##VIDEO ID:https://videoplayer.telvue.com/player/994DtmGEsi0VDYK3jJI2BJ72GfgNIpU2/media/916366?autostart=false&showtabssearch=true&fullscreen=false## <v Speaker 1>Good evening and welcome to the November 20th Natick</v> Select Board meeting. I'd like to ask everyone in the room to kindly silence your devices, and for those of you who are able, please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance and a moment of silence for those who are serving in harm's way. <v Speaker 2>P Pledge of Allegiance to Supply</v> of the United States of America. Of America Republic for stands one, the Nation under Iraq. <v Speaker 1>Thank you.</v> I'd like to begin tonight's meeting with an apology to my colleague Mr. Sidney. Last week. I was a bit terse with him and it was completely an unforced error on my part. It was not the, it didn't reflect the values that I have or the values of this board. And so I would like to say I apologize Mr. Sidney. Thank you. No more, no more talk. At this point, I will open the meeting or open the meeting to Mr. Marshall regarding the Spring Street Bridge takings and the Fairview Lane neighborhood. <v Speaker 3>Thank you, Madam Chair. Members of the,</v> <v Speaker 1>There'll be public speak later.</v> <v Speaker 3>Thank you Madam Chair, members</v> of the board with me this evening. We have John Westerly, our Public Works director and Bill McDowell, the towns engineer. As you'll recall, at town meeting this fall, there were two actions of town meeting, which are coming back to the select board to take action on. One is related to the string, spring Street Bridge takings. These are both temporary and permanent easements that we need in order to complete the replacement of the Spring Street Bridge. As board members may recall that as being funded out of state funding. So these takings, although we need funding locally and the action of the board to take 'em, that project will be completed fully by the state. So that's a great opportunity for us to get that work done. Second is the Fairview Lane Neighborhoods. There's a number of acceptances that had happened previously, however, due to the timing of when the prior board had taken action and when the recordings needed to take place, time had elapsed. So these are basically just coming back to complete that process so that we can move forward and get them recorded. I dunno if <v Speaker 4>Through the chair, good evening.</v> We're gonna ask for a lot of signatures this evening, so I apologize in advance if your risk get tired. No more introduction than to thank Bill McDowell for getting the plans ready for Spring Street. He had a very limited window in order to comply with what Mass DOT was looking for in order to get the appraisals, excuse me, discussions with the property owners, work through the documents with town council and to prepare the plans. And as I vowed at town meeting, we would not miss the timeframe for recording the plans for the Fairview Lane neighborhood. That's part of the reason we're here tonight, is to get those signatures. And then within 30 days, we have to have those recorded at the registry and we won't miss that timeframe either. <v Speaker 1>Bill, thank you Mr. Sterling,</v> <v Speaker 5>Madam Chair and members of the board.</v> I don't have anything to add to that, but if there are any questions regarding any of these documents, either the orders you're taking or the plans, I'm, I'm hoping to answer those for you now. <v Speaker 1>Members of the board, Mr. Sidney?</v> <v Speaker 6>Yeah, what votes do we need or we do?</v> We just take a recess and sign? <v Speaker 1>We're gonna take a recess and sign.</v> <v Speaker 6>Okay. We don't need any particular votes. Good?</v> No. Perfect. Thank you. <v Speaker 1>Are there any other questions or comments from the board?</v> Okay, at this time I'd like to take a 15 minute recess so that we can sign some documents and we'll be back with announcements, public speech, and then appointments. Thank you. We are back at 6 28 and onto announcements. The first announcement is this week's on Monday began Spark Kindness Week or Kindness Week. For those of you who are interested in learning more about that in ways we can be kinder to one another, go to www dot spark kindness, S-P-A-R-K kindness.org. And there's some events that are coming up that you may want to participate in. The Thanksgiving holiday will occur before our next meeting, and I wanted to remind everyone that traffic at Logan is expected to exceed levels of 2019. So plan accordingly in Travel Safely Small Business. Saturday is Saturday the 30th, and I encourage you to consider patronizing our businesses both downtown and Long Route Nine. And at the mall, there are things you can do that if you're not shopping, there are things you can do to support your businesses, which support Our Town. You can write a review of their website, follow them on social media, sign up on their sign up for their email list, like their posts. And in general, you can just send them messages and tell them that you, you support them. There is one more announcement. Yep. So the Friends of Natick Trails is hosting again this year, the New Year's Eve. It's the fourth annual community event on the Cochituate Rail Trail. It'll be from four 30 to seven 30 from Bacon Street to Chrysler Road along the Cochituate Rail Trail. There'll be hosted fire pits, all ages, entertainment and family friend, family friendly, fun. Parking is available at the Mechanic Street Lot. And this event is subject to update the Friends of Natick Trails is working very closely with our fire chief, given the super dry conditions. So we may need to come up with something other than fire pits, so to be continued. But if you are interested, it's a great event for the family. And I'd like to thank Natick DPW, the Fire and the Police for working with the Friends of Natick Trails for this New Year's Eve event. Next on the agenda is public speak. Any individual may raise an issue that is not included on the agenda and it will be taken under advisement by the board. There'll be no opportunity for debate during this portion of the meeting. The section of the agenda is limited to 15 minutes and any individual addressing the board during the section of the agenda shall be limited to five minutes. Is there anyone in the room who wishes to address the board in public speak? Dr. McKenzie, if you could approach, identify yourself for the record. <v Speaker 7>I'm Donna Mackenzie, and I live at seven Belser AV Natick</v> and I'm a town meeting member. I just wanna call your attention to today being the 25th anniversary of Transgender Remembrance Day and Transgender Remembrance Day actually started in response to the brutal killing of a transgender woman in Massachusetts in 1999. I don't know if you know, but most people who are subjected to violence and who are killed are transgender women in our black. So there is a double point of discrimination there, and I think as we try to become a more belonging community, it only feels right to call your attention to this day of remembrance. This past year, there have been 36 members of the transgender community and trans expansive community who have died from violence because of being transgender. Since this memorial was began 25 years ago, there have been over 400 people, so I just simply wanna call our attention to it. And flags are great, but they're not always enough. And as we think is of a com, as a community of helping people to belong, I just wanna say that we're trying to hear you, we're trying to listen to you, and we're trying to help you belong. And we remember those who were brutally murdered on this transgender Day of Remembrance. <v Speaker 1>Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Mackenzie. Mr. Hoagland,</v> <v Speaker 8>Good evening and thank you for this opportunity.</v> As some of you know, I have hearing difficulties, so if anybody has any questions for me, I'm probably gonna need an interpreter. I'd like to take just a couple of minutes to kind of sadly share the fact that I think we're gonna lose the So House. And I'd like to offer a, a couple comments on that and a recommendation. I'd like to start by reading a statement from Chief Caring Hands. And she was a wonderful woman who led the Natick Praying Indians group for years as their chief. She passed away a year ago in April. George saw one who is a member of, of our advocacy group, took her for a walk in the area around the sawn house two or three years ago. And this is what she had to say about that. She said, two years ago I was given a tour of the property by George Soen. Here. He was the descendant of Thomasson. And here I was descendant of the Praying Indians. I walked on a path along the water and he showed me where my people ground their corn. There were big discs in one of the grinding stones. I could feel the land greeting me. I could feel my people, I could close my eyes and feel I was there with my people. I could feel what had happened. The link between the starving and the abundance. Here we have the man in his homestead, and we have the people with the relationship with the land who are able to stand and see that it is someone's response. And my response to see that for whatever else people think it is, it is deeper. Now, the issue that has has been driving me for the last nine years, which is when the town meeting in fall of 2015, past Article 35, article 35, provided that the town moderator would appoint a committee to basically work with the border selectmen and under the selectman's direction to try and find a way to have the House acquired as a monument by Natick. The specific authorities and issues associated with that committee were de determined very precisely in Article 35, and I think you all have a a copy of it, there was an article in this morning's Metro West Daily News that featured quotes from a representative of mass ubon and from our select board chair. And I was really concerned when I read those quotes because they were based on either inaccurate or incomplete information. The motivation that myself and others who have been working so hard to try and preserve this house isn't because it's an old house. It is in fact the first colonial house built in Natick. Now how do we know that? Because it was the first one that could illegally exist in Natick. The area of Natick that was populated by our indigenous people was forbidden to any colonials to live here or build a house here. You've all heard of King Phillips War. What? Nobody probably remembers that. It's one of the bloodiest conflicts that has ever occurred with the population of United States. Remember, we were small then, but a thousand colonials died. 3000 indigenous people died, and nobody knows for sure how many people were grievously wounded. This was all over in 1676. It also featured what most of you know about as the Deer Island genocide, where Native Americans from Natick, who had fought with the Nat militia To resist King Philip, were all gathered up and trucked off to Deer Island without provisions, without anything to survive with. About half of them died within this context. In the 16 85 86 period, a woman with tremendous courage and vision named Sarah Ook, she was a n Munk, persuaded the general court of Massachusetts To pass a law that would allow the native indigenous people to provide a 50 acre piece of land to basically any one of their choosing who would build a sawmill and a gr mill there that would serve the the area and serve the the Native Americans. Thomassen had a mill in Sherburne and it was successful. Ms. Awa, a mug approached Soen and they made an agreement that he would also build a million natick if it was extended the land. The agreement that she signed with him as well as a number of other members of her family persisted for 300 years. Think about that. How many agreements have you read about or heard about where people in North America made a contract with Native Americans that lasted for 300 years, that was never, ever breached? I don't, I am not an expert on this, but I have spent a good part of the last nine years researching this and I can't find any examples where somebody made a deal like that, that everybody respected. What's remarkable about it and what has driven me for the last nine years to try and then save this house as memorial to two people, Thomas Sawn and Sarah Owa. Mark, the reason I think they deserve an incredible memorial is because if you think about what their social environment would've been like at that time, following King Philip's war, following the massive death and damage for two people, in spite of the animosity, in spite of the negativism of their respective populations, realized that they could make something happen that could transform this area. And Miss Awa mug and Thomas saw made that agreement and that agreement actually did transform our area of, of Metro West for the simple reason that one of the few industrial manufacturing facilities that could be implemented relatively straightforwardly was in fact a mill. Now we have lots and lots of timber out there right now. There was even more back in those days, and between the Sherburn Mill and the Natick, mills SA was able to export lumber all over this hemisphere. A lot of it went to the Caribbean because they don't have a lot of trees down there. My feeling and the feeling of the people that are working with, we've been working together since November 3rd, 2015, is that this was a courageous action. And we need to memorialize this because it has everything to do with the kind of people that we are and the kind of people that we want our kids to become. So the reason for saving the house is not so much to save an old building, it's to create a lasting memorial to these two people for their courage. Now we obviously have some difference, Mr. <v Speaker 1>Hoagland, about I'm, I'm sorry,</v> you're at eight minutes now. Could I ask you <v Speaker 8>To, I need 30 more seconds.