bringing in um so that
[4:16:38] we understand sort of what the cost is
[4:16:41] versus what the revenue is that that
[4:16:43] person was generating.
[4:16:45] Yeah, that that's a great question,
[4:16:46] Michael. So this position was created in
[4:16:48] order to administer the American Rescue
[4:16:51] Plan Act. Sharpa funds um that came
[4:16:54] through as a result of COVID right from
[4:16:56] the federal government. So um that was a
[4:16:59] you know 40 plus million I think 42 to
[4:17:01] $43 million
[4:17:03] um that they didn't necessarily bring in
[4:17:05] we would have received it either way and
[4:17:07] they their task was to ensure that that
[4:17:09] money was spent correctly and to
[4:17:11] basically act as the administrator of
[4:17:13] the money for subreients. So t you know
[4:17:16] um Tyler Balile in our office um who's
[4:17:19] been excellent with ARPA um has I think
[4:17:22] also served as a as a contact when
[4:17:24] needed for questions around using you
[4:17:26] know SAM accounts and federal you know
[4:17:29] doing federal grant applications. I
[4:17:31] can't say off the top of my head how
[4:17:32] many additional grants Tyler actually
[4:17:34] brought in if any. Um I think he's been
[4:17:37] pretty busy with the 43 million in ARPA.
[4:17:40] Now, with that said, um Michael, you
[4:17:43] rais a good point and a good question.
[4:17:45] Um you know, I've talked with Tyler a
[4:17:47] lot about whether or not we should or
[4:17:49] could have a grant position in town and
[4:17:51] what that would look like or even just a
[4:17:53] grants process because it's fairly
[4:17:55] decentralized at this point and we think
[4:17:57] there's capacity for it. Um but um but
[4:18:01] unfortunately, yeah, Tyler himself
[4:18:03] didn't bring any additional revenue over
[4:18:05] or above AR ARPA. I just I just briefly
[4:18:08] add to that. Um
[4:18:10] um when we talked to the expenditures
[4:18:11] and revenue study committee and we we
[4:18:13] were asked you know we asked all the
[4:18:14] departments if money was no object what
[4:18:16] are your top three things? One of my top
[4:18:18] three things was bringing on a permanent
[4:18:20] grants administrator. Um and um the ra
[4:18:24] the reason for that is as Charlie said
[4:18:26] our process is decentralized. Some
[4:18:27] departments are very good at hunting
[4:18:29] down grants and funding themselves and
[4:18:31] some of them don't have the capacity to
[4:18:32] do it um and need a helping hand. I also
[4:18:35] need to have insight into our overall
[4:18:38] long range strategy for pursuing grants
[4:18:40] and prioritizing them. You know, right
[4:18:42] now I file all the earmark applications
[4:18:45] for federal dollars myself, you know, I
[4:18:47] ask the department heads, what do you
[4:18:48] need? And then I stay up late and I put
[4:18:49] them together. Um, you know, that's not
[4:18:52] an efficient use of my time. Um, and
[4:18:54] given the amount of money that people
[4:18:56] could be getting for those, you know, if
[4:18:58] we were if we were really strong at
[4:19:01] developing that grant function, I think
[4:19:02] it is a worthwhile investment in the
[4:19:04] long run. But it's something that has to
[4:19:06] come after this override cycle. Um,
[4:19:09] again, it would be really nice and I
[4:19:12] think it would ultimately be a money
[4:19:13] maker for the town to have centralized
[4:19:15] grant support operations. And I want to
[4:19:17] be clear, you know, I'm not saying to
[4:19:19] those departments who do good job. We're
[4:19:21] going to take that function away from
[4:19:22] them. We want to be able to coordinate
[4:19:24] with them and ensure that we're all
[4:19:25] everyone is is able to function at that
[4:19:27] kind of high level. Um, but right now we
[4:19:30] just we don't have the capacity. Um, and
[4:19:33] you know, I don't want to be in a
[4:19:34] position of saying, you know, I'd like
[4:19:36] to add a staff, a permanent staff member
[4:19:38] when we're asking other departments to
[4:19:39] make cuts. So, that's where we are.
[4:19:42] So, this financial plan is based on a no
[4:19:45] override scenario.
[4:19:47] Yes.
[4:19:48] Correct.
[4:19:49] If the override does pass, I don't
[4:19:51] recall that this position is recovered.
[4:19:54] No, it is not.
[4:19:55] Though, as you said, uh, it it generates
[4:19:58] a huge amount of money or could generate
[4:20:00] a large amount of money. It could. Yeah,
[4:20:02] it's it's right. It's it's theoretical
[4:20:04] and as always, you know, we we we don't
[4:20:06] budget in soft money into the hard money
[4:20:08] budget for for good reasons. Um, so it
[4:20:10] is something that's that's difficult to
[4:20:12] quantify and can be ephemeral in ways,
[4:20:14] but we, you know, we obviously track our
[4:20:16] grant funded things. We try and, you
[4:20:18] know, make sure that people understand,
[4:20:20] you know, what's on the budget versus
[4:20:21] what's, you know, what's what's on the
[4:20:23] what's in the operating budget versus
[4:20:24] what's out of it. Um, we try and do all
[4:20:27] of that and I think we're successful at
[4:20:28] it. Um but again we think about the
[4:20:31] priorities of the community, the
[4:20:33] priorities that have been said to us in
[4:20:34] expenditures and revenues. You know, our
[4:20:36] goal to try and keep the town override
[4:20:38] number at the same or lower than the ask
[4:20:41] was in 2023 and the large amount of
[4:20:45] needs in other departments. You know,
[4:20:46] between, you know, fire, police, and
[4:20:49] DPW, that's pretty much it. That's the
[4:20:50] ball game. You know, a couple of other
[4:20:52] departments are getting small numbers,
[4:20:53] but you know, I was just, you know,
[4:20:55] talking to the health director and kind
[4:20:56] of lamenting, you know, there was space
[4:20:59] in this override. Yes, I would give more
[4:21:01] money to public health, but the
[4:21:03] prioritization is what it is. Um, and
[4:21:05] you know, we're kind of in the same boat
[4:21:06] there. Um, you know, we we do what we
[4:21:09] can with what we have.
[4:21:12] Sean,
[4:21:13] well, um, we've arrived at what I've
[4:21:15] wanted to ask about, and I think it's a
[4:21:17] very important point. As we go through
[4:21:18] not just this budget but all the budgets
[4:21:22] we have to keep in mind um that uh what
[4:21:26] we're looking at is a budget that is
[4:21:28] part of an overall balanced budget and
[4:21:31] that does not include uh the assumption
[4:21:33] of any override monies. Right.
[4:21:36] Correct.
[4:21:36] Right. So, um, one of the questions to
[4:21:39] be asked, I think, with each and every
[4:21:41] budget is, uh, okay, so that that's what
[4:21:44] you've got, um, short of an override,
[4:21:48] uh, is your department, um, is this
[4:21:50] budget, um, in line to receive, uh, fund
[4:21:53] additional funds, in the event of an
[4:21:56] override, and if so, what would you need
[4:21:58] them for, and what would you use them
[4:22:00] for? Um, it turns out in this case, this
[4:22:04] is not a department that's in line for
[4:22:05] any additional money through the
[4:22:07] override, but there are going to be
[4:22:09] departments that we address soon that
[4:22:11] will be. And I think we need to know the
[4:22:14] difference between what we're looking at
[4:22:15] and what we would be looking at if there
[4:22:17] had been if there were an override uh
[4:22:20] developed and what what additional
[4:22:22] monies would flow into department X, Y,
[4:22:25] or Z. As a result,
[4:22:27] we might see a small increase in the
[4:22:28] professional technical services as
[4:22:30] Oh, in this in this department. Okay.
[4:22:32] Because as Charlie said, you know, we
[4:22:33] were really
[4:22:34] we're down to our last dollar now. And
[4:22:36] you know, for example, we we had, you
[4:22:38] know, last last year we were able to use
[4:22:40] funds, salary savings, other funds that
[4:22:42] we had to fund the CLA report when we
[4:22:44] needed to do that quickly. We couldn't
[4:22:46] do that this year.
[4:22:47] Want to have that flexibility and
[4:22:49] capacity to do that work. One of the
[4:22:51] other things that department heads have
[4:22:52] also asked of us is we run the um
[4:22:54] quarterly department division head
[4:22:56] trainings. We do these trainings and
[4:22:58] we've been trying to to work with HR to
[4:23:01] do um employee appreciation uh at least
[4:23:03] once a year um which we would like to
[4:23:05] include both a you know thank you for
[4:23:07] the service that you do but also a
[4:23:09] functional aspect of it like a training
[4:23:11] component to it so that people could in
[4:23:13] other communities you know they they can
[4:23:15] do trainings where they take you know
[4:23:17] some departments will take half a day
[4:23:18] off and do an off-site training of some
[4:23:20] kind you know that we would love to be
[4:23:22] able to invest in that uh and so
[4:23:25] restoring a little bit of money into
[4:23:26] that budget to give us more flexibility
[4:23:28] to do that work is kind of what we would
[4:23:30] in a in a if in the current override
[4:23:33] scenario some of the professional
[4:23:34] technical money but not all of it would
[4:23:36] flow back.
[4:23:39] Well, um John, thanks for raising that
[4:23:42] question. It was um something I hadn't
[4:23:45] thought of.
[4:23:46] Kind of makes you think,
[4:23:47] huh?
[4:23:47] It kind of makes you think.
[4:23:48] Makes you think. Um,
[4:23:52] so as we go through this process, we may
[4:23:55] we may not have time to review every
[4:24:00] departmental budget before we get to
[4:24:02] this discussion about the override. Will
[4:24:05] each department and how much money they
[4:24:07] would get be listed and how it would be
[4:24:10] used for as we start talking about the
[4:24:12] override?
[4:24:12] Yes. So all all the override line items
[4:24:14] are keyed in by department and if it
[4:24:16] says multiple departments I have the
[4:24:18] information about how that splits out.
[4:24:20] Okay, perfect. Thank you so much. But if
[4:24:22] one I'm sorry Bernard but as John said
[4:24:24] if as the departments present if we
[4:24:27] could also have it as part of those that
[4:24:30] discussion I think it to provide context
[4:24:32] would be really helpful.
[4:24:32] Got it.
[4:24:33] Okay. Thanks
[4:24:34] John. I'm sorry Michael.
[4:24:36] Um I have one other question for you
[4:24:38] Charlie. you mentioned something uh work
[4:24:41] about community engagement and how you
[4:24:44] would um uh that would be one of your
[4:24:46] priorities if money wow object um and
[4:24:48] I'm just wondering given that we also
[4:24:50] have a department that has community
[4:24:53] relations in its name um how those two
[4:24:59] um functions either coordinate or
[4:25:02] overlap or um uh talk to each other to
[4:25:07] to understand the kinds of work that
[4:25:09] they do.
[4:25:11] Sure. I think that they are different
[4:25:13] functions. Um I think that what we're
[4:25:15] doing on the sixth floor is more in the
[4:25:18] in the realm of disseminating
[4:25:20] information in the realm of keeping
[4:25:23] ensuring we're getting information out
[4:25:25] in the right places in the right ways um
[4:25:27] and doing it coherently with a with a
[4:25:29] unified message. Um to to be honest with
[4:25:33] you, I can't speak to, you know,
[4:25:36] necessarily what they're doing in ODICR.
[4:25:38] Maybe Chaz could could jump in here. Um
[4:25:42] but when I say when I talk about
[4:25:44] expanding that effort, you know, right
[4:25:45] now we have an ARPA funded agreement
[4:25:47] with Capital Strategic Solutions who is
[4:25:49] um helping us with PR, right? Um and so,
[4:25:53] you know, you could you could easily
[4:25:55] have additional staff in our department
[4:25:56] whose job it is to work with Christina
[4:25:58] on all the projects she's working on.
[4:26:01] um and expand upon that. I think um
[4:26:04] tenfold. I think that right now um we're
[4:26:07] doing a lot with a little put it that
[4:26:09] way. So, and I don't know if anybody
[4:26:11] else wants to jump in here and throw me
[4:26:12] a lifeline on.
[4:26:15] I'll just say when when I came on board,
[4:26:17] one of the things that we did was we
[4:26:19] moved a communications officer position
[4:26:21] out of ODICR into the select board
[4:26:23] office. And the purpose of that was to
[4:26:25] give to centralize that function and to
[4:26:29] in the same way that we talk about
[4:26:30] centralizing grant administration. Some
[4:26:32] departments are very good at
[4:26:32] communication. Some departments don't
[4:26:34] have any communication at all. But when
[4:26:36] we did that, we expressly said that a
[4:26:38] part of that role that part of that job
[4:26:40] is to work with ODICR to target outreach
[4:26:43] and to target communication particularly
[4:26:45] with harderto-reach parts of our
[4:26:47] community. And that is some of the work
[4:26:49] that Christine has been doing. And ODICR
[4:26:51] has also been, you know, taking the lead
[4:26:53] in terms of thinking about how do we
[4:26:56] reach people who are disconnected from
[4:26:59] the community but who live here and, you
[4:27:02] know, rely on the and could benefit in
[4:27:04] from the services that we provide. And
[4:27:06] so that question is out there. You know,
[4:27:08] we're always thinking about how we how
[4:27:10] we communicate, not just broadly with
[4:27:13] the general public, but specifically
[4:27:15] with parts of the community that have
[4:27:16] been unrepresented or are are otherwise
[4:27:19] disconnected or or, you know, um not,
[4:27:22] you know, don't feel themselves to be a
[4:27:24] part of the community as it stands. So,
[4:27:27] um there is a joint role for ODICR and
[4:27:30] the communications officer position to
[4:27:32] play in that targeted outreach. Um but I
[4:27:35] think on the whole moving communications
[4:27:37] into the select board office and having
[4:27:39] that sit there has been a success in
[4:27:43] terms of how we've been able to broaden
[4:27:45] our messaging out to the public.
[4:27:48] And the the U diversity office does its
[4:27:51] own communication with respect to
[4:27:52] various programs that that it uh
[4:27:55] supports or runs. So
[4:27:59] they're not out of the game in that
[4:28:01] regard. They do a very good job of that.
[4:28:03] Right. I'm I I I'm mostly asking this
[4:28:05] question as an organizational structure
[4:28:07] question, not a question of like are
[4:28:10] these different uh departments doing
[4:28:15] good work or important work or work that
[4:28:16] needs to be done. It's just is the
[4:28:19] organizational structure optimized for
[4:28:21] getting all of this done in the right
[4:28:23] percentages.
[4:28:24] So um
[4:28:27] OD
[4:28:29] O DICR will be um on our is on our
[4:28:33] agenda for later on. So those are
[4:28:35] questions that we can raise with them.
[4:28:39] Okay. Any other questions for chair?
[4:28:42] I don't have a question about this one,
[4:28:43] but I wanted to make it just a quick
[4:28:45] query about timing. Um
[4:28:47] yeah.
[4:28:48] Uh I don't want to be I don't I I don't
[4:28:50] want to pop the good time bubble here,
[4:28:52] but you know, this was a half hour on
[4:28:55] one.
[4:28:56] Okay. Uh, and I
[4:28:58] Yeah, we're going to be here till
[4:28:59] midnight or 1:00.
[4:29:00] Shorter presentations,
[4:29:02] fewer questions maybe.
[4:29:04] Yeah, we should time block. We should
[4:29:05] time block how much time we want to
[4:29:06] spend on each distance.
[4:29:09] So, Melanie, give us five minutes
[4:29:13] going forward.
[4:29:14] Okay.
[4:29:16] All right. Thank you.
[4:29:17] Five minutes.
[4:29:18] Thank you, Charlie.
[4:29:18] Thank you, Charlie. Thank you.
[4:29:21] Next. Town council.
[4:29:26] So, you have no more than 10 minutes.
[4:29:28] Uh, Joe.
[4:29:31] All right.
[4:29:32] Can you see my screen?
[4:29:36] Yes.
[4:29:38] All right.
[4:29:38] I'm getting a little feedback. So, you
[4:29:40] maybe turn if there's a speaker, turn it
[4:29:42] down a tiny bit.
[4:29:45] All right. Um,
[4:29:48] I'll talk uh more softly up. Um, but uh
[4:29:52] I'm Joe Callahan, town council. Uh, and
[4:29:55] here's my budget presentation, and I'll
[4:29:57] try to keep it short, but I'm happy to
[4:29:58] answer any questions. So, we are uh you
[4:30:02] see me frequently, but there's many of
[4:30:04] us. There's seven other other of us in
[4:30:06] town council's office, five attorneys,
[4:30:08] and uh three support staff. Uh John, who
[4:30:12] counts our FTEEs. Uh in years past we
[4:30:14] had an FTE count of 8.7. Um that was an
[4:30:18] addition of an investigator that has
[4:30:20] since moved over to HR. That position
[4:30:23] wasn't filled but the year that the
[4:30:25] investigator went over to HR we added a
[4:30:28] half an FTE which are paid interns. So
[4:30:31] that makes up our office which is
[4:30:32] usually about 10 people.
[4:30:35] Uh this is a change in the budget from
[4:30:37] last year over this year. um it
[4:30:40] represents a 1% decrease and that's
[4:30:42] again in a no override situation. Um the
[4:30:45] big decrease or big change is $30,000
[4:30:48] reduction in downside services. There's
[4:30:51] a an increase in salaries, but that's
[4:30:53] just steps of our uh employees who are
[4:30:56] not at the top step and an increase in
[4:30:58] our cost of uh computers.
[4:31:02] So I want to talk about two of our
[4:31:04] accomplishments. Um, this is along the
[4:31:07] lines of how we measure our
[4:31:10] accomplishments as opposed to, you know,
[4:31:12] the town council's office doesn't
[4:31:14] produce a building or, you know, produce
[4:31:16] a comprehensive plan. But we do work
[4:31:18] with those other departments who do
[4:31:20] those things to make sure they're done
[4:31:22] legally and, you know, as best we can.
[4:31:25] But how but there's two metrics that I
[4:31:27] try to track that are specifically
[4:31:29] related to legal and that is our
[4:31:30] spending on outside counsel. And you've
[4:31:32] heard this in years past. This is a
[4:31:34] comparison of the last 12 years. Um,
[4:31:37] four the last four years are ones I'm
[4:31:39] responsible for because I've now been
[4:31:41] with Brookline since March of 2022. So,
[4:31:44] four years. But we went back another
[4:31:47] eight years to uh, you know, compare our
[4:31:49] outside spending costs versus what uh,
[4:31:52] we've been spending on outside council
[4:31:54] since I got here. You heard examples,
[4:31:57] but actually there's another example of
[4:31:59] why we don't need outside counsel. For
[4:32:02] example, you heard many times uh many
[4:32:05] many many nights about the negotiations
[4:32:07] that we've had with the MBTA.
[4:32:10] Um in my 11 years at the MB at the uh
[4:32:12] state, I worked on a lot of railroad
[4:32:15] title case. Um in the three years I was
[4:32:18] in private practice, I represented the
[4:32:20] MBTA 15 years ago. I had several trials
[4:32:24] over the state of railroad title. I'm
[4:32:26] one of the few attorneys that know about
[4:32:28] railroad title. So when Aaron came to me
[4:32:30] and said the MDTA is telling her we have
[4:32:34] to accept what they want to do on their
[4:32:36] you know sea line I said well if it's
[4:32:39] within their granted location they're
[4:32:40] right but is everything within their
[4:32:42] granted location and we realized the
[4:32:44] grant of location hadn't changed since
[4:32:46] the 19th century even though the MBTA
[4:32:50] property did and that gave us the
[4:32:51] leverage to negotiate thatou that Aaron
[4:32:54] was talking about otherwise I can assure
[4:32:57] you I represented a community before
[4:32:59] that was in the MDK area. The MDA would
[4:33:02] have treated us differently, but we had
[4:33:06] something that they needed, an amended
[4:33:08] grant of location, and we then were able
[4:33:11] to use what they needed from us to get
[4:33:13] what we wanted from them. And that's
[4:33:15] theou that's concessions on trees.
[4:33:18] That's a lot of concessions that the
[4:33:19] MBTA, you guys understand, just agreed
[4:33:22] to. But because of my experience with
[4:33:25] railroad title, I didn't need to go to
[4:33:27] outside council. Instead, what I did is
[4:33:29] have Susan Harris in my office learn
[4:33:32] about railroad title. I know about it.
[4:33:34] I've worked on it multiple times, but I
[4:33:36] passed on my knowledge to other
[4:33:38] attorneys in the office. So, that's what
[4:33:40] we're trying to do with um the money
[4:33:43] that we get. So, instead of spending
[4:33:46] money on outside lawyers, we increased
[4:33:48] our subscription to West Law. We got a
[4:33:50] sub a membership in the social law
[4:33:53] library. So it's a it's a law library
[4:33:55] where you can get resources that aren't
[4:33:57] online. Uh if you're looking for the
[4:33:59] ward commission reports from the 60s
[4:34:01] that's not on Wesla but it is in social
[4:34:03] law library. You heard about you know
[4:34:05] needs for professional development. What
[4:34:07] we did was increase the money that we
[4:34:10] spent through bar associations through
[4:34:12] mass um Massachusetts continuing legal
[4:34:14] education. All my attorneys can get
[4:34:17] training if they want it. If you look in
[4:34:19] um fiscal year 24 and 25, that's
[4:34:22] spending that we we had on an outside
[4:34:25] lawyer to train our new labor and
[4:34:27] employment lawyer. We spent about um
[4:34:29] $10,000 for him to do 40 hours of
[4:34:32] training. But what he did was power he
[4:34:35] recorded PowerPoint presentations. So
[4:34:37] when he was training Elena Ben David,
[4:34:41] our new labor employment lawyer, Elena
[4:34:44] has left in the past year. All of Jack
[4:34:47] Collins's videos are now available for
[4:34:50] Barry Freedelland who replaced the link.
[4:34:52] So even though we spent money on an
[4:34:54] outside council, we got that money back
[4:34:57] by the way we were able to use that
[4:34:59] outside council. The last uh blip on
[4:35:02] this for outside council is um to hire
[4:35:05] August and Epstein. So you uh you know
[4:35:08] are familiar with our Comcast
[4:35:09] negotiations that
[4:35:13] we lost. Oops.
[4:35:16] Okay, looks like we lost you,
[4:35:18] Joe. We lost you there.
[4:35:21] Oh, okay.
[4:35:23] But, um,
[4:35:23] there we go.
[4:35:24] Okay. So, so this has been our history
[4:35:28] with outside spending. So, what I also
[4:35:31] want to talk about is another
[4:35:32] accomplishment of ours, which is claim
[4:35:34] handling. And we on average here about
[4:35:38] one or claims about 100 personal injury
[4:35:41] or property damage. a motor vehicle uh
[4:35:44] case where a cruiser or a fire engine
[4:35:46] hit a car, a pothole claim, where
[4:35:49] someone slipped on a sidewalk or in a in
[4:35:51] a town building. On average, that's
[4:35:53] about $350,000 a year people are looking
[4:35:56] from the town. Now, we've had a similar
[4:35:59] number. This here was an eight-year look
[4:36:01] back. Um we have similar number of
[4:36:03] claims, although the amount of money has
[4:36:05] increased, but we've also settled more
[4:36:08] cases than denied more cases in years
[4:36:11] past. but we pay out each year the same
[4:36:14] amount. And how we're able to do that is
[4:36:17] by settling for lower amounts of money.
