Uh not can't remember off the top of my head. >> All right. So um welcome everyone to the advisory committee meeting of Tuesday, October 21st. We have four items on the agenda
tonight. Uh discussions of four different warrant articles. Article two regarding collective bargaining. Article 15 LGBTQIA and Pride Month. Article 17 regarding tree preservation. And article 18 a
resolution about preserving recording and preserving the recordings of meetings. Um, if there are members of the public who wish to comment on any of these items, drop your name in the chat
and Harry will uh call on you. >> Sean Lynn Jones. >> Thank you very much. Um, I have a very brief comment on article 17. Uh, substantively it's great. The petitioners have devoted a lot of time.
So has town staff and I have no substantive substantive objections. Uh, I just want to help out the advisory committee here by cleaning up a couple of little things in the text of the article as posted um in the agenda packet for this meeting. Um first um the
usual deletion of the stuff at the end like the explanation and or needs to happen and stuff at the front like um the names of the petitioners and voted needs to be put in the proper form. I assume you can take care of that. Um I
also think that Jack Schlifer's title is not urban forest manager but urban forestry manager. At least that's what he uses in his email. And it's currently forest, not forest tree in operative paragraph 7. So, let's put the
tree back in forestry and uh fix that typo. But the bigger typo seems to me an oper seems to be an operative paragraph three. If you look at the third sentence, it's not really a complete sentence. It seems to be missing a verb.
the existing conditions plan along with their condition and rationale for removal and reviewed with the design review committee and the public at a public meeting. Okay. >> Can I interrupt for a second, Sean,
because I that looks to me like it should be entirely removed as a scrivener's error because of the next paragraph which follows. >> I believe so. Although it also could be redundant with the sentence that precedes it,
>> right? I mean, I was going to ask I was going to ask during the discussion whether that was just discriminator error. I'm sorry to interrupt >> to point it out now before it got to town meeting and um you know the usual confusion might ensue.
Um and so I have to go to another meeting. I leave it to you to resolve these weighty issues, but I wanted to help you clean up the language here. It may be that in the second sentence of that
paragraph three, if um existing conditions were inserted between the and the plan, that would make things clear. And then you could delete the third sentence. But that's all I have to say.
Um, you know, I I hope that there's unanimous agreement for this article at the advisory committee everywhere else and in town meeting because it really has been um, you know, reflects a lot of work by the petitioners and um, you know, an important problem is being
addressed here and town staff has been deeply involved and is on the same page. So um, we we might really have a a true consensus. Thank you for listening. >> So thank you Sean. The first two things that you mentioned are routine part of
the cleanup that we do as part of as part of publishing. Um the question about uh the title and uh the other we'll we'll we'll try to resolve during the discussion. It's not the first time that there's been a typo in this job title, but you
know I did double check with the emails that the urban forestry manager is sending and that's how he lists his title as forest tree. He also just passed his, you know, license exam too to become an official, you know, arbury's tree warden, you know, person,
which is, uh, great, good news. Uh, and so, uh, at some point you'll hear from Jack Schlifer about that, but just came from the tree planting committee where he announced that, you know, information. >> Thank you. >> Right. Thank you, Mr. Lynn Jones. Um
before we um before we uh move on to our agenda for tonight, um I have one um quick announcement which is that our our body is now comprised of 29 members rather than 30. Um as of
two days ago, >> Sunday, >> um Sunday, um Ben Bernbalm has uh stepped down from the advisory committee. Um, and you know, despite the fact that I offered to give him back his bottle of, you know, Knob Creek whiskey,
it it wasn't enough. So, um, so the moderator has made no um uh announcement of of his intentions with what to do with that extra uh spot, but we'll keep you posted when when we know. and we
will um by the time the spring budget season rolls around, we will clearly want to find another person to add onto the school's um subcommittee. So, you know, keep your eyes and ears open, I guess. Um so, let's move on to uh
warrant article two. Is Chris, are you going to present that? >> I think Harry Boris did the write up, so he should present. very bear the brunt of it. Right. Okay. >> This is night. >> All right. I'm I'm going to point out
that uh Ann Hespa is here with us this evening and so um I won't go into excruciating detail. She can she can answer questions and spackle in the details and correct my
errors. So, um I will start with um this is a there's a ratified contract and it's asking town meeting to uh to to um fund it. Um and this is a firefighters contract with local 950.
It is a three-year agreement for FY 252627. Um the wage increases are uh 2% 2% 1.5% uh respectively. Um there of course
other things in this agreement that that add to the price as well. Um within it there are increased educational incentives and um in the packet is the whole breakout so you can see how this works. Um
what we did not ask um is what percentage of the fire force um has these different sorts of degrees or not? Just you know give us a sense of the loading there. Um there's also uh has
been uh increase in the five-year tenure step um at 3% each. Um and there's a very interesting uh component which is the sick day buyback. So um right now if
you've accumulated sick time when you go to leave you can cash out um up to 500 hours. Uh there are some people who have more than that. Um, traditionally it seems that that most people within the
force tend to use what time they have. Um, so how this actually plays out over time remains to be seen. But uh the new structure is that you get to cash out
onethird of what you have banked up to um you can apply that one-third up to 2184 hours. So if it if any hours beyond that that one-third redemption rate doesn't
apply to. So this is a a significant change. Um, part of the reasoning for all of this is that we've known that we've had overtime issues from time to time in the fire
department. Um, some of these things are unavoidable. People have injuries. Uh, people get grave illnesses, whether it's a a cancer or something else. Um, and those things you don't really control for. Um that's that's when life inserts
itself um perhaps unfairly but it does. Um other things may be controlled for at least incentivized and one of those is calling in sick. Um so part of this would be create an incentive for people
not to call in sick but maybe try and save some of their time. Um in addition there's u two other incentives. um one more so than the other and that is within this contract there's a 2% uh
weekend differential rate um for whatever reason I'm sure it's just you know random statistical clustering but sick time or sick use seems to ramp up on the weekends um and so adding 2%
differential rate for the weekends um might bring some of that down uh they've also ex expanded ended um the sick note uh requirements. So, it's also going to include uh deputy fire chiefs. So, that
rolls in there as well. um things that are not financial costs that are also uh part of this agreement is that the town, assuming that this gets
funded um and it goes forward, will step back from the skeleton day provision um that they posited earlier in the year. If you'll recall, they were looking at the cost of overtime, um the financial
stress on the town, which is significant and touches everything. Um and looked at there may be times when we are say summer months, you can move around easier um and people are calling in sick
that we may change how we staff the uh fire apparatus. Um and this was not something that was well embraced by the union as you can understand. So the town will step back from that. Um and on the
union side they will give up some of the grievances that they now have pending. Um so those are just sort of add-on items that are part of this. Um I think that's pretty much it. When we
looked at this, we were struck that um this agreement is both reasoned and reasonable. I suppose to a certain extent. Uh this is sort of a three-year experiment to see if any of these incentives work toward holding down
overtime costs. We will know. Um, time will tell and hopefully we don't get back to the point where we're grappling with that or that the town feels that it wants to reintroduce the um the skeleton manning again. Um, but that would not be part of this three-year agreement. The
town has agreed to step back and I will leave it to uh other members of the subcommittee or an Braa to uh fill in any details or make corrections. Miss Braa, do you have anything to add to that report? I know you'll be
available for questions, of course. Or >> Ann Braga, HR director for the town of Brooklyn. Um, Harry got to most of it. Um, one thing I will just clarify is that skeleton days is not the same as the flexible staffing that we talked
about in the spring. Um, and that skeleton days was a provision that was added to the fire contract in 1971. And it provided that if um other town employees were um um told that they um did not have to
report to work, so think COVID um snow day, that kind of thing, that the union would get um an additional either days pay or a day off. And um since it hasn't been implemented since 1971 and the um original need for it
given the current work environment has has changed um that was one of the things we asked to have removed. Um, and uh, Harry, to answer your question, um, because I looked this up from our previous meeting, um, of our 150 or so
uh, firefighters, 75 have some sort of, um, continuing education post high school, um, five have um, sort of shorthand taken a few classes, but are no longer pursuing um, actively an associates or a bachelor's. we have 47
with bachelor's degrees and 22 with um associates degrees. So it's um it's a lower percentage than if you look at um police officers on the other side. >> Okay. Still about half, >> right? And and they are um as we
discussed um they have to be degrees related to firefighting and not like as as sort of the commentary was around it's not basket weaving. >> Great. uh questions or anybody from the subcommittee want to add anything uh before we go to questions or comments
from the full body. >> Um the only thing I' I'd add is uh it's estimated that the total rollout cost over the three years for this is $4,827 and uh800 I mean 4,827,894.
