Heat. Heat. Good. Good evening. I'm Bernard Green, chair of the Brookline Select Board, and this is our regular meeting of the Select Board for October 28th, 2025. First order of business is going into executive session. Um, I move that the
select board go into executive session for the purpose of discussing strategy related to the litigation matters identified in in item two and discussing litigation related to the purchase I'm sorry discussing strategy related to the
purchase exchange lease or value of real property identified in item three. The litigation matter and the real property matter must be discussed in executive session because an open meeting may have a detrimental effect on
the litigation or negotiating position of the town and the chair me so declares an executive session therefore to be necessary. All in favor uh please indicate by saying I. John Vancoyak I >> Paul Warren I >> David Pearlman I rubenstein hi and chair
both. We will return after our executive session, the open session. Heat. Heat. one. >> Good evening. I'm Bernard Green, chair of the Brookline Select Board, and this is our regular meeting of the select
board for October 28th, 2025. Uh, let's start off with announcements and updates. And I'd like to start off with a couple of announcements, couple of announcements. First of all, set your calendar. On Saturday, November
1, at the Coolage Corner Library at 2 PM, the Martin Luther King Jr. Celebration Committee will present another thought-provoking program. It will be dis a discussion by Brooklyn College Professor Jean Theo Harris
discussing her groundbreaking new book, King of the North, Martin Luther King Jr.'s Life of Struggle Outside the South. She will be discussing this with University of Massachusetts Boston professor Lenel Thomas. King of the North is a radical reframing of King's
life and work. Theo Harris reveals a King often overlooked looked in mainstream narratives as a leader who didn't just inspire a movement but stood in solidarity with struggles throughout the nation. And very important, for the
first time in a King biography, Theo Harris gives special attention to the early and pivotable pivotal role of Ketta Scott King as Martin Luther King's partner and political adviser and guidance and guider.
And because of a generous donation from someplace, as you're aware, the committee is able to purchase was able to purchase copies of Theo Theo Harris's book to give to attendees until they run out.
So, a special bonus here. Uh, next, uh, this Sunday, unless David wants to talk about our trip to Harvest Fest, I'll just say a few things. Uh David and I attended Harvest Fest at the golf course in Putterham Woods. It was
an absolutely beautiful day, perfect setting. We had a large turnout and a bonus opportunity of enjoying the newly reopened uh trails in Putterham Woods. Um, many people were responsible for the
wonderful fall weekend event, including the friends of Waterham Woods, Greenspace Alliance, the recreation department, and Justin Lawson, the golf pro at the golf course. The forest and trails are a great resource for residents of this town. So, I urge
people to go and check them out. Any other comments or updates? Why should I let you do that then? Okay. Uh, next public comment. Um, Charlie, you want to
lay out the rules and start the public comment? >> Sure, Bernard. Thank you for joining us for public comment. This is an opportunity for us to hear your perspective on the issues in Brookline that matter to you. Each person speaking tonight is limited to three minutes. You don't need to use the entire time, but
you may if you like. Once 15 minutes has been met, there is an opportunity at the conclusion of the select board's business for additional comments. Members of the public sometimes raise questions during public comment. We may be able to provide a quick answer, but are more likely to work with staff to get a more thorough answer and respond
over email. The onscreen timer will flash orange when you have 30 seconds remaining and red when your time is nearly up. Please conclude your remarks at that time. If you have more to say, you are welcome to send an email to board members expressing your thoughts in greater detail. Any person wishing to speak must begin their comment by
identifying themselves with their full name, either their Brooklyn precinct number or street address, and the specific topic on which they wish to speak. The board encourages, but does not require that remote users turn off their video, turn on their video when uh commenting. The first person signed up
for comment public comment is Sarah Paleio. Um Sarah, I'm gonna look for you. All right, come on up to the to the podium and your three minutes to begin. Yes. >> Yeah, that's fine. The same for the same three minutes if that's all right. Um,
give me just one second here. I am >> getting set up. Okay. >> And give me one second. Trying to find my notes here. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Good evening everyone. Thanks for having
us. Sorry. >> Yes. >> Um, good evening. My name is Sarah Polyatio from Precinct 5. I'm here to speak on behalf of the Lincoln Grounds Capital Project. Um you'll see you actually have our printouts in front of
you in case you want to follow along with the um some images that we prepared for this evening. >> And uh with me is >> Hi everyone, thanks for having us. My name is Bindy Zach. I'm the director of the Lincoln Extended Day program at the Lincoln School where
I've been working for 20 years. Um, just as an additional note, I'm also a volunteer with the Lincoln Green Team and I've been sort of the head of this initiative for a while now. Um, just as a quick background, I think a lot of you folks are already or are aware of this,
but Lincoln School is really new in name only at this point um, in its lifespan. The construction began in 1992. Uh, the ground uh, building opened in 1994. Um, we've had some really beautiful work happen inside the building over the
years. Um, lot of updates in the last couple of years in particular, which we're so grateful for you funding. The school looks amazing. Um, our outdoor space has really suffered over these last 30 years. Um, we are dealing with
multiple issues now, including uh safety, flooding, accessibility, and just sort of long-term accessibility, sorry, sustainability and accessibility of the grounds that we're going to address quickly.
Um, just as from a personal perspective, running the afterchool program at Lincoln School, um, since September of last year, we have put five children in ambulances because they have fallen off the monkey bars and broken their arms. Um, while I understand that monkey bars are a dangerous pastime, this does seem
a little bit excessive and does call into question the surface areas on the bottom of the playground and whether or not they're safe to receive children that fall from the playground equipment. Um, I also think that the accessibility issue is really important. Lincoln School is um the magnet school for motor
disabilities in the town of Brooklyn and we do serve a large population of students that have accessibility needs that are not met by the playground equipment. >> Um, in addition, the grounds themselves uh are suffering from accessibility
issues. the upper uh up what we call the upper playground, the kindergarten playground area. There is no accessible outdoor pathway down from that playground area, which is problematic in uh in an emergency and even just every day with folks trying to get up and down
the two sets of stairs to do drop off and pickup for their kids from the kindergarten classrooms. Um the flooding issues uh have resulted in damage to the building. Uh the auditorium was redone
and then had to be redone again uh after a major storm. Um and then our uh field occasionally turns into a duck pond when uh and heavy rain. So just to quickly wrap up, you funded this project once.
We want to see the funding either restored or uh or renewed for the >> Thank you. Your time is expired. >> Thank you, Charlie. >> Thank you. >> This is uh public comment. Uh for folks who wish to speak, they can raise their hand if they're in the audience or raise
their hand if they're online and we'll promote you to speak. >> Um Bernard, there's 28 people online and I don't see anyone raising their hand to comment. Okay, thank you. Let's close the public uh public comment period and move on to
our miscellaneous calendar. Any corrections uh to the minutes for September or October 21st? Uh Michael, if you sent them in and circulated them. >> Okay. Any other corrections? >> Okay. With um with that, I move approval
of the minutes for October 21st as amended. Um all in favor, please indicate by saying I. John Vanscoyak. >> Hi >> Paul Warren. >> Hi. >> David Pearlman. >> Hi. >> Michael Rubenstein. >> Hi. >> Chair votes.ai. >> Next. I'd like to take in omnibus
fashion items 6B through 6L unless someone would like to pull one of those items out for more detailed discussion or for discussion. Uh yes, David. I do have a question regarding 6D, the question of accepting
the complete streets grant totaling $313,15.96 from Mass DOT. I'm wondering whether this uh at all interferes with any of the many other considerations we have going on right now with Beacon Street,
also with the MBTA, with traffic flow. Just looking for a better understanding of where this fits in. So, I think if someone from DPW is online, we might be able to ask them that, but I'm not sure. Um, usually, you know, if we were able to anticipate this, we would have pulled
someone in for the meeting. So, >> I'm seeing Dan Martin raising his hand. I'm going to promote you, Dan. Um, hopefully you did intend to speak here. You are promoted if you'd like to share your video and audio. >> Great. Thanks, Charlie. Um, Dan Martin from DPW here. Um so in regards to the
grant um it does not interfere with the um MBTA branch accessibility projects um we're just swapping out buttons and countdown timers and if any equipment is being moved as part of the station work it's just going to be removed and reset
so that equipment will get reused um and it's replacing old outdated equipment that's no longer functioning or um in this extra work order equipment that we know is going to fail shortly. All right. Thank you. >> Thank you. Any other questions or items
you want to pull out? >> Okay. I move approval of items 6B through 6L uh in omnibus fashion. All in favor, please indicate by saying I. John Vancoyak. >> Hi. >> Paul Warren. >> Hi. >> David Croman. I >> Michael Rubenstein. >> I chair votes. Okay,
next item is uh our main calendar. Uh first boards and commissions interviews uh interviews with various candidates. Um and we have two commission on diversity, equity, inclusion and community relations, Philip Stman, and
age friendly cities committee David Des. I apologize if I mispronounce that. But uh >> any rate, are they online? >> I don't see Philip Styman online. Um so we may pass may want to pass over Philip for now. >> David is online. David, I'm going to go
ahead and promote you now. >> David, you've been promoted and you can share your video and audio when you're ready. >> Hi everyone. Good to meet you. Good evening. >> David, how do you pronounce your last name? Sorry. >> Des. No, that's been uh always trouble
for me. K through 12 and onwards. >> Des. >> Yeah. Desadza. >> Okay. So, uh introduce yourself and tell us why you're interested in being a member of the age friendly cities committee and um any ideas you have for
your participation on that committee. >> Yeah, absolutely. So, yeah, my name is David Desadz. So, I was actually born in the uh country of uh Georgia in Europe and my parents took uh me and seven of my siblings and we moved to the Boston area in 2001. So, I've been around
Brooklyn like the church I go to is in Brooklyn. So, I've been around this city for quite a bit and I decided this year to uh purchase and uh move to Brooklyn. the uh and so my background so I went to uh university at Wester Poly Technic Institute and I got a a double
bachelor's in computer science and uh business and the past 10 years I've been in tech most of my interests are in I'm a product manager by trade uh working with like Fortune 500 companies uh but most of my interest is with uh big data systems and data analytics and data
science the reason I applied to the age friendly cities I applied to one other one, the age friendly cities. I thought I could do some good. I mean, I'm a problem solver by trade and speaking a little bit with Matt uh who's from age friendly uh cities committee. It looks
like a lot of the uh work and activity they do is you know preparing like data and making presentations to communicate outwards and you know inwards. So, I thought I could do some good there, especially given my background and my interest, you know, to also like help
the public benefit now that, you know, I'm officially a Brooklyn uh citizen and resident. That's a little bit about me. I'm happy to take any questions. >> Okay. Um, have have you attended meetings of the committee?
>> No, this is my first one. >> Okay. But you've talked to people on the committee, >> correct? on the um other than contributing to preparing data and and presentations, what other ideas you have with respect
to the age um with respect to this committee? >> Yeah, the I think the best answer I could give is I'd have to really dive in and understand the situation with uh that that specific subcommittee. maybe learn more about the information, learn
more about the problems and do some analysis and then naturally like ideas will definitely pop in. That's usually how it is in my day job as well. But uh at this time I don't think I have any crazy ideas without kind of seeing what some of the problems are.
>> Uh Paul. >> Yep. Uh thank you Bernard. Thank you David for and welcome to Brooklyn. Um >> thank you. >> I think you said you've just you just moved here. How long have you when how long ago did you move? >> I actually moved like two months ago. So very >> All right. >> Yeah.
>> Excellent. Fresh. Um so um in looking at your application, I just I I found something interesting. You maybe help me. Um you write that uh for the age friendly cities committee, I offer perspective from the 20s to 30s age group representing the needs and
interests of younger to mid-career adults. Um I'm I'm assuming you're familiar what the who the age friendly cities committee is really representing and advocating for. Can you help me with the 2030s age group versus really the
primary focus of the age friendly cities committee? >> Absolutely. So when I wrote that uh paragraph, it was my initial understanding. I think it was a shortcoming of understanding from my side. I thought it was the full spectrum of ages in Brooklyn. But then when I met with Matt who's on the subcommittee,
they explained it's mostly catered towards the, you know, the older generation and figuring out like how to make it more accessible for them and how to since the population is growing, how do you make their dayto-day a little bit better in Brooklyn?
>> Right. So, so that's um now that you have that better understanding, when I read your application, I was thinking, "Oh, he's a he did he cut and paste that from his bicycle advisory committee application." >> Um, >> so with that better understanding about what the age friendly cities committee,
could you speak a little bit about, you know, the perspective of 20 or 30 year olds is is good. Uh, but that's not really the focus of the age friendly cities committee. How would you contribute? I know you mentioned data analysis, but from your personal experience, um, could you help help me understand
how you would apply that to the age friendly cities committee? >> Yeah, I think my my perspective, the way I can help out is again looking at some of the problems and being able to figure out like what the root cause of that problem is and figuring out what the ROI is on that issue and then bringing it to
light and communicating it. Um, I I think that's the skill sets that I bring to the table. >> Okay. Okay. Okay, got it. Thank you. >> Cool. John, John, >> David, uh, thank you so much for applying um, to serve Brooklyn. Uh, and I am the select board liaison to the age
friendly cities committee, which has been a real privilege and um, you know, it's allowed me to really get to know how that committee uh, works, what purpose it serves, excuse me. And when I saw, excuse me, when I saw your
application and you have so many strengths and so and and such talent to bring to bear, um I have to admit I think somewhat as Paul has expressed, you know, I was mystified what what what inspired the idea of of applying for
this particular committee given um the there might be a stronger match of of your um significant uh background and strengths to some other committee in Brooklyn. Uh I have since had discussions with uh the chair um of that
committee and he had a very positive report on the interview that he um and Emily Williams um our director of senior services did with you. So um that you know sort of helped me come around to thinking well why not? Um I I will say
in my experience on the committee of over five years now um we've never had a person who wasn't themselves uh representative of the senior population um and sort of addressing the issues that that that committee confronts from
the perspective of people um uh who are in the senior population. But there is absolutely no reason why we can't um diversify uh e even the age friendly cities committee. Um and uh and >> we have a Warren article related to
that. >> Yeah. And you know, we I I do hope that once you've sort of gotten your gotten some experience under your belt um on this committee, if you come to the conclusion that as as wonderful as your
experience might have been that there might be a different place for you in the Brookline committee boards commission's hierarchy, you won't hesitate to express that to us. Um and and I I thank you again for applying. Thank you John for the kind words and
absolutely I'm super flexible. It's like wherever I can use my skills for the public benefit like most of my uh you know I guess like foray and energy is spent you know at work and pursuing you know like business ideas. So I wanted to carve out a little bit of time to kind of like help the community. So wherever
my strengths you know will be of benefit I can definitely go in that direction. >> Great David. if you continue to be interested in uh age friendly cities, do you have any experience with uh trying
to uh create synergy between different generations? So, for example, to address a point that both Paul and raised, >> uh Brooklyn High School has an annual event where uh high school students play chess and have other interactions with
seniors in our community. There was a time period where seniors regularly volunteered in our elementary schools uh read to young students and the purpose behind that was sometimes a segment of our senior population can feel somewhat
isolated and it's not just about having seniors with each other but having seniors impart their wisdom upon younger generations and having opportunities for seniors to be fully integrated with those of all ages. So I'm wondering whether there is anything in your
background that might speak to such opportunities. >> Absolutely. I mean I deal with that day-to-day at work. You have party A, party B. They have both different interests and incentives and you have to figure out a way to I guess like incentivize them to action and then convince them. So I it can't offer any
perspective now, but I've definitely faced it in the past. I in short, you just have to figure out like what are some of the incentives like the levers you can pull for both sides. uh especially the younger generation, they're going to need a little bit more incentive to drive them to that action that you know you want them to take. So
there's definitely a way to do it, but I I'd have to like dive into the you know like the root cause and figure out like what are some of the incentives for the younger generations. How can you get them excited to meet with the older generation and you know absorb that wisdom because we've we've all been through that age. It's a little
difficult to I guess put our ego and all of our energies as you know teenagers and maybe younger adults and you know take take some feedback and advice. >> Great. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. We will be making our decision on
appointments to board to committees at a later meetings. >> Awesome. >> We appreciate your application and the discussion. Okay. >> Thank >> Okay. Next uh solid waste advisory committee presentation of their annual
report to the uh select board and I see John Dempsey's coming to the podium to talk to us about solid waste. >> Do you have my slide deck? Can you advance? >> I may be able to do that. This wasn't
attached to the agenda. I hope so. Um one moment. Sorry. >> Yeah, it's in there. >> It was in the meeting pack. >> Yeah, >> that's what I'm checking. >> Yes. Well, I'll start off anyway. I'm John Dempsey, chair of the solid waste advisory committee and I first of all
want to thank you for the opportunity to deliver our annual report live in this room. Um our job is to advise you the select board on solid waste uh matters and both both for the financial and
environmental reasons of reducing our solid waste imprint and we appreciate that you care about that solid waste imprint. Uh that you listen to us that you trust us and often follow our advice
uh to you. That's a appreciative. Yeah. So can you advance uh to the slide uh slide uh to the next one as well. Thank you. Uh first of all I have to mention we
have to thank our professional staff. They're unbelievable. But uh particularly we work very closely with Kevin Johnson the deputy commissioner and um John King who's our environmental health supervisor, Katie
Weather Seed who was our zero waste program manager and Elellanena Chamilillowitz who is our assistant recycling coordinator. These people are very good and anything that we accomplish as a solid waste committee is
really because of them and um we appreciate that. I want to do one shout out and that's to Elellanena Chimowitz in the bottom right hand corner uh because Katie was out sick for several months. Um Eleanor took over both
positions and did a great job. So, she was spinning plates all over town for several months and uh did an excellent job at it. I also want to uh she's not pictured here, but she's here in person. Miranda Hawtham is now our new zero
waste program manager. She's here in the audience and um has been on the staff now for two two months and we're very pleased. We feel we got very lucky to get Miranda into Brooklyn.
So, uh, next slide, please. Uh, these are our annual t these are our annual tonnages. Last year when I was here, we were very proud that we were under 8,000 tons, municipal solid waste,
disposing of 8,000 tons, less than 8,000 tons. >> We had a little hiccup there. were up a little bit, but um that's understandable. I don't want to take any credit for this, but when I first started with the solid waste advisory
committee, we were yearbyear at 12,000 tons of municipal solid waste. So getting to 8,000 was our goal. Our new goal is to get to 7,000. So I hope I'm back here next year and we're a little closer to 7,000 uh tons. Next slide,
please. Um so we have uh two major initiatives this year. Next slide. Food waste diversion is the u is the first one. And the thing about food waste diversion,
it's a major component of municipal solid waste. 25 to 30% of our weight is food waste. And so, uh, solid waste committee and our professional staff have been working to make convenient and lowcost composting for the residents of
Brooklyn and curbside um, pictured here with black earth compost or bootstrap compost is one initiative that we've pushed. Uh, backyard composting, there are uh, many families that are still doing backyard
composting. Um food the good thing about food waste is we have several d ways to divert food waste. Next slide please. One of the ways of diverting food waste is with the schools and we're uh by the
end of this calendar year all the elementary schools and the high school public schools will be on composting. All be composting. So, we're um that's turning out to be a very successful program and we have kids going home and
saying we composted school, why aren't we composting at home? So, that's kind of the message we want uh to get. And next uh slide, please. And another way that we have pushed and
have been very successful is drop off compost drop off sites. There are four sites currently where residents can drop off their compost. Very easy, very convenient. And we're adding two more sites um one
in South Brooklyn at Potterham and one on Beacon Street at Lancaster Terrace uh to um increase more composting. So this is um convenient and free to the residents who want to use it.
We have about 2,000 families that compost by who subscribe to compost service at the curb and then we have many more families or we have hundreds of families who are using these drop off
uh sites as well. So next slide please. Uh you can see from this slide the orange is the u the tonnage that we're getting from the curbside compost uh people and um the green is backyard
compost and we really have no idea how many how many tons we're diverting that way but the schools and the drop off sites are all contributing to lowering our waste. Uh next slide please. So we have some
other initiatives. Uh next slide please. And the big one was the uh question of outsourcing our municipal solid waste collection. And that was um the committee, our solid waste advisory committee and I know the select board
went through kind of tor personal torment about this because we had such a wonderful in-house uh municipal collection system and it was hard to say goodbye to that and outsource it but we
think it was the right decision. We appreciate that you seem to think it was uh the right decision as well and it seems to be working quite well. But that consumed a lot of our time. Three public meetings meeting with the uh the staff,
meeting with town meeting member who was against this proposal and counseling the commissioner on what we thought were the good points and the bad points of it. But um we're encouraged with that. Uh next slide, please.
And um other ways we have diverting that swack supports uh the staff the textile diversion several tons of clothing textiles diverted that way. Several events one at
town hall one at the s I think two at the senior center. Next slide please. We also encourage and support the hazardous waste uh drop off that closed. Today was the last day for the season. But also
this year we had the staff at an e-waste collection in North Brooklyn. Many of the residents in North Brooklyn have a difficult time getting out to the incinerator site and uh so they uh offered this e-waste and though it's not
shown the solid waste advisory committee supports the outreach efforts of the DPW at Brookline Day at Parkfest and other occasions. Next slide please. And we provide input uh we provided
input to several town projects. Uh example, the modifications uh to the sustainable food containers bylaw and the takeout container bylaw. We had public meetings about that. Advised you. You followed our advice. Always
appreciated. Um, we met with Joe Albuquerque from the school department about re uh reusing furniture when schools are renovated or torn down. Uh, very productive meeting and we reviewed
and advised on the climate action and resiliency plan. So, that's what we did during fiscal year 2025 and we're in the middle of 2026 now. I do I would like to introduce some of the members of the
committee who are here and uh Susan Ritling, Clint Richmond, Mary Litur, and Kathleen O' Conor. And that's our report. >> Great. Thank you. >> Very, very informative. I mean, I didn't
realize that food waste was such a huge part of our solid waste um here in Brooklyn. >> It's heavy. It's really heavy. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Oh, >> yep. John, thank you and thank you for everybody serving on the this important committee. Um,
kind of following on to uh Bernard's lead in this uh food waste. Do we have any sense of the percentage of food waste that's coming from commercial operators in Brooklyn? I know you've got a good handle on residential because we're measuring it all.
>> Yeah. Do we have a sense with commercial so restaurants, condominiums, large apartment buildings? >> Um, we do. I don't have the exact figures. They were on one of the graph and so I can't remember them, but Black Earth Compost collects from many of the
um establishments, commercial establishments, >> and they c they keep records. It's all kind of approximate. There are no scales or anything on the truck. So, >> so I just the reason why I bring this up, um, I, you know, just where I live,
I experience the great things about Brookline, the green space, the trees, but I also experience being on the edge of a commercial district and the rats. Um, and you know, the biggest driver of rats and and my observations, I've been observing them and chasing them for a
while, um, is is the food waste. >> Um, and the it's not coming from primarily the residential properties. It's coming from restaurants and it's coming from the commercial large commercial buildings that are throwing everything into a big
>> right dumpster >> and it's all contained and it's just it's you know it's a buffet. >> Yeah. >> Um and it really is it's the source of the problem and I wonder is there do we have the capacity to start looking in that area? Is there something that we
should be doing to try to encourage, incentivize, or require businesses to start composting? I mean, I can tell you the amount of food waste that is, uh, dumped into dumpsters between St. Mary's and Carlton Street in the Beacon Street,
uh, St. Mary's business district is unbelievable. And I can tell you, we have an equivalent number of rats. >> You're singing our song. >> Okay. >> Yeah. So Stephanie Alcoin, who is the I would say the chief person on the street
trying to solve this rat problem, is on our agenda for the next for next Tuesday, our regular meeting. And that's exactly why we brought it up is because of the rat problem and it's related to the food waste problem. So >> they need food and shelter. Can I ask
one follow-up question? Sure. >> Um my So I appreciate that you're It would be great if there's something that we can do to help businesses solve that problem. Um, and then you mentioned hazardous waste. Today was the last day. >> Yeah. >> I gathered up, coincidentally all of my
my paint cans today. Hadn't done it in seven years since I've own the house. Eight years. >> Did you get there in time? >> I I got there in time. I gathered them all up. I put them in the back of my car. There was a lot of them. Big ones, little ones, half full, full, and some empty. And when I got there, they only
took about a quarter of them >> because >> because the vast majority of it was latex >> and I look I had and I should have read the website a little bit better. It wasn't clear to me. It should jump out and bite you on the face that you can't bring these products. But what it struck
me that um you know it would be s I would think that some people would just throw that can into the trash and I can see red paint and white paint dribbling down the streets of Brooklyn. >> Yeah. >> Because they can't Are we looking at our
solid waste policies uh for uh hazardous waste to incorporate start taking on some of these uh type water because the industry's moved to water-based products. >> Yeah. Actually, the paint industry has been very receptive to the idea of producer responsibility
and um we don't have a producer responsibility bill or law in Massachusetts, but this board did maybe two years ago sent a letter to the state encouraging the our legislative team to
vote in favor of a producer responsibility bill for paint in Massachusetts. and exactly the problem that you're talking about. Um, we can handle the oil paint, but the we worry about the latex
paint being thrown out in in the trash, you know, dumped down the sink, that type of thing. >> Yeah. So, it would be great if we could start looking at policies around that as well. >> Okay. My uh >> good advice. >> Thank you uh very much for the report and thank you to the committee. Um, you
mentioned that you have a goal of 7,000 pound uh tons. >> Um, and I'm wondering if you have any sort of vision for what kinds of waste primarily or
in aggregate would help you reach that goal? Well, if it we think that if we can divert more of the compost of the food waste that that's going to edge us down and create a kind of a culture that you don't throw food waste into the
trash. You dispose of it with a curbside or in one of the bins that we've placed around town and that that will that's going to help. So, um you know the original initiative years ago was the recycling. the recycling. We took a lot
out with the recycling. So, we're kind of constantly reminding people that that's you you need to do that. But, um we're another thing on our agenda is to go through our solid waste master plan and see where we are in the on the
different initiatives. So, we've taken the the lowhanging fruit. Now, it gets more and more difficult. >> John, did you have your hand up? >> I did. Yeah. Um I just was I want to say that we've been using um Black Earth um composting for a few years now and I
highly highly recommend it. Um they are really really reliable and um you feel you you're gonna laugh at this maybe but you feel good not using your disposal in the sink you know and every time you
know I I realize we're now composting our food waste from the kitchen. Um I think to myself that in years past that would have gone into the wa the water stream you know not just the waist stream but you know uh we gone flush
down you know your kitchen sink and your disposal unit you know and out out to to the sewage system. So, uh it's always good to um increase the amount to which we recycle and that that's a form of
recycling to compost, you know, as opposed to just send it out to Deer Island. Um I I think I asked this question last year and I got to ask it again. Does does SWAC um track or investigate or look into the trends in
what is happening to the plastic that is ostensibly, you know, being recycled because uh every time I read an article about that subject, it sounds like um it's all about uh some, you know, island in, you
know, off Indonesia where there is a vast vast vast, you know, dump of a lot of plastic from the United states and other countries. >> Yeah, we do. Um, we really rely on Cassella. We all of our recycling goes
to Cassell and gets sorted there and shipped out of there and they they're the ones who are selling it. So, they insist that they have markets and somebody pays them and so that it's not being shipped overseas, that it's being
not shipped overseas and being dumped, but it's being reused. number ones and number twos. Um, that's the little identification, the resin identification on the back. And number fives, Cassella insists that they have they have a
market for the number fives as well. Any of the other resin identifications, there's no market. That stuff gets thrown in the trash and incinerated down at seamass. >> Yeah. Yeah. Okay.
