All right, everyone. Welcome to the advisory committee meeting for Tuesday, October 7th. We have three items on the agenda for tonight to uh report, review, and possibly vote on warrant articles 1,
three, and four, which are unpaid bills. Uh a possible fiscal year 26 budget amendment and the proposed language changes to the bylaws. There are any members of the public who wish to uh
weigh in on any of these topics? Now would be the time for you to drop your name in the chat and we'll call on you. And if not, Neil, is it you that's going to present? Uh, sure. Okay. Where would you like to start? Would you like start with warrant article one?
So, article one, the administration and finance subcommittee held the requisite uh public hearing. Uh we are advised that there uh we're not aware of any unpaid bills and so after an exceedingly short discussion the subcommittee
recommends no action on article one and we'll reconsider it should from you know from the sky some unpaid bill come up before town meeting. All right. Is there anyone in this committee who has anything to say about
the absence of uh unpaid bills? Melissa, are they still no unpaid bills? Yeah. Okay. Great work, Melissa. Well, in that case, I think we're going to move. You call that good cash management?
Like, come on. I I know lots of companies that pride themselves on having unpaid bills. So in that case we'll go to the motion of no action on warrant article one as made by the subcommittee. Let me share my screen.
This is a motion for no action. Yes means no. Michael Berger Ben Burnbound's not here. Harry Bors is not here. Cliff Brown may not be here. Anthony Buono,
yes. Elise Couture Stone, yes. John Daga is not here. Harry Freriedman, yes. David Mark Goldstein, yes. Neil Gordon, yes. Susan Granoff,
yes. Harry Gman, yes. Kelly Hardbeck, not here. Not here. Alisa Jonas, not here. Janice Khan, yes. Brian Lad, yes.
Alec Levitz, yes. Carol Levin, yes. Liz Linder, not here. Pam Lodish, yes. Jocelyn Murphy, yes. Danell O'Neal,
yes. Linda Olsen Pelky, yes. Ran Pearller, yes. David Pollock, yes. Carlos Ridjo, yes. Margaret Robotham, yes.
Lee Elwin, are not here. Christine Westfall, yes. And Alisa Jonas is now here. Uh Lisa, would you care to weigh in on on the absence of unpaid
bills under warrant article one? We're recommending no action. Sorry. Sure. Yes. All right. So, by a vote of 22 in favor, none opposed, no extensions, we're recommending no action on warrant article one.
All right. Neil, why don't you take us through the current status? Dennis. Yes. Could Brookline Zoom Guest Host 2 identify themselves? It's interesting. My my my camera must not be working on this computer. Okay. Thank you.
It's Lisa. Sorry. Yep. And Lisa Elwin is now joining. All right. Um, so Neil warrant article three potential budget amendment. So warrant article three potential
budget amendment. Uh, as of our subcommittee meeting, we didn't have any uh anything to act on on article three. And perhaps Melissa Goff can give us an update. Miss Collins.
Sure. Um I'm going to need a little bit more time on article 3. There's a a couple of things that are still in flux. Um I can tell you the things that are um ready to go. Um you have the recommendation that was published in the warrant around the use of the TNC funds. Those are the Uber and Lift monies that
the town gets. We usually get notification over the summer and then we appropriate in the fall. um that that process might change because we're also hearing that um the Department of Revenue is uh raising some concerns about appropriating funds after the tax
uh before the tax rate is set. So, we're we're talking about maybe recalibrating our schedule and maybe using the annual town meeting to appropriate those funds going forward, but for now um that's what we're looking to do with this article. Um the narrative also talked about potential adjustments for golf.
Um, as you know, the golf is kind of underway with their master plan and and doing a lot of major work at the course. Um, at the same time, they're also considering putting additional lights up at the driving range and thought that they might be able to access some retained earnings in order to do that.
Um, we can't access retained earnings until free cash is certified and it's unlikely to happen um in time for this town meeting. So, uh, if they have a proposal, it will be something that they'd likely consider in May. Um I had a meeting today with the golf team and
you know obviously if we had better news on that we'd we'd want to try and escalate that. I've also encouraged the golf team to uh reach out to the capital subcommittee u to make sure that you guys are fully informed about what their plans are. I know they've been talking about it at the park and rec commission.
Um so that that is not ready for prime time either. Uh and the last piece that we'll do is um adjustments related to debt service. So our bond sale was later in the year. Um and we have adjustments mo mostly around the debt exclusion. So
basically um we got better um a better rate than what we had budgeted for. So we'll be bringing down revenue and then there'll be a reduction in expense at the same level. And so there's no impact on the budget there and a minor tweak to the golf um debt service budget at the
with the same uh the same rationale as well. So, those are the I'll have a memo for the board when it's ready to go and uh then it will be ready for your uh consideration once that's all in place. Um, one other thing that we're also still waiting for more information on is I'm sure people are aware of um the
issues around the um the transfer station and the the floor that failed over I think over the summer. Um and so we're just waiting for a couple more quotes that DPW is assembling around um potential options to to uh deal with uh
the the floor issue. So is that do those options include reserve fund requests or something else? Well, I think I think it's a question of whether or not the timing would allow for an adjustment at town meeting or whether or not it's better to just go for reserve funds. So we could use the
budget amendment if we were able to kind of do it in that way. So it's one of two options. So, and and so for our scheduling purposes, when do you anticipate having uh the memoranda that you just described? So, Kevin had asked for two more weeks. So, probably
um that was last week, so maybe another week. Okay, Harry. Um so, I can deal with people raising their hands or I can deal with people putting their name in the chat. I can't deal with both.