And just a note that um 2.3 million of that will be back in >> there. Would you do me a favor? >> Could you bring >> um just a note that um $2.3 million of
that 4.8 is backend loaded as um effective on the 30th of June 2027. So it will actually kick into gear and cost in fiscal 28. Okay. >> Questions or comments from any members
of AAC? >> Yes, Lindolson Pelky. >> Thank you. Um, I'm just looking for some more clarity on the policy about the sick time and how that is changing. I
was confused whether the value was being reduced or the hours being reduced by a third. So, currently >> go over that. Thanks. >> Sure. Currently, townwide, all the um employees have a $5,000 cap for buyout
of sick time when they leave town service. Um unless they are terminated for cause. Um the union looked to be able to increase that benefit for employees who um are leaving
without being terminated for cause. So that's retirement uh moving to another community, etc. And to have that be um no longer capped at a dollar amount. So $5,000 based on their annual rate isn't a whole lot of hours. Um so the
conversation was had around um the there's no cap on earning the number of hours. Um but if you're looking to buy out um when you leave service um 2184 is the equivalent of one year's worth of
hours that um a firefighter would normally be scheduled for. And um the cap on the buyout would be a third of that 21.84 um even if they had 6,000 hours on the books for example. Um and so um it's
around um 700 hours max times whatever their hourly rate is is the new maximum that firefighters could get paid out upon retirement. Um the hope is that um folks will not try to um be out for an
extended period of time um as they go to retire and um um look to what what would be termed burn their their sick time before they leave um because that costs us more money if they're out sick as far as
coverage goes. So that's uh again on the intended attendance incentive particularly in the folks that have have worked for the town longer and um have a higher cost for us um that they would um you know stay showing up to work and and not be out for an extended period of
time before they leave. >> So is this a similar are you attempting to negotiate this type of change with other employee unions? >> Not at this time. Okay, thank you.
>> I think Harry just said Alec Leovitz. >> Yes, >> thank you. Uh thank you Harry and Dennis. Um uh quick question uh for you Ann and thank you for being here tonight to to present and answer questions. Um I wanted to follow up a little bit about the weekend shift differential.
>> Sure. We had a long conversation about this back in July when we were considering a reserve fund transfer for uh fire department overtime funding. Um at that time I I think it was at least my impression that the shift differential may have been rolled out at
the beginning of fiscal year 26. Is that the case? >> Um we did not have a settled contract that was funded by town meetings. So we could not roll that out. >> Okay. Interesting. So, so the shift differential has not been paid at all up to this point. >> Not been paid. So, what will happen is
because this is a a fiscal 25 through 27 um agreement, the um let me just just looking at this. The um weekend differential is effective on the first day of fiscal 27. So, it would be um
July of next year that this would start. So, there'd be no no retro on this. the retros for um employees, assuming this passes at town meeting in November, um would only be um the 2% for fiscal 25
and the 2% for fiscal 26. Um and obviously that's a halfyear retro. Um, the other items, as I said, are all back and loaded either into fiscal 27 or on the last day of fiscal 27. Um, in the
hopes that we could, um, give ourselves more lead time to sort of manage the the fiscal nuances of the situation um, you know, we find ourselves in. >> Okay. Uh, thank you for that. Um, I do I will just flag that, you know, at our
conversation around the reserve fund transfer, one of the things that we talked at length with Charlie Young about was the fact that this shift differential was the town's effort to control the growth in overtime costs by reducing u the need for OT shifts from
from fire department employees calling out on the weekends. And at that meeting, we had actually I maybe it may have just been me, but I I would guess that others were under the misapprehension that that some form of that differential had already been rolled out. Um because we had actually
requested that Charlie come back this December to give us an update on trends in overtime utilization given the roll out of the shift differential. So, um, that may represent just a miscommunication between the town and the advisory committee or I may have
just been personally under a misapprehension. Um, but I did just want to flag that because I I think we did discuss that at length back in July and we are hopeful that this will be a good tool for us to use to reduce overtime cost growth. Um, so uh you know I'll
just say we're looking forward to seeing how impactful this will be in FY27. Um and I I think we'd we'd like updates on on the progress there in reducing OT utilization going. >> Sure. So, one of the things that we talked about is, you know, yes, this is
um a cash incentive to have people um not call out on the weekends. Um, one of the commitments that the union gave us was to work to the best of their ability to work with their members to be like, listen, you know, the the the folks who
um end up on on what we call in in in HR is end up on sick notes because they've been out more than the um attendance policy allows. um that the union will be working with members to be like, you know, um
uh basically to tell them to cut it out, you know, that taking taking the single days on a sunny Friday, a sunny Saturday, or you know, they're if they're ski folks on a snowy Friday and Saturday to go skiing. Um I'm a beach person, so you know, calling out sick on
a snow day just isn't my thing. Um but you know working with the members for them to understand that this is this is part and parcel of of the you know the labor management relationship that you know um folks need to show up to work.
um firefighters are scheduled to work 92 days a year out of 365. And um that's, you know, the the schedule that they have and and that they signed up for and and you know, the goal is that they're aside from their
contractual leave time that they're um coming in when they're scheduled to work. >> Thank you. Um Janice Khan. >> Yes. And um again um thank you Ann for
being here. So um so the other incentives that had been put in place to try to um lower overtime use. Um so the flexible days, those stay. Um, so the the chief doesn't have
discretion over that if a firefighter asks for a day that um is granted. So there were no changes to the things that were done prior contexts. >> Um I'm confused as to what you're asking. >> Okay. So, right, um, one of the issues
was, um, that there were, I think, five days that could be requested at any time and granted without the chief having to um, you know, look at how many people are working that day, whatever. I mean,
that was also part of the overtime, >> right? So the the five and six days um request, so the five days in the in the winter and the six days during the summer um is still in place. >> Okay, great. >> And we still have to um staff that and
it's staffed with overtime. Um we also have um the issue around, you know, folks that are out on IOD. Currently we have about 17 people out on injured on duty for various reasons, both short and long term. And um you know, that has an
impact as well. Um but looking at you know um to the extent possible is is you know aside from requesting time off and being granted obviously IOD and long-term either FMLA or um sick leave
um that the sort of single day bangouts um be reduced and then where the others can be done either through health and safety uh you know for firefighters and and how they do their work um you know look looking at those things as well.
>> Thank you. >> That um appears to be all the questions. >> All right, then I think we're ready for a motion from the subcommittee. Harry, >> sure. We would move favorable action on funding uh this contract as as presented.
>> Right. So that's favorable action on warrant article two to fund the ratified firefighters contract. Uh let me share my screen. >> Michael Burgerer. >> Yes.
>> Harry Bors. >> Yes. >> Cliff Brown. >> Yes. >> Anthony Buono. Uh >> we are getting used to not being after Ben Durbam anymore.
Uh, did you vote? I didn't hear a vote. >> Oh, I did. I voted yes. Sorry. >> Okay, thank you. Elise Coutur Stone, >> yes. >> John Dogget, >> yes. >> Harry Freriedman, >> yes. >> David Mark Goldstein, >> yes.
>> Neil Gordon, >> yes. >> Harry Gman, >> yes. >> Kelly Hardbeck, >> yes. >> Alisa Jonas, >> yes. Janice Khan, >> yes. >> Brian Lad,
>> yes. >> Alec Levitic, >> yes. >> Carol Levin, >> yes. >> Liz Linder, >> yes. >> Pam Lodish, >> yes. >> Jocelyn Murphy,
>> yes. >> Danell O'Neal, >> yes. >> Linda Olsen Pel, >> yes. >> Ran Pearller, >> yes. David Pa, >> yes. >> Carlos Ridujo,
not here yet, perhaps. Margaret Robotham, >> yes. >> Lee Selwin, >> I don't believe Lee is here. And Carlos, if he does come, will be late. >> Late. Right. Christine Westfall. >> Yes.
>> Okay. 25 in favor, none opposed, and no abstensions. We're going to recommend favorable action on warrant article 2. Thank you to the subcommittee. Thank you, Ann. Uh, so let's move on to warrant article 15. I'm not sure who's presenting for
the subcommittee. >> That's that's me, Dennis. >> Go ahead, Alec. >> All right. Thank you. Um, so Warren Article 15 is a resolution um that calls for Brooklyn to recognize and celebrate LGBTQIA+
pride month each June. Um, and also um urges the select board to acknowledge several other dates of importance to the community. Um, I will note, uh, for reference, there is an amended version of the warrant article that was crafted
between the petitioners and the human services subcommittee. Um, you'll note that is available in the packet, a redlinined version um, at the end of the report posted there. Uh, just wanted to reference that because you will hear me make reference to the original version and the amended version going forward.
