3 2 1 Good evening. I'm Bernard Green, chair of the Brooklyn Select Board, and this is the regular meeting of the select board for August 19, 2025.
First item is uh going into executive session. So I move that the select board go into executive session for the purpose of discussing um matters related to litigation strategy for various opioid settlements negotiated with
Perdue Pharma and the Sackler family and with various opioid manufacturers. This litigation matter must be discussed in executive session because an open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the litigation.
uh position of the town and the chair so declares an executive session therefore to be necessary. All in favor please indicate by saying I. John Vuer I. Um Paul Warren or is he on? Paul is not on yet. Okay. Uh David Corman
I. Michael Rubenstein. Hi. And sherai. Uh the select board will return after the executive session. Thank you. All right, it's 6:00, so we're coming
back in 5 4 3 2 1. Good evening. I'm Bernard Green, chair of the Brookline Select Board, and this is the regular meeting of the select board for August 19, 2025. And this will be our last meeting of the
of the month, right? Yes. Before the war closes, too. Yeah. Okay. So, we will not be back next week. Um, let's start off with u announcements or updates from the select board. Any select board members uh have anything to
say? John, a couple short ones. Um, first of all, I just want to say if if people are, you know, watching tonight and have not yet um experienced the farmers market, um, uh, it's it's continuing for several
more weeks and it is really one of the great sort of features of summers in Brooklyn. And, um, it's in the center center street parking lot. Uh, it's on Thursdays. Um, and I just urge people who haven't yet experienced it or people
who haven't experienced it for a while um to um, you know, check it out. Uh, and you'll find lots of great opportunities to buy fresh vegetables, fresh produce, fresh everything there. And um, and ice cream. So, you know,
can't can't fail to mention ice cream. Um uh the other thing I want to mention is that um our kids and and I'm talking about years ago that we our kids were um part of this but many years ago they were part of uh the Brooklyn music
school's offerings um in Brooklyn um for for any uh parents of children especially children aged six to nine and I'll explain that in a minute. Um the Brooklyn Music School is one of those uh aspects of Brooklyn that is is just a
treasure. Um and it has been so for gen literally generations. Um brought kids into contact with um the world of music, the world of um musical instruments. Um and it has um I'm sure graduated many
many people um who then became um you know uh part of the world of instruments and of music for life. I don't know whether that means on the stage in any cases but um they will continue they will continue to be enriched for the rest of their lives because of the
initial musical training um and introductions that they got at the Brooklyn Music School. And the reason I bring it up right now is that um from August 25th to 28th uh there is a program for k young kids um age 6 to
nine. Uh I urge people who are parents of children in that age group um to look up uh Brooklyn Music School. They have their own website. Learn more about the Meet the Instruments program um that's coming up August 25th to 28th. Uh, and
hopefully if some are interested and haven't yet registered, there'll still be a chance to register. Um, and that's all I've got. Thank you. Any other comments? No. I'm looking at looking to see if Paul wants to say anything, but
apparently not. Okay, let's move on to public comment. Uh, Tiffany, let's lay out the rules and hear from the public. 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 to a question, but are more likely to work with staff to get a more thorough answer and respond over email. The on-screen 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 and either their Brookline precinct number or street address. The first uh individual who signed up in advance for
public comment is Kevin McKenzie. Hello, my name is Kevin McKenzie. I am a town meeting member for precinct 13 and chair of Brooklyn's Commission for Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Community Relations. Though I am not speaking in that capacity, I am asking you as the select board to vote favorably to allow Victory Programs to
purchase the property at 16 William Street. I also want to thank all members of the board and town administrator Carrie for keeping all protected classes and their rights in mind during your deliberations. and in how you have engaged with members of the public. Thank you for your service to our community.
Thank you. The next speaker is Kim Richet. Let me see if Kim's online. Yes, Kim, I'm promoting you now and you can start your video if you're comfortable and begin your three minutes.
All right. Are you able to hear me? Yes, we can. All right. Hi. Thank you for taking my comments. I'm Kim Reichelt at 87 Koolage Street and I'm here to speak about the 40B proposal for 429 Harvard. Others have spoken before about many issues, the congestion, the parking, the
massing, the architecture of the rodents, etc. I'm going to focus on just two, mostly one. The first is that this board worked very hard to develop zoning for Harvard Street that fits the town and that the town overwhelmingly supported. I ask you to work with this
zoning and enforce it to the best of your ability. Why do we pass it if we were going to abandon it the moment it was challenged? If you find it needs adjustment, then go through that process again deliberately and building consensus. Since you've gone through this process, it makes little sense to cast that effort aside so readily. So, I
encourage you to support here a proposal that fits within our regulations. Second, and the issue I want to focus on is the trees, the healthy, mature trees that the owner removed from this site. At the last meeting, you heard from us that the owner had made no effort to
reach out to the neighbors at all, and you encouraged them to do so. They did hold a meeting last week in which they presented their proposal and heard our concerns. A sizable group gathered, and among us, many mentioned the trees that the developer had cut down. The follow-up summary the owner sent after,
however, did not even mention the tree removals. When asked at the meeting why they cut down the trees after being asked several times, actually, the owner finally answered and said they were diseased, that they were a liability, dropping branches on the sidewalk.
There were four trees. Only one of them was not healthy. The others were beautiful, healthy, and mature. And if any had actually dropped branches, obviously pruning them would have been a reasonable step. When the neighbors had checked with the tree warden, he said he had nothing to do with this because the
tree permits, given the regulations at that time, were not required. Neighbors, therefore, took photos documenting the trees. They they were beautiful. So, I'm not saying that the tree removals were unlawful. Unfortunately, they were allowed at that time. What I am saying
is that the owners were not being transparent with us. I believe the truth is the trees were taken down because the owner knew that soon he would not be able to take them down so easily as regulations were being developed. So we rushed to do it while the regulations still permitted it. Maybe a good business decision since it was legal to
and to his advantage. I just wish he had admitted it. Now the owners will tell us not to worry about all the problems with the design. They'll work with us. So you and we are being asked to trust that this owner will listen to us and deal with us in good faith and be honest with us. and that does not appear to be
something we can count on. Thank you. Thank you. The next speaker is Orurit AI Bin. After or will be Susan Frerieded. Good evening. My name is Dr. Orit Ane Bon. I'm a psychiatrist and a women's
mental health uh specialist. I'm a former Harvard psychiatrist. Uh I started my own um women's mental health service at Brighamin Women's Hospital and was the uh founding and acting director for nine years. I'm also a
resident of Bookline over 22 years now and I live on William Street precinct 9 and I'm here to talk about the plan to put a sober house on William Street specifically. Um I think you've heard a lot of concerns about the sober house. I
want to start with compassion. I think that as a psychiatrist, I know firsthand that addiction is a disease. It's not a moral failure. It's not I don't think anybody here passes judgment on uh potential residents. Uh however uh
compassion should include risk uh and and looking risk in the eye and assessing uh what the risks are for women in this program and people outside of this program neighbors uh the elderly people who live in the neighborhood the
young children who go to school across the street and the kids who go to um I think an afterchool program also across the street um as a psychiatrist I'm a mandatory reporter and I've had the very unfortunate situations where I had to
report a mother uh more than once but in particular I remember one mother who uh was a very devoted mother who uh succumbed to substance abuse and I had to report her because she put her child in danger. Women in particular, when
they lose custody of their children, their addiction problems are more severe on average than other people who suffer uh from addiction. Uh they have more on average. They have more trauma in their past. They have more depression. They
have more PTSD. And they're more vulnerable to relapse. I'm concerned about what I've heard about uh the victory programs. I heard that there's no drug checks, which is standard of care when it comes to addiction programs. I've heard that there's no um
consequences for relapse, which is standard of care um for these programs. And I am very concerned about the risk for the children actually in this program. Uh the women's themselves and I know victory programs um are very highly
kind of they're reputable. um they do their best, but those kind of components are of concern when they're not present, the women are at risk, the children who are live with them may be at risk, and the neighborhood as well uh could be at risk. I don't think anybody
here thinks that those people are bad people, I mean, people future residents if the sober house takes place. And I urge you to listen to us. We're not just crying wolf. Uh we're concerned and there's studies that show that we're right. Thank you. Thank you. The next speaker is Susan
Freed. After Susan Freed will be Bob Moran. My name is Susan Freed. Sorry, can you bring the mic closer? Can you start my time over? Yes. My name is Susan Freed from 50 Winchester Street. From the beginning,
our group has been wrongly accused of being anti-lowincome housing, racist, or elitist. These are baseless and deeply hurtful claims. We have always supported keeping 16 William Street as lowincome housing. It was only
when we learned the site would become transitional housing for individuals recovering from substance abuse that we voiced our concerns. Our concerns grew as we learned more about victory programs, including published reports about management issues and most
recently about crime. And I have handout of just a quick summary of crimes that have occurred at Victory House programs. Our worries are not rooted in prejudice. They are practical concerns raised by older residents and parents of young children who expect their voices to be
heard. We have stated repeatedly, we are open to solutions. We have questioned why the funds already in the town budget were not considered for alternatives more aligned with the lowincome housing mandate. We've submitted questions and proposed sensible conditions that could
allow this project to move forward with neighborhood support. We offered suggestions suggested provisions to the agreement well within the board's purview regarding occupancy and license requirements. Instead, our requests have been ignored. The current proposal
addresses none of our issues. Our concerns have been dismissed as overreactions, but refusing to even engage with us isn't public service is a disservice. If your well-intentioned but dogged pursuit of protect the underserved, you have marginalized these
groups of protected citizens. As an elected body, you're expected to listen to all residents, not just those who agree with you. Tonight, I'm asking you to show us that our voices matter. work with us to find safeguards to protect vulnerable populations while respecting
families living nearby. That's what true leadership looks like and that's what our community deserves. I have a copy of our petition with 300 signatures. I'm happy to leave them with you and I will send them to you electronically as well. Thank you. The next speaker is Bob
Moran. My name is Robert Moran. I live in precinct 11. The board is looking at the victory programs proposed transitional residence for recovering drug addicts through rosecolored glasses. What could possibly go wrong? Everyone knows the
answer. That is the reason 300 members of the neighborhood have signed a petition opposing the facility. Listen to the people. It is their neighborhood. The neighborhood opponents are not a wellorganized special interest group like PAX. They are a diverse group of
people who have come together to protect their neighborhood. They are shocked the select board wants to shove this project down the throats of the people. That is why there clear and present danger. That is why the neighborhood
filled with elderly persons in near an elementary school is opposed to the facility. Increased crime. There's a strong correlation between drug use and crime. Probability. The residents will relapse. This is neither bias nor
stigmat stigmatization. It is data facts. Please protect the residents of the neighborhood. That should be the primary goal of the select board. red herrings. Ne neither the Fair Housing Act nor the Dover Amendment mandate that
the town assign its right to purchase to victory programs. Neither the report of the staff nor the advisory board mentioned that at all. If the town assigns its right to BCDC or elects not to exercise its rights to
purchase, this will not be a violation of the Fair Housing Act or the Dover Amendment. The town has a choice. Fiscal crisis. The town is projected to have a deficit of 7 million dollars next year. I just learned this six days ago. The
town cannot afford to keep 16 Williams off the tax roles. Two condominiums will generate $100,000 in tax revenue each year. Victory programs pilot payments will be peanuts, maybe $5,000 per year.
The town needs to expand revenue. It cannot afford to pass up putting 16 William Street on the tax roles. Hold their feet to the fire. The board has leverage. It has the upper hand in negotiating with
victory program. I was hopeful that the board would insert meaningful protections into the agreement. It did not. No ban on arsonists, no ban on sex offenders, no mandatory random drug testing, no one strike in, you're out, and reducing the minimum size
requirements of the lodge lodging house regulations, allowing more people. Competing sober houses such as Vanderberg Sober Living in Beverly and Marble have these restrictions, including bans on arsonists and sex offenders and
mandatory drug testing. 2021 murder at 6 Virginia Street. I just found out about about it today. Thank you. That concludes your time. Taylor never mentioned it. That concludes time for public comment at the beginning of the meeting.
Thank you, Tiffany. Next, let's go to the miscellaneous calendar. Sorry, I did want to just for the record know that there were two individuals who also signed up and that was um Carrie G and um the uh and Anthony B or G. Thank you.
Thank you. Okay, next our miscellaneous calendar. Let's start off with approving the meeting minutes from August 5th, 2025. Any corrections from the select board? Okay. I move approval of uh the minutes from August 5, 2025. All in favor,
please indicate by saying I. John Bencoyak, I. Paul Warren, I. David Pearlman, I. Michael Rubenstein, I. Chair votes I. Next, I'd like to take items 5B through 5M in omnibus fashion, unless someone would like to pull
something out for further discussion. Yes, I do have a question about 5D. Okay. regarding the uh credits change order for Gil Bane, right? That refers to Driscoll. Yeah. Right. I I do have a question about that. Okay. You want to
Sure. So, essentially, I'm a little bit concerned that offering a credit for unfinished work, what guarantee do we have that it'll be quality work? Who will be doing it? Who's going to follow up and making sure that happens? Why isn't it being completed by the original
contractor? Uh Melissa, do you have the answer or um Chaz is raising his hand? So in uh sorry, Chaz carried 10 time administrator and I apologize. Um the uh that my camera is off here. I'm trying to preserve bandwidth. Um so a credit
change order is historically for items that were not needed to be completed or they came in under budget. So, it's not that we're asking we're we're taking this money from Gilbane and giving it to another contractor. It's that it's being taken it's being taken out of their budget because it's not needed. So, um
that's not a situation where we're going to be um asking someone else to take to utilize that money. But it says for defective work. So, for unfinished punch list items, defective work and credit from insurance for
non-completed work. So, it's work they didn't it's either work they didn't do um or work that we asked them not to do or work that didn't necessarily meet our standards in either of those cases um you know regardless of whether or not Gilbane uh so Gilbane is
not going to complete either Gilbane will complete that work and not charge us or another contractor will complete that work but it's not a situation where um you know for if if we needed to complete that work at greater expense and there was a contractor fault involved then yes we would pursue the
contractor for difference between the amount of money we had to spend to complete the work and the amount of money that the contractor was due to have the work done for. I see a quizzical look on Michael Rubenstein's face. Uh so, Administrator Kerry, I'm I'm
confused now um as to whether or not this work uh is unfinished and due to be completed or there is no remaining work to be completed. Could you clarify? I am not sure on this particular set of work what whether it remains to be completed. I
would assume the answer is no. But I would defer to the project lead on that. Um I can ask Lap Yan to comment on that when he comes to speak uh about the um um about the other projects and I will make sure that that gets back to you. Okay. So you want to pull uh pull that
off the agenda? I'd like that. Okay. And um Lapanne is coming at our next meeting not tonight, right? That's correct. I believe. Okay. And I assume there's no um
deadline that has to be met on this. Oh, I don't believe so. Okay. Okay. We'll take that up at the next meeting. So, any other items? Thank you. Um, so I move of approval and I'm discussion of items 5B through 5 C
and 5E through 5M. All in favor, please indicate by saying I. John Vancoyak, I. Paul Warren, I. David Pearlman, I. Michael Rubenstein, I. And chair votes I. Okay. Next, our regular calendar.
Um, if I may, uh, could you individually announce the minutes that we're releasing for executive session for the public? Yes. Sorry. Okay. Okay. Okay. Uh so we're announcing
um the decision of town council with respect to the release of executive session meeting minutes from January 1st uh through July 1st, 2025 uh for purposes of disclosure. So um
January 14 we are releasing January 28th we are releasing. February 11, uh, we're withholding. March 25th, 2025, we're we are withholding page one and releasing page
two. April 1st, 2025, we're withholding. April 8, 2025, we are releasing page one and withholding page two. April 15, 2025, we are withholding. May 13, 2025,
we are withholding. June 4, 2025, we are withholding. June 10, 2025, we we are withholding page one and releasing page two. June 17, 2025, we are withholding. And June 24, 2025, we
are withholding. Any questions from the board on that? Okay. So, we've already voted that and uh let's go on to boards and commissions interviews. Um, we have one interview
for the housing advisory board. Uh, William Fagan. Is he in the Okay, come up to the m uh microphone or podium. And um before you start, I just want to, as I've done before, I'd like to begin with what we should be looking for in a
candidate for town boards and commissions. In general, I think each select board member should be looking for four things. Does the applicant have the skills and background that is required to be successful on the board or commission? Does the applicant have good ideas and perspectives on the work
of the board or commission? Does the applicant bring relevant diversity to the board or commission to ensure that all communities are represented in the work the board or commission does on behalf of the town? And four, can the applicant work effectively and
respectfully with other members of the board or commission and with the town staff that will be working uh with them uh to evaluate candidates. We'll gather information on these areas from the application submitted the interview and from town staff or current members of
the particular board or commission. So, introduce yourself with your name and why you're interested in being a member of the housing advisory board. William Figgan uh High Street Precinct 5. Could you walk talk directly into the mic? Sorry. Can you hear me? Yep.
Uh William Figgan precinct 5. I'm interested in in working on the housing advisory board. Uh because home uh I'm a lifelong resident essentially a lifelong resident of Brooklyn. Uh live in Brooklyn housing authority development
high street veterans. Uh, I've worked for a number of nonprofits that help people with rental assistance and homelessness prevention. Uh, I have a a very deep interest in town government. I have followed the annual
reports and financial plans for almost two decades. Uh, I believe I can contribute in areas uh such as research and ideas, maybe reaching out to benefit uh public
housing or uh maybe working with private foundations and other sources of of funding other than CDBG and and government. Uh, and in general, I'm a pretty easygoing person. I'm relatively easy to
work with. and just looking to make a contribution. Uh I seem to remember from your resume that you served as an administrative assistant for a bunch of a number of uh agencies. You um sort of described your
work and how that could be relevant to the housing advisory board. Well, I think I could bring um organization and detailed research. I think um I'm excellent with uh computer
applications. Um I have experience with grant applications and things like that. Uh but I think in another aspect I'm also a good team player and I've worked with
many different types of people, many different personalities. Uh I'm diplomatic and and easygoing and I believe uh that's essential to making a team work. Any other questions?
Um I think Michael um first of all, thank you very much for your service and also for your application. Um, I know that the housing advisory board has a lot of conversations about both policy uh and
about how to get input from the community and I'm wondering whether you could share any ideas about those two challenges of the uh housing advisory board. I believe
uh a website, a web portal would be a great conduit to gather information and people's opinions. Uh I think surveys, uh data collection, what issues are important to people,
whether they're in uh BHA properties or uh other types of low-income, middle inome housing. Um, thank you, John. Um, I'm just looking for some clarification. Um, and maybe Tiffany
could provide it or or maybe maybe others. Um, we have uh at least one position on housing advisory board that's reserved for H housing. We have two. We have two. And um is William applying for one of the tenant
positions? Correct. That's okay. That's the only vacancy on the housing advisory board right now. Yeah. Great. Great. Um so, uh if you don't do you call are you called Bill? Yeah. Okay, Bill. Thanks. Um
Bill, do you want to comment just in particular on you know the particular role that uh someone from the housing authority uh who's a tenant of the housing authority can play? Board. No, no, no. He he he's authority tenant.
Yeah. can play um as a member of the housing advisory board. Well, I think in terms of uh knowledge, I've gone through the Brookline school systems, the elementary school, the high school. Um I've watched the community
grow and change over the years. Um, and I think my knowledge and interest, uh, you know, ever since I I know it was built in 1950, my development, uh, it was the old Eliza White estate,
and I know it was laid out by the Mstead Company when it was designed, and that's one of the things that stuck out to me was that there's always been a large amount of green grass, trees, foliage.