</v> <v Speaker 1>Okay, thank you.</v> <v Speaker 8>This is, I think,</v> an important issue to the town. When that house is gone, it's gone forever now. It was very clear in 2015 that the town meeting had a strong desire that Natick acquire that house. Clearly this board has the authority as a board to decide not to do that and to have nothing to do with it. But we haven't had that discussion. And what I would recommend and heartily endorse would be a public agenda item on your, for this board to discuss what they should do with the house. We have three months left before the house is destroyed by Math Audubon, and they don't really have much motivation or much interest in doing anything with it. But there are several things that this board can do, and rather than have a debate that goes back and forth without a real discussion, I think that the appropriate thing to do, given the seriousness of the issues involved, is for this board to put it on your agenda and have a public discussion of it and to do that soon. Thank you. <v Speaker 1>Thank you. Mr. Hoagland.</v> Is there anyone else, anyone else in the room who would like to address the board under public speak? Is there anyone on Zoom who would like to address the board under public speak? Okay. Moving along, we have an appointment for the Historic District Commission interview of Nicholas Arthur. Mr. Arthur, are you in the room? Yes. Good to meet you. If you could come to the podium, introduce yourself and tell us a little bit about why you'd like to serve on the Historic District Commission. <v Speaker 9>Hello, my name is Nick Arthur.</v> I am a third generation Natick resident and a third generation home builder and remodeler. And I would feel fortunate to serve on the Historic District Commission because I feel that my professional knowledge of my industry could be helpful for the commission. And as a resident who loves this town, I think that some of the coolest areas in this town are the districts. And I think it's important personally, as a resident, as the town modernizes itself and moves forward with larger projects, it's important that the districts maintain their character and integrity and charm. And I'd like to see that happen in the future and I'd love to be a part of it. <v Speaker 1>Thank you so much Mr. Arthur. Members of the board.</v> Questions or comments from Mr. Arthur? We do have your application packet and have reviewed in advance of the meeting. Ms. Slager, just <v Speaker 10>A quick question, since your address is it,</v> it wasn't included in the application, you are a resident of Natick, correct? <v Speaker 9>I am. Alright. I am.</v> <v Speaker 10>Thank you,</v> <v Speaker 1>Mr. Sidney.</v> <v Speaker 9>Sorry I missed that.</v> <v Speaker 6>I just wanna say it's,</v> I'm really happy to see somebody as qualified as you applying for this position, and I sincerely applaud you and hope that you find satisfaction in volunteering for the town. <v Speaker 9>Thank you.</v> <v Speaker 1>Thank you, Mr. Arthur.</v> Any other comments or questions? Mr. Hoagland, if you could approach the microphone. Yes. <v Speaker 8>I'm a member of that commission</v> and I was approached by one of my peers to raise an issue tonight. I don't have strong feelings about the issue personally, but his concern is that having someone with no background in historical preservation who could potentially use the the position to compete with other developers is something that needs to be discussed. So I, I told him I would bring that up and present that to you. <v Speaker 1>Thank you. Mr. Hoagland.</v> Members of the board, there are four vacancies on this board and the chair and the vice chair will be stepping down after more than two decades. I think one has been on the historic district commission for close to three decades with the four positions that are open and a looming res resignation of the president and the, or the chair and the vice chair, I and the chair Mr. Collins, have been scouring throughout his, throughout the town of Natick, looking for people with backgrounds in building architecture, landscape design. We recently appointed Mr. Landren, Scott Landren, who's a well-known landscape architect. And the Mr. Collins approached me and indicated that he was putting forth Mr. Arthur because he thought he would be a good fit for the commission. So having I if, if anybody has any questions about Mr. Hoagland's comment, please raise them now so that we can incorporate them. Otherwise I'll take a motion. <v Speaker 11>I don't have a question,</v> <v Speaker 1>Mr. Evans.</v> <v Speaker 11>I have more of a comment, which is with the four openings,</v> you're going to have people, some people have vast experience in historic preservation and they're gonna have some people who are learning about historic preservation and will learn from those people. I dare say that everybody sitting in front of you didn't know a great deal about being on a select board. Didn't know a great deal about being on a finance committee before we started, so I wholeheartedly endorse the candidate. <v Speaker 1>Thank you so much, Mr. Sidney.</v> <v Speaker 6>Yeah. And in terms of addressing the concerns of</v> the member of the public, I know that one of the things you'll be signing is an ethics. You'll be taking an ethics course and you'll have to disclose any interests you have. I'm not concerned at all because we hold our boards and committees to high standards and we individually hold each other to high standards. So I don't think that's going to be a problem. <v Speaker 1>Thank you, Mr. Sidney. Ms. Slager,</v> <v Speaker 10>Personally, I think that your</v> expertise in in building would add a lot to the committee, so I wholeheartedly endorse your application. <v Speaker 1>Thank you. I'd, I'd like</v> to correct something I said earlier. I said two decades and close to three that the two upcoming resignations will be 66 years of experience, one for 30 years and one for 36 years. So we're rapidly trying to build a bulwark of expertise and historic preservation for this committee. At this time, I'll entertain a motion. Ms. Slager, <v Speaker 10>I move to approve Nicholas Arthur to point</v> to the historic District Commission <v Speaker 1>And that is for a term of three years.</v> Is there a second? Second. Go ahead. Second by Kristen Pope. Motion by Linda Slager. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. All opposed? It's 5 0 0. Mr. Arthur, you'll get a letter from the board instructing you to be sworn in at the clerk's office and I will alert the chair that you have been appointed. <v Speaker 3>Thank you very</v> <v Speaker 1>Much. Thank you.</v> And thank you for stepping up to serve. Thank you. <v Speaker 11>Thank you for stepping up. Thank you.</v> <v Speaker 1>Next item on the agenda is the</v> section discussion and decision. We have a water and sewer abatement appeal. Is Ms. Crawford or her representative here? Mr. I'm going to turn it over to Mr. Marshall first to explain the background. <v Speaker 3>So board members in your packet,</v> you have information about the appeal. This request did come in front of administration due to the nature of the request and the fact that the use of this was mainly for watering and that there wasn't a fix at this point in time for the issue. It was denied by the administration. We encourage the applicant to appeal the request and she's here in front of you this evening and she can provide additional information for you. <v Speaker 1>Ms. Crawford.</v> <v Speaker 12>Thank you. Excuse me.</v> Thank you for hearing this when you talked about a, a fix, I think we're not going to ever do this again. That's sort of the major fix. The letter explains how this happened. We've been up in the house for, this is almost 40 years now. My husband was the gardener. He took care of everything. He died in 2023 summer. My son came in from Chicago, was gonna help me get this set up so I could keep maintaining this and set up a drip water system and our water meter, 'cause I think it was Mr. Walsh maybe said, check your water meter or see, or the plumber, it's in our basement, which is in stone. You have to move this panel and go into the dirt and the stone and see the water meter. It's not easily checkable, which I didn't do and, and nobody else did. Clearly I was saying to Mr. Marshall when I saw the bill, we were told it would save 80% of our water to do the gardens. And so I thought it was for $247 'cause we usually have a $600 bill. And then I saw what it really was. I don't think there's any way to safely try and do that next year as we've thought about it, because it's not easily checkable on the water meter. And I still work three days a week. I can't be there all the time to monitor it. And as we set it out, I checked the connections and stuff, but it's in a garden. I mean, Dan made beautiful gardens and as they grow in, you can't go in there and see if something's leaking. And so I don't think it's a viable method. I think my son was trying to do a really good thing for me, but it's not a viable method. So this would never happen again. And if you look at undue burden, I am 77, I'm still working three days a week because I need to, and this is essentially one month social security check for me. So all of that considered, that's why we will never do this again. But I would hope that there would be a a one time abatement. <v Speaker 1>Thank you Ms. Crawford. Mr. Marshall,</v> do you have figures for us? <v Speaker 3>Yeah, so I did run a calculation for the board.</v> You know, if this were abatement that administration could approve. Typically what we do is we'll do a look back and we will look at the previous three years during the same quarter. And looking back at that 24 units were utilized, the total units for this bill was 93. So that means that 69 units were the excess. If administration were to abate this, if this met the criteria, we would take the 69 units, bring it to the lowest tier, and charge that rate for the excess. And in doing that calculation, the abatement, the abated amount would be $1,367 and 99 cents. <v Speaker 1>Questions or comments from the board? Mr. Evans?</v> <v Speaker 11>Yeah, I'm looking at that figure.</v> $1,367 and 99 cents. And the Ms. Crawford was mentioning that the 24 71 was a month of her social security. It seems half of that half of that month is a little excessive to me. What I'd prefer to see is maybe twice the 24 units, which would be 800, basically 890, something like that. A little less. <v Speaker 1>Mr. Evans, could you repeat that?</v> This is a you're, you're approach, you're proposing a different methodology for abatement? Yes. Okay. <v Speaker 11>I am proposing, given the circumstances</v> that she's working three days a week and that the 24 71 figure was an entire month for her, she already owes the 24 units of 4 37 and instead of the 6 85, if I'm reading that correctly without glasses, I would recommend the 4 37 96 times two, which will get maybe $200 on it. Little two 50 ish, <v Speaker 1>4 30, 7 92 times two. Yep.</v> <v Speaker 6>Would be the charge and then</v> the rest would be an abatement. Right, Mr. <v Speaker 11>Right? That's correct.</v> <v Speaker 1>Any questions or comments? Ms. Slager?</v> <v Speaker 10>Just a comment. I noticed</v> that you only have one water meter and that if you did wanna keep your garden, you wanna look into getting an irrigation meter if you wanted to do that. It's a separate meter and you don't pay sewer charges on it and it's a lot less expensive. So if you're going to have someone come out, you'll have to work with the town to get an irrigation meter. But if you wanna keep that garden going, I would highly recommend that. <v Speaker 12>Who? Hmm? That so what, so</v> <v Speaker 10>Feel free if you, if you need any question,</v> if you have any questions about that, you can email me or the select Gordon and great <v Speaker 12>Help.</v> I didn't even know there was such a thing in the world. Yes, thank you. Using <v Speaker 6>Bruce method at 15 95, 19,</v> <v Speaker 1>Our three mathematicians are working out those numbers.