Sorry, Harry. I forgot. Um, so Joselyn and then Anthony. Danell had raised his hand. Dell had raised his hand. And so Joselyn, Denell, and then Anthony. Thanks very much. Um, I just wanted to
flush out a couple of things. First of all, I wasn't aware that there had been a failure at the transfer station. Has had that been discussed before? So, this is something that happened. I want to say I'm not sure exactly when it happened, but um
three or four weeks ago. Yeah. The DPW has been dealing with um they have an emergency permit in order to uh continue to use the station and have the trash. Um so now we're trying to figure out what the fix would be, whether it be, you know, shoring up the building and the floor or whether or not
we need a structure that could accommodate the trash. So these are uh a couple of options that they're considering. Is there any idea what caused that failure? Well, I I think the building itself has been in disrepair. It's part of the reason why we asked for feasibility money at the last town meeting to to
look at the overall DPW um footprint so that we could figure out what to do. Um unfortunately, the floor failed before we could get that study completed. Thank you, Melissa. My other question relates to the transportation matter because I know there's been some controversy about
um using the funds funds that were previously used for I think medical transportation for seniors. I may have gotten that wrong. Um and that this proposal will actually take away from that program and again I
this may be misinformation but that's that's my current understanding. So will there be an opportunity to discuss that or has this decision been made? What is the status of that? So the transportation board made the recommendation but ultimately it's town meeting that makes the decision on the
appropriation of funds. So um I am having lunch on Friday with the council on aging director so I can make sure. I thought it was a collaborative proposal. So um you know I'll get more information after I have um after I meet with her. Okay. My last question relates to the
golf course because um it may be no secret that I'm a dark sky proponent and um you know I know the idea of lighting the the driving range has been floated but I also know that it hasn't been formally discussed by the park and
recreation commission. It came up on an agenda item but it was pulled. So you know I I just want to I suppose give some heads up. you know that could be considered in in my view it would be considered a substantial alteration of an open space. Clearly it would be
changing dramatically changing the character um of the golf course and there needs to be there's been no public process. So there would need to be a robust public process because as you can imagine lighting up the um driving range like an
airfield would be presumably very um considered an interference and you know a quality of life issue for the neighbors. So that needs to happen I think before there's any discussion of budget and I just really wanted to highlight that there has been no public process and I
believe there needs to be a significant public process including perhaps you know a committee of five or committee of seven whatever it is as a design review. No I mean I I definitely have encouraged the the um the team to make sure that they reach out to you know I think
Michael Berger is is a liazison as well. Um Carol I'm not sure if he's reached out to you yet either. Um, but I do know that, you know, with the park and rec commission, I would I would anticipate that they would have some sort of public process noticing of butters and all of that as well. Um, so May May is probably
more appropriate for this type of proposal. Got it. Thank you. Dell, did you have a comment or question? Uh, yes. So, I had Thank you, Harry. I had a two finger on what Josyn just said in regards to the lights because you
know so I was a big I'm still am a big supporter of having the lights like Joselyn. So um because of the revenue that that it will bring because of the money that it will bring. So I know it was there hasn't been a discussion about it. I remember years ago in the design
review of that before before we got it you know the bird sanctuary was there so we couldn't do the driving range at first. Um, so, um, when will there be a public discussion on the lights? Because that
was the and I know that was one of the the major issues, but I mean that revenue stream if the butters are are are cool with it. Um, have have they been notified like Jos said, has there been a discussion about that? Because I know that was a problem, but I know that would be a major revenue stream if if
the abuters allow allow that to happen. Thank you. Yeah. So if we wait for the annual town meeting, it would become part of the normal budget process. But then there would also be a separate process that park and wreck as they consider the proposal itself. So I know that they've just started talking about it. So it is still early on, but I would anticipate
that they would also be having a public process as well. Thank you. I mean even the restaurant should be included in that discussion. You know what I mean? That that the restaurant that's there because they have to feed folks who are at the drive. Thank you. Yep. Um, Anthony,
hey Melissa, if I wanted to if I wanted to learn more about the bond auction, is there a place I could go to on the town website or can I send you an email with my questions on how the bond auction went? Yeah, you can send me an email. I I think that when we went in front of the board for approval, there was material in that. I can pull that out. But, um,
if you have specific questions, I'm happy to answer them. Cool. And that's it. Thank you. Y, Carlos, thanks Harry. Hi, Melissa. Um I wanted to see if you could expand a little bit more on the transfer station. Uh so are
there options? Is it to like a short-term fix to structurally fix the the slab that that has been poked? And then the other the second option would be that can't be done a
temporary as in for the next 3 to 5 year outdoor structure that keeps the trash from from getting wet. I guess is that is that the reason why um the alternative would be used? Yeah, I think you know once we get the
full picture from DPW in the building department then we can we can talk about the thought process behind the decision that we're proposing. Okay. But those are the like the two directions that those are the two things that we've discussed. We've met on this twice internally. So um and you know DPW and
building has been doing a lot of research around it as well. Okay. And then uh does uh Massachusetts EPA have to or Department of Environmental Protection have to get involved or so we would need um you know we're currently I think operating under an
emergency permit. So to the extent that we need an extension um I think you know Kevin just said you know we need to demonstrate that we're working through the problem and that we're you know trying to find a solution. So and do you know how long that extension is I mean that permit is for? Um I don't know. I know initially it was
30 days, but I think we've be we've gone beyond that. Okay. Thank you so much. Yep. Uh Fran Parlor. Hi. Uh two comments. One is um I tried to look into this warrant article on the website and it's the only link that when
you press goes nowhere. So, um I just noticed that myself when I tried to call it up for this meeting. So I will look to fix that because it should be working. So now regarding the TNC,
it is true that the head of the senior center and the head of the teen center have a proposal for a pilot project to use $158,000 of TNC
um for this pilot transport. It's also true and the committee should be aware for overall budget issues that the senior center is losing $200,000
in opera funds for transportation and previously had $100,000 devoted to the other transportation pro projects and over 11,000 people use or trips have
been made on the medical transport and there how shall I say it there's a panic among seniors about what is going to happen and you know our seniors that the senior
center serves are the elders that have where inflation has gone beyond their pensions and or who are real estate poor and they can't afford paying for medical transport
um you know having the senior center charge for it. So although the pilot program um you know is something people are very interested in, we're in desperate need of finding funds for
medical transport. And I hope the brilliant minds here could help uh you know Emily and the senior center figure out ways of um getting this done because it's essential program and it's in dire
straits for next year. Yeah. Unfortunately, I hope that clarifies the the difference. Yeah, I mean I I know that TNC funds are not long-term either. They're supposed to sunset at a certain point. Um, so the this isn't really a long-term funding source for that propo for that program
either un unfortunately unless they extend it, but I I I haven't heard anything about that. Thank you. Uh, Janice Khan. Yes, thanks Harry. So, both the golf course and the transfer station are in precinct 15. And so, I want to pro
provide a little bit of context for this board um for the the advisory committee. So, for the golf course, as Joselyn said, there's so far there's been no public process. And I appreciate Donnell's comments. Um, and in wanting
this um it's it's important that there be some negotiation with the abutters. These lights can be very intrusive and um and we want to make sure that it will work for everyone. So, you know, absolutely public process. this should
not be fasttracked and my understanding is that it might be in next year's CIP was one of the um one of the proposals I heard. So just you know just adding a little context there. I do want to definitely add some context to the
transfer station. So my neighborhood, my street directly abuts the transfer station and um when this there was a failure which was about 2 and 1/2 weeks ago um we started getting noxious odors in the neighborhood. So to the point
where people could not um be outside um at all, you know, without being really uncomfortable. And I want to I want to give you a message. Um, I'm hoping that Melissa will convey this for me that this our neighborhood received zero
communication from the town as to what was happening. So, we did our own detective work and I will tell you what's happening is that there are like sales, huge sails that have been put on the transfer station and the garbage is
being dumped um many feet high on the ground under this sail. And the way the sale is, it's directing the odors to the neighborhood. So, um I know this was an emergency situation and we get it and my
neighborhood has always worked very closely with DPW. We have a very good relationship with DPW. Um to me, this was an a real aberration that the neighborhood was not at all contacted. No one reached out. No one talked to us.