Yeah. Um, but in terms of I think I'm very would be very good at at collecting opinions and and gathering information and being sort of a conduit between the tenants and the town.
Great. Thank you. Uh, Michael, sorry, David. I I notice in your application you talk about how you're interested in performing an in-depth analysis and study of the current housing stock and how to uh
expand affordable housing opportunities. Can you talk a little bit about what your uh past experience is in engaging in that effort or uh what it is specifically you would want to do to pursue that analysis? Uh
I believe conducting surveys again would be essential. Uh getting input from tenants um researching and and uh working with developing uh knowledge
of 40B programs. Uh I know there's that it is when a developer builds housing that a certain amount of um apartments have to be uh reserved for people within
a certain income. Um, I know perhaps pursuing things like that, uh, in terms of funding for the Brooklyn Housing Authority, uh, researching, reaching out to things, educational foundations for residents, for, uh,
children, for educational opportunities, technology, uh, those kind of things. Thank you, Paul. Thank you, Bernard. Uh, Bill, thank you for coming forward in your application.
Um, I want to ask you a question related to local preference. Um, local preference is a policy, I believe it's put forward by the the housing advisory board where a certain percentage of uh,
deedrestricted affordable units are reserved uh, or not reserved, but the first preference would be for Brookline residents. So, if it's a a senior that is looking for affordable housing, uh they would give a preference or or somebody else that lives in Brooklyn. Uh
some time ago, it used to be, I think, 75% Brookline preference and 25% outside of Brooklyn. Um a few years back that was reversed. Uh it's now 25% is a preference for for Brooklyn residents
and 75% for folks outside of Brooklyn. I'm curious, do you have a perspective on that? Do you think that's the right balance? Would you Is it something you'd want to look at? Do you think it should change? Uh, I believe that uh connections to the town should count
for something. Uh, I think if you're a town employee, if you're uh work for the the town of Brooklyn, uh, and that should count, it should carry some
sort of weight. Um I believe that um I myself am a four generations of my family have lived in Brooklyn and worked uh some for the town and I think that's
important although you do today have to uh allow people from outside the community uh and and just on on that note I notice that
we have to work to include those people who come to the comm to housing to Brooklyn from outside the community. Uh I think that's very important because I see a lot of disconnect you know what is town meeting what is the select board u
kind of educating uh and getting people involved in the process. Okay. Thank you Bill. Okay. Any other questions? Okay. Thank you, Bill. And u we will make our or have our vote at a later
meeting. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks, Bill. Thank you. The next uh alteration, this is a public hearing scheduled for 6:45. So, we're 10 minutes early. Why don't we go to the uh Well, the next item is a public hearing,
too. Climate leader communities. Yes. Let's go to the climate leader communities and then go back. Uh hopefully we'll catch up with the clock. Alexander is online. Alexander, I'm promoting you now. Alexander, you've been promoted. Alexander, are you there?
We might just need a moment then. What about item 15? I think we can take care of that one pretty quickly. The um Okay, select board sponsored warrant articles. Um, this is an item that we normally put in front of the board before the warrant closes just to make sure that there aren't any warrant articles that the board might be working
on with a committee that may be um filed on behalf of the board. Um, at this time I'm not aware of anything that would be filed outside the norm. Um, but just wanted to give that opportunity for the board to share anything that might be coming uh this fall. Anything
Paul? Oh, that's not your hand. I see Chaz is stands up. Yes. Go ahead, Chaz. Thank you. Um, I have two potential warrant articles that I wanted to discuss with the board. The first is a slight housekeeping warrant article and
it deals with the advisory committee. The advisory committee has a provision in its the bylaw that says that members of the advisory committee may not serve on a border committee that has commander uh uh control over public funds and that's to avoid the potential for
selfdealing or even the appearance of self-deing. Um the uh the moderator and the heads of the advisory committee have asked in response to us talking to them about this um that we uh offer an exception to that for serving on a
committee dealing with um a public building. Uh in particular this would affect uh school related projects. Um, historically, members of the advisory committee have served on school project committees, uh, and they've been valuable members. And so, both the
moderator and members of the AAC have asked that the select board endorse submitting a warrant article. Just to uh clarify that members of the advisory committee um while not being permitted typ typically to serve on bodies that have control of public funds may serve
on committees that um deal with building or renovation of public buildings. Okay. Any discussion? John? Uh this is a question for um our town administrator. My understanding is that um there is also uh a question that has
been raised as to whether there should be an exception for the council on aging um on the basis that it does not have fiduciary uh responsibilities. Is that being looked into as a possible additional aspect to this Warren
article? Um Mr. town administrator, if I can chime in here because we actually met with town council on this today um while you were out. Um and so um town counsel um uh the senior center director Emily
Williams and I met to discuss um whether there was true fiduciary responsibility involved with the council on aging. Um and based on that information, town council is working on sending out um an adjusted determination there. Um town council is online if town council wishes
to speak. So, um, Joe Calaman, town council, uh, I agree with everything Chipman said. We had a meeting about this, uh, earlier today, and I'll be notifying the individual about email later. I'm sorry. You you'll be notifying who?
The the individual involved who serve spoke on the council of agent advisor. Okay. And um I guess you and Chaz will sort of coordinate what type of warrant articles coming out of that discussion. Okay, Chaz, I'm sorry, Paul, you have your
hand up. Yes. Uh thank you, Bernard. So I just I want to just explore this concept of kind of the conflict. Um so the advisory committee has significant influence over the budget. They submit the budget at
town meeting uh including uh the CIP uh which you know was included for for buildings and and maintenance of buildings and allocation of funds for grounds associated with the buildings. Um and we just recently saw in the past
year or two significant advocacy and conflict out of the advisory committee related to school buildings and school grounds. Um, you know, I I I think that's a healthy um barrier, frankly,
uh, between the advisory committee and comm other boards that or working groups or whatever that allocate funds. Um, you know, this is it. I think it's I think we really should not touch that. Um because once you start coming up with an
exception, it's going to be first it's going to be buildings, then it's going to be parks and it's going to be and suddenly the advisory committee has populated you know many of these uh infrastructure uh committees. So I I'm I'm opposed. I'm not supportive of of
this type of change. Um you want to serve on the advisory committee, you have tremendous influence and input into the budget uh and the CIP and the Warren articles. If you want to serve on buildings and parks and other things, then serve on buildings and parks and other things, but I don't believe we
should be allowing uh both. Okay. Thank you. Um someone have a hand up here? Well, I'll put my hand up. Oh. Um and I I'm just wondering if maybe there's a little bit of uh misunderstanding uh in front of us right now as to building. We have a building
commission. Uh we and then we have um school building project committees um and we have the advisory committee and uh as I understand it the possibility here and that's all it is is a possibility is that there will be a um
suggested warrant article to deal with uh making an exception for advisory committee members to serve on building project committees which essentially you know once a building project has been launched. Um the building project
committee meets periodically to hear reports on the con project on the pro excuse me progress of construction, any issues that arise, you know, um any any lag in meeting timets, any items that go
over budget. But um you know expertise that is part of one's responsibilities on the advisory committee having to do with appropriations of funds for uh building maintenance and upkeep and
future um capital projects. Um I is important and and it's also one of the key pieces of expertise that we hope to bring to school building project committees. But I'm not sure there's a conflict of interest in those two
things. That's just my opinion. Paul might have a different opinion and that's why we need to discuss this before it becomes a Warren article. Yeah. So John, is it okay if I speak? Go ahead. Thank you. Uh John, I I appreciate that that there is uh there is expertise on
the advisory committee and that's one of the reasons why we we asked them to be serve on the advisory committee. But the advisory committee has tremendous opportunity to show up at any public meeting, provide that expertise through public comment or the advisory committee
could hold a a a subcommittee or an ad hoc subcommittee on a specific topic to give specific feedback, but but to actually sit on the body that's going to be making the decision. This isn't just tracking progress. they make decisions on scope, size, uh you know, budgetary,
uh, you know, input, uh, decision- making. Um, I think it's just there's too much there, uh, to be on both the the committee that is is appointed in voting to do something and then also on the advisory committee that would then vote again to to fund something. I I
think it's too much of a conflict for certainly for an appointed position that's not elected. Yeah. John, may may I suggest that we could resolve this for now um by uh uh Paul will
forgive me by by by remaining sort of agnostic on on whether we think such an article should be adopted by town meeting but um this is on our agenda uh in case you know there are proposals we haven't
heard yet that might be come from town administration And I don't think we're ever going to get to have a full discussion of this unless town administration brings us a proposal, you know, with the case uh being made as to why a possible
exception should be made for advisory committee members to serve on building project committees. And if we think as a result of that being brought to us, we can then decide if we think it's not a good idea. Um, but I I would hate to see it just sort of stopped cold um when the
town administrator maybe has a good idea for uh why why there should be at least consideration given to this um at at the upcoming town meeting. Can we wait can we um put together a placeholder warrant article? So, because we're not meeting before the
warrant closed, we can we can file it and if you don't want to have it included in the warrant, we can pull it before you execute. That's probably a good compromise. Okay. Time to discuss this. Yeah. I mean, you know, f So, first of
all, once you file it, anybody can move it. So, you know, I'm you're asking staff to spend time on something. And I and I think that, you know, the purpose of this discussion to see if we want them to spend time to file an article on our behalf. The town administrator just
said we were asked by so and so to come and ask if the select board would like to put this on the warrant. So it is up to the select board. Um and again I I I think the second you put it on uh any can move it. And I don't think the select board should sponsor such a thing. It's it's I think it's there's a
significant conflict uh between serving on the advisory committee and serving on any other body that allocates funds. Yeah. If if we don't do something, it's like a veto of the idea, a veto of John's concerns. Although I would say it's possible for
others others could put this on the warrant. Right. This is the another reason why we're having this discussion now. Um, you know, it's certainly possible that if the select board's not in alignment on this and we don't want to, you know, we don't want to rush into it. Um, we can obviously work with if
other people propose it, you know, town council can look at the language, um, you know, evaluate it for as to form and substance and then it would be on the warrant. Someone else proposed it. It's just a question of who the who the, um, sponsoring party is. So, the select board need not submit this if someone
else does. Um, so you don't you wouldn't be vetoing it now. Um, it's just a question of whether or not you want to be the ones to submit it, which is absolutely your prerogative. Um, um, I just have a question about the
process for clarification. Um, if I understood uh, Deputy Administrator Goff's comments, the select board has an option if the town administrator presents a
warrant article for us to dis for us to discuss it in a meeting and decide whether or not to put it on the warrant. And if we decide not to put it on the warrant, then would anybody else be able to move
that article from the warrant or would they have to have filed it independently of the select board? So, the select board could choose before they execute the warrant if they don't want the article on, they could they could remove it. that that doesn't mean
that someone else might file the same or similar article in you know worrying that that might happen. They may want to just do that just to be sure that that an article is on the warrant. Right. So I I believe based on that that member Warren's concern that if we put
the article on the warrant um that's that we could decide not to move it but somebody else could is obiated by the fact that we don't have to actually put it on the warrant. You think I think the fact that we have that we won't be meeting
again before the warrant closes means we put it on the warrant. Right. Yeah. That's how I understand it. Um if I may, I just want I offer a little background as to how how this came about as I understand it because I've been getting calls about this. Um
uh it was the select board or at least it was our T town administrative staff and good for them. um in the course of reviewing appointments to the advisory committee to all of the what we call BBC or BCC's boards, committees and
commissions um came across um a provision of the advisory committee bylaw that raised a question as to whether there should be notifications sent to certain advisory committee members that if they served on the advisory committee, they could no longer
serve um on on certain other committees. And that happened and and and it was initiated in the town administrator's office and the select board oversees the operations of the town administrator's office and we've now been approached or
at least I have by several people who say do you really want to do this? Do you really, you know, can can you talk to the administration, try to work out something? And good for the administration. They have um been on the case and they have seen the need if we're going to work out anything, it's
going to require a town meeting um action, at least in the case of the advisory committee. Uh and I I think we need to just give that the go-ahhead tonight and then we'll get to discuss the merits of the issue later. But um
it's clearly of concern to people who are serving currently um at least in one case, you know, on a school building project committee and on the advisory committee. And um uh I I think we owe them an explanation as to why we would or would not go ahead with some kind of
warrant article that would repair this um because because people have been serving on these school building project committees even though they served on the advisory committee in the past. So we do need to get this stuff squared. Well, John, I'm not aware of it.
David, just Paul, if I could try to understand where you're coming from a bit better. So, are is your position essentially that it's an inherent conflict to be both on advisory committee and on any other commission that's making a financial decision.
Yeah. You're you're putting too much hands into people who are appointed and not elected. Okay. So, if they're serving on the advisory committee, they submit the budget. They vote on budget line items. They vote on the CIP. They vote on warrant articles that impact the budget. If you then have that member
who's on that very very powerful committee, this the advisory committee also serving on a board or commission or even an ad hoc, you know, committee for a building or a anything. They're now double dipping. Um I think it's I think
it's a significant conflict. And you know, there's we have plenty of expertise in Brooklyn. Uh the reason why everybody should you go to a meeting and you see the same faces over and over and over is because we turn the same people. Um you know there's tre there's a tremendous amount of uh capability
within the town of Brooklyn uh for expertise. Um I just again I see conflict um I've seen it I' I've watched it uh sitting in this chair uh for the for the past two years. So I I I'm I'm not supportive of of us putting the
warrant on the article, and if such a article was put on, I wouldn't support it for those reasons. I I appreciate that concern. I share it. For me, though, it's a question of line drawing because I think we have other similar potential conflicts where somebody can be both a town meeting
member and sit on one of these commissions. And as a town meeting member, you're ultimately responsible for the budget, but you're also making recommendations on your commission. So, we have a lot of that. It's not just advisory committee. So, I hear what you're saying, Paul, but I think if
we're going to address this, and this is also to your point, John, we might want to consider broadening it to not just advisory committee, but anyone who has potential overlap. Ju briefly, Bernard, David, a town meeting member is not equivalent to an
advisory committee member. A town meeting member can vote. They can file an amendment, but they do not submit the budget, right? They don't they can't call a public meeting or a public hearing to propose a specific change to a line item, right? That that's that's
totally at the advisory committee. Um the advisory committee has tremendous influence and power over the finances of the town both operationally and capital and if they're going to serve on the independent advisory committee which is supposed to be independently advising
town meeting to have them also serving on other committees that allocate funds that that they may have to vote on and approve at the advisory committee. They're no longer independent. So again, I think there's a it's an inherent conflict. Um, and I think it's
a good uh policy that is already within our bylaws. It says that they can't serve on something where money is being allocated. And shame on us for not catching it early. Jazz, you want to flag for because I think David raises a good point that I think the law talks a little bit about. Town
meeting members and advisory committee members are treated differently under the law. Um, under the conflict of interest law. Under the conflict of interest law, advisory committee members, finance committee members are typically considered to be employees as far as that is concerned and that they
have a fiduciary, an independent fiduciary responsibility to the town. And so they are treated differently when it comes to what they can and can't do. Town meeting members are treated more like members of the public. Um there are some restrictions in what they can and can't do, but they're much more limited
than in the example of an advisory committee member. It's the difference between the appointment to uh a smaller public body that has fiduciary responsibility and then the broader legislative body. Um under state law the
broader legislative body is just not treated as um stringently. I think a part of that is because in some communities they have an open town meeting. you know, if you vote at an open town meeting, um, you know, and you know, if you vote for something, for example, that would have a positive impact on, you know, your own property,
um, are you creating a conflict of interest and so forth? And so for representative count meetings like what we have, the state has looser restrictions on what you can and can't do with the advisory committee, it is stricter. Where does state law stand on this? Because it sounds like the proposal
would be for us to exempt advisory committee members. It sounds like that's the direction this would go in. So, does state law opine on this? State law does say that you if you have a conflict or the appearance of a conflict that you can't do this. Brookline bylaw has taken a step
further. We we go beyond what the state conflict of interest law requires and says that you can't serve at all if you're an advisory committee member and you also want to be on a committee that then has control over public funds. Um, and so that's in our bylaws. It's not in
the state's laws. And so we could loosen that. But even then, advisory committee members would still be bound by the state conflict of interest law, which would prohibit them from, for example, taking a vote in something they had a direct interest on, even if they served on such a committee.
Uh John, go ahead. Just to uh get us past this, uh I I I would like to propose um that we do request that the town administrative staff uh put a placeholder on the town meeting warrant um and then bring to us their
recommendation as to whether action is required that would deal with the question of whether um serving on a school building project committee is um a fiduciary conflict for members of the advisory committee and should we stick
with the bylaw as written or shall we, you know, possibly amend the bylaw to allow for participation on school building project committees of members of the advisory committee. That's my proposal. Can I Yeah, raise one point, Bernard. Uh, so I just
what John's requesting is that we file warrant article, right, and put it on the warrant. Now, we now we would have to execute the warrant. we could for us to say no, we're not going to now approve something on the warrant. We've already filed it. Um, you know, we essentially John is
asking us to vote tonight to put something on the warrant without even seeing it because we're not meeting again before the warrant closes. Melissa, so I think um as a another way to approach it, what we could do is um and we've done this before, we can we can have the warrant and and have the
articles filed as is and then we can create an article but not file it. And then when you are looking to execute the warrant, if you want to insert it, you can open the warrant back up, insert it, and then close the warrant and then execute it. Um it's, you know, that way
you know for sure that it's not filed and then you'll have a vote on whether or not you want to put it in. Um that's the, you know, that's something that we've done before with um you know, an article that may have been filed incorrectly. You want to make a correction, we can, you know, that's the mechanism that we use to correct
articles as well. I assume we could also do a special town meeting within the spe within the special, right? Yeah, probably not. Yes. Well, you know, on that on that topic, um, you know, there there is a potential that we will be asking for a special
within the special. Um, one for the budget amendment. I think, you know, it depends on the volume that we're going to be getting for warrants. Um, we have segregated the budget amendment article um when we've needed to make sure that we have, you know, closed business pretty pretty swiftly. Um but then also
in talking with the planning director about the ADU work that's going on right now. Um I don't think that the working group is quite ready to file a warrant article, but they may be ready in another month or so. Um and you know, as long as they feel that they've done sufficient engagement in order to be
able to tie it within the existing special town meeting, um that might be something that we'll we'll look into in October. Okay. So, so Chaz, under that proposal, Chaz would put together um the idea and um if if we're willing to after
discussing it at our next meeting, willing to include it on the warrant, we can open up the warrant. And that seems like an easy or good solution without, you know, committing ourselves, you know, early. Does it require a vote right now? We can put a vote on the war on the the
docket when we are ready to execute the warrant. We'll have that as another Yeah. Okay. Okay. It doesn't require a vote now um other than to just ask that that if everyone would agree to that. Yeah, we typically don't take votes for this particular item. It's really just a way to make sure that there's nothing
floating out there that you aren't all aware of. Okay. Paul, you okay with that? Uh that I think three of my colleagues, at least three of my colleagues are, so yes, we don't need to vote on it. Well, not the vote, but the approach.