>> I'm sorry, >> David. David. >> So, couple questions. How do our uh waste diversion rates for recycling and composting compare to peer communities? >> Um, I don't have direct uh knowledge of
facts on that. What I do am very proud of is that Brookline's contamination level in recycled recycling is very small. We're regularly 95% of what we're sending over to Cassella is recyclable. It's not
contaminated. And they they periodically dump it on the floor and go through it. Their guys go through it and weigh it and find contaminants. And we're consistently at 95% purity, 96% purity. So that seems
inconceivable to me because I'm so OCD about people throwing contaminants into recycling, but that's what they tell us. >> Contaminants or or what? Food or >> um Yeah. Any type of thing, you know. Um, the worst offenders probably are are
in the parks where people have a a birthday party or something like that and they clean up afterwards, but mo a lot of it goes into the recycling containers where people don't think, "Oh, it's plastic. It must be recyclable." And so they just throw it in. The only plastic that's really
recyclable is one, two, or five container. That's it. Containers. Only containers. Then another question I have around uh potential expansion of smart bins. Any plans of foot there or those among the
goals? >> When you're talking about smart bins like the big bellies or I'm not sure what we're talking about smart >> well not just big bellies but essentially any bin that would have some type of uh technological element to it that can track data.
>> Uh now I've got you. Yeah, I'm I'm thinking South Korea because they have them in South Korea and uh it's it's it's an unbelievable system. We haven't done anything like that, but that's something that we should look into.
>> Many years ago, I had a backyard uh composting bin I got from DPW. Uh it was great, very convenient, um very useful. Are are you um encouraging that? I I don't get the sense that that is really
high on priority list anymore. >> You're absolutely right. It's not high on our priority list because the backyard composting doesn't take it won't take meat, won't take bones, fish, dairy, that type of thing. So, we really
encourage the curbside composting. And if people sign up for curb curbside composting, they they have it in their heads about what can go into that uh bin. And so they have very little contamination. Um and I think John, you probably it's
years you've been on Black Earth compost, but I'm sure after the first or second week that you did it, you said, "Why didn't we do this years ago?" >> Yeah. >> It's so obvious. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So, right on your disposal repair bills,
too. I'll say that. >> Yeah, you're right. We We still offer those bins, backyard bins, but we don't we don't push them that much. We don't stand in the way if you want to do it. But, >> yeah.
May I ask one more question? >> Sure. I don't even know if this really comes under your uh umbrella, but uh does SWAC um do any thinking about leaf composting and the the trends toward uh leave the leaves on the lawn and those
kinds of things? >> Yeah, that's SWAC hasn't uh done anything like Okay, we used to have a leaf dump at the incinerator site, but it wasn't properly managed. It wasn't properly cited and there were smells.
you'll get smells if it's if you're not running it properly, you'll get smells. And so I think the neighbors said no more. And um this was before they redid the the whole apron up there. >> Mhm.
>> Yeah. It's it's it's not on our radar. Okay. >> Can I uh suggest an idea that um we used in Ohio City? I lived in Cleveland Heights and that is the uh paint and I think it was latex paint. I may be wrong
on that. Uh was collected by the town or some subcontractor or something and uh put together and they they created a a product that was sold and with all the different colors that would come into
the um you know um into the town's um >> you know system. No. >> Uh, the outcome was a what we called Cleveland Heights gray. >> But, you know, it got all that institutional green. >> Yeah. Right.
>> Connley Hardware used to do that. >> Oh, really? >> Yeah. Yeah. They would take your leftover paint and Yeah. >> Yeah. There are a couple of private companies I think I'm thinking of two down on the Southshore that do do that. They collect like that. So, um, we have we don't
>> maybe we can invite them in. >> We like Paul, we just kind of push him to go home without So, what Paul needs to do, what I was told when I went out to drop this off was to go home, buy a lot of kitty litter, and I'm going to be making kitty litter, latex, brownies or
something in the next month. >> Yeah. >> Um, so come on by if you want to help out. >> Good. It's a good way to handle it. >> Okay. Uh, thank you. >> Okay. Okay. Well, thanks for the >> very very interesting, very helpful, >> uh, very informative. >> Great. Thank you.
>> Next, we have uh another uh update, not not a report, but an update from the uh commission on diversity, equity, inclusion, and community relations presentation uh by Caitlyn Star on the diversity of boards and commissions. Um,
is Caitlyn online? >> Caitlyn is online. I've promoted Caitlyn. And we have Lloyd as well. I'm promoting just in case. >> Hello everybody. Thank you for having me tonight. I'm going to share my screen. Is that okay, Charlie? >> It should work.
>> All right, here we go. >> Looks good. >> Okay, so I my name is Caitlyn Star. I am the assistant director in the office of diversity, equity, inclusion, and community relations for any of you who don't know me. Um, just a little bit of
background, the ODICR has been collecting data on boarding commission demographics since 2018. We usually do it every two years via a survey. Uh, this survey typically looks at race or ethnicity, uh, gender, sexual orientation, age, household income,
household size, home ownership, disability status, veteran status, as well as town employment status. And we also use metrics um to understand perception of community engagement and the importance of community engagement as well as how
often boards and commissions are doing that. In 2024, we only had 102 survey respondents which was our lowest since we had started. Um however to supplement that data uh that we captured in our comprehensive demographic report the select board requested to see
demographic data being optionally collected by Granagicus. So that is what I'm here tonight to update everybody on. Um uh at the end of last month, September 25th to be exact, data was pulled from the Granus platform, which
is the platform the town is utilizing for commission and boards applications and appointment information. uh the only data that is collected on granicus that can inform diverse demographics are gender and ethnicity. It does not collect any other
information. Uh as of September 25th, there were 491 active appointed commission or board members. Out of the 491 active members, um, 275
did not have any gender data associated with them. So, they were left blank. So, 216 active members completed the response. 51% indicated that they were female, 46%
indicated that they were male, and 1.9% indicated that they were third gender or non-binary. And we had one person who indicated prefer not to answer. Next, we look at ethnicity. Uh for ethnicity, we had 283
of active members leaving this blank. So over over half again, uh, out of the 208 active members that did complete the response, 80% indicated that they were Caucasian or white. 5.2 5.3% indicated
that they were African-American or black. Uh, roughly 3% indicated Asian or Pacific Islander. Roughly 3% indicated Hispanic or Latine. Just under 1% indicated Native American, Native Alaskan, or indigenous. And then
we have again roughly 3% as other or preferring not to answer. So when we look at the Brooklyn population overall uh which is from census data, this is the Brooklyn population 2023 and we compare the um
current data that we got for ethnicity up top and then we have the the genders down below. We can see that for gender uh the representation is roughly consistent. And then we can see over here our white
demographics are over represented. Um Asian and Hispanic Latino are underrepresented and the Native American indigenous slightly over represented. But again, this is such a small sample that that's hard to really collect any useful information out of. But it would
also indicate that our black or African-American um demographics are slightly over represented according to the data that we collected. Based on ethnicity data collected and compared to Brookline's population, Brooklyn's appointed boards and
commission members are not fully representative of the town's population with white members over represented and Asian and Hispanic residents notably underrepresented. As I mentioned, the gender representation among the appointed me members roughly mirrors that of the general population.
There are several limitations to this data. Uh the two biggest is that the data is prone to selection bias as appointed members can choose not to respond to the demographic questions which are not mandatory. This to more than half the appointed members not responding. Diversity also cannot just
be measured by gender and ethnicity alone. The grandus data does not measure any other demographic indicators or engagement measures that the ODICR survey does include. So, I think just for this brief update, while Brookline continues efforts to promote equitable representation,
we need to focus on response gaps and the limited demographic fields uh to highlight the need for more comprehensive and consistent data collection to fully understand and strengthen diversity across town civic bodies. Some of our recommendations or next
steps would be working closely with the select board and town administrator's office to find alternative or additional ways to collect the statistically significant data. Uh before Tiffany had last left, we had talked about including a multi-question demographic
questionnaire upon appointment. That would be similar to the survey that our office has been um doing every two years, but instead of it being a survey every two years, people would have the opportunity to answer it upon appointment or re reappoint.
Um we also would like to start including um departments having community engagement efforts and perception as part of the annual report. Uh and as of right now, our office will continue to gauge diversity through comprehensive indicators and measures in March of 2026
for another full demographic report and I will take any questions. >> Thank you, Caitlyn. That's very very interesting and important. Uh one one question I have is um you know we really don't need to do a survey uh or collect data to know that um one demographic in
town is is very very underreresent under representative on let me get my words straight on boards and commission commissions and that's the Asian population. Um are there any uh initiatives other than
surveys that uh are addressing that uh that issue? >> Yeah, so our office has in the past reached out to commissions and boards to talk about how to decrease barriers um as well as to make meetings but also
just increasing civic engagement. We do that through going to community engagement opportunities, talking with the community and encouraging people to apply. Um, but I do think that needs to come from commissions and boards and not just our our office. So, I do think it
needs to be a townwide concerted effort to really reach communities and encourage civic participation. >> Paul, >> I just uh Thank you, Kaitlin. It's a great question, Bernard. Um, I'm wondering, have we ever surveyed uh from
a kind of a qualitative standpoint the Asian community and ask them why why why are they not participating or do they not feel welcome? It would be really helpful to get at uh their perspective as to um why they're under
underrepresentative on boards. Yeah, I mean I' I've spoken to members of Baffin. Our our office works very close with the Brooklyn Asian-American Family Network, and I do think, and this is would be the same conversation I've had with members of the the black
community, is that everybody is looking for quote unquote diversity. And there are so few people who have the ability, the the the span, the attention, the ability really, the the free time in their schedule to attend and be a part
of of these things and they can't attend everything. They are just not able to be um attending all all of the things that they are being requested to attend. Their time is limited. Um so I do think that we need to find pockets of
community that aren't already engaged and speak with them uh which we have been trying to do. In addition, um you one of the issues is that members of various boards and commissions don't know any Asian folks
and therefore when they reach out to people to encourage them to join the um the board or commission there the people they're reaching out to is limited. Um not sure how you fix that, but you know that that is something that people
should be aware of and maybe that's the first step in addressing that that issue. Yeah, I agree. And you know, one of the things that our office survey was looking at, like I mentioned, is community engagement. How often we ask committees, how often are you reaching
out to diverse communities? How important is that you do that? And and we have all of that data and it it's not happening frequently and not all committee members feel it is important. So, I I think that we need to change the way committees and boards feel about
community engagement. a a two-way conversation and really really reaching out and talking to community members. Caitlyn, can you hear us? >> Yes, I can now. >> You can see us now. Wonderful. Okay, we're back. >> We lost you for a while. >> Okay, >> it was on our end. The whole meeting room went down. So, everyone online
didn't see us. We're back. >> Are we still recording? >> Yes, the meeting is still recording. It was just just that this machine went down. So, the meeting was actually still going. We were the onesating. We were the ones that were offline. Yeah. >> Okay. Please continue. You can reshare
your screen if you if you want, Kaitlin. And >> uh No, I was done with unless there were any other Yeah. >> Michael, you had your hand up. >> Yeah. Um I'm just wanted to dive a little a little deeper into the issue that both Bernard and Paul raised. Um
you mentioned some of the characteristics of like or the challenges that people have in what those challenges is that correct is that what accounts for the disparity?
I'm so sorry, but you your audio cut out for most of I I heard at the beginning and and then the very last thing. I'm wondering whether the challenges that you express that people have in uh being part of boards and commissions that you mentioned things like I don't have the
time as being sort of the most significant whether those those challenges particularly impact the Asian and Hispanic communities and that account your your audio went out again, but I I
understand the question now. And I I think that yes, that's a part of it, but I also think that there is um maybe a not a complete understanding within all
of our communities that you can be involved in a commission and a board and you can have a say and you you can do these things. So I I think that there is that level of people that are just not aware of how they can engage themselves.
>> Okay. So you think it's primarily an awareness issue? >> Yes. As well as people who are aware are not always able to have the the time and ability whether you know their because of a a job or because of whatever it may
be their their home life, however many people they have living in the home. Sometimes it's just not as accessible. >> Okay, any other questions? Thank you, Caitlyn. very informative uh report. >> You are welcome.
>> Okay. is >> we have Dan Martin online uh from the town's DPW and we have Jay Jackson from the MBTA. I've promoted both of them. >> Uh they can share their video and audio when they are ready.
>> Hey, thank you for having me tonight. I'm Dan Martin, a transportation engineer from the DPW transportation and engineering division. I'm here to speak on the MAU between the town and the MBTA for their upgraded transit signal priority system on Beacon Street at the
Washington Street and Marian Street intersections. TSP along Beacon Street has long been advocated by the transportation board, shared mobility advisory committee, and other town stakeholders. In 2014, town meeting authorized funding
to study and implement TSP on Beacon Street. In 2018, um the first pilot was done at Beacon and Carlton Street. And then at 2020, the TSP was expanded to additional intersections.
In 2024, the town hired the engineering group to review several Beacon Street intersections to address questions regarding TSP safety, specifically at Beacon and Carlton, and PET advisory committee's interest in ways to improve pedestrian operations along the
corridor. The findings of this report was that TSP did not pose a safety issue. Drivers would benefit from far side signals if they were added um at intersections and pedestrian operations
could be improved by adding leading pedestrian intervals and reconfiguring the phase so they ran more frequently with um the adjacent vehicle movements and more on this if there are questions later but for now I'd like to introduce Jay Jackson from the MTA who's going to
be sharing a short presentation on the new TM and the Emily between the town and the MBTA for the two intersections, Washington Street and Marian Street. And Jay should be able to unmute and share screen.
Let me see if I can promote. >> I apologize. We lost internet again. I think we are back now um tentatively. So um please give it another try. I think we lost you for uh probably the last minute.
Okay. Um, just to to recap, I'm here to speak on the MU tonight for the new TSP upgrades that are happening on Beacon Street at Washington and Marian. Um, TSP along Beacon Street has long been advocated by the transportation board, shared mobility advisory committee, and
other town stakeholders. For a brief history, um 2014 town meeting authorized funding to study and implement TSB on Beacon Street. In 2018, um the first pilot began at Beacon at
Carlton Street. And then at 2020, it was expanded um and just Chandarking over there. Charlie, what do you say? >> I was checking in if you're able to hear me or not. >> Now we are.
>> We are right now. >> Okay. Um, so I just want to I just give a brief history of TSB on Beacon Street and then I want to add that in 2024 the town hired the engineering group um a consultant firm to review um some
signals on Beacon Street for questions regarding TSP safety specifically at Beacon and Carlton Street. And then um the PAD advisory committee's interest in ways to improve pedestrian operations along the corridor. The findings in that report where TSP did not pose a safety
issue. Drivers would benefit from a far side signal head added at intersections and pestn operations could be improved by reconfiguring the phase to run u more often with the vehicle movement and
adding leading pest intervals. And I can speak more on the report if there are questions later. I'd like to introduce um Jay Jackson from the MBTA who has a short presentation on the new TSP system and the MU between the town and the MBTA for the Washington Street and Marian
Street intersections. And Jay, if you're if you're able to share your screen, Jay has been promoted and should be able to I think he's having a little technical issue, but should be on shortly.
>> Okay. >> You may be destined to go as long as the gang last night. Bernard, >> no. Please, we want to end this meeting the same day we started it. >> This is not our our issue, right, Charlie?
>> That is how I understand it. Jay has unmuted himself. I'm not hearing him speak through the room. >> Can you hear me? >> Hi, Jay. >> How are you? >> Yes, we can hear you. >> Great. Okay, great. Um, let me share screen. One second.
Sorry if I'm uh slowing things down. I have couple of kids under the age of two and it's pretty crazy right here. >> Not watching it. >> Let's see. she um my screen.
>> Yeah, >> great. Great. All right. And I know this project's about uh green line, but I'm part of the bus department. So uh that's kind of the slides that that's the what I had to put put on there. But so my name is Jay Jackson. I am a senior technical project manager for transinal
priority. Um obviously with most transal priority um which reduces the delay uh for buses and green line through signalized intersections. Uh most of most of it is bus but obviously it does spill over to some rail in the case of you know green line and obviously in this case the C branch. Um Dan, did you
introd um did you say what you wanted to say at first or do you want me to just kind of go into this? >> Uh yeah, you can jump in. I gave him a brief history on the TSP that's on Beacon Street. Mentioned this is the new systems and um the report that we had done to look at PED and safety with the
TSP. >> Okay, great. Yeah. So, um, as as Dan mentioned, you know, typically I do I do I work on the bus, but because there's such need for, um, better transit, uh, priority on, you know, Green Line, you know, I want to obviously help here
can. So, the purpose is to talk about anou for Washington and Marian streets. It's a one-year um, contract for now. Ideally, it would be extended. Um, and so, let me just talk a little bit briefly about TSP. Um, you know, over
half of delay is from signalized intersections and reducing this delay is a key to our reliability and travel time goals for all modes and TSP has been around for decades as you know you've had it um you know it's actually started on the the silver line but you know you have it obviously on the C branch and the B and E um but it's not necessarily
well understood or optimized and I think you know um you can attest to that with uh sometimes it's not always installed um as as properly and creates too much disbenefits. So um with that being said, our goal is to install um regionwide system that is interoperable, vendor
agnostic and most importantly we really want to develop measures um to remotely measure and monitor the effectiveness of TSP as well as how it interfaces with other modes and being able to explain that demonstrate that value to stakeholders and um continuing to iterate and improve which Dan and I have
done and that's part of what we're doing today is is an improvement. I won't belabor this because um Dan mentioned the history, but I will state that we um are you know we had 10 intersections um at at when I first started actually the
T in 2020 um we expanded to all 10 on the C on the C line C branch and um now we're trying to upgrade uh the legacy TSP to actually newer uh technology. It's uses like adaptive or um artificial intelligence. It's just much smarter
about detecting the the trolley and it's just it's just a better system. And it's also is actually a more conservative TSP than the original one. I know there were some um more aggressive uh treatments, you know, like skipping phases and um
just more that was just more harmful. Um so this newer system actually doesn't uh do a lot of that. And then hopefully if this works, we could expand it to more locations. So today we're talking about Washington Street and Marian Street and we're talking about the theou that's phase one intersections. Phase two
intersections we'd come back and talk about these other three that are on here. These were chosen because um they were the highest delay in the system based on analysis that our team has done. So very quickly the terms of theou for those two intersections services paid uh by the MBTA for one year. So
there's no financial burden to the town of Brooklyn. Um and then you know we'd find a way to fund additional years um or obviously or the system's turned off unless the town or um MBTA chooses to pay for it at at our option. So no
financial you're not on the financial hook for anything or any obligation. Um obviously you are in financial hook for you know your your signal system outside of TSP which is um you know like obviously the the the controller and different elements of the cabinet and
whatnot. the system. We tested it uh in late September and it works for two weeks. We we had it functions already. So basically all we need to do is flip a switch which is just basically writing a check to the vendor and before we do that obviously we just need in place.
Um most important interesting the thing is actually like the legacy system we put the TSP in but we didn't know really how well it would work. Um it was very hard to get any type of analysis. This one is not the case. it will be >> um much more continuous monitoring uh for improvements and ensuring that
there's not too much disruption and um as I mentioned before you know some of the things there were some issues like uh phases being skipped that's no longer the case um traffic coordination is maintained so it's minor changes for you know adding a few
seconds here taking a few seconds away um that is largely um not noticed and um and really does help the the green line uh ensure that it has a better chance of getting an arrival on green. Um no reduction of walk phases and then you
know emergency vehicle preeemption obviously overrides so fire trucks and the like you know is is going to override a TSP system. Um theou the summary of theou this is I believe the last slide um t town owns and maintains signal equipment the operations are
running you know 247 but obviously that's only when there's a trolley present um we're going to provide the tsp the technical support as needed and then we're covering costs and then Dan and I have been working very closely um to ensure that it's working properly
and just coordinating between the two agencies. and um you know and and what we want to make this obviously we don't want to just have something that does work well for the town of Brooklyn. We want something that works well because we know we want to do it for more than one year. It makes no sense to do two intersections for one year. So the goal
is really to ensure that is sustainable and that it works for for everyone. Um and then the only other element of the MOU is just promotions. Um, we just want to we would collaborate on press releases and just kind of get the kind of the check box as you I'm sure you've
worked with MVTA press team um and you have your own. So that's that's the really the the crux of it. It's a pretty simpleou and all we're looking for is the signature or the approval of signature and then we can um start the one year and then provide uh updates. I'll provide them to Dan Martin. He can disseminate them as uh needed.
>> So if the issues on our end would even running this off someone's cell phone >> Yeah. work or that wouldn't be enough. >> I'm sorry. Give me one second, please. I'm gonna put some headphones in. You can hear my son in the background. I apologize about that.
>> I think the problem's on our end. We're trying to figure it out. >> Um, oh, I had my son screaming in my ear. So, >> could I ask could I ask Jay a basic question? >> Yeah. >> Yeah, absolutely. >> Yeah. I wanted Paul to ask some questions and I want to suggest that um
we take this up next week because I understand there's a report >> that we haven't seen and there are a lot of issues that uh Paul wants to raise. So >> Jay, could you just uh in a very simple terms explain what transit signal
priority does? >> Yeah, absolutely. So what it does is that there's a system that detects the green line trolley as it's approaching and it's done this it's doing this through the cloud. So the MBTA broadcasts where all our vehicles are
and then um the system will detect where it is and then it will predict when it uh believes that it will get to the uh intersection and it's constantly updating that prediction. Um, and then it will then go to the controller, the
the the the um computer inside the cabinet that controls and it will say, "Hey, there's a trolley that's approaching um and we would like you to provide green um when when it otherwise couldn't. So, for
instance, like say for instance, if you're driving and the signal is green and then it starts to turn yellow, um, one thing it might be able to do is hold it for five additional seconds so that the the trolley can get through. Um, even though typically if it was just vehicles, it would have it would it would change.
>> So, that's one way. >> Go ahead. >> So, J just so so just to keep this pretty brief. So, it it predicts when the train is going to go through the intersection and it changes the light. So, if I'm if I just put a picture up on the screen here.
>> Yes. >> Um, and I do have a lot of questions about what studies were done around traffic input. I I hear that there was a study done for pedestrians, but not for for autos. Um, but you know, in this particular case, this is a picture of
Carlton Street and Beacon Street intersection where there is TSP. We are looking south. Um so uh and the cars that are coming towards us are that are crossing the uh inbound lane of Beacon
Street. Okay. Now if a if a train is coming and I just want to make sure I understand this. If a train is coming, the transit priority signal system will change will short cycle that green light
for Carlton Street to turn it red. Correct. so that the train can come through the intersection. >> So that is a treatment that is possible called early return to green. And so but there's a minimum amount of time that the cycle that the side street must be
served. So it won't um do it shorter than that. >> Okay. So, let me let me give you the scenario here and what I'm concerned about. And I and I and based on reading this 56-page report that came out this afternoon was sent to me, I think shared by Dan Martin. This this situation
exists at other intersections along Beacon Street. So, I took this picture from my car. I am sitting essentially in the middle of the uh outbound side of Beacon Street. Okay. Currently, there's no car in front of me, but typically
there would be a car sitting on the railroad tracks or just in front of the railroad tracks waiting to take a lefthand turn onto Inbound Beacon Street. Now, the thing that you'll notice right now is there's I cannot see from this perspective any signal for
traffic, right? There's no traffic light that that that from this perspective you can see. So that means as me as the driver, I don't know that when that train comes through, if there's if the traffic is back up because people want to take a left on inbound, that that
light or Carlton Street has turned red and Beacon Street has turned green. I know this is happening because it's happened many, many times. And I totaled my car right there on that telephone pole on the right because I was
broadsided, t-boned because there was a truck in front of me turning left. The green line was coming. It short cycled the light. The truck turned left. I had no knowledge that the light had turned red for Beacon for Carlton Street and
that the inbound traffic had a green light. I went I first of all I started across the tracks the green line honked at me because they were going to hit me because I couldn't see them. And then when I went across Beacon Street I got t-boned.
That scenario exists today. It'll exist in the future because of transit signal priority. And my concern with this whole system is that we implemented transit system priority without first understanding and assessing and fixing
the limitations of our lighting traffic signals and intersections like Cton Street. Now, based on Dan's report, this situation exists in other intersections in Brooklyn, and it's incumbent upon Brooklyn to take on the cost to go
update our traffic signals so that you can continue to implement transit signal priority. And I'd like to better understand why is that the case? Yeah, I would I would just chime in here that um for the MBTA side, they're they're they're working on the TSP
system and I think the any upgrades we want to do to the signals would be on the the town's responsibility. Um al although TSP can shorten the green time, there are limits to how much I think in general it's less than 10 seconds that we're that it would be allowed to
shorten the side street and it still has to obey by the minimum green times and also the clearance times. So when that whether there's a TSP that's calling for the phase to be switched or there's just that the side streets have reached their max amount of time, we still service the
clearance time. So there'll be roughly 4 seconds of yellow and 4 seconds of red. >> Um >> so Dan Dan, I I understand that. I'm just saying that I'm saying there's a fundamental flaw on our implementation of TSP. We implemented TSP without first
fixing these situations and we've created a very dangerous situation. I totaled my car. Thankfully, my kids weren't in the car when it happened because they wouldn't get hurt. I was going to pick them up from school. So, we we allowed the implementation of TSP
and we did not first fix the signaling lack of signals for those who are doing the cross street across beacon first. And I I I would argue that we should not continue with TSP until we fix these situations because I think we create a very dangerous situation for
not only drivers, but if there was a pedestrian standing on that uh south north southwest corner, I would have killed them because I creamed through that corner and then hit the pole. Um I I think I think we've made a fundamental mistake in how we implemented this and
um I really think we need to take a step back. >> Okay, David. So, I have a question dovetailing off of uh a remark that Paul made. So, uh, in looking at the actual terms of the MOA, not the summary, it places the responsibility squarely on
the town for, and I quote, maintenance of traffic signal systems, including pedestrian signals, and related systems, conduit, transit signal priority, wireless communication, and any other associated signal improvements resulting
from the project. Uh, so it's not clear to me exactly what the MBTA would be responsible for there. I understand that you're saying the intention is the MBTA deals with the TSP portion for the uh
light rail route itself, but the MOA doesn't actually state that. It puts it all on the town side. So, could you clarify that? >> Sure. Uh, yeah. So, I got I I I want to respond to both of those, but I'll
respond to yours first. Um, so the vendor that is installing it is the one that is has to ensure that it works because they're we're paying a software as a service fee. So, they're the ones that would be uh that we have a contract with. So, the anything that is TSP related
would be the TSP vendor that would be responsible for that. Anything that is not TSP related would be or the town. So that's at least the MLA doesn't say that. So that makes me a bit nervous. Uh then a second question I have also in
the MOA, it talks about the MBTA providing technical support to assist town staff uh for no more than 20 hours per year. Why so little? I I think this is a project that's far more complicated than 20 hours of support.
I mean, I just put the number there to be what what it is. Um, the like the fact of the matter is that Dan, to your point, Dan and I work a lot on this. You know, we have bi-weekly meetings and we're working with the vendor all the time. So, it's it definitely comes out to more than 20
hours, but we just had to put a number there and that's what we put. I mean, um, you we're there to to make sure it works. It doesn't say an estimated. It says not to exceed or the exact words. Quote, technical support will not exceed
20 hours per year. >> Um, that's what the lawyer wanted to put from legal, but I'm happy to >> follow that. >> I mean, but I'm happy, you know, if you have changes or you want me to reward it, I'm happy to run that by. I'm not a
lawyer myself. So, um, they they want to limit their liability in terms of, >> of course, >> you know, like what what's just like you, you know, just like the town, they want to limit their liability. So, they put a number like that. >> So, did the MBTA write this MOA?