[4:36:20] We spend the time negotiating with
[4:36:21] outside counsel on, you know, you're
[4:36:24] looking for, you know, a lot of money.
[4:36:26] We're willing to settle for a little
[4:36:27] money. So, those are a lot of words.
[4:36:29] Here are the numbers. Again, this is a
[4:36:31] comparison of 15 quarters versus 16
[4:36:33] quarters. So, the numbers should be
[4:36:34] about 6% less. Um, but you know, we're
[4:36:38] about the same number of claims. The
[4:36:40] amount of money claimed in all those
[4:36:42] claims has doubled in part because of
[4:36:44] inflation 25% over these last eight
[4:36:47] years. But we pay out less or you know
[4:36:50] approximately 5% less.
[4:36:52] But how we do that is we used to settle
[4:36:55] about 25% of the amount claimed. Now we
[4:36:58] settle 11% of what's claimed. So there's
[4:37:00] a 44% reduction in how much we pay out
[4:37:04] even though we pay out close to 20% more
[4:37:07] claims. So this is the hard work that we
[4:37:10] do when we get a claim in and we
[4:37:12] negotiate it and protect the taxpayers
[4:37:14] uh you know uh tax dollars and we don't
[4:37:17] just pay what opposing council is
[4:37:20] willing to take. So, those are, you
[4:37:23] know, two accomplishments that I want
[4:37:24] to, you know, talk about. But you may
[4:37:26] say like, "Oh, wait a second. We pay
[4:37:27] lots of money for, you know, you know,
[4:37:29] million-dollar claims. Those are the
[4:37:32] ones that you hear about, but you don't
[4:37:34] hear about the hundreds that aren't, you
[4:37:37] know, in the news." And and those, you
[4:37:40] know, the ones that I just talked about
[4:37:41] are ones that we can pay within our
[4:37:42] $75,000 settlement line item. If we
[4:37:45] can't pay that, then we have to go to
[4:37:46] the liability.
[4:37:48] And here's the uh you know again
[4:37:51] eight-year look back what we paid in the
[4:37:53] liability fund. Now Alustin wasn't in
[4:37:57] paid out of the liability fund. It was
[4:37:58] bonded. So Alustin got $8 million but
[4:38:02] the to the taxpayer is more because we
[4:38:05] bonded it. However, the last two uh
[4:38:08] payments what we've done is paid them
[4:38:10] out of the liability fund. So even
[4:38:12] though one of them was $1.8 8 million
[4:38:15] because of the way it's structured in
[4:38:17] the time value of money that's only
[4:38:18] really worth $1.5 million because we're
[4:38:21] basically borrowing against future free
[4:38:24] cash as opposed to going out into the
[4:38:26] market and having to pay interest. And
[4:38:28] that's the same case with the um the
[4:38:30] case of the teacher sex abuse. So again,
[4:38:32] it's being paid out over term of years
[4:38:35] through the liability fund. So we don't
[4:38:36] have to borrow it and pay interest.
[4:38:38] We're essentially the interest is coming
[4:38:40] from ourselves. So, those are the two
[4:38:43] accomplishments I wanted to talk about.
[4:38:45] Um, I'll give you, you know, just kind
[4:38:47] of a snapshot of what pending claims are
[4:38:50] we have. We have 36 at the moment. Last
[4:38:52] year at this time, we had 37. And this
[4:38:54] kind of spreads it out into which
[4:38:56] courts. Uh, but the matters are, and
[4:38:58] this is pretty typical, you know, our
[4:39:00] our litigation case load, but in I can
[4:39:03] assure you none of these cases pose any
[4:39:05] significant potential for financial
[4:39:07] liability. There's probably two that we
[4:39:08] might be liable, but again, it's
[4:39:10] unlikely. And it's unlikely that that'd
[4:39:12] be more than you know a couple hundred
[4:39:14] thousand dollars. So you're not going to
[4:39:15] see something like you've seen in the
[4:39:17] last two uh you know settlements that
[4:39:20] we've had. So otherwise I'm happy to
[4:39:22] answer any questions either now or
[4:39:24] later. You guys know my number. I give
[4:39:26] it out. 617308-1525.
[4:39:29] That is my cell phone number. I could
[4:39:31] call whenever you want.
[4:39:33] Thank you. Exactly
[4:39:36] 10 minutes
[4:39:38] David.
[4:39:39] Yes. Just a couple quick questions. So,
[4:39:41] I noticed that there is a graphic where
[4:39:45] for each year there's an estimated
[4:39:47] number of lawsuits and active cla of
[4:39:51] active claims compared to the actual
[4:39:53] number and each year the actual number
[4:39:57] exceeds the estimated number. So, for
[4:40:00] example, for this uh current year 91
[4:40:03] verse 55, how do you estimate
[4:40:08] active cases?
[4:40:11] So, it's a little hard, you know, it's
[4:40:12] it's a lot easier to keep track of
[4:40:14] what's pending as opposed to what's
[4:40:17] going to be filed in August or September
[4:40:18] of next year. Um, so so my staff uh you
[4:40:22] know comes up with those um those uh
[4:40:27] you know metrics that uh come from AC
[4:40:29] and you know what I try to keep track of
[4:40:31] is uh outside council spending,
[4:40:34] settlement spending and pending matters.
[4:40:36] All right.
[4:40:37] Those are the metrics that I kind of
[4:40:38] measure things. Yeah.
[4:40:40] Okay. And then also you list out uh
[4:40:43] pending matters by court and I notice
[4:40:46] that uh there are several matters in
[4:40:48] land court, six of which are tax lean
[4:40:52] collection cases.
[4:40:53] Do we have any judgment lean cases?
[4:40:57] The tax leans um we don't go to
[4:41:00] judgments. Um we try to use the tax lean
[4:41:02] foreclosure proceedings to collect the
[4:41:04] money. So they're more collections
[4:41:06] actions. Um and and acting perk line is
[4:41:09] very good at at this. And again, it's
[4:41:10] something that we do where most
[4:41:12] municipalities contract that out. Um but
[4:41:14] it's really more of a collections effort
[4:41:16] as opposed to seeking a judgment that
[4:41:19] forecloses and the town takes title. Um
[4:41:22] you know, and if if you're familiar with
[4:41:23] it, you know, Tommy Blo is, you know, a
[4:41:26] big advocate against equity theft.
[4:41:28] That's not what we do. We use a tax
[4:41:30] foreclosure for collections purposes.
[4:41:33] All right.
[4:41:36] And also we don't we don't sell we don't
[4:41:38] sell our tax lans to private investors.
[4:41:40] That's another thing that municipalities
[4:41:41] do. We don't
[4:41:43] Hey, Michael.
[4:41:44] Uh I just have one question. Um have you
[4:41:48] considered how uh AI will impact your
[4:41:51] future workload?
[4:41:54] Um I'm on the uh international municipal
[4:41:56] lawyer and technology committee. Uh yes.
[4:41:59] Um but you know the problem is um
[4:42:04] you know to rely on that for the type of
[4:42:07] writing that we need. Okay. So um I'll
[4:42:11] admit I use uh you know AI when I have
[4:42:14] trouble kind of explaining things that
[4:42:16] are what a lawyer kind of understands.
[4:42:18] Oh that's due process. You know you
[4:42:20] can't do that. That's due process. How
[4:42:22] do I explain that to someone who isn't a
[4:42:24] lawyer? Okay that's that's a good use of
[4:42:26] AI. I'll admit that it is not a good use
[4:42:29] and I and I and I collect cases for my
[4:42:31] students at UMass, you know, like it is
[4:42:34] not a good resource to rely on to file
[4:42:36] in courts. Um, you know, so if you're
[4:42:39] looking for brainstorming ideas, um, you
[4:42:42] know, how else can I explain this? Um,
[4:42:45] you know, I have an example. Give me two
[4:42:47] more. That's a that's an effective use
[4:42:49] of the AI that I found. It is not an
[4:42:51] effective use for what is the law on
[4:42:54] this
[4:42:55] and here are some facts and what should
[4:42:57] I do? Sorry it's not there yet.
[4:43:00] Thank you
[4:43:01] uh Paul.
[4:43:02] Thank you Bernard. Uh thank you Joe for
[4:43:04] your your presentation. I and I
[4:43:06] appreciated the emphasis on h how you're
[4:43:08] adding value and you're thinking kind of
[4:43:10] like a business lawyer I guess business.
[4:43:13] Um, so Chaz, maybe this is for you or
[4:43:16] for Joe, if for in the in the override
[4:43:19] scenario, what is there going to be
[4:43:21] money added to this budget and what
[4:43:22] would it be for?
[4:43:24] So there's a little um there's uh a
[4:43:26] potential cut on the town council side.
[4:43:28] We're talking about maybe reducing the
[4:43:29] legal intern budget or the settlement
[4:43:30] budget. We're still in final discussions
[4:43:32] about where that would be, but in a if
[4:43:34] there was a yes override scenario, we
[4:43:36] would not make that reduction, but
[4:43:38] the budget So the budget would stay the
[4:43:39] same.
[4:43:39] Yes. Okay. Thank you. Any
[4:43:44] other questions? We have one minute four
[4:43:47] seconds left.
[4:43:49] Take it back.
[4:43:49] Or actually the
[4:43:53] second.
[4:43:53] Okay. We were very disciplined as a
[4:43:55] select board. Good. This time,
[4:43:58] thank you, Joe.
[4:44:00] My pleasure.
[4:44:01] Thanks, Joe.
[4:44:03] Next, uh, HR, I'm sorry, Office of
[4:44:07] Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and
[4:44:09] Community Relations.
[4:44:13] I see Lloyd Gelano is uh on the screen.
[4:44:18] Good evening. Um um my name is Lloyd
[4:44:21] Gelano. I'm um the chief diversity
[4:44:23] officer um and director of the um office
[4:44:27] of diversity, equity, and community
[4:44:29] relations. Uh with me tonight is Caitlyn
[4:44:32] Star, the assistant director, and I
[4:44:34] believe Sarah Kaplan's online as well.
[4:44:37] Um, so I I have permission to share my
[4:44:40] screen so we can start the presentation
[4:44:47] find the right one.
[4:44:56] Okay. Um, can you see my screen?
[4:44:59] Yep.
[4:45:00] Okay.
[4:45:02] So, like I said, we're the um office of
[4:45:05] diversity, equity, and um inclusion and
[4:45:07] community relations. Um
[4:45:11] you know, we have a team of um four um
[4:45:13] staff members. Um and I, uh before we
[4:45:17] move forward, I just want to say that
[4:45:19] we, you know, we have um a small staff
[4:45:23] compromise of four uh four staff, but we
[4:45:25] do have a small budget of $3,000
[4:45:28] um for stipens for three interns per
[4:45:30] year.
[4:45:32] Um at this time I just want to
[4:45:34] acknowledge the ODICR team. Um uh their
[4:45:38] expertise uh expertise, dedication and
[4:45:41] work ethic is highly valued by the
[4:45:43] community and town staff. Um they're a
[4:45:46] great smart team and we are very
[4:45:48] fortunate to have them in the town's uh
[4:45:50] workforce. I just want to take this time
[4:45:53] just to thank them for their service.
[4:45:59] Our office um promotes community uh
[4:46:02] driven events and activities that aid
[4:46:04] Brooklyn uh Brooklyn's community to
[4:46:06] become more culturally competent and to
[4:46:09] to be informed of the achievements and
[4:46:11] barriers faced by our protected classes.
[4:46:13] It continues to work with community
[4:46:15] entities to examine quality of life
[4:46:17] barriers due to racial inequities or
[4:46:19] discrimination based on protected class
[4:46:21] status and to help create strategies to
[4:46:24] mitigate those be uh those barriers.
[4:46:30] Uh we work with a very modest budget. Uh
[4:46:33] as with other departments, we do have um
[4:46:36] most of the funds goes towards
[4:46:38] personnel. Um but the office this year
[4:46:41] um the budget is decreased by $24,000
[4:46:44] which is 5% u a decrease of 5% in the
[4:46:48] fiscal year 2027.
[4:46:50] Um the total reduction is compromised of
[4:46:52] a $3,2657
[4:46:56] increase in salaries to staff
[4:46:57] compensation.
[4:46:59] Um a $360
[4:47:01] increase in lease uh computer equipment
[4:47:04] and a reduction of $28,000 to the
[4:47:07] professional tech services um a line
[4:47:09] item. Um be specifically that's going to
[4:47:12] be directed towards language access. Um,
[4:47:15] currently staffing levels remained at at
[4:47:17] 3.72 FTEES.
[4:47:25] Accomplishments. Um, overall, I just
[4:47:27] want to note that we work with town
[4:47:29] departments and community organizations
[4:47:31] in their endeavors to promote and uh and
[4:47:34] provide resources to the Brooklyn
[4:47:36] community, including marginalized
[4:47:38] groups. Um some of the highlights here
[4:47:41] um you know collecting collected and
[4:47:43] analy data on demographics of town
[4:47:45] boards and commissions. Um these um this
[4:47:49] data um and graphs can be looked um can
[4:47:52] be seen on um our web page.
[4:47:57] Um the office provided logistical
[4:47:59] assistance to plan and host an annual
[4:48:01] indigenous people's day celebration and
[4:48:03] the LLK day event and all other
[4:48:06] associated programs for these
[4:48:08] communities. Um the office also provided
[4:48:11] logistical and staff support to the um
[4:48:14] Ahapi
[4:48:16] heritage event festival Junth. Um I'm
[4:48:20] not going to go all Jewish heritage
[4:48:22] months pride month activities. Um um as
[4:48:25] you see we do a lot of coordinate
[4:48:27] collaboration coordination with um town
[4:48:29] entities. Uh we finalized the language
[4:48:32] access and effective communication plan
[4:48:35] securing interpreting devices for all
[4:48:37] departments through a state earmark and
[4:48:39] assisted town departments in their
[4:48:41] understanding of how to secure language
[4:48:43] translation interpretation services.
[4:48:46] Um we provided consultation for
[4:48:48] revisions for the town's EO policy. Um
[4:48:51] we completed one one of potentially
[4:48:55] three Hidden Brooklyn welcome tours
[4:48:57] video working with um Barbara Brown in
[4:48:59] Hidden Brooklyn. Um provided
[4:49:02] consultation and support to various
[4:49:03] public health initiatives such as CHIP
[4:49:05] and the community health champions
[4:49:07] program. Um, I won't go into any more of
[4:49:10] this because I just want to say we do
[4:49:12] for a small staff, um, we do get a lot
[4:49:15] done and so it's one of those things I'm
[4:49:17] really proud of, um, a staff being able
[4:49:19] to accomplish as much as they they they
[4:49:22] do.
[4:49:25] Key achievements for physical year 2028
[4:49:28] uh, 26
[4:49:30] uh, continue implementation of the
[4:49:31] language access and effective commission
[4:49:33] plan across all departments. completed
[4:49:35] the hidden Brooklyn walking tour,
[4:49:38] provided consultation services to town
[4:49:40] departments and community entities
[4:49:42] entities regarding ADA compliance and
[4:49:44] pro program referrals for those in need
[4:49:47] of disability services.
[4:49:50] uh again collaborated with the public
[4:49:51] health and human services and women
[4:49:53] thriving inc to develop and launch the
[4:49:55] health champions program and translation
[4:49:58] and distribution of updated know your
[4:50:00] rights pamphlets in addition to hosting
[4:50:02] workshops, bystander trainings, and free
[4:50:05] legal claims for staff and community
[4:50:06] members.
[4:50:10] key goals for um FY 26 27. Um the ones
[4:50:15] involved are the ones that actually are
[4:50:17] consistent with uh the select board's um
[4:50:20] initiatives and objectives. Um assist
[4:50:23] departments in locating and inviting a
[4:50:25] diverse representation of community
[4:50:27] members to participate in p public
[4:50:29] meetings and to engage in public
[4:50:32] processes.
[4:50:34] um provide information to the public
[4:50:36] regarding significant plans, town plans
[4:50:38] that may impact quality of life at ODR
[4:50:41] at our ODICR events and activities.
[4:50:45] And again, uh collaborate with
[4:50:47] departments to ensure changes in fees
[4:50:49] and fine structures are equitable and
[4:50:51] are known to the community, particularly
[4:50:53] to marginalized groups and limited
[4:50:55] English-speaking individuals.
[4:50:57] and then work with the appropriate town
[4:50:59] departments to develop culturally
[4:51:00] relevant programs, events, and
[4:51:02] institutions that would entice people to
[4:51:04] consider living in Brooklyn.
[4:51:10] Long-term objectives um increase growth
[4:51:12] opportunities for individual and
[4:51:15] families of low income residing in
[4:51:16] Brooklyn.
[4:51:19] Increase civic engagement by decreasing
[4:51:21] structural barriers to participation
[4:51:24] uh by various mobilized groups. um
[4:51:27] communities.
[4:51:29] Three, to eliminate barriers of all
[4:51:31] individuals that prevent reasonable
[4:51:33] communication and access to town
[4:51:35] facilities and processes
[4:51:41] and and again this how how are your
[4:51:43] operations further the select both goals
[4:51:45] and objectives for the past fiscal year.
[4:51:47] Uh the office through collaboration with
[4:51:49] community entities, boards and
[4:51:51] commission
[4:51:53] and town departments work together uh
[4:51:56] towards achieving the select growth goal
[4:51:58] by delivering and implementing and
[4:52:00] language access policy and plan for
[4:52:03] approval by the select board.
[4:52:05] participate in the supply diversity
[4:52:07] disparity study and update and move the
[4:52:10] diverse and inclusive business directory
[4:52:12] to the quality part platform and then
[4:52:15] collaborate and participate in the
[4:52:16] health department's human services
[4:52:18] assessment assessment and gap analysis
[4:52:20] reports.
[4:52:22] So what if the question is um if I had
[4:52:25] an unlimited budget um the three things
[4:52:29] I think are uh really important would be
[4:52:32] some kind of employee housing subsidy
[4:52:34] programed
[4:52:36] community event or center and work
[4:52:40] sponsorship programs for non-citizens
[4:52:46] and so um how will these objectives set
[4:52:49] um be consistent with the um select
[4:52:51] boards uh mission in this coming year.
[4:52:54] The office seeks to improve voter
[4:52:56] turnout for underrepresented groups to
[4:52:58] increase participation of
[4:53:00] underrepresented groups in Brooklyn's
[4:53:01] town boards and commissions. Identify
[4:53:04] strategies to increase minority owned
[4:53:07] businesses, specifically black and brown
[4:53:09] enterprises. The office also seeks to
[4:53:12] increase access to vital documents for
[4:53:14] um LOE individuals in their own
[4:53:16] languages and to monitor the language
[4:53:19] access needs of the Brooklyn community.
[4:53:21] These are consistent with the select
[4:53:23] board's diversity inclusion goals
[4:53:27] and that is the end of my presentation.
[4:53:32] So if you have any questions please
[4:53:38] any questions from Michael? Um, so I'll
[4:53:42] ask you the same question I asked um
[4:53:44] Charlie Young um about your thoughts on
[4:53:48] the communication role and the community
[4:53:51] relation role in your office and the uh
[4:53:54] communications role um that is now
[4:53:56] resident in the select board office and
[4:53:58] whether there are opportunities for
[4:54:01] coordination
[4:54:02] or
[4:54:03] uh yes we do I'm sorry Michael I jumped
[4:54:05] in on where you finished your sentence.
[4:54:07] Um there is um um coordination between
[4:54:11] certain projects with uh with Christina
[4:54:14] um Christina um we actually uh
[4:54:17] collaborated on two I believe this year
[4:54:19] both dealing with the schools um
[4:54:25] um but the going to the question about
[4:54:27] community relations um and then
[4:54:29] community engagement. Um, we I sort of
[4:54:32] look at community um community um excuse
[4:54:38] me.
[4:54:41] I look at community um relations as sort
[4:54:45] of making sure that the relationships
[4:54:48] that already exist are strengthening and
[4:54:50] we we are able to do collaboration.
[4:54:52] community um um engagement. It's it's a
[4:54:56] bit different. Um that tends to be more
[4:54:59] focused on things that the town will
[4:55:02] would want to do and that we're actually
[4:55:04] doing the outreach to those uh groups
[4:55:07] that may not be aware or know they're
[4:55:10] empowered to help make the town make
[4:55:13] decisions. So, we go out and seek people
[4:55:15] out for a specific project. let's say
[4:55:17] it's a road project or um that we go out
[4:55:21] and find folks who um anything that we
[4:55:23] do may impact their lives whether
[4:55:26] positively or negatively and we try to
[4:55:28] work in to mitigate those um um bad
[4:55:31] things from happening. So, um that's my
[4:55:35] distinction between the two and I do
[4:55:36] think that um you know we'll probably
[4:55:38] tighten our relationship with Christina
[4:55:40] as the years go on, but we do have a
[4:55:42] working relationship.
[4:55:45] Thank you.
[4:55:46] Oh
[4:55:47] uh same question Jazz I asked for the
[4:55:49] others override impact.
[4:55:51] Um in this case as Lloyd mentioned the
[4:55:53] big impact here is to language access.
[4:55:55] We would have to pretty dramatically
[4:55:57] reduce our language access budget. We
[4:55:58] and that's what's reflected in here. If
[4:56:00] we if the override were to succeed that
[4:56:02] would be restored.
[4:56:02] Okay.
[4:56:10] Thank you Lloyd.
[4:56:11] You're welcome.
[4:56:12] You have two minutes 35 seconds left. if
[4:56:14] you want to say anything to and
[4:56:17] no thank you for the opportunity for
[4:56:19] sharing what our office does and um no I
[4:56:24] I just want to say it just my staff uh
[4:56:26] the staff is just remarkable and you
[4:56:28] know I think most of you have worked
[4:56:30] with with them in one way or another so
[4:56:33] um got a good team here thank you okay
[4:56:36] thank you
[4:56:36] next
[4:56:38] we have um
[4:56:42] HR
[4:56:45] I can find it in my book. Yep. HR. I I
[4:56:48] take it Anne Braga is
[4:56:50] and it's online.
[4:56:51] It's online and uh is ready to speak.
[4:57:10] Good evening. and Braa, HR director for
[4:57:12] the town.
[4:57:15] I am going to share my screen.
[4:58:08] Okay. So, um,
[4:58:11] good evening. I'm here to present both
[4:58:14] the HR budget and in collaboration with
[4:58:16] Melissa Goff, the personnel benefits,
[4:58:19] um, components for fiscal 27.
[4:58:23] Um fiscal 26 we have been busier than
[4:58:27] ever um with classification
[4:58:31] um job reclassification position review
[4:58:33] committee. So, um, in anticipation of
[4:58:37] our, um, challenges for budget moving
[4:58:42] forward, um, with Melissa, um, we review
[4:58:47] all positions that are requested by
[4:58:50] departments for authorizations to hire
[4:58:52] that go to the select board. Um, and we
[4:58:55] have a conversation with the department
[4:58:57] heads about what the um what the role is
[4:59:00] doing, how long it's been vacant. Um,
[4:59:03] are there other opportunities for the
[4:59:06] work to be done in a different way um
[4:59:09] before the ATHs go to the select board
[4:59:12] for um a vote and approval um and
[4:59:16] continuing investigations,
[4:59:18] coaching and counseling managers. Um we
[4:59:21] have hosted a few um gatherings
[4:59:24] including a popcorn um afternoon break.