Yeah. As long as as long as there we have a a place to make a decision to go forward or not. Okay. Right. Sounds good. Yeah. Michael, I just want to be clear that the thing that we're asking the town administrator to produce is a warrant article for us
to consider as opposed to like an idea or proposal, but it would be formalized and an explanation or justification for it. Yeah. Yeah. Great. Okay. Okay. You had another one. One more. Um uh and this one also I
think can follow the same pattern if that's what the board would like to do just to have some more breathing room. Um currently you have a human resources uh board that uh the town has a human resources board which is a creature of the bylaws that create that serves two
primary purposes right now. The first is it approves alterations to job descriptions and titles. Um the other thing it does is it um serves as an intermediate step in the grievance process in all of our union contracts. Uh that is typically a grievance will go
first to the department head then to the HR board and finally to binding arbitration. Um there have been uh the H the members of the HR board have served uh really admirably uh some of them for decades. Um and we are now at a point where we are down one member of the five
member board um and another member is preparing to retire. Um we have advertised that opening on that five member board for a year and have gotten no qualified applicants. The qualifications as you might understand are stringent. uh you know the professional requiring them to be an HR
professional, requiring them to live within the town, requiring them to have that level of expertise. Often what we found is that when we approach people asking their interest to serve on the AHR board, they feel they're conflicted out uh because they might have business before the town or they might, you know,
for example, if they're labor attorneys, they might represent an employee at some point uh and so they feel that they can't serve on the HR board. So we are in danger of about of losing a quorum on the HR board and given that the work
that the board does while significant um is work that can be done in terms of the uh job descriptions uh by the HR department and ultimately by the select board since it is you who ultimately approves authorizations to hire um and
that the opt uh interim step or the intermediate step in the grievance process can be handled more efficiently. One of the complaints that we have gotten from the unions is that it takes too long to get in front of the HR board. Um we are considering uh with
your permission filing an article to uh disband the HR board uh and move that function inhouse uh so that we don't run the uh risk of h losing that functionality um if we lose a quorum which seems we are likely to do in the
next year or so. Um, and so I wanted to put that in front of you. And I would suggest given the kind of the the breadth of the last discussion that we have a similar uh uh path forward here where we don't file that but we prepare an article for your discussion and we
notice the public that we have we're considering this so that you have the opportunity to hear about it before you decide whether or not it goes on the warrant. Okay. Okay. Say about me. Sounds like a plan. Good. Okay. Um, David, could you take over for a
second? Sure. All right. So, now we will move to a public hearing alteration of premises. Question of approving the application for an alteration of licensed premises for an all alcohol restaurant license
for D2 Restaurant LLC doing business as ESM at 1306 Beacon Street. The alteration of premises is to construct a roof deck to include 1,000 square feet with 45 occupancy and is seeking to amend its license to include the deck
under the description of licensed premises. Good evening. Good evening. Hi, Stephanie Budro from Arlaw. With me is David Ing. Sorry. Can you just be sure to speak directly into the mic? Thank you. Sure. Is that better? Yes.
Okay. uh Stephanie Budro from our law on behalf of D2 restaurants LLC doing business as Esmemes. With me is David Ing the manager of record for Esmemes and the manager of the LLC. Um David has over 30 years of experience in the food and beverage industry and has brought
his wealth of experience to Brooklyn where he's been working since 2007. Um tonight we're on the board uh on Esme's request to alter the premises for the purpose of adding a new roof deck at the premises. Originally Hopsson Scotch, the license he changed the name of the
restaurant to Esmemes about a year ago. Uh the restaurant was named after Mr. Ang's daughter and to quote the owner was reimagined to create a place that felt like home any time of day. Restaurant now serves a wide selection of lunch and dinner cuisine with craft
cocktails, beer, wine, as well as daily tea time. The idea of the roof deck was conceived over seven years ago, and the process to get the owner here today has been a bit of a journey. plans were drafted, approved, codes changed requiring an additional bathrooms. Um,
and there were other delays, but ultimately the town approved the revised plans for a 30 by30 roof deck, and construction of the roof deck is now near completion. Um, as amended, the restaurant would consist of a two-story commercial premises with total interior
of 4,400 square ft plus a 1,000 ft roof deck. The first floor is a bar, dining area, and kitchen. Second floor is a small dining area, small kitchen and the roof deck will be located adjacent to the on the second floor. Total occupancy
with the roof deck will be 134 with 45 occupancy on the roof. Um the legal ad was placed in the Herald on August 8th. Notice to all of the butters was provided. Um if there are concerns about noise, the closest residents are a building that are six to seven
storefronts away and across the street from the dry cleaner. So, we don't think noise will be an issue. Um, notably, this roof deck is a bit revolutionary for the town because it will be the very first roof deck restaurant in Brooklyn. Uh, recently Brooklyn's economic
development leazison came to visit the store and we're very pleased with the roof deck and plan to use Esmuse as a barometer for consideration of other roof decks in the town. Um, in close, we request approval of the town of the license amendment and that it be submitted to the ABCC for their approval
as well. Uh, and again, David is here for any questions the board might have. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Any questions, John? Um, thanks very much. Uh, and, uh, I think we're all excited about this proposal, but there's a couple things
about it I'm not 100% sure of. Uh I is there going to be access to the roof deck from the second floor? In other words, you don't climb up to the roof of the second floor. You you go step out. Correct. The stairs there's the staircase going right upstairs and you just go right outside.
You can go right outside. Correct. Um and it does your license um allow for the possibility of you know music to be or we currently have music but we intend absolutely intend on being a conservative roof deck. We're moving
away from the bar liquor business, if you will, just by need if if you will, over the last five years, moving more towards food. And my wife is a classically trained chef. She's got a she's a undergrad and graduate of uh uh Johnson Wales, and
she's cooked around the world, a year and a half in Hawaii, three years in France to the FX. So, we're moving more towards the food aspect of it and not the whole bar aspect of it. Yeah, if that makes sense. But but in terms of uh music um you put you planning on there
being like performances on the deck? Not performances. No. Uh or or music piped into the deck just like Yeah. If uh surrounding uh speakers if you will. Yeah. And I wonder does the current license allow for that or would there have to be an amended license? If I can chime in here, assistant
administrator for operations Tiffany Oliva. Yes. We would need the applicant to revise the entertainment license to include the outdoor deck for any music to be outside. And I I'm Tiffany, I'm sorry, but I didn't clearly understand what you said. Oh, sorry. I said that very quickly. Um, yes. Uh, so the current entertainment
license wouldn't apply to the outdoor area. They would need to revise that to include the outdoor area and that music would be there. And so that is not in front of us right now. No, that would have to go to the licensing panel. But we did want to bring normally this would have gone forward to the licensing panel first and then to you all. but we wanted to bring
it directly to you all because it's the first application of um a roof deck and because we had interest among the board um in knowing more about roof deck roof deck opportunities. Okay. And so for now um if we say yes to this tonight, will that include um they
have permission to serve food on the roof deck um uh or will that also await further uh permit? No, this would be the only um application for that aspect. It's just the entertainment piece. It would allow for serving of food but would not allow for there to be, you know, music piped out to the people on
Correct. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Thanks. Yeah. Would it be possible because the entertainment is not public notice to apply make a motion now to have that voted on and I will submit a application
uh following the hearing? Uh the entertainment license actually doesn't require a public notice component to it. It's only the all alcohol. Right. Right. Right. So that's what I mean. Could could the board vote on it now and then we would submit the application tomorrow? I I don't think it's our practice to
vote on something sight unseen, but it's something that we could certainly take up in the near future. Thank you. Yeah, but I and I feel like there needs to be uh a regular Wednesday meeting of the licensing review that the public can know that there is going to be
consideration given to allowing, you know, entertainment in the form of music. um on the roof deck so that anybody wants to have us comment on it can have a comment. We don't um for entertainment licenses like this, we don't typically require an utter notification. Um the way they
receive public notice on an entertainment license is because it's been posted to the licensing panel agenda, right? Um I would suggest probably having the applicant submit it directly to the select board. Um because it sounds like there's some urgency in the request here. Um and the licensing panel meeting
is tomorrow and so um there wouldn't uh be enough time to get that onto the agenda for tomorrow. Also, town administrator Kerry has his hands raised. Um and I'll allow him to chime in because he does normally That was exactly it was exactly what I was going to raise. Unfortunately, um even though right we don't typically
allow it's not a public hearing an entertainment license is not a public hearing, we do still have to notice them. So we couldn't take you couldn't take that vote tonight. Um and we couldn't notice it for tomorrow. Uh but the board's next meeting will be on September 9th, I believe, and we can put that on the board's agenda for then.
That's perfect. Thank you. Thank you. A question that I have, uh is there a mechanism for the mobility impaired to get to your roof? We have we have a elevator. There's a absolutely it's all it's all been considered just elevator up there. The pathway is absolutely uh ABA compliant
the whole way through. All right. Thank you. And Paul's had his hand raised. Yep. Uh thank you, David. Um and first thank you for your investment long investment in Brookline. It's appreciated. Um hopefully you're getting the support that you need. I I my understanding so you've been in operation right as is for
a while. So Esme is a year old. Half it's a year old. Yeah. Half of was 12 years old. So uh this this round of it and we had the liquor store next door for a little six or seven years before that. So I've been in town on that block for about 20 years now. Um
okay. So I guess my my question is um so have you closed? Is the restaurant currently open or not? No, it's not not currently right now it's um not open not not operating. Okay. And how long has it not been open? Uh all the way through through uh July
and then uh the first week of August. So now we're now where we are right now in the place is every it's just the outdoor deck needs to be rectified. Yeah. So, so I guess my only my my qu I'm going to ask the town administrator this question. Chaz, I know that when
when things stop functioning, u how long do they can they not function before they um have to kind of relic though? Is and does this count? Is that what we're doing now or? It's a good it's a good question. The answer is uh not in this case, right? It really is case by case. For example, if
somewhere someone closes their operations because they're remodeling the the structure like they're doing here, that's not grounds for taking the license. If if there is no economic activity at all, if someone is sitting on the license and has no intention of using it, that's a pocket license and that's something we go after.
Yeah, I wasn't suggesting taking the license. I just I knew that sometimes it could trigger some building code stuff, which I have some experience with that around a corner for me. Um Okay. No, that's great. And so, just to clarify, you're adding 45 additional seats with the roof deck in addition to the
capacity. Correct. And we took away some seats from the interior and we added a bathroom upstairs as well. Okay, great. Okay, thank you so much. Continue. All right, any other questions by board members?
All right, seeing none, this is a public hearing. So, is anyone uh signed up to speak for this? There is no one who signed up in advance. Is there anyone online who wishes to speak on the alteration of premises? Um, if so, please raise your hand using the raise the hand feature or if in the room, please make your
presence known. All right, we have about 14 individuals in the room, 34 online, and no one is indicating their desire to speak. All right, so how about discussion by the board? What do we think? Sounds good to me. Yeah, it's a great uh restaurant.
May I say a few few words as well? I'm so sorry. It's it's been a long haul and sometimes I my wife questions if I'm sane or not for even going through the process and u somewhere along the way you know with the wonderful help of Bobby's office and the town itself and you know all the all the um economic
leaison and stuff it was a very much a use it or lose it moment right it was one of those moments of like let's either we're going to build it or let's let it go because it's driving us crazy and now that all the technicalities are out of the way we are hoping to bring a very wonderful experience to the Now, you know, conservative, very wonderful
dinner just for the Yeah. And our neighbors as well. And I know I drive I was driving my curtain my neighbors crazy for a few weeks. I told him, "Please hold tight. Please hold tight. It'll be great for all of us. We'll bring more more traffic to this corner." And literally transparently, that is the intention here. Yeah, that's great.
And you have some uh spectator support, too. Appreciate it. Thank you. I really appreciate it. Come up to the microphone if you want to speak. This is Emma in Brooklyn citizen residence. I'm sorry. Um I might miss
it. Um the where is the where locate the restaurant? Right across the street. Right across the street from Trader Joe's. Can you speak into the mic? Right in Coolage Corner. Right across the street from Trader Joe's. It's called Esme. It used to be called Hops and Scotch.
The address is 1306 Beacon Street. Yeah. Yeah. All right. So I move. That's right. Please. All right. So, I move that we approve the application for alteration of a licensed premises for the all alcohol
restaurant license for D2 restaurant LLC. All in favor? All in favor? I. Bernard. Uh, John. I. Paul. I. Michael. I. And I also vote yes. Congratulations.
I hope to make you guys proud. Honestly. Okay. Okay, I'm back. Uh, next 7 PM noise bylaw waiver public hearing. Uh, Amy English um is online. Amy,
you've been promoted. Good evening everyone. Um, this is a request for a waiver of the um the nighttime work bylaw. Um it's the project is essentially a rectangular
rapid flashing beacon. You guys have seen with the the flashing on either side of the crosswalk um installation on Beacon Street near Strathmore. Um the reason we have to do this is um the parts of the construction that involve work really close to the track uh the
MVTA Green Line track uh they want us to do that work when it's when the train is not in operation. Um and so that is you know a very small window of time and that is at night. So uh that's the reason for the request. Uh we do actually have we should have two representatives here from the contractor
um who will be uh performing the work as well if you have specific questions. Any questions from the board? Oh, I see your hand up. Yeah, thank you Bernard. Uh hi Amy. Just a quick question of the construction work. Are we jackhammering or what's the
what is the why do we need a not a noise bylaw waiver? Um so there will be an excavator mini excavator will be part of um the work that'll happen overnight. Um and then some trucks truck noises that kind of thing. No jackhammers.
Correct. Okay. Okay. Any other questions? Okay. This is a public hearing. Tiffany, open the public hearing. Now that the chair has opened the public hearing, there are no individuals who signed up in advance. Is there anyone
online who wishes to speak on this public hearing? If so, please raise your hand using the raise the hand feature. Uh or if online, please make your presence known. There are approximately 20 people in the room and 35 online and
no one is indicating their desire to speak. Okay, then I will close the public hearing um and close all public hearings and um any further discussion by the board. Okay.
So, so I'm I'm just interested in knowing um I'm not sure if this is specific to the noise pilot waver, but I'm seeing this is happening over basically the next two weeks. Um, is there any risk of uh during the intermediate days any sort of debris or
danger or concern about the site because that's a pretty heavily traffked area? Um, no, I don't think so. Um, it, you know, shouldn't be too different from some of the sidewalk work that we see in other places. um just, you know, putting
putting the the pole into the into the sidewalk and then also the um getting the power there and all those things. But yeah, it shouldn't be super disruptive. Thank you. Well, yeah, Amy, um just curious, how many uh
public notices were mailed to a Butters? The number I don't need the exact number, but I mean, was it five? Was it 25? Um I'm not 100% sure that the number uh but we usually do yeah like out like I think
a block or two in either direction. Okay. But those notices did go out. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Mhm. Okay. Any other discussion from the select board? If not, I move approval of the uh noise bylaw waiver request from
the Department of Public Works um related to rectangular rapid flashing beacons on beacon at Strathmore Street inbound uh by Dgo Electrical Construction Corp. All in favor, please indicate by saying I. John Vancoyak. Hi.
Paul Warren. Hi. David Pearlman. Hi. Michael Rubenstein. Hi. Chair. Thank you, whoever that was. Thank you. Okay. Um, next, climate leader
communities. I see that our um, director of sustainability, um, Alexander Veio is at the mic. Please tell us what this is about and what you want us to do. All right. Good evening everyone. Alexander Veio. I'm the director of sustainability and natural resources.
Um, so I'm here this evening to give you an overview of a new state program. It's called the climate leaders communities program. Uh this is really just an overview this evening. There's no action needed from the board tonight and it's just forformational purposes. Um but as you'll see as I walk through the presentation I'll be coming back to you
all with um some uh requests for action um in the future in order to meet the program requirements. And so um wanted to give you a little bit of background and an opportunity to ask any questions before we went too far down a path for the program requirements. Thank you.
All right. So um the climate leaders communities program uh was launched in 2025 by the uh Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources and really this program builds upon the green communities program. That's another state program which uh Brookline is a
member of and has been for a number of years. Uh the goal of the program is to provide a framework for communities to meet climate action goals specifically to help um communities uh move towards the statemandated goals around uh clean
energy and energy reduction. So right now um the program has uh just uh accepted its first group of participants that included 19 different communities. Um they had another application round that closed um I believe is closing this month. Um, and then the next round will
be in December. And so, um, as you'll see, there are some requirements that we have to meet in order to be eligible to apply for the program. Uh, which is why I'm suggesting that Brookline target their application for the December 2025 deadline. So, why do we want to be a part of this
program? Why does it matter? Um, money. That's why it matters. Uh so this program um becoming a certified climate leader community opens up some resources, technical resources um and grant funding for any participating community. Um and those grant funds can
help support um numerous different uh climate priorities that are part of the state's plan but also align with Brookline's goals as well. So that includes energy efficiency measures, uh heating and cooling projects, energy management services, uh local energy
generation, that would be uh rooftop solar panels for example, um and and many other things. So as you all know, Brookline's currently developing our climate our updated climate action and resiliency plan. And um just looking into my crystal ball, I think a lot of
the goals that'll be coming out of that plan are going to be dependent on us um having some resources to implement those. Um and this state program really aligns very closely with some of the actions that I think we'll are are starting to develop in the the planning
process. Um so essentially in order for us to meet our climate goals um we really need to be looking um at different places for funding and this is a new opportunity that we can pursue. In particular uh the GL the grants that are available for climate leaders
communities essentially um fall into two different buckets. One they're calling a decarbonization technical assistance grant. So this is really money that would allow us to hire vendors that then could do assessments to determine um uh what kind of documentation we may need
to move forward with any sort of construction project. That could be design and engineering type of documentation. Could also be assessments for you know which projects are going to give us the best return on our investment. Um which projects are going to be u the most uh u helpful for us to meet our climate goals moving forward
and the most economical. Um then in there there are also grant funds available up to a million dollars uh for projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions for municipal operations. And so I should clarify that these grants are specifically for municipal operations. Um that means our building
stock, our fleet in particular. Um so that could be anything from renewable energy generation on site, installation of heat pumps, um any other uh electrification measures that really move us towards our decarbonization goals. Um essentially moving us off our
reliance on fossil fuels. The requirements um for uh participation in the program is uh that and as you'll see here, many of these we already have met and then a couple we have in progress. So we have to be a green community in good standing of which we are. Um as I mentioned that's the kind
of precursor program to the climate leader community program also a state program. We have to have created some sort of local body that advises us on clean energy and climate activities. Brookline has that. It's our zero emissions advisory board or ZAB. And
then we have to demonstrate a municipal decarbonization commitment. And so, um, we have a couple of different places that we've done that through various warrant articles and, um, different policies, all that focus on our effort to be a, uh, net zero community
currently, um, by 2040. The fourth requirement is that we develop a municipal decarbonization roadmap. And so, that's one of the ones that we are working on right now. Uh, the municipal decarbonization roadmap, we actually applied for a grant to help uh, do that analysis and that's
underway. I'll talk a little bit more about that in a minute. We also have to adopt a zero emission vehicle first policy. Um again, this is something that's in process. We already have a fleet purchase policy here in Brooklyn. Um and this would really be tweaking
that um uh just so that it aligns more closely with the state's goals for zero emission vehicles first. And then uh we have to adopt the specialized stretch any energy code which Brookline has also already done. So, um, we're well on our way and the other two that we requirements that we need to meet to be
eligible for the program application are in process. So, I'll talk a little bit more about those two. So, the municipal decarbonization roadmap, as I mentioned, our sustainability and natural resources division did receive um apply for and receive a grant to help us create this
road map. Uh, the goal is essentially to look at our building stock, particularly our top emitters, um, and help us figure out uh, which ones we should target. um to move the community towards um electrified buildings and what that
process would look like uh and some set some realistic benchmarks along the way. So that analysis is currently underway right now and we anticipate having uh the road map available um in just a couple months. Then the zero uh excuse me the electric
vehicle purchase policy which um prioritizes um a zero emission vehicle first uh is really uh something that we have some language around this already in our vehicle purchase policy. Um we just need to put strengthen that a little bit so it lines more closely with
what the state's looking for. Um and that isn't to say that every vehicle that's purchased uh needs to be an electric vehicle. it is um based off of what is available on the market and what is feasible for our operation. So the state understands that in some cases for
example a firetr um that you know we don't have u uh alternatives out there right now um that still meet the requirements for that vehicle to to perform its everyday function. Um so from my perspective um from what I've seen over the last few years we're
actually really doing this in practice. Um we've really pushed forward um a lot of uh EV purchases over the last few years in our fleet wherever practical um and so I think uh this will be an easy step for us to put into practice.