um you know, we can't walk through the woods to Skyline Park now at certain hours because it is really terrible. And I I there's another thing I've been noticing too, Melissa, is that the trucks that are coming in when they
leave that there's trash on both sides of of Incinerator Drive now that they seem to fly out of the trucks and so that should also be looked at. I noticed that some random people have been coming with plastic bags to pick up garbage.
But really, we shouldn't be doing that. That the people who are bring trucking the trash in should really be more considerate um of the area. This is a reserve. This is a natural environment. It's embedded in a natural environment
and and we really care about it. And so, um, so I'm saying this because I I really want the town to talk to the neighborhood and really keep us apprised of of any developments and really work with us um
to make this really very terrible situation for my neighborhood to make it just a little bit more understandable and to have us be sort of partners in helping to resolve this faster. Um it is it is really a a terrible situation. Um
public health should also be involved in taking a look at it. And the other concern we have is that they're planning to put deodorizers on and so the neighborhood is very concerned that these not be toxic in any way, right? um contaminating the
groundwater around the area because that does also flow into Lost Pond which also then flows into the other waterways that it connects to. So again, we want to be partners and and we really um we were
very much blindsided by this and uh so that's that's the tale from my part of Brookline, but um I just wanted to share it with everyone to know that um that this is really an issue and and a concern of the neighborhood and really
beyond because we take everybody's trash um right to our street. So, um, so thank you for listening and and you know, I hope we can work together also. Yep. I'll bring that back to the team
for sure. Thank you very much. Thank you. Uh, Dennis, that seems to be it for comments. I'm assuming warrant article 3 will simply go back to the subcommittee. Yes. So, um I think I'm I'm hoping that
the members of the subcommittee um were listening closely to the concerns so that many of these can be raised um when uh the memo is uh is available in a couple of weeks uh and and follow up with with Melissa and then we'll bring
it back then we'll bring it back here. Uh we'll schedule that with Carla once we have the timetable a little bit better worked out. Um sorry. Um thank you. Could I just ask one final question because it might be timely. Um
I think you said Melissa it it was an old building and it fell apart, but has there been an investigation as to what caused this? Because you know obviously if a third party caused it, you know, whether it was the vendor or one of the vendor subsidiaries or one of the vendors agents, you know, uh clearly the
town should go after them if it was negligence. Was there an investigation or did someone just casually say, "Oh, it was an old building." Um, I'm I'm not sure what um what what you know how who determined what the cause of the of the failure is,
so I'd have to get back to you on that one. Thank you. Um, so let's move on to um final item on article four. Uh, Neil, I think that's you again. No, that would be me again. So, warrant
article 4 uh is a petition by the town clerk. Uh I think we're all familiar with the uh travailes of uh updating uh the bylaw uh that's been going on in the town clerk's office for some time. Uh we
dealt with a resolution on that subject six months ago or last uh last town meeting. Uh this uh I believe is the last piece and it is intended uh to be non-s substantive in terms of not
changing the law in Brooklyn but to correct for changes in the names of various boards, committees and commissions. Uh otherwise make non-substantive changes to the general bylaw uh as the final step in completing
the bylaw update project. Um the uh town clerk was not uh at uh our subcommittee meeting. Uh but I did have u several conversations with him prior to uh and a conversation
with town council uh and uh reviewed specifically the question of how is this vetted uh and what assurance do we have because we're the we the subcommittee and the advisory
committee are in no position to go through and uh and be assured heard that these are nonsubstantive changes. Uh the the answer is that they've been reviewed by town council. They've been reviewed by the town clerk. They've been reviewed
by uh the various departments as necessary. Uh all conclude, I'm told that they're not substantive. And if you go through the list of items as printed in the warrant, uh you can pretty much
determine the same that nothing indicates that these are uh substantive changes. They are just changes uh to update and there are lots of overtime changes in the names of boards, committees and commissions. The um uh
there there are two amendments. uh one uh well both u clear with the moderator there is one addition uh it's cited in the u in the minutes in the report it adds I quote chapter 4.8 8 is
amended to change quote executive officer of elder affairs unquote to quote executive office of aging and independence unquote. And then the last uh is a correction in section 5.3.2
to correct the spelling of Mstead. the um uh what I just said was pretty much the discussion that the subcommittee had. There were no public comments uh during the public hearing. Um
the there there there was some question uh and we kept it light and we didn't want to spend a lot of time. Um you'll you'll notice on the list that um we're changing bylaw in its various spellings to bylaw with hyphen. Um I'm pretty sure
that's not going to change the law in Brooklyn whether it's bylaw hyphen bylaw not hyphen. um you know there and capitalized or not also presumably yeah and capitalized or not it you know it's it's not going to mislead anybody
but for the purpose of consistency and in particular consistency going forward a conversation that I had with the town clerk is who is going to be responsible for
um checking for style let's call it that um style inconsistency of these sorts of non-s substantive uh issues going forward. Who is going to do this? Is this going to fall on the um
you know BDI uh members of the U advisory committee or you know the various subcommittees or the subcommittee chairs and inevitably these sorts of changes are going to have to be made again. Uh, and so let me just
say that I'm having a conversation uh with the clerk and with town council about how we might avoid uh having to bring this to town meeting in a way that doesn't allow for
shenanigans of pretending something is nonsubstantive when in fact it is. So stay tuned for that. I just want to let you know the uh the question of who is going to be responsible for vetting warrant articles consider it rhetorical
until it isn't. Um having said that uh as amended the subcommittee recommends favorable action on article 4 unanimously. So, it's unfortunate that we don't have um town clerk uh either at the your
subcommittee meeting or here tonight evidently. Um town council is here. Um Joe, do you have anything to to add to this, particularly as it relates to that
fundamental question of whether the um the meat of some of these articles might have been subtly changed as a result of this process? Uh good evening, Joe Kalan, town council, and I apologize for my video not appearing. I have uh a new work from
home setup and I'm still figuring it out. So, um you don't get to see my pretty face uh tonight, but um I agree with everything Neil said. Um my one addition would be it wasn't just town council. It was actually four lawyers in my office that we reviewed this. So, uh