[4:59:27] Uh we did a winter coffee break with um
[4:59:30] baked goods and coffee and cocoa. Um we
[4:59:33] continue to work on the ask me class and
[4:59:35] pay plan and public safety hirings and
[4:59:39] promotions. We sit on the interview team
[4:59:41] and work with them on their new um
[4:59:44] subscriptions for police um new hires
[4:59:48] and promotions. Um through our
[4:59:53] online learning platform, we
[4:59:56] had employees complete
[4:59:59] uh 9800 trainings last year. Um in
[5:00:03] fiscal 27, we look to redistribute
[5:00:06] learning and development, develop a
[5:00:08] regular cadence of training so that
[5:00:10] we're not doing once a year where
[5:00:13] there's three hours of training. Um it's
[5:00:15] a it's a burden on staff to be able to
[5:00:18] to commit that amount of time especially
[5:00:20] if the folks are not um computer facing
[5:00:24] um and we will have um adjusted response
[5:00:28] times due to um staffing changes um in
[5:00:32] the department. We hope to review and
[5:00:34] streamline new hiring and offboarding,
[5:00:37] continued review of policy and benefits
[5:00:40] and collective bargaining. So for fiscal
[5:00:44] 27, we have the last year of police and
[5:00:46] fire and we have five other contracts
[5:00:49] that are currently as of July 1st will
[5:00:51] be a year um out of um
[5:00:56] an active contract.
[5:00:59] This is our budget at a glance. um
[5:01:02] you'll you'll see a 10% reduction in
[5:01:05] personnel. That is um due to the
[5:01:08] reduction and elimination of the
[5:01:11] position of learning and development
[5:01:12] coordinator. Um we did take out the $550
[5:01:16] for the um clothing and um
[5:01:20] and uh uniform stipend. Um the biggest
[5:01:26] uh reduction outside of personnel is
[5:01:30] $55,000 or a 43% reduction in our legal
[5:01:34] services account. Um while the legal
[5:01:38] services account um has funded outside
[5:01:41] attorneys to do investigations,
[5:01:44] um it also funds arbitrations and um
[5:01:49] settlements that are on the HR end of
[5:01:52] things. So, um we hope that with the
[5:01:55] addition of um an uh the latest um labor
[5:02:00] and employment attorney um that um we
[5:02:04] don't need that um amount for um outside
[5:02:08] investigations in collaboration with our
[5:02:11] new
[5:02:12] um
[5:02:14] position that came over from legal which
[5:02:16] is the generalist investigator. Um we
[5:02:20] hope that we don't need to access those
[5:02:22] funds. Um there's an increase in our
[5:02:25] professional technical services as the
[5:02:28] HR budget will host the funding for
[5:02:32] um new hires and promotion costs for
[5:02:36] assessment centers at fire and police
[5:02:38] and also the new hire contract with get
[5:02:41] badged which does our online portal for
[5:02:43] new hires for police officers. A slight
[5:02:46] reduction in office supplies. Um we
[5:02:48] don't we do as much you know through
[5:02:52] technology as we can um and um a slight
[5:02:56] increase in our capital computers and
[5:02:58] equipment for the cost of um
[5:03:02] computers and updates with an overall
[5:03:05] reduction of 10% at $81,359.
[5:03:11] Um, as you see, most of our our funds
[5:03:14] are spent in salaries and then services
[5:03:17] and supplies and and the other um cuts
[5:03:20] and ends.
[5:03:23] What's different for fiscal 27? As I
[5:03:26] said before, a $50,000 reduction in
[5:03:28] legal services, the learning and
[5:03:30] development coordinator was eliminated.
[5:03:33] Um and the work will be absorbed by
[5:03:36] other staff and then the centralized
[5:03:38] funding for public safety hiring and
[5:03:41] promotions.
[5:03:42] And what have we been up to? Um this is
[5:03:45] oh um this is a
[5:03:49] short list. Um I'm not going to read all
[5:03:51] of it but just highlight um looking at
[5:03:55] comparison analysis um and providing
[5:03:58] support to expenditures and revenues on
[5:04:01] some of the HR related costs and
[5:04:03] expenses. Um continued labor management
[5:04:06] meetings with unions. Um HR labor
[5:04:10] meetings continue with the new labor and
[5:04:11] employment council. Um
[5:04:14] and um we spend a significant amount of
[5:04:18] time on coaching and consulting with
[5:04:21] departments both um mid managers and
[5:04:25] department heads on employees management
[5:04:28] department and organizational issues as
[5:04:30] well as discipline and um compliance
[5:04:34] issues, employee training and
[5:04:36] development. Um we've covered um
[5:04:39] harassment and other policies,
[5:04:41] compliance issues around drugs and
[5:04:43] alcohol ethics, well-being related
[5:04:45] topics, supervisor training. Um in the
[5:04:48] last year we did first aid, CPR and um
[5:04:53] uh electronic defibrillator training as
[5:04:55] well as stop the bleed and our continued
[5:05:00] um position review. Update leave time
[5:05:03] and alcohol and drug and Corey policies.
[5:05:06] update class and pay and create a new
[5:05:08] recruiting and hiring guide.
[5:05:12] And I'd like to thank Leslia, Jennifer,
[5:05:15] Kayla, Kimi, and Jim for all that they
[5:05:18] do. Um I will say that um there aren't
[5:05:23] too many upsides for um the current
[5:05:27] state of affairs at the federal level.
[5:05:30] However, we have been able to um secure
[5:05:34] believe in disability specialist with 32
[5:05:36] years of experience both at the state
[5:05:38] and federal level to work on our um IOD
[5:05:42] workers comp and FMLA. And our labor and
[5:05:46] employment council comes to us from from
[5:05:48] HUD at the federal level. So, um we have
[5:05:52] benefited by getting experienced um
[5:05:56] individuals um into some key positions
[5:05:58] and and
[5:06:00] If we're able to do that moving forward,
[5:06:02] it will um benefit the town.
[5:06:05] And I don't know if you want to take
[5:06:07] questions before we go to personnel
[5:06:09] benefits.
[5:06:12] Uh questions from the board.
[5:06:15] I I have a question. Um so you seems to
[5:06:19] have unilaterally eliminated the uh um
[5:06:24] uniform budget.
[5:06:27] Yes, we have we have no union employees.
[5:06:31] So why
[5:06:32] and um there are no uniforms.
[5:06:34] Okay. I guess I wonder why uh uniforms
[5:06:38] appear in other budgets. Uh is it always
[5:06:41] because they have union employees who
[5:06:44] are required to wear uniforms or is it
[5:06:46] just a carryover from
[5:06:49] I believe it's a carryover from the ask
[5:06:51] me contract and that where we have
[5:06:54] non-UN clerical positions um that the
[5:06:57] benefit was was part of the budget. Um
[5:07:00] but it's a tight fiscal year and um
[5:07:05] it's not something
[5:07:09] Okay. Okay. that um is a priority.
[5:07:11] Yeah.
[5:07:12] Well, it's a good question. Do we
[5:07:14] provide uniforms for anybody? Why is it
[5:07:16] a
[5:07:16] Yes. Yes. For there are certain
[5:07:18] positions for whom we do provide
[5:07:19] uniforms. Um
[5:07:20] for instance, other than police
[5:07:22] officers,
[5:07:22] DPW
[5:07:24] Okay. But within the within
[5:07:29] within the office, the office staff,
[5:07:31] right?
[5:07:32] Is there any line items for departments
[5:07:34] that don't have
[5:07:36] people
[5:07:38] like you know allowances in pay parody
[5:07:40] for example right like sometimes we you
[5:07:42] know we have clerical staff that are in
[5:07:44] the union clerical staff that are not in
[5:07:46] the union and some of the clerical staff
[5:07:47] that are in the union get that benefit
[5:07:49] get this get the get the $500 for or
[5:07:53] $550 for a union benefit as a union
[5:07:56] benefit and so to avoid having a
[5:07:58] situation where we have a non-un person
[5:08:00] making in the same role in the same
[5:08:02] title making less money than a union
[5:08:04] person or vice versa we try and balance
[5:08:06] that
[5:08:08] Okay.
[5:08:09] And the the uniform money has been used
[5:08:12] as a way to supplement um general wage
[5:08:15] increases over past contracts is as a
[5:08:18] way to be able to give basically a
[5:08:20] stipend um to add to compensation, but
[5:08:23] it is not pensionable and um
[5:08:27] so that's why.
[5:08:28] Okay, let's move on. I'm sorry, Michael.
[5:08:32] Yeah. Um I I'm not sure if this is the
[5:08:35] right time to ask this. Um um Paul, you
[5:08:39] didn't ask the uh override versus no
[5:08:41] override question, so maybe that's also
[5:08:44] relevant. But you mentioned that the pol
[5:08:47] the police and union contracts are
[5:08:49] coming up. And I'm wondering in terms of
[5:08:54] the negotiation process for those
[5:08:57] contracts,
[5:08:58] how the decisions that we make around
[5:09:01] the override will affect your your
[5:09:05] negotiation capacity
[5:09:08] for those contracts.
[5:09:11] So, police and fire expire at the end of
[5:09:14] fiscal 27. Um I don't know that our um
[5:09:20] the provisions of the override um
[5:09:22] include expanded capacity for subsequent
[5:09:26] year negotiations for police and fire.
[5:09:29] Um we have money to in the override to
[5:09:32] cover um the tail for the fire contract
[5:09:36] in which there um are several other
[5:09:38] provisions that kick in on the last day
[5:09:41] of fiscal 27. Um, but other than that,
[5:09:46] um, I don't believe that there's a chunk
[5:09:48] of money that's set aside for police and
[5:09:51] fire collective bargaining as part of
[5:09:52] the ask for the, uh, override. So, at
[5:09:57] least what's been discussed,
[5:09:58] there's $350,000 that goes into the
[5:10:00] collective bargaining reserve if an
[5:10:01] override in the current town proposal if
[5:10:04] that passes. Um, so there is money in
[5:10:07] the in the override uh, uh, for that. Um
[5:10:12] and we're trying to um uh you know
[5:10:16] maximize that wherever we can um in
[5:10:18] terms of where that goes. But um for
[5:10:20] example, we've had we have settled
[5:10:22] contracts with police and fire. You
[5:10:24] know, they're ending at the end of this
[5:10:25] fiscal year. Um we don't have a settled
[5:10:27] contract with ASME. Um we've actually we
[5:10:30] have a couple of you know um uh bridge
[5:10:33] one-year contracts that we've settled
[5:10:35] with them. Um but you know um we've been
[5:10:38] working towards trying to implement a
[5:10:40] contract that deals with the paying
[5:10:42] class study in DPW and that's going to
[5:10:44] be an expensive lift um to try and deal
[5:10:47] with that and the subsequent ripple
[5:10:49] effects but we are trying to make that
[5:10:51] happen. Um and so that money and the
[5:10:53] override is really targeted towards
[5:10:56] those efforts and then we need to think
[5:10:58] about you know what the what the future
[5:11:01] years are going to look like. We budget
[5:11:02] money every year for collective
[5:11:04] bargaining increases for the cost of
[5:11:06] living. So that's baked into the budget
[5:11:08] anyway. Um and we have target numbers
[5:11:10] for those and that's what we will be
[5:11:13] telling the unions and non-UN staff
[5:11:15] alike as we move into negotiations for
[5:11:17] the next few fiscal years what those
[5:11:19] numbers are.
[5:11:21] Okay. Uh let's move on to Melissa and
[5:11:24] benefits.
[5:11:26] Sure. So, uh, we covered a lot of this
[5:11:29] when we, uh, originally presented the
[5:11:31] financial plan. So, I will, uh, try and
[5:11:33] be as speedy as I can be. Uh, for group
[5:11:36] health, um, the financial plan had an
[5:11:40] increase of almost $6 million projected.
[5:11:43] Uh, the GIC has come out with new rates.
[5:11:46] Um, we are still waiting for the final
[5:11:48] rate sheets from the GIC and, um, they
[5:11:51] are slightly better than what we had uh,
[5:11:53] estimated in the budget. We had
[5:11:55] estimated a 12% rate increase. Um it's
[5:11:58] closer to eight. Um some of the plans
[5:12:00] vary though, so we're waiting for those
[5:12:02] final sheets. Um then we have our group
[5:12:05] life budget which is going up by 3%. Our
[5:12:08] Medicare coverage which is going up 4%
[5:12:10] that's generally tied to wages. Our
[5:12:12] pension uh funding is going up uh about
[5:12:15] 8% and that is based on our current
[5:12:18] funding schedule. We will have a new
[5:12:20] funding schedule probably sometime this
[5:12:22] summer. Um we have a a schedule that
[5:12:24] resets every two years. So we'll be
[5:12:26] looking to see kind of based on market
[5:12:28] performance and um kind of activity in
[5:12:30] the fund uh what that might look like
[5:12:32] and hope that we can still stick with
[5:12:34] our 2030 timeline. Um and then the last
[5:12:37] few groupings are uh transfers that we
[5:12:39] make to certain trust funds. So we have
[5:12:41] a trust fund for the public safety IOD
[5:12:44] medical expenses. At this point the fund
[5:12:46] has a healthy fund balance. So, we're
[5:12:48] not recommending an appropriation uh
[5:12:50] which is why you see the drop of
[5:12:51] 350,000.
[5:12:53] We, as you all know, we are level
[5:12:54] funding our contributions towards OPED.
[5:12:56] So, that is uh flat for fiscal 27.
[5:12:59] Unemployment compensation, we're
[5:13:01] boosting by 500,000. I am keeping an eye
[5:13:03] on this one because I am also concerned
[5:13:05] given the staffing reductions that might
[5:13:07] be implemented in fiscal 27 um that that
[5:13:10] might need some additional funding. Uh I
[5:13:12] do acknowledge that there likely would
[5:13:14] be be some savings in group health that
[5:13:16] likely would need to slide into
[5:13:17] unemployment um in a no override
[5:13:19] scenario. So we're we're keeping an eye
[5:13:21] on both of those budgets. And then we
[5:13:23] have a $200,000 increase in uh workers
[5:13:26] compensation. Uh so for overall uh n
[5:13:30] $9.5 million um obviously that will be
[5:13:33] reset when we readjust the group health
[5:13:35] budget. Hoping to get you that
[5:13:37] information uh within the next week or
[5:13:38] so.
[5:13:42] Thank you, Melissa. Any questions?
[5:13:52] Okay, let's move on. Thank you, Melissa.
[5:13:54] Thank you, Ann.
[5:13:56] Thank you. Have a good night.
[5:13:57] Thanks, Ann.
[5:13:59] Next, we have uh four warrant articles.
[5:14:02] First public and these are public
[5:14:04] hearings. Uh so uh first is appointment
[5:14:08] of measures of wooden bark.
[5:14:12] Melissa, are you going to tell us about
[5:14:15] that item?
[5:14:17] Sure. Uh you are all familiar that this
[5:14:19] is a requirement measures of wood and
[5:14:21] bark be the first um item on the docket
[5:14:24] for the annual town meeting and it
[5:14:26] requires that the select board appoint
[5:14:27] and we do that when we do our annual
[5:14:29] appointments in June.
[5:14:32] Okay. Um, let's open the public hearing.
[5:14:36] Public hearing is open on measures of
[5:14:39] wooden bark.
[5:14:46] Nobody's raising their hand.
[5:14:47] Okay, let's close the public hearing.
[5:14:49] Any discussion? Who are we appointing?
[5:14:54] Uh, good question, Melissa.
[5:14:56] Well, currently it's Elmont Henderson
[5:14:59] and uh Bill McGrody, but given Bill's
[5:15:01] retirement, we are likely going to need
[5:15:03] to find a new measurer.
[5:15:05] All right. We'll have that for you in
[5:15:07] June.
[5:15:08] Okay. We're setting the number at two.
[5:15:10] That That's
[5:15:13] uh Okay. So, we've closed the public
[5:15:15] hearing. I I see no questions from the
[5:15:18] select board. So, let's move on to uh
[5:15:22] next item, which next warrant article,
[5:15:24] annual authorization compensating
[5:15:26] balance agreements. Um,
[5:15:28] Bernard, before you move on to article
[5:15:30] three, um, if you wanted to vote on
[5:15:32] article one.
[5:15:33] Oh, I'm sorry.
[5:15:34] That would be great.
[5:15:35] Why don't we do that?
[5:15:37] Um, I move I move favorable action on
[5:15:40] more article one, appointment of
[5:15:43] measurers of wooden bark. All in favor?
[5:15:46] John Vancoyak.
[5:15:47] I Warren.
[5:15:48] Hi,
[5:15:48] David Pearlman.
[5:15:49] I,
[5:15:49] Michael Rubenstein.
[5:15:50] I chair votes I. Thank you uh Melissa
[5:15:53] for reminding me. Um next uh annual
[5:15:57] authorization of compensating balance
[5:15:59] agreements. Uh is that you or is Lincoln
[5:16:03] gonna handle that?
[5:16:05] Lincoln's here. I I wish that I had
[5:16:06] known he was coming. I would have told
[5:16:07] him I could cover it for him, but since
[5:16:09] I'm here, I'll let him do it.
[5:16:10] Thank you, Melissa. I'll be very brief.
[5:16:13] So, as the board, as at least four
[5:16:16] members of the board may recall from
[5:16:17] previous years, the law um requires that
[5:16:21] if the town is to have compensating
[5:16:23] balance agreements, that is to say,
[5:16:24] agreements with banks, that um rather
[5:16:27] than we pay rather than the town
[5:16:29] directly paying for services from those
[5:16:31] banks, we would instead agree to uh keep
[5:16:35] uh a minimum balance there. Um the law
[5:16:39] requires that if the town is to have
[5:16:41] those agreements, it needs to be
[5:16:42] authorized annually by town meeting. Um
[5:16:45] and so it would be good to have this
[5:16:47] flexibility. We do not currently have
[5:16:48] any compensating balance agreements, but
[5:16:50] um it would be good to have this
[5:16:52] flexibility particular continue to have
[5:16:53] this flexibility continue particularly
[5:16:56] in the context of the variable uh
[5:16:58] interest rates that we've been
[5:17:00] experiencing that we've all been
[5:17:01] experiencing.
[5:17:03] Okay, any questions?
[5:17:06] Public hearing.
[5:17:08] I'm getting there.
[5:17:10] Let's open the public hearing and see if
[5:17:13] anyone would like to talk about uh or qu
[5:17:16] ask questions about compensating
[5:17:18] balances. Okay, seeing none, I'll close
[5:17:21] the public hearing. Um
[5:17:23] are we ready to vote?
[5:17:25] Yes, please.
[5:17:26] We can vote on this one. I move by I
[5:17:29] move favorable action on warrant article
[5:17:31] 3 annual authorization of compensating
[5:17:34] balance agreements. All in favor, please
[5:17:36] indicate by saying I. John Vancoyak,
[5:17:38] I.
[5:17:38] Paul Warren,
[5:17:39] hi.
[5:17:39] David Pearlman,
[5:17:40] I.
[5:17:41] Michael Rubenstein,
[5:17:42] I.
[5:17:42] Chair votes. I
[5:17:44] Okay, next. Probably not as quick. Um,
[5:17:46] article seven, establish an overrise,
[5:17:49] I'm sorry, override stabilization fund.
[5:17:52] Is that going to be you, Chaz?
[5:17:54] Sure. Um, so as you know, one
[5:17:57] possibility uh for a structure of an
[5:17:59] override would be involving a situation
[5:18:02] where you uh raise the tax levy and then
[5:18:06] t and then tax more money than you spend
[5:18:09] in a given year and put some of that
[5:18:11] money aside in an override reserve fund.
[5:18:13] And the purpose of that reserve fund
[5:18:15] would be to cover operating deficits in
[5:18:17] the out years of the override cycle. Um
[5:18:20] the concept of this being that you would
[5:18:23] if you a little more upfront, you have
[5:18:26] to tax less over the course of the cycle
[5:18:28] and then the assumption would be that by
[5:18:30] the end of the cycle. Um there would be
[5:18:33] changes in the financial uh situation of
[5:18:35] the town such that there would be a more
[5:18:38] it would be more advantageous to the
[5:18:39] taxpayers to take uh a larger amount of
[5:18:44] money uh up to take a larger tax
[5:18:47] increase up front um but ultimately pay
[5:18:49] less in taxes overall over the
[5:18:51] three-year period. Now the expenditures
[5:18:53] and revenue study committee is still
[5:18:54] talking about this. It is not set in
[5:18:57] stone that this is going to be part of
[5:18:58] their recommendation to you and is not
[5:19:00] set in stone that you have to uh move
[5:19:02] forward on this at all. Um but in order
[5:19:06] to give you the optionality that if
[5:19:08] that's the decision you make in terms of
[5:19:10] how an override is structured, we ask
[5:19:12] that this question be put on the
[5:19:14] warrant. Um if ultimately you decide not
[5:19:16] to go in that direction, then you just
[5:19:18] simply don't have to you don't have to
[5:19:19] move it.
[5:19:21] A question that was asked in
[5:19:22] expenditures and revenues is can this
[5:19:24] money be appropriated by anyone? You
[5:19:26] know, is this a is you know are we
[5:19:28] worried about this being a slush fund?
[5:19:30] The answer is yes. It can be
[5:19:32] appropriated for the purposes that it's
[5:19:33] stated for. Um and so we want to be want
[5:19:37] to have firm policies in place about how
[5:19:39] we use this money and when. Um and but
[5:19:42] that's part of the structure of any
[5:19:44] given override. Uh if that's the
[5:19:46] structure you decide to go with. The
[5:19:48] other question we got was can the
[5:19:49] purpose of the fund change? For example,
[5:19:52] if things go better than expected and
[5:19:54] there is a balance left in this account
[5:19:56] at the end of the three-year override
[5:19:58] can be spent for other purposes. And the
[5:20:00] answer is yes. By a two-thirds vote of
[5:20:02] town meeting, you can change the purpose
[5:20:04] of the fund. Um or you can continue to
[5:20:06] spend it on operating expenses. Um
[5:20:08] because the way the fund is designated
[5:20:10] is for operating expenses and because
[5:20:13] those categories of money are fungeible.
[5:20:15] for example, you could fund you you
[5:20:17] could fund certain operating expenses
[5:20:19] out of the fund and then use the savings
[5:20:21] from that to fund a capital project, for
[5:20:23] example. So, um it's it's easy to use
[5:20:29] anything that's extra in the fund for a
[5:20:31] different purpose, but we wouldn't be
[5:20:34] we're not thinking about it in those
[5:20:35] terms. We're thinking about it in terms
[5:20:36] of stabilizing the during the three-year
[5:20:40] period of any of any potential override
[5:20:43] um so that the overall tax burden on the
[5:20:45] voter is lessened.
[5:20:48] Paul,
[5:20:48] so is this so this is our article?
[5:20:50] Yes.
[5:20:51] Okay. It's our article. So it's already
[5:20:52] on the warrant.
[5:20:53] Yes.
[5:20:54] And um if if we choose not to
[5:21:00] do this
[5:21:01] Y
[5:21:02] um we just wouldn't move it.