So, what does the timeline look for this? Um, essentially, uh, providing you all this overview this evening so that I can return in the fall with that municipal decarbonization roadmap as I talked about, as well as the zero emission vehicle policy. Um, and then
the application deadline, which would require that we have all six of those requirements met, will be due in December of this year. Um, hopefully that application would be successful and approved. So then we would be eligible for some of those um grants that I was talking about um by next spring, summer
depending on the application deadline for those. Um so we'd be looking to to turn that application in this year and that aligns quite nicely as well with our climate action resiliency plan timeline and that we are hoping to have a finalized plan um in 2026 uh which will help outline you know some of our
priorities and in particular guide which of those uh grant proposals we would want to push forward through the climate leaders program. Uh, so that's all I have for you this evening and I'm happy to take any questions on the program. What is that?
That was not me. Okay, I just wanted to sort of hint to someone to turn off their whatever that is. Uh, Paul. Uh, thank you Bernard. Thank you Alexandra. A quick question about the road map, the decarbonization road map. Are there any other requirements
associated with that? either a time frame or a percentage of your buildings um or is it just to have a road map? It's to have a road map that does um take an approach that basically whenever there are any um triggering events uh which the state classifies as you know
uh you're already going to be replacing a roof or you're replacing an HVAC system in the building um that you're using those as the impetus um for removing away from fossil fuels um and towards building electrification and decarbonization. Um so it does give you
they take a a zero overtime approach is what they call it. Um to allow for um some flexibility there understanding that it's not going to happen all at once. Um but really asking communities to have a prioritization plan of which buildings they are targeting um and which ones will really have the the
highest impact as well. So we would so we would map any plans that perhaps the the the building commission or uh building commissioner has for renovating buildings, roofs, HVA systems, we would map that onto our decarbonization plan
and associate those things. Yes, the input for the the technical assistant grant for this uh decarbonization road map was a very robust spreadsheet with a lot of information including um the age of some of our systems, the age of our roof. the last year it was replaced warranties um
all those sort of things. So we've been working um very closely with the building department um and uh getting that information collected as part of the input. So that is all taken into account as they build out that roadmap. Thank you Michael. Um first of all thank you very much uh
for putting this together and your timing is excellent um as usual. Um, one of the reasons, um, why I'm thinking about the timing of this is we have later on in the agenda tonight the discussion of fiscal year 27 select
board goals and objectives. Um, and I would hope that the work that you are teeing up between this grant and the community action resilience plan would also serve as input and influences on
that conversation as well. Um uh in particular um when you talked about municipal decarbonization um one of one of the things that I know that the town is thinking about uh is uh
the consideration of its various real estate assets including its land and its buildings. Um, and I would hope that you um would be able to supply this information to whatever ongoing efforts the town has to consider those questions
um as to whether uh the buildings that we have are suitable for uh adoption to um to uh less greenhouse gas emitting technologies um or not. and how we might
uh manage those assets accordingly. Um I had one quick question with regard to the climate action and resiliency plan. You said in 26 um and given that we're discussing fiscal year 27 goals. Um are you talking about within fiscal year 26
or are you talking within calendar year 26? um so that we can take the results of the clim climate action resiliency plan and actually incorporate the goals there from into our fiscal year 27 goals. Sure. Thank you. Uh so the climate
action resiliency plan uh actually be returning to you all probably next month to give you a bit of an overview on where we stand with that project. Um but the hope is that we will have a uh final plan for the board's review and adoption early in calendar year 2026. Um and that
that would be uh finalized um for any future planning efforts including um any of your strategic planning efforts as well as um any funding um efforts that we have underway. Thank you. Uh
David, I have a question regarding the zero emission vehicle. first initiative. Do we have any departments or divisions that uh you anticipate we will need to uh be procuring a new fleet of vehicles in the near future?
Um in a well we have our vehicle replacement schedule um as part of our um kind of general uh procurement of of our vehicles. And so you know the vast majority of those vehicles uh sits within within DPW. Um so that's kind of
a a a process that happens over time. Um but I think and is how we've been approaching um our adoption of of electric vehicles. So essentially when you know something's coming out of service, is this um eligible to be an EV
uh replaced vehicle? Um and so we have to take into account both obviously the cost associated with that but really the functionality of that vehicle as well. So, um I point that out just to say that I think that some of the vehicles might be um in need of replacement uh because
of their lifespan, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they would automatically be replaced with a zero mission vehicle um it would depend on the functionality of that vehicle. So, if something's needed for emergency services like snow response or um our fire trucks, different things like that,
if we don't have something um that we're able to still perform that same function that is um available to us, then we would opt to continue on with an internal combustion engine or vehicle. You just referenced the fire department.
So you have ongoing conversations with school department, police department, out outside departments, not just within DPW. Yes. So um the fleet purchase policy and procurement of those vehicles happens in coordination with DPW, but any uh
transfers or changes, shifts to the fleet, um would happen in conversation with all of those different departments that it would affect. Yeah, exactly. Great. John uh Alexandra, thank you so much for the work you're doing on this and also for congratulations on the grants that
already, you know, have been a acquired by the sustainability uh division. Um I just want to ask you about um something that's known as Berto BDO, building emissions reduction and disclosure ordinance. Does does anything in the
climate leaders program obligate us to put in place um some sort of Berto ordinance? It does not. Um the focus really for the climate leaders program is really on in-house. So um our building stock and our vehicles um whereas uh Berto is
really looking at uh private and commercial buildings. Um, so it wouldn't uh necessarily touch a BTO like policy as part of this program. Um, but I will say I do know that's something that um the zero missions advisory board is is certainly interested in and talking
about what that uh what something like that could look like, but nothing that would relate to the requirements of this program. Great. And and since you mentioned the zero emissions advisory board, um what what role do they play in this climate leaders um initiative?
Sure. So um the they heard about this program um uh several months ago um and I asked for their support both in you know pursuing uh the climate leader certification um and then they are helping both with changes to the policy
itself um for the zero mission vehicle first policy um and then also we'll be reviewing um the content that comes out of that uh municipal decarbonization roadmap. So, um, very aware and, um, they're really doing the technical review and, uh, drafting on these
concepts before they come before the the select board. Great. Great. Great. Any further discussion? Thank you, Alexandra. Thank you all. Appreciate your time. We'll see you back here in a few weeks. Can't get rid of me. Yeah.
Well, we don't want to. Yeah. What you're doing is very important. Okay. Okay, what do we have next on the agenda here? Oh, 16 William Street lodging house. Um, let me start off
by saying Cara, are you coming up? Okay. Uh, many of the concerns of neighbors uh to 16 William Street are very very important and we have and we will continue to address them. But this discussion
tonight or this discussion around 16 William Street has brought out some sentiments by residents that I find a little troubling. Uh for example, unwelcoming statements about nonbrookline people. For example,
questioning whether the program will serve will serve enough Brooklyn residents. In my view, everyone outsiders and insiders have a right to live in and enjoy the benefits of our community. So the question of how many
Brookliners there are in the program, I consider irrelevant. Uh statements that uh imply that victory will bring various problems from the inner city to Brooklyn. Um find that a little offensive uh and I hope people don't um
continue making them. and assertions that allowing victory residents in this neighborhood will drive down property values. Ironically, if people say that enough, it may well drive down property values, but I'm not sure that that's really a
relevant issue uh in this discussion. I will note that our assignment of the right of first refusal uh to victory, I've just been given some materials. Pardon me.
Oh, this is the petition. Okay. Um Okay. I will note that our assignment of the right of first refusal will have some conditions attached such as the house being subject to our lodging house
regulations which Victory has agreed to and maybe others sometime next week. And separate from that, when Victory has ownership of the property and applies for a lodging house license, there will be license conditions that will apply to their operations.
Of course, if residents have suggestions for reasonable reasonable license conditions, please write the select board with those suggestions as we put together the license conditions for uh this lodging house.
So, uh th those are my thoughts. Uh this is an opportunity for other select board members to give their opinions or comments before we move on to a vote. Uh Michael, did you want to say something? First of all, sorry, can you speak into the mic? Thank
you. Um, first of all, I would like to thank Victory Programs for responding to Brookline's request for information and their presentation at the last select board meeting. Uh, second, I want to thank Carrie Goldberg uh, and the eight
other neighbors of 16 William Street who were willing to meet with me and share their concerns about this matter in person. The select board and other public servants often decide whether to permit or license a particular use of property
as per our general and zoning bylaws as well as state and federal laws. Here we are being asked whether to exercise, convey or relinquish a property right that the town has acquired. A different kind of question with different process
rules. This process must comply with open meeting law but does not require the town to affirmatively notify anyone in particular nor incorporate specific stakeholders such as abutters or neighbors in the process for deciding
the town's action. The select board elected as the executive leadership of the town is empowered to take action. However, the public has had opportunity to weigh in on this matter and the select board has thoughtfully considered the many
letters received from members of the public as well as remarks delivered at this and other public meetings. I believe that the opportunity has been sufficient to express one's opinion and be heard. Others may legitimately
disagree. Like many hard choices, this decision comes down to weighing values that are simultaneously legitimate and in tension with each other. In this case, the values of maintaining the current housing and providing necessary housing
to people with a disability outweigh the value of ameliorating the risk of danger or the risk of loss. We cannot either from a legal or a moral perspective discriminate based on the speculation of harm.
Thus, I will support the conveyance of the town's right of first refusal to victory programs. Finally, to the question of whether I would weigh these values similarly if I were about to live adjacent to a victory program's poris house. I try my best to
hold values steadily regardless of my personal circumstances. I value such steadiness as a hallmark of good public service. Thank you. Um David uh just today similarly at our last
hearing where we addressed this matter we heard from many neighbors who felt that they are not being heard. We do hear you. We've heard you in two meetings. We've also heard you in private conversations that uh you have
had with some of us outside of meetings. We've also read many of your emails. And some of these emails and some of these conversations actually underscore divisions within the neighborhood about how to proceed. So for example, just
today uh I believe all of us may have received this email from center communities of Brooklyn and I'd like to read it. Statement from residents of center communities of Brooklyn on Victory House proposal. We are residents of the center communities of Brooklyn at
100, 108, and 112 Center Street. Recently, some nearby Kulage Corner residents have suggested that seniors living here need to be quote protracted from the proposed Victory House residents at 16 William Street, which would provide temporary housing for
mothers in recovery and their children. We want to state clearly, we do not feel threatened by Victory House. On the contrary, we strongly support this proposal. Mothers working to overcome addiction and reunite with their children deserve the chance to rebuild
their lives in a safe and supportive environment. As seniors, we know the importance of community, compassion, and second chances. We welcome Victory House to our neighborhood and gladly stand in support of it. And this is signed by uh
nine named individuals and then it mentions and others. So there are multiple opinions about this even within the neighborhood. Beyond that, it's important to understand that there are certain legal constraints here. As uh
Michael alluded to in his remarks, under the Fair Housing Act and the American with Disabilities Act, we cannot discriminate with housing on the basis of disability. and those with substance use disorder qualify as being disabled
under those two federal acts. So, we cannot be discriminating against them. In terms of the broader concerns about specifics of the victory program and how we can allay what some of you have said,
I'm going to continue to have open ears. I'm going to continue to welcome that type of dialogue. uh Susan Freed, I believe you in particular, you spoke about the importance of guard rails and I appreciate that and I think that's where the focus will transition to. Uh I
believe that the board is likely to approve uh victory programs tonight, but that's not the end of the discussion or at least I'm not going to let it be the end of the discussion. It's important that we always engage with the neighborhood. It's important that we always hear from neighbors both while debating something and then in the
aftermath. And so, uh, to the extent that you have concrete ideas beyond the ones you've already articulated that you want us to follow up on, we will listen and we will do our best, uh, in accordance with what we can do legally,
uh, and, uh, proceed appropriately in that manner. So, I don't want anybody to feel like they're being ignored. We do value what you say. Uh, as for the specifics of uh, this proposal, I do think it serves a very important need,
including for the Brooklyn community. We heard about two Brooklyn families who have benefited from victory programs at their Jamaica Plane location. But even beyond that, as Bernard said, lots of communities help people regardless as to
uh, where they may originate from. And Brooklyn has a long-standing tradition of progressive values and of trying to lift everyone in our society, whether they have a specific Brookline connection uh or not. Uh a town meeting
member in precinct 9 did bring to my attention a uh homicide that took place at a victory programs location in Dorchester. We do have uh the chief counsel from uh Victory here and I'm
wondering if you could just speak to that to provide some more context for the community because I I don't want people who wrote to us about that to feel like we're ignoring it. We also have uh Chief Pastor online if uh she wants to add anything to that
uh discussion. Uh good evening everyone. Uh thank you for inviting me back. Um uh my name is Taylor Moley. Uh I am the chief operating officer and general counsel for Victor programs. Um so what I can talk about in terms of that in incident
um is still protected by our confidentiality policies uh and the obligations we have to our clients. Um but that is um a rare and oneoff incident for our programs. Um, you know, I checked in with our director of co
recovery who oversees that program. Um, and what I can share is it um, it was an individual who's having a mental health crisis at that moment um, who committed the act. Uh, there have not been any um, similar incidents or any violent incidents of um, nature that would harm
somebody's life uh, in our program since then. Um, but again, the Portis family home is not our recovery homes. We operate six recovery homes where that um and that incident occurred at one of those six homes. It's a different
population. It's a different stage of somebody's recovery journey. So, it is a very different environment uh than the Poris family home is. Can uh Paul, I see your hand up, but can I ask uh chief pastor to um of course add anything that she
thinks is appropriate? Sure. Hi, can everyone hear me? I apologize for being in the car. Um, but I I would just add that I, you know, when I saw this article, I reached out to my counterparts in Boston PD. The case has
not yet gone to trial, so we're all limited in what we can say. Um, but I can liken it to maybe an incident that we had here in Brooklyn at a rooming house for uh adults with developmental disabilities back in I think it was 2004, 2005.
um or or even liken it to other cases that we've had involving homicides or uh you know assault with intent to kills um in domestic violence situations. And I think there's nothing in the case that we can see so far that um would lead us
to believe that this is something different than what you know we've had already in a rooming house type situation regardless of um the reason for being there regardless of a substance use um misuse diagnosis.
um you know when you have family members living together, roommates living together, um you know, things can get heated and and violence unfortunately sometimes happens. But I don't think that we should use that incident um you know as a reason to prevent this
housing from going forward. And I'll add that they Boston police confirmed that there have been no incidents of violence related to the Victory House programs in that area since this incident in 2021. So um one thing I think is important is that you have your own internal
confidentiality requirements. I think what what Chief Pastor is saying is that because this case has not gone gone to trial, there are additional restrictions on what can be said which I assume is why this
hasn't come up before or is it? Well, correct. Um so victory programs uh both due to HIPPA and state confidentiality requirements can only share so much. Um and again internally our policies around protecting our
client data even when things go wrong um does limit our ability to comment on it. Um you know in in terms of our response in the RFI um you know it it really is not lip service to say it is a completely different program. Um and
there was no intent not to be transparent. Um there was you know there was not a section in the RFI where we could have shared any you know incidents to on an unrelated program. Um so again it was not there is no intention not to
disclose it. It is of course um in the public sphere and news um but an opportunity to address it hadn't arisen till tonight. Okay. Uh Paul. Yeah. Uh thank you Bernard. Um and I do want to speak about that point in a
moment but first I want to address uh the many um abutters the folks that have raised concerns about this. Um you know I am extremely sympathetic. You should I I want you to know I've read every email that you sent to us. I've read every
email that's gone back and forth between the TMMA and PAX. I think there's been hundred of them or more. Um, I've read every thread on at least two to maybe three uh threads um on social media about this. Um, and I I I want you to
know that that your concerns, you should not be told that you're crazy, that you're making stuff up. Um, your concerns are your concerns. And you know, um, whether there's a lot of data behind them or not, um, it's it's how you feel and and there's fear and uncertainty and doubt about about this
situation. So, I just want you to know that I hear you. Um I I do want to mention that um you know this evening although we can't speak about it because it was an executive session we the topic was the op opioids opioid settlement um
you know there are opioids have ravaged um our community including Brookline my wife is a transplant surgeon she understands the impact that addiction has on human beings um it's devastating and much of
this is accidental. It happens over time. Um it it's also a disease. There's a whole bunch of reasons that happen. But it doesn't automatically mean that because you got addicted to opioids because you had something happened with
health uh that you know really turns you upside down. Um means that you're a criminal. Um it it there's not an automatic. I know there was some data that was shared that show some relationship. Um, you know, there's also that the number one problem in our
community is not opioids, it's alcohol. Alcohol is devastating uh our community. Um, and if you don't think that you've got big problems in your neighborhood already with alcohol, I assure you, you probably do. Um, and you know, folks that could be addicted to alcohol could
quickly uh get into a situation where they would perhaps have to leave their children to have their children taken away for a time. And again, I there's just a human aspect here of understanding that to to to have an
opportunity, a safe opportunity for a family to be united, reunited, and to have those children have that opportunity to be with their birth parent, their caregiver, uh, and have that healing happen. I can't think of anything that's that is would be more
rewarding than to help have that happen in a safe, effective um you know environment uh that is open and transparent. So that's really why I I feel pretty strongly about supporting this. Um, for those that are worried
about, uh, their real estate prices, I live in one of the most expensive areas of Brooklyn and it's across the street from transitional housing, uh, where folks are have come through there. I've known some of them. I've seen them. I've interacted with them. They're lovely
people. Um, you know, they're have come out of homelessness homelessness sometimes. Sometimes they have some additional issues, but I can assure you my property value has not gone down one bit. Um, so I I I don't think this idea that there's going to be a correlation to your property values and what's
happening. Um, and I I I feel pretty confident that um that as time passes, this will be just integrating you and we'll say, "Wow, what were we so worried about?" But I do want to speak go back to this issue about transparency.