I gave it to all of our lawyers uh except our labor and employment lawyer to see if there was anything substantive and it was unanimous among the four of us that there wasn't anything. Uh we gave uh Ben some suggestions on things that we saw um that he did add. So,
um, you know, the the idea of whether a change is nons substantive, you know, is kind of a hard thing because some lawyers may say, whoa, you know, bylaw with a hyphen means something totally different. Um, you know, and then a a court's going to have to decide that.
Um, I can't stop lawyers from making stupid arguments, but, um, in our opinion, none of the changes are substantive. But if anyone has um you know any concerns about a particular change, I'm happy to uh uh address that
except for adding a hyphen. I lost on that argument. Uh I want to go with the SJC style guide that had no hyphen, but even I didn't get everything I wanted. So it's not too late. Um Susan Granhoff.
Okay, thank you. So, uh, I applaud the town clerk for undertaking this endeavor. I think it's much needed and way overdue. Um, just to clarify, I think one of the
important subtle changes of this is that it makes it clear that there is one town general bylaw with individual chapters and not as we keep referring, well, this
warrant article is a new bylaw. They're not separate bylaws. we have a town general bylaw and then within that there are individual chapters that are added or amended and I think that's an
important conceptual change. Um, one thing I have a couple of of questions related uh to this change and that is uh I checked the zoning bylaw as it currently appears on the town website
and as it appears in the e version of it and that still uses uh articles instead of chapters. So, I'm assuming that at some time in the future, town clerk will be giving a
uh submitting a warrant article that comparably changes the terminology of the zoning bylaw and does does town council know about plans for doing so? Um, yes, I do. and and that is Ben's
intention that um I am kind of surprised at that um distinction because it's the same vendor, but um we would there is an effort once the general bylaw has gone through their process to to then kind of match up um the zoning bylaw which was
done a couple years ago. Um, but you know that there there is an effort to kind of come up with a town of Brooklyn bylaw style guide and that's again kind of in the future after this by I'm sorry after this warrant article is adopted or hopefully
okay I was before I became an attorney I was uh a college textbook developmental editor for 25 years. So this is my jam. This is the kind of thing I actually care about in addition of course to the law. Um, the other question I have is
even though it's not part of this article, I think it's critically important that the terminology used on the town website reflects these changes because otherwise it's it's very confusing and sends a mixed message.
It's not a requirement under any of these laws, but I think it's essential if we're making this change that we want it to be consistently the terminology be consistently and actively referred to on the website. And again, it's unfortunate
town that that the town clerk isn't here, but I hope that that's conveyed. I also think that the town meetings members association handbook should be made consistent with these changes because the people the
petitioners are often looking to that handbook for stylistic guidance. And so there's a lot of um different parts to making certain that this is fully implemented in uh a consistent way. And
I think that it's all of this is part of that. Um, as a subcommittee chair, I don't think it's a problem for us to simply make certain that future warrant assuming this is passed by by town
meeting and approved by the AG's office uh to make certain that that any future warrant articles have the correct style. But I agree with you, Joe, that it would be very helpful if we could have uh a
simple statement of style as far as terminology goes. And particularly when you look at the zoning bylaws, again, they're still using the plural. And so I think that it's an important uh
conceptual change to go from bylaws to by law uh with or without a hyphen. Um the other question I had and it's just a question within the general revisions it there's um one sentence
that says references to the zoning bylaws and zoning bylaws are amended to read zoning bylaw and with the correct terminology. Uh, do we not want the same thing to say references to the general
bylaws and general bylaws are amended to read general bylaw? Even though if you actually read through the the smaller aspects uh the individual aspects of the article, that is essentially what we're saying. But shouldn't there be a simple
statement of that so that it's clear that this is in fact what is being done? Um I can check with Ben. I did take notes on your suggestions. Um and um you know one thing about the the website um
you might be familiar with Christine Medcaf's um efforts at branding um you know so I would I would uh speak to her about making the website consistent. Um we actually do have a working group on making sure the website is um compliant
with the ADA so everything is OCR and accessibility. So that could be shifted over to that group too but that's certainly something we could do. I would just suggest it um it is not something that Ben probably has the capacity to do but our IT staff and Christina. So
okay thank you. That's all I had to say. Okay, Labovitz. Thanks, Harry. Um, first I Susan, you took the words right out of my mouth. My one of my suggestions was going to be that since we are in effect establishing
a new new style parameters for the construction of our bylaw. Um, perhaps we could think about integrating some kind of style guide into the town meeting handbook or town meeting members handbook rather. Um or we could develop one under the opaces of the AC and
potentially send to petitioners along with their questionnaires before they go to their public hearings at subcommittees. I think there's a couple junctures we could consider for when to provide a resource to that effect to uh warrant article petitioners. Um I also am a little disappointed that a
representative of the town clerk's office isn't here mainly so I could thank them. Um, this is, as we know from our discussions back in May and before that, a massive undertaking that that Ben and his team has been leading on for
several years now. Um, and I, you know, I think it's worth celebrating when something of that kind of magnitude is accomplished and what in what looks to be a very promising way. Um, and and I do also in the in the vein of kind of questioning whether this addresses every
individual change we'll ultimately need to make, which I'm sure it doesn't. Um, I still think we can't we shouldn't let the enemy be the the or the perfect be the enemy of the good rather in this case. Um, I think what's really important to keep in mind, uh, with this
warrant article is this is what will authorize Ben and his team to move forward with getting the e-code version of the general bylaw up and running on the website, which um, if if folks recall our conversations at town meeting in May, will really be bringing us into
alignment with comparable communities in greater Boston and in Norfick County. Um, and in particular for members of the public, I think the benefit really can't be understated in making our bylaws much more accessible, easier to digest, easier to search for individual chapters
and provisions. Um, so I think this is a key article in bringing forward or to fruition one of the really outstanding transparency initiatives that the town has been undertaking for several years and I look forward to enthusiastically supporting it.