>> It was a combin I mean, it was reviewed by by legal >> by our legal. >> Yep. It was um we worked together to finalize it. I think the first draft was written by the MBTA, then we reviewed it and then legal reviewed it and then went
back to review. >> Yeah, >> he didn't get an answer to Paul's question. >> Okay. >> He said that he would answer Paul's question. He didn't. >> Okay. Could you answer Paul's question? Repeat the question, Paul. >> I He It was so long ago. I don't know what the hell I asked.
>> Okay. >> I just know it's not satisfied. >> Well, wait a minute. I think I was recognized if you don't mind. >> Well, can you re ask my question? Go ahead. >> Well, yeah, but okay. Well, >> I was recognized. >> Let John Let John go. >> There'll be plenty of time to pursue the
answer to Paul's question later. I was recognized. Um so I I'll just recite a recent experience I had um taking the sea line show up at the um uh Coolage Corners uh stop at 6:30 in the evening which is
within the you know sort of prime time for service. Uh next next uh train will be in 14 minutes. So here we are, you know, trying to figure out if there's going to be some incremental difference
in maybe seconds that the the T spends at a particular stop um as a you know under normal circumstances versus if it has this TSP and can short the light for the cross traffic. Um and yet clearly
the bigger problem with service on the sea line and and often on all of the lines is the variability of the ability of the of the tea to actually follow its own schedules which should have been you know like a space
between cars of maybe seven minutes um at 6:30 in the evening. uh and the there are so many of those variabilities that I truly question whether we're gaining anything of significance by this
tweaking of a complicated um technical uh fix for uh a a line that has many problems that are more significant than the ability to save, you know, 10
seconds, you know, at a given stop. Um, will there be an increase in service as as a result of this TSP between St. Mary's and Cleveland Circle? >> So, I'm I'm not in the I can't speak to what if there will be an increase in
service in terms of what is, you know, the the MBTA planning on doing in terms of operations. But what I can say is that it's not 10 seconds saved. if it is like a green extension, it saves an entire signal cycle. So that could be a
minute or a minute and a half depending. Um and so it actually does add up because the stuff kind of you know as as if the trolleys get bunched you know this is a way to de debunch them um in terms of that and to keep running it on
u improving the reliability and that's what's that's what's kind of the most important and also being able to have insight into how well it's working. But wouldn't wouldn't you say just as a matter of math that uh if it doesn't
increase the number of cars that serve people between St. Mary's and Cleveland Circle over the long run, um it's essentially just a matter of maybe on a on a good day they'll make the trip from St. Mary's to Cleveland Circle a tiny
bit faster, but they'll still have to wait the same amount of time or maybe even longer depending on whether they just just missed one of the trolleys that took advantage of TSP and took off. Um, you know, if it's still a gap of 14
minutes at 6:30 in the evening, uh, ju just to wait for the trolley to arrive, we're not really talking about any significant savings here. and we're never measuring it against the um loss of time to people crossing Beacon
Street. Um I suppose uh you know in the eyes of the MBTA they don't matter because they're cars but maybe we have to take kind of a holistic view of this whole situation and you know measure the total gain which I don't think is much
because of the infrequent service um to um people who happen to be on the trolley versus the loss of people who have to wait extra long at the cross intersections in their cars. So what I would recommend there's this uh system called automated traffic
signal performance measures. It's ATSPM is the acronym and it measures modes. In fact most most of the measurements are for vehicular traffic. Um you would get a great picture into how well the operations is working and how it's working with all the different
modes. I know you have some cameras in your system on uh some other corridors that have those cameras. So, um, you can get that sort of insight with with data and you can find out and and I would I would also state that we do have buses that run on uh several of the corridors
and it affects the buses just as much. Um, so with it's important to not foul up the operations, but if you can if you can improve the efficiency of transit, then you can make it more attractive, more reliable, therefore more people can
use it. And that is something that has been shown and you've se and we've seen it. >> We don't have buses on the seaine. I have to put on >> I know we don't No, I'm not there. But like for instance, Washington Street, you know. >> Thank you. >> Well, we have 66 bus that crosses the sea line.
>> And we'll maybe have to wait. >> I think Michael >> Michael. Yeah. So my understanding of the point that you're trying to make is that you're actually trying to reduce variability because I've had both the experience that you've described John um with the
sea line but also the experience where like trains start getting bunched up and back to back which causes between if you have two trains that are bunched then the time between the second train and the train that follows is excessively long and so that that is when I tend to
experience those long wait times. But I want to get back to the issue that Paul raised which is the the divi which I think is the division of responsibility that we're talking about because the I mean the horrific scene that you
described. Oh, did I just >> Sorry, it froze. >> I've been having move forward. >> We had some techies. >> Hold on. Dan, are you can you chime in? Are you able to hear us or are we cutting out?
>> You cut out but you're back. >> Okay, I'm going to try something folks in the room. I'm just going to give me one minute, please. I'm going to change our internet connection and see if I can improve the situation here. I've just been waiting because we haven't had any issues. Figured I wouldn't interrupt what was working.
>> Okay. Um Dan, can you still hear us? >> I can still hear you. >> Okay. Let's see if this um improves things at all. Jay, if you need us to repeat what was said on our end, let us know. >> Michael, you probably need to go re That's all right. Sorry, Michael.
>> Yeah. No, that's that's okay. So, so describe I want to go back to Paul's issue describing the horrific events that he experienced when he was crossing Beacon Street at Carlton Street. And he started that presentation, as I
understand it, with the fact that as he had moved forward, there was no light on the other side of Beacon Street or any indication of what his crossing status was or the crossing status of the other cars that that he could see from that point. And the thing that I'm trying to
understand is is you know up is while I understand I understand that if we put a light on the other side of the street that he could see that that would be helpful. Is the presence or absence of TSP
in any way affect how is it affecting the precariousness and the danger in that situation given that there is a light missing from from from the the uh
>> from the intersection. So I wonder if Jay or Dan have any >> sense of that. So, first of all, um, sorry that that happened. Um, that's me, too. That's scary and, you know, really horrific, and I'm glad that you're okay,
and I'm I'm glad your kids weren't in the car, for sure. Um, so what I highly recommend doing is what's called a road safety audit. Um, and you basically have an engineering firm come and you look at the intersection and you look at all the safety issues. Mass does this a lot. You
can Google this. um and they look at it from all different modes um and they and they try to come up with solutions to make it safe um you know with and then you can do like a crash you know analysis and try to figure that out. So, so those are what I would recommend. Um, for that the transit signal priority
doesn't really change any of the like margins of safety in terms of like clearance intervals or you know moving like you know we don't add a mast arm. We're not adding like signal heads. We're adding additional signage or you
know changing phasing or sequencing. The only difference is a adjusting slightly some of the green time. Um, which I, you know, if you did have an impatient driver who was like, hey, I should normally I get X amount of seconds and
now I'm getting less and so I'm just going to drive through and I don't that TSP doesn't really change the safety implications of that. um emergency vehicle actually preeemption can >> sometimes if in an ecosystem of
transportation everything is balanced and we understand the when you change one thing what's the impact on the other but my premise my contention what I'm putting forward here is that we implemented tsp without understanding
the implications for public safety with respect to traffic and pedestrian now Dan said it doesn't affect pedestrian I would argue otherwise, but let's assume that's correct. The issue I actually raised was car traffic and it does shorten the cycle by some period of time
and it puts you in a dangerous situation. We should not implement TSP until we fix the light issues at the intersection because it's a public safety issue. That's it. all this technology stuff with the cloud and a a
vendor and who's going to be responsible for what. Those are certainly important issues for the for the uh memo of understanding the agreement, but we have an unsafe situation and I think we should stop TSP until our lights are fixed and it's everything is prepared to
turn TSP back on. That's my that's my contention. But just just so you know the the engineering assessment of the yellow change interval and the all red like clearance time is what you know has been decided by an engineering firm and been
stamped to be what is safe for what is what is possible. So like you're not to having transal priority yet on or not on is not going to fix the safety issues. It's not going to change anything. Um, and you can always like have TSP, you
know, if you decide to do a road safety audit, you decide to change things, you try to add a mast arm, you decide to add, you know, different way that you do the sequencing, you can easily modify TSP at that time to match the new system. Like, it's it's very >> simple in that way. You're just changing green. You're not changing yellow, you're not changing red. Um,
>> Jay, you're you're selling me a technical solution and you're not hearing what the problem is. I with all due respect, >> okay, >> at Carlton Street, when the green line comes to the intersection, it expedites the Carlton Street light from Green to
some other state that results in the the green coming on Beacon Street. That is resulting in a dangerous situation. And I would respectfully ask you to get off the technology solution and start looking at what the human problem is. If you're crossing Beacon Street and the
train expedites the light cycle and you drive into oncoming traffic inbound on Beacon Street, you're going to get hurt. Period. End of discussion. >> Okay. >> Rotate the you want to look into
>> I think people are familiar with bunching. Um, I think people, you know, who use the sealine on a regular basis may have noticed that the bunching tends to have already developed by the time the trolleys get to St. Mary's. And
there is also in effect um a frequent occurrence which is to solve the bunching problem. the driver on you know particular um trolley will say this is going to be express from whatever you know kage corner to Cleveland circle so
that they can kind of get ahead of the other trolley so there are solutions in place for bunching and I don't think the bunching is caused for lack of any tsp um on the sea line right now um I think there's a v variety of other reasons
people probably are quite familiar with cars getting bunched underground and they don't have to deal, you know, with crossing traffic of cars. Uh they still get bunched. So, you know, bunching has been an MBTA problem for a long time, but I don't think it's because of lack
of TSP on the sea line. >> Okay. >> And you can also use TSP to help reduce bunching by not providing TSP to uh a trolley that's too close to one in front. >> Okay. I don't think that we're going to uh come to a conclusion at this meeting
on whether to sign theou. >> I mean the uh the what Paul calls a 56 page report uh was dropped on us this afternoon. >> Yeah, I assume >> it's up to me. I forwarded it to you guys. >> Okay. Um I assume that it has important
information in it. We should I think we lost you again. >> So, I'd like to put this uh item off until next meeting, November 4th. Um, assuming that we can assuming that that's enough time, but >> I just ask a question. Yeah. Is the
report that's been referenced 56 pages, is that attached to the agenda as of now? Um, and if not, can it be part of the record of this meeting? >> To Kate, so she's going to add it to the pack. >> She's going to add it. Thank you very much. Bernard, can I ask one question for them when they I assume they're going to come back. Um, it would be
helpful, and I I skimmed the 56 page report, but I didn't read it in detail. um to understand a couple of things. One, how many intersections along Beacon Street that are currently using TSB have the situation like Carlton Street where
you can get a short cycle and you as a driver you don't know the lights changed. Um that's the first question I have. I'd really like to know that very specific intersections that have that situation. Um the second question would be um what would it cost to fix those intersections meaning to and hang a
light so that's you can see it the the light the status of light and then um the third would be do you have the ability to uh turn off TSP for specific intersections or is it a a corridorwide
uh implementation they all have to be on or they all have to be off it would be helpful to understand those things when you come Okay, >> thank you. Thank you for your time. Um, I am off. Um, so I think we'll be a little longer till we return. >> Okay. >> Thanks, Dan.
>> Give us more time to read the >> And Dan's been Dan's great. He's been really really help Oh, Zoom. >> There is one person >> and I think is um is Flock and Chestnut Hill here or they >> Chestnut Hill was not planning to attend
but Flock representatives from Flock. >> Oh, really? >> Online or in? >> Uh online. >> Okay. Is there a name? Uh, TG Foley, um, Tyler Fallon, and Kristen McCloud. >> And is is council online also?
>> Is online? Town council. >> Yeah. >> Kate, perhaps you can give us an indication of whether you're hearing us. I'll go and see. >> Yes, we can hear and see you now. >> Thank you, Kate. Much appreciated. Okay, let me resume.
Uh, I told you about uh what this uh hearing is uh related to about the license plate readers, what it does. Uh it's uh updated or uploaded to the file to the cloud um and made available to law enforcement
across the country. So, one of those cameras was acquired by purchase or lease by uh Chestnut Hill Realy. Uh which is why we'd like we wanted them to be here because we live in a scary time and this is a scary technology that can
be accessed by scary people. Uh this hearing is particularly important to give the public an opportunity to express their concerns and provide the select board with information that we may not have. is also important to enable the select board to make its decision fully aware of the consequences
of its actions. So I'd like to sort of take or use the privilege of the chair to um you know speak for myself. Um, you know, I believe that license plate reader technology is a very valuable tool in legitimate law enforcement, but
it is a form of invasive surveillance by the government that in normal times we probably would accept as a price we pay for law and order. But we're not living in normal times. the guard, the guard rails and guardians that protected our
rights to free speech, due process, independent courts, a free press, and the right of the people to peacefully assemble to petition their government for a redress of grievances are being dismantled in Washington. In my opinion,
that is the context within which we must look at thisou. Um, and any uh any other select board members have anything they want to say before we start the hearing, start the presentations? >> Okay. Um,
>> probably, but I'm going to keep my >> Yeah, >> why why start now? >> Okay. So, um, the order of speaking will be first uh Brookline Police Department and we have Chief, uh, Pastor at the podium. Uh second, we were hoping to
hear from Chesnut Hill Realy, but they're apparently not are not appearing. Third, Flock Security, the vendor of the automatic license, uh plate readers. Uh fourth, the select board, uh making any final or asking any
final questions. And finally, uh we'll go to the public hearing. So, Chief OS, Chief Pastor, >> thank you, R. >> Welcome to the select board. >> Thank you. I've been here once or twice before. >> Um, I do appreciate the opportunity
tonight to introduce the proposedou. >> She wants you to speak closer. >> Oh, okay. Sorry. >> Is this okay? >> Better. >> Okay. Um, thank you for the opportunity to introduce theou tonight. Um, I also want to thank the town administrator for
suggesting the proper route proper process for this. Um, where he suggested that we first take this matter to the PCAC. Um, I'll thank the members of the PCAC who heard this last month. They reviewed it thoughtfully and voted 50 to support it so long as we provided a
policy that reflects our community's values and addresses the concerns about privac privacy and data retention that were already mentioned. Uh, I believe those concerns have been addressed in the draft that was included in this week's packet. I also want to acknowledge the public
concern about this proposal which is completely understandable. I've heard the questions that many people have raised, and they've been actually very helpful in helping to frame our policy. Anytime new technology is introduced in any field, but particularly in law enforcement, people naturally want to know how it will be used and what
safeguards are in place. Representatives from Flock are here tonight should be able to answer any technical questions about how their system works. That's not my area of expertise, admittedly, um how they store data and what oversight mechanisms are in place. And so just to
be clear on what I'm asking for tonight with regard to thisouou, Chestnut Hill Realy is purchasing and installing flock cameras or at least one with LPR technology for their own private use. LPRs are currently uh I'm sorry, they're currently in the early stages of
installing this technology on Independence Drive near the Boston border. These cameras will be on private property but facing the roadway. Hancock Village is not the first private business in town to acquire license plate readers. We know several commercial properties and private residents that have them already.
This is different because uh Chesn Hill Realy is offering our police department access to their data as part of a broader community safety initiative supporting proactive townwide public safety efforts through modern technology. The only change contemplated by thisou is that our department would
receive real-time alerts when a license plate captured by the cameras matches a hot list. For example, when a license plate is tied to a warrant, stolen vehicle, or an amber or silver alert. The flock cameras at Chesn Hill Realy will not capture facial images, and our
department will not use them for face facial recognition or any other unauthorized surveillance. Our courts have generally found that the simple act of reading a license plate in public is not a search under the for data might be retained and who may access it. These points reinforce the
safeguards that we've built into our policy, including clear data retention limits, audit trails, specific alert criteria, a prohibition on facial recognition, and requirements for transparency and oversight. Our policy aligns with the best practices and
addresses the major concerns cited by the ACLU, ensuring that this technology serves legitimate public safety purposes without infringing on privacy or civil liberties. As always, our department will continue to abide by mass law by our own internal policies and procedures, including those
that govern information sharing in coordination with federal immigration authorities. As a reminder, we've been operating since 2009 with our town-owned SIMS cameras. And while there are very similar sentiments expressed at the time that those were introduced, I stand here before you today 15 years
later able to say that there's never been an allegation of misuse by a member of my department. With that in mind, I'm happy to answer questions about theou and I believe the flock team is here online to do the same. >> Okay. Do you want to ask questions now
or wait till the end? Paul looks like you want to start now. >> I just I just I'm not going to give opinions. I actually do have some questions. First, thank you uh for coming. Um this is such an important point because I know that there's lots of uh information, misinformation, speculation, legitimate concern from the
community and I think this transparency is very very important. So, thanks to both of you for coming. Um so, and this um this is a basic question just about how this works. So, the cameras are going to be on Chestnut Hills property. >> Yes.
>> And it's going to be pointing towards a public roadway. Yes. >> And it will has the ability to capture the license plate. Um what is why does and Chestnut Hill is not here. Do you know why they want to do this? I mean if if we didn't have access to it, they would still do it.
What do they how do they benefit from it? What does the system do for them without any intervention or support from uh or collaboration with the Brooklyn Police Department? >> In conversations with them, it seems their primary purpose is deterrence. um having the word, you know, deterrence
and having having it out there that they have this technology um particularly for their commercial properties and the Bertuchi's um >> you know strip mall. Yeah, thank you. Um where they have seen a spike in in reuse. >> So this is like having that big, you
know, people that really want to deter theft and crime, they they don't put the small inconspicuous cameras on their house. They put the big ones. I can't say I haven't seen actually what it will look like. >> Yeah, I'm just saying I just I know that that's a strategy in order so so people actually see oh I'm being I'm being
recorded. How is this different from uh all the cameras that were uh that were um uh the footage was researched and scanned with technology uh during the marathon bombing. All those cameras were
pointing towards the public way, towards public sidewalks, towards restaurants, and they used hundreds of those and scan that technology, scan those that data technically, the FBI data is my understanding, in order to track down the bombers of the marathon bombing. How
is this is this different in some way? >> It's a little bit different in that it allows us to react in the moment to real-time alerts. So, for example, um a very recent example, this past week, we have a mailbox at Putterham at the Putterham Rotary. I'm sorry, you can um
let me know if you can't hear me, but the uh mailbox at the Putterham Rotary Rotary has been hit a couple of times with um mailbox thefts. I don't know if the board's been made uh familiar with these cases where there are skeleton keys out there. It's going on all over the all over the country where they go in, they steal mail, they can wash
checks, um, and steal money from anybody that's deposited a check into the mail to pay a bill or what have you. Um, we did have a license plate that we were looking for. Um, had that passed by the reader, we would get an alert in real time that that car was in the area and we could we could approach and ideally
we would have made >> So, it's proactively telling you, alerting you that something's happening versus having to go back >> without this. We could go back and say, you know, within the period that the data is >> a period of time. >> Yeah. It's it helps. It could help in solving something, but it doesn't help us.
>> Yeah. I want to add there's a really big difference in addition to that, and that is these cameras create a text file that goes into the cloud. Correct me if I'm wrong. And that text file can be uh access accessed and analyzed by people
whoever has access to flock security flock safety's um system. >> I mean that that's not true of of the cameras that we're talking about. >> Yeah. So it might be a technical question for the flock team but so we
ourou gives us access to the community tier level um which is >> well and for 90 days you have access to everything >> we do and then we can subscribe for or just for that broad >> it will default back to community after
that initial trial period. Um but Chestnut Hill Realy decides who they share their data with. We don't own any data. We can't share any data with anybody else. This is just for us to have access to the Chesn realy camera. >> Okay. Wait. You mean that I guess we
need to ask Flock, but from what I read in their materials, this data goes to the cloud. Anyone who has access to Flock's cloud has access to that data. >> Be great to hear from Flock about how their works. >> So that's Tag and Kristen.
>> Yes. >> Okay. I'm going to promote Kristen now and I will also promote um TG just in case. >> Thank you so much. Good evening members of the select board. My name is Kristen Mloud. I'm a public affairs manager with
Flock Safety. We appreciate the opportunity to join you this evening and thank you so much for that question about access to the flock system. Um so each customer is um in full control of which other flock
customers um or in this specific instance Chestnut Hill Realy would be in control of whether or not they share their data with an a law enforcement entity typically within um their
immediate community. Right? So they are um elect they would like to share their information that is captured by their camera network with Brooklyn Police Department um for purposes of providing evidence should a crime occur. And of course Brooklyn PD would be able to be
alerted to any wanted vehicles that also passed by cameras in the community. Access to the flock system by our law enforcement agencies. So when through thisou when Brooklyn um would enter into
and become of the flirt part of the flock system um they could request from other law enforcement agencies access to their camera networks. It's that the agency that they're requesting to access
that lie that whether or not they're going to share their camera network information is in full control of each respective customer. So just because you have access to the flock system doesn't give um cart blanch access to everyone's cameras. And then the private entity
cameras operate a bit differently than the law enforcement access. So the non-law enforcement users have more limited system capabilities and controls where law enforcement have broader functionality including investigative
tools again access to shared law enforcement networks. Whereas commercial and neighborhood customers can only access data relevant to their property or community and cannot conduct these larger law enforcement style
investigations. Can I have a followup question? >> So, uh, thank you Kristen for that. Um, welcome to to the meeting. Um, so when data when a license plate is captured, let's just use Chestnut Hill
Realy by a Chesh Hill Realy camera, that data goes into the cloud, your cloud somewhere, private cloud, I assume. Um, and does does that data become part of a a repository that is accessible by others
outside of chest? So, if there's a police department in Chicago, uh the Chicago Police Department wanted to access data or had a license plate that they were monitoring uh and it and it went past a camera in in uh in
Chestnut Hill uh realies cameras, would they be alerted? >> Thank you so much for that question. So yes, if a law enforcement agency requests access to Chestnut Hills camera network and Chestnut Hill grants that,
yes, they could be alerted um to that. And again, that decision is is completely up to Chestnut Hill realy whether or not they share with a Chicago law enforcement agency. We find that private um customers typically just
share within their kind of immediate jurisdiction. However, >> okay, >> um to to follow up to um with the the data being held in the cloud, that is held for a default of 30 days. So, at
the 30-day mark, an image, each image is given a time to live, if you will. At the 30-day mark, that image is hard deleted and unreoverable unless it's been downloaded as part of a criminal investigation or retained for
evidence. um all of those images that are collected and not um utilized as part of as evidence in a criminal investigation again are hard deleted and unreoverable at that 30-day mark. >> So Kristen, let me just see if I can summarize because you said a lot. I want
to make sure you answer I understood your answer to my question. So, a license plate that passes in front of a camera on chest that is uh operated by Chestnut Hill Realy or paid for by Chesn Hill Realy. The data from that camera
cannot trigger a hit with some law enforcement agency unless Chestnutill Realy gave that law enforcement agency permission to to monitor their camera. >> Correct. >> Correct.
Okay, thank you. John um >> many questions. Um uh but I'll focus on just a couple. Uh we have something known as the surveillance technology and military type equipment study committee.
Um have they reviewed this? >> No, that's sort of um how would you put it? It's not operative right now. >> It's not operative. Oh, well that's unfortunate. Okay. that committee. I'm sorry to interrupt. That committee issued its uh final reports and has not
met in years. So it's not Yeah. >> All right. So they have disbanded. Okay. Um >> sort of >> sort of. Okay. Um uh next question. Uh there were a couple of documents um you
know that are tied to this uh in our packet and one was from chief pastor uh and one was one was a proposedou and it was on flock letterhead and I I'm
a little uncertain as to who in our you know administration at town hall here who is looking over the language of theou to make sure that it does what it purports to do in terms of protecting
civil liberties. Um uh can anyone answer that question? >> Chief pastor >> I am not I can't say for certain that town council has looked at it. It was it was shared about things >> we ask town council
>> uh well I mean if town council if town council hasn't looked at it how can we approve it? Well, that's kind of how I feel about it, you know. I mean, especially where it seems to have been, you know, originated with flock. >> Yeah. >> But that's an important issue. Certainly
town council should look at the thing, but you know, there's there's a broader discussion that we have to have, I think, about this, right? We've got >> fundamental philosophical, >> you know, uh, concerns about surveillance state. I'm hearing that
word thrown around. Um there's ideas about leveraging technology today that it's a no-brainer if this is available to us to be able to uh do modern um you know public safety in Brooklyn. Um I think that's the conversation the
lawyers actually have to look at the agreement make sure it's it's doing what it's it purports to do. But I think there's just a a broader discussion we need to deliberate on which is do do we want to have
our police department accessing a private network of data um in order to do police enforcement and knowing that that data potentially could be accessible by others under the permission of Chestnut Hill Realy. I think that's
>> or do we want to have surveillance excuse me um license plate reader um technology use whether it's flock or anyone else right and I don't want people to misunderstand the intent behind my questions um I think that you
know it's going to come down to what's in theou it's going to come down to our policies and so we have a policy document and we have anouou but I'm not satisfied that the civil liberties perspective vetting has been done given
that the language I I'm not even sure who drafted the language in the in theou um but I am clear in my own mind that uh license plate reader technology is something that is accepted not only by
our own governor Healey who has in recent days specifically cited it as being extremely useful in breaking up u gangs that that congregate, you know, all drive to the
same spot at the same time and then do very dangerous things with their cars. And they're using she's actually come come out and advocated that license plate reader technology can help deal with that gang problem. It's not the only thing it could help deal with, but
there have to be protections. So, I'm not I I'm not there's no doubt in my mind that license plate reader technology is useful. President Biden's administration encouraged the use of license plate reader technologies at the local level through ARPA funding and through other
types of funding when when President Biden was in office. Um so, um I I think we we've come to re recognize the usefulness of this technology, but then we have to implement it in ways that protect civil liberties. I see Chaz. Um,
David, >> sorry, let let I'm happy to let other this board member speak. >> No, why don't you go ahead? >> I just I wanted to, you know, follow up again as the chief noted, right, when we're talking about the span of this and
the the scope of the discussion, right? The question here is whether or not we are accepting access to this technology. The question is not whether or not Chestnut Hill Realy can use the technology and I think that's an
important distinction to make because I know a number of the comments we've received from members of the public are you should ban this technology. that's not, you know, a absence an attempt to put that in front of town meeting and then have the attorney general determine whether or not we have the ability to do
that, which I have some doubts that we are able to um ban that technology locally, but we would have to look at that. Um, you know, the the question here is are we going to agree to have
this information shared with us? and if so, what restrictions do we place on our use of that technology? And so, in that regard, I think the operative document that's really important for us to look at is the policy, right? Our our our
police policy. Um and certainly we can take a look at the and I want you know town council will obviously chime in on the language of the contract but really the focus on this is if we are to um
move forward with agreeing to have this data shared with us um then what are the what are the restrictions that we place on our use of it and to the chief's point how do we ensure that as with past uses of cameras we are ble to have
strong policies in place to deter and and avoid um the abuse of that and the abuse of it for civil liberties purposes. I think one of the most, you know, important things when we talk about the Biden administration and ARPA on that front is, for example, the use of cameras to police traffic
enforcement, um, which in many circumstances eliminates, uh, an aspect of bias that is really, um, that people have raised in terms of when people are stopped and how things are addressed in that regard. Um, a license plate leader
reader is only as good as the people who are behind it. But I think as a tool it potentially has that ability to eliminate bias by being in the data in that front. But again depending on the structure in place and the goals of the
I'm sorry the um the policy that is behind it to ensure that that that technology is not abused. there. >> So, I have a related question. Uh, with the example about whether the Chicago police could access uh this data, it
would depend on whether Chesh Hill Realy approves them. But in that hypothetical example, I'm assuming the Chicago police aren't entering into an MOA with Ches Hill Realy. So, to some extent, is this MOA superfluous? And it's really just
about what additional restrictions the Brooklyn Police Department would be imposing on themselves. So that's that's what it sounds like to me from your explanation, Chaz. And secondly, do we need to have an MOA in place in order for the police to access this
data? You referenced another license plate reader that's been put up in Putterham Circle? Is that through Flock? Is that through someone else? >> Sorry, I might have mis So the license plate reader I'm ref I'm aware of other license plate readers in town owned by private citizens and a few other
commercial uh properties. Um what I was saying is that had this license plate reader been up on Independence Drive at Chesn Hill Realy, it would have given us an alert that that car was coming in to hit the mailbox. So I'm not aware of one
currently at Potterham Circle. >> Do we have rules in place around whether the police department can uh utilize this data absent MOA? We would treat, no, we treat those similar to how we do Nest doorbell cam footage, for example,
following a crime, after a crime, when we go back and um, you know, do door knocks, asking anybody if they've seen anything, if they have any relevant camera footage. U, we don't need anou for that. That's just um oldfashioned policing, but with access to better technology. Um, but I think to your
point, yeah, if Chestn Hill Realy decides they want to share with the Chicago Police Department, they don't need an MOA. Uh we believe here, you know, that the community deserves transparency. Um and that I I want to hear the opinions and I want to hear the concerns. Um and that was the value in going to the P to the town administrator
of the PCAC and now here. >> Irrespective of this agreement, if Chess Hill realy contacted you saying we have this alert, you could follow up on it. Correct. >> So my understanding and uh flock can correct me. I don't think they get alerts. They wouldn't get like they
don't get the data the R&B data that's behind a license plate. So they wouldn't get and they wouldn't get the NCIC information because they're they don't have access to that. >> Now doesn't the Boston police already have an MOA in place with Chess Hill Realy? >> I we'll refer to them to see where that
is in development. >> Kristen, could you answer that question? >> Yes, that is correct. They would uh Chresnet Hill Realy would not receive any hot list alerts. And if I could ask to unmute TA or I'm sorry, not TA, Tyler Fallon.