Um, I did get a phone call today and I did get a bunch of emails about this the information that came out. um I think it was from from one of the other uh program houses uh about the homicide. I do think that you know the the very very
important lesson that Victory needs to needs to hear from this is you have to proactively be engaged with this neighborhood with this community. Um you have to share information. You have to be transparent. I think that there was a violation of trust. uh because I do
believe at the last meeting someone asked was there any violent actions and the answer was no and in fact no if you're talking the the the context of this specific uh type of uh of program that you have but it did happen within uh your overall
program uh and I think it's really really important I can't emphasize this enough that that victory work and be transparent overcommunicate and be available to the neighborhood and the community because that's how we've seen
other lodging houses effectively work with the communities. Uh transitional housing or not, um communication is really important. So, um just again to those folks who who have raised a lot of concerns, I I I've heard you. Um, but I
think that this is is a needed program and I'm committed as David had said and Michael and I'm sure John and Bernard will say, we're going to find a way to make sure that this we have the provisions and the licensing operational components uh tight and communication happening so that uh so that we're ahead
of anything that may happen. So um thank you so much. Okay, any other any other John? Uh ju just to add to what my uh colleagues have said uh you know I I will confess
that uh it didn't take long for me to decide you know once I saw um that Victory was an applicant and once I had sort of learned some basic stuff about the programs that Victory offers um that you know this was a yes for me. Uh and
and I say that and at the same time I acknowledge um that it's one thing for us from afar um who don't live on this block of William Street um to say it's an automatic yes, you know, because uh out
of compassion um you know, out of support for these types of programs, it's quite another to be the resident of a house next door, of a house on the block, of a house around the corner, um to have children, uh to maybe live alone
and worry about your safety. Um so I think we all have to concede that these are not easy issues. Uh but in the end, uh and actually at from the very beginning, there's been no doubt in my mind that the right thing for Brooklyn
to do is to uh welcome this program. um welcome the uh those who receive services via this program recognize um I'll put it in this phrase there but for the grace of God go I um this could be
any one of us um either individually or through a family member or a relative or a neighbor um at some time point in the future is going to need the services of u support for those with addictions and
that's basically what this is all about. Um it's a it's a category of people who need an extra level of support and maybe an extra level of compassion um in in their struggle with addictions. And I I'm I look forward to Brooklyn uh having
a relationship with victory programs um that will last and last and last and that will also um deal with uh uh without hesitation um and without without any judgment um the concerns of
neighbors. Um these are legitimate concerns and uh I think the neighbors have done their best to express them in in a um responsible way and yet at the same time I think the final decision is uh Brooklyn should welcome this program
and we should make it work for everybody neighbors uh and the program uh uh residents themselves. Thank you. John Cara, are you up here for some some reason related to this? No, I think you all My name is Cara
Brutin, director of planning. Also with us tonight is associate town council John Bukite. Um or the head of our housing community planning division of Wana if you have any additional questions, but I think you've covered all the topics. Um tonight I'm asking you all to authorize the select board
chair to execute an agreement and related documents to assign the town's right of refusal, sorry, the town's right of first refusal to purchase 16 William Street in Brooklyn to Victory Programs, Inc. Okay. Thank you, John. Yes. May I say something about that? I I
would have said this sooner, but I I saw Cara standing there and I thought, well, she's going to go over this, so I won't I won't step on her um you know, what she has to bring to the discussion. Um but uh I hope everyone listening tonight will go to the agenda and the item uh
that we're discussing right now and recognize that there is a memo from Cara and there is also Cara, help me with the language. What do you refer to them as? stipulations. U there's obligations um in the in the assignment um right that cover the
topics that you all went over. Yes. So uh there is a lot of work has been done to incorporate uh into our dealings with victory programs um many of the concerns that have been brought to the table by neighbors and others and
you will find them um on this uh page called obligations. uh and I think um that'll make us all better informed as to what we have already recognized ought to be reasonable u requirements of going forward with this program at this location.
Uh thank you John for bringing that up. That's very important that that is those will be obligations within our assignment right of first refusal. Yes. In addition, when they come up for licensing, we'll have additional conditions of the license. And that's
what I'm, you know, urging people to let us know what you think are important um uh conditions to put in the license uh conditions piece. Chaz, um thank you. I just wanted to flag um because I know this is of concern to the
public that some of those obligations people have asked, oh, it doesn't say you agree to be regulated as a lodging house. It's actually stronger than that because it includes requirements of a lodging house and in some cases goes beyond those requirements. So rather than saying you agree to be regulated as
a lodging house and if those rules change or challenged in some way uh as a broad mechanism um the house is no longer subject to them. We put the specific requirements in there so that it's not just oh we agree to be
regulated as a lodging house. have the specific requirements of lodging houses as part of this obligation and as part of that licensing process. As the chair said, I do just want to make sure folks understand the framework of this conditions of licensing have to be reasonably related to the license being
issued and we have to treat all licensing applicants equally. Um, which is not to say we have to treat everyone the same, but we have to treat everyone equally in terms of what we, you know, the the rubric we use in terms of determining how a license is issued and
what the restrictions on or conditions on that license are. So, there's more to come on this, but I do just want to make sure that people's expectations are set in terms of how to frame out a request for uh a license uh uh condition and
that it has to be reasonably related to the service being provided and that it has to be in line with how the town does business with other likeminded uh licenses. Great. Thank you. Any further discussion from the select
board? Uh oh. Chaz's hand is still up. Nope. I don't think they need to. Okay. Okay. So then I'd like to make a motion. Um I move that the select board approve the assignment of the town's right of
first refusal related to 16 William Street to the Victory Programs, Inc. program with such conditions as the town administrator and planning director determined to be appropriate. I assume that's what we've been discussing. Uh
including that the house be subject to the town's lodging house regulations as uh town administrator described that that uh a good description of what we're moving and are we authorizing somebody to do something as a result specifically
select board chair to execute an agreement related documents. Okay, sorry miss um it's not in my notes. uh and u authorize the select board chair to sign the documents related to uh this transaction.
Okay. All in favor please indicate by saying I. John Vancoyak I. Paul Warren I. David Pearlman I. Michael Rubenstein I. Chair votes I. Thank you and thank you to the community for your inputs into
this process. Next project eligibility letter application for 429 Harvard Street. Uh here we are u being asked to uh give our opinion as to a proposed project uh
eligibility letter that um the um 429 Harvard Street uh project would like to be issued by uh Mass Housing. Um Cara, do you want to sort of introduce this this and and then I I'll talk about, you know,
what we're going to uh vote on. Okay. Um again, Cara Brutin, director of planning and community development. Um the select board talked heard a presentation um from the development team at your last
meeting and reviewed a draft um letter. I asked for comments based on your discussion and there was a um basically one question that needs a little bit more discussion of how you all want to um frame the letter and with that chair green we spoke earlier I think you're
ready to walk through those those choices. Yeah. Okay. Uh let me start off by um first of all I want to give everyone an opportunity to discuss you know the issues that they think are important and maybe articulate you know where their
where their thinking is uh before we vote. So I'll start off with my comments. Um, first, uh, I'll start off by saying that I'm going to oppose the project. Uh, meaning that we're going to
I propose that we ask the, u Mass Housing not to, uh, issue a PEL. Um, even though I can appreciate the project's right to try to get in under the 10% uh subsidized housing inventory
window and legitimately circumvent our Harvard Street zoning. Uh, that zoning provides an as of right process for developing the site which would be more efficient and economical than the protracted struggle that they will encounter under the comprehensive
permits process. And related to this uh regular inclusionary zoning requires 50% uh area medium income uh restrictions for rental units as this project has. But the Harvard Street Zoning District, which
they have not agreed to act under, increases AMI for rental units to 70%. Which would provide housing for some workingclass and middle inome families. uh a demographic that we really need here in Brooklyn. Uh so, you know,
that's it's their choice. Um and it's my uh decision to um vote uh to not urge approval of the peel by mass housing. Um any other comments or
ideas? Uh John? Yeah. Um well uh Cara has um provided a very useful memo with um actual um you know optional uh different forms of a couple of parts
of the phrasing of the vote tonight. And uh what that is all about u is that uh the there's a u there's always going to be a question hanging over uh so-called
40b projects uh as to whether uh the nature of the 40b process is that the state deems uh a community in this case Brookline to have fallen behind in in its obligation to
provide for subsidized housing units and therefore the state essentially intervenes whenever the state whenever the town or the local community is in a position of having fallen behind the threshold is 10 10% uh of
the inventory u be subsidized um and um the me the mechanism that the state has adopted to um address that is they they then essentially take control of the approvals process through something
called a comprehensive permit and they u allow for developers to get um certain certain uh uh allowances, excuse me. Um in terms of height, massing uh uh
setbacks, landscaping, etc., etc., et etc. uh and and get relief from what is the normal requirement at the local level under our zoning laws and and our other provide our other um regulations of local development. So, uh, if the
state is going to take over the whole decision-making process because we have fallen below a certain threshold, do we then as the select board simply say to the state um, flat out, you shouldn't approve this because it doesn't conform
to uh, what we believe to be the proper height limits and other limits for development on Harvard Street? or does the local select board say um what you should approve um is something that is
more in conformance with our um expressed uh preferences as to height, massing etc. And that and what we mean by that is and then we you know provide for a brief explanation of you know what
the prevailing uh consensus in the town is as to how housing development should take place on Harvard Street and we have a very clear indication of what that consensus is. It
couldn't be more clear because we went through a process of developing something called this form-based zoning plan. I like music too, but maybe not right now. Not here, right? Um and uh at the end of that process um
there was a uh vote of town meeting and it has not had much time yet to prove its to prove its value in terms of development that has actually ensued um under our um formbbased zoning. Uh
but certainly uh the the thought behind that was that there would be housing development spurred and the thought was that it would be housing development that would conform to pe neighborhood desires and expectations as to
Brooklyn's quality of life. Um so can we get that result by simply saying no in this instance or can we get that result by saying um that we would we would agree with the state in allowing a
development under these and such conditions. I'm in the latter camp. I I think we owe it to the state not just to say no but to say what we would what we consider yes. And I think we can give them an indication of what we consider
to be yes. Um while at the same time saying what is in front of them isn't isn't what we think should be um allowed. Um and and so I I I prefer the the suggested the optional wording that
is uh that the state approve this only if certain conditions are met and they're defined in Carara's suggested vote. That's where I'm at on this. Thank you, John. Uh Paul, I see your hand up.
Uh thank you. Thank you, Bernard. Um so I I I want to say touch upon a couple of subjects. The first is I challenge this concept that we've fallen below 10%. Um I asked the building commissioner to come hopefully could
answer some questions about this. But, you know, the the only reason why we're below 10%, my understanding is, is because Pudding Stone hasn't been given their certificate of occupancy yet. Yet, they've been given a temporary certificate of occupancy. And there's
people living there. And if they had the certificate of occupancy, we would be below temp above 10%. We wouldn't be even having this discussion. So before I talk about a broader issues that maybe touch upon what John and Bernard had said, I'm hoping that maybe Dan could
just talk a little bit about what's going on with Stone, why do they have a a temporary COO, not a permanent, and what what's the requirements for them to actually get to a permanent one? Is that okay to ask? Hi Dan.
Yes. Um, sure. I can uh do my best to answer those questions. Dan Bennett, building commissioner. Um, so right now we've got 540B projects that are active and the one that's most close to being done is
the pudding stone and there are 250 units. there is a temporary certificate of occupancy and it is um um I I issued TCOs for three months at a time and they phased that construction in so we could move people in over the last I'd
probably say maybe year 8 months 8 to 12 months and they've reached full capacity and they have not uh submitted the documentation for a full CO uh there is one minor um issue that the plumbing and gas
inspector has with the garage um of a the um garage heater, the intake and exhaust um vent material. We've been in discussions with the engineer and um they are um
working on it, but it's just been very slow. And now the engineer works for the uh the developer and um we're doing our best to kind of push this along. Uh the TCO uh to renew all 250 will cost about
$37,500 which I've let uh CHR know. Um but the plumbing and gas inspector recently I spoke with him. He is expecting this to be completed um by Friday or Monday. Um
now again that's just a normal schedule. Tradesman out there working an engineer's letter is going to come in after that and you know they could take as long or uh they could do it as fast as they want or as slow as they want if they they feel that there's
some benefit to delaying a full CO. I don't know the inside, you know, story there. So one of So Dan just to be clear and Bernard if if it's okay I just got a couple of questions for Dan first I really appreciate you have a you do yman's work you have a hell of a difficult job to deal with all this but
but essentially we're waiting on the developer to tell us when they would like the the the final co is that correct yes because they have to submit the paperwork so so the situ so the situation so we're waiting on them so
the situation is it's the devel developers who actually decide when the window opens and closes so they could wait and wait a little bit. And right now we've s we've seen what two or three two at least two. We saw the one at Chestnut Hill West and now we're seeing
this one that are just coming in while this other thing we're monkeying with a vent over at Wooding Stone. And this is lunacy to me that that that there's no impetus. There's no requirement. There's
no trigger for the for the developer to actually close the window. We're dependent upon them to close the window for submission of 40bs. The we should not be my we should really have a discussion about this. We should not be we should not be issuing temporary COS.
We should because they're generating revenue. They could this could go for for another three months, right? this. We're not going to solve this tonight, but I just want to put this on the radar for the board of this situation that's going on. Chestnut Hill Realy, I have a
lot of respect for they're currently in control as to when the window opens and closes for this 10%. And that to me, we're not in control of it at all. Um, and I think we have to address that from a longerterm policy perspective. But Dan, I appreciate you uh answering the question. It really is just a vent or
something that's in the way. But back to um back to the issue of um kind of what John said and what Bernard had said. Um John, I happen to agree with you that that we have very clear requirements that the state should understand we have
and what we want the state to have them ask this developer to do to adhere to. It's called the form-based zoning that we just passed at town meeting two years ago, a year and a half ago. um through significant community input, major
negotiations, a huge amount of money that our planning uh team and community development team put in place to create all the formbbased zoning. Um I mean this was a herculean effort by so many people and so many groups to rally around this consensus plan that passed
town meeting over like 85%. And the way that we communicate, I believe we communicate to the state that this is what we want the developer to do is we say no, don't take any of what this developer is bringing to you
because the the letter only says that they have to kind of be close to, you know, our zoning uh with six stories or four be close to four stories. It doesn't take into all of the form based on there's so much to it. There's green
space. There's setbacks. There's first floor commercial depths. There's parking requirements. There's vegetation for parking. There's fenestrations for how the buildings are to be designed. Why on earth would anybody bother participating in the comprehensive plan or any
comprehensive zoning reform in the future if the select board was just willing to say, "Ah, the windows open because some developer delayed it." and we're just going to override, let the state decide what should go in this lot. I I don't think that's the right way to do it. I'm completely aligned with
Bernard. We should say no. Uh we're asking for the PEL to be denied and ask this developer to come back and conform to the zoning that the community and town meeting went through extensive process of consensus to develop. That's
what the town wants. We've upzoned the whole corridor. Um, and that's what we should ask the state to ask the developer to conform to by denying the PEL. That's my position. I'm really hoping that we can come to agreement on this. Thank you.
Uh, David, if we were over the 10% threshold, then I would agree with what Paul's saying, but this application is not to have the project proceed under existing Brookline zoning. it's under 40B and they don't
need to comply with Brookline zoning. That's just the underlying reality and you stated that in your remarks as well. So, we have two approaches we can take. We can acknowledge that reality but try to get them as close to our direction as we can uh in the manner that uh John
described. or we can just say flat out no and be ignored as we always are by mass housing because inevitably the PEL gets approved because again this is about 40B. It's not applying within our Brookline zoning. Uh you referenced
Bernard specifically the uh that under the Harvard street zoning that can be 70% AMI. This proposal though is for 50% AMI. So that would actually be reaching out to a group of people who have lower incomes and that's a component that I
see as a positive to this proposal. Another positive, the 15 parking spaces. So they're not trying to take a lot of space for parking and this is an area that is bicycle friendly. So that's a positive. Even though under 40B there's
no commercial requirement, they are at least in this first draft respecting that there will be first floor commercial. So there are positive elements I want to acknowledge, but at the same time uh we have received some very detailed lists of uh negatives with
the current design. Uh, I thought that Linda Pelky sent us some very constructive uh, criticisms of the design and I think that many of those criticisms are incorporated in the draft that John is favoring. So I don't think
any of us so far who are speaking are saying yes to this proposal as is. None of us are saying that. The difference is in the approach that we take in order to try to get something constructed that is
if we remain over if we remain under 10% as close to our zoning as we can and if we uh get over 10% then they're going to have to work with us. But either way this creates a path forward for John's proposal. Go ahead.
Okay. Oh, sorry. Could I speak briefly for a moment on this? Yep. Briefly. So, uh, so David, first, um, you just completely misrepresented Linda Pelky, and I think I'm pretty confident in in in her abil and she's saying, "Paul, please speak up." Um,
Linda Pelky is absolutely opposed to this. Um, there she doesn't want it to be close to the zoning. She doesn't want you to be near the zoning. She wants it to be exactly conforming to the consensus forbased zoning that was just approved by town meeting a year and a
half ago for Harvard Street. It's not it's not up to us to just negate entirely what the community said they want along Harvard Street. They just did it. And what you're saying is you have you know better than what the community and town meeting and all the boards and
commissions that agree to do it. You know better. Um and and frankly I don't think you I I don't think he does. Um the other point is I think rephrase that offense targeted that one of your colleagues. I don't mean I don't mean to target him
but I I do think that we that we should not override what I think every board and commission 85% of town meeting members the the the unanimous select board at the time uh approved for the the consensus plan. But I also wanna I
also want to plant a seed with my colleagues. Um, if we send a letter that denies it, asking to deny it, if they do approve it, I'm I'm going to suggest that we challenge this because I I think I think the regulations
on how this is done is absolutely upside down to right now we are over the 10%. There are 250 units. I don't know how many people are living in that building, but I know it's a lot. So, these these units are already being lived in, and
we're not getting credit for it, and we're waiting for the developer to allow us to get credit for it. And while that developer is waiting to let us get credit for it, other developers are coming along and sneaking under the wire to to file their 40bs. This is wrong,
wrong, wrong. And I think we should specifically ask for the state to deny the PEL so when it gets to the ZBA, the ZBA feel empowers to say we're not going to approve this because this is wrong. We should be we should be getting credit already for those 250 units because that's the right thing to do.
Um so I don't think we should be getting close. This is not hand grenades and horseshoes. Thank you. Cara, uh, what do what do the state regulations say with respect to when a certificate of occupancy is u is u um going to put
something on the shi. So it simply says certificate of occupancy. Um and um I was speaking with town council Joe Kellen about this earlier today and we've known that this was probably going to come up for 10 years now. There was going to be some point
like this. Um, I don't know if Joe wants to speak more, but when if and when an application is filed with the ZBA, as Paul Warren mentioned, that would be the time for the town to say, "We think we're above or in a safe harbor or not."
Um, and so we're preparing for that, for the ZBA to use that if they want to or not. um to make the argument depending on where we're at, we may get above the 10% anyways before a full application is filed. Remember, this process takes
about 90 days with the state and we're about 20 days in. So, um there's a lot to unravel in the next couple weeks, but what what Paul was mentioning was the pla the timing and the place to make the
assertion that we're in a safe harbor would be when the ZBA receives a full application. Right. Thank you. Any other Michael? Uh yeah. So a few things. So just just to uh put a pin on the point that you just made the the timing of the
application to mass housing and the request for this project eligibility letter. Um what I'm hearing from you is that the timing of that is really distinct from the determination of whether or not we're over the 10%. So my
understanding of developer behavior in this regard is that they will line something up with an application like this and then often seek extensions for optimal timing in front of the ZBA as
opposed to waiting for the mass waiting to do the mass housing project eligibility letter step. Right? they're just putting their ducks in a row for some future future uh optionality. Is that is that right?