Thank you. Thank you, uh, Lisa Jonas. Well, this is very minor, but with regard to the hyphen or not hyphen on bylaw, um, that's that has been one of my most frustr frustrating inconsistencies in the bylaw. So, I'm
glad it's being addressed, but I did happen to do research and I agree with Joe that the lack of a hyphen is what is the current uh more appropriate um spelling of
bylaw? And so I'm just wondering on what basis was Joe overturned because it seems like he's he's he's recommended what generally it seems should have been uh what was used. And I
know this is very minor, but this has been a particular um irritation of mine as I've been reading the bylaw. Um, I I I would suggest you take that up at Ben, but I don't want you to think that it was a violent um arm wrestling that I lost out
on. But uh but uh I I expressed my opinion and it wasn't listened to. So yes, I I will point out you'll have to ask him why. So just as an aside, if you go to the town of Arlington's website, you see inconsistent uh
spelling, capitalization, and hyphenation just like ours. Right? This is a well understood problem that I think must start with the original enabling legislation having a hyphen in it at the state level. Right. Which authorizes the town to
enact bylaws with a hyphen. Right. Right. Right. Interestingly though, the same section when it talks about corporations and their boards of directors and corporate bylaws and insurance company bylaws, you start
seeing inconsistencies, hyphen or no hyphen. And that may have to do with when the particular uh statute was enacted. Alisa, are you all set? Well, I mean,
it's so minor, but um I guess I am just thinking if we're bothering to make changes, why wouldn't we be using what's the most appropriate modern um usage? Very minor.
Well, do you want to make an amendment? Uh will it uh Joe if if you do it now it'll be an amendment forever after it will require a warrant article. Well Joe if there's any reason not to I
sure I would make that amendment. Okay. So when we get to amendments Dennis um call on Alisa. Dennis did you have another comment? Yeah I had a um a question actually. So, and it this is a question that by rights
would be for town, but it's possible that um Joe or Melissa may have some insight into this. So, the description for this warrant uh article basically says after this is approved,
then we will be able to update the uh website with, you know, the with the e-code uh version. Um, and that's undeniably true, but I would I was wondering if we had a better sense for how soon after when we would actually
expect to see the fruits of this labor um available to the public. I don't have a good answer. I'm sorry. I All I know is it's soon. We have, you know, it in a pretty good form now. So, I think it is just waiting for town meeting approval. Um, and then it could
be pretty quick after that. But um Ben Ben has a much better idea of the details on that on that schedule. And then do you happen as as part of um of this I know we've been doing an enormous amount of digitization uh uh and and this reconciliation and so
we will clearly have uh the bylaw in its current uh adjusted uh you know cleaned up uh state available. Um, how far back, if at all,
I is the history preserved as part of that process? Again, that would be a question for Ben. I know some of it is. I don't think a lot of it is. So, but you know, how far back it goes, again, um, you know, Ben has been, we've only been assisting, but
Ben's been, you know, running this this process. Yeah. All right. Thank you. I will follow up with Ben. Harry Freriedman. I hate to be a killjoy, but in my 20some years in town meeting, I've seen a lot of time wasted, but this
has to go to the very top. I think this is a complete waste of time and money. I would point out that consistency is a hobgoblin of little minds and I will be a voting against this. Neil Gordon.
Yeah, thank you. Um, thank you for your for your comment there. We we you know, we deal with the warrant articles as they come without judging them at the subcommittee level. Um, I do want to bring to the attention of the
subcommittees and committee chairs in particular who are dealing with um uh and making recommendations that may include bylaws. Uh, article four will be voted um early on night one
uh and will include uh I suspect it's going to pass and I suspect that the changes that are in here for the most part will be made without amendment with or without the hyphen. Um and uh I
suggest that we use that as our style guide less uh lest we get to article 9 for example and you know don't you know use the word chapter instead of article and you know bylaw with or without the hyphen depending upon what article 4
says and whatever whatever else might be in there because I suspect that's going to if it's not pointed out before the vote um the bylaw will be the bylaw and the inconsistencies will be right back
starting with the AG's approval of article 4, article 9, and whatever else is in the is on the list. I don't know whether that changes your vote or anybody else's vote. Harry, not mine, but thank you, Neil. Um, Susan, put your name in the list if you
want to speak. Okay. Linda Olsson Pelky. You're muted, Linda. I'll start over. Thank you. Um, I have a question. I think it's for town council, and I'm wondering what the thinking is
behind leaving in chapter 5.10 neighborhood conservation districts. Now, I know that we had a court case about the one neighborhood conservation district that we tried to adopt and we lost.