</v> <v Speaker 6>Yeah. Madam chair, Mr. Evans</v> approach would provide an abatement of 15 95 19. <v Speaker 11>Huh?</v> <v Speaker 1>Comments or question</v> <v Speaker 6>The abatement amount would be 15 9 5 19.</v> <v Speaker 11>No, 'cause the, the units were</v> 93 units was billed at 24 71. The abatement that Mr. Marshall put up was the 24 units that, that's the regular charge. And then the excess units were at 6 65 16. And what I was suggesting was do the 24 units price at her, at her tier, which is probably the lowest tier where thereabouts and double that, that gets to instead of 13 67 99, it gets to 8 75 92 total. <v Speaker 6>Well that would be the bill amount.</v> And the abatement is 24 70. No, <v Speaker 11>The bill amount, the bill</v> is 24 71. Yeah, I think you and I are saying the same thing. That bill <v Speaker 12>Included $174 That was outstanding.</v> That I also didn't know about. The year was kind of tricky. So I paid that when I saw the bill and the remaining amount, I paid a hundred and seventy four eighty two of that $2,400 bill. 'cause that wasn't part of it. That was from before. So you have to deduct that. <v Speaker 10>The, the bill that we're looking at has a total current</v> bill of 24 71 11. <v Speaker 12>Okay. But in that had a</v> <v Speaker 10>Right, but that you, you had paid that?</v> <v Speaker 12>No, I paid the previous balance,</v> which was a hundred and seventy four eighty two. That shows as part of that 24 71 <v Speaker 11>Like Rich and I are saying the same thing.</v> <v Speaker 12>Oh, I see what you're saying.</v> <v Speaker 1>Yes. Because it says previous balance</v> and then less payments received. I see. Okay. So the, the total doof is $2,471 and 11 cents. And which is, which is <v Speaker 11>Which is right.</v> <v Speaker 1>And and rich is right.</v> So using Mr. Evans calculation, he is proposing an abatement of $1,595 and 19 cents. Exactly. Is that your motion Mr. Evans? <v Speaker 11>That is indeed my motion. That's really</v> <v Speaker 12>Interesting.</v> <v Speaker 11>Thank you Mr. Sidney. I was using the</v> wrong part of the equation. <v Speaker 1>Any other comments or questions from members of the board?</v> Is there a second? Second. Seconded by Kristen. Moved by Mr. Evans. All in favor for an abatement of $1,595 and 19 cents please say Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes 5 0 0. You'll get correspondence from Mr. Marshall. <v Speaker 6>Madam Chair.</v> <v Speaker 1>Mr. Sidney,</v> <v Speaker 6>I don't know if you qualify, but I know</v> that there are programs that allow you to, if, if you, if you qualify income wise to pay the lowest tier or or lower for your water rates going forward. So I would urge you to contact the administration and find out if you qualify. Thank <v Speaker 1>You.</v> And that would be Mr. Marshall. <v Speaker 12>Mr. Marshall. Okay. Thank you all very,</v> very much. I appreciate <v Speaker 1>It.</v> Thank you so much Ms. Crawford. Happy Thanksgiving. <v Speaker 13>Okay,</v> <v Speaker 14>Happy Thanksgiving.</v> <v Speaker 1>Next up is the five Auburn Street</v> update from our developers. Hi Kaitlyn. <v Speaker 11>This is being thick</v> <v Speaker 14>This</v> okay. <v Speaker 11>It's</v> <v Speaker 6>What happens when I don't write it</v> <v Speaker 14>Out. Alright,</v> <v Speaker 13>Can everyone hear me okay? Yes.</v> <v Speaker 14>Okay.</v> <v Speaker 6>If you could pull the microphone a little</v> closer to that'd be great. Thank you. Yeah. <v Speaker 13>Okay. How's that? Perfect. Better? Great.</v> Good evening Madam Chair and members of the board. Thank you for having us here tonight. My name is Caitlyn Madden and I'm the executive director of Metro West Collaborative Development, the nonprofit developer for the five Auburn Street site. We are here tonight to provide an update on the project as requested by the board, I'll give a short update on community engagement permitting and our funding timeline and talk about some of the work that we've been doing since we were last in front of you. In June on the community engagement front in June, we held an additional open house to invite members of the community to come and hear about the project and ask questions and talk with the project team. Excuse me. We also met with the historical commission and we met with the Natick Historic District Commission on Permitting. Since May we have made progress on our 40 B comprehensive permit. We submitted the project eligibility letter application to the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities at the end of May. And in September, 2024, we received the project eligibility letter approval from E-O-H-L-C. And that allowed us to move into the local permitting process with the zoning board of appeals. We filed our chapter 40 B comprehensive, comprehensive permit application with the zoning board on October 1st. That application included the same design as the project eligibility letter and also the same design that was shared with the board back in May. Our submission to the zoning board was comprehensive and responsive to questions and concerns We've received and included a traffic study, environmental impact analysis and more advanced civil plans. All of those materials are publicly available on the zoning board website. We failed held our first hearing on October 28th and just this past Monday we had our first standalone hearing with the zoning board for the project on November 18th. And there's a series of future meetings that are scheduled for the project in December, January and February and March of this year. We are also planning to meet with the historic district Commission as part of the 40 B process as they have an advisory role On our historic tax credits. We have made progress in our process for both our state and federal historic tax credits that we plan to utilize for the project. We submitted our federal historic tax credit part one and just this week received our part two conditional approval, which means that the National Park Service is in agreement with our proposed rehabilitation of the existing Elliot School and we will be able to access federal historic tax credits for the project. We also submitted the state historic tax credit application in August and expect to hear back in December whether we've received that funding award. Just to touch on the process and timeline from here, we plan to submit an application for funding to the West Metro Home Consortium in December. <v Speaker 15>Alright.</v> <v Speaker 13>And the, the next steps</v> and timeline for the, the project really depend on the state funding and the permitting process. Just as a reminder, the state holds a yearly one stop funding round with pre-app applications that are to be submitted next week and then invited project applications will be due at the end of February and projects must have a zoning board vote by the February deadline. If we weren't to receive a a zoning board vote by then, we would aim to apply to the highly selective mini mid-year mini round. Or if we are not invited into that mini round, we would be looking at the winter 2026 funding round. So we are hopeful that we are able to make process progress through the zoning board process to allow us to submit that funding application in February if we, It's not often that applications are funded in their first submission to the state. So we think that the, the best case is that we receive funding in the mini round, which would mean a construction start by the end of 2026 and completion in 2028, which is what we are thinking of as, you know, the best case scenario. And we would be receiving a funding award and if we were delayed and received a funding award in the winter of 2026, that would mean a construction start in 2027 and completion in 2028 or 2029. So that's where we stand in terms of progress to date since we last met and upcoming next steps. <v Speaker 1>Thank you so much members of the board questions.</v> Ms. Pope, <v Speaker 16>Thank you for the update.</v> You mentioned that you're gonna have meetings in December through March. Is that once a month? <v Speaker 13>That's right. They're scheduled for the first,</v> first or second Monday. Second Monday, yes, that's scheduled. The zoning board schedule is available online. I have those dates here. November 18th, December 9th, January 13th, February 10th, and March 31st. We are hopeful that we won't need all of those dates, but they are currently scheduled. And <v Speaker 16>So are those all zoning board</v> meetings that, that you're having? That's <v Speaker 13>Correct. Okay.</v> <v Speaker 16>Right. Thank you.</v> <v Speaker 1>I had a few questions.</v> So it's based on the zoning schedule and based on the meeting that I watched on Monday, it's unlikely that you'll need fewer meetings. So I'm, I'm assuming that you have to go through March 31st and then a decision usually takes about six weeks to write or it when I was on the ZBA. So we're looking at April, middle of May, what would be the next funding round if you were, if you missed the February. <v Speaker 13>So we would be targeting the mini round, which is due in</v> a pre-application in June. But all of the funding rounds are very competitive. So we would need to be, you know, highly ready to proceed at at that point. <v Speaker 1>One of the thoughts that occurred to me</v> as we have been preparing and going through our budget for a potential override is looking at potential sources of funding that we've relied on that have federal sources. How much of the funding at the state level is contingent upon federal funding and how much of the funding that you're looking at, whether it's tax credits or otherwise may evaporate with the new administration? <v Speaker 13>That is</v> a good question. So we are, I don't have actually the budget numbers in front of me, but we are relying on federal sources. You know, we, the tax credit program generally has broad bipartisan support and we know that through both admin housing is a top issue for the new administration. I think it's, you know, to really to say what the, the impact would be. But any impact would be over time and I can't, I can't speak to the, <v Speaker 1>I appreciate that I, it, it occurred to me late</v> or I would've sent you the question ahead of time. So I, I appreciate that. Perhaps in the spring when you come back for another update, maybe we can, well we'd have a better sense and it is premature. I just didn't know. I know that in town we have looked at all of those things when considering how to formulate our budget for February one. So thank you so much Caitlin. Are there any questions from members of the public that are in the room, members of the public who are on Zoom? Thank you so much for coming before us. I know it's been a busy week for you. Appreciate it. <v Speaker 13>Thank you.</v> <v Speaker 1>Financial policies update</v> Mr. Townsend, <v Speaker 14>I have some questions.</v> <v Speaker 1>Yeah, of course.</v> <v Speaker 17>Thank you Madam Chair, members of the board,</v> John Townsend, deputy town administrator and director of finance this this evening, asking you to take a look at the new Natick financial policy manual, the first tranche of policies. We are rolling out 16 of 'em I believe. I do have a presentation for you. I'm gonna go through it very briefly, however you do have the deck in your materials so we can take a little bit deeper look at it and of course we're happy to answer any questions or come back at a later date should you have additional questions about it. Just first of all, recognize my team with me tn, we assistant director of finance, very involved with drafting the policies and especially the work workflows for us. And of course Gloria Wong who is responsible for the lovely slides are gonna be that I'm gonna unfortunately have to run through this evening. Okay. So we'll go to the slide. Next slide please. You got it. So just the couple of, there we go. Okay, thank you. The, the, this couple of areas that your slide deck sort of covers. First of all just the brief summary of the DSL report and then we're gonna talk a little bit about the systems, the policy summaries and some of our workflows. Give you some examples of that work. Go to the next slide please. So you rule a call the DSL report, the director of local services of the Department of Revenue covered a lot of various functionality of the finance department and other departments of the town. What we're talking about here, of course this evening is coming under B financial management fiscal policies. These policies of course cover a lot of the other issues involved in this report, but tonight we're just gonna focus on the policies themselves. So next slide please. We just have a couple of slides with regards to what we've done so far. We've actually accomplished quite a bit, not just the policies, we wanna take a look through some of our accomplishments if you have the time. So I'll to skip through to the systems