He wanted to offer some um some information regarding theou. >> Tyler has been promoted. He should be able to share his audio. >> Good evening everyone. Can you hear me? All right. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Um just by way of quick introduction, I'm a Massachusetts resident. I've been with a company
leading our Northeast group for the past two years. So I'm thrilled to be here, happy to answer any questions. I I the example you gave is a great one. So local police departments have access to NCIC essentially like criminal, you
know, background databases that just a normal security group would not. So the example that I like to give is let's say there is an Amber Alert that goes off or or maybe it's not gone off just yet, but the department understands that there is a non-custodial parent that has, you
know, taken a child. They would then be able to with access to those cameras with Chestnut Hill Realy set an alert that says if that vehicle that we know took that child hits that license plate, we want to know about it. And I can actually reference you to a case um if
you Googled it from about one year ago. It was a non-custodial parent at a daycare in Canton, Massachusetts. um who is a client of ours as well where they took their child from daycare and thankfully due to the flock network that child was back home within a few hours.
So that would be the power of that versus Chestnut Hill Realy is not going to have access to setting those alerts and that data. I I hope that offers a little bit of context and clarity. >> Michael, um thank you and thank you for the
presentation and the information. Um, but I I think Paul made a really good point about the the the context of what we are discussing. Um and for from my perspective, the important question that
we need to be asking ourselves um or one of the many important questions we need to be asking ourselves is whether we as a town want to participate in the business model that flock safety is establishing because all of these
agreements that are being mediated by a private company, I think we are we are just at the beginning of understanding understanding what those agreements are, you know, what their role is in facilitating, you know, for example, the agreement between a Chicago police force
and Chestnut Hill Realy, what it means for Chestnut Hill Realy to be granting um permission or access to the data, how Flock facilitates that information, and what the benefits are of all of the various parties. Um I'm also concerned
um I I believe the chief you mentioned something about RMV data um being associated with this information. So the first question that I would ask um of the flock people um is um how they uh
con uh manage their information in order to conform with the aspects of the driver privacy protect protection act which is specifically designed to prevent the aggregation of RMV data along with license plate information.
Kristen, I'm happy to take that or if if you would like to. >> Yeah. No, go right ahead, Tyler. >> Yeah. So, the in short, we we do not connect to RMV data um in be we'd be happy to follow up with additional information and you know, additionally, we'd be happy to come in and and sit
down and and review, you know, more flock specific items around those types of questions. In short, you know, all we are capturing is vehicle data. So, yes, we have the license plate, but Flock in and of itself does not connect to that data.
So, if the department was to get an alert that um you know that that person had a warrant out for their arrest, you know, they would essentially be putting that in through NCIC, which is, you know, the national criminal database that would then send an alert to the
department, but the department in and of itself would actually have to go access their own, you know, records to to get into RMV. So flock is is really kind of merely the vehicle for ensuring that you know it is nothing to do with you know
personal identifiable information. There is you know no picture. It is the rear uh of the vehicle traditionally. It is the make and model of the vehicle. Uh it has nothing to do with you know any PII. >> Um and then to you know kind of the the
protection of that data. Uh and we've mentioned it. It is Amazon Govete cloud uh all of the you know security protections that you know all of the the top data integrity in the world has. So we take that very seriously and would also be happy to you know uh share out
that information. >> And and just to follow up on that you said that what I heard you say is that your customers are responsible for accessing the RMV data and doing the aggregation. Is that correct? >> Yeah. So the flock in and of itself does
not does not own or access any of the data. >> And and does your does your customer base now or could it in the future include for example private investigators
um that could get access to RMV data on behalf of other customers of their own other customers? >> Not to not to date to my knowledge. Kristen would have to keep me honest, but very similarly, you know, there is a
number of protections that are put out and it's slightly over my pay grade. Chief Pastor would be better to speak to that than I, but as to the level of data access there, there is certain data that is protected in that way. And to my knowledge, we we do not do any of that
business. Flock Safety essentially is partnering with law enforcement agencies. uh in in your instance here with Chestnut Realy uh what where we were founded with HOAs who are dealing with with crime and then commercial businesses. So for instance uh you know
Lowe's and Home Depot. >> Um I think Mike David >> so I think Michael just raised an excellent point about access to uh potential customers beyond law enforcement. So is there a bright line limit currently and who can access this
information or not? What prevents some random person who claims to be a private investigator or claims to be affiliated with some kind of government agency from accessing this data for uh purposes that
are not law enforcement related but to harass someone or worse. >> So, thank you so much for that question. And and like TA said, our private customers or or I'm sorry, TA Tyler, the two T's, our private customers have
limited system capabilities and our law enforcement their uh their ability to access to we are integrated on the back end with those law enforcement alerts and that's law enfor law enforcement sensitive information. And in our terms
and conditions with all of our private entities, um they and all users regardless of type, whether government or a private customer must comply with our privacy, our auditing, our accountability standards. And in our
terms and conditions, outline permitted purposes of the system. And this is to mean that use of the system is for legitimate public safety and or business purposes including uh the awareness, prevention, prosecution of crime,
investigations, prevention of commercial harm. And if a customer if it is brought to Flock's attention that if a customer is found to be using the system nefariously or for an unpermitted purpose, Flock may suspend that service.
Are you policing that yourself or it sounds like it's the honor system >> all we would >> Oh, did you want to >> No, I was just going to add to that. So, so every agency is set up with what we call a transparency portal. So, every search requires a reason. Most
departments will, you know, tie it to a case number. Um, and that is oftentimes published on the department's website. So, you know, the public can go in and see how many searches were pro uh performed, what other agencies uh have shared network access, what are the
search reasons. We'd be happy to provide some examples of that. But to your point on on the honor system, it is it is a very very public uh forum, I would say, in in display of why it is that people are searching for the very reason you asked, which is a great one, which is what prevents people from doing this for
nefarious reasons. That's exactly what it does. Well, I I did look into this a little bit in terms of example searches and they can be very vague such as investigation that can mean just about anything. So, I'm not sure how helpful that that really is. One other question
uh that I wanted to ask, you were talking about how flock doesn't take ownership in this data that's being gathered. So how do you square that with number nine in the proposed MOA where it states ownership flock retains all
rights title and interest in and to the flock service flock IP and its components or data provided by Flock to customer. Customer further acknowledges that Flock retains the right to use the foregoing for any purpose in Flock's
sole discretion. Could you explain that please? >> So yes, in the I want to address the first um the first comment about the the search reason reasons being vague. We're actually implementing um a more robust
um procedure to address just that. And that is going to be a a drop-down selection menu for the search reason. then the offenses are based on um neighbors and so the search reasons will
be specifically linked to that uh those criminal offenses that are recognized in neighbors. In addition to we provide agencies the ability to not only um enter in that search or it's required that they enter in the search reason but
they can also opt to require that their users enter in a case number. So that makes that auditing um very much more uh much more friendly and easy to conduct um because they can tie that search directly to a documented case number.
And then um the second part of the question referencing the terms and conditions that is not granting Flock a general right of access. um Flock will not access your data. If we were to receive a subpoena um for instance for
your for our customers data, we would notify our customer immediately and work with them to to respond to that. We work with um city's uh legal teams um to help respond to that subpoena, but Flock would not uh release that data unless
legally compelled to do so. And um the we retain aggregated data and that is for customer benefit. It is wiped of all meta metadata. So I think a good example is um say we are alerted by one of our
customers um that a there was a a misidentification in the character of our license plate number. So an E was mistaken as an eight. the number eight that is flagged for us. We retain that image. It is wiped of all metadata and
we use that to train our machine learning so that we can improve our accuracy. We have um we are very confident in our accuracy rate but being able to um retain that aggregated data that is wiped of all metadata. We don't
even know where where the images come from. It enables us to keep up with new models of vehicles that are on the roadways, new colors, so that we're accurately identifying that information. >> Okay, Paul. >> Yep. So, um I I want to kind of maybe
bring us back onto the key question, which is do we want our outstanding police department have access to this data? And when I say access, it proactively lets you know
that something's happening or you could actually proactively go backwards and I assume do some research. That that that that's the first question. There are fundamental questions about does Brookline want to get involved in this developing industry and support it and economic models and all that. Um I'm still not clear who actually owns the
data at this point, whether it's a license or what. Um but fundamentally we're asking Chester Hill Realy is going to do this. they're going to put this system in and we have to decide whether we would like to support the chief's
request to gain access to that information on a lake local basis to help improve public safety and public safety outcomes in Brooklyn. I I want you to know that I'm generally inclined to support your request. I have a lot of concerns like John had about the our
lawyers looking at this thing and scrubbing um the the the policy. Um we may want to have um not only the policy but also uh the memo memorand of agreement. Um we may want to make this memorandum of agreement to be a period of time that we come back and do an evaluation and see how it's going. So
it's not it it's not forever. Um but I do I it's still not clear to me who owns the data. And I'm just going to go back to the flock team real quick. When a license plate is scanned and it gets uploaded to the cloud, who owns that piece of information? You
own certainly the infrastructure, the IP around the technology, the programming, you know, all of that, the infrastructure, but who actually owns that electronic copy of the license
plate? Is that your IP and you license it to Chesh Hill Realy and others to use it or do they own it and it's theirs and and you are kind of hosting it for them, but they own it? That is correct. The
customer owns the data and we act as the guardian of that data. >> You you're the guardian but the the data is in your cloud, right? >> Amazon Web Services government cloud. We contract with them for the data storage. >> Okay. So, so the question I think people
in this town are very concerned about, including the police department, is um the access the ability of uh certain government agencies like ICE to access that information um and use it uh in ways that do not align with our uh
values and our laws. Okay. >> So, and what how how secure from that type of use is is this data? >> Yes. So, we currently do not have any contracts with um with ICE or HSI. Um we
ran a brief >> Would you need a contract for them to uh access your data? >> We ran a brief pilot um that lasted a few months over the summer. those pilots have been suspended. Um, and I think
something very important to note is that each customer is in charge and in full control of whether or not they share their data with any other outside um with law enforcement, with any other law
enforcement agency. Um, some communities choose to share their information with um nationally. Some agencies choose to share with other agencies within their state. Others choose onetoone and others
choose not to share at all. We want to make sure that the flock system is customizable to each community so that it align aligns with not only community values but of course um state laws. and
we are implementing and have implemented several product features to support that that very that very notion. Um so really it's up to each individual customer whether or not they want to share their
data and with what other entities. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. And along those lines, um chief pastor, uh would we be paying for use of the data? >> No. So there'd be no cost to us to have
a relationship with Chestnut Hill Realy whereby they share the data that they gleaned from their flock cameras with us. There'll be no cost to us for that. >> Wait, correct. In theou it says you get a free ride for 90 days.
>> That's of the Sorry. >> Yeah. After that it's a subs it's a subscription service. >> That's to the community tier but it's we don't pay for that. That's it's Chestnut Hill Real Chestnut Hill Realy um is footing whatever bill.
>> Okay. And and if I may ask um follow-up question. Um I I I hope this helps people to maybe a little bit better understand the relationships that are at work here. So let's just take the example of a I'll call it a porch camera, a re a ring
camera. Um, we've seen on Facebook, you know, people say, uh, this is the image I got with my Ring camera of someone stealing a package from my po porch. Um, and I believe that on occasion those kinds of images have been useful to
Brooklyn police in tracking and then maybe even, you know, um, arresting a suspect or two, um, in these porch thefts. Right. >> Absolutely. >> Right. So there's no hesitancy on the part of the police department in in um
if there's been a porch theft in asking the person who reported the porch theft, do you have a Ring camera and then asking could we access the video from the Ring camera? Right. >> Right. >> So would the relationship with Chestnut Hill Realy be of somewhat the same um
you know nature? Uh, and within that question is assumed, how would Chestnut Hill Realy know if one of the pieces of data they purchased, um, in other words, a license plate number is a license plate number of someone who's on some kind of a watch
list or or, you know, be on the lookout for list. >> My understanding is that they would not know. >> So, they wouldn't initiate call to the police and say, "Hey, we think we've got something you might want might be interested in." >> Right. Um so uh h how does that so
basically you you get full stream all of the data and and then somewhere you know under your opaces it's it's screened for any sus suspicious license plate numbers. >> So in the if we reference back to the example I gave with the uh the mailbox
thefts we had a license plate on a car that we were looking for. So we could put that license plate in uh to our hot list >> and when it goes by the license plate reader, our dispatch, somebody sitting in dispatch would get a notification that the car just passed. >> Okay. So that's kind of part of our
relationship with Cheset Hill Realy, >> right? >> Is that since you're already screening all of these, you know, license plate numbers, would you um let us know if one of these shows up? That's that's kind of >> so it's yeah it's not relying on you know these things are happening at at
three o'clock in the morning. So it's not relying on a person you know to be looking at the camera at that time. It's automated in that way that it would go right to dispatch who would alert >> at some point it' be reviewed and you'd get a hit or something like oh my god one of these license plate numbers matches right with something that is of
interest to Brooklyn police. Yes. Okay. >> But but it's not a direct relationship. Chess Hill Realy sends the information to the cloud through flock cloud and you are going to the cloud to get that information. >> I think there's a match made in in the
cloud. This is again beyond my technical expertise, but that match is made and the alert is made. And I would compare it to, you know, if I'm in a patrol car um behind somebody in traffic, I run their license plate. If they have a warrant, every, you know, every bell and whistle starts going off to let me know
the person in front of me has a warrant. If I could finish my thought on this, I hope people because these civil liberties concerns are really important, but I also hope people understand that it would be irresponsible of local law law enforcement if if they were made
aware that there had been a porch theft and then they were made aware that the the person who, you know, was the victim in the porch had a video of the person who might have done it. If we were to say, "We're not interested in that. I'm sorry because we have to protect civil
liberties here. We would, you know, be within our obligation to that person to take a look at the information and try to, you know, do something as a follow-up. Right. >> I think that's right. I'm just trying to get the best. >> Yeah. So, it's not a one-way street
here. I mean, we have obligations, >> you know, when when information is available that could be useful um to police and that kind of use useful information crops up all the time. And it's not just license plate readers. It's, you know, these, you know,
whatever surveillance cameras that are out in in neighborhoods. And they just had a former mayor of Fall River who was nearly killed. >> Yeah. by someone who came up and stabbed him, you know, in the dark on a on a street that was, you know, pretty much
empty. And that person is going to survive, but they had video because there was, you know, one of these types of cameras that happened to capture the person running up and they now have a suspect in that. Um, so >> except again those are different types
of cameras. I mean the the license reader license plate readers create a a text file that can be searched. It can be manipulated in all kinds of ways and that creates additional problems.
>> That's that's a very important distinction. That's why we need a good contract. >> But Bernard, but can can I just say that I I think that's not 100% accurate. So today's uh camera technology has advanced so far that if if your camera
which is is push all the data up into the cloud um it has an account. You could give the account to your neighbor and your neighbor's complaining that some dog's doing their business on your lawn. Um the cameras today you can actually tell the camera to search for any dogs and it will go through the
entire data stream and only pick out the time that a dog walked by your your camera. So that's a little different. >> It's not it's all the same technology. It's capturing information then processing that information with data. And again, we could to it's innovating
so quickly. The core question is if the information is accessible to us and we have a law enforcement department that is, you know, the best by far than anybody and they they have clear procedures. Um they don't share
information with ICE. They've made it very clear in the policy that you publish draft version. I assume we could comment on that as to how they're going to use it, what they can and can't do with it. Um it's it's no different than any other aspect. >> The question I asked was can ICE get
access to this? And I don't think that I got a good answer and and that's the issue that people in this town are concerned about. I think I I I I thought I can speak for them, but I thought they said that the way that ICE would access the information was if
the Brookline Police Department gave it to them or another department gave it to them. ICE does not have an account. >> It goes up into the cloud. The cloud doesn't have different rooms, right? >> No, but they have security. >> So, and I think theou issue is separate
from ICE having access to data. This is just >> No, it is. But but it it's related here because you know we we're we're setting up a system where in effect we're making an un an inr run around our procurement procedures. Right? In other
words, instead of the police department procuring this technology, we're having Ches Hill realy procure it and we're just taking advantage of it. >> Well, I don't want it to make it sound like >> Well, no. I mean, they're getting it. that that may not be intention of
anyone, but that's that's the effect in the sense that >> you just first of all, they're not here, so we can't talk about their terms and conditions, their policies, right? Um, and you
and Chesnah Hill Realy um, you know, is now I lost my train of thought. Sorry, >> David. Bernard, unless you want to fix >> No, I Well, I was I hope this is helpful. I just asked Bernard this question. If Chestnut Hill Realy were to
come to us and say, um, yes, we would like to share the data with the Brooklyn Police, but yes, we would also share data with ICE. Does that does that mean if we say well on that basis we cannot have any business looking at the data
that that would be shared with us does that mean we're not going to ever have any contractual relationship with anyone who has any relationship with ICE? I I I I don't get it. Well I mean the type of relationship that we're talking about is
a little more than just you know a minor thing. I mean it's it's we we know the stories Yeah. of you know someone is at a um a a a demonstration support of immigrants, their license plate is read, you know, a
um undocumented or maybe a legal resident um is captured on their license plates are captured. Yeah. >> And they're picked up and um you know um picked up by ICE. >> Yeah. >> Because they're caught on um you know,
one of these systems. >> So I mean that that's the concern. I mean, may maybe we're being paranoid about this, but no, I don't think >> or a dangerous driver strikes a pedestrian on the streets of Brooklyn, we want that information if that person is a known dangerous driver.
>> But I guess that we don't have any sense that there are controls that prevent the worst type of outcome from from these. We we don't have terms and conditions from Ches Hill Realies agreement with with Flock. you know, we have issues
with the flockou here, >> right? So, we're not ready. We we haven't gone through, you know, normal procurement, which would help us identify, you know, backgrounds of of uh vendors uh and help us identify different vendors that maybe um would would provide more security for us, more
more services. Um there just so many um sort of gaps in this process that I'm uncomfortable with uh you know, with with going forward right now. So to answer one of Paul's questions to Bernard, I think you were asking about whether ICE would have access to this
and it sounds like from Flock's explanation that if Chest Hill Realy as a third party decides that they would like ICE to have access, they can >> they could give they could give to any agency. >> Exactly. And that's irrespective of
anyou with the Brooklyn police. Now, I don't think any of us here are saying that we question how the Brooklyn Police Department would utilize this data. But to Bernard's point about procurement, there are other ways that we can carry out surveillance if that's the direction
we decide to go in that doesn't necessarily involve Flock and some of these other concerns that are being raised. Uh the way theou language is articulated does give me a lot of pause. That said, I
understand your point that it's not our decision to make whether Chess Hill Realy utilizes uh these cameras. They're going to be there whether we like it or not. So, the question is, do we want to support the uh Brookline Police Department accessing it? But that brings
me back to my earlier question about whether theou is in some respects superfluous. So to use John's example about the ring camera, someone sees that a package is robbed from their porch. They contact the police, you review the camera footage, and maybe you're able to
identify the perpetrator. Why would that not apply in this situation as well, even absent an MOU? So, for example, someone at Hancock Village uh has a breakin. There's knowledge that there's a flaw camera on site that might have
caught the license of the driver. you know when the incident occurred, what would prevent you from going to Ches Hill Realy and saying, "Can we look at um the plates between this date and that date?" Sort of being reactive as opposed
to having those proactive alerts. Absent, can you not do that? >> Absent, we can still do that. that it would be treated the same way as a as a ring cam or um but I think theou covers us for you know having access to creating our own hot list putting in plates that we want to be alerted on and
um the rules of engagement around doing something like that and I was just informed that this was reviewed by um Susan Harris with town council >> Chaz has his hand up online >> I just did want to flag that um this you do have a public hearing um
>> no I We're having such an interesting and u important conversation. I wanted to like get it out of there. >> I I think the the one other flag that I did want to have is that as I and I flock to obviously chime in on this, but my understanding is that ICE could have access to this one of two ways, which is
either um Chestnut Hill voluntarily gives it to them as David laid out or or um it um which is what Flock laid out. Um, so and that's the case with any sort of federal law enforcement agency,
right? If they issue a subpoena, um, then there's that question of, you know, as Flock pointed out, they work with their clients, but ultimately a subpoena is a subpoena. Um, and there again, we, you know, whereas if ICE were to issue
us a subpoena for their duties, I think we would strenuously argue against it and argue basically you can't deputize us into doing your unconstitutional work. Um, it's different with private companies and it doesn't necessarily leave a role for us whether or not
thisou is signed. >> One question, Bernard. Okay, one one last question and I want to open up and >> this this would be for whoever can answer it. Maybe it's it's it's flock. Um maybe it's jazz. >> Um for all of the license plate readers
that exist surrounding Boston, so to get in and out of a tunnel, to go across a bridge, to get on the mass pike, those are all license plate readers. Um is that information, that license plate information accessible to law enforcement?
Does anybody know? >> So, but are you asking flock specific license plate readers or because there are >> I I I don't know who I don't know who captures my license plate when I come out of the Sumar tunnel, right? >> Uh but they charge me.
>> It's >> you do. Is that you? >> Okay. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, that is a totally different technology. Uh that that just Yeah. For the easy pass and the ticketing. Uh I've been there. Uh, I I'm in actually coming to you from New Jersey right now on a Pennsylvania Jersey road trip and I will probably be
there again. Um, so no, very different technology. That's that's not flock. >> It's not it's not that information is not captured and accessible by law enforcement. >> We we could subpoena the same way that information um and it does hit on my understanding is on Amber Alerts.
>> Yeah. Okay. So they do you could it will capture an Amber. Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Uh let's open up the public hearing. Uh Charlie, you want to uh >> Sure. So, this is a public hearing. Folks in the audience can use the hand raise feature online to let us know they'd like to speak or if you're in the room, you can raise your hand. We have
one person signed up for public comment in advance who's online. That's Michael McGra Herd. Michael, I'm going to promote you to a co-host now, so you can share your video and your three minutes will begin when you're ready. >> Hi folks. Sorry I couldn't be there in person. It's kind of a spooky night with
the the Zoom. Um, good evening. It's Michael McRae. I live in Precinct 6. Um, I think we need to thank Flock for being here tonight for their transparency and advertising. They're installing these licensed plate reader cameras near Hancock Village. They didn't have to tell us. I'm glad they're helping our town discuss this technology. It's
legally installed on private property and operated privately. Um, I just want to talk the facts and the risks and maybe the reporting. Um, on the facts, I read the memorandum and the policies. The police policy is silent on the use of video. Um, and I'm confused to hear flock reps say tonight that it's plates
only. So, a summer 2025 flock press release says their cameras now stream live video and save video clips of the plates. That's a big value ad for them versus basic LPRs. And it's a strange gap in the discussion what happens to the video clips. Um, so as you've heard, Flock's product is very innovative. Um,
immigration enforcement can easily put together a list of plate numbers, register to people with visa overstays, um, track those cars across the country, maybe pick a good time to schedule pickups. Um, I'm hoping that Chestnut Hill Realy will opt out of that feature in their view of the app. I I really hope they will and it will work. Um but
then in terms of risks tactically, if the town of Brooklyn signs this agreement and gains access to similar LPR data, this creates a target for federal authorities to try to coersse us into using those data. Um I hope we'll be able to say no when we're asked. Having the technical ability to say yes
exposes us to the risks of being pressured. So imagine if we lose federal funds until we say yes to ICE searches for for visa overstay license plate data. Um, I hope that we'll balance the risks against the benefits here. I know that in 1985 the town enacted a resolution saying it's our policy to the
extent legally policable. No department or employee of the town will violate established or future sanctuaries by officially assisting or voluntarily cooperating with investigations or arrest procedures, public or clandestine, relating to alleged violations of immigration law by refugees. Um, and I know in 2006 the
town passed warrant article 26 reaffirming that 1985 policy expanding that sanctuary status and those protections to all undocumented immigrants from all countries. Um, and I know the select board is the police commissioners. So, you choose the policies here. Um, I'm just asking you to make sure that the policies you pick
are consistent in whatever risks they create or expose us to with any risks of misuse that might might put us in violation of past policy positions we've taken on protecting our residents. Just please think carefully when you look at these policies and thisou at how we're
protecting our neighbors. Uh and finally on reporting um whether or not we approve these policies in this form or another one, I just want to request that we start writing down in the 2025 annual town report in the public safety and infrastructure section something slightly new. Um I want to request that we start saying that we know we have
LPRs in town. We know where they are. Here's the ones we know about and here is how many times they've been used to support federal surveillance which we can get from audit and transparency data from vendors like Flock who are great at sharing them. I'd just like us to start publishing that information because the press report on it. Um, future
historians are going to be looking at what's been happening to our neighbors with searches like this. Now that we know it's here, we should be as public and transparent about its presence. Um, and thank you to the folks from Flock and the Select Board and Chester Hill Realy who have raised this issue. There's a lot going on here and I hope we'll be able to balance protecting all
of our residents with protecting our our public safety interests. Thank you very much. >> Your time is expired. All right. The next person signed up for public comment is Amy Newell. Amy, I'm going to promote you to um to speak actually. Um hold on
one second. Amy, you've been promoted. Uh you can share your video and audio and when you're ready, you can begin. >> Hi. Can everybody ah okay, yes, you can see me. Um okay. Amy Null, town meeting member, precinct 7. I am speaking
tonight against signing anyou with flock. I understand that we cannot prevent Chestnut Hill Realy from installing PL flock plate readers. However, the town of Brookline should not do business with this company. Flax CEO declares that his company's intent
is to end all crime forever. Yet, Flack habitually breaks laws itself. Apparently, corporate crime is not, according to Flak's CEO, crime. Let me give just one example. You can find the article linked on the TMA TMMA mailing
list. Evston, ilino Illinois had a contract with Flock which it canled when it was found that Flock had shared data with ICE without a authorization from Evston authorities and against Illinois law. Most of the cameras were removed, but then Flock turned around and
reinstalled them, forcing Evston to issue a cease and desist and to physically cover up the cameras so as not to continue to allow Flock to illegally surveil. This was as recently as September. This example shows that Flap does not think it has to follow the
law and it does not respect the cancellation of contracts. Again, this is a company that secretly reinstalled cameras after a contract was cancelled due to illegal activity. Clearly, nothing that Flock says can be trusted. We should therefore sign no agreements
with Flock. We should not be aiding and abetting the expansion of a nationwide surveillance network by what is obviously a bad actor. Thank you. >> Folks online, please keep your hands raised. We're going to take the folks who are lined up in person to speak or
Okay. You're not you're not looking to speak, neither of you folks. >> Yeah. No, please go ahead and approach the podium. Uh Oh, yeah. You can you can go first. Yeah. Go ahead. Whoever Whoever would like to go first. You got to speak right into the microphone so we can hear you.