[5:21:03] Correct. Um or we could move it even if
[5:21:06] we choose not to do it. And we could we
[5:21:08] put money into it like million and a
[5:21:11] half from the housing trust fund that
[5:21:13] we're putting towards that which there's
[5:21:15] other ways for them to get money. We
[5:21:16] could could we start seeding this?
[5:21:18] Yes.
[5:21:19] With money from other sources or does it
[5:21:20] have to be from the tax?
[5:21:22] No, it's you could seed it with money
[5:21:23] from other sources. Lincoln, I believe
[5:21:24] that's right. Right.
[5:21:27] Correct. Yeah.
[5:21:28] And then one one more question. Um, and
[5:21:31] maybe that this is for later when we
[5:21:33] start debating this about the how to
[5:21:36] structure the override, but is there any
[5:21:38] discussion about
[5:21:40] is it a disincentive for some folks to
[5:21:42] vote for an operating override if they
[5:21:44] know they're not going to be here in
[5:21:45] three years, so they're paying
[5:21:46] everything up front, right? And then
[5:21:49] they find out, you know, in a year or
[5:21:50] two they're going to be gone. If they're
[5:21:52] not, there's some uncertainty. Would
[5:21:53] they say, "I'd rather not, you know,
[5:21:56] vote for that because I may not be
[5:21:57] here." Possibly, but again, I don't
[5:21:59] know. You know,
[5:22:01] just a scenario.
[5:22:02] It's not. Yeah, I I I have to admit I
[5:22:04] didn't consider that possibility. Okay.
[5:22:06] That is that is a possibility.
[5:22:07] Interesting.
[5:22:08] Okay.
[5:22:08] Thanks,
[5:22:10] Michael.
[5:22:10] Um, can you just clarify who the
[5:22:13] dispersing authority who has dispersing
[5:22:16] authority over the fund?
[5:22:17] Town meeting.
[5:22:18] Town meeting. Town meeting makes makes
[5:22:20] can make appropriations from the fund.
[5:22:23] It would be part of the budget vote as
[5:22:24] well. We would it would be a line item
[5:22:26] within the budget that we would need
[5:22:27] time meeting to go out,
[5:22:28] right? So there would be conditions of
[5:22:29] appropriation similar to everything
[5:22:30] else, you know, so it would be
[5:22:32] appropriated as, you know, x amount of
[5:22:34] dollars from this fund to the operating
[5:22:36] budget subject to the same conditions as
[5:22:38] the operating budget. Um,
[5:22:43] okay. Any further discussion?
[5:22:47] I think it'd be good, just my opinion, I
[5:22:50] think it'd be uh good if uh we hold this
[5:22:53] so that people opportunity to really try
[5:22:55] to understand it. It's not it's not a
[5:22:57] simple concept and the funding of it
[5:23:00] comes from you know an override that is
[5:23:04] frontloaded
[5:23:05] um you know year one but that
[5:23:08] front-loaded amount continues in
[5:23:11] perpetuity
[5:23:13] right I mean if you know if if uh year
[5:23:16] one override is let's say up to makes
[5:23:20] makes the levy 100 that 100 plus 2 and a
[5:23:24] half plus new um new um uh new
[5:23:28] construction
[5:23:30] plus any subsequent overrides or etc
[5:23:33] would continue into perpetuity.
[5:23:35] Yeah. Um do you want to open the public
[5:23:37] hearing?
[5:23:38] Uh yes.
[5:23:39] Okay.
[5:23:40] Public hearing is open. Um
[5:23:45] anyone online or in the audience who
[5:23:48] would like to speak, please uh speak up
[5:23:51] now. raise your hand
[5:23:54] or just stand up in the audience.
[5:23:56] Is getting short.
[5:23:57] Raise your hand.
[5:23:59] Okay. Uh seeing no one, I'll close the
[5:24:02] public hearing and uh we'll take this up
[5:24:06] at a future select board meeting.
[5:24:08] Could I ask one question about the
[5:24:09] future? So, would it make sense to take
[5:24:11] this up after we've had a discussion
[5:24:13] about the
[5:24:14] Yes.
[5:24:15] Okay.
[5:24:15] Yeah. Just to we put it out here now.
[5:24:18] It's an it's an easy one to put out
[5:24:19] there and then there's a conversation
[5:24:20] but we would vote on it after we figure
[5:24:22] out the
[5:24:22] yes probably after after this month.
[5:24:24] Thank you.
[5:24:26] Okay. And we will receive the
[5:24:27] recommendation of the expenditure and
[5:24:29] revenue committee at next meeting. Um
[5:24:33] and uh we will have at least two
[5:24:36] meetings to discuss it.
[5:24:40] If we don't get it done in two meetings,
[5:24:42] we have until 11:59 on March 31st to do
[5:24:46] it.
[5:24:47] Please do not do that.
[5:24:50] Okay. Next, uh, article 21, resolution
[5:24:53] expressing support for the Massachusetts
[5:24:55] Medicare for all legislation.
[5:24:58] Um,
[5:24:59] is there someone?
[5:25:01] Yes.
[5:25:02] Yes. Oh, I'm online. I mean, I was um
[5:25:06] there in person until about 20 minutes
[5:25:09] ago. Um, so my name is Francis Lang
[5:25:13] Laby. Uh this is my first time at um as
[5:25:18] a petitioner at the select board and um
[5:25:26] several other people were present um who
[5:25:29] had to leave who were also in support of
[5:25:32] this. I should say that this is a
[5:25:35] resolution simply to put support for
[5:25:39] Medicare for all on the ballot. Um,
[5:25:44] so I will say that
[5:25:48] the Wait, hold on just one second. I'm
[5:25:50] so sorry.
[5:25:54] The the United States is really
[5:25:57] virtually the only Western country that
[5:26:01] does not have a publicly funded
[5:26:04] universal health care system. Um, it's
[5:26:08] not a good distinction. And
[5:26:11] Massachusetts has actually been in the
[5:26:14] forefront of progressive
[5:26:18] equitable movements in affordability and
[5:26:21] health care.
[5:26:24] Also, at this time, there's a whole
[5:26:27] bunch of resolutions being um presented
[5:26:32] in other towns in Massachusetts.
[5:26:36] Having listened to a lot of the
[5:26:39] discussion about um budget problems, I
[5:26:44] want to say that um
[5:26:48] Brooklyn would save it's been estimated
[5:26:51] that through the um municipal calculator
[5:26:54] and um with a lot of thinking about
[5:26:56] this, Brooklyn would save about $30.5
[5:27:01] million in 2027 with this um with
[5:27:05] Medicare for all and there's a very
[5:27:08] compelling study by the University of
[5:27:10] Massachusetts which shows how much money
[5:27:13] would be saved throughout the state. Um
[5:27:18] it is not only however the savings that
[5:27:21] Brookline and other towns would make.
[5:27:24] I'm very aware of how many people with
[5:27:30] our private health care system now
[5:27:33] simply do not get health insurance. And
[5:27:37] I'm thinking of young people in
[5:27:39] particular who are locked into jobs
[5:27:43] purely to get the health care benefits
[5:27:47] um and are not able to do things that
[5:27:50] would be valuable and that they want to
[5:27:52] do. And this is true not only for young
[5:27:54] people obviously um and
[5:27:59] employers, including very much the town
[5:28:02] of Brooklyn, um
[5:28:05] spend huge amounts of money on health
[5:28:09] care premiums for their employees. Money
[5:28:13] that could be spent so much more um
[5:28:16] beneficially in other ways. Um I'm not
[5:28:20] an economist so I cannot go into detail
[5:28:24] about the savings. Um but I do know a
[5:28:28] number of pe many people including
[5:28:31] myself um who are
[5:28:35] not done well by by private insurance
[5:28:39] companies. Anyway, I certainly think
[5:28:42] that this should be put on the ballot.
[5:28:44] It doesn't commit. It just that would
[5:28:47] simply allow Brooklyn residents to vote
[5:28:50] on it. And um really that's all I have
[5:28:53] to say. I think it's kind of a nobrainer
[5:28:57] to put this on the ballot. Um and I'm
[5:29:00] sorry not to be there in person and I'm
[5:29:02] sorry that the other individuals who
[5:29:04] were going to be um speaking to this are
[5:29:08] also not able to be here now.
[5:29:12] Thank you.
[5:29:12] Oh. Oh wait. Maybe maybe Alec who is
[5:29:16] there I can see um might like to say
[5:29:18] something.
[5:29:21] See you Alec.
[5:29:23] No Alec Le is is he a co-etitioner?
[5:29:28] I am not a co-itioner but I would like
[5:29:30] to speak during the public hearing
[5:29:31] portion.
[5:29:31] Okay.
[5:29:33] Okay. Any questions before we open
[5:29:35] public hearing?
[5:29:37] I I just want to I just want to make a
[5:29:39] clarification for the petitioner. She
[5:29:41] mentioned a couple of times that this
[5:29:43] has something to do with a ballot. Um,
[5:29:46] I'm reading the language of the
[5:29:47] the warrant. The warrant.
[5:29:48] The warrant.
[5:29:49] Yes, that's what I meant.
[5:29:51] Okay. Thank you.
[5:29:53] Okay. With that, let's open the public
[5:29:56] hearing.
[5:29:59] There anyone who would like to speak? I
[5:30:00] see Alec Levitz has his hand up and
[5:30:03] Regina Crowley. Uh, so let's go with
[5:30:05] Alec first.
[5:30:07] Yes. Thank you very much, Chair Green.
[5:30:08] And I'll try to be very brief. Um, I I I
[5:30:11] agree with Francis and I I strongly
[5:30:14] support this article. Um, as you heard
[5:30:16] from Francis, um, Brookline would stand
[5:30:19] to save substantially on healthcare
[5:30:21] costs, um, should the state move to a
[5:30:23] singlepayer model. Um, the financing
[5:30:26] mechanism that has been proposed in the
[5:30:28] legislation that this Warren article
[5:30:29] endorses, um, would replace GIC rates
[5:30:32] for Brookline with an 8% payroll tax on
[5:30:36] our total salary line item. Um, as
[5:30:39] Francis mentioned, that would save the
[5:30:41] town, based on the FY27 financial plan,
[5:30:44] $30.5 million in that fiscal year. We'd
[5:30:47] be talking about going from spending
[5:30:49] almost $50 million on group health
[5:30:51] benefits um to slightly more than 17.
[5:30:54] Um, as as we've heard earlier this
[5:30:57] evening, and this is, I think, a very
[5:30:58] opportune moment to take this article up
[5:31:00] after having just heard the benefits
[5:31:02] budget, um, healthcare cost increases
[5:31:05] are are really reaching a crisis level
[5:31:06] for municipalities. Um and I think it's
[5:31:09] important to note that one of the
[5:31:11] advantages of a singlepayer system in
[5:31:12] addition to um providing savings through
[5:31:15] just a change in the financing mechanism
[5:31:18] for group health benefits would also be
[5:31:20] that the state would have substantially
[5:31:22] greater ability um to negotiate and
[5:31:26] contain the cost of health care growth
[5:31:28] over time. Um, and that would prevent
[5:31:31] Brookline from facing single-year
[5:31:33] healthc care cost shocks such as what
[5:31:36] we've seen this year with a group health
[5:31:37] rate increase of 14%. Um, and and I
[5:31:41] think finally, as Francis also touched
[5:31:42] on, uh, I I think this idea very much
[5:31:45] fits within the community values of
[5:31:47] Brookline and Massachusetts, uh, and I
[5:31:50] think really seeks to continue
[5:31:51] Massachusetts leading role in setting
[5:31:54] healthcare policy across the country and
[5:31:56] really envisioning how, um, concerted
[5:31:59] state efforts can can drive um, national
[5:32:02] health care policy conversations and
[5:32:04] reform. Um, you know, we did that
[5:32:07] already, uh, with the Affordable Care
[5:32:08] Act. That model was pioneered in
[5:32:10] Massachusetts and expanded nationally.
[5:32:13] Um, and as to this date, no state has
[5:32:15] implemented a state level singlepayer
[5:32:17] system. Um, some have tried and failed.
[5:32:20] U, no state has succeeded at this point.
[5:32:23] And I think Massachusetts, for a number
[5:32:24] of reasons, is uniquely situated to
[5:32:27] succeed where some of those previous
[5:32:28] efforts have failed. And I think the
[5:32:30] implications for that in addition to
[5:32:32] being a gamecher for our municipal
[5:32:35] budget um and for the residents of the
[5:32:37] Commonwealth, many of whom are either
[5:32:38] uninsured or underinsured um it also has
[5:32:41] the potential to drive a really critical
[5:32:43] national healthcare conversation
[5:32:44] forward. Um so I'm a strong supporter of
[5:32:46] this Warren article. Uh I thank Francis
[5:32:49] for bringing it forward and I would
[5:32:51] encourage uh the select board to
[5:32:52] consider voting favorable action. Thank
[5:32:54] you.
[5:32:56] Okay, Regina.
[5:33:02] Thank you, Regina Frolley from precin
[5:33:05] 16.
[5:33:07] I'm not understanding how this would get
[5:33:09] paid. Um, as somebody who worked till I
[5:33:13] was 72 to qualify for Medicare. Um, it
[5:33:17] seems like it wants to save money for
[5:33:19] the town, but it's going to shift it to
[5:33:21] someplace else. And I don't, if I heard
[5:33:24] him correctly, he's talking only about
[5:33:26] those who work. it would be on their
[5:33:28] their um uh taxes somehow or other. I
[5:33:32] I'm not clear, but that's kind of the
[5:33:35] point. I doubt that you are clear either
[5:33:38] and you shouldn't be supporting anything
[5:33:40] you don't have a real rigorous
[5:33:42] understanding just because gee it sounds
[5:33:45] great and gee everybody all the young
[5:33:47] people will have it. I think this is
[5:33:50] rigorously important and I think that
[5:33:52] that I would like to hear rigor on the
[5:33:55] discussion here. Thank you.
[5:34:00] Okay. Any other uh comments from the
[5:34:03] public?
[5:34:08] Okay. Any questions from the select
[5:34:09] board? Paul.
[5:34:10] Yep. I I have one um for the petitioner.
[5:34:13] Thanks for Is she still on?
[5:34:16] Yes.
[5:34:16] Oh, there you are. um
[5:34:19] uh for the uh the two I think you
[5:34:22] referenced two bills in your the
[5:34:24] legislation in your article in your
[5:34:26] whereas clauses or maybe in um in your
[5:34:29] resolution.
[5:34:30] Um could have you provided the text of
[5:34:33] those
[5:34:35] um
[5:34:38] bills?
[5:34:39] It would be helpful if if they're not to
[5:34:41] to to send them uh
[5:34:43] okay
[5:34:43] send them to the board. I uh I I did a
[5:34:46] quick Google and I I may be tired and
[5:34:48] it's late, but I couldn't find them. So,
[5:34:50] um it would be helpful to be able to
[5:34:52] read uh the various legislation that
[5:34:54] you're referencing because basically I
[5:34:55] assume you're asking,
[5:34:58] you know, should the resolution pass,
[5:34:59] are we
[5:35:01] would we transmit a letter to the
[5:35:02] legislature? That's what we would do.
[5:35:04] Yeah. So, it be really helpful to make
[5:35:05] sure that
[5:35:06] that we understand the legislation that
[5:35:08] we're actually suggesting we
[5:35:10] I will I will I will do that. Um Yeah.
[5:35:15] Okay. Any other
[5:35:18] uh questions from the uh select board or
[5:35:20] the office or the audience?
[5:35:24] Did I close this? I'm sorry. I guess I
[5:35:26] didn't close the hearing.
[5:35:28] Let me just um say one additional thing.
[5:35:32] I appreciate what the woman just asked
[5:35:35] and what she brought up and I had
[5:35:37] anticipated that this might be a
[5:35:40] question and actually Alec um sent me a
[5:35:44] very useful email in response and if if
[5:35:47] he's still here he could speak to this.
[5:35:50] Um yes, just very briefly what I had
[5:35:52] referenced was the the main finance
[5:35:55] mechanism in the bill that this warrant
[5:35:57] article would endorse um is replacing
[5:36:00] what is currently municipal direct
[5:36:03] contributions from Brookline to the GIC
[5:36:06] um with an assessed 8% tax on our total
[5:36:10] salary line item. So essentially a 7%
[5:36:13] state payroll tax. Um while that may
[5:36:17] sound like a lot or excuse me, it's
[5:36:19] actually an 8% tax. Um, that may sound
[5:36:21] like a lot in a vacuum, but as I
[5:36:23] mentioned, that actually represents a
[5:36:25] substantial reduction in the town's
[5:36:27] requested contribution um, for group
[5:36:30] health benefits. And Regina is right.
[5:36:33] Some costs will shift through the
[5:36:35] economy. That is true. That's part of, I
[5:36:38] think, um, the point of the healthc care
[5:36:40] financing reform that's trying to be
[5:36:42] advanced in this bill. Um but I think
[5:36:44] the important thing to emphasize with
[5:36:46] along with that is that the total cost
[5:36:49] of health care um will be reduced and
[5:36:52] the counterfactual relative difference
[5:36:55] in how much health care cost will grow
[5:36:57] over time will reduce will make the
[5:36:59] reduction even more substantial. Um, so
[5:37:02] while who pays what amount may shift
[5:37:05] somewhat, most people including small
[5:37:08] businesses, including municipalities,
[5:37:10] and I would argue I believe most
[5:37:12] residents um will pay less overall. So I
[5:37:15] just would add that.
[5:37:20] Okay. Uh David,
[5:37:22] so just a question about you uh cited
[5:37:24] substantial savings for the town. Do you
[5:37:26] have some kind of estimate based on
[5:37:28] current numbers?
[5:37:30] Yeah. So what for FY27 uh we've
[5:37:33] forecasted 47.6 million in group health
[5:37:36] benefits under the status quo. Um with
[5:37:39] an 8% tax assessed on our payroll that
[5:37:42] would be 17.1 million roughly. So that's
[5:37:45] the difference of 30.5 million that we
[5:37:47] referenced uh earlier.
[5:37:49] Okay. Thank you.
[5:37:51] Yeah, I was just going to add that um
[5:37:53] you know, Alex referenced the fact that
[5:37:56] overall health care would be less and
[5:37:58] that's true because the uh there's
[5:38:01] tremendous inefficiency within the
[5:38:03] system uh because of because of the
[5:38:05] for-profit
[5:38:07] health insurance companies. Um in my my
[5:38:10] wife's practice, she's a physician. Um
[5:38:12] they have several people that are
[5:38:14] dedicated to do nothing but chase
[5:38:16] insurance companies, right? just to get
[5:38:18] them to pay because automatic there's a
[5:38:19] rejection and they you know they put you
[5:38:21] through hoops um just just for the
[5:38:23] healthcare provider to get paid um so
[5:38:26] there's tremendous inefficiency and if
[5:38:28] you cut out that efficiency there'd be
[5:38:30] tremendous savings
[5:38:32] thought I'd add that
[5:38:35] okay I'm sorry Michael
[5:38:36] I mean I mean I'm I'm just bringing up
[5:38:39] one of one of the links um and it talks
[5:38:41] about um there is an employer payroll
[5:38:44] tax there's also an employee E tax based
[5:38:48] on AGI. There's also a 10% tax on
[5:38:52] unearned income and a 10% tax for
[5:38:55] self-employed individuals and an
[5:38:57] exemption. So that I mean the taxing
[5:39:00] structure seems relatively complicated
[5:39:03] and I'm not sure that I understand it
[5:39:05] all. Um, I don't understand, for
[5:39:07] example, the effect on seniors and fixed
[5:39:10] incomes who are getting Medicare now,
[5:39:13] which is generally much less expensive
[5:39:15] than private insurance because it seems
[5:39:18] like the cost is shifting from basically
[5:39:21] paying based on your health care needs
[5:39:24] to pay paying based on your incomes. So,
[5:39:28] so that there is a lot of there is a lot
[5:39:30] of shifting going on.
[5:39:31] Yeah.
[5:39:32] Can I ask a question? I mean, I'm sure
[5:39:35] you know the answer. Alex does. Um,
[5:39:37] Medicare doesn't pay all your hospital
[5:39:39] costs or I'm sorry, all of your medical
[5:39:41] costs. So,
[5:39:44] given given that um is uh your estimates
[5:39:48] of uh the savings that would would come
[5:39:52] from such a system um
[5:39:56] totally accurate or
[5:39:59] able to be deter assessed?
[5:40:03] I mean, I have Medicare, but I also have
[5:40:06] insurance through the GIC.
[5:40:09] So, I mean, a Medicare for all is going
[5:40:11] to give people Medicare, but not GIC
[5:40:14] insurance. And that or something
[5:40:16] comparable.
[5:40:18] So, so respond very
[5:40:21] um so I one one thing I I do want to
[5:40:24] stress and and you know I I work in
[5:40:26] health policy so happy to get wonky on
[5:40:27] this if people are interested but um a
[5:40:30] singlepayer state level system will not
[5:40:32] actually be Medicare for all because
[5:40:34] Medicare for all is a federally
[5:40:35] administered pro or Medicare rather
[5:40:37] excuse me is a federally administered
[5:40:39] program. The state has no ability to
[5:40:41] directly administer Medicare. how the
[5:40:44] states can have some influence um over
[5:40:47] how Medicare is administered and also
[5:40:49] how Medicaid is administered on the
[5:40:52] state level is through um the
[5:40:54] negotiation of waiverss with the federal
[5:40:56] government. Um that allows states to to
[5:41:00] customize some of these programs and how
[5:41:02] they operate within state borders. Um
[5:41:05] what has been a staple of previous
[5:41:08] proposals and um Vermont's uh attempted
[5:41:12] move to a state level singlepayer system
[5:41:14] has been um alongside
[5:41:17] the establishment of a state level
[5:41:19] financing system, what Michael alluded
[5:41:21] to, um and a state level um insurance
[5:41:25] coverage system that covers non-Medicare
[5:41:28] eligible people and people who are
[5:41:30] currently on Medicaid. Um, it typically
[5:41:33] involves trying to use your waiver
[5:41:35] authority to customize the way Medicare
[5:41:38] and Medicaid are implemented in
[5:41:40] Massachusetts to fill in the gaps
[5:41:43] essentially for where we would need
[5:41:45] federal support. Um so even though uh
[5:41:49] you know uh we would ensure say dual
[5:41:51] eligible seniors could receive coverage
[5:41:54] under a state singlepayer system, if you
[5:41:57] only currently receive Medicare
[5:41:59] coverage, um it's highly likely that you
[5:42:02] would just continue to receive Medicare
[5:42:04] coverage with potentially the state
[5:42:06] offering supplemental coverage um to
[5:42:08] address the coverage gaps in Medicare
[5:42:10] that you referenced earlier, Bernard.
[5:42:12] Thank you. Uh, John.