slide. So just to sort of give you a little refresher, 'cause we did talk about this earlier, but one of the issues we had with regards to putting together our policies for the town, of course our systems, the backbone of the system for the finance department courses, the muni system. The muni system was first appropriated the funding for and implemented 1997. Unfortunately the town only implemented the general ledger side of things with the payroll and accounts payable. And actually it wasn't until 2021 that we did the full conversion of uni to accounts receivable and utility billing. As you'll notice, 2021 comes just after the pandemic and we actually started the implementation of that conversion in 2020. Unfortunately man to quite a bit of problems and difficulties with munis because of the pandemic situation, we did manage to get past that. In addition to Munis, of course we have upgraded our budgeting software clear gov in 2020, debt Burke in 2022. And then in 2023 we did move munis to the cloud. This is important because it gave the schools much more access to Munis and that was reflected in quite a few of the policies that we did draft with regards to various financial functionalities. Let's go into the next slide here. Just briefly with regards to how we sort of developed these policies. We did look at quite a few things. Best practices I-C-M-A-G-F-O-O-A, which are professional finance and penal municipal finance organizations have a lot of materials for us. Of course we look at the town charter and bylaws, compliance with state and profess state regulations, mgls, DOR regulations and IRS things that govern the way that we operate. And then finally we did work a lot with the staff, both from the finance department staff as well as other departments that are affected by our policies. And we actually did workflows of all of our policies with regards to how the work is actually done. So we made ature and we understood that we were trying to be the most efficient use of our staff and procedures as possible before we wrote and developed our policies. Let's go on to the next slide here. Just gonna have a couple of little examples here. So we did workflows of all of our various major policies. This one is just a slight, there's only a partial one, right? Yes, it actually, this is much, much bigger, but the workflows that we did with regards to payroll. So a lot of the major policies we have these workflows sort of worked out to help us develop our policies. And then going on to the next thing, the policies themselves, we actually came up with a little bit of different sort of format for them. Basically the policy starts out with the actual and why we do these policies, the purpose of 'em. Then we do the applicability and we sort of name who is responsible and who is sort of affected by this policy. So it's just a quick way to check to see whether your particular unit has anything to do with policy. And then we have the policy statement of itself. Now we did combine our policies and our procedures together. So the second major portion of our, our policy is of course the procedures. We set out the procedures for departmental staff and finance department staff separately. So you'll have the, this one up here is the, the procedures for the department staff. And then out at the bottom you see a first box, a one. And this will go down for a couple of pages that have a step by step instructions for the department staff or for the finance department staff if it's that particular section so that the staff can actually go through and find exactly what they're supposed to be doing. And then finally each policy ends with the references to mgls DOR regulations and whatever else we rely upon with regards to developing these policies. So we go on to the next slide please. So tonight we're talking about just briefly this first 16 set of policies that are, we are releasing four, your consideration questioning. First of all, we and I sort of divided it into, first of all is the update. This first set of five set of policies were ex existing policies. Some of the policies such as the fraud risk assessment policy is actually a policy that you approved back and I think it was 2016. We basically updated a reformatted, it just sort of refreshed it a little bit. Then the second set of policies, update and formalization. These are also policies that may not have been an actually in policy format at the time that we started this project, but we updated them and formalized them. And then finally the formalization of these policies, which are policies and actually procedures that oftentimes were in place in each of the particular divisions of the finance department that we formalized as actual policies and formatted and then included in the policy manual. So our work is not quite complete. We actually have, go to the next slide please. We actually have some remaining policies and procedures still left to go revenue receipts. We have drafted that and we've done some testing on it, but we still need to roll that out. We plan to do that shortly, introduce it to the departments and make sure everyone's sort of comfortable with that before we sort of formalize it. Payroll we're working on as well. The town is actually applying for a lot of grants, therefore we have developed a grant management policy that we're working on to help departments with making certain that they, their grants do comply with the various regulations and our auditor's requirements. Encumbrance policies is something that encumbrances and year end of course are things that we do every year. We actually usually send out a memo to everybody, but we sort of formalize them as policies. The final one I wanna talk just a little bit about is the cash management. The reason I wanna talk a little bit about this because this is where we are working on the cash book and the cash book formatting as well as the process of actually completing and update in the cashbook. Now the majority of these policies we have done in house. We've worked with, you know, some outside sources on it, but primarily most of the work has been done in house. However, for the cash management side of things is particular the cashbook. We have brought in outside consultants to help us out with this. Clifton Larson, Allen who used to be our auditors, are now our consultants and are working with us on reconciling the cashbook, making certain that, you know, best practices are being used. And also we're gonna work with them and it reformatting the cashbook to make it easier for staff to update it, make sure that it's correct. And also to incorporate a couple of modules that Munis does have that'll help us with making certain that bank reconciliations are done on a more timely sort of manner. So we are working with them on this. We actually have a meeting with them I believe tomorrow and it's been substantially complete, but we're talking, talking with them about it. And we do expect to have that completed shortly. And once they complete their work, we will have the ability to finish our balance sheet and submit it to DOR in order to get our course free cash. Now of course the next question of course is well what is that free cash number? As you probably know, you ever heard me talk about free cash? I don't speculate about free cash, I don't have a crystal ball, I can't tell you what it is. But you know, we have reached that particular point where we will probably be feeling comfortable submitting it to DOR in the very near future. So we will have that number in short order. So ma'am, I'm sure that basically ends my comments this evening. Once again, happy to come back and talk about whatever policies, you know, the board feels necessary to, or even to provide more information around this particular presentation. And of course happy to take any questions that the board may have. <v Speaker 1>Thank you Mr. Townsend.</v> At this time I just wanted to let the board know that some of these policies are gonna, you know, require us to spend some time looking at them. It wasn't anticipated that we'd be prepared to thoroughly discuss them tonight. So what I'd like to do is, I've spoken with Mr. Townsend, he's happy to come back in December and I'm going to ask for comments and questions from the public both here and on Zoom at that meeting in December. Are there any comments or questions from the board right now, Mr. Sidney? <v Speaker 6>Thank you Madam Chairman. I've real three really quick</v> ones I think in the forecasting policy. Yep. On page one in the policy, in the first paragraph there's a statement that the town administrator, select board and FinCon will use the forecast administration can't direct the FinCon to do anything. FinCon is a legislative process. I'd suggest you either change the word will to may or find a way to say this forecast may be used, will be used by, rather than have it be directive in the way it is currently worded. <v Speaker 17>Certainly. And that was not meant</v> to be directive in any, any manner. We do present to fin com with regards in the past with regards to our forecast. And I think hopefully that is useful information, but absolutely we can make that change and turn it to a will to aay. Not a problem. Yeah. <v Speaker 6>It's just, you know, keeping the separation</v> of powers we need in the tailings policy. It's a real quick question. Are we queuing up acceptance of general law 200 a section nine A for the spring? <v Speaker 17>So the, well, to the best of our knowledge,</v> we are actually already have accepted that. Okay. So the question is we do hope to start on that project. It is of course a very sort of large project shortly. <v Speaker 6>Yes. Okay. And the last question</v> in the tax enforcement policy, yes. The only explicit reference to a local publication is Metro West Daily News. Yeah. Is it, does it make sense to actually explicitly call them out or should we just say a local publication? <v Speaker 17>So that pretty much is, is following DO'S guidance on this</v> and that's what the terminology that they use, I know that, you know, with regards to it, it has, we've had some difficulties with Metro West Daily News, so, you know, hopefully we can come up with an alternative to that and we, we'll probably be talking to DR whether we are allowed to actually do some other sort of notice on that. <v Speaker 6>Well, I wasn't concerned so much about the notice</v> as the explicit naming of, of the particular publication. Right. I mean, we have to do what DOR and, and general law Yeah. Call for. But I, if the policy can could be a little more general, I would think it would make <v Speaker 17>More sense.</v> Yeah. We, we never, we should probably should take that out. Correct. Yeah. <v Speaker 1>That's</v> <v Speaker 6>It for me.</v> <v Speaker 1>Ms. Ms. Slager,</v> <v Speaker 10>Just, just quickly just wanted to say thank you Mr.</v> Towson and thank you to Kean and Gloria for all the hard work on this. This has been yearly anticipated for many years by the finance committee and certainly the select board as well. Just, is it possible for us also to get copies of the workflow diagrams that, that you have? <v Speaker 17>Yes, def definitely we can, we can share, yeah,</v> we'll make 'em available to everybody. Yep. <v Speaker 10>That would be helpful. And you know, some</v> of the policies don't have procedures associated with them, correct? Yes. Is that because, <v Speaker 17>Because they're basically, or</v> <v Speaker 10>You're not, you're not documenting them or</v> <v Speaker 17>There is no, there is no, there really isn't any, any sort</v> of outstanding procedures that the department has with regards to how that sort of steps are supposed to go. Yep. <v Speaker 10>Okay. But presumably there is still people know what</v> to do at, at what particular time on the policies that don't have <v Speaker 17>Procedures.</v> Yes. And so, and also we'll mention the fact that when you talk about something that's purely done in Munis, we didn't actually, because we thought it was just too clunky. You know, do screenshots and say you, you know, click this button and that sort of button. We do have those, those are sort of, you know, separate documents for the staff to use. But we didn't actually include 'em as these particular policies. Okay. <v Speaker 10>Well thank you.</v> <v Speaker 1>Thank you so much Mr. Townsend.</v> We look forward to seeing you back. And Tian and Gloria, thank you for all your work. Deeply appreciate. <v Speaker 17>Thank you Madam Chair. Thank you.</v> Members of the committee board. <v Speaker 1>Great job. Next item is the override discussion.