>> We'll stretch up for you. >> You can lift it up. >> All right. >> Go. >> Hi, my name is David Butcher. I'm a homeowner in precinct 9. Um, I'm here today in opposition to the signing of the MOU with Flock. Uh, it is clear that Ches Hill Realy is going to install
these cameras. So, I'm going to be specific in my arguments about why Brookline should not engage in using AI surveillance services provided as a gift by a private real estate company. I will not today argue on why Brookline shouldn't install these cameras in the future, which is not yet something we must consider. Um, I will also not argue
why we should stop CHR from installing these because we don't have uh the ability to do that today. I think we, the constituents of Brookline, will have to find other ways to pressure Ed Zucker and his company, who are not here today, um, to not install these systems on their properties in Brooklyn and in our community.
Uh while the town of Brooklyn isn't yet considering installing these systems ourselves, it is impossible not to see that the decision made here tonight sets a clear precedent as to how the board feels about AI surveillance. Again, this is not just licensed plate readers. This is AI surveillance technology um and how it'll be used in our community in the
future. Uh this is only the start to how this uh AI technology will be used. Block Safety started business in 2017 and is already a 7.5 billion business. How did it become so valuable so quickly giving away its services for free like
it is trying to do here in Brooklyn? That's because like so many other AI technology companies, the service is not the product. The people that use the product, the people that use the service are the pro are the product. Block doesn't care about selling cameras. They care about selling the information collected by them. What is that
information? Well, reading theou you are being asked to sign surely doesn't tell you. uh they come here and say that these are license plate readers but in the whole five-pageou license plates are only mentioned once but fortunately patents are public which means we can see what sort of information flock really cares about or their publicly
awarded patent there this is quoted neural network module configured to identify different classes of people male female race etc we cannot let them hide from what their true intentions are with this technology I like to believe that our great police officers would not abuse a system um with this much power
in fact Let's assume that they won't, even though there's countless examples across the country of that happening. Um, the problem is we we all make mistakes at work. It's part of life. And why would we want to put a system in place that puts our officers at such a high risk of creating serious Fourth Amendment violations by making a simple
mistake in their use of a technology? Why create that risk for our department? And when those mistakes inevitably happen and the town of Brooklyn has to settle the lawsuits for millions of dollars like other towns have had to, how are we going to afford that? Is this system still free at that point? Those who would give up essential liberty to
purchase a little temporary safety deserves neither liberty or safety. It's a quote from Benjamin Franklin that you're going to continue to hear. Yes, the technology does work. It can potentially solve crimes, but at what cost? What cost to our liberties? What financial cost to our towns? What cost to our privacy? Theou is simply too
broad and vague with no policies or guide rails to protect DPT and the town from misuse. You guys have the ability. >> Thank you. Your time is expired. Please go ahead and approach. as a reminder of your name, precinct. >> Thank you. Um, I'm Carolyn Thal. I'm a
town meeting member in precinct 16. And sorry, I'm going to try and put this down. Um, so I've been just jotting some notes along the way because I've been learning a lot about this. Um, so I just have a few things I'd like to put into the mix. Good evening, select men. Um,
and chief. Um, so few things I want to put in the mix. I don't know a ton about surve surveillance and the interesting issues that you've been discussing and I think others will discuss. Um want to be really clear. I think the chief knows this. I very much appreciate our police
department and particularly the chief. Um I trust her. I trust her intentions and her methods. Um, and it's helpful to hear how she uses information um, well in the public interest and I believe that is absolutely her primary driver at
all times. But in this case um, I am concerned about the partner the town um, being a partner with um, Chestnut Hill Realy in something that might feel chilling to Brooklyn residents. Um,
Independence Drive is a major thorough affair. Um, and what we're talking about here amounts to infrastructure, although it would be on the private property. Um, so when we participate in this, we we are doing this. We're not just peripheral. Um, CHR says they are
installing these cameras due to problems down at the shops. Um, that's Boston, a half mile away from their entrances. Um, although it's not entirely clear where these cameras would be. Um, and I just want to add a little bit of context. Um,
in case folks don't know, Chestnut Hill Realy has close to a thousand housing units on the Brookline side of Hancock Village because it is a rental property so close to a wonderful school. Um, Hancock Village is extremely popular with non US citizens living here for
approximately 1 to three years on work andor study visas. Typically, the Baker School is about a third populated with Hancock Village residents. This is who is walking to the Baker School, walking along Independence Drive, um, and
potentially now being recorded. Um, in addition, and along the same lines, we know that the two 40B projects at Hancock Village have added 91 affordable apartments in the past four years. I believe all are occupied. And it's my understanding that 40B eligibility does
not require US citizenship, a visa, or any proof of immigration status. Um, so it's entirely likely that um, Brookline residents who are not US citizens, do not have visas or proof of immigration status are occupying our new affordable
units at Hancock Village. Uh, this tells you a bit about our neighbors who live in Hancock Village, who will be walking to our school, and who would be surveiled um by their landlord. >> Thanks. Your time has expired. >> Thank you very much. >> Please go ahead and approach the podium.
Name and precinct. You'll have three minutes. >> Hi, good evening. Clint Richmond, precinct 6. I've been involved in this issue since 2008 of privacy. I want to point out that we shouldn't just call these ALPR. It's much more than a than a plate number and in and can include the
following. The make, body type, sedan, SUV, etc. Color, plate number, state, missing plate, type of plate, standard or temporary, resident or non-resident, other features and objects such as roof rack, cargo, flags, bumper stickers transcribed by AI, date, time, location,
GPS in this case. We've heard about other images and video associated with this record. Uh the this can include the occupants. Uh there's probably other data. uh flock should reveal all the metadata that they collect and whether or not they own it because that they create the metadata. The it's it's not
clear who owns that if they're we're it's so I'd ask you to ask that question. Uh since they own the video, are they allowed to uh stream it live or publish the list of all the visitors to the properties? Is that their right? Uh
no one was contemplating ALPR back in 2011 um uh when we reviewed the uh policy, but now mass surveillance is leaping ahead. Our own senator Cynthia Cream had over many legislative sessions introduced bills that would have banned
all private apr and limited government use for specific purposes for specific personnel and government entities would only be allowed to keep the data for 14 days under this proposed law, not the 30 that flock is currently using. And given my uh background in computer software
and hardware like some on the board, I would say this is impossible to safeguard uh digital data. It's because it's so mobile and so accessible. So now we are proposing that the town will in effect endorse or sanction ALPR in Brooklyn which will be added to Flock's national network. Flock is a private
for-profit company with a dubious track record themselves and cooperates with even more problematic companies like Palanteer. We have no control over this private service. Their policies, protections, and terms can change at any time. Every driver on Independence Drive will be surveiled in order for police to be able to access um the data for law
enforcement in Brooklyn or nationally. If we think surveillance is good, the logical conclusion is that we should uh surveil every road and then every vehicle of interest will be caught. I join with many other town meeting members and residents and the ACLU who've submitted comment directly to you
on or online and urge you not to sign anyou with chestnut hill realy. Furthermore, I I would say to Chestnut Hill that they should not be surveilling uh vehicles on Brooklyn public roadways like busy Independence Drive since it will not be well received by much of the public and could hurt their reputation.
Thank you very much. >> Can I I'm going to put this down here. It won't hurt your computer. I hope I need to be able to see it. >> Could I just ask whoever's if you could check your phones if your phone keeps beeping and reminding you of something? Someone keeps showing me. It's hugely distracting.
>> Mine's off. It usually is. >> Hi, I'm Amy Hmel, town meeting member, precinct 12. Um, uh, this is not a no-brainer. Um, and this is not a gift to Brooklyn, and it it's it's a gift to Flock, a 7.2 2
billion dollar surveillance company with 90,000 AI powered cameras across the US who just last week signed a partnership with Ring announced a partnership with Ring which uses face surveillance. It's also widely to believed but not entirely confirmed that they do liaz or there's
there's API sharing between them and Palunteer Peter Thiel's company. Um and they can and when companies are using both they can uh both can ingest all the data sets license plates 911 calls utility bills financial records the whole right the and the flock incentives
are financial sharing. It sounds like it's this easy. Oh great let's catch a crook when they drive by. It's so much more complex and complicated than that. Let's not the fact that we don't understand all the in-depth pieces and just go with this high level, you know, in, you know, mile wide and inch deep
understanding induce us, right? Seduce us into using it. There are these guys are generally known bad actors. You've heard um some of the things Amy Newell said, having been called out across the country for misdeeds. In Virginia, they tracked a man 526 times for four months after he
investigated the company. Um you heard about Illinois. Um and you know disputes across the country are actually fairly wide. Public outrage is fairly fel wellounded and considerable and you know by signing this with with them we sort
of endorse them right we endorse them in that way in the use of it and are complicit in normalizing this all. Um it's toxic. It's a toxic pill. Um it doesn't matter that flock actually. Yeah that's what I want to say. Um, it
doesn't matter that Fox or Flock focuses on this safety message promising to prevent all crime to the US. To me, that's a bizarre and a creepy message. Um, they don't seem Well, anyhow, let I'm going to move on a little bit because I want to get to this point before my time is about this p public
private conflation that a lot of people do when they think about these two things. is, you know, if any government tried to entity tried to build this surveillance network like Flock has, it would run a foul of the Fourth Amendment and there'd be people in the streets in protest, right? But somehow because
these public private surveillance partnerships quietly undermine privacy rights in this way and induce private businesses or you know or invite them to pay for you know pay for the privilege of gathering customer data on the customers family friends neighbors and
most of all sharing that with data brokers um the go with government actors who often abuse it. Um, and so I'm just going to I want to make another quick qu. But in this matter, we do have agency, right? We don't have to do this. You don't have to sign it tonight or any
other night. And I and we shouldn't. I'll end there because my time is up. >> Thank you. >> Thanks. >> Is there anyone else in the room who wishes to speak? Please go ahead and approach the podium. >> Name precinct. >> Yeah. Good evening. Salino um precinct
uh central square in Cambridge, Massachusetts. So I'm an interloper. Um, I was living in Brooklyn up until two years ago and I did serve on the surveillance technology and military type equipment committee. Um, I've actually been deploying license plate
readers for over 40 years. Um, and I'm a computer vision professional and uh very familiar with this technology. Um, but mostly have a bunch of questions. Um, you know, one is like since when is it okay to point private cameras on public
roads? um was there a risk assessment that actually took place. Um this whole question of whether or not license plates are PII um is uh very up and down. I mean as an example um in the state of California it
is considered PII. So to say that license PI >> personally identifiable information and PII is the trigger for all the privacy laws, right? So there's very careful um orchestration here that the license
plate data is not correlated in any way with a commercial database because by doing so that then triggers all the requirements around PII for flock and anybody that's involved with this and what's happening here is that the correlation is being pushed back and so
the liability is actually being pushed back and anybody wants to use the data. It's a very convenient relationship frankly. Um, I'd like to know about the accuracy of these license plate readers and third-party um, data which supports those accuracy claims because obviously
accuracy in the use of this technology would be critically important. Um, I'd like to know I know that Flock doesn't share um, its its security operations center audit um, because for probably good reasons um, and make that publicly
available. But if someone were to enter in an agreement with them, I would think that maybe a select group of people could review that to determine the security of the information that and where they're being shared. Um, I understand that they're using the Amazon Federal Cloud. Um, I'd like to know the
relationship between that and the actual security operations center in Atlanta. Um, you know, not all um like license plate reading is not unbiased. is completely biased depending on where you put the camera. Um, and so yeah, I so
basically I just have a bunch of questions the same kind of questions I helped ask when I was on the military type on the surveillance technology and military type equipment committee. Um, I'd be happy to ask these questions or collaborate and ask these questions, Bernard, if for some reason you wanted
to invite me back to help again. So, thank you very much folks. Appreciate the time. Yeah, >> thank you. I thank you. Regina Frolley from Precinct 16. Just a b bullet points. Uh I worked for the federal government
until I fully retired. And it was we took an oath. Some of it was a lifetime oath of keeping confidentiality for the rest of our lives about any identification of anybody we interviewed it got data from, etc. The irony was we
had to the policy was we had to change our um computer access with 16 or so figures twice a week and that would guarantee we we were not allowed to write it down on a piece
of paper. Even if something if we were to disappear there'd be no evidence other than at the federal agency that we had even done an assignment and the assignment would have been five or six different places. as I could have been. So, it' be a long time before you found my corpse. That said, I got a beautiful
letter on letterhead from that agency telling me they had been hacked and all my information was taken. I've since had multiple letters from other Visa and other places that their information uh has been hacked and my information is
out there. Um, even last week I had another one. So, I'm I wouldn't go forward with uh and I agree with the use of the word cloud. I wouldn't go forward with confidence that it wouldn't be out there. Second point, you just tonight said you regret the some of you regret
the decision with the MBTA on the signals. This is another example of it. Don't go ahead with something that you were going to regret later on because you will. Um it can be misused as people have
testified. Absolutely. And uh that's pretty much it. AI is working on ways to have the AI sympathetic, empathetic, having feelings. This is all about money. It has no feeling. Green bucks have no feelings. Thanks.
>> Thank you. We'll now go to some folks that are online. I'm going to promote uh I have uh I saw Yolanda Rodriguez's hand first, so I'm going to just promote Yolanda to speak. Um Yolanda, you've been promoted. When you're ready, your three minutes will begin.
Thank you. Um, I am so old. I remember what privacy used to be. >> And I know that everyone tells me there's no such thing as privacy anymore, but I don't want to believe that. I want to believe that there is still some privacy on the public streets
of Brooklyn. We should have some privacy. The idea that any private company or any private organization or person can put license plate readers or cameras or whatever out on the streets
with no reason other than they want them or have something to do with that. That's not right. It's just not right. the taxpayers support the public infrastructure of this town and they
should be free to use it as and and not be afraid. I don't believe that ICE can't get anything it wants. It can get anything it wants whether it should get it or not. And we're making assumptions
ances and no 23 and me swore to the people who sent their DNA to them that they would always be it was absolutely positive that no one could ever get their information their DNA their any private stuff. Yet when
they sold their company that was considered an asset and it now is out there for someone else who bought the company. anything can happen and to say that this can just be a perfect contract anou or whatever isn't necessarily true.
Plus, I don't think most of the people in Brooklyn know about this. People who are involved, who are interested, who read brookline.news or whatever, they may have some idea about this and not really understand how it's
going to function. But I'll bet you anything that most of the people in in this town don't know this is happening and at least they should go to town meeting or something so that people know and have a choice, a voice in what
decisions you make. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Just going to go down the list. I have um I have Alec Liboitz. I'm going to promote Alec now. Alec, you've been promoted and when you're ready, your three minutes will
begin. >> Thanks so much, Charlie, and good evening, everyone. Um, I want to start out by thanking uh, Chair Green for, I think, correctly contextualizing this issue. Um, these are not ordinary times, and I think that should give us serious concern and pause as we consider thisou.
Um, there was some some discussion about whether this has been legally vetted. I was glad to hear that Susan Harris has taken a look. I did want to just point out that we know of at least one other attorney who has thoroughly vetted thisou um and that is a specialist attorney from the ACLU Massachusetts um
who wrote in his letter to the select board that was also posted on the town meeting list serve this evening earlier today that theou would quote give flock unlimited authority to use data collected from Brooklyn for any purpose whatsoever without oversight or restriction end quote. He also wrote
that quote under theou Flock, not Chestnut Hill Realy or the Brooklyn Police Department, would have ownership over Brooklyn license plate reader data. End quote. Despite this, tonight Flock's representatives have expressly claimed that they would not own the data
collected by these cameras. The fact is Flock has shown both tonight before the PCAC and across the country in their dealings with many municipalities that they have a serious credibility problem. And I know speaking for myself, I trust the ACLU of Massachusetts over Flock any
day. As we've heard from other speakers tonight, past reporting has found that Flock has shared data from other municipalities with ICE to support immigration enforcement efforts. They've also been accused of sharing data with Texas state law enforcement to augment their efforts to track and potentially
prosecute a woman who crossed state lines to access reproductive healthcare. These things are completely antithetical to everything Brookline believes and values. I also want to note uh that Cambridge um did install uh their under
their own opaces as a city several flock cameras um earlier this year which in the last week they have decided unanimously as a city council to shut off. Um they've joined Eugene, Oregon, um Evston, Illinois, as we heard earlier, and Austin, Texas, in summarily
ending their contractual relationships with Flock, um after it has been discovered that their data has been irresponsibly shared um with ICE and other entities. I also want to comment briefly on the fact that, as we heard tonight, there's no cost for access to this service for BPD. I think we need to
recognize that if something seems too good to be true, it usually is. And as we heard from uh my town meeting colleague Amy Hmel earlier, we just simply do not understand all the implications or potential harms of entering into this contractual relationship. Um as as I mentioned uh or
as was mentioned by other speakers, um signing this is effectively giving our endorsement to the work and mission that Flock does. And as I think we've heard tonight, what they do is completely antithetical to our values and our beliefs as a town. We also heard tonight
that BPD could gain retroactive access to flock camera data if a crime is found to >> Thank you. Your time is expired. >> So why go further at this point given the obvious? >> Thank you very much. >> Your time is expired. Thank you. >> I'm promoting um Kevin McKenzie.
Um one moment Kevin, you've been promoted. You can share your video and audio when you're ready and your three minutes will begin. >> Hi, my name is Kevin McKenzie. I'm a town meeting member in precinct 13 and I'm the chair of the town's uh commission for diversity, equity, inclusion, and community relations.
Though I am not speaking in that capacity, uh I want to echo many of Chair Green's concerns tonight and just want to add my own. Um earlier it was mentioned that other police departments or organizations could access data. What is to stop a this a police department
that does have an agreement with ICE from accessing data from Flock that was from Brookline and handing it to them as a third party. Um I'm also unconvinced by some of what has been said tonight in terms of ICE's ability to access or not access data maintained or compiled or
put into flocks, whatever kind of system they want to describe it as. I'm given precedent that has already been cited by several other speakers tonight. Um and so I I am very hesitant on that. Um I think there's a lot of other concerns with this technology and its implementation. Um and I think this is
something that take would require a lot more thought and I am just inherently skeptical of anything uh being written by the company that we are being asked to sign on to as a municipality even if it is not again in this case Chester Hill Realy is installing it on their
private property. Though again, we all know that the town deals extensively with Chesn Hill Realy and we are certainly in, you know, able to express our concerns about this to them directly. Um, even though again, it's their private property, their decision, we can still communicate our feelings as
a town should we choose to. Thank you. >> Thank you. Um, I the next person we have here is Janice Khan. I'm going to promote Janice Khan now. Janice, you've been promoted and when you're ready, your three minutes will begin.
>> Okay. Um, thank you very much. So, um, I am speaking tonight mainly because the con the comments have been about Hancock Village and I wanted to relate another story about flock. So, a week ago, I received a phone call from a very
concerned neighbor who said that there was a flock camera at the on Heath Street at at Holly Lane. So, this is by the cemetery. This is not anywhere near Hancock Village, but there was a flock camera and it was in the public way. And
um the next day she looked again, this neighbor, and it was now in the cemetery. So, I called the town to find out whether the town even knew about this camera. I was told yes, they did. I asked who requested it and I was told
Chestnut Hill Realy, which I thought was odd because um this is not really near their property that I am aware of, but they had moved it inside the cemetery. So, my neighbor called the cemetery to ask if
they knew about this because as has been said before, this is typically um on private property, not in the public way. And um and she was told that no, they did not authorize it. Now whether or not this is I have not followed up but the
fact that we got this information is troubling because if these cameras are going up without permission which appeared to be the case here and if they're going up in a place that the town may not already be aware of or
neighbors certainly were not aware of it then it it I am concerned about the proliferation of these cameras just popping up. um in everybody's neighborhood with no advanced warning. Um and it certainly feels my my neighbor
felt it was an invasion of privacy. Um and it was um aimed at a public street in Brooklyn. So on Heath Street and Holly Lane and so we also I wanted to share that concern from my local
neighborhood to Janice Con precinct 15 not 16. Thank you. Thank you. Um, the last person who has their hand up online, um, I believe is Marty Rosenthal, but, uh, it's a very long name. It looks like Marty Public
defender Rosenthal. Marty, if if that's you, uh, please go ahead and, um, share your video and audio when you're ready and your three minutes will begin. >> I'm always slow. I think I'm in. >> You are. We can hear you. >> Yeah. Thanks. Uh, and by the way, I I I
forgot the rule in three minutes and I I've been feverishly trying to get down from four, but I'll I'll do my best here and speak fast. Um, I'm Margie Rosenthal, town meeting member precinct uh nine, former select board member when
it was called something else and co-chair of Brooklyn Packs with Neil Gordon. Uh, sorry. Um the uh last 12 12 years PAX has been opposed to this and Clint Rich
Richmond will remember that. So will Amy Hmel. I found my town meeting speech from 2013 article 18 by Clint and passes Frank Farlow which passed 113 to 86. I also found the t-shirt that I then got
and if you can see it um I think it says uh one nation under surveillance. That's 2013. And uh I then reminisced about my own privacy passion. And as a trial lawyer
and being involved in government, I long had to give up privacy. But consistency is one of my hobblins. And I remember when I first heard about these cameras, I was I used to walk in the Flag Day parade with Frank Spisac's people. And
one year there were no selectmen there. That's what they were called. And Rich Keller asked me as it has been to help carry the banner. As we passed by KI, he asked, "Do you see that camera up there? How would you feel about public cameras?" I said, "Believe it or not,
I'm a private person. I block caller ID. I'd be against it." So then it came. We got a pretty good compromise, which I think remains in place on the public cameras. and nonetheless surveilling and cyber mis misuse keep snowballing. So
with the bar advocate crisis going on in September for the PA PCAC agenda, I went I attended that meeting and by coincidence, Flock was the main event. fully unprepared. I for once remained
silent but hearing very respectfully receptiveness to this even I think by Scott long ago an anti-surveillance activist. So for the others including two of the best of hundreds of police leaders I've known across Massachusetts.
They were m much too receptive. Either I'm paranoid because nobody outside Brooklyn could be out to get us or our visitors like the law enforcement so-called people in the White House. Or maybe they're just too young to remember
the controversy we had here 10 or 15 years ago. And what I fear and I think we did back then and still do is the forest, not the trees and the details. I think like ACLU.
>> Thank you. Your time is expired, >> ma'am. All right. I'll just if I could conclude with one uh from muted Marty. Um okay. Uh I have a couple other folks online who would like to speak. I'm going to go ahead and promote
Scott and right now. Scott and you are um promoted and when you're ready, your three minutes will begin. Scott, are you there? You are promoted. Okay. Uh you can keep your hand up if you'd like to speak. Scott, I'm going to go to uh Judith uh Likener.
Judith, you've been promoted and you can begin when you're ready. >> Yes. Hi uh Judy Likener, precinct 16 town meeting member. Just a few things. Um so many people have spoken so eloquently. It seems to me that there is
um I I certainly hope you feel that there's no way that you should be making a decision about this today. Um way too many people know nothing about this and I think this needs much more um conversation around town. The few people who I've heard from um constituents in
precinct 16 who have heard about it are adamantly against this. Um if the problem is the shopping center um that as Carolyn mentioned is actually in Boston, they can put up whatever they want in their shopping center facing
into their shopping center u to deter crime there. Um um I hope that you will uh consider having a conversation with um Chesville Realy. They certainly depend upon the town for
many kinds of zoning issues and and uh licensing issues because um maybe they could be convinced that this is not the best thing for them to be doing either. Um and as many have have said by uh
supporting this umou it seems that we would be supporting flock and they do not seem to be good actors. So thank you very much. I appreciate your time. >> Thank you Judith. Um the next person we have um is still just Scott and Scott.
I'll try promoting you one more time. Hi Scott, if you're ready. >> Thank you very much. I uh I found my unmute button. Um thanks. I didn't actually mean to speak tonight, but um I uh Marty did call me out. So I will say I think as as the chair knows, more than my personal
feelings pro or against surveillance, I'm always in favor of of audits and protections to mitigate uh any harms that that that are caused. Um sometimes you can't uh stop the tide, but you can at least uh try to prepare for it. Um, and so I'd like to actually just speak
very briefly in favor of adopting the L ALPR policy that Chief Pastor presented and I think is in the agenda packet. Um, I think it's it's best to have uh those things written down in case uh as the police department does uh it's uh old-fashioned police work as Chief
Pastor called it. Um that we have some some written policy on uh what uses we do and and do not make with the data however we should come by it. Um uh I probably have some other comments to say about the specifics of that policy in terms of uh you know audit requirements
and in terms of uh putting some lines in the sand about um uh sharing data outside our department, but that can be done at another time. Um but uh uh I I do I am pleased that the department has written uh updated I believe a 2013 ALP
ALPR policy and I'd like to see us follow up on that. >> Thanks. Okay. Um, there are 39 participants online and no one else is using their hand raise feature to let us know they'd like to speak. >> Okay.
Any uh other comments from the select board? >> Michael has his hand up. >> Oh, I'm sorry, Michael. I wasn't even looking there. >> It's quite all right. Um first of all um I'd like to thank all of
the uh public commenters for taking the time to participate and share their views and share their stories. Um it was very illuminating and very very helpful. Um I I do have many many questions about
the technology about encryption about uh fourth amendment uh risk um etc. Um, but all of those questions are sort of uh caught up in in the framing and I'm I just wanted to share that framing um in
order to give some context um for for future questions um should the should the timing arise. Um there's obviously a trade-off involved here and none of this conversation I think um speaks to the outstanding quality of our public safety
um and our police officers in particular. Um I think that um the trade-offs that we are considering or thinking about between safety and liberty um or between safety and uh
participating in or endorsing or profiting by um uh activities that we don't necessarily agree with um is sort of what the select board is cons is considering. I realize that there's a specific um issue of theou but I also
believe that there's a larger issue. Um the four major concerns that I have are um the values of privacy that have been mentioned by many of the public speakers. Um the risk that the town is putting itself by potentially
participating in a scheme that could violate um fourth amendment rights. um that uh could potentially uh come against the town in the form of litigation. Um the risk of access to this data by subpoena um with influx uh
business model and their technical practices as well as risk of access to u to this data via various forms of cyber crime again based on their polic on flocks policies and business practices. Um, I recognize that we don't have a
relationship um with that where we can compel Chesnut Hill Realy to act one way or the other in this matter. Um, though it is interesting to me that by definition I believe we would have a relationship. We would need some form of
relationship whether this relationship was mediated by flock safety or not in order to get access to that data. So there are lots of questions around that relationship too. So that is the framing I am using and I'll stop there for now.