[5:42:15] Um, I I must confess that when, you
[5:42:18] know, resolutions such as this come
[5:42:20] along, I I quite I I don't quite know
[5:42:22] what to do. Excuse me. Because, um, I
[5:42:26] mean, you know,
[5:42:29] we've heard Alex tonight, you know,
[5:42:31] present the case for it. the numbers
[5:42:33] seem, you know, themselves to be,
[5:42:37] you know, I don't know how to explain
[5:42:40] that just by magically calling it
[5:42:43] Medicare for all. Um, and by imposing a
[5:42:47] tax, which will only raise a certain
[5:42:51] amount of money, the difference between
[5:42:53] that amount of money and the amount of
[5:42:54] money we're spending now on, you know,
[5:42:56] healthare equals how much we'll be
[5:42:58] saving on healthcare. Well, maybe we'll
[5:43:00] be getting like one-third the health
[5:43:01] care for one-third the money. I, you
[5:43:04] know, for us to delve into this
[5:43:07] seriously, and I think it's a very
[5:43:09] serious topic, but the fact of the
[5:43:11] matter is there hasn't been a successful
[5:43:12] singlepayer health care system in any
[5:43:14] state in the country as so far. Vermont
[5:43:17] tried it and abandoned it. Um, so we at
[5:43:21] Brooklyn Town Meeting will take on in
[5:43:24] the middle of everything else we're
[5:43:25] trying to do, the debate over, you know,
[5:43:28] what What would a singlepayer health
[5:43:31] care system look like even though we
[5:43:32] can't adopt a singlepayer health care
[5:43:35] system uh in at the town level? Um and
[5:43:38] and what are we supposed to do? Call in
[5:43:40] um experts on healthcare finance from
[5:43:42] all over the country to testify on this
[5:43:44] that the other aspects of it. And at the
[5:43:46] end of the day, for what purpose? I
[5:43:48] mean, we we could try to settle the
[5:43:51] debate over whether singlepayer health
[5:43:53] care would be a better system than the
[5:43:54] system we have um at the floor of town
[5:43:58] Brooklyn town meeting, but it wouldn't
[5:44:00] have any effect in terms of resulting in
[5:44:02] there being a singlepayer healthcare
[5:44:04] system. Um so I'm I'm just not sure how
[5:44:07] much time we want to spend on this.
[5:44:08] Yeah.
[5:44:09] Can I just say one thing because I do
[5:44:11] not I'm not an expert in the finances of
[5:44:14] it.
[5:44:15] Nor am I.
[5:44:16] Okay. I wasn't trying to pretend to be.
[5:44:19] But really, what we're talking about is
[5:44:22] making health care accessible for
[5:44:25] everyone. This is a step along the way.
[5:44:29] All of these um questions,
[5:44:32] financial questions need to be worked
[5:44:34] out. But really what we're saying is the
[5:44:36] system that we have now is so burdensome
[5:44:40] and excludes so many individuals and
[5:44:44] families. It's not working. And I I feel
[5:44:48] as if it wouldn't only be Brooklyn in
[5:44:52] any case because there's a lot of other
[5:44:53] towns that are voting on this or
[5:44:55] hopefully will be voting on it. Um it's
[5:44:59] just expressing in a way a commitment to
[5:45:04] um a less not a profit driven but an um
[5:45:09] a more equitable approach to healthcare.
[5:45:12] That's a good thing. Yeah, that that's a
[5:45:15] good thing. We all agree with that. But
[5:45:17] let me just throw out one concern I
[5:45:19] have. Medicare, this is not Medicare for
[5:45:22] all as as Alex described and I should
[5:45:25] have known that because Medicare is a
[5:45:27] federal program and we're talking about
[5:45:29] a state program. So I mean that the
[5:45:31] Warren article is kind of confusing and
[5:45:33] it's going to confuse town meeting and
[5:45:34] we're going to get bogged down in trying
[5:45:36] to
[5:45:37] say Medicare for all, right? Yeah, it
[5:45:38] says Medicare for all, but that does
[5:45:40] that means nothing. And we can get
[5:45:42] bogged down in trying to unravel, you
[5:45:46] know, what we're really talking about.
[5:45:48] And it seems to me it's going to be
[5:45:50] real, you know, what show.
[5:45:51] Did you just want to flag? It's 11
[5:45:52] o'clock.
[5:45:53] So, just so just I just I want to just
[5:45:55] suggest something to the petitioner,
[5:45:57] maybe to Alec. Um, and it is based on
[5:45:59] what you just said and and John kind of
[5:46:02] triggered this thought for me. Um
[5:46:04] there's going to have to be a
[5:46:05] significant effort to educate town
[5:46:07] meeting as to what this is. What what
[5:46:10] the what the uh you're you're actually
[5:46:13] asking town meeting to resolve for two
[5:46:16] specific bills. Um there's we have to
[5:46:20] town meeting will need to understand
[5:46:21] what those bills are, what the economics
[5:46:23] of those bills, what are the trade-offs.
[5:46:25] There's a huge heavy lift here because
[5:46:27] you're um because you're referencing
[5:46:31] something very specific. I don't know if
[5:46:33] the resolution can be modified so it's
[5:46:35] not so specific, but if you're going to
[5:46:36] get that specific, there has to be a lot
[5:46:38] of education, I think, at town meeting
[5:46:41] um for for the town meeting to approve
[5:46:43] it and then for the board to be able to,
[5:46:45] you know, get behind um and and send a
[5:46:48] letter.
[5:46:50] Make a suggestion, which is the first
[5:46:52] thing we'd have to do is get a ruling
[5:46:53] from the moderator, is can you take a
[5:46:56] resolution, which is titled Medicare for
[5:46:58] all, and instead say, well, it's not
[5:47:00] really a debate about Medicare for all.
[5:47:01] is made about a singlepayer health and
[5:47:03] I'm like okay what I don't know it's not
[5:47:07] a scriven
[5:47:07] it was introduced as being me for
[5:47:09] Medicare for all
[5:47:10] yeah I mean let's try to wrap this up
[5:47:13] so first I I don't know I don't know if
[5:47:16] we're going to be taking a vote tonight
[5:47:17] it sounds like
[5:47:19] um but to to to Paul's point um you know
[5:47:24] there is a obviously a lot of education
[5:47:26] um I think that the the way the
[5:47:29] resolution is worded
[5:47:31] the details actually do matter. Um
[5:47:34] because what the petitioners are asking
[5:47:38] town meeting to do and asking the select
[5:47:40] board to make a recommendation on is
[5:47:43] support of a as you say a specific set
[5:47:46] of of bills um that have specific
[5:47:51] mechanisms in there for accomplishing a
[5:47:54] specific goal around healthcare. Um and
[5:47:59] and I'm just I'm just really concerned
[5:48:03] not about not about the overall
[5:48:05] objective but about the details and the
[5:48:09] specifics, the follow-on impacts, the
[5:48:12] economic analysis,
[5:48:14] um the tax consequences. You know, all
[5:48:17] of those things have to really be well
[5:48:19] understood for all the various
[5:48:22] populations who are all going to be
[5:48:23] affected in different ways.
[5:48:26] You know, let me just say as the
[5:48:29] petitioner, these are all
[5:48:32] um really important points. I'm very
[5:48:34] glad that you have mentioned them. I'm
[5:48:35] glad that you're not going to vote on it
[5:48:37] tonight, it sounds like. And um so I
[5:48:41] appreciate this response.
[5:48:43] Okay. Thank you. Uh I'll close the
[5:48:46] public hearing if I haven't already
[5:48:47] closed it. And u we're not going to take
[5:48:49] this up tonight. So let's move on to the
[5:48:52] next and final item. hopefully the final
[5:48:55] item um which is pardon me
[5:49:00] thank you for for hanging for sticking
[5:49:03] around Meredith
[5:49:04] of course
[5:49:06] um question of calling a special town
[5:49:08] meeting on Tuesday May 26 at 7:30 p.m.
[5:49:12] at the high school auditorium and Zoom
[5:49:14] remote meeting to wave requirements of
[5:49:16] section 2.1.2 through 2.1.4 four of the
[5:49:19] town's bylaws to open and then close the
[5:49:23] warrant and to insert in said warrant
[5:49:25] two articles.
[5:49:27] Um I just Melissa was going to talk
[5:49:29] briefly about the mechanics of this and
[5:49:31] Mary talk about the substance.
[5:49:32] Okay, great.
[5:49:34] Yeah. So um the the board essentially is
[5:49:37] looking uh we had talked a couple weeks
[5:49:39] ago about the board uh using the special
[5:49:42] town meeting and scheduling that within
[5:49:44] the annual town meeting. Um the way that
[5:49:46] you're doing that is by essentially
[5:49:48] scheduling it for 7:30. The annual town
[5:49:50] meeting will start at 7. Um this will
[5:49:53] open up at 7:30 and then you'll schedule
[5:49:55] it according to what fits the rest of
[5:49:57] the town meeting schedule. Um so I my
[5:50:00] memo provides the mechanism for you to
[5:50:02] be able to do that. Um just don't forget
[5:50:04] that the very last page of my memo after
[5:50:06] the articles um you you also need to
[5:50:08] execute the warrant. So I after I will
[5:50:11] uh toss it over to Meredith to describe
[5:50:13] the articles that uh that will be filed
[5:50:15] if the board chooses to call this
[5:50:16] special town.
[5:50:18] Thank you.
[5:50:18] We have to execute the warrant today.
[5:50:21] Yes.
[5:50:22] Okay. Do we have that? It's it's it's
[5:50:24] back. It's back in your conference room.
[5:50:25] Okay. Ready to go if you want if you
[5:50:27] want to sign it.
[5:50:28] Okay.
[5:50:32] So go ahead.
[5:50:33] I thought it would be helpful just to
[5:50:34] sort of recap what brought us to this
[5:50:36] moment. Um back in
[5:50:40] February 3rd, Economic Development
[5:50:42] Division presented our recommendations
[5:50:43] for the Chestnut Hill commercial area
[5:50:45] study, which is a study that's been
[5:50:47] underway since 2024.
[5:50:49] Um, and included amongst those
[5:50:52] recommendations was a proposal for um an
[5:50:54] overlay zoning district. Uh, the select
[5:50:57] board opted to hold a public hearing
[5:50:58] regarding those recommendations on
[5:51:00] February 10th. On February 24th, we were
[5:51:03] given direction from the select board to
[5:51:05] move forward with um submitting for the
[5:51:07] select board's consideration uh a
[5:51:09] package of warrant articles addressing
[5:51:11] the overlay zoning as well as a package
[5:51:13] of protections in the form of a
[5:51:15] memorandum of agreement and tax
[5:51:17] certainty agreement with city realy the
[5:51:19] owner of the Chesn Hill office park at
[5:51:20] 1280 and 13:30 Boilston Street. So that
[5:51:24] is what we have um submitted this
[5:51:26] evening. There are the two warrant
[5:51:27] articles. There's the set of proposed
[5:51:29] zoning bylaw amendments to incorporate
[5:51:31] the overlay districts, the Chesnut Hill
[5:51:33] commercial overlay district. Um, as well
[5:51:35] as a separate warrant article that would
[5:51:37] authorize the select board to enter into
[5:51:39] an MOA and tax certainty agreement with
[5:51:41] City Realy. Um, so updates to the zoning
[5:51:44] since uh the you saw the draft zoning in
[5:51:47] your packet for February 3rd, there has
[5:51:49] been some adjustments um primarily in
[5:51:53] response to conversations we had with
[5:51:54] the planning board. We had a
[5:51:56] presentation and then a workshop with
[5:51:58] the planning board and then a follow-up
[5:51:59] discussion. So, we've incorporated some
[5:52:01] of those changes that they requested in
[5:52:03] terms of setbacks and height limitations
[5:52:05] in certain areas um of the district. And
[5:52:09] um we have also removed four properties
[5:52:11] that are on the national register from
[5:52:13] the eastern most part of um the
[5:52:15] district. So, along Dunster Road. Um so,
[5:52:18] the study boundaries have changed
[5:52:20] slightly on the eastern side. There were
[5:52:22] a couple of other follow items follow-up
[5:52:24] items and requests that were um brought
[5:52:27] up at the February 3rd meeting. Uh one
[5:52:29] regarding sort of the transportation
[5:52:31] board having the opportunity to weigh in
[5:52:33] on the anticipated traffic impacts
[5:52:35] associated with this upzoning. So we did
[5:52:39] receive the future capacity analysis
[5:52:41] from our transportation consultant. The
[5:52:43] TA board is going to be reviewing that.
[5:52:45] They're going to receive a presentation
[5:52:46] from the consultant and then uh some
[5:52:48] feedback from our transportation
[5:52:50] engineering division staff with sort of
[5:52:51] their technical assessment of um KDson's
[5:52:54] work and recommendations and that's
[5:52:56] going to be at their March 18th meeting
[5:52:58] next week. And then finally, there was
[5:53:01] uh the request that uh we circle back
[5:53:04] with Newton. We've been in touch with
[5:53:06] our counterparts in the Newton planning
[5:53:07] department as well as the transportation
[5:53:10] um planning staff regarding the study
[5:53:13] process. However, with the benefit of
[5:53:15] the study recommendations finalized and
[5:53:18] um us finalizing the zoning, uh we have
[5:53:20] been in more recent communication just
[5:53:22] to update them on where things have
[5:53:23] landed. Um and then, you know, giving
[5:53:25] them the talking points that they need
[5:53:27] to answer questions from Newton city
[5:53:29] councilors and and leadership. Um we
[5:53:31] also participated in a meeting with town
[5:53:33] administrator Jazz Kerry and uh the
[5:53:35] Newton mayor um mayor Laredo regarding
[5:53:38] this proposal as well. Um, so that's
[5:53:42] sort of our our update and where things
[5:53:43] stand.
[5:53:44] Just to follow up on that and thank you,
[5:53:45] Meredith. Um, I met with uh the planning
[5:53:48] the planning staff and I went out went
[5:53:50] out to Newton and had a staff to staff
[5:53:51] meeting. We also so I spoke to the
[5:53:53] mayor. I spoke to councelor Liar B Lyall
[5:53:56] Baker who came here to speak to you with
[5:53:58] his concerns about the site uh and the
[5:54:00] proposed resoning. I also then spoke to
[5:54:03] uh on Monday night um with the uh city
[5:54:07] Newton city council's uh committee on
[5:54:09] planning um and zoning. Um they raised
[5:54:13] similar concerns. Their two concerns
[5:54:15] remain primarily um how traffic will be
[5:54:17] handled at the intersection of Route 9
[5:54:19] and Hammond Street. Uh and about the
[5:54:21] parcel north of Route 9 um where the
[5:54:24] Star Market parking lot is. They
[5:54:26] continue to be concerned about the
[5:54:28] potential of that being reszoned in such
[5:54:29] a way that disincentivizes keeping the
[5:54:32] parking there. They're very concerned
[5:54:33] about the parking for that supermarket.
[5:54:35] Um we've talked about how because of the
[5:54:37] interrelated nature of the special
[5:54:39] permit that Newton issued for that
[5:54:41] supermarket that and the fact that the
[5:54:43] owner of the supermarket also owns the
[5:54:45] parking lot across the line in Brooklyn.
[5:54:48] The parking lots in Brooklyn, the
[5:54:49] supermarkets in Newton. Um it would be
[5:54:52] very hard for them to get rid of that
[5:54:53] parking. um ba basically impossible like
[5:54:56] they would have to they would replace it
[5:54:57] theoretically with underground parking
[5:54:59] or structured parking but they can't get
[5:55:01] rid of it um because of this because
[5:55:03] they would have to change the use of the
[5:55:05] entire space and then they would have to
[5:55:07] go through resoning in Newton you know a
[5:55:10] new special permit or reasonzoning in
[5:55:11] Newton along with here um so you know
[5:55:15] we're trying to assuage that we we
[5:55:17] talked we talked about about how at a
[5:55:19] staffto staff level we're setting up a
[5:55:21] task force to deal with these issues we
[5:55:23] talked about how Route 9 is a concern
[5:55:25] for us, not just for these projects, but
[5:55:27] in general um that traffic is increasing
[5:55:31] uh and we need to be working on
[5:55:32] mitigation and pedestrian safety along
[5:55:35] with uh driver safety. So, it was a good
[5:55:37] it was a positive conversation. and you
[5:55:39] saw the letter from councelor Baker that
[5:55:41] was sent today in your note in in your
[5:55:44] uh packets reiterating those concerns
[5:55:46] but also indicating that you know the
[5:55:49] the thanking us for being in good
[5:55:51] dialogue with them and continuing the
[5:55:53] conversation. So I think on the whole
[5:55:56] positive steps in our conversations with
[5:55:58] Newton they have concerns and we're
[5:56:00] working to address them.
[5:56:03] Cool.
[5:56:04] Yeah. I just I had a a quick question
[5:56:06] this so I just wanted to make sure you
[5:56:09] um you spoke as to what the directive
[5:56:11] was from the board for you to do um and
[5:56:14] I think you left out the 12story
[5:56:17] um amendment right there's a whole
[5:56:18] another whole package
[5:56:21] um of stuff that the board had asked
[5:56:24] planning to do right
[5:56:25] yes so thank you I did omit that so
[5:56:29] there were three steps it was submit
[5:56:31] this warrant article proposal with the
[5:56:33] 14 story maximum height.
[5:56:35] Yeah.
[5:56:35] Uh consolidate the study recommendations
[5:56:38] in a report format that people have the
[5:56:40] benefit of referring to as they're going
[5:56:41] through the warrant article review
[5:56:43] process. And then finally to prepare an
[5:56:44] amendment with a maximum height of 12
[5:56:46] stories.
[5:56:46] Okay. So u just a follow up on that
[5:56:48] Bernard real quick. So I um I had a
[5:56:51] Michael and had I had a good
[5:56:53] conversation yesterday about this whole
[5:56:54] project and its its life and vitality
[5:56:57] and ups and downs. Um, and and I I
[5:57:02] shared concerns that I have with Michael
[5:57:04] about the possibility of this thing
[5:57:06] passing or not passing, but we talked
[5:57:08] about the 12 stories and you asked me to
[5:57:10] do something
[5:57:12] um to reach out to um the five town
[5:57:16] meeting members that serve on the um the
[5:57:20] advisory group. Um and I and I did that.
[5:57:24] So last night in this in most of the day
[5:57:27] today I spoke I did reach out and have
[5:57:29] conversations with each and every one of
[5:57:31] them um over the phone personally it
[5:57:33] wasn't through email um and I the the
[5:57:38] each one of them said um that they won't
[5:57:42] support 12 stories.
[5:57:44] So I actually want they won't support 12
[5:57:47] stories. So bringing bringing the thing
[5:57:48] forward is it at this time maybe at some
[5:57:51] other time but right now there's not
[5:57:52] enough time to adjudicate 12 stories um
[5:57:57] in a way that would be uh would be
[5:57:59] effective. So, I actually would like to
[5:58:02] strongly recommend that um planning not
[5:58:07] waste their time developing amendments
[5:58:11] for 12 stories negotiating
[5:58:14] with uh because we'd have to do all that
[5:58:17] work again um with uh city realy because
[5:58:20] I don't think it's going to make amount
[5:58:22] to a hella beans. There's not support
[5:58:23] for it at this time. It could be in the
[5:58:25] future, but at this time uh that that
[5:58:27] combination won't happen. So, I wanted
[5:58:29] to report back at least to Michael um
[5:58:33] that this uh there's it's a non-starter
[5:58:36] at 12 stories. So, I don't think we
[5:58:39] should waste our time on it.
[5:58:41] Okay.
[5:58:42] I agree. Let's not waste our time.
[5:58:44] Um
[5:58:45] Michael, what do you think?
[5:58:47] A couple of things. First of all, thank
[5:58:48] you um both for the conversation.
[5:58:50] I had hoped for a bit of ok, but um and
[5:58:52] thank you thank you for reaching out. Um
[5:58:55] and um
[5:58:58] so so
[5:59:01] one of the things that I had looked
[5:59:03] looked at in terms of of sort of the
[5:59:06] challenge of the moment um is that I
[5:59:08] went back and looked actually at the
[5:59:10] MBTA Communities Act um process um and
[5:59:14] one of the things that I noticed was
[5:59:16] that the agreement that was that you
[5:59:19] ultimately shephered through um to uh 83
[5:59:23] 84% % of town meetings vote uh actually
[5:59:27] occurred about less than 30 days around
[5:59:30] 30 days from the time that the
[5:59:35] um that town meeting began. Um and it
[5:59:38] was a set of amendments to
[5:59:42] to the warrant articles that were
[5:59:44] ultimately filed. Um and um as I have
[5:59:48] said uh repeatedly um that I am
[5:59:54] uh still hopeful um and I believe that
[5:59:57] there are trade-offs and negotiations to
[5:59:59] be considered um and am uh looking
[6:00:03] forward to those conversations. Um I
[6:00:06] want to respect the multiple years of
[6:00:10] effort um that have been put together by
[6:00:13] uh the planning department um the
[6:00:15] community advisory group um the number
[6:00:18] of uh other stakeholders who have been
[6:00:20] involved um and as you and I discussed
[6:00:24] uh yesterday um this process is in some
[6:00:29] ways more complex than other processes
[6:00:32] because we have not only the town and
[6:00:35] the community and the neighborhoods and
[6:00:36] people who who are expressing those set
[6:00:39] of interests. But we are also concerned
[6:00:42] about uh the economic viability and
[6:00:45] because we have a project in place um we
[6:00:50] have more uh
[6:00:54] more present uh uh expressions of what
[6:00:58] would be economically viable or not. And
[6:01:01] it is my hope that over the course of
[6:01:03] this um examination that those
[6:01:07] considerations of economic viability um
[6:01:10] are continue to be reviewed and examined
[6:01:13] and uh thoroughly vetted. Um but um
[6:01:17] first of all I want to thank Meredith, I
[6:01:20] want to thank um Carara, the rest of the
[6:01:22] staff um Mike Sandman and the rest of
[6:01:24] the community advisory group again for
[6:01:27] their continued engagement and work on
[6:01:29] this and raising a number of critical
[6:01:31] questions that have continued to be uh
[6:01:35] incorporated into this body of work. Um
[6:01:38] I'm very uh excited about this. I think
[6:01:42] it represents both a vision um for the
[6:01:45] entire study area as well as a project
[6:01:47] which will deliver significant benefits
[6:01:50] to the town um as I have mentioned in
[6:01:53] the past um and I am ready to take the
[6:01:57] next steps and continue to move forward
[6:01:59] with all parties engaged.
[6:02:02] Okay. Uh John,
[6:02:03] well I I just want to ask Michael um
[6:02:06] just help me understand.
[6:02:08] So, you're still uh aiming at the May 26
[6:02:12] special town meeting. Is that is that
[6:02:14] That is at this point. That is correct.
[6:02:16] Yeah. Okay. Uh and I um Oh, I'm sorry. I
[6:02:21] I wasn't finished. Yeah. Um so,
[6:02:24] something came to my attention and I,
[6:02:26] you know, it was actually today. Um and
[6:02:29] yet it's something that, you know, maybe
[6:02:31] should have been part of these
[6:02:32] discussions uh for for some time now. Um
[6:02:37] you know there's always been this kind
[6:02:38] of question hanging over this whole
[6:02:40] process that that it's aimed at an
[6:02:42] entire you know district which you know
[6:02:45] in incorporates many many other
[6:02:47] properties in addition to the properties
[6:02:49] owned by uh uh city realy um where
[6:02:53] there's this 14127
[6:02:55] uh proposal um a and it's been kind of a
[6:02:59] mystery like well if we reszone you know
[6:03:03] the entire district uh what other
[6:03:05] developments might be possible in the
[6:03:09] the other parts of the district. And
[6:03:11] then I found out today that there's um
[6:03:14] you know there's I I just happen not to
[6:03:16] have had a conversation with this person
[6:03:18] until today. Uh there's a very
[6:03:21] significant owner there um and and his
[6:03:24] company is called Growth Companies and
[6:03:26] he happens to have the immediately
[6:03:27] adjacent uh uh parcel uh to the west of
[6:03:32] Tully Street um which is currently a
[6:03:34] parking area but he also happens to have
[6:03:37] uh commercial properties
[6:03:39] uh on to the east side of Tully Street
[6:03:43] and he happens to have an interest in
[6:03:46] possibly purchasing some uh residential
[6:03:48] properties.