Um, the dates in the original version that are uh singled out for select board recognition include the International Transgender Day of Visibility, the International Day against Homophobia, Bifobia and Transphobia, the anniversary of the Stonewall riots, National Coming
Out Day, and the Transgender Day of Remembrance. Um these are not separate celebrations that should be noted just um date recognitions from the select board um or um in the case of the amended article from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Um so during the petitioner presentation um lead petitioner Kevin McKenzie articulated the significance of the resolution um emphasized the need for the town to support the LGBTQ plus community. Um and it this was particularly notable in light of recent actions taken by the federal government
and several state governments throughout the country. Um it was pointed out that historically while many of these observances have been led at the federal and state governmental levels, recent shifts in governmental attitudes um may necessitate local communities to step up
uh and take a more proactive role in asserting values of equality and respect. Um, and that by recognizing the commemorative dates set forward in Warren Article 15 and establishing a town pride celebration, Brooklyn would reaffirm its commitment to supporting the LGBTQ plus community uh against the
rising challenges and political um environment occurring nationwide. Um, subcommittee discussion touched on a number of topics. Um, there were concerns raised by some members about the broad scope of Warrant Article 15. Um, and the potential distraction that
could cause from uh what is largely focused on a pride celebration that's more similar to some of the other heritage and group associated celebrations Brookline currently organizes. Um, some members of the subcommittee felt that this could lead
to a conversation that would be more difficult around the equity between various cultural and social groups with the number of observances. Um, and there was in general a strong sentiment that the resolution should um focus uh more on the pride celebration aspect uh of
its original draft. Um, Chair Granoff, uh, who regretfully could not be here this evening, um, proposed a new whereas clause, um, that was added to the resolution with the consent of the petitioners, um, which states that the Commonwealth and the city of Boston as
well as many other municipalities in the US recognize um, June as Pride Month um, and helped to give some more logical flow and assert the existing precedent for Warrant Article 15. Um the subcommittee also discussed whether uh
the number of commemorative days aimed at the select board should be limited uh in order to focus the resolution more specifically on pride month. Um it was as I mentioned expressed that there was concerns about the potential focus in the warrant article. Um and in
addressing this concern, the subcommittee proposed and the petitioner agreed to remove the seventh therefore clause in the original draft. Um which is the clause that resolved town meeting recognize various occasions beyond the
official Pride Month celebration. Um this was largely done to prevent redundancy and to minimize potential objections to the Warren article um on being too broad. Um we did do some exploration of the potential financial implications of warrant article 15. Um
this is mainly uh this information came mainly from director Gelano um from the office of diversity, equity, inclusion and community relations. Um and he estimated that a single event pride month celebration uh would incur costs for the town between 1,00 and 2500
annually which includes staff time expenses, coordination costs, refreshments uh and materials for that celebration. Um these costs are very much in line with uh several of the other um similar celebrations that are currently uh put on by the town. Um and
Dr. Dr. Galano further estimated that about 144 hours of staff time uh would be required to execute a celebration annually each year. Um, and through I I I'll just further note in concluding here that um we felt
and the subcommittee expressed that Warren Article 15 was very much in keeping with the values of Brooklyn um that it's something that has value to LGBTQI plus residents um and particularly is poignant in light of the changing federal um circumstances in the
country. Um, and finally, as I mentioned, you can see the redlined amended version at the end of the report. And I would just note uh for consideration this evening, we did receive a scope ruling from the moderator on some of the proposed changes um that were out of scope. In
particular, the moderator ruled that the proposed changes we made to resolve clause 8 were beyond the scope of warrant article 15. And those changes um redirected the resolution from town meeting urging the select board to
recognize the individual days of commemoration I mentioned previously to directing that urging to the Commonwealth. Um because the original resolution makes no reference beyond Brookline, the moderator did rule that to be out of scope. Um so when we get to
a motion later this evening uh based on our our deliberation we we may we will likely not be taking up the um subcommittee's original proposed motion uh as we will need to address that one particular scope ruling. Um and I'll conclude there.
>> So before I go to um Mr. McKenzie to add um any um comments from the petitioner's perspective. Um it's going to be really important, Alec, when a motion comes up that we have something that can be uh voted on that is that we can report in
that you know that Lisa can report and that we can put put in our packets. So if you have the ability to redline the red line into a thing that we can display later, that would be great. >> Yeah, I I can absolutely do that. And and I'll just note that the moderator did uh in issuing his ruling um provide
two alternatives that would be within scope. Uh one being just a return to the original language. Um the other being uh he he provided another example that um would shift the language from the town meeting urging the select board to um
officially recognize or commemorate these uh days to the select board or urging the select board rather to officially acknowledge uh the following occasions. So both the original language and quote the official acknowledgement language have already been judged to be within scope by the moderator. Um so
with that I I'll conclude. Okay. All right. Kevin, if you have anything you'd like to add, um, this would be a great time to >> Yes, I do. And I'll just note that I believe um, one of my co-etitioners, Bitsy Pearlman, TMY member, precinct 6, is here. Um, so if it's okay if they add on after I finish. Um, so I'm Kevin
Mackenzie, town meeting member of precinct 13, as well as the town's chair for the commission for diversity, equity, inclusion, and community relations. Um I'm the lead petitioner on this Warren article as well as several of the other openly LGBTQIA plus town
members um in Brooklyn meeting. Um one of the things I will note is I'm deeply appreciative of the advisory committee subcommittee's support and partnership on working to amend war article 15 and there are elements of it that I still do
and my co-pic and I believe are still friendly amendments. Um and also just best practices whether that's changing the language the wording from past uh resolutions that would say you know make statements to town meeting urges things to just be most in practice with what
authority town meeting actually has. Um and when it comes to the those additional dates of commemoration, um I I personally feel and I believe several of my co-petitioners as well feel it is important that the that town meeting again in the absence of federal
leadership still and as a continu as we continue to see different state governments throughout the country um you know sort of undo those days as well. Um, and so again, just Alec stated those. I'm not going to restate all of them. There are several of them. Um, but again, when we say things like I know
the original language proclaim, I'm totally open to the moderator suggestions um in terms of asking the select board. Um, whether it's, you know, instead of proclaim, officially acknowledge or recognize um to give them the flexibility that they see fit to acknowledge those. Um, and just
personally, this is a resolution, right? It's not a bylaw. It's not a mandate. This is a resolution. It's an expression of what town meeting would like. Um it's not a demand of what is going to happen. And so the select board can implement this as they see fit. The same is true
for the office of diversity, equity, commun uh sorry, diversity, equity, inclusion, and community relations as well as the commission which is flagged in it. Again, just to disclose of which I am the chair. Um we have also recently established a subcommittee for commemorations and observations which
would support the office in that work and advise select board and the full committee sorry the full commission on those issues as such. Um so I as we drafted it we did want to ensure flexibility for the bodies that would be impacted by it at town level down to
board level um to allow them to implement it the way they see fit. Um, Alec did mention that there could be a potential cost for a new celebration, and that is true, but we're likely years away from a new celebration taking place. Those take years of planning,
expertise, collaboration. Um, but what Brookline does have at the moment is sort of a hodgepodge of events that take place during LGBTQIA pride month that different town bodies or departments sponsor. Whether that's the public works department in conjunction with the
school department to paint crosswalks outside different elementary schools each year or whether it's the programing the library does. Um, ODICR has promoted that, but there again hasn't been that sort of centralized town celebration. So, in the interim, a way that that
could be celebrated is just I don't know if any of you had seen and I shared it with the Tamil member reserve. I believe all of you on it as AC members and I'm sorry I'm taking up so much of your time. I apologize. Um that they shared an infographic of all the different events during Indigenous People's Day month happening on different days beyond
just a talent celebration. Um a pride month celebration could just be sort of a centralized poster highlighting those existing events. It could be the aspiration that we one day work towards a family-friendly pride month celebration. It the way that the resolution is written because again it's
a resolution, right? It's not a mandate. It's not a it's not a bylaw saying that this has to happen. It's to done to give those who will make those decisions the flexibility to do that. And that includes a select board when it comes to acknowledging those different um days
and months of significance in the LGBTQI community, whether that be international um transgender visibility or whether it be national coming out day. uh some difference municipalities specifically south of in the south of the country will celebrate pride instead