That's been you're talking about when developers do things. That's been my experience as well, but Okay. Okay. So, that's point number one. Um point number two, um is within the letter and I and I'm sorry if I'm bur burrowing into the details of the letter, but I would like to try and move
this along. Um there is a statement here that says regardless of the outcome of this PEL application the select board looks forward to collaboration between the developer the town and members of the community to realize infield development at this location and I
notice uh director Brutin that you did not flag that as optional in the various versions that we're considering and thus um I am operating under the assumption that regardless of whatever other choices we make within the letter that
that line is still a reflection of the select board's position. Um, in which case, um, regardless of the outcome, I would be in favor of sending this letter because I think that that statement from the select board is actually the most,
uh, relevant factor to the considerations that both the developer may make over time as well as what mass housing may or may not choose to consider in their criteria of this PEL letter, right? because as we know our
even our commenting on this is is optional to the process. And so that's issue point number two. Um, and point number three, um, to the to the point that Paul made, uh, sorry, member Warren
made, um, originally about, um, the very long list of of, uh, features within our Harvard within our zoning bylaw that impact this property. Um,
a number of those features, as member Pearlman pointed out, are actually addressed in the design that's been presented um by the developer and is part of this application. So, for example, the amount of frontage um that
uh is devoted to commercial space, the fact that there's parking um entrances not on Harvard Street but on a side street. Um, and I'm sure there are many more. And while I agree with both uh the
intent of Linda Pelky's letter that these are important and the fact that Paul has raised this, the fact that the developer has proactively addressed those concerns only tells me that we don't have to raise those concerns in the context of this specific application
because this specific application includes that design. Um and finally, you know, to this question of should we flat out say deny um or
uh say something else. Um, I guess the reason that I am more aligned with uh John and Paul's position um is because sorry. Yes.
Ain't my position that and not your position. My apologies. Um David, we're we're all having trouble with names apparently. um with David and John's position is that you know I believe that mass housing has
a relatively strict set of criteria that they will use in terms of of judging this matter and the from my perspective the objective there there are two objectives here. One objective is the
creation of housing which we know is a deep need in this town um and affordable housing as well. Um, and the other is to um have that housing conform with what the neighborhood requires. Um, and while
I agree and appreciate all of the effort that went into um the creation of the development on Harvard Street, we also have data um that indicates that that
effort is not leading to significant creation of housing. Now, it is possible that there are reasons totally independent of the Harvard Street uh uh zoning bylaws that are causing that, economic reasons, interest rate reasons,
etc. And we understand that. Um, but I think the most important thing is for us to continue to signal are the fact that we need to be making this effort in engaging neighbors, developers, and town
requirements um on all of these factors um in order to satisfy all these constraints. Um, some of that may involve um, what some people in letters have suggested, which is going back into the zoning code and making modifications
and going through that process again with its rigorous community engagement. Um, and I think that that is also a signal that is coming from this letter and from from the feedback from the community. Um so to the extent of to the
to the desire of moving this along, the place that I would agree with with other select board members is sort of the middle position um which is of the two options being very specific for the two options
of the third paragraph um to ask to say that the town respectfully requests mass housing only approved with conditions to identify the conditions that the developer has specifically not met yet. Um, particularly the four-story scale
constraints and the tree canopy issues um that were that were not met um by the developers design um and most particularly include uh include that that other statement of our interest in
collaboration. So for the sub option within the second section of closer to and consistent with um I would be willing to support consistent with in the in the effort to move that along and to be consistent with what you're talking about Paul and what Linda is
talking about. Um but that is my revised position based on what I've heard from uh my colleagues and the information that I've gotten from you. Let me be clear. you're suggesting that we select option two, which is not to
object or not to um refuse to uh accept uh the peel. Um well, the decision of whether or not to accept the PEL is not our decision. It is mass housing. But it is our Mars mass housing not
that that that mass housing only only approved the project eligibility letter for this project with a set of conditions that include consistent with as opposed to closer to the fourstory scale constraints uh and the tree canopy.
Okay. So So you're with John's position. Um, I don't know if John articulated a position on the closer to and consistent with option within that second option, but for the first question, yes, you're saying consistent with uh I'm saying I I would prefer closer to, but I'm willing to I would prefer
closer to, but I'm willing to accept consistent with in the spirit of compromise and meeting the broader concerns of I like consistent. Paul, yeah. So, I just I wanna um I want to take a step back and and I think first
question we should be asking ourselves and we should vote on before moving forward is whether we want this letter to um to ask them to deny the PEL or not. And and I think you know look I spend an exorbitant amount of time on
comprehensive plan this whole consensus plan for uh for for Harvard Street. Um and I think we are about to absolutely break trust with the community. We went to town meeting and we went to town meeting with all kinds of community
engagement negotiations. The reason why the thing passed it 85% or more was because the community said this is the right package. this is the right zoning to create housing, to create commercial, to make it fit in the
scale of the neighborhoods. That that's what we did. Okay. And for us now to just unilaterally say we're now going to design on the fly. That's what Michael's doing right now. We're going to design on the fly what the the zoning should be for this site. I think I if I'm a
resident, I'm not going to trust anything that comes out of zoning out of this out of this government because the first chance you had to break it, you broke it. And I think this is a huge mistake. We're setting a very very bad precedent. We're sending a terrible message to the community that that we
can't be trusted. We cannot be trusted um as a board and as a comm. I'm just this is my view, Bernard. I'm not talking about you and I. I'm just saying we can't they can't trust their government if they're going to say this is the package. This is the zoning that's right for Harvard Street. This is
what's going to make us compliant with the law. And the second that someone says, well, we have an opportunity to break it, we're going to support it. Okay. The way Okay. So that's all I I would like I would like to first have a discussion in a vote about whether the p
whether the letter that we're sending should say that we're asking them to deny the PEL, but we would still like to work with the developer to conform with the the zoning that we passed on Harvard Street. Okay, got it. I'm happy to do that. Okay, let's be clear. um zoning whether
it's Harbor Street zoning or any other zoning in town can be ignored under 40B and I to the extent that we're under 10% they have every right to ignore the underlying zoning including Harvard
Street. Now, it's my position that they shouldn't have done that you know uh but you know let's let's not you know suggest that if that those select board members who don't want to uh uh ask mass housing to reject the peel that they are
somehow going against the sentiments of of um of town meeting and and the residents. That's just not true. Okay. Well, I I can Okay. Here here's what I want to suggest. Um, I'd like to move um Okay.
How do we say this? Um, option two. Okay. No, I want option one. Okay. Well, yeah. So, so um, let let me Sorry. Yeah. Uh, I move that we do not approve a project uh, I'm sorry, not approve, that
we do not ask Mass Housing to approve a project eligibility letter for 429 Harvard Street and that the letter to Mass Housing reflect that decision. Thus, the letter that we approve will one select the first option on page one
of the revised draft number three on the redline copy, which I think everyone's looking at, right? Yeah. Yeah. Uh number two, will not include the language on page two that starts with thus the town also respectfully requests. That was another option that
Cara gave us. and three will select the first option on page five of the revised draft which also you know is in line with rejecting um yeah to to the the mass housing. So, is that
clear? And and we can we vote and I like And I like the language I like the language that that Michael highlighted that's staying in the letter that says we're going to work with this developer like we should always work with the developers, right? And that work may result in them coming to, you know, four
stories and figuring out how to use our zoning or it may result Michael and us bringing changes to town meeting to change the zoning to make it work better. Okay. Yeah. So, motion on the floor. All in favor of that motion, which is to uh not tell uh
Mass Housing to issue the PEL. Um all in favor, please indicate by saying I. Jonathan Scoak, uh no. No. Um Paul Warren, yes. David Pearlman, no. Um Mike Cole Rubenstein,
no. Chair votes, yes. Okay, so pardon me. Weren't you counting? Yeah. Well, no. Oh, I I I thought David here would be there on the vote, but you got it. Okay. Um so, uh someone make a motion
for the uh second option. Uh may I Sure. Yeah. Well, this is, you know, pretty straightforward. Um I move that we go with option two in in each of the cases where there are two options for wording. Um that
those in front of me John could you actually use the words so I can understand what to is to the compliance. Okay. What what what John is asking and this is his motion um that we um select the second option on page two which says
the town respectfully request mass housing only approve a project eligibility letter for this project with a design of the building that the proposed site layout and I think they agree consistent with the fourstory scale constraints of the Harvard Street
zoning district and consistent with the design requirements outlined in 760 CMR 56.044C and the related comprehensive permit guidelines dated December 2014. It also
would include in this letter uh the following sentence. Thus, the town also respectfully requests Mass Housing only approved a project eligibility letter for this project for a design that includes mitigation for this significant
tree loss. And finally, uh, this option, uh, would include language on page five, which says, "The select board concludes that the development proposal on this site should only be granted a project eligibility letter with massing
constraints consistent with the four-story scale constraints of the Harvard Street Zoning District and with requirement to mitigate significant tree loss and meet existing sustainability design standards." And then Michael, did Michael have one other edition?
Well, or is that already in? Are you are you talking about the one where uh regardless of the outcome of this poem? Yes. That that as as far as I'm is is just one that we've all consensus.
Is that clear statement of your position? Yes. Okay. So, can I amend it? Can I amend it? Can I can I make a I'd like to make a suggestion to the letter. Okay. So I and I don't have the words but I'll I'll first present the concept. I would
like to have to to have us add the concept that we believe we are already above the 10% threshold because we have a a what temporary whatever you want to call it uh certificate of occupancy for
250 units and and communicate that we believe we're already above the 10%. We challenge that we're that we're below the 10%. Can we put that in? Can we put that in? Absolutely. What do you think? Yep. Absolutely. Okay. And you'll put it where
we had the safe harbor language last summer when we did the same thing. Oh, okay. But it was a different Do you remember the language? Um, not offh hand. Are people willing to accept the fact that uh Cara can put together the appropriate language? Do you?
Yeah. Well, I I'm just not I want to be sure we're not contradicting ourselves um in in you know, depending on which uh where you look. I mean, I I'm assuming that the the the designation uh that we are the window is now open for
developers because we are below 10%. If we don't even agree with that, um there's nothing left to discuss. uh you know we have to challenge that's my their right to even even um intervene in this case.
This this is my point John that we can't challenge this until it gets to the ZBA. So there should be some statement that just says look we we believe that this is an accounting issue of how we account for these things. And I don't know if
McCarrick we maybe we had discussion I can't remember before in the past whether this has actually even been challenged before but you know there needs to be a certificate of occup certificate of occupancy we've issued one it's just temporary says a temporary isn't valid
John I mean it's just a meaningless statement in a certain sense unless it's true that we are above 10%. Right. Um I believe that it is a meaningless statement regardless of whether we are
above 10% because Mass Housing in their consideration of a project eligibility letter doesn't look at that information. That information is not considered until it comes to the ZBA or presumably it would get considered if
the ZBA makes a ruling and then that re ruling gets appealed to the state zoning board of appeals. Is that the name of that body? Hack the housing. The housing board the the housing board. So So you know we could we could also say you know there aren't enough seats
in this room. Um but come on. Come on Michael. That's Michael. Michael, please. That that you know, you're you're actually demeaning the the point that I'm trying to make. It's not equivalent to how many chairs are it's not equivalent to how many chairs are in the in the room. Yeah. Well, that that that's true, but
he does make a a relevant point, and that is we can say that Mass Housing is going to cross it off and say, let's read the rest of the letter. I I think it will damage our credibility as a thoughtful body to put in a statement that we know that they will
not consider. Okay. How do you know they wouldn't consider it? Okay. Wait. So that's an amendment. It's okay. On the amendment. Can you Can you articulate your amendment? Yeah. I My amendment is for for for we
to have the directive Cara Brutin insert the safe harbor language that was included before but reference the existing project that that has its temporary occupancy. Could I could I suggest a specific sentence? Yes. At the uh very first paragraph, the
last sentence would there would be sentence added that says the select board believes we are in a safe harbor now due to 10% of the units having a certificate of occupancy and and why why would why would mass
housing care about that? Well, that we don't just yeah actually inaccurate. Let her let her answer the question. She you Bernard asked her a question. she's going to answer. So, the state in their regulations does
take into account the local housing efforts the town has made. This is why we mentioned where we were where we thought we were with percentage of land last summer. They care and weigh how how much has the town moved in addition to
what's being proposed. So that is why I drafted the letter along the same lines of the case in Easton which was very rare that relied on the fact in the regulations that local
significant housing production includes things like as of right multif family zoning. Okay. So, so mass housing the question is you're saying mass housing will take into consideration or look at that sentence. Um,
it reflect it reflects the housing production the recent there's a whole section in the in the letter about recent housing the rates right? Yeah. Are they gonna are they going to investigate whether that's a true statement or not? I don't think they'll care whether that's true. That's the ZBA and then the
housing appeals committee decision to be made later. But it it does reflect where h the recent production that the housing has made towards housing needs. David, I think it's important for us to be accurate in our statements, but I do agree with Paul's broader point that it
is concerning that we allow developers to control the timeline of when we're in the safe harbor or not. I am not opposed to having language to that effect in this letter. Uh but I do object to the precise construction of it as being
presented now because it's not accurate. Okay. That we have 10% uh with certificate of occupancy. If we wanted to spell out in detail the exact situation we're in the delay because of the venting system that uh we
have met the spirit of 10%. Something like that. I just want to be truthful. Okay. Uh Paul has a motion on the floor. Let's vote on that. It is it would be it would be the sentence that that Carriage just articulated,
right? Okay. All in favor John Vansek? No. Uh Paul Warren. Yeah, of course you got to say yes. Paul, come on. Yeah. Uh David Pearlman, no. Um Michael Rubenstein, no.
Uh and chair votes no. So, okay. Okay, now we're back to John's original motion. Um, everyone clear on what that is? Yes, Cara? I amend John's original motion and just say what I'm hearing is that you all are comfortable with using the phrase
consistent with instead of closer to throughout the letter. Yes. Yes. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Um, unless anyone has any further discussion or questions. Uh, all in favor of John's motion. I
Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you call John Vanak. I jumped the gun. I Paul Warren. No. Um, David Pearlman. I Michael Rubenstein. Hi. I know which way the wind's blowing, so I'll vote I, too. Okay.
Welcome to the club. No. No, I'm not in your club. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Just Yes. Before we move on though, I do want to reassure the neighborhood, similar to our to our uh discussion with 16
Williams, we are listening. This is an ongoing process. The first draft is a first draft. There will be more changes. Uh we have a dispute here about the best strategy to take in a letter to mass housing, but essentially we're still
saying even in the letter that got approved that uh the PEL should only be approved if it's consistent with Harvard Street zoning. That's essentially what it's saying. We're just we're just not flat out saying reject it. So, but David, you do real you do realize,
David, that that they can but they can approve whatever they want now because you're not saying deny it. They can say, "Well, thanks for asking for four stories. We can make it five." They could always approve whatever they want. They always approve. So, we've had no credibility as a board. Just outright rejections. I think it's time for a
change in our practice and see if it works better. Okay. Um, so we had the vote. Let's go on to the next item of uh on the agenda, information technology policies. Uh, is Fun on Zoom? Yes. Okay.
Hello, Fun. Hi. Good evening. Good evening. Talk to us about these policies and and then the various 34 is it guidance guidances that uh we're not we're not being asked to read.
Let's make make that clear. No, you're not asked to read the 34 policies and guidelines only the three I'm presenting and that's in your packet. So, um hi, I'm Fun. I'm uh the chief information officer, information technology department. Good evening,
Chair Green, members of the board, Mr. Kerry and Miss Golf. Um I um let me uh bring my slide up. I only have a very few so um it's getting late. I know uh it's it's been a long night for you
guys. Um Tiffany, am I able to share? Yes, you should be. Okay, great. Okay. Are you able to see my slides? Okay, great. So, um well, these
policies, the three of them, um have um that I'm going to present. Uh hold on one second. Let me move this window aside. Okay. So, um have been reviewed by the information technology um advisory
committee, office of town council, HR, town minister's office, and by chair green and the board uh the select board members. Thank you all for your valuable feedback. In particular, I would like to extend my sincere appreciation to Mr. Michael Rubenstein who spent a great
deal of time um reviewing or revising the three policies that were developed at different times to make sure the terms we're using are defined well and are consistently used across all three policies and the language is simplified
for general users. So thank you for your experience and and fresh set of eyes. So the three policies are information technology resource use policy uh the general uh gener generative uh artificial intelligence use policy
written information security policy. So I'll start with the first one. The existing ITR use policy was adopted by the sled board in 2000. The policy framework is good. Most of the updates are in the acceptable use section. It
outlines user responsibilities, acceptable and unacceptable use, email and public records law, network security in the sense of in the context of users and enforcement and disciplinary action. It provides clear definition of terms,
defines roles and responsibilities. So that's a revision of an existing policy. And then the next the second one is a new generative AI policy. Excuse me. Fun. Yep. Um you we talked about a um revision or
an amendment to unacceptable use number one which I think is very important. So just make sure people are aware of that before they vote. Yes. So the uh change that Cher Green uh was referencing is uh is uh the
unacceptable use number one. If you look at page two of the first policy, uh let me read the original language and then let me tell you what the change that was proposed by chair green. So sending, receiving, downloading, displaying, forwarding, printing or otherwise
disseminating material that is profane, obscene, harassing, fraudulent, offensive or defamatory other than uh for legitimate work related matters. So, Chair Green was uh recommended to use um
instead of work rellated matters uh uh to say limited law enforcement and similar or and other similar matters. Uh so that was the the change that's recommended. I I thought that you know the language is a little too open-ended
that um uh you know and what is the legitimate workrelated um uh matter in terms of downloading I don't know pornography or or other things. I I think we I thought we had to be a little more precise there that you know this
was limited to law enforcement of course but al also other legitimate uh purposes like HR um I assume the library does monitoring of uh of the usage of their equipment things like that.
You you have a question? Yes, I have a I have a question. Um, I'm wondering how this applies to the incorporation of material. Uh, okay. Let me be specific. I'm thinking of a use case where, for example,
somebody produces educational materials um on a relatively sensitive matter, sexual health for example. Um, and they include some material that may be graphic. Um, and some people may consider that material obscene or
profane. Um, and others may not. Um, and I'm just concerned about, um, what the validation process or verification process is for a use case like that so that we don't end up selfensoring um, our educational
any educational materials that the town might produce. Uh, in that regard, yeah. Um, I think that's separate from you what I'm suggesting we add here. But how do we deal with that generally in in the
policy fund? Well, um, well, I think it would be if if someone was violating the policy, there'd be an investigation. And so I would assume that that would be the determination of the investigator um in terms of whether or not the content was inappropriate and
and in violation of the policy. But if if anyone if um you know fun if I'm not sure if you've had you know uh use cases that you might be able to refer to on how this particular section um might have been dealt with, but I would assume that during you know the
investigation it would be something that would be addressed. Yeah. So we we haven't had a use case. Um um um in general um you know if there's a complaint about violation of the policy um HR conducts investigation
and then uh so um Ann's has his has her hand up so probably I will let h an answer that question and you're muted. Thank you. Ann Braga, HR director for the town of Brooklyn. Um when there is
an allegation of inappropriate use of um IT resources or any town resources, um we would look at the um total situation. So in the case that was was defined where it was um used for sexual health
and there were um graphic anatomic pictures that kind of thing um there would there would be warning of that for whoever's participating. But in in that particular use case, if it's being used for a legitimate work-related purpose,
um then that just on that narrow scope um as provided for a use case wouldn't be found in violation because the the generally accepted definitions of obscene and profane are that there is no um redeeming value of of the um of the
content. And in this particular case, if it's used um appropriately for educational purposes, I'm not talking about, you know, showing porn or something like that, but um where you're you're using it for an educational or training purpose, then um you know,
while there might be an allegation of, you know, inappropriate use um in that particular case. And as with anything else, they're all fact specific. um we'd be looking at, you know, the the training focus and where the intended audience is. And hopefully people would
reach out um to HR um or um it if they were going to present on something that is sensitive um that they were looking for guidance on ahead of time. Right. That's why I'm I'm sorry I don't have the your specific language in front
of me, but I I know it referred to law enforcement and other related um and and other similar work rellated matters and that would be HR be the schools for example library
but but not for example public health public health I guess yeah the point is is that there had a person accused of downloading something that's inappropriate would have the burden of proving or showing
that they had a legitimate reason for downloading that. And I think what Ann is saying is that HR is sort of our writer of that. Right. And I and I'm I my concern is that is that the more restrictive language if you don't spell out like all
the all the places that that somebody might inadvertently self censor their own activity. Yeah. In in a less productive way in anticipation of like being caught up by this policy.