[6:03:49] that are adjacent to his property on the
[6:03:52] east side of Tully Street. And he is in
[6:03:55] a position of um from his p perspective
[6:03:58] of having presented to um the town a
[6:04:03] plausible plan under which he too would
[6:04:06] become a developer through this zoning
[6:04:10] that we're proposing to do for the area.
[6:04:13] um if only he could get um you know a
[6:04:16] little bit of um uh agreement to uh some
[6:04:20] some special circumstances that would
[6:04:23] have to be met for him to be able to do
[6:04:25] the development that he um would propose
[6:04:29] to do. but he he kind of feels like he's
[6:04:32] just been getting the cold shoulder and
[6:04:35] um no one seems to be interested in
[6:04:38] paving the way for him to do a
[6:04:40] development and um you know I'm not
[6:04:43] going to judge whether that's an
[6:04:45] accurate description. That's his
[6:04:46] description of what's going on here. But
[6:04:50] um as soon as we open the door to the
[6:04:53] possibility of there being more than one
[6:04:56] developer who would like to do
[6:04:57] development um in this district, I mean
[6:05:00] first of all that's kind of what we
[6:05:01] wanted to happen. So you would think we
[6:05:04] would do everything we can to encourage
[6:05:06] this person. Um and then second of all,
[6:05:09] you have to then begin a discussion
[6:05:11] which we haven't yet yet had, which is
[6:05:16] how much development can this whole area
[6:05:19] sustain.
[6:05:20] And if we're only talking to one
[6:05:22] developer about one part of the uh
[6:05:25] reszoned area
[6:05:28] and if that developer um uses up a lot
[6:05:31] of the capacity to absorb excuse me
[6:05:34] additional units of well let's say
[6:05:36] additional units of housing a whole
[6:05:38] bunch of units of housing, a hotel, some
[6:05:40] some retail, some office. Um uh it
[6:05:44] impacts what might be allowable for the
[6:05:47] next person who wants to develop because
[6:05:50] now we've already you know said yes to a
[6:05:54] whole bunch of activity happening at one
[6:05:57] happening at one end of this whole area
[6:06:00] without um um you know introducing the
[6:06:03] possibility that other developers might
[6:06:06] want to do their thing and they might
[6:06:08] not have the same opportunity to do
[6:06:11] development if if for example there has
[6:06:14] been a additional burden on
[6:06:15] transportation created by the westmost
[6:06:18] development.
[6:06:20] So, I don't know what we're going to do
[6:06:23] if we do this special town meeting at
[6:06:25] May 26 and this particular developer,
[6:06:28] you know, shows up and says, "I, you
[6:06:31] know, I can't seem to get anywhere uh
[6:06:33] with the the people at town hall. I've
[6:06:36] got a plan. I'd like to do some
[6:06:37] development. How are we going to justify
[6:06:40] only sort of paving the way for one
[6:06:42] development when there's another
[6:06:44] credible owner who says he's not getting
[6:06:48] similar treatment?" I hope we haven't I
[6:06:49] haven't mischaracterized what he's been
[6:06:51] saying, but that's a big concern for me
[6:06:53] and I just want people to know that.
[6:06:56] Um, you want to respond or fill in
[6:07:01] information?
[6:07:02] Yes, thank you. So, growth companies,
[6:07:07] we've been engaged with growth companies
[6:07:09] since before we launched the study
[6:07:11] process. Um,
[6:07:14] we've had a lot of individual meetings
[6:07:17] with them. They participated in almost
[6:07:19] every community advisory group meeting
[6:07:21] in 2025. They've attended almost every
[6:07:23] economic development advisory board
[6:07:25] subcommittee meeting and discussion.
[6:07:27] Growth Companies has been very involved
[6:07:29] and engaged in this process and
[6:07:31] conversations about development
[6:07:32] opportunities in this area.
[6:07:35] Throughout much of that time, there was
[6:07:37] not a specific development concept that
[6:07:40] Growth Companies was able to share with
[6:07:42] us to help us better understand where
[6:07:46] their concerns and pain points might be
[6:07:48] within the proposed zoning in the draft
[6:07:51] format. Um so on the day of the warrant
[6:07:55] article filing deadline we did receive
[6:07:57] that proposal or a concept um that it's
[6:08:00] still sort of there are question marks
[6:08:01] about the extent to which that even
[6:08:03] would conform to the existing zoning.
[6:08:06] Um you know of course we're happy to
[6:08:09] continue those conversations. You know
[6:08:11] we included growth companies in the east
[6:08:13] block in the Chesn Hill 4.0. um you know
[6:08:17] in recognition of sort of uh development
[6:08:20] potential that exists on that block and
[6:08:23] um giving parody with uh the city realy
[6:08:25] proposal. We also understand you know um
[6:08:27] and have contemplated in the zoning the
[6:08:31] challenges of their teley street parking
[6:08:33] lot and what it will be what will be
[6:08:35] required in order to redevelop that. We
[6:08:37] don't want it to be a gap tooth in the
[6:08:38] study area.
[6:08:40] So, um I I I was forwarded the the
[6:08:43] letter in the communication and so I did
[6:08:45] just want to state that, you know, we
[6:08:47] have included in the zoning that in the
[6:08:50] 4.0 you can submit a project proposal
[6:08:52] for non-ontiguous lots only in that
[6:08:55] subdist. And that was specifically
[6:08:56] contemplating the the Tully Street
[6:08:58] parking lot and the situation that
[6:08:59] Growth Companies is in um and what they
[6:09:02] would need in order to redevelop that.
[6:09:04] Um,
[6:09:06] and you know, I I'd be happy to walk you
[6:09:09] through different aspects of the zoning
[6:09:10] where we were, you know, thinking
[6:09:12] specifically about growth companies and
[6:09:13] issues that they had raised with us in
[6:09:15] conversations with the economic
[6:09:16] development advisory board subcommittee.
[6:09:18] Um, and I,
[6:09:22] you know,
[6:09:23] um, would happy to continue that
[6:09:26] conversation. Another suggestion that um
[6:09:29] I think could be helpful um would be um
[6:09:34] sort of reaching out to the economic
[6:09:35] development advisory board for their
[6:09:37] feedback about the extent to which you
[6:09:39] know we feel like all developers
[6:09:41] interests and opportunities have been
[6:09:43] appropriately reflected in the zoning
[6:09:44] proposal.
[6:09:45] Okay. Uh David,
[6:09:46] so I shared John's concern. We received
[6:09:49] this letter from growth companies just
[6:09:52] today and that letter essentially says
[6:09:56] that the zoning as currently drafted
[6:09:59] would not be economically viable for
[6:10:01] them and they are the only other uh
[6:10:05] ownership present on the uh 4.0
[6:10:09] portion of this resoning. So
[6:10:13] when we are thinking about economic
[6:10:15] viability which was raised uh earlier by
[6:10:18] Michael and all of us care about
[6:10:20] economic viability of course I think we
[6:10:22] need to reach consensus about what that
[6:10:25] means for the entirety of the stretch
[6:10:29] not just one portion uh and I appreciate
[6:10:33] what Meredith has just said about
[6:10:35] ongoing conversations and I'm sure
[6:10:36] that'll happen but I'm a little worried
[6:10:39] that we are putting way too much work on
[6:10:43] you and Carara and on others to be able
[6:10:45] to work all of this out by May 26th. and
[6:10:48] even growth companies aside. You
[6:10:50] mentioned that uh transportation boards
[6:10:54] meeting on March 18th to formally uh
[6:10:58] address the traffic plan and we don't
[6:11:01] know specifically what they might uh
[6:11:04] recommend from that and what uh changes
[6:11:08] or modifications might need to be made
[6:11:10] in furtherance of their suggestions if
[6:11:13] any. Uh also it sounds like the meetings
[6:11:17] with Newton that are are at a
[6:11:20] preliminary stage. Uh in terms of other
[6:11:23] developers who are involved in other
[6:11:25] portions of this uh Route 9 district for
[6:11:28] Cheson Hill West, there's also WS. Uh
[6:11:32] it's not clear whether uh their vision
[6:11:36] is achieved by this zoning. Also there
[6:11:40] is uh Salvatore owns another portion.
[6:11:43] Now, I say this not because I'm
[6:11:45] suggesting that we abandon everything
[6:11:48] we've done. That's not what I'm saying
[6:11:50] at all. And but I do think that we're
[6:11:53] being a bit unrealistic to hold this
[6:11:56] special town meeting on May 26 because
[6:11:59] it sounds like there's still a fairly
[6:12:02] significant amount of work that needs to
[6:12:03] be done. And I want to see
[6:12:07] whatever we do end up uh having at town
[6:12:10] meeting pass. I want this to be
[6:12:12] successful. And if town meeting hears
[6:12:15] that there are other developers who feel
[6:12:17] that this zoning does not address their
[6:12:20] needs, that's going to be problematic in
[6:12:22] terms of achieving passage. I would like
[6:12:25] to see buyin from everybody if it's
[6:12:27] possible. Maybe it's not possible and
[6:12:29] then we ultimately vote on it anyway.
[6:12:31] But I would like to see these other
[6:12:33] parties given the opportunity at least
[6:12:36] to come together to make sure that all
[6:12:39] of their needs are being addressed so
[6:12:40] that we could achieve that 84% like the
[6:12:44] uh MBTCA consensus plan.
[6:12:48] I I just I I think
[6:12:50] his hand was ready.
[6:12:52] It's been up for a while.
[6:12:53] It's really up there. I I I think
[6:12:56] Meredith may be too diplomatic to say
[6:12:58] this.
[6:13:00] Growth companies send you a letter the
[6:13:02] day you are debating this after over a
[6:13:04] year of process on this in which they
[6:13:07] have been deeply involved. It's a two
[6:13:09] not even a two-page letter that says we
[6:13:12] have concerns. Of course, we have other
[6:13:13] concerns.
[6:13:15] Growth companies and city realy are
[6:13:16] competitors.
[6:13:18] They there is an ulterior motive to this
[6:13:22] letter. a clear ulterior motive to this
[6:13:25] letter.
[6:13:26] It's it's not it's not even particularly
[6:13:29] subtle, right? It's we you know, we see
[6:13:33] now that this is that that what we
[6:13:35] thought was theoretical is now becoming
[6:13:38] reality. And even though the town has
[6:13:42] been begging them, please give us
[6:13:44] something that so that we can do we can
[6:13:46] build something that to your point David
[6:13:48] conforms to this vision, they've said
[6:13:51] they haven't done it. And then when they
[6:13:53] did it on the deadline, it wasn't it
[6:13:56] didn't seem to be workable. And so they
[6:14:00] do what any good competitor will do in
[6:14:02] these situations,
[6:14:03] try and sink it. Um this is a letter
[6:14:06] that's trying to sink this process.
[6:14:09] Whoa. Whoa. Chess, I think you're going
[6:14:11] a little too far with with with, you
[6:14:15] know, with that assumption. I can
[6:14:17] understand you having a concern about it
[6:14:19] coming in for last minute, but I don't
[6:14:21] see I don't see a property owner trying
[6:14:24] to sink something. I see a property
[6:14:26] owner saying um we'd like to have some
[6:14:30] more time so that the so that I'm going
[6:14:33] to read it as as we would not be able to
[6:14:35] partake in the ability to develop our
[6:14:36] properties while having to put up uh
[6:14:38] with the increased traffic zoning to the
[6:14:41] area. We have no choice but to state our
[6:14:43] position against the proposed zoning
[6:14:45] amendment. We hope at the very least the
[6:14:47] proposed zoning can be delayed until
[6:14:49] more time has been put into this effort
[6:14:52] that
[6:14:52] How much more time do they need? Can I
[6:14:55] finish?
[6:14:55] I'm sorry. You're I understand you're
[6:14:57] upset.
[6:14:59] No, it's not upset. I mean, I think he's
[6:15:00] he's accurately stating,
[6:15:02] you know,
[6:15:03] so in this letter,
[6:15:04] so I I want to speak about on on this
[6:15:08] subject in general.
[6:15:10] Um, so
[6:15:13] and I conveyed this to Mike. We had a
[6:15:14] good conversation about this. I am
[6:15:17] really concerned about this not passing,
[6:15:20] right? this this to achieve a twothirds
[6:15:24] vote with the number of issues that are
[6:15:27] unresolved. There's a number of them. I
[6:15:29] could list them, but there's a number of
[6:15:30] them. I just wrote them down as you were
[6:15:31] talking. Um
[6:15:34] the
[6:15:37] the town wants a solution. City realy
[6:15:40] wants a solution. The neighborhood wants
[6:15:43] a solution. Um, nobody is saying that we
[6:15:47] don't want to redevelop Chestnut Hill
[6:15:50] West. Um, I think what what they're
[6:15:54] saying is we need a little more time. My
[6:15:58] fear is that we go to town meeting with
[6:16:03] this proposal
[6:16:05] and we roll the dice on it and you don't
[6:16:07] achieve a twothirds vote and then it's
[6:16:10] dead.
[6:16:11] Um, I think with a little more time,
[6:16:15] taking a step back to get parties
[6:16:17] together to address the issues with
[6:16:19] traffic with the Department of
[6:16:21] Transportation, figure out these
[6:16:23] U-turns, you know, a little more a
[6:16:26] little more work with Newton to get that
[6:16:28] settled down. Um, I know that Cara has
[6:16:31] suggested uh doing some due diligence um
[6:16:34] on on the actual uh pro-forma signing an
[6:16:38] NDA, which we've done with every other
[6:16:40] project of this magnitude uh to get a
[6:16:43] good sense of whether it's viable,
[6:16:45] they're viable, what they're proposing.
[6:16:47] Um I do think we need to get a little
[6:16:51] more input from growth companies. Um,
[6:16:54] and most importantly, we need to bring
[6:16:58] South Brooklyn into the fold here.
[6:17:00] They're all saying no. So, that coupled
[6:17:04] with, and I dare I say it, BBD also sent
[6:17:08] us a letter that said we don't support
[6:17:10] it. There's not going to be a two-thirds
[6:17:12] vote for this. So, I I would like to
[6:17:16] make a suggestion. Um, and this and and
[6:17:19] and I'll make the suggestion, and I'm
[6:17:20] willing to put time in to try to help
[6:17:22] with this. Um, we need this project to
[6:17:25] be successful. I just don't know if it's
[6:17:27] exactly this proposal, but we need a
[6:17:31] plan to redevelop Chestn West. I think
[6:17:34] it can be found with a little more time.
[6:17:37] There's the economy is not great.
[6:17:40] Interest rates are high. Oil's through
[6:17:42] the roof. You know, this thing they're
[6:17:44] not going to start digging September 1,
[6:17:47] right? We don't need to rush this. Um,
[6:17:50] I'm not suggesting that we kick it way
[6:17:52] out, but I think scheduling this special
[6:17:55] town meeting for September.
[6:17:58] Let let's get through the summer having
[6:18:00] these conversations, having a deadline,
[6:18:04] I would suggest September 30th is the
[6:18:05] special town meeting. We march to that
[6:18:08] to work towards a consensus solution.
[6:18:11] And whatever that solution is by March
[6:18:14] 30th, if by September 30th, if if we
[6:18:17] can't come to agreement with parties and
[6:18:20] it this comes back on, you have a much
[6:18:23] better way of selling that at town
[6:18:25] meeting to say, "You said you weren't
[6:18:27] involved. We didn't listen. You had a
[6:18:30] lot of concerns. You had the opportunity
[6:18:32] over the summer to raise your concerns.
[6:18:34] We're working together to find consensus
[6:18:37] between the neighborhood, South
[6:18:38] Brooklyn, uh, city realy and, uh, growth
[6:18:42] companies and the town for that matter.
[6:18:46] Um, and we bring that solution to town
[6:18:48] meeting in September.
[6:18:50] Okay.
[6:18:50] A focused one second, Bernard. A focused
[6:18:53] special town meeting that there's
[6:18:55] nothing else on the agenda. There's not
[6:18:56] a budget. We're not scrambling around
[6:18:58] with other stuff. It's only this. I
[6:19:00] think this is important enough to have
[6:19:03] that focus and a little bit more time to
[6:19:05] develop it. So, I would strongly suggest
[6:19:07] that we schedule this special town
[6:19:09] meeting for September 30th.
[6:19:11] Okay. Um I'd like to move the question
[6:19:14] on the on the agenda and that is the May
[6:19:17] 26th uh town meeting. Um uh and if we
[6:19:21] decide to not move the articles at that
[6:19:24] town meeting, we can do that. uh if you
[6:19:26] know if it seems like um you know more
[6:19:29] time would enable us to get an agreement
[6:19:33] that uh is workable but I I don't want
[6:19:35] to stand here and and and spend all
[6:19:38] night talking about sort of a
[6:19:40] hypothetical alternative way of doing
[6:19:42] this. I think
[6:19:44] well I I don't think it's
[6:19:46] hypothetical.
[6:19:47] Yeah, I don't think it's hypothetical.
[6:19:48] That was a very specific proposal.
[6:19:50] Well well in ter in terms of ability to
[6:19:52] pull together an agreement with all the
[6:19:55] parties.
[6:19:56] Yeah, that would work. So there's a
[6:19:58] perception and I'm hearing it's not the
[6:20:00] reality, but there's a perception that
[6:20:02] all the parties haven't been heard from.
[6:20:05] And as Paul just said, if we spend a
[6:20:07] little more time meeting with everybody
[6:20:10] and they're still saying the same thing
[6:20:11] in September, then that's they're not
[6:20:14] going to have credibility before a town
[6:20:16] meeting. But if they go if we go full
[6:20:19] steam ahead for May 26 with all these
[6:20:23] issues still hanging in the air and then
[6:20:26] these same entities come forward at town
[6:20:28] meeting and say we weren't heard from
[6:20:31] the process was improper. What about our
[6:20:34] parcels? That's going to sway votes. It
[6:20:37] will. And we all want this to pass and
[6:20:39] it needs a twothirds majority. Now I
[6:20:42] want to be clear. I'm not saying abandon
[6:20:45] 14127.
[6:20:47] I'm saying let's take seriously the
[6:20:50] letters that we're receiving from these
[6:20:52] groups. The growth company's letter
[6:20:53] didn't say abandon 14127.
[6:20:57] Didn't say that. It said if you can do
[6:21:00] follow these specific steps, we would
[6:21:03] appreciate it. Can we have further
[6:21:05] discussions about it? And it might be
[6:21:07] compatible with the 14127. their asks
[6:21:10] were not height related per se or they
[6:21:13] weren't detailed around height and I
[6:21:16] don't see any harm to increasing the
[6:21:19] probability of passage which we all want
[6:21:22] by having a slight delay. Now I don't
[6:21:25] know if I agree with Paul about
[6:21:26] September 30th. I think maybe a little
[6:21:28] early in September a little earlier in
[6:21:30] September uh might be better. Uh but I
[6:21:34] think buying more buying a little more
[6:21:36] time just a little May 26 is what is
[6:21:39] being proposed here on the agenda and if
[6:21:44] it's say a mid late September date
[6:21:46] that's basically just three more months.
[6:21:48] That's not a super long delay. And in
[6:21:51] that time, it would be very difficult
[6:21:53] for growth companies, Salvatore, WS, uh,
[6:21:57] South Brooklyn, Chestnut Hill, uh, the
[6:21:59] neighbors to say that they still haven't
[6:22:01] been heard from if we're committing to
[6:22:03] giving them that time to craft something
[6:22:05] that works for everybody. And if it
[6:22:07] doesn't work for everybody, we we have
[6:22:09] this 14127. I would be prepared to vote
[6:22:13] the uh the current plan as what we place
[6:22:18] for a September special town meeting and
[6:22:22] if there's an amendment before then then
[6:22:24] so be it. But hopefully it would be a
[6:22:26] vetted amendment.
[6:22:28] I mean September town meeting you can
[6:22:30] get a sort of selected group of people
[6:22:33] and I'm not sure that that's a good way
[6:22:34] of going forward with this type of
[6:22:36] proposal.
[6:22:37] What's you mean a selected group of
[6:22:39] not
[6:22:41] un un it's a irregular
[6:22:44] date for town meeting and you there'll
[6:22:48] be
[6:22:48] kind of in February in the middle of
[6:22:50] winter to
[6:22:51] and we have a we have a different a
[6:22:53] different audience or a different town
[6:22:55] meeting than we do regular town meetings
[6:22:58] and that's just my my view of things.
[6:23:01] Well,
[6:23:02] so what? So you're say Okay.
[6:23:04] Well, you moved that. Well, you you you
[6:23:06] made a motion for
[6:23:08] We'll see if it passes. And I Well, and
[6:23:09] I Well, I'd like to amend your motion.
[6:23:12] So, I want to amend
[6:23:13] another date.
[6:23:14] I'm going to change the date.
[6:23:15] So, I'd like I mean, I I think September
[6:23:18] 30th gives you remember, we get we need
[6:23:20] time for whatever gets developed and
[6:23:22] agreed to. It still would need to go
[6:23:23] through advisory um because it's going
[6:23:26] to be a new it would be an amended
[6:23:27] article. So I I think September 30th is
[6:23:30] gets everybody back from school.
[6:23:32] Okay. Let's let's that's that's okay.
[6:23:33] That
[6:23:34] in order in order to do that,
[6:23:36] you would have to amend the contents as
[6:23:39] well because the contents reference the
[6:23:43] special town meeting May 30th.
[6:23:45] Okay.
[6:23:46] So it's not it's not just
[6:23:48] okay
[6:23:49] the special town meeting.
[6:23:50] So we'll we'll make it we'll make we'll
[6:23:53] make the amend the changes to the
[6:23:54] article to make it a September 30th
[6:23:56] special town meeting. So I I so I'm
[6:23:59] offering I look I I first I want to get
[6:24:01] my motion on the table. My a I would
[6:24:04] like to amend the special town meeting
[6:24:06] instead of being May 26th. I'd like to
[6:24:09] offer uh September 30th um and direct
[6:24:14] staff to make the adjustments to the
[6:24:16] articles and materials to reference uh
[6:24:19] September 30th special town meeting
[6:24:21] versus instead of the May 2. So, I just
[6:24:24] I if you if you're going to do that
[6:24:26] procedurally, you got to check with the
[6:24:28] town clerk and the moderator first to
[6:24:30] see if it's possible. We got to figure
[6:24:31] out if we can get the high school and so
[6:24:32] forth. What I would suggest is that you
[6:24:37] take that you direct us to go check and
[6:24:39] see if that's feasible, if an end of
[6:24:41] September date is feasible, and then we
[6:24:43] can bring that back to you.
[6:24:44] Well, take that vote.
[6:24:45] Okay. So, so I I I appreciate that
[6:24:47] advice. I'd like to take the vote. Um,
[6:24:50] you know, if we want to say contingent
[6:24:51] upon
[6:24:53] you know, uh, the availability of town
[6:24:55] of of the high school, but I would like
[6:24:58] to have the vote.