of over the summer when it's the weather's more aggressive will actually have their pride month or not sort of their pride month but with their pride parades in October because the weather is friendlier. Um other places like Philadelphia for example have out national coming out day sort of
festivals that weekend. So, there's options, but again, as Alex said, it's not calling for a different event for each of those dates. It's calling for the select board. And again, I know the original language proclaim, and I really appreciated the subcommittee offering
different suggestions. Um, and again, I was personally willing to change to the state level. The moderator ruled out of scope. Um, so I'd prefer to see it transferred to the select board now. um however they would like to acknowledge it. Whether that be an announcement by a member at the beginning of a meeting,
the week of or the month of, whether that be something posted on the town calendar um where you know different events are happening that this date is this is this thing or whether that be you know the town social media accounts posting a certain thing or whoever you
know is in charge of or helps the town administrator with his newsletter acknowledging certain dates of observance. Um, so part of the intention is to allow maximum flexibility for those who are responsible for again quote unquote implementing something that again it's not a mandate but a
resolution. Um and the the commission that I chair the you know the CDICR our acronym changes every now and again but C DER as it's been called an advisory committee um we're here to support whe whether it's the select board whether it's the town whether it's anybody else
in ensuring that this gets implemented the way that they would like to see it implemented too. Whether that's writing the proclamations and the statements they read annually whether it's advising them on brush practices whatever it really is that they would like to see from us. Um, and so that's where I'll leave it. Um, and I know that again
Bitsy is here, so I is it okay if I just pass to Bitsy to see if they would like to add anything? >> Yes, go ahead. >> Thank you, Dennis. >> Uh, thank you everyone for for meeting, for hearing this. Um, I don't think I
have anything uh particularly uh long to add. just you know as the national environment has changed sort of the places where Brookline uh isn't I guess acknowledging or officially acknowledging these things have become
more clear and so you know I feel like in in years past like it would have been lovely to have this acknowledgement but it wouldn't have been quite as meaningful but especially with everything being under attack you know having Brooklyn apart from Boston have you know just like this is pride and
this has a place in our community. I think would be particularly meaningful um to you know everyone in the community but uh to people in schools in particular you know to the children who live here. So that's all I have. Thank you very much for for having us and
debating this. >> Thank you Harry. >> Uh Denell O'Neal. Uh thank you Harry. Um and thank you for putting forth this uh resolution Kevin. Um so just a couple of things. I have a
question. Um just wanted to quick comment Harry. I'm sorry. Um so it it's tough every February to even have the select board members read out the names of the enslaved in Brooklyn. Um, so it
down to the statements and all that, it's going to be difficult for the select board to do that unless they're prompted. So, I will say that or unless somebody from the community um recognizes it during like a select
board meeting or something like that. Um, I had a question about like, and I asked this during a subcommittee meeting of like where the bucket of money um, the one to $2,500 would actually come from. Um,
someone mentioned fundraising. Um, uh, h have have, um, that community looked into doing some fundraising and and, um, things like that. Um, so I mean resolutions,
uh, you know, some resolutions cost money obviously and so there has to be a bucket of money for where it comes from. So I just want to know if there's any ideas of where that little bucket of money would come from. That's all. Thank you.
>> I I is that to the petitioners? I I'm happy to report from the subcommittee, but Danell is on the subcommittee. Go ahead. >> I sorry to interrupt Alec, but if people I can also share um I spoke to Lloyd um Dr. Galano earlier today too on this topic. >> Yeah, go go go ahead Kevin.
>> Yeah. Um so again it sort of depends on how the office decides to implement it um in the immediate short term. Again sort of my vision um as lead petitioner and I think co-partitioners also understand this and the office is in the same place capacity is limitated is limited. it would probably be a couple
fiscal years until, you know, that $2,000 cost could be incurred. Um but one thing I will just quickly note as chair of CD CDEICR is that there is u money sort of somewhat affiliated with my commission isn't touched um or used
by the commission itself that can get reallocated or whatever might be um and since we've recently established the um subcommittee this our new subcommittee on celebrations observations that might be an existing financial allocation made that could be tapped into by the office if the office itself deems that as wise
I won't tell the office what to do with right? That's that's they're the professionals. They know it's due. Um, but I just wanted to note that there might be already some money that exists allocated that we're not tapping into. >> Yeah, I I guess I'm all right. Thank you, Harry. >> Thank you, Danell. Um, Elise Couture
Stone. >> Hi. Thank you. Um, so Kevin, thank you so much for sharing this. Um and um I had a lot of questions before actually hearing um Alex um sort of reprisal of
of how your meeting went. I guess my questions to you are is you know as someone who knows and understands what it costs and the sort of person power it takes to put together let's say a large scale really fun um celebration that I
think would be worthy of this cause. Um as you noted you said that that might take a couple of years before we could do that. um in the interim period, what would be meaningful do you think to this
community that would show that for Brookline to show our support? Um and >> well, I'll leave it at that. Okay. Thank you. >> Uh sorry, was that a question for me as lead petitioner at least? Yes.
>> Ah, okay. Um, I think it, you know, there are sort of four events that come to mind in town for me. Um, we have the annual MLK Junior celebration. We have the annual Junth celebration now, which is a wonderful event. Also in June, we have the annual indigenous people's day
celebration, and we have the annual AAPI Heritage Month celebration. Um, and town meeting did recently pass a resolution to establish some form of an annual um, Jewish American Heritage Month resolution as well. Um but that hasn't sort of formalized the same way the other four have. Um so I think something
that again one day would be not on the same level but sort of in a similar spirit to those would be desirable for the community. Um and in the interim I think there is that again that existing programming that exists but isn't sort of formally promoted by the town itself
or the diversity office as a package deal. That can be just sort of a hey we see you we support you. here's the things we're doing to support you and we're going to package it together for you so that you know what's happening. Um, and just an asterisk I'll add to that briefly is that one element I think
that's important for Pride Month and just LGBTQI individuals in general is to really indicate that a lot of the stuff is familyfriendly, right? Like LGBTQI individuals can be any age, whether that age is seven or 75. It it it really can happen at any point in time. Um, so
offering something that everyone in the community can really come together around is important, whether that's painting the crosswalk, whether that's a book reading at the library, or whether it's a new event that we aspire to establish one day. Um, but in the interim, I think sort of making sure
that LGBTQIA residents and community members see that they're recognized and and supported by the town and then separately know what those events are and that those allies in the community know what those events are that they can attend is an important first step.
>> Okay. So if I'm hearing you correctly, I think then the way to interpret this resolution then would be to create an affirmative space across cultural organizations and
institutions until the town can specifically um host like a really great party. Is that what I'm understanding? >> Yeah. And if the town can get to that point for that really great party, quoteunquote, great. Um, and if not, you
know, there's some things in the mean in the meantime that we have that we can celebrate and elevate in the meantime. >> Yeah. And I think like Kevin said, you know, the library does a lot of great stuff and it would just be, you know, nice to see the libraryies things highlighted at the what are the digital
displays around town and, you know, the sign in Brooklyn Village just to to pull it out in front of people. Okay, thank you very much. >> And that appears to be it for questions.
>> Okay, so Alec, do you have something to if I make you a co-host, do you have something to project? >> Yes, absolutely. Um, let me pull up this red line copy or blue line copy as the case may be. I
I don't really know why it makes that distinction. Um but as I mentioned previously, the one amendment uh made at the subcommittee that was ruled out of scope u occurs in this uh therefore be it resolved paragraph. Um where the
original language was quote town meeting urges the select board to proclaim uh the subcommittee amended that to quote town meeting urges the commonwealth of Massachusetts to officially acknowledge the following occasions. Uh as I mentioned up top the moderator provided
two potential remedies. One just being the restoration of the original language. Um the other being changing or reverting to the original language with the one additional change that to proclaim be struck and replaced with um
to officially acknowledge. >> Well, that's what I'm going to recommend you change it to. >> Okay. I'm I'm happy to do that and I' I'd be happy to offer that motion. U >> um so sorry, just as lead petitioner to be clear that would I'm sorry to interrupt. Um would that be that the town meeting urges the select board to
officially acknowledge the following? >> Correct. She's going to edit that right now. >> So if you let me do it on the Oh, I accidentally accepted that one. So if we take that suggestion, then it would restore the original language and then simply strike proclaim and replace with
officially acknowledge. So in other words, if I may, so this is going to be the motion as distributed in our packets with the exception of this oneline change that we're making here. >> Correct.