And yet, here it is in our bylaw. And what's being amended is the verbiage around when a building permit can be issued. And I'm also kind of surprised
to see that in the bylaw at all, which makes me wonder, are all the procedures that the building commissioner goes through for determining whether a permit request is rejected or not, etc., etc. Is that all
in the bylaw or is it in the zoning bylaw? And why are we leaving in neighborhood conservation districts? So, let me start with uh why we leaving it in and where it and I'll answer the where it is in a second.
Um, so the why we're leaving it in um again, we kind of considered I don't want that to make you think that we had a three-hour meeting about the consideration, but we considered um you know, excluding um you know, bylaws that had been struck
down or not approved. Um I thought that was an extra effort. Um, and you know, would suggest that it be done separately. Um, this was really just trying to be style. Um, it could be arguably nonsubstantive
because I'll tell I'll tell Dan, you can't enforce that bylaw uh because it's been struck down. Um, but there's lots of examples of this. So, if you go into the mass general laws, you'll see a lot of crimes that are still punishable by death. There was a constitutional
amendment in the 70s eliminating the death penalty. The legislature has never gone through and struck every single penalty by you know by death. We could um but there's a lot of effort in that that people then get um
exercised about you know kind of revisiting that. Um, so it was my suggestion that we don't strike bylaws that have been not approved or struck down by the courts. I look as a separate effort.
All right. Except that there is at least one of these that I've seen in here that was about the community preservation committee, I think, and it was somehow what I'm gleaning from the fact that
it's taken out here. Somehow it got put into the bylaws before the town vote happened on it. Then the town vote failed and then it gets the reference to the state statute has to get taken out
of the bylaw. So this contradicts what you just said about not doing the removal of things that weren't adopted. So I'm just I don't really care, but I'm just pointing out to you that that's an inconsistency. Yeah. Well, I'll double check on that,
but I understood that as as like an editorial comment or an editor's comment that we made a reference to something wrong or like um you know the kind of example with the um you know, Elder Affairs, you know, it was executive office of elder affairs and now it has a new name that I don't even know what it
is. So like you know that that I think I look at that as more of an editor's note, but I can double check on that. Yeah, I think maybe you do want to look at it because I thought it was relevant because of the date being 2006 because Yeah. All right. Thank you.
Doesn't go off. Oh, okay. So although I'm just as eager as as Neil to get this implemented, I really think that doing so in the middle of town meeting
so that all of the warrant articles that come after a vote is taken on warrant article 4 suddenly needs to use the correct language is going to complicate the process needlessly and create a lot of paperwork that doesn't need to be
done. I think we should wait until after the attorney general has approved this and then everything can be changed at once. I think there may be a simple way of making that change so that it's a universal change and I don't know
exactly the the mechanism that the town clerk's office uh would use but it might be a lot simpler to do it at that stage than having each of the individual uh warrant articles that will be going to town meeting after warrant article 4
have to individually incorporate this change. So, I just think let's wait until after the AG's office has approved this and then everything uh both the prior warrant articles and the ones that we pass at this current uh town meeting
can can be changed at the same time. David Pollock. So I I I sort of have come at this from the opposite end from the comment Susan just made and as a subcommittee chair for the last month I've been typing
bylaw very carefully with a hyphen and without an s and and made sure that that lang proposed language is now consistently throughout everything coming through land use subcommittee. So, should Alisa move uh to amend
uh what's on the table with bylaw, I recommend against amending it just because I've already been incorporating it. Thank you. Uh Linda Olsson Pali, sorry to bring this up, but I did see somewhere that we're correcting the
spelling of Mstead, which is very important. However, I'm reading it spelled incorrectly on page five of my warrant article. Um, under the demolition delay bylaw, it lists the uh
local historic districts and it says Mstead Richardson. Is that the Mstead we're changing? Because it's not marked here. Yes. Okay. Why isn't it I think obvious I think it's specified as 5.3.2.
Okay. In in the U in the report. Uh well, okay, but this is the thing we're adopting and it's not spelled correctly. So, it says correct spelling in section. It's an amendment. Correct spelling.
All right. That's the motion that will be made. Okay. All right. All right. Thank you. Um if I could get a quick two finger, Harry. Sure. I had a conversation with the moderator. uh the moderator would take if article 4 passes and we have uh bylaw
u amendments that use the old style. Uh I I'm paraphrasing he would accept those sorts of changes as scribners equivalent of scrier's errors. Um I think his exact words were with regard to hyphen or not
whatever I think he said. um he'll take so he'll either way uh he'll take it as uh uh Scribner's error I think you know use your best judgment as to which whether article 4 passes or does not but
I don't think it's going to require um amendment uh from the floor of town meeting it's just going to going to require uh reference by the moderator to where those changes are going to be Um, Janice,
the test of whether they are in fact nonsubstantive. Harry, were you saying we're all set? No. Um, I said Janice Khan. Yeah. Ah, okay. Sorry, Dennis. And actually, this is I've been thinking about your earlier comment, which is why I'm commenting
now. We went some years ago there was an effort to um to have in our bylaws the historical evolution of our of each bylaw what is a chapter now I guess and and I don't know Dennis whether that was
you who that was me that was you who was doing it that's what I thought and and really it makes a lot of sense since it is a living document and I think that the history of each part is relevant. It it tells us a
lot about our thinking, our evolution as a community and and I think that's not an insignificant um issue. I I look at the bylaw for I I refer to it all the time when I want to learn something that adds another
dimension to us as a as a municipality. And I very I would like to see that not just retained but enhanced in whatever we do. I think that there is a lot of value to
that. I I go through the old the old Brookline histories all the time, the annual reports and there is a lot of really excellent information in there. It talks it it gives us a real flavor of of the people who lived here. um how we
lived, what was important, what we valued. And um so I think that's not an insignificant comment that you made earlier, Dennis, and I totally subscribe to to putting some effort into that. You
So Dennis, now we're all set. All right. So, uh, we're going to take a motion from the subcommittee for favorable action on warrant article 4 as amended and, uh, by them and printed in
our packet. Right. That's Yes. Uh so uh on behalf of the subcommittee I will move uh article 4 as printed in the warrant plus the uh two amendments
uh that are in the packet uh the first adding chapter 4.8 and so on uh the uh executive office of elder affairs language and the second being in section 5.3.2 to the correction of the spelling
of Mstead. Right? So I think that under the assumption that that that this passes in becomes the motion, we will still have to have a conversation with the moderator and others about the
right way to present this as something that the public can read and and be generally aware of. But we don't have to solve that as we stand here tonight. My my so my intent my my intent for the combined reports
were to include the entire motion. Right. Right. And then uh also rather than a black line of the motion um has changed from the warrant because
there are only these little little changes. I think we just say it. Yeah. Uh, but I mean there's supposed to be a a a a full revision of the bylaws available for the public to, you know, pursue if they want to see what the
combined version looks like post editing. We weren't mailing that out to everyone, but it was supposed to be available and I want to make sure that it is. Um, all right. And uh uh before we go to vote on this, Alisa, are you making a motion?