>> Thank you. Any other? No. >> More time. >> Pardon me. >> We're going to take more time. >> Um I would propose that we take more time. I think that there's a lot of information we don't have. Uh for example, I'd like to see the um enduser
license agreement that Ches Hill has with Flock. uh you know that's critical information if we're talking about you know whether you know uh Chester Hill Realy is going to comply with the you know um our rules and and values and all
that stuff. Um and they weren't here. I mean I I'm kind of upset because I thought they I was told that they would be here. Um you know the procurement issue is something that um you know we we need to find out about. I mean in a certain sense they're they're doing an
inr run around our procurement uh procedures by setting up the um the uh uh readers instead of those readers being set up by you know the town and going through processes that give us
both information as well as as uh asurances u with respect to the people that we're u entering into contracts with. Um um what was the other thing? Oh um the other thing I thank you for the special
order that was written. I think that's very important. However, it should be a general order um that the select board uh approves uh which is I think what the statute requires. Uh this is not a temporary situation uh that um that um
would lend itself to a special order of the police department, but this is going to be ongoing. So that's you know my my suggestion. It's not a big deal. I'm sure you'll agree with it, but maybe maybe not. Okay. >> Only if you reflect back on where we are with body warn cameras, anytime we
introduce technology specifically, it's important to you know body warn cameras, we're still tweaking that as the roll out happens. um you know once we get in there we start using things and it's very hard to make changes even small tweaks to a general order. So typically our practice
is to issue something first as a special order once it's ready to be fully incorporated into our standing orders that you see um it moves over to the general order but that's that's pretty standard practices to start it with the special >> I I accept that. Okay. Uh but eventually it should be a general order uh once
once um you once uh I don't know once something happens. I'd like to close on um sort of repeating a quote from the head of flock and I don't have the exact words or even the guy's name but he said his goal is to eliminate crime in
America forever. Right? Think about that. Okay. Where where has that been accomplished? Okay. Where North Korea? Do we want to be North Korea? And I think that while that may, you
know, sign sound like hyperbole, the reality is that if that is the mentality of the head of this company, I'd be very very concerned about entering into any type of relationship with them. So any on that
with with that note a final note u what I'd like to suggest is that we not act on theou I don't think we have enough information uh we haven't had enough time to really digest all the u all the uh issues that have come up in this
hearing um so I'd like to put it all for another day >> and maybe to that >> and maybe we could encourage realy to come out and speak with us >> yes >> um it's not it's not clear to me If if they don't have a relationship with the Boston Police Department, which it
sounds like they do, or the Brooklyn Police, I don't know what the value proposition is the Chestnut Hill Realy using the cameras. I just not I mean, other than the threat of, you know, surveillance, but it's just unclear to me. It would be it would be really helpful if we encourage them come in and
speak with us. >> Maybe. Well, I hope we have a date certain by which we're going to, you know, take this up again and that we have a plan for how we can address um the question of theou
being drafted from our perspective reflecting our civil liberties concerns as opposed to the draft that was in front of us, which I'm just not certain was drafted in that manner. Um, but the other thing I would love to just have a quick answer to on on behalf of
the chief what Chzin Hill Realy, you know, they've taken a lot of, you know, hits tonight, but they have a responsibility to protect the safety of hundreds of people who live on those properties. And for those who have never driven past those properties, there are
two main entrances on opposing sides of Independence Drive. Um there's there is possibility to enter you know the property um other than through those two main entrances but most of the traffic in and out of the properties comes via
those entrances on Independence Drive. I suspect that is why the cameras are on independent drive and I suspect I have not had any conversations with anybody but about this Chestnut Hill Realy would like to have
some recourse if crime is occurring um on their property and victimizing residents of their properties to then then determine if there there can be any kind of um success in identifying the perpetrators. of those
crimes. So if chief pastor next week gets a call from Chestnut Hill Realy and says, "We just had three breakins, you know, in the past week. Would you come over or send someone over to take a look at um license plate numbers of vehicles
that we have seen entering and exiting right around the time of the um thefts? What is she supposed to do?" >> You asking me? I should go over and talk to them. >> Well, >> but that means it's that >> Yeah, but we're essentially sending a message tonight that we don't want to
cooperate. Um >> No, we're sending a message that we need a lot more information and a lot more comfort that uh there are the restrictions that we require. >> Yeah. on on type of technologies like this because of in my opinion it's just my opinion because we're not living in
national times and we have to really take into consideration the fact that you know ICE is out there using technology like this to go after not just non-documented people but anyone who looks Hispanic uh anyone who um
>> No, I I you know Yeah. >> Yeah. But are you I think I just heard you say which I would agree with. No, she should go she should respond to that call just as you would from any any address in Brooklyn. Yeah. >> Where there's been a crime committed and the owner of the address wants to help
the police to identify who may have committed the crime. Michael >> um to respond to that. I think the two of the key aspects of this technology that are of concern is one is that is
aggregating data nationwide um and this data is contributing to that and number two is that lock is providing a service that that allows their users to be alerted based on hot lists when cameras
see this data. Um, the scenario that you described doesn't require either of those features and would be handled by a camera that records data. But the system that Flock is aggregating by entering into all of these agreements, collecting
information from cameras, collecting information from law enforcement agencies about how they are using the cameras because that's also data that they are collecting. um provides a diff a much higher level of surveillance
than simply a camera pointed. >> Well, would you agree with our chair that the police should respond if they are called by >> Sure. Sure. If they if they all Chestnut Hill Realy would need to do in order to provide the data would be to
install such a camera. the aggregation and alert features don't come into play in the scenarios you described. >> Okay, >> David John, I would just add to what Michael said. I I asked that very question to Chief Pastor. She said it would be treated the same way as
responding when a ring camera records something. So, we don't need anouou for the scenario you've laid out. That's >> No, I I I think that was a very good question that you raised early on and I think we should continue to pursue that question. Um but you know we also should pursue can there be a draft that has
civil liberties protections in it. Um one other question if I may for chief pastor. So for the proactive part of it is there a way for you to make a request uh to have such an alert occur absent the MLOU if you have specific
information that you give to Ches Hill Realy such as we're concerned about someone driving this vehicle. Could you let us know whether that vehic could we have access to the information showing whether that vehicle has been on the property within a certain time window? Can you do that in advance or only
after? >> My understanding is no, but I would I would have to confirm. >> L said that they that the capabilities that she has put in a license plate and trigger for that the end user doesn't have the business customer doesn't have.
So Justinville realy doesn't have that. Um, you know, I, um, I'm looking forward to having another discussion. It would be helpful to hear from Chesn Hill realy. Um, but you know, this to me is, is an electronic version of be on the lookout,
>> right? I mean, if you have if if you have somebody who's committed a crime in another jurisdiction that is armed and dangerous or they've taken a child or they're they're they're known to be doing something very bad, very bad
intent. Um, I think it's a good development if we could prevent that from happening because someone drove by a a reader. Does that mean that we want to go chase down people because they're
a they're a certain shape and size? Absolutely not. And that's not what our police department's going to do. But um if if that h if that happened in another jurisdiction and then a crime was could have been prevented in my household because
they drove by a camera and the police department got an alert. Um, you know, I I I I think that's okay if we can find a way to put the controls in place, to put the agreements in place, to put the audits in place the way uh Scott and had mentioned um to get a better
understanding of how the data um is is being aggregated if it's being combined with other data the way Clint had mentioned um you know, I think we should consider it. Doesn't mean we should say yes, but we should consider it. But I don't think we have enough information right now and and and enough detail to
see can you even put guard rails around this. >> Okay, with that let's move on to our next item. Thank you, Chief. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, uh, Deputy Campbell. >> Okay. Uh, next warrant articles public
hearing. Oh, this will go through very very quickly, right? >> Please, guys, please. >> I hope so. It's 10 10:20, right? Okay. Um, we have uh an hour and 40 minutes to end this
meeting today. >> Okay. Warrant article 2, approval of collective bargaining agreements. Um, Melissa, I guess that's fairly straightforward, right? >> Yeah. So, Ann Bragg is online. Um, you previously had approved the agreement for the fire union in executive session. So, this is the public hearing on the
war. >> Okay. >> Ann, >> good evening everyone. Ann Braga, HR director for the town of Brooklyn. Article two includes the three-year collective bargaining agreement for the
firefighters um local 950 with the town. Um I because this has been approved before um my goal is to review the um
the cost centers and answer any questions and then obviously you've got um folks who will be speaking um on the warrant article and I'm just trying to pull the memo up.
Okay. Nope. Here we go. So, um this is a three-year contract with a two two and one and a half general wage increase. an inclusion of a weekend
differential in the amount of 2%. Uh change in the education incentive um which would increase in the first year by 10% followed by five and and then 5% the following year. And in the
final year of the contract, on the last day of the contract, there would be an addition of both a 5-year step and a 10-year step and a change to the sick buyback program, which would go from a $5,000 max to
uh onethird of a capped number of hours of 21.84. Um, and the total cost of the contract is 4.8. 8 million with 2.3 million occurring on the last day of the of
fiscal 27. >> Okay. Any questions from the select board? Okay. Oh, where's Charlie? Who's going to open up this public hearing? >> Well, I will open up the public hearing. I guess I don't know who's online. >> Mayor Green, this is Kate.
>> Okay. Um, right now we have 31 people in the audience and I don't see anybody with their hands raised to um speak on this public hearing. I don't know if there's anybody in the room. >> No, I don't see any hands hands raised
in the um room here. So, I'll close the public hearing and um move uh that we vote on this unless someone >> No, there's other John. >> I just have a I can't help but I have a question. So, I'm a little confused by something. The select board is
responsible for for approving contracts and and we did it right. >> Yes. >> And and so this is a budget amendment. >> No, article two was collective bargaining agreements. That's the first one. >> Oh. Oh, okay. Okay. Okay. So um is it
does does this in any sense depart from um town meeting's role other than to for approve the funding for >> that's essentially what article 2 is asking town meeting to do is to approve the the funding of the contract. >> Okay. >> And and we're either giving our approval
or saying they shouldn't approve the funding. >> Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Okay. I just want to get the lines of control here clear here. >> Good. >> Okay. Uh, I take it you don't have any questions. >> I don't. I'm ready to vote. >> I'm ready to vote, too. Um, I move approval of warrant article or I'm
sorry, I move favorable action on warrant article 2 uh, collective bargaining agreements. Um, all in favor, John Vancoyak, >> I. >> Um, Paul Warren, >> I. >> David Pearman, >> I. >> Michael Rubenstein. >> I chair votes. I
>> Oh, I thought you were raising your hand. >> Well done, Bernardo. I'm always looking to see if you want to say >> that's you finally noticed me. It took two and a half years. >> Thank you very much folks. >> Oh, thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Next, Warren Article 3 budget
amendment. Um Alyssa, tell us what this is about and what it includes. It's more than TMC funds, right? >> Sure. Um so we have a budget amendment for fiscal 26. There are a couple of items that we're looking to adjust. Um the first is to appropriate uh ride share revenue coming from Uber and Lift
rides. the town gets a piece of the assessment that is uh on the transportation network companies. So, um the the memo that's in your packet describes the proposal that um has been recommended by the transportation board. Um it's uh council on aging related uh
subsidized program for adults and teenagers. Um and then payment marking for DPW as well. Uh the other piece of the budget amendment is debt and interest. Um, we have conservative assumptions in the budget when it comes to our debt service. Uh, and when those
come in more favorable, we especially for the debt exclusions, we're looking to true up those numbers. So, you'll see um a reduction in revenue for property tax because that's the debt exclusion piece and then a reduction in expenses under debt service. So, there's no
budget change in terms of any other adjustments that need to be made to accommodate that. Um, and then we also have a slight adjustment for the golf enterprise fund. Um, some of the structure of the bond sale, um, the term that we assumed, we weren't able to, um, do a 20-year term. We had to do a
15-year term. So, we had to recalibrate the budget based on that. Um, when we initially spoke about this with the advisory committee, there were concerns that were raised about the senior center program and um, you know, the change and just the overall concerns about transportation in general with seniors
and the the medical transport in particular. Um, but I think that this is kind of separate from that larger issue of, you know, ARPA running out and the town still wanting to preserve the service. Um, you know, as a result, the advisory committee after a lot of
questions and conversation with the director of the council on aging, they ultimately voted to support the budget amendment as recommended. So, that's where we are with that. >> Okay. Any questions from the board? Um, David, >> you referenced the uh municipal golf course that there's an adjustment based
on uh the bonding between 15 and 20 years. Is that the only element that's golf course related? There have been some questions by the community about the overall master plan for the golf course and whether there are any adjustments to that financially included in this budget amendment.
>> So there are not. So we were we in the description for the Warren article, we were anticipating that we might need to to make an adjustment to the golf budget. Um we need free cash to be certified in order to be able to access retained earnings. So that is unlikely to happen before town meeting. Um, and
even so, with the feedback that we've received from advisory committee members and others, we feel like it's probably better to slow roll the proposal and and have it be an annual town meeting um item. >> Okay. U Michael, >> so in terms of the uh true up for the
bond fund, it's over a half a million dollars. Um so am I to understand that what we are one of the effects of this is that we are reducing the property tax burden of Brookline residents by this amount >> um versus the projected burden. So we
had a projection that went into the budget then the bond sale happened and then now we're just touring that up. >> Okay. And so, um, to the extent that that, um, residents sort of receive their their tax bills, will this
difference show up as a lower tax bill at some point? >> Essentially, because we, you know, when we put it in the budget, we had assumed a higher and even when we were forecasting the rate that when we were initially putting these projects on the ballot, we had a 5% interest rate
assumption, right? So that that's come down slightly from >> and so when does that when do you expect that that would hit from a resident's point of view? >> So this is a fiscal 26 adjustment. So it will be part of when when we have the tax classification hearing which will be
coming up in a couple of weeks. This is part of what will be folded into the recommendations around tax classification. >> Great. Thank you. >> Okay. Uh, this is a P. >> No, we we haven't started the public
hearing yet. >> Re um Okay, Kate, do you want to open up the public hearing? >> So, right now, Chair Green, we have 28 participants online. I do not see anybody with their hand raised feature to speak. Okay, one person in the
audience unless someone else also >> Virginia Farley TD member from 16 when we uh one of my constituents in South Brooklyn uh wanted um complained that the would have been nice to have a wheelchair at the library for our
socials because it made her life a lot easier. Within a week, uh, the health department provided a wheelchair. Town council Jennifer Depazo immediately wrote in a, uh, contract, so to speak,
or waiver indemnifying the town. I'm very, very happy about the bus being intergenerational, but I hope you'll take the idea of people using it, signing a waiver of indemnification against the town should something
happen. Just something I'm bringing to your attention. >> Sure. I've encouraged Emily to reach out to town council. >> Sorry. Say again. >> I've encouraged the director of council and aging to reach out to town council before the program gets implemented. >> Good. Thank you. Just just wanted to call it to your attention.
>> Okay. Any other questions from the audience or online? Kate, >> I don't see any hand raised features right now. >> Okay. I'll close the hearing. And uh is the select board ready to vote on this? Yes, I am. >> Yeah, I am. Okay. I move approve. What
do you you have a comment? Okay. Um, okay. I move approval of Warren. >> Favorable action. >> Three. Pardon me. >> Favorable action. >> Oh, God. Keep Sorry. >> Okay. We're here. >> Uh, I move favorable action on It's It's 10:30. >> I'm with you.
>> Let's keep going as we get out of here. >> Okay. Good point. Okay. Okay. I move favorable action on warrant article 3 fiscal year 26 budget amendment. All in favor please indicate by saying I. John Vancoaki I. >> Paul Warren. Hi. >> David Carman. >> Hi. >> Michael Rosenstein
>> Rosenstein >> I. >> And chair votes I. Next. Warrant article 15 resolution regarding the celebration of LBG BTQIA plus pride month. Is Kevin McKenzie available? Kevin
McKenzie is still a co-host. Kevin, you're um can just unmute and speak. >> Great. Um and I'll share my screen for some quick slides. So they will be quick, I promise. All right. Hello. So I am Kevin Mackenzie, TMY member of precinct 13,
chair of the commission for diversity, equity, inclusion, and community relations and lead petitioner on war article 15 along with several other town members, some of who may also be here tonight. Um and so I'll just go quick. So what is it asking for? It's asking
for the town to acknowledge, observe important days and moments of commemoration to the LGBTQIA community and as well as work towards establishing an LGBTQA pride month celebration annually. Um and again I will like it's as a at a time where the federal government is undermining the rights,
rolling back fundamental rights and erasing many of these observances um it is important to members of this community that this action is taken take is taken at a local level. Um there have been several other past instances where town meeting has passed resolutions
calling for the designation and eventual establishment of annual celebrations indigenous people's day apa heritage month and then uh most recently May as Jewish American heritage month as well. Um in terms of the implications for war article 15 again it's not a mandate so
it's not a prescription because it is itself a resolution. Um, it would encourage the office of diversity, the commission or their design to eventually work towards planning a yearly pride month celebration. As a note, the there would only be one celebration called for
again per this um resolution. The other days would just be an acknowledgement um in this case by the town or select board. I'll loop back to that. And this would require the offices staff time and resources several hours a week um per the director. Um, and it would also
require volunteer time as well, whether it's for the commission or whoever their designates are. Um, it would be an approximate cost somewhere between$1,000 to $25,000 for the event itself with the possibility of supplementing through grants, need for a space, and staff involvement leading up to the event and
on the day of the event itself across departments. Um, and as a note just in the interim, the the office and several town departments already do plan several pride related events each year. Um so you know in the interim right as we work towards building up and as budgets are tight um centralizing them into one
package could qualify as an annual pride celebration in the interim. Um so you know it doesn't necessarily have to be something totally new just a sort of a repackaging of it as one program. Um and then as additionally it asks the select board to formally acknowledge or otherwise observe at their discretion um
the other days and months outlined and that could take whatever form the select board decides. Um and CDICR is here to support you in that. Uh we have recently established a celebrations and observation subcommittee which can assist in providing any statements or language that the board would be
interested in using. Again at your discretion if that's how you so choose to honor it. Um in terms of support for the war article so far it has passed through the advisory committee uh human services subcommittee with some amendments some of which were accepted as friendly. One of all of which were
initially accepted as friendly. some were ruled out of scope by the moderator. Um and then so after those were removed, it was passed um by the full advisory committee as well. Um just asking the select board as opposed to the state or the commonwealth to observe
those additional commemorate days of commemoration and celebration. Um and I think I have a couple of my other co-atitioners here. I'll just quickly pass to them if they would like to add anything. But that is all from me. Yeah,
>> do we or Melissa, do we have a redlinined? Is there an amended version? Is that's what we have in front of us or >> So, I think that there are um there is an AC subcommittee report that provides the current um motion from the AC subcommittee. Um,
>> but Kevin said that AC had accepted this or approved it with some >> there's a red line if you look at page >> I do see the red line but is that is that the AC's final version or is that the subcommittee's version? >> So the AC also voted this as well.
Kevin, was the full um advisory committee, did they accept exactly what's in the uh subcommittee, the human services subcommittee report, or did they make some changes? >> Uh the the the there were no changes. The only exception is I think it's the
last um operative clause at the end um is just again it was ruled out of what was originally in the subcommittee's draft was ruled out of scope by the moderator. Um so that language basically just re reverted back to the original and full AC voted on accepting B effectively the original language for
just that part >> the clause seven that town meeting urges the select board to official to officially acknowledge that's the that's the revision >> okay as opposed to the state is that is that the change >> yes
>> um some reason I lost my page. >> Can I ask Kevin another question while we're while you're trying to find your page? Michael, did you have >> I just wanted to make sure we're on pages 177, 178, 179 of the combined report. That's the version we're looking at.
>> Are you looking at the combined reports? That's impressive, huh? The agenda. >> You're in the search. >> There's a um there's a tag for the 2025 STM AC human services subcommittee. >> It's in the agenda pack. So the the pages um four, five, and six are the red
line edits that the AC subcommittee did. And then um the change that I just referenced in clause 7 that basically reverts back to the original language. >> Okay. >> Kevin, was there any um did this go before the school committee? I noticed that you've got a school clause in here.
>> Uh it has not. They um did identify their subcommittee on government relations identified more articles that they would like to hear and this was not one of the ones that they identified. >> This is not one of them. Okay. >> No. Yeah. >> Okay. Any other questions? If not, let's
open up open up the public hearing. Uh Kate, could you open the public hearing? >> Yes, this is a public hearing. There are 26 participants online right now. If anybody wishes to speak on this article, you can use the hand raised feature.
At this point, I don't see any any >> Okay. And I see no one in the uh room uh with their hands up. So, I'll close the public hearing. Uh is there any further discussion from the select board? Are we ready to vote to vote on this? >> Mhm. >> Okay. >> I am. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Uh I am too. Uh I move approve. Sorry again. I move favorable action on warrant article 15 resolution regarding regarding the celebration of LGBTQIA plus pride month. Uh all in favor please
indicate by saying by raising your hand. >> I'm sorry. >> Saying I >> saying I um John Vancoyaki. >> I remember your name. You're doing great. >> Um Paul Warren. >> Hi. >> David Bowman.
>> Hi. Michael Rosen Rosenai. >> Hi. >> Okay, it's getting way too late and shares. >> Okay. Um, next foreign article 9, create a new bylaw establishing a renters's handbook. Oh,
I'm sure we can get through this quickly, right? A petition. >> Okay. Who's who's uh going to be presenting this petition limit? It's already online. Okay. So, Alex, um tell us about your Warren
article, but also about the um amended version of it in our um in our packet. >> Yes. >> Do you agree with that or is that something that you're >> um Yes. So, so the amendments made um by the AC subcommittee and then full AC
were accepted by the petitioners. So, this is our unified motion at this point. Uh is that amended version that you should see in your packet. >> Okay. and and the one that comes right after Figler's u >> so yeah there's >> okay because it wasn't clear where that
was what that was okay I got it any questions or comments from the um select board >> does he have a presentation I >> I do sorry >> not not to worry I can you see my screen I I should be sharing my slides >> yes we can see it
>> okay excellent um I will try to go as quickly as possible to be mindful of time um so this article Article 9 was originally called the renters's handbook. It's really now kind of a misnomer. It's really should be called the statement of tenants rights and notification program. And I I'm Alec
Loveitz, town meeting member precinct 8 here representing myself and my co-petitioners. Um I think we can go through this pretty quickly. I think everyone on the select board's aware of the housing crisis and the impacts that Brooklyn is facing from that. uh would just highlight that one of the facets um of housing instability
is that when tenants confront instability, they're often uh required to take action individually through complex systems of state and local laws in order to assert their rights. And they often face an information asymmetry in trying to do so. And one of the um
efforts that peer communities of Brooklines have undertaken to address this has been creating uhformational resources for their tenants and also instituting tenant notification programs. Uh some quick background on that. These are programs that have been stood up in the past decade in Boston,
Cambridge and Somerville. Um they all have some similarities. They've involved the office of housing stability for those municipalities or equivalent departments. Um they have included the creation of a locally focused centralizedformational resource for tenants. Um in they include regular
updates to those resources. Um and they've also required that tenants um receive a notification by land their landlord um at certain points in their teny including when a notice to quit uh which begins an eviction process is delivered to those tenants. Um the
result is that as of current uh Brookline is uh lagging behind our surrounding peer communities on this front uh and in effect lack what is becoming a standard protection in the greater Boston region for tenants. Um so as amended warrant article 9 would
um charge the select board with designating a department or departments to create and publish a statement of tenants rights. Um that statement would need to include the following at least information, but it could include more. Um that would be an explanation of a tenants's legal rights and available
legal resources. Um how that tenant can apply for public support or stabilization programs and how tenants can request housing and sanitary sanitary rather inspections from the town. Um the the town would also be required to um assess if updates are
required for the statement on an annual basis uh but not necessarily updated unless there were any new information that needed to be included. Um on the tenant notification front um this article would require any town employees, agents or officials that
participate in the eviction related noticing of a tenant in Brooklyn to provide a copy of that statement to the tenant receiving the notice. Um so that notification would only be required upon the first delivery of any eviction related notice to that tenant um by the
agent in question. Um and the notice would have to be either provided in hand or left at the residence and then followed up and sent by first class mail. This reflects best practices for uh noticing agents in delivering eviction related notices. generally um
in practice this propo or this part of the warrant article would u mainly apply to Brooklyn constables and in some cases um department of public health inspectors who are uh occasionally charged with um delivering eviction related notices. Um and ultimately the
idea here is connecting Brooklyn tenants to the resources they need and the wherewithal to assert their legal rights when they face a critical moment of housing related instability. Um, so as I'm you may have gleaned from this presentation, the design for war article 9 is slightly different than the
programs stood up in Boston, Cambridge, and Somerville. Mainly the difference is in those communities, the landlord is required to provide notice. Um, and in general, uh, we as a town, I've been informed by both town council, um, and
multiple attorneys outside of our town council's office that, um, trying to set up a similar landlord notificationbased program in Brooklyn would likely not pass AG review. Um, so what we've done with Warrant Article 9 is attempt to come up with a product that achieves the
goals of these programs that other communities have created, um, but is legally permissible for a town to move forward on. Um, and that in the initial implementation will pose some challenges and we acknowledge that. Um, one and and I think probably the main challenge here
being that because we can't require the landlord to be the noticing agent, um, there are other categories of servicing a or noticing agents rather um that are not town agents or town officials. Um, so the the two other categories um of
noticing agents that were really identified are uh Norfick County Deputy Sheriffs and there are also private thirdparty noticing agents that can be hired by landlords. Um, we see Warrant Article 9 as a a kind of robust first step in standing up this notification
program and our intention uh going forward should this pass is to seek voluntary compliance with this bylaw from the Norfick County Sheriff's Office um and also to potentially investigate whether um Berkeland has the authority to regulate the um delivery by third
party noticing agents as well. Um, in terms of implementation for the town, u warrant article 9, uh, to the petitioners feels very timely because this aligns with several ongoing initiatives. Um, primarily the ongoing implementation of the office of housing
stability bylaw. Um, but also importantly the implementation of the community health improvement plan, the chip. Um, and in particular as part of the chip, uh, the launch of a new human services platform and the onboarding of our human services navigator. um that human services navigator uh
we've identified as a likely a key position to support the implementation of this article. Um and in fact uh we believe and and we've had conversations with uh the department of public health um that have confirmed that um that position and the creation of the
statement of tenant rights actually dovetail very nicely um with kind of the initial standing up of the human services platform um in that it would like likely be informed by an environmental scan of local programs and legal resources related to housing and human services.
Um this would be the statement rather would be a considered a vital document under the town's language access policy. Um so there would also be um some translation services required for implementation specifically as a vital document. Um the statement would need to be proactively translated into the top
five spoken languages in Brooklyn. Um and we would also need to make translation services available upon request to provide that statement in the top 15 languages um should that need arise. Um, we've also in this article made clear that print copies um are
required for tenant notification and that print copies also be made available to any resident upon request. Um, so we do anticipate some printing related costs and ultimately um, our estimates put the total potential cost for printing and translation services as
roughly between $3,200 and $6,400 annually. and that assumes 400 print copies being printed in a given fiscal year, which we believe um is a significant overestimate, but we want to be mindful uh of accounting for potential costs that could arise.
Um and as I mentioned, this really feels like the opportune moment for this kind of programming uh because the intersection of both the housing crisis and Brookline's ongoing efforts both on the housing stability and public health side. Um and we we feel confident that no additional FTEES would be required
for this because of the onboarding of the human services navigator. Um and to this point favorable action on warrant article 9 as amended u has been endorsed by the advisory committee by a vote of 18 to1 with some abstensions and also by a unanimous vote of the advisory council
on public health. And you will also note in your packet tonight uh memos of support uh for war article 9 that were submitted by both the department of public health and human services and uh odor. And with that I'd be happy to take any questions.