>> Okay. Thank you. Is that hopefully that's clear um to everyone on on the call. Um so I'll let you make uh make that motion and someone can second it. >> So moved.
Hopefully we need a second because >> All right. So the motion is favorable action on warrant article 15 as amended by the subcommittee.
Um and uh can you drop that that sentence into the chat uh Alex so I can paste it in here? with the additional um uh recommendation
from the moderator. Let me just wait for you to do that. Just that one sentence. Okay, thank you. I'm just copy that. Put it in here to change. And what that was that was bullet point. What paragraph number was
that? >> Um, it's eight in the original draft. It is seven in the amended version. So that would be in in therefore clause seven >> in in warrant article 15 as amended
>> clause 72. >> Okay. All right. Thank you so much for the waiting. Um so it is favorable action on war article 15 as amended by the subcommittee um with the additional recommendation from the moderator to change the language and therefore clause 7 to quote
that town meeting urges the select board to officially acknowledge and it was seconded and we will now go to our voting uh Michael >> yes >> Harry B >> yes >> cliff
>> abstain Anthony, >> yes. >> Elise, >> yes. >> John, >> abstain. >> Harriet F. >> Yes. >> David Martin, >> yes.
>> Neil, >> yes. >> Perry, >> yes. >> Kelly, >> yes. >> Alisa, >> yes. >> Janice, >> yes. >> Brian, >> yes. >> Alec, >> yes. Carol,
>> yes. >> Liz, >> yes. >> Pam, >> yes. >> Jocelyn, maybe Joselyn has stepped away, right? Darnell >> Stain.
>> Linda, >> yes. >> Fran, >> yes. >> David, >> yes. Margaret, >> yes. >> Christine, >> yes. >> I assume Carlos has not arrived yet.
Harry, >> Carlos has not arrived. Joselyn is >> I'm here. Sorry, I I couldn't get my audio to work. My I am voting yes. >> Okay, thank you. All right, so by a vote of 22 in favor with none opposed and three abstensions, we're going to recommend favorable action on warrant
article 15 as has been amended. Thank you very much to the subcommittee for all the work. Thank you to Mr. McKenzie and uh to Mick Pearlman. And if um we
can move on to warrant article Well, we can move on to warrant article 17 if there's someone from the subcommittee who's prepared to present. I thought it was going to be Carlos, but he's not here. Are you prepared, Carol, or should we move on to warrant article
18 on the off chance that Carlos will be here? >> I'd appreciate it if you moved on and then I'll do it if he doesn't show up after that. >> Okay. All right. Let's move on to warrant article 18. Um, who's presenting that? Mr. Bors.
>> Okay. Warrant article 18 is a resolution and it's a resolution regarding the recordings of public meetings. Uh, let me just say upfront and I apologize. I start this off with an egregious split infinitive. Um, and in our
recommendation, there's one typo, which I will point to when we get there. Um, so is Heather Hamilton here? >> I'm not seeing her. >> I She's not on the list. She's >> I don't see her. >> Okay. She She's a petitioner. Um, and I
figured she can probably speak to it better than I can. Um and Neil can chime in as well. So essentially what the resolution asks for is that recordings of meetings, boards, committees, commissions, um get posted to the website where you can find them. Uh if
you request them, you can get them. They're there. There's a way to get them out. Uh we do it regularly as you'll notice with the subcommittee reports that were in the packet tonight. In there is a link to the recordings. Um,
and we're sort of used to it. Not all boards, committees, and commissions do that. Um, and it may be that some of the smaller ones that don't meet as often, aren't doing this as regularly, aren't as used to it, um, don't have as many
people to do the work, don't have staff. There there's a variety of things. Um, the resolution doesn't really ask for anything new other than to say these recordings already exist and since they already exist, can we just get them posted so that people can can get to
them? Um, when we discussed this as a subcommittee, one of the things that we discussed was a concern that this would put extra work on town staff. Um because it's easy to add a little here and a little there to town staff and it's you
know death by a thousand cuts. Um but but what struck us also is because we've done it is that it's not that ownorous a task. Uh you're posting the minutes anyway and all you're doing is cutting and posting the link to the um
to the recording that's already been done. So we thought that was pretty reasonable. Um we did change some of the wording in the recommendation and you can see the the markup here. Um a lot of it's more sort of for grammar and
clarity. Um the one substantative portion is at the end and that is that these would be posted. These videos would be posted. Um quote and again the typo is where we crossed out within four business. That
should be within four business days. Days should have been crossed out also. Um and we added as soon as practicable but no more than 10 days um of the meeting and and there there was a little bit of discussion. Um I will say most of
the subcommittee uh the chorus harmonized um there was one voice that was a little bit out of kilter and I will confess it was mine and that came to the 10 days. the way it's written is 10 days as
opposed to 10 working days. Um, and that was uh essentially to comport with the rules for posting minutes. Um, what I had pointed out was if it's not working days, it could essentially be a week.
So, think of hypothetically someone is going to their daughter's wedding in Washington DC and takes the week off just before um the long weekend. That's 10 days used up right there, but it's only one working week.
Um other than that, we were all in agreement. Um we voted unanimously to recommend this recommend it with the changes. We don't think it is that hard to do. We suspect that once people get used to actually copying and pasting it
into their minutes, they'll realize it's not that big a deal and it really shouldn't put stress on town staff. Um, and I think that's about it. People on the subcommittee want to chime in their thoughts. And we also have the
petitioner Heather Hamilton here. >> Ms. Hamilton, would you like to add anything? I know you came in in the middle, but you can trust that despite the fact that Harry didn't mention how much he likes the word practicable, he gave a good summary of the uh of
>> Neil fored it up on me. >> I I trust Terry as a as a fellow precinct 3 um representative. Um, the only thing I would add is, uh, part of this I'm I'm pushing because I
really think the town needs to automate this. Um, I I frequently ask staff to for the recording because I know it exists. And the problem with the current policy is you have to know that a
recording exists and you have to know who to ask for it. And that's unfair. That's that's not in keeping with transparency. So I Zoom has the recording. The ad the admin account of the government Zoom has all
of the recordings that have been uploaded to the cloud. The IT department just needs to automate this and it's possible. Um so I I'm pushing that. I I'm also pushing that because I work at big and one of my initiatives
that I took on because I feel very strongly about it is people need access. They need to be able to watch their local government in action. And so we're we're dedicated to downloading these meetings and putting them on our channels and we can only do that if
they're uploaded. Um, I understand, you know, the concern, uh, and I definitely understand the concern about requiring staff to to make these available, but these recordings are available an hour after the meeting concludes and it is a copy and paste. And I'm I really hope
that the town does automate this so that it takes staff out of the equation altogether. Happy to answer any questions. >> Okay. Um Dennis, the first question goes to you. >> Um I actually have two questions. One,
uh Heather, this is a leading question. You're very happy with how the advisory committee has complied with your requests for this so far. I hope. >> Yes. Barry. >> Okay. Now, my question, my practical
question is um during the subcommittee report uh there was uh the repeated statement that this is not adding any new work, the recordings already exist or very little new work. The recordings
already exist, etc., etc. Um, what about for a totally in-person meeting for which there it was not recorded by Zoom? Is there the expectation that we're going to have to start recording them or is it only for recordings that exist? I
haven't read the language in detail. >> Right. It's as it's written, it is only for recordings that exist. It doesn't impose any new requirement that every board committee commission uh meeting whether of substance or
whether it's just more ministerial that they bring in an owl and and set that up because then that would have certain IT and staff >> functions that would be required. But that that's not in this >> that that was a I was not prepared to make.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> Um Neil Gordon. >> Yeah. Thank I just want one comment and that's the notion. We hear this word uploading. So if you're hosting a Zoom meeting and you click the record button,
right, it's there. It's uploaded, right? There is no uploading. There's no, you know, figuring out how to put it on YouTube or or anywhere else. The only thing you have to do is go back into the admin page, find the link to the
recording, and paste it into the minutes. >> The link is even emailed to you typically for the host of the >> right done. Right. Done and over the it it it exists and the only thing you're doing is moving it from behind the
curtain to in front of the curtain. And it takes about that long to do it. there there is no there's no burden uh if you can't do minutes if you can't find the recording to do your minutes and you need staff help right that's the same
help but to actually put the u a link to the recording in the minutes that's an exceedingly light lift there I think there is no burden >> there's no burden no cost >> I would also suggest the possibility
that that for some of these smaller committees that meet less often don't do minutes as often and I think all of us know when we go to write minutes sometimes we agonize about how much to put in the minutes they're supposed to be you know relatively descriptive but
they're not transcripts either and you know you think how much do I have to put in how much don't I have to put in these are going to be long minutes maybe I'll wait till the weekend to get it done but if you're putting in a link to the recording um that can spackle in a lot
of the detail that you may not have to, you know, key in the verbiage and maybe after people start doing it, it just may make them feel more inclined to get the minutes done quicker as well. >> Thank you, uh, Perry Gman.