</v> Mr. Marshall. <v Speaker 3>Thank you. Members of the board, Mr. Erickson had</v> provided a memo for the board just regarding where we are in the process right now. Some anticipated dates in the future. And you know, the intent of that is really just to share with the board what dates are important coming down the road should the board choose to make a decision regarding the override. So happy to answer any questions and also Mr. Townsend's here as well. But I'm sure that we will have more conversations at future meetings moving forward. <v Speaker 1>Thank you Mr. Marshall, are there any member questions</v> or comments from members of the board? Mr. Evans, <v Speaker 11>Just a comment thank you to Mr. Erickson</v> and Mr. Marshall for putting together sort of a timeline that we have. We, we had a vague, more vague timeline before and this sort of spells it out much more clearly. So thank you <v Speaker 1>Ms. Slager,</v> <v Speaker 10>Because the memo is not up on Novus.</v> I thought I would just read something so the public knows that we are gonna be having a joint meeting between the select board and the school committee on December 16th. And that's gonna provide a more complete picture of the revenue and expenses that are leading to us of requesting an override. <v Speaker 1>And then we'll be discussing it again two days later at</v> the select board meeting on the six, the 18th, and then we'll, we're anticipating public forms in January. Thank you Ms. Walsch Logger. Mr. Walsh, could you upload the memo to Novus when you get a chance? Thank you. South Natick Dam update. Mr. Johnson. Mr. Marshall, <v Speaker 3>Thank you.</v> Members of the board. There are two memos in your packet for this evening that are up on Novus. One is related to the spill wave removal work that is taking place in the river restoration that is progressing nicely. We are in the permitting phase for that. So we've submitted a number of documents along to state a state and local agencies. So we've identified kind of where we are on those steps for everyone. We are current, the current work that we're doing right now is, the majority of it has been funded through a DAM and seawall grant. And we're actively pursuing, I think, as we've mentioned in the past, every funding source possible as we continue forward with that. We do have an updated cost estimate in the document as well that is tracking with what came out of the advisory report and some of the initial cost estimates we had. So the dollars right now are very consistent with what we heard back in 2022. So roughly 1.5 million for the spillway removal. That included the initial design and engineering work, which is ongoing right now, which we have funding for moving into construction and permitting work. And then the actual work required to remove the spillway. And then the second memo that's in your packet is related to the park work that we're doing in designing and visioning what could happen this past year. We had a number of public meetings. We had an onsite visit in April. Wanted to outline a little bit of our plans for the year ahead. We're gonna be finalizing some of those physical elements that we see in space. So where the past will be starting to put some engineering work towards that so we understand exactly how they will fit into those locations. And then we'll be doing some visioning on future connectivity to the water that, you know, we will likely, and I think we've mentioned this in the past, will have to happen in phases. As the spillway is removed, we understand where the water's gonna flow, then we're gonna be able to have future phases where we can really do that connection. But we want to do a little bit of concept work in the year ahead to at least try to make sure in our planning process that we're able to make future connections to support that access <v Speaker 1>Questions and comments from members of the board.</v> <v Speaker 16>I just wanted to call out one thing in</v> particular and that's the funding. So, and this is in the documents that are uploaded on Novus, but it might be helpful for the public that the work that's already being done, and you can correct or clarify John, but it's being funded 90% by this 2023 DAM and then C will grant. <v Speaker 3>Yes. So on the, on the removal portion</v> of it, you're correct. And then on the design and engineering work on the park side, 90% of that is being funded through the MVP grant that we have. <v Speaker 16>Okay, thank you. And then the going forward funding is we,</v> the town is in touch with these different agencies to seek grant funding. Correct. <v Speaker 3>We've, I believe we've actually sent, submitted and Mr.</v> Sprat on here as well, so he can, if I misspeak, but I believe we've already submitted some letters of intent for those funding opportunities, so we're actively pursuing those. <v Speaker 16>Thank you</v> <v Speaker 1>Mr. Sidney.</v> <v Speaker 6>Yeah, I want to thank you for this update.</v> I'm very gratified to see that the construction numbers are falling in line with what was projected when we made this decision. I'm also gratified to note that the grant funding and all the possibilities for funding that were discussed at the time we made the decision are being pursued and seem to be coming through, which is really good news and it, I'm glad to see some of the thought processes, at least I used when I made this decision being validated. And I really appreciate all the work that the administration is also doing to vision through the park and make sure that people have access to the water and, and that they, that it'll continue to be a calming and, and beautiful place for people to visit. <v Speaker 1>Thank you, Mr. Sydney. Ms. Slager,</v> <v Speaker 10>For members of the public that are interested,</v> you can sign up for updates on this project and both on the DAM and the park improvements. There is a webpage on the town website that goes into great detail and has all the information available. So please do that if you're interested. <v Speaker 1>Thanks Ms. We schlager.</v> That's exactly what I was gonna follow up with. Perfect. Thank you. Did <v Speaker 11>Dito times</v> <v Speaker 1>Two Dito times three</v> discussion on public speak policy. So in your packets is the draft public speak policy that has been reviewed by council? There were two questions that came up in the course of review by select board members. One was whether the public speak policy needed to reference the charter and counsel said it wasn't necessary. The other question I had was whether or not the town could require, as we have done, identifying name and place of, and, and address the, our town, our primary town council is out of the country. And the question was re we received a response from one of her colleagues who's our, our licensing attorney. It was of his opinion that for privacy reasons we shouldn't ask for address for privacy reasons. However, ident asking for identification of whether or not the speaker's a Natick resident is reasonable. So with the exception of those two items, those two questions, the latter one, I'm gonna wait until town council returns until after she, she returns after Thanksgiving to ask for her comments on whether or not we can ask. I do know other towns ask for addresses. It's for, it's to ensure that a person who is speaking before the board or representing himself or herself is actually that person. It cuts down on zoom spamming and other such things that we've seen with the exception of that item. Are there any other comments on the public speak policy that the board would like to see addressed or changed or edited and sent to counsel? Mr. Evans, just <v Speaker 11>Following up on your point about names</v> and addresses, every other board our public committee asks for this. So it's not just the select board, it's the CBA. It's the planning board. It's the conservation commission. So I I, I'm a little surprised that they wouldn't ask for an address. That's not an invasion of privacy in my mind, but we'll see what town council says. <v Speaker 1>Thank you Bruce. Any other questions or comments or edits?</v> Mr. Sidney, <v Speaker 6>Is there any reason not to vote this tonight?</v> The idea of asking for a name and ad address doesn't have to go into the policy, I don't think. <v Speaker 1>Well, what I would say is, is this, that</v> this policy will be incumbent upon those committees that we appoint to. And so as Mr. Evans noted, the many of these committees ask for addresses. So I would want clarification. And there isn't a terrible rush since it's been sitting around for four months. We're looking at a couple more weeks. We're looking at a couple more weeks. So for those of you in the public who have not been following the Natick report called a recent meeting of ours, policy Palooza because we're working through a backlog of policies that have not been updated in about 10 years. So this is part of that. So I, I think we're very close. I just would want to ask about the addresses, add that once we vote it, we can send it to the committees that we appoint to. Yeah, <v Speaker 11>Good plan.</v> <v Speaker 1>Agree. Okay, sure. I just, are there any members</v> of the public that have any questions or comments on the public speak? If you, if you looked online, there are two policy. One is called Citizens Concerns and we've changed that to expand it to public. That is so that you know, business owners, I mean anyone who has a concern about an item writ large that has to do with Natick is encouraged to come before the board during this period of time. Public mass general law, open meeting law prohibits us engaging or responding because it's not something on the agenda giving fair warning to other people. But this is just a, a much needed update I think. So we'll put this on the next agenda or, or when Town Council gets back to us. The next item is a discussion on welcoming communities policy, recognizing the values and diversity of our community policy. Couple of notes. So the recent iteration of this dialogue on this policy started with correspondence received from a group of concerned residents in October of 2022. Email correspondence with the police chief took place prior to that. So this is I believe in the fall of 2021. So this led the select board to recognize the importance of having some type of policy or a set of policies to provide guidance to town employees and staff regarding matters pertaining to engaging with Natick immigrant population regardless of their documentation, whether it's legal or other status. Between October 22nd and October 24, approximately a half dozen meetings and many more conversations and emails took place by and between the resident group and the police chief and the deputy chief, the select board chair and vice chair and at times town administration. The purpose of these engagements was to understand the current operations of the town, including the police department, the current laws and regulations governing the topic and inform a policy and approach for consideration by the board. The intent was to put a draft policy before the board for consideration as early as September of this year. But that was delayed by a number of factors including but not limited to town meeting proceedings and preparations. Other pressing matters before the administration and the coordination of meetings with all of the parties involved, including the police chief and various numerous, various enumerated individuals that proved challenging. In addition, town employees or town of officials, the chief police chief, the deputy chief, the select board chair, the vice chair and the town administrator sought guidance from town council on the matter. Given the state federal regulations, the laws and case law that influenced the subject specifically in Massachusetts, the most reading recent meeting with council was held earlier this November or this month. The timing of the rollout of this policy is post-election is utterly coincidental. If I'd had my druthers, this would've been done in June. This is not a re reaction to recent elections, nor is it in response to fearmongering social media posts, national immigration policy current or proposed. So what this policy, what is this policy and what is it not this policy is or intends to be? It's a draft policy. This policy will not be voted tonight. This is the first public airing of this policy. I anticipate having at least one and perhaps two more meetings of public meetings for discussion. This draft policy is being sub is is being considered by the select board pursuant to its authority as the policy making and executive body of the town applicable to town employees, not school department employees who fall under the jurisdiction of the school committee. This policy intends to formalize what is the current practice across town departments, which is that no town department has the legal authority to act as immigration agents nor enforce immigration laws, nor ask for immigration papers or status unless required by state or federal law. For example, human resources does confirm status of authorization to work. This policy intends to ensure that the town articulates an environment where the immigrant community, whether documented or undocumented, knows that they can participate in law enforcement investigations whether as victims or as witnesses without fear of retribution. It