>> Uh I'd like to ask a couple questions first. Um in um in our packet there's a uh email or memo from Joe Figler, one of the constables and uh he asserts that landlords are required to include a
specific form that details various rights of tenants um uh pursuant to state law that was enacted during the um during COVID. Uh sounds like you're saying that we can't impose on landlords that uh responsibility. what I'm
confused as to what what's true and what's not. >> Yeah. So, um there is a kind of standard issue form is my understanding that is used in these servings. It is very bare bones. I wouldn't really describe it as a comprehensiveformational resource
which I think uh is why other municipalities have undertaken these efforts to produce their own documents to that effect. Um, the specific legal rationale for why Brooklyn cannot require landlords to provide this notice
um came to me in an opinion rendered by town council. I'd be happy to share with the board if that's helpful. Um the the general legal principle at play um is a restriction under state law on municipalities ability to directly
legislate certain civil relationships um in this case between a tenant and a landlord. Um I'd note all the communities to this point who have passed these notification programs have been cities. So they've been implemented by ordinance. None of those ordinances has faced legal challenge. So we are in
a in a unique situation here being a a renter majority town that it wants potentially to move forward in this same approach. >> My second question is um what is listed in in the statement
relates to uh tenants um before the process of eviction begins. Um seems to me that that's something that should be distributed to to tenants. um at the beginning of the uh tenency u when
they're about to be evicted is pretty irrelevant uh in many respects um and you know what so I guess my my question is why doesn't the existing statement acquired by state law suffice I mean you
say it's not sufficiently um expansive but we also have on our website a ton of information with respect to you know rights of tenants and and uh and resources that they can use in the event of eviction as well as many other things.
>> Yeah, I think there's a couple points uh that I would I would uh respond to that with. one is um I think one of the reasons why a number of municipalities have gone down this route and have found these resources to be valuable is while yes they do include legal information um
they also elomeorate resources and specifically locally focused resources for tenants so I for instance think of the BC uh BCDC tenant um emergency relief stabilization program that's something that would never be
highlighted in a state resource But actually, if you're a tenant in Brooklyn facing eviction, say for being in a rears and rental payments, that program could prevent you from being evicted. That and while also making your landlord whole. So, I I think there's a local
specific element to these that other communities have found important and I think would be important for Brookline tenants as well. Um, and so I think I think that kind of speaks to both of your points there. Um, but yeah, I think that's the real value ad here. And I do
think, you know, because a notice to quit is the trigger we're using here for notification. Um, it's important, I think, to to appreciate that a notice to quit doesn't always equate to eviction. And in fact, in many cases, it can be avoided. So connecting people with those
resources at that moment can be very valuable. And we also do require under article 9 that when this resource, the statement is created that it be made very readily accessible and available on the town website as well. So while we're only requiring by law notification at
the point of a notice to quit, um we're still making this resource proactively available and we'd still as a town or with community partners have opportunities to market that or spread awareness of that. So hopefully people could access that before they were in an e situation.
>> Okay. Uh I have another question, but I'm not going to hold David. >> So I I have a question about one of your definitions. So tenant is defined as someone with an express or implied rental agreement. Could you be a little more specific about what constitutes an
implied rental agreement? Does that mean that perhaps a roommate who is not on the lease itself but is residing there is an occupant? Would that occupant be considered a tenant? Do you see a difference between tenant and occupant?
Uh and if so, if you in situations where you have multiple tenants, which is fairly common uh in roommate situations with students, for example, uh do there need to be multiple copies of the statement that are provided? Uh and if
not, what would you do in a situation where let's say there are three roommates, uh and one of the three is not English speaking? >> Yeah. Uh great questions, David. Um, so kind of running down from the top, um, I think that definition is is written in that way to deliberately capture these
kind of informal or or not legally formalized housing situations. So that I think you're absolutely right that we're trying to incorporate into that tenants who may not necessarily be on the lease or for instance um, subletters in certain situations. So, we we did want a
broad definition there um to ensure that we weren't leaving people out who could benefit from this program because their name is officially on a lease. >> Um that being said, uh the notification requirement itself um is only required,
you know, the notice is only required to be delivered to the name that is on the eviction related notice. So that may be the person on the lease, that may not be the person on the lease, but in any situation that arises, the notice would be required to be delivered to that
individual. Um because the statement itself is a vital document if and because Warrant Article 9 includes a requirement that copies be made available upon request. Um, if there were any situation where a non-English speaker um, reached out to the town to
request a translated copy, if that is in the top 15 spoken languages in Brooklyn, the town would be required to produce that translated copy. Um, so again, you know, I I don't want to get too focused only on the notification piece because as I I mentioned to Bernard in the last
question, this is also about putting out a resource proactively. Um, and we hope ideally the majority of people accessing this will do so on the town website before they get to that point of receiving that notice. >> U Paul,
>> yeah, just a quick question about the um about the situation that David raised. Um, how does someone who's not on the lease, it's four roommates and three of them are fed up with the fourth, do they get a formal eviction notice? Do you go
to court? I mean, how does that happen? They and the roommates >> call a constable. I mean, I I'm just I'm confused about um how our you know, you're placing the responsibility and notification on us. This is the section that I have the greatest concern about.
Um and so in that situation, we're you know, maybe we don't serve it properly, maybe we give it to the wrong person, maybe there's not a formal eviction process. Are we now legally responsible somehow? You're inserting if I feel like
you're inserting us into the middle of the tenant landlord relationship here. Um, I don't think it doesn't seem right to me. >> Ironically, what I've been advised legally is that this is the solution to avoiding the town inserting itself into
that >> rel. But the communities around us, Alec, don't they? So aren't there, you said they're cities, but they actually place this responsibility on the landlord. >> Correct. >> Yeah. >> And as I said up front, that would be my preference here.
>> Um, but what we have done is worked within the legal confines that we're confronted with. Um, it is my understanding that the town would not be legally liable in in any eviction related proceeding if there were some incident with compliance with this bylaw. Town council has reviewed this
bylaw. did not flag any concerns in that to that effect. Um, and I would note that this version, the amended version of the bylaw that's before you this evening, um, was rewritten with a significant input from one of Brooklyn's current town constables. Um, so I I I
think we've actually done a good job of avoiding those potential legal pitfalls. Um, and uh, yeah, that that'd be my response. >> But he's also not a lawyer, right? >> No, but as I mentioned, this was >> just to be just to be clear, he's not a lawyer. >> You're absolutely right. Absolutely right. Uh David,
>> so I'm worried about Paul's question, but from the perspective of making sure that all the roommates are truly notified. So if you have someone who's residing there, especially non-English-speaking, maybe not there all the time, perhaps goes back to uh the home country for a period of time
and that's when notice is being served. How is that person going to be aware of the resources available if only the named uh tenant is the one who receives notification? And then secondly, this
warrant article is early tailored to town officials who are serving. Uh and in many instances, it's a non-town official who would be serving. So that does those situations, the tenants would not be receiving this statement of rights at all. hopefully they would see
it on the website. >> Yeah. So, so to both those points, um I think to the I I'll start with your second point. As I mentioned up top, we we definitely agree and you know, we're under no illusions that this is a you
know, the the final step in setting up this pro this program in a comprehensive way. Um but because of the limitations placed on us legally um it's not necessarily the best path forward to include covering all our bases on that
front in a single warrant article. Um that's why should warrant article 9 pass um I think our intention as petitioners is our next step would be securing some kind of voluntary agreement with the Norfick County Sheriff's Department. Um my understanding from um interviewing
some of our constables is that the deputy sheriffs of Norfick County likely deliver the plurality of these notices. Um unfortunately there's no real hard data collected on this, so it's hard to say with complete certainty, but we don't have any legal ability to regulate
how the the county sheriff's office operates. But what I do have and what I I think we do value is we have a good relationship with Norfick County. Um, and I I'm hopeful that there could be, you know, fruitful discussions there. The other piece is um we are looking
into right now whether or not um we could put together some kind of bylaw regulating third party servicing agents. Um that is being workshopped and we'll certainly be looking for input from town council on that. Um, but as I said, for
those reasons, it didn't really make sense to us to try and address all of those pieces in a single warrant article. Um, but there will be more to come on that. This is by no means the end of a process. It's the beginning. Um, on your point about the roommates,
um, again, this is, I think, why we see the landlord being the noticing agent is so desirable is that is really the best way, I think, to address that concern. What we are left with, barring that possibility, is the person in question
would receive a notice if they were the person who the eviction notice was addressed to. And if not, we would need to rely on proactive promotion of this resource, or the fact that we ensure that their roommate receives a paper copy, which we feel confident under a town agent we would do with this warrant
article, um, and and hope and rely on the fact that they would share that within the household. But we are somewhat limited here in how we can proceed unfortunately. >> You've left open a lot of loose ends that uh you're promising will be dealt with in the future.
>> Well, I you know I I it's a complex process unfortunately. >> Yeah. Okay. Something >> let's open the public uh hearing. >> Okay. This is the public >> open hearing >> on article nine. If anybody in the Zoom
would like to speak, please raise your hand. I do not see anybody yet. >> Okay. Someone at the podium. >> Joe Figler. >> Nobody has raised their hand for this article. >> Okay. >> Hi. Uh I'm Joe Figgler. I'm the
constable uh senior most constable in Brooklyn. I think it's fair to say I'm the most experienced as well, not just in Brooklyn, but throughout greater Boston in general. So I have >> Speak right to microphone. So I have a lot of experience in terms of serving notices and process throughout.
I mean one of the biggest I have no problem with adding the tenant information as part of the process for serving. That's fine. Boston does it. We know Somerville does it, Medford does it. They didn't mention but they do a much better job of it. Um the the issue
I really have is about the notification process, right? And when I look at section 8.40.4 for delivery by agents of the town. To me, that's a big miss, right? Because in order to serve a notice to quit, all you have to be is
over the age of 18 and a disinterested person. That's it. That's how I can serve so many notices outside of Brooklyn, even though I'm only a Brooklyn constable. And I would say, I don't know, maybe a third, maybe more of the process I serve is outside of
Brookline. So when you look at this and you see whenever an individual agent of the town participates in delivering a notice to quit and it goes on and on and on that just opens up a big loophole for anyone you know to come in from out of
town and not have to adhere to our processes. And you know, in the email I sent, I talked about at the state level, they require an accompan accompanying notice to be included with a notice to quit, right? And they require landlords
to be the ones to ensure this happens. Why? Pro, and I'm not a lawyer, so forgive me, but it's probably because they're the ones filing the the basically complaint in court. So, they have to prove their case. They have to prove that notice was served. the right
way. That's why they need to be the ones to make sure that these notices are accompanied with a notice to quit. And if you look at Boston, if you look at Medford, you look at Somerville, they all do the same thing. They all require the landlord to include these notices
with the notice to quit. And I know Alec had mentioned that ideally the landlord is the, you know, in a perfect world, the landlord be would be the one who's responsible. And it's 100% true. And so to go forward with this notification process, not doing it the right way, to
me doesn't make sense. And I don't understand why town council is saying that a town can't do it. Because to me, if a city can require this and the state can require this, to me, the tenant relationship between a landlord and a tenant is the same whether it's in a
city or a town or at the state level. I don't understand why they're saying it's different. Again, I'm not a lawyer, so forgive me, but to me, that just doesn't really intuitively make sense, you know, and in my mind, if we're going to do this, let's do it right, right? Let's
require the landlord to do it um to make sure it's done, and then you can actually make sure it gets done, right? Um, you know, and then the the other thing is if you look at what Medford does, and I really like the way they do it, they require the landlord to include
this tenant information when they sign the lease. So the tenant knows right up front when they sign the lease with the landlord, these are your rights. Then what they do is when you serve the notice to quit, you have to do it again. So in Medford, you're notified twice
about this tenant information, right? And again, it's the responsibility of the landlord to ensure it's done. Me as a constable, I deliver the message, but it's not for me as a town agent or anything to make sure all the forms are there, right? It's always the responsibility of the landlord to ensure
everything's done right because again, they're the ones filing the complaint in court. So, they need to make sure that their tees are crossed and eyes are dotted and things like that. Um, and so that's why I'm just concerned with how this is kind of laid out for the
delivery of the message. And to Alex point about, you know, this is a multi-step process. Well, the first step can just be creating the tenant information, putting up on the site, making sure it's available to everybody. That could be the first step. But where I get concerned is when you're starting
to talk about delivering this message and putting the onus on the town agents to make sure that it's delivered right. It's not our responsibility. Me as a constable, I have to be a disinterested person. And so when you try to make me be the one to make sure that this notice
is included, that changes the whole disinterested part. And so for me, I just feel like that doesn't make sense. And so, you know, from that perspective, um, that that's my main concern with the way this is being approached.
>> Thank you. >> Yep. >> And I see that Regina Frolley is raising her hand. >> Thank you. Uh, also a constable, Regina Frolley. Um Joe raises wonderful points
but the number one complaint of a tenant when or somebody in a divorce situation such a when they go to the court they say I never got the notice that's rather typical. Um you're putting us in a difficult
situation even if we can take a photo of ourselves putting it under their door because we do you cannot always reach them in person. um you put us in a position of having to go to court to say yes I did your honor all of that is not
paid if you're doing that by this part of this rather than making it voluntary and doing it at the level of the first of the landlord and then making us as agents voluntary ing to have to go to court it's going to
happen indemnify me I already pay for a bond are you going to cover those expenses is cuz that makes you liable by this law making you liable to me. So I think you haven't factored that in and that's worthy of a huge discussion
and nobody hasn't spoken to me spoken to Joe about this. I don't know which conible he did speak to but anybody should have talked to Joe because he is the most experienced of all of us. So, um, and take a take a look at your liability.
When you tell us we have to do it, then you've taken on the responsibility of the town and we're your agent at that point. So, I want you to think about that. Um, >> is there we're still got the public here. >> Yeah, I pretty much made the point that
you need to endify us. If that's the case, increase our bonds substantially and we should invoice you for all the extra time. I'm not joking. I'm not joking. >> I can laugh though if I want to. Don't tell me I can't. >> I beg. >> Okay.
>> Um, I'd like to ask Alex about the Oh, what what was it? >> Should we close the bubble? Should we close? >> Um, I think Joe wants to say something. Yeah. >> Sorry, I just want to add one more thing. So, um, to your question about, you know, making sure that everyone's
notified during a service, right? The way it works is typically when you see a notice to quit, they list all the names of the people on the lease, right? And if they know that there are other people in the apartment, they'll say and all other occupants. And then what I have to do as a process server is I have to
include a copy for each person. Then I'll highlight each name on the lease, right? And then I'll add something for all other occupants, right? So if there are let's say three names on the lease and then you know maybe someone else is there under the all other occupants I would serve four copies. So in this case
there'd be four tenants information forms to go with the four notices to quit to go with the four accompanying uh forms that go with the notice to quit. Right? And so a lot of times what you do is you you put it in four different envelopes, right? With each name and and
that's kind of how you do it. That's the process that you would follow and that's how it's handled. And if someone's not there, let's say I give it to one person and the other three aren't there, I would have to mail a copy to the other three. And that's basically the best you can do. If someone's out of out of the
country, you can't. There's only so much you can do, you know, and that's kind of how it would work. >> So, >> okay, I'd like to close the public hearing and ask Alex one question. Um, how many constables did you talk to before preparing this article?
Um, I consulted with Neil Gordon and he, as I mentioned, was extensively involved in the rewrite of this article to the emitted version that you see before you now. >> Um, John, did you have your hand? >> Yeah, I did. Um, I I uh I I need some guidance here, and
Joe, you might be the one to provide it. Um, do tenants in in Brooklyn um have any rights over and above the rights confer in the case of an eviction, the rights conferred upon them under Massachusetts law? >> So, in in addition to Massachusetts law
and their local laws? >> Yeah. Well, no. I mean, in addition to Massachusetts law, do do we have specific Brooklyn statutes that offer additional protections to tenants over and above what they're guaranteed by the state? or they're they're told they
>> as far as I know no, but I'm also not a lawyer. So, take that for what it's worth, you know, >> because um you know, every time I have researched the question of I'm a tenant in Brooklyn and I need to know what what my rights are in the face of an eviction, it goes right to the Massachusetts
government page. Um, and there's it's full of information and very specific information about what the rights are of the tenant in those situations. And what happens in Brooklyn tends to be if if the if that request goes to Brooklyn is
they then refer the tenant to the Massachusetts Protections. >> Yeah. I I think to Alex's Alex point though, I think there are local uh like groups and organizations that are probably more specific to Brooklyn that can add more assistance.
>> Well, that's true too, right? Yeah. And so that's where I think the benefit of what Alex is is talking about, right? Having Brookline specific information that, you know, the tenants can access more readily, >> right? >> Well, yeah. And in fact, one of the agencies in Brooklyn that specifically
addresses those other um uh resources is the Brooklyn Community Development Corporation, you know, which deals with tenants all the time. Um, so I'm I'm just not seeing the value ad here of, you know, um, setting up this pro
process um, for there to be a written version of what are the known rights that tenants have in the face of eviction that is somehow vetted through somebody in an apartment in Brooklyn.
What if we leave out, you know, something that is guaranteed and is clearly in there for people to take the benefit of on the Massachusetts government page that addresses all of these questions? Um, are are we supposed
to simply repeat and print out what what is readily available um through the mass Massachusetts government? I don't know. I'm asking you, Joe, but you know, please >> I would leave that. I can >> we tend to always speak to the podium,
but um I I don't know. I >> I I I feel as though we're spending money to to create some confusion as to where a tenant should turn for a clear statement of what their rights are in the face of of an eviction process.
>> I don't think any of the constables are are opposed to this concept. >> I think the issue is >> we're going to be here all night. Regina. >> Regina. No, >> it's 11:15. We can't keep We don't have >> Michael had his hand up. >> I had actually mine was up. You called
on me until Regina took my spot. >> Do you >> I don't. >> You called on me. Um so that I think the thing that that I'm most concerned about is what Joe said earlier that you know
this section 8.404 404 844 um would only come into play if one of our agents was was delivering the notice. So if you're a landlord in Brooklyn and you don't
want to have to deal with notice or proof that notice happened where it's a where you could you know the tenant could say I wasn't properly noticed by the Brooklyn agent therefore you can't evict me. I'm if I'm a a landlord in Brooklyn, I'm not calling a Brooklyn
constable calling somebody else. Why Why would I use a Brookline constable? It just adds risk. >> Um this whole section uh 844, I I like the tenant handbook, but this uh this process that we're creating, I'm not
supportive of it. I frankly, I think it should come out. >> Hey, Michael. Um I'm wondering whether whether town council can tell us why the landlord um option was not possible. >> Right.
>> So Kate, can you promote Joe? >> Joe's been promoted. >> Thank you. Good evening. Um, so if you recall, uh, the Brooklyn's history with rent control back in the 70s, uh, it was ruled unconstitutional because it's a
limitation. There's a limitation in the state's constitution about, um, the authority of municipalities to interfere and create civil law between private parties. So, the classic case about, uh, the limitations of municipalities in this area already involves Burkelong. Um
so we can't get into situations where we're creating um new requirements between a landlord and tenant just like we weren't able to do that with rent control. When rent control was passed as a state law the next year then we could have rent control. So that was um you
know that's kind of an example of the question about why can um there I think what Joe brought up in his letter uh to the select board that there's a requirement by the state to include information. Sure, the state could do it, but the municipalities can't. Um,
and then the question about like, well, cities can do it. Why can't towns? No municipality can. However, I our bylaws are reviewed by the town bylaws are reviewed by the attorney general's office. So, there's a much quicker way of figuring out it's illegal, but city's
ordinances are not reviewed by the AG's office. So, they're only uh determined um to be illegal if someone were to sue. But if we were to pass this bylaw, it would be immediately reviewed by the attorney general's office and they would say because of Marshall House versus the
town of Brooklyn from 1970, it creates civil laws between private parties which is unconstitutional. >> Thank you. >> Uh no, >> uh yeah, I mean I guess my only comment
on this is to reiterate what Alex said in terms of this being one step. Um, and you know, I I agree that it's not it's not perfect. It's incrementally positive. So, I just sort of leave it at
that. >> David, >> I I was leaning in that direction until uh Constable Figler spoke. I am very concerned about what Paul raised that what this does it essentially creates an incentive to not use Brookline
constables and basically we're going to be running our constables out of business and favoring u all non-constables essentially. How is that really helping? There's a very clear endun that this creates for Brooklyn
landlords. I am very supportive of uh the statement and of the motivations behind this, but I do think that the notification procedure uh as currently written is is very problematic in terms
of uh the city ordinances that passed basically compelling a landlord to provide the municipalities uh statement of rights. uh for how long have these ordinances been in place in Boston, Somerville, Medford? Uh I hear
what you're saying uh about town council regarding the uh the legal precedent, but I'm a little surprised that no one has challenged Boston, Somerville, Medford, and all these cities that passed it. One would think that
landlords, if they had an opportunity to not have to provide these statements, they would jump right at it. And apparently that hasn't happened. So how many years have gone by? Do we know? >> I don't know. But just because somebody else does something illegal that hasn't
been challenged doesn't mean it makes us it makes it legal for us. It's just waiting for a lawyer to figure it out and and raise it as an argument. >> And if I could jump in briefly, I would just say those those ordinances have been adopted um in varying years roughly
over the last decade. Um I believe the earliest one was 2015 or 2014. Um and and I think you've you've correctly identified what our main hesitation was in trying to bring the landlord notification model in as a warrant
article is because there's not been a legal challenge to one one of these ordinances. We would effectively through attorney general review be bringing legal challenge to the ordinances in these other communities which I don't think is our intention. We certainly don't want to create a legal predicate to overturn tenant protections in other
communities. But I would also suggest that the notion of an you know an incremental run in run around the constables may not be as founded as is seems theoretically likely given the fact that over 10 years no landlord has
objected to these provisions enough to even bring legal challenge. So I would again just stress that this is an incremental approach. We will be seeking to fill those gaps um shortly after passage. Um we it's not our intention to leave this as a finished product. Um but
I would just encourage you to reflect on the fact that no challenge has been brought to this point as you weigh to what degree landlords will view this as overly intrusive or negative in their parts. Well, there there's the concern also articulated by two constables tonight about that they are no longer
impartial if they are being required to affirmatively take a stand on behalf of the town when they're supposed to simply be serving. So, how do you respond to that concern? >> Um, I I would say I don't think they are taking a stand on behalf of the town. I certainly respect both of their opinions
and they've certainly been doing this um you know for a long time and and I appreciate those perspectives. But we're not asking the constables to take up an advocacy role on behalf of the tenant. We're asking them to deliver as they deliver an eviction related notice a
notice pre-prepared by the town. They have you know we're not asking them to provide any input on what that notice says. We're not asking them to make themselves available to answer questions or, you know, connect those tenants with resources after they read the notice. It's all about transmitting the notice just as they do on behalf of the
landlord uh to begin an eviction proceeding. Um so I think the petitioners um don't necessarily share that concern. >> Paul, so um I I really appreciate the the intent of what you're doing here. I'm supportive
of the tenant handbook. Uh, frankly, you probably could do that through policy with the board, but you want to create a bylaw. Um, I'm really struggling with this section uh 844, the notice. Um, I do think it's going to incent landlords
to not use our constables. I do agree with uh with uh constible frai that um this places the burden onto the constable uh to have to deal with the court system to prove that you know if there's any dispute um you know they're
they're taking on that risk um of delivering this type of notice. Um there I just I think there's all kinds of holes in this. Um, I for me to support this article, I would need to see that section either change it to the notice
with the landlord and roll the dice with the attorney general and you got a provision in here that says there's severability. So, you know, they could strike that clause, the attorney general, and and and uh you wouldn't have delivery in this article until a
future date when you can figure it out. Um or you know I I could make a motion to just strike that entire section uh from the article but I can't support this article with this uh with this delivery process. If I may, Paul, just briefly, my understanding because we've
taken this approach to avoid some kind of regulation of the civil relationship between landlord and tenant is that there wouldn't be a situation that would arise where a constable would be compelled to testify in court. >> Because my understanding is that receipt
or not of this notice wouldn't have a direct legal impact on an eviction proceeding because those are governed separately by state law. I would welcome town council to correct me if that's not the case, but that is at least my understanding at this point. Um, >> but Alec, that wouldn't stop and at some
point we need probably need to deliberate ourselves and not debate with you. Uh but um you know that that doesn't mean that a crafty lawyer or even a crafty tenant can't say that the well-meaning constable was inept and
delivered the wrong uh version of the handbook or some other found other some other problem with the handbook that was created by Brooklyn and they're a Brooklyn agent. Therefore, Brookline is responsible in the agent. Um again, I appreciate what you're doing, >> David. I'm not sure we should be so
afraid of potential litigation. Let's say that it was struck down, but Boston had successfully utilized it since 2015 and Medford and these other communities that might spur state action and then this Brooklyn Warren article actually
led to statewide action that benefits all of our residents. I would see that as a positive. >> Okay, let let's try to wrap this up. um either number one um because we're not both. So, uh the idea
of uh no action is not relevant. But I wonder if someone would like to propose an amendment because there things that you know people have indicated they're not willing to accept and there's things in here that I'm not willing to accept. So would someone like to propose an
amendment and and but we'd have to submit that >> think next week maybe that could get submitted to the packet so that you could deliberate on if there was one >> directionally directionally I I'm kind of with David that um given the
severability clause in here you know this is not a huge risk the article for us to amend this section and require that the landlord deliver this at I I like the idea of at the time of the signing of the lease and then at the
time of the signing of the of the of the notice. Um >> I I think you'll find that the moderator will probably not find that in scope. >> That's a good point. >> That's a good point. >> Which part? The delivering at signing of the lease or the shing by the to the by
the landlord >> requiring the land both you know in both cases that's an expansion or change of the Again, I don't want to speak for the moderator. We can absolutely put it in front of him. But I do think generally speaking, right, if you the whole point of the requirement that you not add something and subtract something is
because the warrant's supposed to warn people. So if you change who's responsible, I think the I think the moderator is likely to say you didn't give them adequate warning that that was coming. >> So why don't we check with the moderator to see if we can swap um town agent to tenant.
>> I think the chance of you know that being within scope is is pretty low. >> Very low. And the alternative is to strike that Yeah, I actually you want to do that proposal? >> I I unless I would like to check with the moderator just be willing. >> Sure. Absolutely.
>> We could at least check with them, but if you know uh let's say that the moderator says no, that's out of scope. Um I would propose striking this section from the article. >> Okay. Any other proposed uh el what's the word? Elisionions,
>> deletions. >> Where do people what do people think of that? I mean, is that a >> that reasonable >> work for based on this discussion? Sounds like maybe three votes for that. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, uh that's what we'll do. We'll take it up next meeting.