>> Um, yeah, thanks for this. Um, Heather, I I support it. Um, I wanted to ask a question for us for AC. Um sometimes I find that um you know uh the the reports or the minutes are not published until
the meeting or even the afternoon the day of or afternoon before our um AC meeting. So I have a hard sometimes I have a hard time being at work and and commuting home and getting my reading done of the report. So, I'm wondering if
our this is a question to AC, not the not the petitioner, but if we could get our subcommittee recordings posted somewhere before the minutes or the report comes out. And I'm
wondering if it's that tracker um would be the best place for this, the tracker uh that Lisa puts together or if there's some other public place that these uh recordings could go when they're available. Thanks.
>> Um is I mean Lisa I don't know what the level of complexity is. because I don't know how frequently you're updating that that tracker. >> I mean, I could certainly build that into, you know, my day. I just would
have to follow up after every subcommittee hearing and go to the four different Zoom accounts to find the correct one and just download download the link, copy and paste the link. It's not it it
sounds ownorous and it probably would be, but it's not impossible to do, >> right? >> And I could in fact I could in fact add it to that tracker, Perry. That's a really good idea. I could embed the link right in the uh in the subcommittee, you
know, listing where the when the meeting was held. I could certainly either add add a column there for the sub for the recording which would then make it accessible 24 hours after the hearing. >> Thanks. That would be great if it's possible if it's not too much work.
Appreciate it. >> Sure. >> Thank you. Um Elise, >> hi. Thank you. Um yeah, I think I think most of us probably think in this vein, but I think I just wanted to
I guess comment and say that I think given that we are living in a time when our administration is restricting access to information, I think it's really important that we take a stand and make easily available the work that we're
doing and that um our neighbors, our friends, community members ers can easily access our conversations. I mean, you know, to to Perry's point, I I emailed even just today as our meeting
was starting Lisa in a panic like, "Oh my god, I have all these questions, but I don't want to take up all this time because I didn't have the time to read through in between my workday, picking up kids, dinner, and all the things." So, um I think there are a lot of layers to this, but um I think we I think we
should um really work toward making access to information as easy as possible. Thank you. >> Um David Pollock, >> my question is along the same lines. Um, I think that Perry's uh question and um
uh Lisa's sort of solution of getting all of our meetings into the tracker works for one board, but there's over a hundred. And um I guess the obvious place for and I I imagine this might be where Heather's excuse me leading is um
automation is that the um the links go back into the agenda center. And so if I wanted to see a meet, you know, if I knew that there was a meeting of a subcommittee in September, on September 20th, I would go back to September 20th
to that uh agenda and then there would be a link that would be in the calendar and then everything could be that would be that seems to me the c one central place and it goes along with what town hall it did creating the newer agenda
center which we all town meeting freaked out when it switched from the old calendar But then once people figured out what the new click was, I think it actually works a lot better the new one. >> Thank you. >> So if there's a question there, it sort of is that what you were thinking,
Heather? >> Yes. I mean what what I would be ideal is if the IT department worked with Zoom government and got you know the the it automated to populate because it it I do
like the new platform quite well. Um and this summer we had an intern at BIG who wrote a code. I I mean he basically just asked chat GBT to write a code to automate a process that went onto the
town's website, looked for Zoom recordings, downloaded them, uploaded them, and then changed the format because Zoom recordings are in a file that our system doesn't recognize. So, we have to reformat them and then upload
them into Cablecast, which is a completely separate system and it's kind of archaic. I mean, he wrote this in a week. It's possible. >> Thank you, Janice Khan. >> Hi. And hi, Heather. Good to see you.
And um I do look at the big recordings. So, thank you for that public service. Um, so David actually um was on the track I was thinking of as well that um to me it seems to me that um what we do at AC is above and beyond because the
link is in minutes and often people won't sit for a two-hour meeting but they can skim and then figure out um you know how to skim through the meeting to find what they want and you know on it and that would be true of the agenda too. So I I wholeheartedly
um support what David's saying. I think that a meeting with no context is not as useful as one in some sort of context. And um having it on the same um you know in where the agendas are would be a
really kind of I think a a good approach to giving the public a little bit more than just knowing that um the select board are meeting on Tuesday, but really having a little bit more um context. So, um I I like David's idea a lot and you
know and your wanting to do this transparency is uh is really also wonderful. So, thank you. >> Thank you, John Dogget. >> Hey, thanks Siri. Um Heather, this is a great Warren article. Really appreciate you bringing it forward. I think it it
really would uh help improve transparency. Uh I've got a question and that is return. What is the retention period planned for these? And is there any cost over time that we would need to uh fund this for long term?
>> Interesting question. Um I'm going to have to put my former select board hat on. Uh I I mean I count these as public records and so I think that they would fall under the the public record um guidance and I believe that's seven
years. Um but that's really just you know also about the contract between the town and Zoom if that comes up for renewal what the you know data storage retention is. I can tell you working at
big um I I have downloaded so many of these meetings but I actually don't list them because we don't want them to clog our YouTube channel. Um what I do is I I post them on our govern on our um cable
channels. Um our we have things dating back to 2010 still on our YouTube. So because of what we're doing on our side, we're acting kind of as a data retention
as well for a lot of these meetings. >> Thank you, >> Dennis. That's it for questions. All right. So, uh, Harry, uh, would we have a motion from the subcommittee? >> Sure. We're going to recommend favorable
action on, um, the article as amended and extend that strike mark the within four business days. Um, and that's our motion, the the amended version. So the amended version simply says as soon as
practical but no more than 10 days is the uh >> it says as soon as practicable but no more than 10 days. Yes. >> Okay. Great. So there's a motion from the subcommittee for favorable action on warrant article 18 as amended.
Uh hey Michael >> yes. >> Harry B. >> Yes. Cliff >> abstain. >> Anthony, >> yes. >> Elise, >> yes.
>> John, >> yes. >> Harriet, >> yes. >> David Martin, >> yes. >> Neil, >> yes. >> Perry, >> yes. >> Kelly, >> yes. >> Alisa,
>> yes. >> Janice, >> yes. >> Brian, >> yes. Alec, >> yes. >> Carol, >> yes. >> Liz, >> yes. >> Pam, >> yes.
>> Jocelyn, >> yes. >> Darnell, >> yes. And thank you, Heather. >> Linda, >> yes. >> Fran, >> yes. >> David, >> yes. >> Margaret,
>> yes. >> Christine, >> yes. All right. So, by a vote of 24 in favor, none opposed, one abstension, we're going to recommend favorable action on more article 18. Thank you to the subcommittee. Thank you, Heather.
Uh, nice to see you again. And, uh, I believe Carol, you're up because Carlos hasn't made it. So, you're pitch you're gonna pitch in. You have to unmute. >> Fat.
Okay. Um, so Warren Article 17 is a resolution regarding tree preservation practices. And this resolution applies to um trees that aren't street trees or trees that aren't private on private
property that are um uh covered by other uh town bylaws already. Um so we had two meetings about this and after the first meeting it or during the first meeting it became clear that there
was an opportunity for collaboration between the petitioners and DPW and they took a week or two weeks I believe it was to collaborate and came up with the uh revised warrant article that you see before you
which basically um sets out procedures for uh public notice if a heritage tree, which is a tree on public property that isn't a street tree, uh is uh in danger of being taken down. And it sets out
procedure for an arborist review and for procedures for notification of the public. And uh both the petitioners and the DPW I'll let them speak for themselves uh
are very satisfied with this outcome and feel that it goes a long ways and there is a a meeting of the minds as to what best practices would be. And that's all I have to say.
>> Okay. So, um, for the petitioners, I see, um, Karen, uh, if you'd like to add anything to that, uh, report, um, go ahead. This would be a good opportunity.
>> Hi everyone. Thank you so much. Actually don't have, uh, much to add here to answer any questions if there are any. uh to sort of amplify what Carol was saying, it was really a wonderful opportunity to work with uh the commissioner of public works and her
team at the DPW. A phenomenal bunch of professionals and I think we're all really happy with what we were able to put together as a group. >> All right, Harry. Um, well, it's open for questions.