Uh, sure. Since why not do what's currently the most appropriate spelling even if David has already worked on changing it to by hyphen law kind of documents what Susan was saying that it's kind of confusing to do it in the
middle of town meeting. Um I amend that by hyphen L aw be changed to y l aw. Yeah, the question is
it's easy to say that standardize on the use of you know by y l aw as the canonical representation of that concept. What I'm concerned about is the right way to turn it into right
um uh you know the actual motion for town meeting which is going to be an enumeration of every single place where that word exists. No, no, that's not No, no, because in article 4 itself, the second of the
general revisions, it's right on, it starts article four, then there's an introductory paragraph, then there is a heading called general revisions. The second is the term quote bylaw without the hyphen is amended to
read bylaw with the hyphen. I think if you just reverse those that becomes the amended motion. Can you um Are you looking at that on on a screen right now? Because if you are, can you share your I'm I'm looking at what I'm looking at
what they you know I get one of those like a real one. Ah okay. Um Susan Yeah. Also, uh there are individual underneath a couple of lines below what uh Neil just
read, uh references to the zoning bylaws and zoning bylaws that one has no hyphen, one has a hyphen are amended to read zoning bylaw with a hyphen. That
too would have to be changed. Um, so does the one about ordinance. Yep. Yeah. So, there may be some minor ones, but I would think that for the purpose of of
our vote tonight, it might be sufficient simply to say that the ma the main thing would be to spell bylaw without a hyphen as you know, and and wherever that gets implicated throughout that that change
would be made rather than going through all of these pages and making certain that every single reference within the u uh uh
lines and lines of copy uh say the same thing. I think if we understand what it is that you're changing, it can then be considered a scriber error where it it would appear with a hyphen instead of without a hyphen and it could be easily
changed. I'll find them all in preparing the report for the combined reports. Yeah. Okay, that sounds great. Um because I because I I think it is 100% clear to everyone here what the intent
of what we're voting on is, but it's extremely important that we can figure out the right way to communicate that in the in the report so the town meeting can understand how to vote on it without having to think about it in layers. I will sub I'll submit my draft of the
revised u of the motion right uh to Dennis. Okay. Hopefully with all of the corrections we'll get one more one more read and then you know if we miss one as you said it's a scrier's error right and then we'll and then presumably
this will go back to um select board as well. Um uh all right. So we're going to um um go ahead. Linda Olsson Pali. Oh um I didn't realize I was on the list. Hang on.
I was looking something up. I actually am sympathetic to being consistent with the state enabling legislation. I think that makes a whole lot of sense. And so I was trying to find out if Dennis really was correct that that is where the reference comes from. But I haven't
gotten there yet cuz I was frantically researching while we were talking. So, um I guess maybe Joe knows the answer to that question. I know the answer to the question. The enabling legislation that authorizes
towns to enact bylaws uses the hyphen. Okay. Do you know? Well, I guess it's not relevant yet until we go to amend the zoning bylaw, but I believe it's the case in in that enabling legislation as
well that it's hyphened. So, that makes me want to vote against Alisa. I'm sorry. No, no, no. It's a minor issue. I don't really care. I'm just given what I read it seemed like
the alternative approach is the approach that's currently in use and um whatever happens happens. But I do want to mention to Harry, the reason why inconsistencies actually are very important is if you're doing
research and you're searching for a term, you might not be catching all the different spellings of that term. So if you're looking That's only if you're using computers, Alisa. Oh, sorry. Yes, I forgot. Yeah, by the
way, that concept is is one of the reasons we have all of these updates here because when we changed selectman to select board member and select board and so on and so forth, we didn't capture everything that had, you know,
an apostrophe something or other. Elise, did you want to ask a question or was that simply rhetorical? over on the dance. No, I do have a question. So, I I'm I'm trying to follow along with all of these different things and um I'm I'm an
editor um for the Gender Equity and Museums uh newsletter. So, I'm just really curious about this back and forth that we're having about a hyphen. Um, and largely I think we're spending a lot of maybe a little too much time on it, but
I I'm a little confused. If we go with this less formal just bylaw sans the hyphen um what are we achieving here? Nothing. It it it's not so why change it? Well, it's not less formal. It's just
that is that is the current way that that term is spelled in modern American English. So not even sure that it is it's a contemporary form, but right, we're a governing body that has a very
long history um and consistency with a hyphen. So I'm just wondering why we're spending so much time in a hyphen. We actually have an inconsistency. We have the standard. The inconsistency
is that it appears in both forms throughout our B throughout the bylaw. We have to we want to standardize on one or the other. I see. And so the question is which one do we standardize on? Is there even I say just pick one. Let's move on. Flip a coin.