The town administrator has his hand raised. Pardon me. Uh the town administrator has his hand raised. Right, Chaz. Well, I think the catch all language that Bernard has proposed deals with this, you know, other legitimate workplace uses. Um, you know, it does
limit it specifically to to the law enforcement context, but it provides an example. Um, and then our what I would hope in this instance would be that to Ant's point, right, if someone is doing something that would approach a line, people know, all right, generally speaking, I shouldn't be downloading,
you know, you know, anatomy pictures without uh without cause that they would go to HR in advance and say, "Hey," or to it in advance and say, "Hey, I need to do this for a public health reason. can we just make sure that people know and that it's not flagged and we don't
waste time on this. And so when those things happen, we are available and it's very easy for us to do that in advance. Um and so I would hope I don't think people would self censor. I don't think open the open-ended language at the end
um would cause someone to self censor. I just think it would make sure that people say, "All right, is my is my work covered by this? I better check to be sure. Okay, Ann, you have your hand over there. Um, and and that presupposes that um the
filters that are already in place through it would allow you to actually download those things. Okay. So, if you need to download them, you'd want to ask it to release the filters, I assume.
Yeah. Okay. Okay. It's fine. Um okay. Should I proceed? Yep. Okay. So um the second policy is the new generative
AI policy. Well, artificial intelligence is not a new concept. It was uh first named in 1956. So AI comprises of machine learning, robotics, and natural language processing. Many systems have been using this technology for a while. But since
uh November of 2022 when open AI launched the chat GBT AI has gained unprecedented attention. Generative AI is a type of AI that creates new content as text, images, audio, video and
software code. So the rapid u technological advancement and everinccreasing unsanctioned and ad hoc use of AI tools by users without approval uh creates governance challenges for many organizations including local governments like us. So
this generative AI policy is intended to provide clear guidance to our users. Uh to prevent misuse or unintended consequences, to minimize organizational risks, to provide transparency and create public trust and to promote
innovations in safe and ethical ways. And then the third um policy is called written information security policy. Um data governance is important very important and critical um is extremely important and critical with the
advancement of AI technology. It is even more so. So the third this policy WISP uh this is an overarching policy that is designed to protect um the confidentiality, integrity and
availability of information data. It outlines high level framework for managing information security risks. It is also a set of documented policies, guidelines, protocols, procedures to protect sensitive information. And uh
chair green mentioned the 34 list uh which is in the uh back of this policy uh that all that's the list of documented uh guidelines and policies. Um and uh with separating that actually
it's a Mr. uh Rubenstein's good idea to separate that from the policy the high level framework policy um gives you know um the uh departments the agility and also you know change the guidelines uh when technology changes you know because
we know technology changes very fast. So this make you know makes the high level framework uh longlasting but also the subsequent guidelines that uh that are much easier for for departments to change. So so we're more you know
efficient and more agile if you will and also written information security policy is a requirement of mass data privacy regulation and it applies to all departments and users. So um the policy revision uh that we
talked about the new policy development and adoption are very important part of our holistic cyber security program as it is improving and maturing as you can see from our national cyber security review. Uh we have made huge progress in the past few years due to the
understanding of the importance of cyber security by the town leadership like you all and the funding provided via grants during co that accelerated our digital transformation but also accelerated our um you know building up of our cyber
security program and also the funding IT operating budget and also of course your dedicated IT department staff. So the the uh NISK framework version 2.0 pulled out governance um out of the five
categories identify, protect, detect, respond, recover uh to emphasize its importance in uh in this increasingly fastchanging digital landscape and the three policies are part of that. Um so
um since this these three policies have been reviewed by all the governing bodies um extensively so I highly recommend you um approve the three policies tonight.
So um with that said that's that concludes my presentation and um if you have any comments or questions. Okay. Uh, I'd like to do this by just asking anyone or asking if anyone uh
objects to just approving policies or do you want to have a more discussion? I'm ready to say yes. Yeah. Pardon me. I'm ready to say yes. Okay. Um, I just have one clarifying question. Okay. That's all. Um,
thank you so much um uh director um for this work. Um, I really appreciate the framework that you're putting in place. Um, I just I had one question and this will probably be answered in one of the 34 policies um
probably having to do with data classification. Um, but I wanted to understand um with regard to publicly available data that is provided on the town's website um whether that is uh
spreadsheets or documents and so forth. Um, I just want to make sure that from the IT department's perspective, none of that data um, in the form that it is presented on on the town's website is considered
privileged or is considered privileged information in any way. so that if somebody uses that data within the context of their town work that they can be confident that that data um doesn't run a foul of um privacy concerns etc.
All the information that's published on the town website should be public information. So I uh don't believe any sensitive data is published on the town website. There might be restrictions related to the use of the town seal though because that is under the purview of the town clerk. Yeah.
Okay. The the other thing is not on the town website, but we receive uh attorney confidential material and you know that that of of course you know has to be uh kept in confidence. Yeah. No, I'm thinking about and privilege. Yeah.
I'm thinking about things like um like the the the property assessments or the list of town meeting members and so forth, right? The list of town meeting members I think is publicly available and I believe all of their addresses and
emails do have to be. So that one is um live on the website. Sorry, Tiffany Levas and town administrator for operations. But I I do get the train of thought that you're thinking on I mean for example with licensing um folks are able to search all of the licensed facilities but there is protected information that's blocked out of that
portal um that's personally identifiable information and not public. Sure. there they're also technical uh materials in connection with I don't know building committees and things like that and there's a specific um specific um exception to the public records act
for those types of things so right anything else any other questions okay then I move approval of all three of the policies the information technology resource use policy the generative artificial int intelligence policy and
the written information security policy. All in favor of approving one amendment. I think we can also approve the IT security program policies and guidelines list. That's not part of the other three policies. Um is that something we we're supposed to approve? because I thought that those
were the sort of day-to-day details of that that implement these policies as and and and those can change you know as as technology changes etc. I was just acknowledging the fact that
this list exists as as part of our policies. I I could be wrong. I think it's similar to when Christina had her policies, there were the the operating guidelines that are separate from the policies and so this would function in the same way. Yeah.
Yeah. I I I would recommend not including it into in the three policies you are voting. Yep. Okay. Yeah. And that that was u providing us with information as to the existence of those policies. Thank you. Um Okay. Did I finish my motion? I think
I did. All in favor, please indicate by saying I. John Vancoyak. Hi Paul Warren. Hi uh David Pearlman. Hi uh Michael Rubenstein. Hi and chair votes. I thank you phone. Thank you very much done.
Okay. Hey uh next select forward goals and objectives. Okay Stephanie you want to lead us through this discussion? Yes I'm happy. 9:15 at night. I'm happy to start us off. Well, this is a preliminary review, of
course, and we've just digested information that you gave us from the work uh work session last time. Again, sorry, assistant Todd administrator for operations, Tiffany Oliva. Um, so just a recap of kind of process since the work session. So, um, obviously at the work session, we went through the list of
fiscal year 26 goals and objectives and we went one by one and decided um, are we going to carry it over to fiscal 27? Are we going to pull it up and out to the 2030 roadmap or are we going to uh remove it because it might be completed
um within fiscal year 26? Um with that we narrowed down the carryover from fiscal year 26 to six items, six or seven items. Um and then we generated a list of 25 potential additions for fiscal year 27. Um since the work
session, we met um individually and also in groups with department heads. Um we met individually with planning and community development director Cara Brutin who's online and also individually oh is in the room uh and also individually with um department p
department of public works commissioner chute um and then we met in groups with the remaining department heads uh with the exception of we did not meet with um the director of office of diversity, equity, inclusion and community relations and we did not meet with the interimm director for public health and
human services um due to scheduling conflicts. Um so with that said, uh between the feedback you all provided and um the discussion with department division heads, I've put together a list of 16 um fiscal year 27 goals and
objectives. Um one major thing that I left out was reference to the community health improvement plan and I caught that um while speaking with our council on aging director um yesterday. So, I have not had the chance to actually go in and add that one in there, but I just want to note that was a major leaveout
that I definitely want to go out uh go back and add because you all discussed it during the work session. Um, I'm going to pull the goals and objectives up on the screen. Let me ask a question. Uh, you're going to meet with um the diversity director
and the health director before our next meeting. Before the next meeting. Yes, we'll follow up with them. I assume, but I just wanted to Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Um and so just a note here um the first column has the drafted language and then the third column um has kind of notes changes that
uh references the original language you propose any questions um that came up as we were hashing these out and we've highlighted several of the goals and objectives in blue a lot of those are housing and planning and community development related which is um why I
also asked um the director Brutinv here uh to help us answer any questions and guide discussion there. So, um interested to hear your reactions to the goals and objectives, what was left out, what needs to be changed, and what technical questions you might have in
particular for um Director Brutin or Commissioner Shu. Michael. Um okay, so first of all, thank you. um uh Tiffany and all the others that you
met with to uh bring this list. Uh there's obviously a lot of work here. Um I am a little concerned that there is there is a very long list here um with lots of detail, but we have an amazing staff. that um I tr I trust their uh
ability to both filter um their capacity uh and to uh help guide us through this. Um looking at the first item in planning for the future. Um let me focus my comments there. Um, we had a pretty we
had somewhat of a robust discussion about the real estate asset board um in an earlier select board meeting and I'm one I'm not sure if I saw that board specifically referenced here in any
place. Um, but is it proper to assume that that real estate asset board is involved in the completion of the first objective given its charge? Um, and the second comment I have about this item is
that, um, if that is the case, um, there are a number of other plans aside from the three that are listed, the comprehensive plan, the open space and recreation plan, and the climate action and resiliency plan that I believe need
to be incorporated into the consideration of, you know, how we use our assets and sort uh how we uh manage the implementation and funding of all those various plans. So, I'm a
little concerned that if we just have those three in the list, then all of the other things that we might also have on that list um would be uh relegated in a way that we don't necessarily want to signal. Um, as for your question on the
real property asset board, the only mention of the real property asset board, if I'm recalling correctly, um, is on row 11. And this was one that, um, director Brutin Br or sorry, it's getting late. Um Cara came up with um
and it says assign the real property asset board to review use of town-owned properties caretaking agreements as a potential option for public employee housing in the 80 to 100% area median income range. So um focusing less on the
real property asset board overall charge which I think is um kind of more addressed in the fiscal year 26 objectives. Um, this is more focusing on an item that uh, Chair Green had brought up with respect to public employee
housing. Um, but, uh, Director Brutin, I know, has been working on taking in some feedback related to the real property asset board. I don't know if you can better address the questions or vice chair Pearlman also, who I know has been working on um, taking that feedback from staff and other sources together to come
up with some language for the real property asset board. Am I better address your question? Right. I specifically in the context of of this item uh with permission, Chair Green. So the uh Car Brutin, director of
planning, I hear your specific question, Michael, about making sure that we're listing all of the specific studies. And Tiffany, if you could go back up to the top for a second. Yep. I'm wondering if a helpful catchall would be um and other plans um
major planning effort by that coming out of other plans summarized or prioritized other plans prioritized by the comprehensive plan because a comprehensive plan certainly is a wide net that has all of these plans that have been floating around and are going to be trying to prioritize a
lot of those those items including um a work plan that comes out of it. So that might be just a helpful reference that would capture all of those plans that are listed on that website. Um there may also be others of course. Do you do you want to make it broader
than just uh the ones that it looks like that that um I'm I'm looking at the first phrase of this determine a phased approach for implementing and funding elements of the compreh of the comprehensive plan
parenthesis open space recreation plan and climate action resiliency plan you know which is an important goal. Um if if I were to think for example like where does you mentioned the community health improvement plan um we also have
a housing production plan we have a vision zero plan etc etc um and and so I'm just I'm concerned that if we have a body um that is looking at implementing and
funding elements that they that they also have an equally wide net. Are you thinking you'd want to add and any uh recommendations from the real estate asset board? Does that get to what you're
I think he's worried about missing a planning effort that's not referenced in the goal. Okay. Yeah. I'm I'm wondering if so like the first item on that goals and objectives does not specifically mention the real property asset board, right? So, I think we're starting to inter intermingle
those efforts um which are slightly different and I think the real asset property board as first envisioned started with um real property like land that has a building on it or town assets that have a building on it and the
comprehensive plan is going to address far greater than that. So, I don't know that we should intermingle real property asset board with that first goer objective. Um, I think we could broaden and out, but I think as a reminder, um, the fiscal year 27 goals and objectives
don't need to touch every single plan that we're working on. May maybe maybe I can propose an alternative. If this goal is specifically talking about implementing and funding elements of the comprehensive plan, then it may make more sense to remove the reference to
the other two plans so that this this goal is like specific. And if we want to take up the the implementation of funding of elements of other plans, then that would be separate and independent goals. And we can have we can separate
we can separate and prioritize those debates independently because that that I actually feel is a significant select board role. Okay. Um, Commissioner Shu has a I'm sure a comment and also looks like select board member Warren also has his
hand up. I don't know if it's about the same discussion. Aron Chu, Commissioner of Public Works. I think one point I was going to get to is I think that the sort of the real property question and um consideration of priorities and
implementation of these plans are separate uh in terms of overall as a goal. And I think the reason why these came together and they certainly don't need to around the comp plan, the open space plan, and the climate action and
resiliency plan is that those are all um going to be sort of very new uh plans for the select board that you'll be um looking at and uh hopefully adopting in the coming year. We see the open space
um recreation plan will be coming before you uh in uh 2025. and probably the the KARP the climate action resiliency plan in 2026. So just seeing those kind of the having some type of road map and keeping the momentum going is something
that we were talking about and those are all feeding into the uh comprehensive plan as well. So, I think it's certainly fine to um eliminate those in your goals for 2027 and we can revisit that um in the future, but they will be very
contemporary um goals that uh members of the community have worked on and we thought those may be things that you want to highlight as you move into 2027. Okay. Oh, yeah. Um, I just I wanted um Tiffany, could you put the
Yes. the list back up. Thank you. Uh, I just I wanted to suggest that we not specifically say uh mention the um the real asset board. Okay. And just make it and just make it an
objective that says review if you I need to see where it is. So, so yeah. So get rid of I'm suggesting that we get rid of assign the real property asset board. I'm suggesting eliminate that and just say
review use of town owned properties agreements etc. And who does that? It may be a real asset board. I know we're stoked to having a discussion about what is a real asset board and do we need one? So you know I'm suggesting let's take that out. Let's take the assignment out of the goal and just have the
objective which is review use of town owned properties etc etc. Okay. And then to if you scroll up to Michael's point, um, and I think which Erin just spoke to, um, I think the the spirit of this goal
is to instead of having plans that just sit on a shelf that we're actually starting to execute through, uh, funding, right? So, what are the phases to fund? I think that's what we're trying trying to get at. Um I think it's okay to list them but um I think the key
statement here is determine a phased approach and implementation and funding elements or the following. It could be comprehensive plan and these other incillary things but I think the key is phasing and funding so stuff doesn't sit on the shelf.
Okay, good. Any other comments, questions, especially on the ones that were in blue? Um, I can go through those. So, one was to continue to work with planning and community development staff to enable funding and select board support for the
next two town actions in parenthesis reszoning, sale of land, etc. that would enable significant additional property revenue or new growth parenthesis, which which would bring at least 500,000 additional property tax revenue per year. Um, sorry, let me en I enlarged
this. Let me make it a little bit bigger. Okay. Consulting funding from the general fund for planning and community development will continue to prioritize projects that add to commercial property growth. So, there was initial language that was proposed by select board um member um Vancoak on
this one. Um, how do we like this current language slash um director Brutin? I don't know if you have anything you'd like to add or share on um the shaping of this goal and how you arrived at this new language. I think we talked about what types of projects this might mean. I think that's
that's just to give a little bit of context. Um if you don't mind, and where did we come up with the number 500,000 that was proposed by John? I think it was off the top of my head to
be honest with you. And also just a note that um Paul has his hand raised. Okay. Do you want um No, go ahead. Okay. I found um the direction that the sle board was going very helpful to have, you know, something about something big enough that we're talking about a half million dollars. Like
that's actually very helpful direction to say that that's what kind of project you're you're talking about because this is an objective just for one fiscal year. We're coming to you every year saying, "Here's the next two or three projects that we see in the pipeline that might shift around based on
political support funding and property owners being willing to actually do something." We'll continue to do that. I thought it might be helpful for for you all to have this be about, you know, funding. What's the next step to help these things actually happen? As everybody
knows here, any one of those projects that are a product of that size will most likely require reszoning and will most likely take 10 years. So, I think the idea hopefully is to keep the pipeline going, right? Not rest on our laurels, but okay, what's the
next one? What's the next one? And we got we got to keep the What size project generates $500,000 in property tax? Is that a You say it's a large project. How large? Right. So, uh, the children's hospital expansion years ago was was brings 2
million project, right? Brings 2 million a year. Um, half a million dollars. I don't think I wrote the numbers. Didn't want to. Sorry. Okay. Had this ready to go and I don't. But something like 80 units residential units, something like that.
And how often do we get those? Residential we don't get unless it's a 40B. Yeah. Um, Paul has his hand up. in commercial we do get with resonings. So we've had multiple hotels um that's true and those come in every you know three to five years.
Okay Paul my my hand is not up or not. Sorry. Okay David just regarding you gave an example on the residential side of 80 units producing 500,000 in uh revenue growth. What about on the commercial side? What
type of project would lead to that? not good at doing this on the fly. Um, let me come back to you. I I have these in notes, but I think it's something like 75,000 square feet of commercial, something something like that. A huge commercial site, right?