>> Well, the first one was me, I think. >> Oh, okay. I'm sorry. >> That's all right. Um, uh, as I'm not sure who was here at the start of the meeting, but, uh, town meeting member Sean Jones came and had a
few observations about the resolution as as, uh, uh, as presented or as amended. And everything that he mentioned is clearly a scrivener's uh, error which we can address uh, with one question. And
so I'm just going to ask it here on behalf of Mr. Lynn Jones, which is this sentence right here. If you can see it, isn't quite a
sentence and it appears to be combined with parts of the previous sentence and the parts of the second the sentence which follows. And is the question for the either the subcommittee or the petitioner or um whether or not it is appropriate to simply remove that as an
editing error. >> Sure, I can I can answer. Um I think there may have been some sort of administrative error on Sean's part. I actually have been rotating back and forth between the select board meeting as well and seeing uh Sean sort of overlap in Zoom. um those edits that he
made uh didn't make it to my desk until this morning and I had a full day. Uh I can happily go back and review. Erin and I did do a lot of back and forth with the track changes of the various edits that we had made. I can go back through
um I had told Sean I would check the minor error stuff. I have not had an opportunity to look at the if it's a sentence or not a sentence yet. Well, um we're going to be making a vote uh tonight. So the all of the air all of
the objections that Sean raised um the original ones are are are just formula are are are issues that I can uh assure you are are are completely within the realm of the normal cleanups that we do when we're producing a motion which is
to take out this language at the end that says or take any action relative there too and a few other cleanups. I'm not worried about that at all. The only thing I'm worried about is this sentence right here, which is not which is not uh which is just not a sentence. And so, um, if there's any
>> Can you read it for me, Dennis? Uh, only because No, I'm on multiple devices. So, the device that I'm looking at your meeting on is a smaller device. >> Could I simply, Dennis, because I think it's just missing a couple >> a couple words. So, let me um It's
Karen. It's just sort of like an incomplete thought. Um, >> okay. But I think but I think Erin, it looks to me like it is. It says the existing conditions plan along with their condition and ration off for removal and the that that that part is
in the previous sentence and the second part is in the sentence which follows. So it it appears to me that it is redundant as part of a copy and paste. >> Exactly. because it you have the following paragraph starts with the existing conditions plan, tree removal
plan, and the tree planting plan shall all be made available well on the town's website. Now, this is actually >> and the previous sentence says it should be it'll be reviewed with the design review uh uh committee and the and the public at a public meeting. >> Exactly. My sense is that that what I
have highlighted should simply be deleted and there would be no loss of of of of uh of substance and the and significantly improved clarity. Um >> that is correct. It was rewritten to be I think the intention was to be a little
more clear as to what would be on the plans and then it would be reviewed um at a public meeting. >> Erin, if you're fine with it, then we're absolutely fine with it. I told Sean in an email first thing that well when I
saw it uh I said that you know I I really wanted to make sure that you guys were on board with it and I didn't want to put a fire alarm uh on your side in that I know you guys are so inundated with tons of things and this is going to be protocol that you guys are putting in place. So if you're fine with changing the verbiage then I'm completely fine
with it. Again, in layman's terms, so that everyone's aware, uh the petitioners and the uh and the town are very much on the same page with the spirit of what we're trying to put in place here. Um and and so if Aaron's
fine with it, like let's go with it and make the changes. >> I'm not trying to be any more overly pedantic. It just seems like it's an opportunity to clean it up. And I I generally don't like editing by committee, but this seemed like an obvious scrivener's problem. It's just a scrier's er error. I think between the
track changes back and forth, this was coming out because the previous sentence replaced it. >> So, we will we will follow up with uh with uh that as a scrivener's error in the um in the in the reporting. I think
it's obvious what what what's happening there. Um Harry, if you want to go to other questions or comments. U Margaret Thank you. So, this resolution seems really well-intentioned, like what monster
hates our tree canopy, and I get it. However, this seems like a classic tree law. This will be familiar to anybody familiar with Ezra Klein's thesis and abundance. My concern is overregulation that prevents progress. Ultimately, our
built environment is necessitated to change with our community. And so, I want to know from you, how does this regulation prevent it from being another stick in the mud that prevents Brooklyn from changing over time as it may need to? Um, and just for context, when I say
tree law, I'm referring to environmental and legal regulations that are often well-intentioned, but generally hinder the progress they're meant to support, such as building green infrastructure, etc. Miss Garity, would you care to comment?
>> Sure. Uh, I don't think that this would prohibit growth at all. Uh, as far as the question that you're asking, it it really is meant to engage more people in stewardship of shared communal natural
resources and to increase transparency of when change is occurring. >> Okay? So, let's say for example, it's like the Fiser Hill property right now where there's a lot of conversations around what Brooklyn can do with that property. I've never been there. I just
want to know what it looks like. For all intents and purposes, let's argue that there's a mature tree canopy there. And the determination is made to build a pool or senior housing or what whatever the other options are for how that property can be used. If this regulation
were to if this resolution were to move forward, what would it look like for the town to use that property as passed by various committees and as passed by town meeting? What would this regulation mean for the team that is therefore responsible for developing that
property? I think you're asking a very vague and a very specific question at the same time. I think that the true goal of this resolution is to put a value set in place and on paper. And again, the true
goal of this resolution, the spirit of it is to increase transparency that will then increase engagement of the community. The specific case that we cite in this resolution has to do with a
tree in Monmouth Park that, you know, was almost taken down and then wasn't and uh and really got the neighborhood involved because of the, you know, the transparency that neighbors were able to track down of of what was happening with the tree. This isn't meant to uh stop
progress by any stretch of the means. If anything, it's it's really intended to engage more community members in stewardship of shared natural community resources. >> Commissioner, did you want to uh chime in?
>> You had your hand up from >> I I just was going to provide a little more information just with that particular scenario. I think it's a and Karen did a great job um answering answering that question, but I think uh
Margaret in that particular situation with this resolution, so there'd be a couple things. One is if a healthy tree was being removed as part of a major capital project, then we would be looking to mitigate that tree loss um on
site or in the general vicinity of in accordance with the tree protection bylaw. So that would be piece one. And before it was removed in accordance with this resolution, the
tree would be posted um with a notice that let people know that that particular tree was going to be removed and why. >> Okay, that's really helpful. Uh Erin, do you have like any insight into
like materially how that would impact like operations to develop a space or or to change something in Brooklyn? So an example would be like let's look the the one in Mammoth Park. Could you guys walk me through what the process looked like to like in the past and then what it
would have looked like if this resolution were to pass? I'm just I'm trying to like visualize operationally what's different and I'm I'm not Yeah, it's not clear to me like what is actually happening with this piece of paper. >> Okay. So, um what
what has happened in the past with a park design review process and that's what this was. So, the park was being renovated and as part of the renovations uh or as part of the design review process, which includes a design review
committee and public notice, uh the landscape architects and the team look at the condition of all the trees. They talk about what and how to preserve and protect them. They look at the plan. And in this particular case, it was some lawn improvements and replacement of a
play structure, but also a um very large old asht tree was was determined by the town's arborist to be in significant decline. And uh it was discussed at these public
design review committee meetings that the tree was being proposed for removal. the rationale for why and um it was communicated in in several public in several public meetings. However,
um fast forward to when we actually go to do the construction, like the whole process wraps up. we're going out for construction. And those that weren't involved in the process didn't know that that tree was coming out and they wanted additional review on
that tree to see what preservation measures could be taken to prolong the health and stability and viability of that tree. So what's being asked for here is okay when you do the design
review processes um the the conditions assessment ultimately the um the meetings we're going to be actually talking about the trees and what's removal. pull all of those out from the deck so it's one
piece so that people can go to the park website and get all of the information about any removals, transplants, planting. It's it's called out and that the tree trees will be posted with information if they're um being proposed
for removal with a QR code so that people can go to that information and and see it there. So I think the the scenario here was was sort of twofold and I I think we can also talk about risk assessments and that's something
you know a little bit um different and more involved. But some folks wouldn't necessarily be part of the design review because they're like it's a little playground. The folks that are going to use that are going to participate. But there actually was a component of that project that other
folks in the neighborhood wanted to know about and felt that they should know about. And so this is an additional way for us to post trees, pull out information we know the community cares about and make it um
more accessible. Um and that may lead to um more engagement and conversation about um decisions that are being made. And in this case, um, and we also, so we also talked about third party review and
so trees of a certain size. Um, when we're looking at, um, we have a proposal from, uh, our certified arborists. We have two certified arborists look at this that we will bring in a third party um to take a look at it, confer and work
with our arborists to see if there are um means and methods um that would enable us to prolong the life of these trees and have a a community conversation. >> Do you do you currently use the third party right now in your process or no?