Clerk already did. I think I'm next. Terry, you are next. Although I will point out that town council has raised his hand. Okay. Well, I yield to to to no one in my uh observation that we spend far too much time on stuff uh uh like this, but
I will also um say that were I uh able to vote on on this, I would be voting for bylaw with a hyphen rather than bylaw without a hyphen. In part because the scale here. Wow. in part because it
estab I this is like once in four years man it's about the least substantive thing you could possibly imagine you're telling the vote and I'll tell you why it's because it's because it it it's because it it reads
to me like a um like a proper noun in that in that way you know a noun that has some sort of significance um and and and is meaningful in its own right. And so I prefer that that sort of old-fashioned nature because of the
historical nature of our biolog. I apologize that I broke brought this up. It's I said it was minor. I'm I'm waiting for someone to abstain because they have some financial conflict of interest on this. All right. Well, we haven't had a second on your business. You might have a
conflict. I I'll second it. Okay. Joe, do you have a comment? Um, I just want to for folks to understand there is an inconsistency in our bylaws that we're trying to fix. There is an inconsistency at the state that we can't
point to one thing that says this is right versus that. The courts do not use a hyphen. The legislature does use a hyphen. So, my only interest is we pick one. So, pick one. But there is actually no right answer. Um, bylaw is a with a
hyphen is a little e acronistic. If you actually want to be even more eacronistic, you could spell it with an e by ye hyphen l a w. So, so I ask that you be consistent and pick one. So,
all right. So, I think at this point we're gonna take if I one comment on the length of time, right? Don't confuse the length of time. It's it's 8 o'clock. If this started at 10:15, we would be done in like 45
seconds with this. So we we give it to Okay. Sorry. Go ahead. All right. So we have an an amendment offered by Lisa Jonas to standardize on
bylaw without a hyphen. I am going to um move to the vote on that. Uh, Michael Burgerer. Yes. Is no hyphen. No. Is yes hyphen. Um, he may have left us. I'm not sure.
No. Ben, no. Harry, no. Cliff. Anthony. Advisory committee. Vote yes. I vote no to save the hyphen. Elise. I'm a historian. I'm going to save the hyphen. Uh Harry,
I will join my colleagues and vote no. David Mark, as a person with a hyphen in his name, I would like to thank Elise and the others and vote no and everyone else to vote no. Save the hyphen. Neil Neil votes yes.
Susan, no. Perry, uh no. Kelly, is Kelly here now? Uh, yes. And my answer is no. So, it was yes, I'm here. And I am pro- hyphen, so no.
Okay, Alisa. Well, my daughters have a hyphen in their last name, but I'm still saying yes. Janice, oh, save the hyphen. I'm a no. Ryan, no. Alec,
after much consideration, no. Carol, I'll do whatever my auto correct tells me to do. So, I'm going to abstain. Pam, no. Jocelyn,
well, I just want to point out that the oldest version of all is by law bye l a. So, if we're going with history, we would change it to that. But I am a
yes. Donnell, yes. Linda, Dave, the hyphen, no. Brand, I always thought by law was a weird word, so I vote no.
David, no. Carlos, no. Margaret, yes. Lee, you know, there was a woman who worked for me many years ago used to spell nonetheless with two hyphens and I I
always spent time editing her text to get rid of it, but in this case, I want to keep the hyphen. So, I'm a no. Did she go on to get a job at the New Yorker with LA? I think she just sold her business to New York to CBS for 150
million. No. Okay, Christine. I'm gonna abstain because I could care less either way. All right. You know, I I I'd almost agree with you on that. And how many man hours or person hours did we just waste on this?
All right. The motion uh failed. So now we're going to go back to the main motion, which is for favorable action on warrant article 4 as amended to include the Mstead and aging and independ uh aging and independence references. Michael,
he's not here. Blah blah blah. Down to Anthony. Yes, Elise. Yes. But how are we spelling homestead? I'm just kidding. Oh, it's however it's supposed to be. Um, is
it this? No, there's no A in it. It removes the A. Thank you. Yeah, it should get rid of the A. Okay, I stand corrected. Scrier's error. Harry, no. David Mart,
I'm gonna go with Harry. Say no. Neil, yes. Susan, yes. Perry, yes. Kelly, yes. Alisa, yes. Janice,
I'm going to abstain. I'm not sure it's ready. Brian, yes. Alec with appreciation for the town clerk's hard work on this. Yes. Carol abstain again. Pam. Yes.
Jocelyn. Sorry. Yes. Dell. I'm going to abstain. Linda. Yes. Because we have to reward the clerk for all of his work because remember he wanted us to give him the power to do it
without anyone voting for it or not. So we have to reward him for doing the right thing. Fran, yes. David, yes. Carlos, yes. Margaret,
yes. Lee, I'm with Harry. No. Christine abstain. Okay. By a vote of 16 in favor, three opposed and four abstensions. We
recommend favorable action on warrant article 4 as amended. Harry, you want to give us an update on what um is happening the next couple of meetings? So, we're meeting this Thursday night. We're meeting over Zoom this Thursday
night and we're doing two resolutions. Warrant article 14 on contact information for public officials and warrant article 16, a resolution regarding women's professional basketball.
Next week, we are not meeting on Tuesday the 14th at all. We will meet on Thursday the 16th. It will be a Zoom only and we will be doing the warrant article 9, the renters's
handbook, warrant article 13, a resolution on older population/Fisher Hill property, and warrant article 10 on the renaming of a baseball diamond. Great. Thank you so much. Uh so we will
see you on Thursday. Bye. in tiny little boxes. Oh, David. Yes. Yes. you not that anybody should take the extra time, but um the land use subcommittee is meeting on warrant article 7 tomorrow on Zoom tomorrow at um at 6:00 p.m.
which is the first uh you know public meeting around the um proposed multif family overlay zoning district to re um reuse the building that the public schools of Brooklyn rented for 5 years
and that my monities hasn't used in a number of years and that was sold to a new owner in in March. That will then uh next week proceed to the planning board. Then uh we've scheduled another land use subcommittee for the f the following
week in case we don't conclude our recommendation tomorrow and then it'll come to advisory in in a couple weeks. So if you're interested in you know a sort of a relatively large real estate project um it's it the fireworks start
tomorrow night. Thank you. Uh all right good night everyone. See you soon. Good night.