allows our town government to prioritize and allocate its resources. Shields our law enforcement personnel from liabilities resulting from local enforcement of federal immigration laws and reiterates the fact that town employees are obligated to follow state and federal law, including case law regarding the subject of immigration in the state of Massachusetts or in our town. What this proposed policy is not or does not, it is not a proclamation of the select board nor the select board taking any political stance on the subject of immigration, which is outside the purview of the select board and is a federal matter. This policy does not interfere with the rights of free speech of employees or individuals within the community. It does not apply to volunteers on committees and boards or to elected officials. It does not offer to provide shelter or housing to immigrants documented or undocumented. And it is not a Natick Police Department policy. Now the order of business, I'm gonna describe how we're going to approach this and then we're gonna take a break until the police chief arrives. He is attending the graduation of the Natick Police Academy tonight and he anticipated being here by eight o'clock. He, when he arrives, I will ask him to discuss his involvement on this topic in the history of his involvement of those who asked for a written police policy on whether and when to ask a person for documentation of their immigration status. Chief Hicks will provide an update on the status of the proposed police policy at after that I will ask board members for their comments, questions and discussion and then we will open the floor to comments and questions from the public. I will ask first from residents and business and property owners of Natick and then employees of Natick businesses, town employees, and then all other members of the public. All questions to the board. So the guidelines for discussion are these all questions to the board or to the police chief come through the chair. All persons wishing to address the board are asked to state their name and address clearly. For the record, discuss the proposed policy in the words of our esteemed moderator. Just the four corners of the policy. So the policy is posted on Pegasus, I mean on Novus. And that is the policy that we are debating tonight. Do not engage in legal arguments as we are not attorneys and town counsel is not present. Do not repeat arguments that have been previously stated. I'm encouraging dittos. Do not speak over people or have side conversations in the room. The hallway is a short distance away and it's open to such discussions and above all I ask that each of us be respectful. So with that, and I think the chief will probably hear in about 15 minutes, I'm going to ask perhaps that we move to the consent agenda so we don't keep these kind people waiting and we'll, we'll ask for town administrator updates and select board updates. I won't ask all of you to sit through alcohol policy debate if you so inclined you're welcome to stay. It's riveting, but I won't make you do that. So for the CAS consent agenda, Mr. Clerk, <v Speaker 6>Thank you.</v> The consent agenda tonight has four items on it. I'll read them off and then I'll ask whether anybody wants to pull anything. Item a approve request to occupy a public way. Franconia have annual block party item B, approve application for a lodging house license. Item C, approve request for exemption from town bylaws Chapter 41, section four for Elizabeth Schneider and Dion Dion, Bruce. And item D approved meeting minutes for November 6th, 2024. Do any members of the board wish to pull anything? Any members of the public wish to pull anything? <v Speaker 1>Ms. Ger?</v> <v Speaker 10>So the approved request</v> for exemption from Tom bylaws, I don't see that on our consent agenda on Nobus. <v Speaker 1>I have</v> <v Speaker 10>It. I also don't see Ms. Ger. You're welcome.</v> It's off. Oh sorry. The approve request for exemption from Tom bylaws. Item CI don't see that on Novus neither. Do I see a, the meeting minutes? <v Speaker 6>They are both there. I</v> <v Speaker 1>Pulled them up. I'm looking at 'em right now.</v> <v Speaker 10>Okay. Must have happened this afternoon</v> because I refreshed it had be, oh, I I had the same issue. Yeah, same issue. So, okay, I see it there now <v Speaker 1>Do you wanna review them or and should we take a moment</v> and review them, decide whether to pull them? <v Speaker 10>I'm fine with the minutes, but if we can just pull C</v> 'cause I haven't had a chance to look at it. Okay. <v Speaker 1>Mr. Sydney?</v> <v Speaker 6>Yeah, I just make a note.</v> Okay, so we're gonna pull item CI move approval of items B, A, B and D. <v Speaker 1>Second. Second. Second by Mr. Evans, moved by Mr. Sydney.</v> All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. 5 0 0 oh. Any opposed? 5 0 0 it passes. Item C, approve request for exemption from town bylaws Chapter 41, section four for Elizabeth Schneider and Dion Bruce. Mr. Evans, <v Speaker 11>I just do a comment.</v> This is a, the standard sort of thing when somebody is employed in a particular department and have an exemption for them to continue to do some activity that's a paid activity. So basically it's designed to, excuse me, eliminate a conflict of interest or a potential one. <v Speaker 1>I've read it, I'm fine with it.</v> I'll take a motion on item C, move approval on item C. Second move by Mr. Sidney. Second by Ms. Slager. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes 5 0 0. I think we'll take a 15 minute break or until the chief arrives. Let's go ahead and stretch our legs. The town administrator up. Yes, I think we're gonna do that at the end. Okay. And thank you for your patience. So at this time I would like to, since many of the questions that we re received had to do with police and police policy, I'd like to introduce Chief Jim Hicks. And I was wondering if you could just introduce yourself, talk a little bit about the process that brought us to where we are and then the board will engage in questions and discussion. <v Speaker 18>Thank you Madam Chair. Members of the board,</v> also those present from the community and I see many online. I'm James Hicks, I'm the chiefs of police here in this great town of Natick. I was asked for by the board to, to give an update on where the police department is, number one, in developing a policy, but also a little bit of a history of how we got here. I think a history really when it comes around, at least the development of this particular policy goes back to almost 2017. Based on my records when discussions really started, has been ongoing. That was several groups along the way at looking at some really sample policies from many communities, not only from local policies that were promulgated either by their town government, but also the policies of of those police departments. And those organizations had a lot of great back and forth as part of that. I think the meetings I would consider to be productive heard both sides. So as far as the police department is concerned, we are finalizing our draft policy at this point in time. And just generally, we took in consideration a lot of the feedback we receive from the groups as well as what is common practice, not sharing that policy yet. 'cause we haven't shared it based on our collective bargaining agreements with our unions first, before we can can move it out of a draft format. We did, we, when we were in heavy draft writing, we did share it with the groups with those feedbacks. Now we're in a point of final draft. And based on our agreements, we, we have to work with those, with the unions first. In general, our policy takes into account law, so federal law, state law, as well as court decisions, especially here, here in the commonwealth of Massachusetts. It talks about what we can and cannot do as police officers and in general for a perfect example is local police departments in the commonwealth of Massachusetts cannot repeat, cannot enforce federal laws. And to be quite honest, departments the size of Natick and probably most like myself, do not have the time or the resources to take on that duties anyway. So as a matter of practice, we do not, cannot do not enforce federal laws. And those are the guidelines that come within our, our draft policies. So that's where we stand now with our draft, I did have some questions that were asked to me and about our policy and, and the philosophy is again, to stay within federal and state guidelines and laws. And that's what we continue to do. We don't have an interest in breaking any of those laws or guidelines. And at the same time now our role and my role is to create a safe environment here in the community. So our policy balances both of those. <v Speaker 1>Thank you Chief. Mr. Marshall, could I ask you to turn</v> that television screen towards us so that I can I do. Thank you Bruce. It's not of much use to, yeah, that's perfect. Thank you. At this time I would like to read it, reiterate that this is a time for the board to listen to members of the public and your reflections on the policy that's posted. I would like to ask people on Zoom who wish to speak, if you could raise your hands so I can get a general sense of how many people wish to speak. And also in the room, if you could raise your hands for people who wish to speak. <v Speaker 19>3, 4, 5, 6.</v> <v Speaker 1>Thank you</v> Mr. Marshall, could you move it the screen so I can just see the second, <v Speaker 20>If there was a raised hand that would show up at the top.</v> There are no raised hands. <v Speaker 1>Okay. So at this time I'd like to ask</v> for comments from people in the room. Ms. Dixon, if you could come to the podium, if you could, I'm asking people to keep their comments to about three minutes and to not repeat comments that are or concerns of other people other than to issue a, a general ditto or I support Ms. Dixon. Go ahead. <v Speaker 21>Good evening, Madam Chair, the board</v> and my fellow residence. My name is Judy Dixon. I live at 94 Oak Street and I also work for Family Promise Metro West, which supports families, residents of Massachusetts who experience housing insecurity. I'm speaking in support of this draft policy and urged the board to adopt it. I submitted my support in writing earlier, but want to take a brief moment to stress my support for the policy at hand as it impacts the children of newcomers to our country. Whether the children of immigrants were born here or in another place, they find themselves in the middle of a volatile and frightening situation given the mixed sentiments about the presence of their families in this land of opportunity. And it is for those children who are the collateral damage of a broken system and a divided country that I want to speak, simply put, no matter how you look at it, the children are the innocence of our immigration situation and they are the most vulnerable. We as a community must minimize trauma to them by stabilizing their families as we're able and ensuring their physical safety. No parent should ever second guess. Seeking education, which I now understand is outside of the realm of this policy, but also, and especially medical care or emergency assistants from first responders like police paramedics or firefighters for fear of retribution related to their immigrant immigration status. Children of newcomers who are also our neighbors, deserve this small protection as their caregivers navigate an already uncertain future. Thank you very much. <v Speaker 1>Thank you Ms. Dixon.</v> I'm going to go to someone on Zoom. Ms. Kelly, Catherine Kelly, if you could unmute yourself. Yes, <v Speaker 22>Yes.</v> Thank you. Yeah, so I just wanted to say, I recently moved here back here after growing up in Natick and moving to California for 40 years and watching my city San Jose adopt Sanctuary City policies. And then of course the state of California. And I just want to say that you know, these policies, you're not de dubbing them as Sanctuary city policies, but they're definitely in line with Sanctuary city policies. And I can tell you in my 40 years of living there, I watched the decline of the city because of these policies that allowed so many undocumented people to come to the city and live. There was massive increase in crime and homeless. Our school systems were ranked 25th in the country because half the schools were, you know, English second language kids. And so all these things impact the town. And this town is so small and we have very limited budget. And while you, you know, we're trying to say this isn't gonna affect all those things, it's a slippery slope. And adopting these types of policies are is just going to lead to having similar situations that are going on in Framingham on a daily basis. <v Speaker 1>Thank you. Ms. Kelly.</v> I'm sorry, the woman in the black vest. Victoria. Victoria. Could you give your full name please? Yes. <v Speaker 23>Hi, I'm Victoria Grafflin.