Is that an additional cost? Uh we often do use a third party for um for large trees and here we're defining those as 32 in or greater. Um so that
has often been the case. It was not the case in this particular scenario um as early as it would have been um because we just had a change in staff. >> Okay. Thank you.
Alec Leovitz. >> Thank you, Harry. Um, I just had a a couple quick questions. Um, uh, one, I I was curious as a matter of policy, does every town capital improvement project have an associated standing design
review committee? >> Uh, every parks and open space design review project does. So, our projects do And those would be the projects presumably most likely to have an impact
on mature trees. >> Yes. Um I mean there are school projects and there are you know there are other town ground projects as well that we're not part of those
design processes always. >> Okay. because I I am wondering if if there's a potential for a scenario to arise where we have a say lower cost capital improvement project that doesn't have a design review committee and it does have an impact on mature trees and
with the current wording of this resolution. It's not necessarily clear that if that were the case, the new administrative procedures would would allow for the full transparency and availability of of public engagement on that process. Um, so I'd be I'd be curious maybe to down the line confirm
with other departments that they you follow those same protocols to make sure that this procedure is effective across all departments. Um, I was also curious, there's a mention in this new resolution about posting the 40 14-day notice on the town website. Um, has there been any
thought given to where on the town website that would be posted? >> So, the notice is actually posted on the tree itself. And and I think if I'm not mistaken, I believe the new language also includes um a publication on the town website
including the rationale for removal. So I guess I'm curious if that be hosted on DPW's page or or elsewhere. >> Nope, that's going to be on the DPW forestry like parks and open space um forestry section. But these are I mean I think that so there's the design review
component and then there's there will be trees that my arborists determine are hazardous and need to come out because they've they're in significant decline. They've reached the
end of their, you know, successful and effective life. They're looking at targets such as sidewalks, roads, pots, and um those trees outside on our property outside of the design review
process would still be posted with the rationale. >> Okay, thank you. That's >> absolutely. Yes. So I think this resolution also, you know, will need to be shared with the school committee and um public buildings so that they, you
know, understand the resolution because, you know, we can only post the the work that's under our jurisdiction, >> right? Yeah, that that makes sense. Thanks so much, Aaron. And uh I just close by thanking the petitioners for
their hard work on this um and particularly for their collaboration with the subcommittee and with uh Commissioner Shootute and the DPW. Uh I think the the version in front of us tonight is vastly improved from the original version. So I just thank you all for your hard work on that.
>> Thank you Janice Khan. >> Yes, thank you. So um I have just another perspective another comment is that um in often in design reviews such as in a park that you have the user group typically involved but in the case
of say street trees um you know that's not necessarily the case. It's the people walking by. And so it's really important to have these trees if they're going to come down have it be posted. allow people who, you know, are not maybe considered the user group um also
um aware of it. And I can just tell you I live on the border of Newton and this happened actually in my neighborhood on the Newton side where there was a street tree that was posted as coming down. um you know, a developer wanted to bring it down, but then but people walking by
felt it had value as as a street tree with a canopy and with, you know, it it enhanced the the value of the street. It did not to to respond to a little bit to Margaret, it did not prevent the development from happening. The
development happened, but it also preserved the tree. And so it was really a kind of win-win. Um and and I think that's really what we're try what we're aiming for here is to come to a win-win. And so um so just to give another sort
of perspective on on this on the value of doing this resolution and I thank the petitioners for working so well with the town and um and with the subcommittee as well um for this resolution.
Thank you, Dennis. That's it for questions and comments. >> Um, all right. So, we're going to move to uh motion >> move that um the advisory committee
approve warrant article 17 as amended. So that's a motion for favorable action on warrant article 17 as amended with a note when we're um uh transmitting this to um for the
combined reports and and uh to the moderator that the that third sentence that we displayed has is removed as a scrivener's error. And there's a couple of other um minor um scriveners errors that were mentioned earlier and I can follow up with uh Carlos afterwards.
That includes the correct title um for the um uh forestry manager and um the the rearranging it to be in the form of a motion rather than in the form of a um the sort of original warrant article.
Um, so, uh, share screen. We have a motion for favorable action on warrant article 17. Michael, >> yes. >> Harry B, >> yes. >> Cliff,
>> obsane. >> Elise, >> yes. >> John, >> yes. >> Arif, >> yes. David Mark, >> yes. >> Neil, >> yes. >> Perry,
>> yes. >> Kelly, >> yes. >> Alisa, >> yes. >> Janice, >> yes. >> Brian, >> yes. >> Alec, >> yes. >> Carol, >> yes.
>> Liz, >> yes. >> Pam, >> yes. >> Jocelyn, >> yes. Dell. I don't hear Danell. Linda, >> yes. >> Fran,
>> yes. >> David, >> yes. >> Margaret, >> no. >> Uh, Christine, >> abstain. >> All right. And was Danell here? >> Dell is here. Yes. and he's now unmuted.
Sorry about that. >> And at your vote, Danell, I'm sorry. >> Yes. >> Yes. Great. Thank you. Okay. So, 21 in favor, one opposed, and two abstensions. We're going to recommend favorable action on the amended version of warrant article 17
that. So, thank you uh to the subcommittee, thanks to town staff, thanks to the petitioner. Um Karen, I apologize. I normally give the petitioner the chance for the last word before the vote and I failed to do that. Um but hopefully you're happy with the outcome.
>> Yeah, it's great. Thank you so much. >> Um so Harry, we have announcements about upcoming schedule. >> So the schedule is a bit of a work in progress, but it appears that we will
not meet this coming Thursday, the 23rd. So Lisa, if that date has been posted, please cancel. We will meet Tuesday, October 28th, which is a week
from tonight. It will be virtual. I believe what we're doing is warrant article three on the budget. Um, assuming warrant article 3 is ready
and I believe we will do be doing warrant article 19 regarding the 25th amendment. So, Cliff, if you could make sure that the petitioners for warrant article 19
are aware that we're doing that. Um, we are not planning on meeting Thursday, October 30. And then in the first week of November, we will be meeting on November 4, we
will be doing warrant article 8 on lighting, assuming it is moved. We'll be doing warrant article um seven on Clark Road, God willing. And we will be going into executive
session regarding a litigation matter. And then right now for th and that meeting will be live or hybrid. And then on Thursday, November 6. Um, right now all I have is warrant
article 10 on uh renaming a baseball field and presumably anything else that we haven't gotten to by then. >> Thank you, Harry. Um, please note what um, Lisa dropped in the chat about the
deadline for October 28th for items that we have um, voted on uh, already and that's several at this point. um writeups for the combined reports are due to me so that I have a chance to do
editing to get them to Melissa in time for their publishing in the first mailing of the combined reports. So, um please don't make me cranky. I want to try to get through that as quickly as possible. Um and I think that's
everything. >> Uh Dennis, >> see yes. Uh, Dennis, um, uh, I know that the town is is not going to move on article five, but do we need to vote no action on that? And where are we going
to put it on the calendar? >> Uh, I guess we could do that on Tuesday, a week from today. >> It just needs to be posted appropriately. That's all I'm saying. >> Yeah. Lisa, can you add that um warrant article five?
>> Um where are we putting where are we adding five? >> Next Tuesday it'll be a twominut um >> Gotcha. Okay, >> Dennis for vote. Yes. >> Um I'm just sort of curious if if at
town meeting the moderator says nobody has moved warrant article 5, I'm going on to warrant article six. Is is our vote necessary or or does it need to be there on the record? >> I think that it's it's like the belt and
suspenders uh uh thing just on the off chance that there is a um that there is a motion that's it that is that is made. We generally vote no action just to have that. >> Very good. Thank you. >> We always take a position on article one, >> right?
>> Even when there are no unpaid bills, >> right? So it it'll take but we're not going to get nobody's going to get up and speak on it I assume. So we're not going to spend any time on it at town meeting. Um all right, Carol, I will follow up with
you and um Carlos about the um the small scriveners changes to the article tonight and then um uh I think that's everything for uh for this week. Dennis, I'll I'll reach out to you about seven and eight scheduling.
>> Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Can we do it tomorrow? >> Yeah. >> Okay. Thanks. All right. Goodbye. >> Good night. >> Good night.