[6:24:59] Okay. So, so just just so just so I'm
[6:25:04] clear about what you're asking,
[6:25:07] what what you are proposing is that the
[6:25:11] feedback that all of these people have
[6:25:13] given us for the last two years
[6:25:16] can potentially change not in the next
[6:25:19] 80 days but in the next uh 170 days
[6:25:24] roughly right to the end of September.
[6:25:27] And you think that the difference
[6:25:28] between that 80day window and the 170
[6:25:31] day window will change either what
[6:25:35] growth companies does or what what uh
[6:25:39] the members of South Brook line who are
[6:25:41] on the C.
[6:25:42] I think what it will change is what town
[6:25:43] meeting does. You keep losing sight of
[6:25:46] the goal here. The goal is twothirds
[6:25:48] vote. You do not have a twothirds vote.
[6:25:50] It will not pass.
[6:25:51] Wait, Bernard. Bernard,
[6:25:53] you keep saying we do not have two vote
[6:25:56] and we have not had the Bernard. I'm
[6:25:58] saying that the like I'm saying the like
[6:26:00] guessing that
[6:26:01] I'm saying the likelihood of a twothirds
[6:26:03] vote is very very low and all these
[6:26:06] issues that have been raised need a
[6:26:09] little bit more time. So
[6:26:12] So and you do not believe that the 80
[6:26:14] days between now and town meeting is
[6:26:16] sufficient time?
[6:26:16] I don't believe so.
[6:26:17] Okay. So So you have an amendment to my
[6:26:20] uh motion on the floor. Let's Let's just
[6:26:22] vote on that.
[6:26:23] Do So, we're going to vote. What?
[6:26:26] Michael, where?
[6:26:27] Wait. No. No. Go ahead.
[6:26:29] I I want to know what the amendment is
[6:26:31] to to change the special town meeting
[6:26:33] from May 26th, whatever's in in in the
[6:26:36] here to September 30th.
[6:26:38] Conditional on it being practical
[6:26:41] or being need to know if the dates.
[6:26:43] You bas you basically we can't like
[6:26:45] there's language in here that reflects a
[6:26:47] May date. So, we in the articles. So, we
[6:26:49] would need you would basically what your
[6:26:52] amendment is is you're directing us to
[6:26:53] bring back to you a package for a
[6:26:55] September 30th town meeting for you to
[6:26:57] open because then the formal votes that
[6:26:59] you have to take about opening and
[6:27:00] closing the warrant and so forth
[6:27:03] are are things that can't be undone and
[6:27:05] then you run you run that you know MBTA
[6:27:08] Communities Act issue where we had a
[6:27:10] bunch of special town meetings that we
[6:27:11] had to call and then uncall. So rather
[6:27:14] than doing that here,
[6:27:16] I would suggest that the motion be that
[6:27:18] you direct us to prepare for September
[6:27:22] 30th special town meeting and that we
[6:27:24] come back to you with the revised
[6:27:26] documentation that says September 30th
[6:27:28] is the date or as close there too as
[6:27:30] possible if they
[6:27:31] Okay.
[6:27:32] Can I just add one more thing too?
[6:27:34] Sorry. Um you wouldn't need to wave the
[6:27:36] notice provisions if you were calling it
[6:27:37] in September because you have the 755
[6:27:39] days. So um
[6:27:42] That's that's another reason why you've
[6:27:44] got a little bit more time if that's
[6:27:45] what you choose to do.
[6:27:48] I will I will note um
[6:27:52] the the city realy proposal is roughly
[6:27:56] five acres.
[6:27:58] The uh growth company's proposal is
[6:28:01] roughly
[6:28:03] somewhere between an acre and a quarter
[6:28:06] to an acre and a half. Um,
[6:28:09] every delay of a month costs the town
[6:28:14] roughly
[6:28:15] somewhere between 350 to $525,000.
[6:28:20] Well, how do you how do you how do you
[6:28:22] determine that?
[6:28:23] Um, based on the the stability tax, the
[6:28:28] stability the calculation that we made
[6:28:31] for what the net fiscal impact is. Yeah.
[6:28:34] of this project. It's between
[6:28:38] 4.3
[6:28:40] million per year and I'm 4.2 million and
[6:28:43] 6.3 million a year.
[6:28:45] I I am just telling pointing out the
[6:28:48] trade-offs.
[6:28:49] So I I I just I
[6:28:50] and and your assertion that as Bernard
[6:28:55] said that we don't have a twothirds vote
[6:28:59] is true because we don't we haven't had
[6:29:02] town meeting yet. And I know that you
[6:29:04] don't believe that we can get there,
[6:29:08] but but
[6:29:10] so Michael, I just want you may I
[6:29:11] respond to Michael's your assertion
[6:29:13] about this this cost, this lost revenue
[6:29:16] potential cost.
[6:29:17] Yes.
[6:29:18] Everything about about the net fiscal
[6:29:21] impact is a gueststimate.
[6:29:24] Okay. There's a whole bunch of
[6:29:25] assumptions there. We there's no
[6:29:27] guarantee that that uh city realy is
[6:29:31] going to be able to start when they
[6:29:33] think they're going to start for for the
[6:29:34] first building. There's no guarant
[6:29:36] there's actually nothing that forces
[6:29:37] them to create the second building,
[6:29:40] right? There's there's some there's they
[6:29:42] up to five years. I mean, there there's
[6:29:45] there's no guarantee
[6:29:47] for you to be able to assign what a few
[6:29:50] months of trying to get this right.
[6:29:54] Um, and trying to tie a revenue to some
[6:29:55] of that is is is an absolute guess. Um,
[6:30:00] and it's just it's not it's it's not
[6:30:02] convincing.
[6:30:02] There'll be some cost. Maybe you don't
[6:30:04] know exactly what it is, but it's going
[6:30:06] to be
[6:30:07] it's going to be a cost, David. But I
[6:30:09] think the cost analysis is a little more
[6:30:10] complex than that because if it's if
[6:30:12] it's true that the uh growth company's
[6:30:17] parcel can't be effectively developed
[6:30:19] under the current zoning and if it's
[6:30:22] true that WS might not be able to do
[6:30:24] what they want and Salvatore might not
[6:30:26] be able to do what they want and a
[6:30:27] traffic suggestion that might or might
[6:30:31] not come on March 18th impacts projects
[6:30:34] in some ways. We also need to analyze
[6:30:37] those potential numbers because if we
[6:30:39] have zoning that works for the entire
[6:30:42] stretch, then presumably we would have
[6:30:45] development that is providing an even
[6:30:47] larger net fiscal benefit than we would
[6:30:51] if we try to push something through that
[6:30:54] even if successful and I I share Paul's
[6:30:56] concern get to a twothirds majority now
[6:31:00] might be less. So I I don't know that we
[6:31:03] really have that data yet,
[6:31:04] but we also have the option
[6:31:07] if this passes and city realy continues
[6:31:12] to move forward with their project to
[6:31:15] continue conversations with growth
[6:31:17] companies and
[6:31:19] WS development etc. And as we've done
[6:31:22] with other other zoning issues like ADUs
[6:31:26] and so forth, go back and make changes.
[6:31:29] But if we don't do this, then we will
[6:31:33] definitely be delaying city realy. And
[6:31:36] we haven't even talked to them about the
[6:31:39] impact of what a three-month delay would
[6:31:41] be. Well, again, this in part of this
[6:31:46] discussion
[6:31:47] about how much we're we're we're we're
[6:31:51] tailoring our actions
[6:31:54] to city realy. I mean, they're
[6:31:55] reinforcing the point that actually the
[6:31:58] the other property owner made in their
[6:32:02] letter to us that they're not being
[6:32:04] considered at all. Um
[6:32:06] Meredith
[6:32:10] in trying to interpret from the staff
[6:32:12] perspective about policy direction in
[6:32:15] this discussion. What I'm hearing is
[6:32:17] that the select board unless there is a
[6:32:19] specific developer and development
[6:32:21] proposal for near-term redevelopment on
[6:32:24] the table. You're not comfortable moving
[6:32:26] forward with that. And so I I just but
[6:32:29] so just to I'm looking for
[6:32:31] clarification,
[6:32:32] David. You know, the the idea of
[6:32:36] not moving forward until WS has made a
[6:32:39] public statement saying we support this
[6:32:42] zoning. If they don't have a specific
[6:32:44] project proposal, it's going to be very
[6:32:46] challenging that for them to come out
[6:32:48] and make that statement publicly. Um and
[6:32:51] you know even in terms of assessing you
[6:32:53] know the financial feasibility if
[6:32:55] they're going to say we might be
[6:32:56] interested in a boutique hotel 10 years
[6:32:59] from now assessing the financial
[6:33:00] feasibility of that hotel based on
[6:33:03] current day is going to be very
[6:33:04] challenging. So I'm struggling at the
[6:33:06] staff perspective to understand what I
[6:33:08] can do as follow-up items that are going
[6:33:10] to make you feel more comfortable with
[6:33:11] moving forward with this proposal. I
[6:33:13] would also say going back to the study
[6:33:16] objectives and incentivizing creating
[6:33:19] strategies and proposals to incentivize
[6:33:21] significant net new commercial tax
[6:33:22] growth.
[6:33:24] You know, part of that and when we set
[6:33:26] out in this project and before City
[6:33:27] Realy entered the picture as the new
[6:33:29] owner of the Chesn Hill Office Park was,
[6:33:31] you know, we're supposed to be creating
[6:33:32] zoning that's going to get developers to
[6:33:35] think more critically about what they
[6:33:37] can do under this upzoning opportunity.
[6:33:39] um that's going to bring additional
[6:33:40] commercial revenue for the town and to
[6:33:42] establish a planning framework for the
[6:33:44] study area. So that's what we put in
[6:33:46] front of you today. Um and then I think
[6:33:49] the benefit of you know the city realy
[6:33:52] being involved in the conversation is
[6:33:53] like we have a very clear picture from
[6:33:55] one particular part of the study based
[6:33:57] on near-term redevelopment in a specific
[6:33:58] proposal what that's going to translate
[6:34:00] to in terms of net fiscal impact. Um, so
[6:34:04] you know, and I think um it would be
[6:34:07] helpful for the economic development
[6:34:08] advisory board to maybe fill in some of
[6:34:10] the additional gaps about, you know, the
[6:34:12] the value of the incentives that we're
[6:34:14] providing in the rest of the study area.
[6:34:16] But I I would like clarification about
[6:34:18] if you are going to be postponing this,
[6:34:20] what specifically do you need in order
[6:34:23] to feel more comfortable with moving
[6:34:24] forward? So specifically for me, I would
[6:34:28] like to see the growth companies WS
[6:34:33] Salvador
[6:34:34] specifically approached about their
[6:34:37] thoughts on the zoning. That doesn't
[6:34:38] mean cave to it, but have a full
[6:34:42] understanding of what they're asking
[6:34:44] for, why they're asking for it, whether
[6:34:47] those tweaks could be made to the
[6:34:50] current zoning or it would require
[6:34:52] abandoning everything. I'm not looking
[6:34:55] everything. I am looking at trying to
[6:34:57] get the zoning to a point where
[6:35:01] everybody can or almost everybody can be
[6:35:04] on board with it where we can have the
[6:35:06] 84% type support at town meeting where
[6:35:09] it passes because what's going to happen
[6:35:11] is if we don't get a twothirds majority
[6:35:14] at town meeting the threemonth delay
[6:35:16] you're talking about will be more it
[6:35:18] could be a never or it could be a much
[6:35:20] longer delay until the next town meeting
[6:35:23] with a totally different proposal. And I
[6:35:25] think what'll happen is if this fails,
[6:35:28] city realy will probably come back with
[6:35:31] a uh housing choice under the housing
[6:35:34] choice statute proposal for housing only
[6:35:37] and that would only require 50% at town
[6:35:41] meeting and maybe they'd have to vote
[6:35:43] for that. That would be uh that would
[6:35:46] not be good for the neighborhood. It
[6:35:47] would be even worse for the town from a
[6:35:49] fiscal perspective. Of course, certain
[6:35:51] housing goals will be met, but from a
[6:35:52] fiscal perspective for a corridor that
[6:35:55] we want to see robust commercial, it
[6:35:57] would really be a lost opportunity. And
[6:36:00] if they don't go that route, if we wait
[6:36:03] maybe a year and a half or so, we're
[6:36:05] going to be under the 10% safe harbor
[6:36:07] threshold. And then there will be not
[6:36:09] one but actually two 40Bs because the
[6:36:13] owner of the 40B uh 40 the approved 40B
[6:36:17] project for Sheath and Hammond has
[6:36:19] already stated that he would build a
[6:36:22] hotel if some kind of zoning uh akin to
[6:36:26] what's being proposed today passes. Uh
[6:36:30] so if this fails, we end up with either
[6:36:34] housing choice or we end up with 240bs.
[6:36:37] We have lost opportunity for net new
[6:36:40] revenue. It would be financially
[6:36:42] disastrous for the town. So, I
[6:36:44] understand that where you're coming
[6:36:46] from, Michael, you're saying given that
[6:36:47] I'm saying we should be supporting this
[6:36:49] now. I I don't think it's going to pass
[6:36:51] now. Not with a developer saying this
[6:36:54] doesn't work and that they won't be able
[6:36:56] to uh add to the net new revenue and
[6:37:00] without really having uh WS on record,
[6:37:04] some of the other owners on record. I
[6:37:07] this to pass. I don't want it to fail. I
[6:37:09] don't want us to be in that position
[6:37:10] where the three month delay turns into a
[6:37:12] never uh or we end up with 240bs.
[6:37:16] We can do a lot better than that for
[6:37:18] this corridor, which is not to say uh
[6:37:22] let's throw out the proverbial baby with
[6:37:24] the bathwater. I'm totally fine with
[6:37:26] putting the 14127. I'm just saying let's
[6:37:31] do it in September to have a little more
[6:37:33] time so that all these groups that are
[6:37:36] that they haven't been sufficiently
[6:37:39] included or that their concerns haven't
[6:37:40] been sufficiently addressed get a very
[6:37:43] public opportunity to do that. And if
[6:37:45] they don't exercise that opportunity
[6:37:48] we're giving them with this extension,
[6:37:50] then that's on them.
[6:37:52] Okay?
[6:37:52] And then we go to town meeting in
[6:37:54] September, town meeting will hear that
[6:37:56] narrative and we'll act accordingly.
[6:37:59] Chair, you have your hand up.
[6:38:02] just I mean just briefly I mean
[6:38:05] the other thing you have to consider
[6:38:07] here is the impact of this decision with
[6:38:10] the overlay on any potential decision
[6:38:11] you make on an override question right
[6:38:15] um what is the narrative you send out to
[6:38:18] the public if you put an override
[6:38:19] question on the ballot what are you
[6:38:21] asking of them for how much and what
[6:38:24] else are we doing to deal with the
[6:38:26] issues of property taxes so I think if
[6:38:30] you're gonna
[6:38:31] think about doing this a different way.
[6:38:35] You have to think about how to tailor
[6:38:36] that narrative accordingly. Um because
[6:38:41] it's,
[6:38:43] you know, the question that I get asked
[6:38:44] at these budget 101 meetings is what are
[6:38:47] you doing besides raising my property
[6:38:49] taxes? Um and I think you got to make a
[6:38:52] strong case that to your point, David,
[6:38:55] what you're doing is you're trying to
[6:38:57] get something passed and you're trying
[6:38:58] to get it you're trying to get it
[6:38:59] through.
[6:39:01] Because you know the the story that's
[6:39:04] going to come out of this is here it is
[6:39:07] another delay. You know a bombshell
[6:39:09] letter on the last at the 11th hour from
[6:39:12] a developer who has been to every single
[6:39:15] meeting. Every single meeting.
[6:39:17] What's just wait let him finish. Okay.
[6:39:22] I mean you jump in too much.
[6:39:24] No it's and I I jumped in on Paul
[6:39:26] earlier so I apologize.
[6:39:28] Raising my hands. you know, like,
[6:39:32] you know, we, you know, it's it's it's
[6:39:36] chum in the water. It's it's it's a it's
[6:39:40] it's such a I'm I'm not going to say
[6:39:43] publicly what I think it is. Um because
[6:39:45] I worry it would have a dilitterious
[6:39:48] impact on the town's bargaining
[6:39:49] position.
[6:39:53] If we're going to let every last minute
[6:39:57] 11th hour thing throw a wrench in the
[6:39:58] proceedings and go chasing after it as
[6:40:01] opposed to at some point putting our
[6:40:03] foot down and saying, you know what,
[6:40:04] we're going to take take the chance. Um,
[6:40:08] then we need to have a really good
[6:40:10] narrative for why we're doing what we're
[6:40:11] doing. And so I I I I hear what your
[6:40:14] narrative is and it makes perfect
[6:40:15] intuitive sense to me. I know the end
[6:40:17] goal here is twothirds vote. So they
[6:40:19] pass this town meeting. I get it. And I
[6:40:22] also think,
[6:40:24] you know, to your point, David, about,
[6:40:26] you know, how making sure these people
[6:40:27] have been heard, these people have been
[6:40:29] heard. This this this objector in
[6:40:32] particular has been heard. So to
[6:40:35] demonstrate to them that there is a
[6:40:37] reward for continuing to assert that you
[6:40:39] have not been heard when that is not
[6:40:41] true,
[6:40:43] what what message are we sending? that
[6:40:45] you can continue to throw that other
[6:40:47] people can continue to throw objections
[6:40:48] that are untrue into the process and
[6:40:50] have a result to Meredith's point that
[6:40:53] people you say you want WS and Salvatore
[6:40:55] involved. They don't want to take a
[6:40:57] public position on this and then that's
[6:40:58] going to be used against us um if we try
[6:41:01] and if we try and make this this point
[6:41:03] go forward. So I I I hear what you're
[6:41:06] saying and I I know that the aim of this
[6:41:08] is true. I would just say think about
[6:41:11] think about shoring up that narrative
[6:41:13] and shoring up that process on a really
[6:41:15] meaningful way because
[6:41:18] the the optics of it from another
[6:41:21] perspective don't look good. So it's
[6:41:23] it's not just the last minute letter
[6:41:26] from growth companies. It's that key
[6:41:29] boards transportation board hasn't even
[6:41:31] approved the traffic plan yet and
[6:41:33] they're they haven't they're not even
[6:41:35] meeting on this until the 18th. We don't
[6:41:37] know what recommendations they're going
[6:41:38] to make. There are still a lot of other
[6:41:41] pieces in the air. And it's even unfair
[6:41:44] to staff, frankly, to expect that they
[6:41:46] can come up with all this and make all
[6:41:48] these pivots in such a short time frame.
[6:41:51] This gives everyone a little more time
[6:41:54] to try to achieve consensus. And I think
[6:41:56] that in anything we do as a town, we
[6:41:59] should be trying to achieve consensus.
[6:42:01] So, it's not just about the developer. I
[6:42:04] I trust what you're saying. I'm not
[6:42:05] challenging what you're saying, but the
[6:42:08] perception could end up being otherwise
[6:42:10] depending on what others might claim at
[6:42:13] town meeting. And I want this to
[6:42:15] succeed. I don't want us to lose this
[6:42:16] opportunity because the alternatives
[6:42:19] that will likely come in its place will
[6:42:21] be much worse.
[6:42:24] U Michael,
[6:42:25] um by the way, let me just add
[6:42:27] something. you know, um the sub the
[6:42:29] what's called the future subcommittee of
[6:42:31] the extension and revenue committee um
[6:42:34] has a draft of a economic development
[6:42:36] commercial development uh paper and one
[6:42:39] of the things they said is that one of
[6:42:40] the problems we have in Brooklyn is that
[6:42:42] we always put something in the way of
[6:42:45] getting things done and you know I'm not
[6:42:48] suggesting that this is exactly what's
[6:42:50] happening now but you know
[6:42:53] um
[6:42:55] it it looks like Brookline again
[6:42:59] get getting itself in the way of a
[6:43:02] project and success. So
[6:43:06] Meredith, can you speak to the
[6:43:09] transportation board's engagement with
[6:43:12] this process thus far and their review
[6:43:14] of plans because it sounds like David
[6:43:17] and potentially Paul are not up to speed
[6:43:20] on those points. So the transportation
[6:43:22] board, the transportation study that we
[6:43:24] conducted as part of this had three
[6:43:26] phases. Existing conditions, conceptual
[6:43:29] improvements, and then there was a third
[6:43:30] phase where we're going to sort of
[6:43:31] pressure test the capacity of the
[6:43:33] existing infrastructure to support the
[6:43:35] increased density with this upzoning.
[6:43:37] So, the transportation board um was
[6:43:40] presented with reviewed the conceptual
[6:43:42] improvement plans that we talked about
[6:43:44] here in the presentation on February 3rd
[6:43:47] and adopted those as a planning document
[6:43:50] for staff to continue to work on and
[6:43:52] develop those plans. So, TA board has
[6:43:55] already sort of um reviewed the scope
[6:43:58] and said, you know, move forward with
[6:44:00] exploring these options for conceptual
[6:44:02] improvements.
[6:44:04] Um the third phase is what they're going
[6:44:06] to be presented with um on Wednesday. I
[6:44:10] apologize it's it's late. Um
[6:44:11] we're going in the second day by the
[6:44:13] way.
[6:44:14] So um
[6:44:17] so they'll be receiving a presentation
[6:44:19] from our consultant about sort of the
[6:44:21] capacity testing for the area. So it is,
[6:44:25] you know, based on a very conservative
[6:44:26] set of assumptions about the level of
[6:44:29] development and the types of development
[6:44:30] that we could potentially expect under
[6:44:32] this zoning and, you know, how the
[6:44:34] existing infrastructure would fare and
[6:44:36] how if you implemented some of the
[6:44:37] conceptual improvements that we'd
[6:44:39] identified, how that could be um
[6:44:41] beneficial in mitigating the impacts of
[6:44:43] the increased trip generation. So TA
[6:44:46] board is going to receive a presentation
[6:44:47] about this from the consultant. our
[6:44:49] staff has the technical expertise to
[6:44:51] sort of you know give commentary about
[6:44:53] sort of the quality and the conclusions
[6:44:54] of KDson's analysis and the TA board
[6:44:56] will be in a position to provide comment
[6:44:58] and have a discussion about that um you
[6:45:01] know and provide some um additional
[6:45:03] thoughts about appropriate next steps
[6:45:04] given the conclusions of that analysis
[6:45:07] but it sounds like those next steps
[6:45:08] could impact zoning in the form of
[6:45:10] certain tweaks that are made
[6:45:12] potentially I mean ultimately we're
[6:45:14] talking about um so you know
[6:45:17] intersection redesign design at Boilston
[6:45:19] Street in Hammond that would, you know,
[6:45:21] help in in mitigating the impacts of
[6:45:23] increased trip generation. That's
[6:45:24] controlled by Mass DOT. In order to move
[6:45:27] any of those concepts forward, we're
[6:45:28] going to really need to engage with City
[6:45:30] of Newton and Mass DOT to keep pushing
[6:45:32] on and creating a sense of urgency about
[6:45:34] how do we move these improvements
[6:45:35] forward. So, in theory, yes. Um, but I I
[6:45:40] really don't see how the outcome is
[6:45:41] going to be any different on the other
[6:45:43] side of that T-board meeting.
[6:45:47] Okay. How do we wrap this up?
[6:45:50] Wednesday.