</v> I live at 45 West Lake Road in Natick, mass. Thank you Ms. Chairman. Sorry. Ms. Chairwoman and the board and the residents of Natick. I just wanna say a couple of things in support of this policy. I feel that it's important that it clarifies for the town employees and the public, the appropriate roles of town employees in the face of expected mass deportations. This clarification is important because we don't actually know how municipal employees might be informally conscripted or personally motivated to engage in federal immigration enforcement activities, which are not the jurisdiction of local officials. Town employees are not trained to accurately make assessments about individual's legal presence in the US and so should not be taking any such actions for which they're not properly equipped. Should a town employee mistakenly take a federal immigration enforcement action that results in the detention or other punitive measures against a person who may in fact be legally present, the town could be held legally liable for the error costing Natick taxpayers money. Another important function of this policy is to continue the feeling of trust that most residents feel in their local officials. This is possibly the most important aspect of this policy. And finally, I would hope that no person living in or passing through the Our Town should ever have to fear being questioned about their immigration status by our town employees. That's not the kind of community I wanna live in. Thank you. Thank <v Speaker 1>You.</v> Ms. Grafflin Going to zoom, Ms. Ball. Ricky, could you unmute yourself? <v Speaker 24>Yeah. Okay, move on. Go ahead. Okay.</v> For those of you who don't know me, I'm Erica Ball, formerly of Natick for 64 years. I lived at 11 Russell Circle in Natick and participated most of that time. I am a survivor of the Holocaust, as was my family. And I lived under the conditions that many immigrants are living through now. Having been under threat of deportation from 1947 to 1957, I know the conditions under which these people are living and the anxiety that suffuses their existence. I feel very strongly in favor of this proposal because I know the relief that I have felt when I came to Natick and established myself in, in the town. And it became my home. So much so that the investment of my lifetime has been to be an active participant in the civic life of Medic. As a town meeting member for 35 years as the first woman and the first Jewish person to be elected to the Natick Board of Selectmen. I have tried to pay back for the honor and dignity I was afforded to live in this country. And I think that most migrants, they appreciate that opportunity more than the people who were born here in America. I think that making Natick a welcoming community and making that obvious to everyone is a demonstration of our humanity. And it's one that the citizens of Natick have lived up to. If you look around the town, there are people, immigrants from all over the world who have come to Natick. There's an Irish community, there's an Italian community, there is a Jewish community, there's an Albanian community. We have members at the Housing authority from the Chinese community. We have Indian, we have an Indian community, we are a multinational community. Boiled down into individuals who get along with each other, who learn from each other. And this is, this is an example of what we wish for and work for throughout the world. We are a great community, let's keep it that way. <v Speaker 1>Thank you Mrs. Ball in the room?</v> Yes, please. <v Speaker 25>Hi, I'm CC Conway.</v> I live at 45 West Lake Road and I just wanna speak out in support of this proposal as far as I understand the language of the proposal. And, and correct me if I'm wrong, this is essentially the status quo that we already have. Is that right? That <v Speaker 1>Is correct, yeah.</v> <v Speaker 25>So, you know, I've, I've heard some of the comments about</v> what might change under this proposal and as far as I can tell, nothing materially changes. I've read some of the comments about how this might affect immigration in town and personally I find the slippery slope kind of argument to be a logical fallacy because as far as I can tell, this proposal does nothing to materially impact or provide resources for further migration of any person from anywhere to the town of Natick. So I ditto all of the comments that have been made about things like people not having the qualifications to make immigration judgments as well as the comments the last speaker made about humanity. Sorry, I feel like I'm very nervous all of a sudden <v Speaker 1>Don't</v> <v Speaker 25>Be humanity</v> and dignity for people from, you know, whatever background or immigration status living in this town already. And I think the people living in this town already of immigrant backgrounds or who are most at stake here in this proposal, simply put, I don't know how undocumented people from Framingham or or anywhere else people may be afraid of would move to the town of Natick simply because this proposal passes. I've heard lots of comments in that vein and they again, personally make absolutely no sense to me. So I support this proposal because it protects town resources and it makes common sense. Thank you. <v Speaker 1>Cc, could you repeat your last name?</v> <v Speaker 25>Conway, C-O-N-W-A-Y.</v> <v Speaker 1>Thank you so much. Thank you.</v> On Zoom land, is there someone who wishes to speak? Please raise your hand and in the room, Mr. Jacobs, <v Speaker 26>Cody Jacobs.</v> I, I live at 16 Tamarack Road. I, I'm proud to be a member of, of the group that has been working on this for the, the past several years, the Natick Welcoming Immigrant Policy Coalition. And I just wanted to fill in, I think that the chair did a great job of covering some, a lot of the deliberation with different stakeholders in town government that has gone on over these years with respect to the policy. And they have been incredibly productive discussions and I think have produced a, you know, really, really solid document that is, is, you know, is, is very carefully put together and I think accomplishes exactly what the chair said. I just wanted to add to that though, that a lot of our work has been more public facing and that we have engaged with the public through, you know, including through two large events that were hosted by Nat as United, that were, you know, zoom events where there was a panel discussion, it was well attended and people heard perspectives from people who work with our immigrant community and people who are immigrants themselves and have, have been involved in some of these things. We've also had tabling presences at several town events, including Multicultural Day in two different years. We spoke to the town Democrats and members of the, the Town Democratic Committee and members of the Town Republican Committee as well, and the Coffee with a Purpose as well as town faith leaders as well. So it's been a long road of, of public engagement, but it's been very positive. You know, even discussions with people who, you know, oppose the policy and may still oppose it, I thought have been productive discussions and, you know, have led us to, to where we are today. I would add just in, you know, in thinking about this, it's important to put in context not only that this is a reaffirmation of the status quo of how we do things in Natick, but this this is also very similar policy language that we have come up with that you know, has, has come out of this process to what already exists in many other municipalities and the sky has not fallen in those places. And it's not just, you know, what people might consider the usual suspects for a policy like this. There is certainly one in Cambridge, but there's also a policy in Acton. There's also one in Amherst as well. And you know, I think that Natick taking this step is, is right in line with that and in line with our values. So I'm glad to see that we're doing that. And the last thing I wanna say is just, you know, there's been some discussion, especially on social media about making sure that we listen to the people and that, you know, we listen to, to what people want on this. And I think, you know, the slice of of people that you see at a municipal meetings can be misleading in terms of what the overall population wants. But you know, I wanted to point out that a couple of years ago there was a ballot question in Massachusetts all across the state regarding whether or not we would continue to have a law that allows people who are undocumented to participate in, in public life through having driver's licenses. Natick voted on that and over 60% of Natick residents voted to retain that law because it was a value here in Natick that we make sure that everyone can participate in public life and I think regardless of documentation status, and I think that this policy proposal is consistent with that. So I urge you to support it. Thank you very much. <v Speaker 1>Thank you Mr. Jacobs.</v> Anyone else in the room who wishes to speak? Yes sir. In the blue, if you could come to the microphone. <v Speaker 27>Thank you for the opportunity. My name is Bill Larkin.</v> I am a longtime resident of Natick for 25 years and a business owner of a Larkin of painting company for 25 years in Natick. I live at 36 MacArthur Road. I am strongly in favor of this proposal. I employed around maybe 40 to 50 families over the years, probably 70% of them i new immigrant communities. And they not, they, these communities added so much to this business and into this town and many of them aren't able to receive some of the resources that they paid into the systems. In particular social security through payroll taxes. I'm very heartened to know that the chief is gonna be following state law and federal law and I strongly support it. Ditto to everyone who has support come out and supported this so far. Thank you. <v Speaker 1>Thank you. Mr. Larkin.</v> Other comments, questions? Sure, yes, there's a hand in the back if you could come forward. <v Speaker 28>This is a little Hi. Hi everyone, my name is Andrea Prema.</v> I'm a resident and I'm also a business owner. I'm a immigration attorney here at Clark's Block and immigrant myself. So this is very dear to my heart and I just want everybody to realize that we don't have many voices here as immigrants. I would like to see more of us being able to come here and feel comfortable talking about this. And when I think about immigrants, I think about the feeling of belonging to something, belonging to a community. And I think this policy is gonna make sure these people feel welcome and feel they belong to the community. They can speak up and that free speech is also for them. So I, I'm really happy that this is being discussed and I think everybody should have an opportunity to talk about it and show their support or against, but have the information available to them and make sure they are making an informed decision about what is happening. And that's all. Thank you so much. Andrea, <v Speaker 1>Could you spell your name for me please?</v> <v Speaker 28>That's gonna be difficult. Okay.</v> That Andrea, A-E-N-D-I-E-I-A. And is p as in Peter, R-E-C-O-M-A. Thank you so much. <v Speaker 1>Thank you so much. Yes, please. You in the blue jacket.</v> <v Speaker 29>Good evening, Este chair and members of the select board.