>> Um >> I since Paul asked, I'm sorry. I I I should at least answer his question. Um, even if the moderator were to allow that, I would not be in favor of >> of having the of having a landlord >> of having the landlord because we being
advised by our legal counsel that it's just going to get struck down by the attorney general. >> It's going to raise questions for the cities that that have that provision. >> Well, yeah. Yeah. Well, what I mean that I'm not that's a no no concern of mine, but >> but let's ask and we can we can figure
it out. We we've we've kind of got to figure out at some point whe whether we are going to just repeatedly, you know, whenever somebody doesn't like the interpretation of our legal council uh as to a given statute's viability, you know, are we just going to say, well,
let's find out, you know, I mean, we're we're dragging Brooklyn into, you know, legal complications every time we do that. And and it it consumes a lot of time. It consumes a lot of the, you know, available staff in in the legal council's office. And maybe we'll win
and maybe we won't, but why not take the safer course, John? >> Okay. Okay. >> Just to that general point, John, litigation actually sometimes shapes the law for the future. It sets new precedents. So, it's not always a
negative in my view. >> Speaking as a lawyer. Um, okay. So, let's move on. Michael, you have something final quick to say? >> Uh, no. I John took the opportunity to answer Paul's question. Um, I would say that on balance, I think that the
section is worth keeping and I'll just vote that way. >> Okay. Um, why don't you work with Paul and >> find out? I I I don't need to make the change so Paul can propose what it has. >> Oh, he likes the change.
>> Oh, he does. That's what I'm saying. See if you can compromise. >> Take the change. >> Well, no. At least give your your your views to Paul and see if >> you just I think I just I >> Okay. So, okay. Next. Warrant article 8 uh general bylaw nuisance lighting.
>> I am promoting uh co-etitioner Ira Kchin. Ira, you've been promoted and you can unmute to speak. Um, actually I'll be promoting Lisa. >> Oh, okay. >> And um, David Titel, town meeting
member, precinct 8. First time ever speaking to select board and doing it at 11:20 at night. So, >> I got the whole show. I really did. Um, I had sent in some slides. Do you have those available to display, please? send
>> um I sent them to Kate, but um Alisa also has them if she needs to share her screen. >> Oh my god. I will also do this without slides because we have been here a very long time. So, okay. Hopefully while that
happens, let me uh while we work on the slides, let me do this from my phone. I'll have to squint a little bit. So, just bear with me. Um whole reason for a warrant article 8 is to um provide a means for residents to effectively address lighting nuisance that negatively affects health and
well-being. This is about empowering Brookline residents to be able to bring up a nuisance and have the town's backing when they do. So problem with the new uh lighting being a nuisance, it's a lot like noise.
Um it can um cause issues with to it can cause issues for people who have light sensitivity. Um migraines uh people who are on medication, too much light can have a whole host of health issues including sleep implications that can
affect immune systems, loss of productivity. There's been um studies that link lack of sleep to things like dementia. It's bad. Um the other thing is that um excessive lighting um can also cause dangerous and blinding glare.
Um lighting can create um poor lighting can create shadows which actually make situations that are more dangerous lot not less um and it can be a safety hazard. So source of the problem is light trespass. Light trespass has always been
an issue. The reason we're bringing it up now and the reason that's really come to the four is LED lighting. LED lighting is a double-edged sword. It is great in that it is low power, it is cheaper, you can do it in all sorts of colors. It is problematic because it is low power, it is cheaper, and you can do
it in all sorts of colors. Because what is happening is people are buying more light. They're buying brighter lights and they're buying lights that are of higher temperature which can bother things like circadian rhythms and things like that. These are now at everybody's
disposal and they're cheap. So, we're seeing them more and more and more. So, the problem has become very real. Um, I had some images that sort of demonstrated all this, but we will move right on to let's talk a little bit about the lighting regulation landscape.
Um, existing lighting regulations really have primarily focused on signage, and it's unclear if we can use signage rules to apply to a nuisance caused by a neighbor's light. It's why we're here today. Um, the planning department introduced a more restrictive zoning
bylaw in um by government governing lighting in the fall and there was concern that is we were concerned about that because a zoning regulation would only address things going forward. it doesn't address anything that's a current problem. Um, that got referred
back to planning. No further action had been taken. Um, town council has taken a position, and I'm speaking for somebody who's on screen right in the room right now, so please correct me when we get to open if I've gotten anything wrong, but town council has taken the position that the town cannot regulate lighting via
general bylaw. That has been challenged by others. Oh, we've got a screen. Outstanding. Thank you. Um we just need to go to full screen. Uh town council has taken the position as I said um Dick Benoa wrote in um questioning that he
wrote in his letter which should you should have um in the absence of evidence that the zoning bylaw comprehensively attacks light trespass which is the issue we've been talking about. Town meetings should decide what to do based off the subst substantive merits of the article. Um, and to my
understanding, town council has agreed to ask the attorney general's office whether the town could regulate glare and light trespass via general bylaw. Next slide, please. So, um, we've talked to a bunch of groups, uh, AC land use comm um,
subcommittee, um, planning, EDAB, um, got a lot of feedback. The key point that we got was that the planning department developed a proposed amendment that had substantial changes um including adding lighting standards
and reworking the enforcement. We then worked in close partnership with them, modified things a little bit to really tweak things to address the nuisance concerns. So we're in lock step with planning department. Next slide please.
So key areas where we made changes um it is now limited to residential. It's not including group commercial. We've added standards to clarify what types of lighting do and do not cause a nuisance. That includes things like maximum illumination levels and luminere um
elevation, color temperatures, time standards for motion sensors. Um one of the things that was problematic was the question of whether or not light trespass onto public sidewalks was a problem. It was never intent to imply that it was, but there was some confusion about that. So, we clarified
that light that properly lights a sidewalk is good for everybody. It's a huge safety um safety bonus for um people with low vision, elderly. Um everybody likes a well lit Everybody likes a well-lit sidewalk. We want that.
Um we extended the correction period from two weeks to two months. Um, but I should also note that there's an extent there's an extension there for good faith efforts to correct. If somebody for example wanted to correct a problem by changing their fixture and the fixture they ordered was say on back
order, that's a good faith effort. People people are trying to do right, there's no reason there should be a fine imposed at that time and it's that's pretty explicit. Um, the key thing is that the current warrant article is one that the building department feels that they can effectively enforce. So that
building department feels they can effectively enforce it. Planning department and the co-etitioners are all working together on this. Next slide please. So what hasn't changed is the spirit. It's still a nuisance bylaw. So
enforcement is complaint driven. Bylaw would provide residents the backing they need when they approach their neighbor to ask that problematic lighting be addressed. The first pathway is to talk to your neighbor. If that goes ary, if the property owner
with the effect with the offending light source is not responsive, then the resident now has the ability to escalate things to the town and the town has their back. That's the goal of this. The general bylaw and the final thing, we don't need to show the last two slides
because it is late, but the key point is that most of the offenses are likely to be very easily correctable. Some can be as simple as taking a light that's shining into a neighbor's window and changing the angle. Literally just pushing it down or changing a light bulb or changing the amount of time on a
motion sensor. A lot of this stuff can be fixed as simply as buying a new light bulb or moving something or putting a shield over an angle on a light existing light fixture. So that is the abbreviated version. Thank you so much.
I open I am open to questions and thank I appreciate the time. >> Yeah, I really appreciate what you just presented. Um it sounds like a much much much improved uh version. Um I I do have um a remaining question on this matter
of the general versus the underzoning. And as you pointed out, you know, the real distinction here is if we do an underzoning, it'll apply to all future, you know, cases. Um and we we already have the the structure in place for reviewing you know people who are
creating new lighting situations that will have to comply. If we do it under general we will have to basically deal with any situation that arises where somebody says that light over there is in violation of this new general bylaw and it it could be you know lighting
situation that has existed for decades but all of a sudden now it's illegal. Do you have any estimate as to how many potential illegal situations will be created by this uh general bylaw? >> That is a fabulous question and the answer is no. I I don't
>> that's what scares me. >> I what what I can tell you is that we have put specific guidelines that make this very easy to distinguish. And also the problem is that while there is something that could have existed forever, the real issue is that there's
been a spike in this because of LED lighting. So the issue is becoming much more real with existing fixtures that now have bulbs that have become problematic. So, it's not really it's not fair because I can't tell you how
many people have changed their bulbs to problematic bulbs, which could be as simple as taking the incandescent bulb that went out and buying a 5,000 Kelvin bulb from Home Depot. And if someone does that tomorrow, that could be a problem. I can't tell you how many
people might have done that. But again, remember the first course of action here is to talk to your neighbor. >> Yeah, I know. which in my experience people hate to do. I mean we get select as select board members we get calls all the time and and and the first instinct on on the part of my part I think
probably other select board members can identify with this is don't you want to talk to your neighbor yourself they want someone from the select board to intervene to get in between themselves and their neighbor or they want Dan Bennett to get in between themselves and their neighbor then and I I understand
that no nobody wants to get into a thing with their their neighbor they'd rather have someone a stranger from town all come with a light meter to bump this. And if you if we can't say how many situations we're creating that are complainable in in the town, how do we
know how much is going to cost an enforcement? >> So, John, with two two things. First, with all due respect, there's no way to measure that number because there's no way to know how many light fixtures are on every single private residence in Brooklyn without going to every single house in all of Brooklyn. >> Well, one way would be to be zoning instead of general. And then we know
>> that that doesn't >> you know only the new >> which doesn't address our concerns. Yeah. >> Um >> so this I had a second point but it's late. >> I'm sorry I shouldn't have interrupted. >> No no no. I the the major concern here
is that we are oh about neighbors. The hope is that by enacting this if town meeting were to vote in favorable action on this. hope is that it would empower people knowing that they've got this
bylaw in, you know, has their back to have that conversation rather than have the conversation without knowing if there's anything that can be done. To what end? I speak to my neighbor, my neighbor says, "I don't care. I'm stuck." Now, if my neighbor says, "I I
don't care." It can be escalated. residents are now empowered to take that next step. This is about empowering the residents of Brooklyn to be able to take that next step. >> Uh Paul. >> Yep. Uh thank you. Um I I kind of agree
with John. I'm really worried about we're going to piss off like 80% of the town there's going to be these neighborly issues. And um I think I think it's a huge issue. I think it's a big problem, but the solution is like a sledgehammer across the head. But but
John just made me think of that because he brought it up. What I wanted to raise is this issue around the business districts. So, you know, the business I and I saw the the the notes from various bodies uh asking that the business
districts be excluded. Um there's a big difference between the front of the business district and the back of the business district in Brooklyn. Most of our business districts abut residential neighborhoods. >> Talking to a pre so that's my life. I am the house that
looks right down St. Mary's Court which is behind all the restaurants in HMart. >> Um it's lit up like you know Fenway Park. >> Um and you know I it's too much. Now I wouldn't want to limit the front or I would want to limit the front but have
it you know somehow managed differently but the back >> um is is is really a very big issue. >> So this step and I want it to be a step. I think we all want it to be a step. This step is residential only. So that whole commercial issue that you're
talking about is excluded from what we have before us today. it is still a problem and I think a more comprehensive bylaw is the next step to start working on that because that gets very prickly. That is one of the things
we discovered as we started this journey and the thought amongst the co-etitioners right now is really how do we address the biggest problem right now which is the nuisance lighting that is happening residential. Let's get that done. Let's start there and then let's
start worrying about the the commercial. And I live across the street from Clear Flat. >> Well, when you say residential, it is, you know, you're try you're talking about light trespassing. >> Yep. >> Right. Which is an issue for residential property owners. Well, the commercial
light is trespassing. >> Absolutely. >> Right. I mean, so anyway, I so I appreciate what you're doing. I can tell you a quick story that my son who is eight um just a month ago uh you know was complaining to me because the light
that the new I won't say the restaurant's name owner put up behind the in behind in the back was shining right into his bedroom you know and so so I understand the incremental step um
>> okay uh David >> but I'm concerned about >> so I think the reason why bylaw would be extremely advantageous is precisely because we don't really know where current enforcement lies. And this has been a complaint actually from both ends. From the person who feels that
light's trespassing onto their property to also the person being accused of trespassing light into another property. Right now, we look at the zoning bylaw that applies to signage, and it's I don't really follow how a zoning
uh bylaw regarding signage is somehow being used to litigate these disputes. And it's being done in a very nebulous fashion. There are accusations flowing again birectionally about selective enforcement. We need to define this. And if we only do it on the zoning
side, we're not correcting the current existing problems. Uh and I share your concerns about how commercial properties also can trespass onto residential. And I think we can address that too. Uh maybe not in this Warren article in a future Warren article, but we take
incremental steps. And if to uh John's point, it becomes too overwhelming and we have far too many complaints that the building department can't manage, but it's instructive the building department says they feel that they could enforce this uh warrant article if it becomes
bylaw. Uh we can always modify it later. If it's too overwhelming, we take it away. And that has been done uh in the past where we modify bylaws even a year later if need be. If if I might add, the building department and the planning
department again are in lock step with us on this. If either group felt that this was going to be an overwhelming tax on their bodies, they would have said so. We have had multiple conversations and there has been multiple
opportunities. And for what it's worth, an earlier version of this that they had concerns with left this at the full discretion of Dan and that was deemed too great and too taxing on their department. So they absolutely have
chimed in when they when they thought it was a problem. Now I'm speaking on their behalf right now, but that's from the conversation. That's how this has evolved. >> Okay, John, quick >> question. Would they prefer the zoning version or the general version?
>> I don't want to speak for that, but we have not been discouraged from going this path. >> So, I don't want to speak for them, but I can tell you we have not been discouraged from going this path and we are in agreement with this. >> I as an added point, if I may, thank you for the answer. Um, two of my least
favorite general statements about how we should conduct ourselves in terms of changes in our laws. You know, one is, well, let's just go ahead even though we've been advised this is probably illegal and let's test it in court. That can last forever and cost a lot of money
and you lose. And the other one is, well, we've been told this is defective, but let's just put it into law and then deal with the problems with it later. I mean, come on. we have a chance to pass something which will survive legal tests and doesn't have to be fixed later.
Let's do it that way and not the let's go let's risk our future on a possibly illegal law and a lot of expensive litigation and a law that does that has defects that are going to cause suffering and we'll fix them later. That doesn't make sense to me. >> Hey Michael, >> uh
a couple things. One, to your point, I think there's a difference between defects and shortcomings. You know, this may this if it's not complete but it makes incremental progress then that's different than introducing a defect and I'm not sure which is the case here. That's number one. Number two in the
section on applicability um it it describes the the areas where it apply as um lighting originating from private properties in areas where solely residential uses are. And so I guess my
concern is that that definition is is like really unclear to me. You know, for example, it doesn't it doesn't in that sentence refer to zoning. It doesn't take into account dover uses. So
for example, a school a school could be private property. So would a school be subject could a school be subjected to a nuisance complaint? Um, so I'm wondering whether there there's any clarification that you can make about that phrase and
how it would or wouldn't be enforced. >> Um, so my understanding, our intent was when we say solely residential use, a school is not a solely residential use. Enough said. Um, so
I so the way I was interpreting it is and the way that we interpreted it as we drafted it was houses, apartments, residents, this and and really limiting it, you know, confining it to that specific
>> dwellings, if you will. >> Might I suggest then that you strike out the words in areas? >> Okay, I'll check. Richmond Precinct 6 co-etitioner. Uh the first part of the bylaw says commercial or says residential lighting. We struck commercial. A school would not be residential lighting. So it's
residential lighting in a residential district. So it's not doing residential lighting in a business district. >> Right. Okay. >> Or or business lighting. Okay. Sorry. I'd like to >> Thank you, Cl. You finish. I'm sorry. Michael, you finished? >> Yeah.
>> Okay. I'd like to open up the uh public hearing. Uh Kate uh do to open it up. >> Right now we have 22 participants. If anybody would like to speak on article 8, please use the hand raise feature.
Oh, we I see one. Let me um Okay, Jocelyn Murphy, I'm going to promote you. Okay, Joselyn, you're being promoted and you can um unmute to speak. We have a timer. >> Pardon me.
>> Do we have a timer? >> Hi. Um, I'm having trouble unmuting. Thanks very much. I'm going to be exceedingly brief due to the hour and I really just Joselyn Murphy, town meeting member, precinct 16. I really just wanted to direct the board's attention
to a letter that I think you received um that was sent um from a resident in my precinct whose situation is frankly the poster child for why this this bylaw is necessary. Um her name is Martha King. She lives on
Pacin Road and there's new construction behind her house that has lit up her the back of her home um like an airfield. And so I think the time is has come for this bylaw. This is one of
the most frequent complaints that I hear from people in my neighborhood. Um and so I ask that you recommend um recommend favorable action on it. Thank you. Okay, I don't see anybody else with their Oh, I'm going to promote Janice
Khan right now. >> Yes, due to the hour, I will also be brief. Um, Janice Khan, committee member in precinct 15 and full disclosure, I am married to one of the co-etitioners, Ira Krepchin. So, um I I just want to really
emphasize a point that that's been made, but it it really needs to be emphasized again is that um that the town has been working on this. This is a very big interest of both the planning department and the building department. Um I and
it's really important that we give um our department heads or um enforcers the tools they need to really do the work that we as residents are asking them to do. And this is a tool and um it's a
framework for the town. It is not um unique to Brookline. there are other municipalities that already have this as a general bylaw and and um and so I just urge you to really support your
departments um and support the residents of the town to be able to um to live more peaceibly actually in the town. I see this as a way to bring peace, not to bring disruption. Um, so I urge you to
consider favorable action on this article. Thank you. >> Okay, any other comments? >> There are 22 participants online and nobody's using the hand raise feature. >> Okay, I'll close the hearing. Any
further discussion from the board? >> We need to vote on this tonight. >> No, I don't think we should, but that's just my opinion. >> Yeah, that's great. Okay. So, let's move on. >> Um, >> thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Um, our next it uh next uh seg item is a warrant articles that are continued warrant article 13 resolution to consider the odor population when determining use of the Fisher Hill property. Um,
any thoughts on that? I'd like to move that we uh endorse it. >> Okay. >> Favorable favorable action. >> All in favor? >> Yes. >> I >> Paul Warren >> I >> David Bman >> I >> Michael Rubenstein >> I
>> I'll vote I although it's it's kind of offensive that Rubine asked this but I'll vote I. So okay next foreign article 7. >> Hello. >> Thank you. This is Yolanda. Thank you.
>> You're welcome, Yolanda. >> Uh Warren, article 7, amend uh section 5.06.4 of the zoning bylaw to create a Clark Road multifamily overlay district. We we decided to put that off, didn't we? >> We don't have advisory committee vote yet and it's up to the board whether or
not we want. >> Do we know when advisory committee is going to take this up? >> I think they're going to need to do it within the next couple weeks because the combined reports deadline is um next week. So, >> but have they scheduled a specific date yet or >> I think they're meet subcommitteees meeting tomorrow on it, aren't they?
>> I'm not sure. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Final warrant article is warrant article 17 regarding tree preservation practices. >> Um >> so in your packet you have a substantial rewrite that was done by the commissioner shoot and the petitioner.
So that is what is um >> at 5 minutes to 12. So, I would like to move favorable action on that hour. >> Oh, I have a lot of these. >> I I would hope we would have a I know it's late, but if we could have a little bit of a summary about the changes.
>> When did we get the >> We got all the changes last week. >> No. >> Well, sometime I thought to Michael. >> So, I believe Paul is correct. We did get all the changes last week. Uh, I asked to make an additional change and
work that out with Commissioner Shute. I had a conversation with Commissioner Shu. We decided that no further change was needed. >> Right. Okay. >> Okay. >> So, so we're not >> so what the thing that we the thing that
therefore the article as it was written last week that we debated is the same as the article we are considering tonight. There are no further changes. >> Okay. So the substantial rewrite we're not considering. >> So no, the petitioner and commissioner shoot worked together on the rewrite. So
they're in alignment with changes >> and it was presented last week. >> Is the petitioner online? >> Probably not. >> Is advisory voted on this? >> Um I believe they may have already voted >> and is version four what we're talking about? >> I believe so.
Okay. How many articles do we have left? >> Last. Oh, no. One more. Just >> this and one more. >> This next one would be quick, but we're going to end this meeting in a different day than we started. >> Oh, okay. >> Well, can we ask can I ask who who has
reservations about this article? Bernard, you >> I have a couple. I'd like to know what what the status of the big asht tree on Pamoth is right now. But my serious obs u concern is uh you know we hire a highly skilled and expert arborist and
in section five uh we set up a procedure where we second guess that expert um with respect to the removal of trees unless um unless the tree is removed based on a so-called objective criteria
which is not which any which which which you don't need to be an expert to agree to. Um that's a minor maybe that's a minor issue. I just think it's kind of almost insulting to our highly paid and highly skilled aristers.
>> You could you could offer to remove it. >> Um I'm not in defense of that provision. I you know for whatever reason I I've been sort of an observer of a couple of instances over time of trees and the question of their condition and the
arborist um in in the cases I'm speaking of uh tended to welcome outside opinion because it isn't an openandshut case often as to whether a tree is preservable or not preservable and um it helps to have more than one opinion you know
>> and commissioner shootman kept something in that would be upsetting her. >> It may not upset her. I I find it upsetting, but anyway, that that's not not to the extent that I want to suggest any changes. So,
>> and there's a resolution. >> Okay. So, I'm sorry. >> It's just it's a resolution. I'm ready to vote this. >> Okay. Yeah. Move. Um I move favorable action on warrant article 17 uh regarding street preservation practices. All in favor? John Vansa.
>> I Paul Warren. >> Hi. >> David Pearman. I >> Michael Rubenstein >> I votes I >> warrant article 18 resolution regarding the recording of public meetings. Uh any discussion of that? >> There were revisions voted by the advisory committee that um Michael also
put in the packet as well. >> Okay. So if we can we do that in one minute and 15 seconds which is >> well there's no way we're going to do this. It's going to take 10 minutes. Right. >> Okay. So Mike Michael Okay. So, so I
I submitted to all of you a modification to the resolve clause um in order to to basically remove the the process for compliance from the resolution and have
it referenced in the select board handbook. Um there is another question which we're not taking up tonight apparently because it's not on the agenda with regard to changing the select board handbook but we can defer that. So the thing that I am proposing
is this this set of amendments. Um I've talked to somebody on the um advisory committee who said that they would move this for reconsideration so that the advisory committee can be in alignment with this. And I've confirmed with Heather Hamilton, the petitioner, that
she's also accepting of it. Um to the question of whether 10 days um in this should be aligned with five days in the um select board handbook, I think we should take if we need to take that up, we should take it up by modifying the
select handbook. >> Okay. Um am I read am I hearing this right? We're not ready to vote for this. >> Well, he needs he he needs to make a motion to >> So, I need I I'm submitting a motion to
amend the resolve clause. >> Okay. >> And and so we still have to wait for advisory committee to respond. Right. >> No, advisory committee has taken a vote, >> okay, >> on the amendment. So, I am introducing this amendment and then it will go back
to advisory for consideration and incorporation. >> Is this what you're required to do? 1028 article 18. >> No. >> No. Okay. What are we referring to? >> Okay. We just missed our 12. >> Yeah. I wanted to be sure we did.
>> Okay. So, if you're looking in the meeting packet, um it's uh called 10.28.25 article 18 Michael Rubenstein. >> Okay. Okay. So there in the or it's for
some reason the indenting didn't stick. But >> what does it say now, Michael? >> I'm sorry. >> What does it say now? Can you just read it? I can't find it. But >> uh sure. It says there the the clause is as follows. Therefore, be it resolved that the town will ensure that any
official video recording of any future public meeting will be made available to the public in a convenient consistent manner through the town's website as soon as practable, but no more than 10 days after the meeting ends and published according to guidelines
specified by the select board or its designate. >> Yeah. And I I I find it uh too broad. I mean we started out with a subset of six boards, committees and commissions that would be uh you know for whom that would
be given this kind of um you know stamp of required uh circulation of the videos of their meetings. This as I read it applies to every single board committee and commission >> uh if they choose to >> if they choose to record.
It's not required that they record their meetings. >> Well, we don't want them not to record their meetings. >> There are some that don't. >> And and you're right, John, this was the intent of the >> this was the intent of the original warrant article.
>> So So I'm not actually changing that. >> Yeah. >> Factor. But then we also um ran into capacity concern concerns in terms of you know uh server or I mean I can't even
>> at this point um the zoom uh.gov like uh allows unlimited storage. So >> so we have no issue there. >> Okay. Okay. Okay. Well, >> get this meeting covered then. >> Yeah. It's going to be um excuse me. It's
going to require an awful lot of boards, committees, and commissions to start putting their videos up because even now, um, ones that we thought should regularly put their videos up, you know, it's it's just go down the list of recent meetings and you'll see that the
number that have their videos up is like a a fifth, you know. >> Yeah. I think Tiff Tiffany's memo outlines some of the challenges around the implementation, but I think, >> you know, it's we're going to try and make our best effort to to comply with the, you know, what the resolution's asking.
>> I think Michael's >> wiggle room, right? >> But Michael's amendment. Well, but Michael's amendment here says um after the meeting ends and published according to the guidelines specified by the select board its designate that gives us
the ability within the handbook or some other policy. >> Yeah. >> To to say we're going we're only going to require these six major we're going to phase them in. Is that is that I know is that your intent is to give >> Well, I know I didn't mean to give that
specific use case, but does does your amendment allow that level of flexibility to the board? Well, I think that the first part of the resolution that says will the town will ensure any official video recording of any future
public meeting sort of does not allow uh does not intend to allow the select board to constrain the set of recordings. It's only the publication process that was the original intent of the
resolution. Okay, David, >> also too, I think you're suggesting concern that maybe this could be a way to enlarge the amount of time it would be at to the select words whims, but it's phrased as an and the first part of that sentence is by no more than 10
days, right? >> So 10 days would be the highest number possible. Yeah. >> And if the select board policy were to then switch to four days >> and four would be operable. >> So 10 is that max number. >> Okay. And and what does this provide as to how for how long do they have to be
available archived? >> Uh the warrant the warrant article doesn't speak to that. >> Well, I think it needs to >> um I mean I think it follows the same rules as any other public record.
>> Yeah. Retention rules. >> So which means in the case of videos I Yeah. They're very complicated rules and >> yeah, >> you know, videos are covered, but I have no idea how long,
>> right? Be nice to have it specified. >> Well, the in the published I don't the guidelines could be in the >> there are state rules about how long certain things are kept for. Um there's a state schedule of storage basically that we follow.
>> I don't know what the rule is for video. Little check. >> Maybe that language should be in here according to state and and and archived according to state provisions coming also provide that kind. >> Okay. Okay.
>> And of course if we're uploading to the cloud I mean they're going to be there forever once >> they start charging the storage. >> You keep you keep us back to keep our old docu our old videos. Okay. Um,
>> we start being related to our license. >> What are we doing here? >> So, I'm making I'm making a motion, I guess, for Do I make the emotion the motion for the amendment and then motion for favorable action or can I combine them into one motion?
>> Favorable action on your amendment? >> Yeah. >> On Okay. My amended version of >> Yes. >> Yeah. And and then it's going to go back to advisory. >> They agree. He'll come back to us and we'll >> they disagree. If they disagree, what? >> But your amended version is the
petitioner's version, preferred version. Right. >> Um she's agreed to it. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. Uh all in favor of the amended warrant article um 18 for favorable action. John Vanser >> I. >> Paul Warren. >> Hi.
>> David Corman. >> Hi. >> Michael Ruben. >> I sai. Okay. Okay. Unless there are any uh comments post meeting, I will >> There's nobody indicating that they would like to speak at this time. >> Okay. >> Thanks, Kate. >> Thank you, Kate.
>> Okay. Meeting ends is over. Whatever. >> Record midnight. >> Um I think we >> in the old days, >> you'd be going in the back room and working another hour >> on what, >> Melissa? Melissa, you're the only other person in the room who remembers the
four o'clock session and then the one o'clock in the back room in the rabbits. >> When I started, they were still meeting in the in the hearing room. >> Say it again. >> When I started, they were still meeting in the hearing. They weren't >> Well, they were meeting in the conference room, but there were no >> um
>> Yeah, they were meeting in the conference room. You're darn right there was >> who who was meeting >> and I was