But, you know, remember the Porsche dealership just uh doubled or tripled in size. That's bringing in new commercial growth. These these things do happen. Sometimes they're just not as controversial. So, are we talking about TJ Maxx size commercial to get to 500,000 or
more than that? Uh, let's see. A grocery store is about 200,000 or about 150 200,000 square feet. If that gives you a sense of of size. Okay. Um,
any Yes, Michael. So, so I'm I'm noticing in the wording that it sounds like it's very important that the goal include uh enable funding and select board support, right? So, I mean
this is a list of select board goals. Um I mean I guess that seems redundant with the select board function. So, so I'm wondering if we can actually focus the goal language on the specifics because I think we can all acknowledge and it's
true for this one. Uh it's also true with the first one. It's also true with the 100% housing one that all of these things are going to require funding and select board support. Um, and so in a sense, what I'm what I'm hearing from
you, Tiffany, and you, Carara, is that that you're asking us to make to make funding and support and focus decisions through this through this process is well, if I could chime in here, I think
it is helpful to understand where the priorities lie so that when we do need to make funding decisions, we have a clear sense of where to put the the limited resources that we do have. So, as an example, the discussion that the board has had over the last couple of years around street rehabilitation and
the priorities that need to be happening there, that has been very helpful as we're building the CIP and trying to allocate resources. So, you know, if everything's a priority, nothing is a priority. So, we need to make sure that, you know, and I think that's really where the road map is going to help as
well because those will kind of be broader broader priorities and then we'll have some more specifics with the year-to-year goals. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Um the other ones uh we highlighted in blue we we talked a little bit about um re re removing the
reference to the real property asset board in this one to be just review use of town owned properties care caretaking agreements as a potential option for public employee housing in the 80 to 100% area median income range. Um we if there are additional comments on that um
please let us know. Um there were a couple that we added kind of or that uh Cara added through the sense of the board at the last work session. So um one is direct the planning board and housing advisory board to report on a prioritized list of strategies to
increase the number of deed restricted income housing serving households between 80% and 100% AMI. This could range from incentivizing or buying restrictions on existing units to new construction. We also added ask property
owners and the development community to give advice on whether and in what way the Harvard Street zoning needs to be adjusted to be more utilized if interest rates drop to a point where multifamily non-40B development construction starts to resume in the area. Um I have an
error here. I apologize for that. Um, and then work with the housing advisory board and planning board to create inclusionary zoning incentives or other zoning incentives for households in the 80 to 100% area median income range. So, it would be helpful to get feedback from
the board today or even after today on um if this language is right in the direction that you were going for. Um, are there other questions that you were hoping to get answers to? I was just about to say or which one of these is most important like you know but I was just trying to give language to give a
little more specificity about the this idea behind uh 80 and 100% AMI what do we want to do next um if it's row 12 13 or 14 is a higher priority not that we can't do two things but it would be helpful to get
feedback from you all of you know one two three or if one of those is isn't actually something that you feel like is a top priority for board. Yeah. Are are though do we really have to prioritize those three? It seems like they sort of go together, don't they?
If if you want them all, that's also feedback. I'm just I'm saying that uh working with uh Sleptboard's office, we were thinking of like three different ways that that could be articulated.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but rows 12 and 14 were ultimately towards the same goal. Is that right? So yes, I I have heard some people in general talk about the Harvard Street
zoning because it requires on-site affordable units and the option to do a little bit higher percent AMI. that that could be another action that helps meet that 80 to 100% AMI goal. Sure. Sure. But but I mean I I certainly
agree that identifying ways to serve households between 80 and 100% AMI is an important goal. And I also agree that working with the housing advisory board and the planning board to figure out ways to do that is is worthwhile.
I mean, I I I guess I in terms of like operationalizing, it seems like 12 and 14 are the same goal to me, and I'm I'm trying to understand if they're if they're different. I would say one is asking the the HAB
for their um expertise in this world and bring you some options whereas 14 is saying we don't need the the lecture we want you to create more more units. So one's about the policy and one's about bring us the units.
Oh I would this Yeah. Go ahead. U sorry I my bandwidth is really wonky so I'm I'm hearing every other word. Um just let me know if you can't hear me. Um did these come out of our workshop or what? And again I only
heard every other word. Where did these come from? These three did we spoke specifically during our workshop at these ones? Okay. I think sorry. So, um you at the workshop you all discussed a couple of
different things and so uh 12 and 14 um more so came out of this um request to increase the availability of affordable housing up to 100% and marketing the town's available AD and 100% options to employees. Um so this was one of the
contributions from Chair Green. Um and I think also us trying to navigate the carryover from fiscal 26 related to the previous goal and objective of support development of new mixed income multifamily residential housing in areas um in the consensus plan. Um so based on
what we heard in the workshop um and based on what was submitted after the workshop, we revised some of this language to try to get a better sense from you all on direction today. What? I'm not sure Paul is done. Are you done, Paul?
Yeah. I just um I guess the the one where we're I think it's I don't necessarily think it needs to be one of our goals to talk to the developers to find out how we should make the changes on Harvard Street. Um I think that could just come as a natural course, but
should it be a select board goal um to propose new zoning? It sounds like we're going to propose new zoning on Harvard Street potentially. Yeah. Yeah. I mean that's for me that's helpful feedback is just to strike that row. That's that's fine. I just I mean that that may come out of
a we I mean I know we're going to probably that's a topic of the comprehensive plan, isn't it? Um and would be coming out of the comprehensive plan as a priority if that's Yes. And it's something they want to do. Yes. Planning staff is already doing. So I I Okay. Why don't we take it out of our goals and objectives and put it in the
comprehensive plans lab or planning and community developments lab? I mean I mean if you're going to do that in Excuse me. Yeah, go ahead. If if you're going to do that in this case, there are a number of other things that would would equally fall under the
comprehensive plan. So I guess the question is should the select board have a set of goals you know for the for the sake of uh ensuring better greener income diverse housing that that we
recognize are worthy of town staff work um independent of or in parallel with the comprehensive plan. I believe the answer is yes but others may legitimately disagree. Well, and and and it's yes because these are goals that
have a time frame, right? That is fiscal year 27, right? I mean, and I mean that that I think that was what we're trying to do is identify fiscal year 27 goals as opposed to other goals that have a longer time span
in in the um what what's that plan called? Road map. Yeah. I just my only my only point is is that you're leapfrogging the comprehensive plan. So you're essentially saying we're going to priorit I'm not saying that's a bad thing. I'm just saying it's a thing that if if you're saying prioritize these
three four things for the planning community development team and uh when the comprehensive plan is done which is going to be done toward towards the end of this year um you know you there may be a different set of priorities that come out of from the community and
you're already chasing these that that's all I mean Cara would know better because she's closer to it with the consultants but these two things could conflict Um, that's all. Is that true, Cara? They could conflict.
Sorry, Tiffany, if you could bring up that. Oh, yes, absolutely. One more time. Um, so row 13 that talked about having conversations with property owners. We're doing that now. We've been doing that. We'll continue to do that. I don't think that needs to take up much more of your your time here tonight.
Yeah. Um the row before that that invites the HAB to have a more interactive conversation with you all about how to get to the 80 100% AMI I think would be a very productive next step for FY27
and wouldn't risk strain too far from probably where the community will end up whereas the row 14 is more about creating units and I I think that's where I it would be helpful for me to get feedback from you all whether
creating units is a goal that you want to set down for FY27 in that income range. Um because that would influence things like what do we do with Babcock Street? What do we do with Kent Street? What do we do with Fiser Hill? That's how that that would be folded into the
work that we're doing. Um but if you were to take it out then that would leave the window for the comp plan to finish up over the winter. I mean, it would be Oh, sorry. Go ahead, Paul. No, I was just gonna I'll follow on to that real quick, Michael. That you know,
it would be great if we could get Waldo Durgen moving, which would cover a lot of would help with a lot of our goals on this sheet, right? Commercial space, residential space. We add that as a goal. What would be the goal?
get ask Eddie to get moving. I to to talk to Eddie Zooker and get moving. Please, please get moving. Yeah, I mean I think that fits I think that fits pretty well under row seven. Um the
uh enable significant additional property revenue, new growth, which would each bring in at least 500,000 additional property tax revenue per year. Obviously, I I think it's safe to say that Waldo Durkin would fit in that category.
So I So So I think we're I think we're covered there. I mean with regard to rows 12, 13, and 14, I mean, I think it would be good for the select board to say to the planning and and community
development department that we are looking for you to create these, you know, to mo to create these incentives and bring them back to us um and to um to work on Harvard Street and, you
know, bring that bring that back to us. I I don't I don't think that that's that's ultimately in conf uh in conflict with the comprehensive plan. I would hope that it would be additive to the comprehensive plan.
Yeah. Okay. Okay. That's helpful feedback. Thank you. Um the last one I highlighted in blue um was related to um one that I think there was some mixed opinions about at the end of the work session um
related to guard rails for Prop 2 and a half. Um we've refined it a little bit and um the language you've come up with and would really appreciate some additional thoughts perspective on it is continue on the work of the expenditures and revenue study committee by
evaluating and implementing um recommendations including but not limited to a new town school split memorandums of agreement on shared services guard rails related to future proposition 2 and a half override considerations um etc whatever other recommendations
come out and then if proposed was recommended by the expenditures and revenues um study committee. Um oh sorry actually that was just a repetitive I apologize that was the end of it. So any thoughts on POP two and a half and if that's something um the select board
wants to uh explore guard rails for. What would be a guard rail for Prop 2 and a half? I mean not as if we have any control over it. Uh or do we? Well, I think this was around policies around the um you know, we have policies within
the levy on what our debt burden can be, but we've had conversations about, you know, what that would be outside of the levy. But I think one of the things that we are worried about is, you know, setting a policy that would look like it would be binding a future board, which obviously it's the board's prerogative to set these levels.
Um and so trying to figure out a way to to kind of change that a little bit. So that's why we've got some of the additional language in there. David, sorry David, my recollection is at the workshop John had raised the point that taxpayers want
some type of certainty about how much their taxes will increase year-over-year or in segments of five years. Some sense that we would not exceed a certain level. So that was the context discussion came up in and as you just
mentioned there was some concern about binding a future board from uh taking some kind of action which we cannot do but my interpretation of John's remark was more what would be sort of our general policy what would we try to
avoid what type of guarantee would we try to give to the taxpayers so that they have an understanding of what's coming and uh when would support or oppose uh property tax increases on that basis.
Yeah. If if you tell people that this is what we're aiming for and you know world falls apart and we can't reach that then some people will say well you violated your you violated your agreement with
with taxpayers by raising taxes higher than you were trying to keep them below. Bernard, may I speak? Um, so we already have a tax certainty agreement. It's called Proposition 2 and a half and it
can only be overridden by the voters. So there's already a guard rail there. Yeah. So what what what the community might find helpful is if we could forecast out beyond this override and get to the next
one and say if growth continues to happen the way it is, you can ex, you know, we would anticipate all things being equal, we didn't add additional commercial space, whatever. Um, you know, this is what the deficit would look like in in the next six years um to
to forecast it. But I I I think we got to be really careful in saying that we're going to have a policy that says we can't go beyond X. We already have that policy. It's called Proposition 2 and a half. Michael, um I'm just reading the text of line 21
again. Um and I just want to make sure that we're debating the thing that's that's actually referenced in the in the text. I mean this talks about the work of the expenditures and revenue study committee you know and a town school split memorandums of agreement on shared
services a number of topics that have been taken up by the expenditures and revenue study committee in order to help us manage and make our finances more predictable and I and I'm think what this goal is asking is whether the
select board has as its goal to continue and enhance that work. Not the question of not the question of are we put are we putting
limitations on our ability to collect revenue or to ask for overrides. I mean these these things the town school split the memorandums of agreement on shared services are mostly guardrail are mostly issues of expense
not of revenue. So, so it seems like why don't we why don't we focus it why don't we focus it Michael on um on one I think you're right it's it's not about two and a half but what if we uh just
more focus this goal on the town school partnership um and continuing because I know there's more work uh to be done there and and focusing on that you know town school 2.0 or something. Yeah. Okay. That's helpful feedback. Thank
you. Um I did ask um Commissioner Chute to join us tonight just in case there was any um follow-up questions related to the DPW goals and objectives. Um like I mentioned, planning and DPWs were the ones we discussed the most. So are there any other follow-up questions for her on
items you brought up at the work session or what you see on the goals and objectives drafted related to DPW's work? I'm fine. Okay. All right. So, um I'll take the feedback from today and um work with
staff. We'll meet with um Lloyd and um John with um diversity, equity, inclusion, community relations, and then public health. Um and then I also failed to mention there was one other major ad that we wanted to add for fiscal year 27, which is um in the fiscal health category just related to thinking about
um the close out of American Rescue Plan Act funds um and and the um plan for stability there. So, we'll add some language related to that since that will happen um right in the middle of fiscal year 27 and is a pretty um big one. That is big.
Okay. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Next on the on the agenda is um boards and commissions reappointments. Um,
why don't we do those in on this fashion 16A through 16F. Anyone have any questions about anyone eiing? None. Let's uh vote. I move approval of the U appointments in items 16A through
16F uh to the various uh uh committees um in our agenda. All in favor please indicate by saying I. John Vancoyak. Hi Paul Warren. Hi.
Um I take it that was a okay that is I David Pearlman I um Michael Rubenstein I and chair votes eye next boards and boards and commissions appointments
question of appointing uh let's see I'll just read them Ruby De Brun and Virginia Simpson Gunnar to the Brooklyn Youth Council as members representing precincts 5 to 8 I I think that is something that John um had a hand in.
Oh, I just, you know, I made a suggestion which Chaz took me up on. So, good suggestion. Yeah. Um why don't we do though do that separate because it's a new council. Um I'm not sure that's a good reason to do it separately, but we'll do it. Okay.
Uh I move approval of um Ruby Dub and Virginia Simpson Gunner to the Brooklyn Youth Council. All in favor, please indicate by saying I. John Vancoyak. Hi. Paul Warren. Hi. David Pearlman. Hi. Michael Rubenstein. Hi. Chair Boss. Hi.
Before moving on, um I just had a question. Okay. Um I believe that Alec Liowitz in his recommendation letter had a couple of other recommendations and I didn't know whether those were reviewed or considered. I'm just wondering what the
status of those recommendations is. Um it's it's admittedly been a minute since I looked at his memo related to this one, but um for Ruby and V uh for precincts 5 through 8, there were at least one other individual who's uh recommended. However, there are
not any more seats available um on the youth council. Um so and and there are no more atlarge seats or not unless you appoint additional associate member uh seats which you
could um but I I I hesitate to recommend you to go down that path because there were a lot of other youth that also applied. Um so it starts to get a bit more slippery only one year you know right? Yeah. Okay. Uh, next a question of appoint of
appointing Bruce Erlick as an alternate member on the preservation commission. All in favor please indicate by saying I. John Vancoy I. Paul Warren I. David Pearlman. I. Michael Rubenstein. I chair votes I. Next. Council on aging reappointments
promotions and new appointments. Um, let's just go down one by one or let me just read them and then we can vote them together. Uh, citizen member reappointments, Sher Lee and John Mohane. Associate member reappointment,
Sue Muy. Associate to citizen member promotions, Marsha Goldstein and Enid Liieber and Rosalyn Low. New associate member appointments, Mark Chadborn, Janet Galbart, Marggo Rosenbach.
That's it. Um, I move approval of of those reappointments. um promotions and member appointments. All in favor, please indicate by saying I. John Vancoyak. Hi. Paul Warren. Hi. David Pearlman.
I just have a question if I may first. So for new associate member appointments, did we interview them or why not? That's handled by by the council on aging itself. Yeah. All right. I Okay. And um Oh, Michael Rubenstein.
Hi. And chair votes. And that is the end of our agenda unless someone in the audience or on Zoom would like to Is that the comment? Yes. I I just wanted to make sure that we voted 17A because I think the question was happening in the middle of the vote. So I just want to make sure that we just
17A. It's a blur for me. Yeah. Yeah, we voted that. Okay. You you got it. Okay. I'm saying it's a blur for me. So Oh, it's a blur. It's a blur. Why don't we just do it? So we can do it again. I remember voting it. So question
of appointing Ruby Dub Brun and Virginia Simpson Gunner to the Brookline Youth Council as members representing precincts 5 to 8. Uh just to confirm um all in favor please indicate by saying I. John Vancoy. Hi. Paul Warren. Hi. David Pearlman. Hi.
Michael Rubenstein I and Chair Bai. And you do still have one public comment waiting in the room. Okay. Neither are we. That's right. do it. Um, is this someone's Is this someone's laptop?
I don't want to. I can just hold. Oh, no. This is ours. Oh, okay. So, that should be there. Okay, great. Thank you. Okay, so almost there. Um, once again, I'm just Oh, do you want to start the Oh, you did. Okay. Once again, I'm just channeling others in this public comment. uh you've heard
enough from me lately and to be honest I've had enough of being called despicable and offensive in the various threads. So uh first I'm channeling Dr. Antonio Gardulo who was here earlier. He's a leading gynecological surgeon at
Brighamin Women's and a resident in the neighborhood for 30 years. He's in strong opposition to the victory programs plan and he says quote urban planning best practices advise against placing high impact or high needs facilities immediately adjacent to
sensitive uses such as schools and elder care residences. This is not a rejection of recovery housing itself but a call for responsible sighting that balances the goals of such programs with the duty to safeguard the well-being of our most vulnerable residents.
Second, just a factual note on crime. According to an AI search, it's not just the 2021 homicide at a victory program site. Just in the last year, one resident of Portoris House, which is the parallel house to what we would be doing, was involved in a threat of
bodily harm and they also had a case of shoplifting. We would know more about crime records if we could get them, which we have not been able to. Lastly, I'm now channeling the neighbors who met outside with Taylor Morley a few minutes ago. Select board members telling us we
hear you when in fact virtually nothing neighbors ask for is incorporated into the draft agreement is just not very helpful. I've I've personally had conversations with most of you, but there have been scores of emails sent to you by others that never got any
response at all. How can you expect people to feel heard when they're not responded to in any way going forward? Neighbors most want to be actively included in the licensing discussions in a way they were not included in the
selection committee and could have possibly changed the outcome there. And they want to understand what the options are for input and to actually see some effects of their requests. Finally, to end on a little personal note, I've long argued that it didn't matter if the
select board consisted only of men. I thought you were such good men, it should be no problem. I now think I was very wrong. You are extraordinarily good men, but you clearly just don't get it.
You you you don't you don't feel in your guts the feelings of threat that women live with our entire lives. and how important safety is to us. I'm not into any excessive simplistic focus on identity, but I now believe that if
there were even one woman on this board, it would make an important difference. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone else online who wishes to speak? If so, please raise your hand. Okay. I'll just I'll just add that um as
I mentioned earlier um when the licensing conditions uh come before us uh we will take into consideration the uh suggestions that people make u but it's our decision to to uh add you know
the specific conditions but you know we we have our ears open so and and and that's where you know those suggestions uh come into play not uh with the conditions to the um to the assignment
of the uh right of first refusal. David just have a question about the uh part of the public comment around the selection process. Do we have any precedent for including members of the public for a selection process and the
right of a first refusal or something parallel? I don't know. Yeah, this is a kind of a rare instance. This is not really a normal I'll say I mean it's you know we were lucky that we had that written into the agreement. It was because we had contributed
housing trust funds. Um but nothing I mean I've been here I've just hit my 19-y year anniversary and I don't think we've had an assignment like this in my tenure. Yeah. And you know, we're under a deadline um that required us to act fast and
um so we did. Michael, I make two points. Um first of all, thank you again for your comments. Um I I note that you did not identify yourself. I know who you are, but identify yourself. For the record, I am Carrie Goldberg,
precinct 9, several feet from the house in question. Okay. Um and the second comment that I would make is that um I think that your comment about feedback and response to the letters um is is well taken and um one of the things that we might consider
whether it's within the context of fiscal year 26 or fiscal year 27 is to develop some sort of select board office policy that would at least provide automated response or some sort of feedback that we got. We we have such a
policy. It does send automatic feedback right now, but it's not in response. It's it's a blanket statement. Yeah. The knowledge of of and many of the comments came to us individually as opposed to through the select board office, right? So, you know, that that serves outside
the I mean, as a as a matter of practice, any comment that I've received that has gone to all five of us, I've as a practice forwarded to select board so that it gets through that process. But then I realize of course the acknowledgement then comes back to me
and not the and not the original petitioner. Um but maybe maybe I'll take a look at that policy and recommend improvements. If I could say the school committee does it the school committee answers every they right David like they basically someone is assigned each week
to answer all the emails and they do. Thank you Carrie. Okay. Okay. And that ends the meeting. Thank you.