[6:45:51] Is this hour tonight the last chance we
[6:45:53] have to put these articles on the
[6:45:56] warrant?
[6:45:58] Good question.
[6:45:59] Okay. So, what why don't we put it off?
[6:46:02] I'm not sure how we would determine what
[6:46:04] when we do it and what we do. Well, I I
[6:46:07] I you know, whatever that deadline is,
[6:46:09] if it's a week from now or 10 days from
[6:46:11] now, um you know, I I think one of the
[6:46:15] things we are, you know, really
[6:46:18] wrestling with here is um yeah, there's
[6:46:21] a possible scenario where this other
[6:46:23] developer is just basically trying to
[6:46:25] step in and throw a monkey wrench into
[6:46:27] the works and he doesn't have sincere
[6:46:29] intentions. And um if we could use the
[6:46:33] next seven or 10 days just to have, you
[6:46:36] know, some kind of a, you know, clear uh
[6:46:42] meeting with with this person where we
[6:46:44] demand certain things, you know, if
[6:46:47] you're serious about looking for some
[6:46:50] kind of path to doing a de development,
[6:46:53] you know, prove it. And um, you know,
[6:46:56] and then I think we would at least have
[6:46:59] a better understanding the next time we
[6:47:01] take a vote.
[6:47:03] Are do we have someone who actually move
[6:47:05] upon the total amount of development
[6:47:08] that we're trying to get in this zone or
[6:47:11] don't we? And I think it's worth a shot.
[6:47:15] Okay, Michael.
[6:47:16] Okay. So, just to respond to to your
[6:47:18] point. So, as Meredith mentioned, on
[6:47:21] February 25th, we got a proposal from
[6:47:24] them in terms of what they would like to
[6:47:26] do to redevelopment to redevelop. Um and
[6:47:29] it
[6:47:31] it it basically consisted of uh them
[6:47:35] redeveloping the the six houses that
[6:47:37] they would acquire into housing plus
[6:47:40] parking and redeveloping the Tully
[6:47:42] Street lot into medical office plus
[6:47:44] parking and leaving the other three
[6:47:45] units be because those units are cash
[6:47:48] cows and and they can do wonderful
[6:47:50] things. Um, we could certainly go
[6:47:53] through and identify all the loc all the
[6:47:56] places staff could do this. I believe
[6:48:00] that this proposal is either unclear
[6:48:05] or fails to meet the requirements of the
[6:48:09] zoning whether it's in you know
[6:48:11] sufficient commercial percentage, open
[6:48:13] space requirements, setbacks, etc. And
[6:48:16] we could have that list. Um, and you
[6:48:18] know, we could negotiate on that list,
[6:48:21] which is something that we could do now
[6:48:24] or in 3 months or six months or whenever
[6:48:28] because they still have to acquire
[6:48:30] properties in order to to get this done.
[6:48:33] So, so they're actually
[6:48:37] they're not under the same kind of time
[6:48:39] pressure.
[6:48:40] Yeah. you know, which is just another
[6:48:41] point of the job. But to your question,
[6:48:44] we could go through that exercise and
[6:48:46] and get an answer to the difference. Now
[6:48:50] if you ask me whether we could negotiate
[6:48:52] in seven days across all those
[6:48:54] differences and then for example go back
[6:48:57] to EDAB and go back to the planning
[6:48:58] board you know to make sure that the
[6:49:01] conceptual framework that we and the
[6:49:04] vision that we have is still maintained
[6:49:06] in light of those modifications and also
[6:49:09] of course go back to the neighborhood
[6:49:10] because some of those neighbor some of
[6:49:12] those things for example might impact
[6:49:15] the character of Heath Street which is a
[6:49:17] big neighborhood concern. So it might it
[6:49:20] you know you could you could take a step
[6:49:22] back in that direction. So so you know
[6:49:26] those are things that we could do but we
[6:49:29] can do those things whether this is on
[6:49:30] the warrant or not.
[6:49:32] All I'm looking for is is there a way
[6:49:33] that um you know either after seven or
[6:49:36] 10 days, whatever it is, you come back
[6:49:38] with um now we have a second developer
[6:49:42] who also says this, you know, this is
[6:49:44] good and and we should be going forward
[6:49:46] with with development for the area. Um
[6:49:50] and and he also is interested in
[6:49:53] participating in addition to the first
[6:49:54] developer. Or you could come back and
[6:49:57] say we gave this person a chance to show
[6:49:59] their bonafide and it
[6:50:02] This is a
[6:50:03] so so so the I believe this is my
[6:50:07] opinion and please Meredith I would be
[6:50:09] interested in your opinion as well that
[6:50:11] in seven to 10 days we could not get an
[6:50:14] agreement from this person. One of the
[6:50:17] reasons is there is a risk of what Chaz
[6:50:19] mentioned that they're really just
[6:50:21] throwing chum in the water. They would
[6:50:22] never come to an agreement. But the
[6:50:24] other reason and you know which I think
[6:50:26] is more substantive is that in order to
[6:50:29] come to that agreement we would have to
[6:50:32] make a number of changes to the zoning
[6:50:36] that would
[6:50:38] you know be reflected in the sort of
[6:50:41] overall con construct of that zone
[6:50:46] and and it should properly then go back
[6:50:50] to the other boards and commissions that
[6:50:52] have weighed in on those those
[6:50:57] uh the aspects of the zoning that have
[6:51:01] created that vision.
[6:51:02] Okay. I'd like
[6:51:03] I don't think it's possible.
[6:51:04] Hold on. I'd like to put this on the
[6:51:08] agenda for a future meeting. Can you say
[6:51:10] that that's possible?
[6:51:11] We're running short, very short on time.
[6:51:13] I know, but we're not going to get
[6:51:14] anywhere tonight. Paul.
[6:51:15] Yeah. So I just I I just I want to make
[6:51:17] a a couple of comments because I
[6:51:22] a quick comment.
[6:51:24] Okay. Quick comment.
[6:51:25] Yeah.
[6:51:27] This is important.
[6:51:30] So um I first want to say that
[6:51:35] what is the problem?
[6:51:37] You can't take a vote without holding a
[6:51:39] p a public hearing. Number one. Number
[6:51:41] two, when you look at the agenda, sit
[6:51:44] down, please. This is not a public
[6:51:45] comment. I'm sorry.
[6:51:46] It's so hard for me to talk tonight.
[6:51:48] Even Regina's interrupting me. So, so
[6:51:52] Michael, this narrative that you know
[6:51:54] they're they're inserting something at
[6:51:56] the last minute to blow it up, right? Um
[6:51:59] you we talked about this yesterday. You
[6:52:01] received a note from them a week ago,
[6:52:05] two weeks ago.
[6:52:06] You mean the the the thing on the 25th?
[6:52:08] Well, I I don't know what the date was.
[6:52:11] Janice Khan was copied. She was the
[6:52:13] February.
[6:52:15] and they said the zoning isn't working
[6:52:16] for us, right? Basically, it's not
[6:52:19] working for us. Um and and so but
[6:52:23] this idea that they're trying to tank it
[6:52:25] at the last minute. Um I I just I think
[6:52:28] it's I don't think it's fair because
[6:52:29] they did communicate with you. You
[6:52:31] didn't communicate with us that there
[6:52:33] was another property owner that had an
[6:52:34] issue. So by rights in reality, you
[6:52:38] should have brought it to our attention
[6:52:39] when this thing uh was raised by them
[6:52:41] and and you chose not to. So I I let me
[6:52:44] just you I haven't talked. I've kept my
[6:52:47] mouth shut. Okay, this isn't just about
[6:52:50] one property owner. Okay, city realy.
[6:52:53] It's also about other property owners.
[6:52:55] But the reason for the for suggesting
[6:52:57] that we give this more time is it's not
[6:52:59] just about that property owner. There's
[6:53:01] no support from South Brooklyn 14, 15,
[6:53:04] and 16 said they're not voting for this.
[6:53:07] Okay, they're not. So we don't have
[6:53:09] cons. We don't have near consensus to
[6:53:11] get this thing to a third two-thirds
[6:53:13] vote. You and I talked about this,
[6:53:15] right? Your line of sight isn't there.
[6:53:17] So, I I really want to strongly
[6:53:20] encourage us to do what Chaz suggested,
[6:53:24] what Bernard started with the with the
[6:53:26] uh the motion is to instruct staff to
[6:53:30] come back next week with a package for a
[6:53:34] special town meeting in September,
[6:53:36] either the 15th or 30. find a date in
[6:53:38] the in September, ideally in the second
[6:53:41] half and with the amended articles so
[6:53:42] that we can settle this and put create
[6:53:44] the special town meeting and get it
[6:53:46] settled. Um, that's what I'd like to
[6:53:48] make a motion to vote on tonight.
[6:53:50] Um, maybe it'll pass, maybe it won't,
[6:53:52] but that's I think what
[6:53:53] Okay,
[6:53:54] I'd like to make that motion.
[6:53:56] Okay, Paul,
[6:53:57] anybody second?
[6:53:58] I'll second.
[6:53:59] Meredith, you want to say no?
[6:54:02] Or I'm sorry, Cara. Oh, you just come up
[6:54:05] to get a better view of the slack board.
[6:54:09] Thank you. And uh good morning. I just
[6:54:11] wanted to say that um Meredith and I
[6:54:13] were just comparing notes about some of
[6:54:14] the deadlines that we need to follow for
[6:54:16] planning board
[6:54:18] procedures process. If you still wanted
[6:54:21] for some reason things were to come
[6:54:23] together, if you still wanted to do the
[6:54:25] Mtown meeting, we would probably need to
[6:54:27] we are planning to advertise a week from
[6:54:30] yesterday um this coming Tuesday. So it
[6:54:34] probably if it if you want to go to
[6:54:36] Maytown meeting, we would probably need
[6:54:37] that warrant open and closed and
[6:54:40] executed by Tuesday during your open
[6:54:43] work session. But I'm hearing majority
[6:54:45] of you wanting to shift to the fall
[6:54:48] no matter what. We don't know if it's a
[6:54:49] majority.
[6:54:50] Okay.
[6:54:50] We're going to take a vote. We'll find
[6:54:51] out.
[6:54:52] Okay.
[6:54:54] So, I made a motion to
[6:54:55] Okay. Motion to amend my motion um to uh
[6:55:00] push out the date to September or
[6:55:02] something. Um so, we'll take a vote on
[6:55:05] the mot.
[6:55:13] There's not Well, there's not clarity. I
[6:55:14] just want to make clarity. Bernard, you
[6:55:15] had moved actually the special town
[6:55:17] meeting. Chaz made a case that we
[6:55:19] actually can't do the special town
[6:55:20] meeting tonight. So what he suggested so
[6:55:24] you you can't do you can't do a special
[6:55:25] town meeting for a different date,
[6:55:27] right? You we we we need to go back to
[6:55:29] the drawing board and figure that out.
[6:55:31] So he suggest So what Chaz suggested was
[6:55:33] that we that we vote to direct staff to
[6:55:40] investigate what date in September would
[6:55:42] work. Find the date that works. Um and
[6:55:46] put of the package of the zoning and
[6:55:49] other materials that need to go into
[6:55:51] that because some dates are going to
[6:55:53] change.
[6:55:53] Okay, that's an amendment to my motion,
[6:55:56] which is
[6:55:58] to um approve the special town meeting
[6:56:02] um for September 26th.
[6:56:05] For May 26th,
[6:56:06] I'm sorry. May 26th.
[6:56:08] Y
[6:56:09] um okay. So, we'll vote
[6:56:10] the point of order.
[6:56:12] No, you may not make it. You are not
[6:56:14] You have to respect the point of order.
[6:56:15] No, you may. No, you do not.
[6:56:17] Ma'am, sit down.
[6:56:18] You cannot take a vote on a warrant
[6:56:20] article without holding a public
[6:56:22] hearing.
[6:56:22] This is not a warrant article. This is a
[6:56:24] warrant. Sit down, please. You are out
[6:56:26] of order.
[6:56:27] No, you are out of order. Sit down,
[6:56:29] please. You are out of order.
[6:56:31] We don't have to yell at her. Regina,
[6:56:33] we're not voting on a warrant article. I
[6:56:34] sure am.
[6:56:36] We're not voting on a warrant article. I
[6:56:38] promise.
[6:56:40] Okay. Thank you.
[6:56:41] Okay. I have a request.
[6:56:44] Paul, you had said earlier that you had
[6:56:46] a list of issues that you thought were
[6:56:48] of concern between now.
[6:56:50] I am asking if you would be willing to
[6:56:52] share that list with the select board
[6:56:54] and the staff so that we can review that
[6:56:57] list and understand combination. They
[6:56:59] were all mentioned tonight. David talked
[6:57:01] about the transportation. Um he talked
[6:57:04] about uh the issue with growth
[6:57:06] companies. Um
[6:57:10] there it's been mentioned that we want
[6:57:11] to do due diligence on um hire someone
[6:57:14] to actually be able to sign an NDA with
[6:57:18] uh with city realy and and check the
[6:57:21] financials and make sure that what
[6:57:22] they're saying is true
[6:57:24] but we've done it with every other
[6:57:25] project. Um
[6:57:26] okay wait just just give me your your mo
[6:57:29] your amendment and let's vote on that.
[6:57:31] We're taking up way too much time. Okay,
[6:57:33] I agree with you question Michael just I
[6:57:37] know but
[6:57:38] I I I apologize
[6:57:39] barking
[6:57:41] I'm
[6:57:41] not barking
[6:57:42] you are a little bit but it's it's late
[6:57:44] okay so I made my amendment so
[6:57:48] so repeat it
[6:57:49] so so so the so the proposed motion or
[6:57:52] amendment is that we direct staff
[6:57:56] to come back with a special town meeting
[6:58:01] package for September they'd have to
[6:58:03] figure out when town hall when uh the
[6:58:06] high school is available and the
[6:58:08] associated warrant article whatever
[6:58:11] would go into it um if we need it at
[6:58:14] that time uh for for September
[6:58:18] for
[6:58:22] okay um everyone understand that all in
[6:58:25] favor please indicate by saying I John
[6:58:27] Vansco
[6:58:29] uh
[6:58:31] is the alternative that we can just lay
[6:58:33] this to rest for a week and come back.
[6:58:36] Well, the alternative was going to be um
[6:58:38] the May 26 warrant article or May 26 uh
[6:58:42] town meeting, but if you want to propose
[6:58:45] that um
[6:58:47] well why don't we why don't we say this?
[6:58:49] I'm sorry. I know there's a motion on
[6:58:50] the table, but just to try and satisfy
[6:58:52] everyone.
[6:58:52] Yeah.
[6:58:53] Why don't we come back and update you on
[6:58:54] where we are in a week? Why don't we
[6:58:56] come to your work session and say we've
[6:58:59] identifi here's how far we've gotten on
[6:59:00] September. that would be the last
[6:59:02] possible day to decide whether or not
[6:59:04] you move forward on this. So, you have
[6:59:06] an escape valve there, but we will be
[6:59:08] operating under the assumption that it's
[6:59:09] September. Um, and then we will tell you
[6:59:12] how far we've gotten
[6:59:13] and then if you want to make a motion
[6:59:15] to, you know, call it on call it in May,
[6:59:18] then okay. But our assumption would be
[6:59:20] to go forward in September. But that's
[6:59:22] what gets us that's what gets everyone
[6:59:24] satisfied and gets us out of
[6:59:25] we but we have all the information if we
[6:59:27] want to call it for May. We don't need
[6:59:28] to do any other work.
[6:59:30] No. So, right. So that's if that's what
[6:59:32] what John is suggesting is can you you
[6:59:34] know how late can you keep this May
[6:59:35] option on the table? The answer is to
[6:59:37] next week. So
[6:59:38] what is the additional what's the
[6:59:40] additional information you need for us
[6:59:42] to decide whether we want May or not? I
[6:59:44] mean does the board already have the
[6:59:47] I I mean I I I think some questions have
[6:59:49] been raised about whether we're being
[6:59:51] played.
[6:59:52] Yeah.
[6:59:53] And I I think we we need to figure try
[6:59:55] to figure that out. It's not an easy
[6:59:57] thing to figure out. You know, it
[6:59:59] depends on conversations you have with
[7:00:01] these individuals and whether you think
[7:00:03] that they're being straight with you or
[7:00:05] not being straight with you or, you
[7:00:06] know, what their motivation is and so
[7:00:08] on. And and you know, I I I can't say
[7:00:12] for sure that I know what's going on
[7:00:14] here tonight. I want to know what's
[7:00:16] going on here and you know at least have
[7:00:18] a better understanding of what's going
[7:00:20] on here as to what our options are and
[7:00:22] you know because I don't want to be part
[7:00:25] of delaying this till September and then
[7:00:28] find out
[7:00:30] he wasn't serious about that development
[7:00:32] proposal and furthermore it hinged on
[7:00:34] four houses he said he was going to buy
[7:00:36] that he has no way of buying you know so
[7:00:39] we we need to know a little bit more
[7:00:41] about this this idea that's
[7:00:45] raised that uh there that that there was
[7:00:48] not an opportunity given to another
[7:00:50] developer who was you know credible and
[7:00:52] who had a credible plan
[7:00:55] and I can't swear that it's that I know
[7:00:58] the answer to that question. I I don't
[7:01:00] know if
[7:01:00] how would you determine whether the guys
[7:01:03] So Chad says that they can come back
[7:01:05] next week and and and
[7:01:08] and uh give us guidance as to where we
[7:01:10] go next.
[7:01:12] We're not getting anywhere by continuing
[7:01:15] this discussion. So, I'd like to end
[7:01:17] this meeting in the second day of it.
[7:01:20] Um, and uh, you know, wait for uh, what
[7:01:23] Chaz and staff bring back next week.
[7:01:27] So, John, are you happy waiting till
[7:01:28] next week?
[7:01:30] Yeah, that's what I'm I'm trying to
[7:01:32] Well, that's what I'm trying to
[7:01:33] understand.
[7:01:33] Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
[7:01:35] Okay. So, with that said, I'm going to
[7:01:39] end the meeting.
[7:01:39] You have public comments. public
[7:01:41] comment.
[7:01:41] Regina wants to make that comment. And
[7:01:43] Regina, I um I apologize for being cross
[7:01:46] with you. That was it was not
[7:01:48] appropriate.
[7:01:48] Get out on me and your frustration. It's
[7:01:50] late for me too.
[7:01:51] I understand. I
[7:01:52] And I haven't been rude.
[7:01:54] I apologize that there is a bylaw.
[7:01:57] If you are going to take
[7:01:59] Excuse me. I now have the floor for
[7:02:01] public comment. You don't get to
[7:02:03] interrupt.
[7:02:04] I do.
[7:02:04] No, you don't.
[7:02:05] Town council is the one that gives us
[7:02:08] legal guidance. and don't try to
[7:02:12] push your way into saying that. Now, you
[7:02:13] can make your comment, but we listen to
[7:02:16] town council.
[7:02:16] That's what a point of order is. And and
[7:02:19] Sandy Gatsby was very clear that if you
[7:02:21] don't raise it before there's a vote,
[7:02:23] you lose your opportunity. So, I'm I
[7:02:26] rose before what could have been a vote
[7:02:30] and it's down as on the agenda as if it
[7:02:32] would be a vote. So, I I had to use
[7:02:35] parliamentary procedure. Regina, can I
[7:02:38] make one one quick point? You don't have
[7:02:40] standing to make uh you don't have
[7:02:42] standing in this meeting to to call a
[7:02:45] point of order
[7:02:46] if you're doing a warrant article. I do.
[7:02:48] No, no, you you do not in in you do not
[7:02:51] have standing to make a point for you do
[7:02:52] in town meeting. Well, all town meeting
[7:02:54] members do, but in this body, you in
[7:02:57] this room, you do not have
[7:02:58] because you do run by parliamentary
[7:03:00] procedure. And if you advertise a public
[7:03:03] hearing which is on the agenda,
[7:03:06] maker comments,
[7:03:08] if if I may, the the vote, had we taken
[7:03:10] it tonight, was about whether to put
[7:03:12] something on the warrant, not our
[7:03:14] substantive position.
[7:03:15] I understand that was the final result,
[7:03:17] but that wasn't clear that it would be
[7:03:19] the final result. That's the point.
[7:03:22] Well, that's what was in the agenda.
[7:03:24] So, I still have public comment.
[7:03:26] Yep. Go ahead.
[7:03:27] Yes. Yes.
[7:03:29] Do acquaint yourself with the kind of
[7:03:34] public procedure that is not rude, that
[7:03:39] is inclusive. I sat here all night. I've
[7:03:41] been here since 5:30. There is
[7:03:44] absolutely no reason why you should
[7:03:46] speak to anybody, let alone somebody who
[7:03:48] invests their time, that gets no
[7:03:50] remuneration for it. I don't have a pony
[7:03:53] in that race as far as the names of the
[7:03:56] companies. What I do care about is the
[7:03:59] fact that I see
[7:04:02] proposals for zoning change decade after
[7:04:05] decade where you guys are reactive. You
[7:04:08] are not the leaders. You don't say what
[7:04:10] is the comprehensive plan for Brookline
[7:04:14] that in this case would have included
[7:04:15] this other these other parcels you were
[7:04:17] talking about with I think you said
[7:04:20] globes I don't know who these people are
[7:04:22] there should be one heck of a process
[7:04:24] and it should come out of a consensus of
[7:04:27] the people and you people should not be
[7:04:30] making the final decisions town meeting
[7:04:32] should but you should be giving us all
[7:04:34] the resources we need to understand what
[7:04:37] the options are. We've done that in the
[7:04:40] past for the B2. We've done it at other
[7:04:43] times. We just town meetings should be
[7:04:46] educated with the kinds of skills that
[7:04:48] our planning department has and the
[7:04:51] rigor of questions. That does include
[7:04:53] public rigor as well. We need a grand
[7:04:56] plan for that whole section. We've been
[7:04:58] wanting that section developed for a
[7:05:00] long time. Nobody I know is against it.
[7:05:03] It's the question of how does it do it
[7:05:05] and how does it serve the public in the
[7:05:07] end at large and all of the the
[7:05:09] stakeholders including the abutters. So
[7:05:12] the process, if you can do something
[7:05:15] over the summer, if that ends up being
[7:05:16] how it is handled, you need to do an
[7:05:19] extraordinary outreach to the neighbors
[7:05:21] as well as townwide to come to every
[7:05:24] meeting so that we do hear every single
[7:05:26] proposal. And we make a judgment at at
[7:05:30] those meetings as to how good faith the
[7:05:33] players are. So I don't know who these
[7:05:36] globals are. I don't know who city is,
[7:05:38] but I want to make that judgment by
[7:05:40] seeing them in action. And this is quite
[7:05:42] a curveball thrown into the mix. I grant
[7:05:46] you because I don't know any why it
[7:05:48] waited this long. I don't know who these
[7:05:50] people are. Maybe they're last minute 11
[7:05:52] hour planners. Maybe they didn't have
[7:05:54] their funding for some of the plan
[7:05:56] they're thinking of. They needed the
[7:05:58] bank to to back it. I don't know any of
[7:06:00] those things. and all of those things,
[7:06:02] but it should be something that is
[7:06:03] discussed by the public in front of the
[7:06:06] public with the public for the public.
[7:06:08] Thank you.
[7:06:11] Thank you. Okay, with that, the meeting
[7:06:13] is over.