</v> It's a pleasure to speak before you today on an incredibly important topic that affects me both personally and professionally. As an immigration attorney, I've had the opportunity to both help aspiring Americans to achieve their dreams by becoming US citizens through adjustments of status as well as protecting individuals who've suffered past persecution and have a reasonable fear of, and a well-founded fear of future persecution in their home countries, many of whom would never have left had it not been for those circumstances. Those individuals contribute to our community, but they are afraid to be seen until they feel comfortable enough to be engaged in a community where they know they belong. Many of our business owners who have achieved that status are still questioned on a regular basis about where they come from and whether they belong. I, myself and the daughter of immigrants, and when I was five years old, my next door neighbor told me to go back where I came from. And this is the only place I can be. And I would like for all of us to care for each other and to know that there is great damage in the way that we can speak. And there is great opportunity in the way that we can comport ourselves to make natick the place where we can all be proud to be members of the community and hang together whether or not we're experts in immigration law or just decent human beings. And I ask of all of you today to please consider that as you work forward to support this policy that we've worked so hard together, together with you. Thank you. <v Speaker 1>Susan, could you say your name</v> and address please for the record? <v Speaker 29>Oh, sure. So I'm Susan Simone K</v> and I'm at 49 Rath Bunn Road. I am former member of the Natick Planning Board. <v Speaker 1>Thank you so much. Are there other parties</v> in the room who wish to speak? I'd like to direct a question to the chief. There's been some discussion both in letters received by the board and on social media with regard to whether the town will respond to ice detainers and I was wondering if you could address that and, and how you would, what the involvement with immigration and customs enforcement looks like for the town, for the Natick Police Department. <v Speaker 18>Sure. Madam Chair, just to be clear as I I reiterate</v> what I said earlier about following guidelines and rules, especially those that come out of the Massachusetts Supreme Court. So as far as ice detainers, detainers are just that detainers are not warrants as those in law enforcement, which we operate off of many different levels of enforcement activities and ability warrants that are issued. I talked specifically around state laws. State warrants are a, a document or an action that is approved by a, a judge to issue a warrant at which such as directs any and other law enforcement officers to take specific action, usually take custody of an individual. ICE detainer is not a warrant and that needs to be made clear. It's a detainer that basically, and again, I don't wanna, I don't, I don't want to define federal law because that's not my expertise, but ICE detainers are simply just that. It's a request by a, a organization to hold a person for the purpose of, I would assume further investigation or to gather information. Since ICE detainers are not a warrant issued by the Massachusetts Court or a federal judge under the Lund decision, we are, we do not have any authority to enforce or follow an ice detainer. In fact, it's, it's basically illegal for law enforcement to do so. What that means is an ice detainer particularly for us, doesn't mean anything. We don't hold anyone. And it is, that's one of the things written in our policy that's consistent with law. We don't hold anyone for the purpose of ice detainer because we simply cannot. So the question of, of whether we can take any action against our with an ice detainer to answer is no. The only thing we we can do is that if the, if a detainer is issued and ICE is aware of it, the only thing we can do is saying, yeah, we are aware of detain detainer, we are aware of the candidate here, but it doesn't change our, our process or position here with any, any other individual. And this is just those under arrest. So we just, those that under arrest are the only ones that we would be made aware of an ice detainer in any way. But there is zero action we can take on behalf of an ice detainer in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. <v Speaker 1>Mr. Evans,</v> <v Speaker 11>Thank you Madam Chair.</v> I just had a quick question and, and I was part of the discussions during this process and we asked the question of, in the last five years how many ice detainers has the Natick Police Department had to respond to? <v Speaker 18>I mean, not respond, made aware of,</v> <v Speaker 11>Made aware of three three, thank you, five years</v> <v Speaker 1>At this time, I'd like to open it to the board.</v> The board has had to have an opportunity to discuss the policy. I'm personally not a great fan of the title, so I thought maybe we could talk about the title and any comments or questions that you would want to see in a, in a future. Again, this is a draft policy. We're taking public comment, there'll be another meeting in December E. Each member of the board reads all of the letters that we receive. They're immediately, you know, we receive them when there's, we receive them in our personal e email account and they're also posted on Novus for anyone to read. They become part of a public record. So I, at this time, I'd like to open it to the board for comment or question or discussion. Mr. Evans? <v Speaker 11>Thank you, Madam Chair. First of all, I wanted</v> to thank all the residents who have communicated with us and who have participated in this. Obviously it's an important issue. Much of the chronology has already been shared by the chair and the police chief, so I'll skip all that. This has not been a hasty decision as Chief Hicks said, it's been in the works for at least five to seven years. But what I wanted to do was to acknowledge that the immigrant community has legitimate fears and by adopting this policy, it helps them understand that their community is behind them. That they're not out on a limb, that they're not in a difficult situation. So what what I'd like to do is just very quickly summarize my interpretation of how the discussion went was a very productive discussion as, as others have noted, we reviewed some samples from other communities in the Commonwealth and we utilized the Acton policy as a basis to start from. And we decided that there would be an overarching select board policy that you see before us tonight. And the first of these policies, it basically would direct the actions of each department under the purview of the town administration or the police force. The first of these policies is the police force, which the title is Enforcement of Immigration Laws. And this policy has been drafted, as you heard earlier, but can't be reviewed, put out tonight because it hasn't been reviewed by the police unions. But I think I wanted to emphasize a couple things. The title is very Important, enforcement of Immigration Laws. It provides guidelines to NA police officers regarding the precise procedures they should use to enforce immigration laws. It reads immi immigration status or lack thereof of an individual group is not a police concern, a Natick police concern, nor does it require subsequent immigration enforcement action enforcement of the nation's civil immigration laws is the responsibility of the federal government. It goes on and, and I won't go into too much detail because the chief might slap some cuffs on me. I'm just kidding. In essence, for anything that's a civil violation and on immigration status, it's no concern of Natick police. They're not gonna ask people when they're stopped. What will happen is if there is a violent felony or an outstanding arrest for a violent felony, or there's a terrorism related offense, or any human trafficking sorts of things going on or probable cause in a, in, in a street gang activity or distribution of illicit drugs. Those are the focus areas that the, that are important to the safety of natick residents. Immigration status is not important to the safety of Natick residents. So I'm glad that we've gotten such a great turnout of people with opinions pro and con. This is not your father's sanctuary city, right? Some have mentioned, no, we don't wanna be a sanctuary city. This is nowhere close to that. This is giving citizens the, the confidence that their community has their back. That is it. <v Speaker 1>I have some comments, but I'll wait</v> until the board has finished. Mr. Sidney. <v Speaker 6>Thank you Madam Chair. Bypassing the title</v> because it's, i, I don't know how to name this thing, but what I like about this particular policy is it provides a framework for town staff. And I'm not talking about school staff, but for town staff to do town business, wherever it needs to do with whoever it needs to do it with. It doesn't get into the weeds of police enforcement, which is under the jurisdiction of the police department. And I think it's important to recognize that members of our community who are here need to feel comfortable asking for, you know, the help that they need or getting the, getting what they're entitled to, whether they're undocumented or not. We have a very diverse community here and we have a policy in our administration and have for years of serving the community, whoever they are. For the most part, undocumented immigrants don't receive a lot of public services, at least not from the town. They can't get 'em. It's, you know, there are reasons they're not allowed. And like a prior speaker said, I'm also the son of an immigrant. My father came here in 19, he arrived here in 1942 on the heels of, You know, the Holocaust. And thank goodness he was able to get here. Ultimately, he, he became a citizen by joining the army. He was sworn in as a citizen in late 1943, halfway through basic training and stayed here and raised a family and we're all very glad to be here. Frankly, he was an illegal immigrant, as were many of the people that were rushing into our shores in 1941 and 1942. And we accepted them and we did our best and ultimately most of them contributed to our society. I would hate to see us throw out the baby with the bath water, if you will. So I support this policy, we'll see what happens if it gets tweaked, but I'm not really concerned. It's a very simple policy and I think it's at exactly the right level to support our popula, the the population of Natick. So thank you very much. Thank you Mr. Sidney. <v Speaker 16>Ms.</v> <v Speaker 10>Thank you.</v> As the new person on the board, I have to say I'm really gratified to have gotten so much community input on this. It's my first experience with an, an issue that is somewhat controversial and the thoughtful replies that we've received from so many people in the conversation tonight has been very gratifying. But I do wanna address for the people who responded to us that were against this policy and the ratio was about two to one, and some of their concerns were really heartfelt. And I hope to hear from some of them in the interim before we have our next meeting about what we can do to asage some of their concerns. Primarily they're concerned about the impact on town finances. How can we convince them perhaps that there aren't any, they're concerned about safety for their, their children. They're worried about an influx of criminals in town. And I know some of that might have been not quite understanding what this policy is about, but some of them, like I said, were, were quite heartfelt and I'd like to find a way to somehow, I don't know if it's from the administration or in some manner of reacting to their concerns because I think they do feel they are real. With that said, I am completely in support of this policy for so many reasons that everyone articulated so much better than I can do tonight. And I think, you know, as we all know, Natick is a changing community. We have a lot more people coming into town. It's more diverse. We speak, I don't know, something like 50 languages in our schools. And I do think it's an important statement to make to all the people that aren't here. You know, we're not representative of this community in this room or with necessarily the, the information that that was sent to us. So there's a lot of unheard voices in the community and you know, I wanna hear from them, but I also wanna hear from the people that are against this and, and really hope that we can come and and bridge the gap a little bit. Thank you Ms. Pope. <v Speaker 16>Thank you Ms. Wiler for your comments.</v> I feel similarly in gratitude for all of the communication that has come from our community about this issue. Because on the baseline, people care. They care about this community. They care about where they live, they care about the children, they care about how people are growing up, how they're living, and from whatever perspective they're coming from. I think it is very important that when we are dealing with policies, we don't depart from people. Our policies cannot be divorced from the people that they impact. And I gather that this impacts not just one type of person or category of person, but it, it could impact us all. We've talked a bit about the immigrants who don't live in Natick, but I'm very concerned about the ones that do and the message that we're sending to them. The ones who are already afraid to be involved or show their faces or the ones that we're trying to get more involved and be more vocal. I, I'm concerned about the message that we send to them as a community diverting just a little bit to the, to the title. I don't know why, why we've shifted from welcoming community, but that title means a lot to me, specifically because of what I think of Natick to be. I think of Natick to be a welcoming community. I think of Natick residents and people who live here as my neighbors. And I think that a policy that demonstrates the protections of the people that live here is a policy that does its job and its duty for the people that want to be here. And most of the stats that we have, most of what people have said here, immigrants are not typically looking to come and be lawless. And I think it's really important that we are not criminalizing people before we know them and interact with them. I think it's very important. I think it's important to approach people as just that people and our neighbors and give people the benefit of the doubt and then pay attention to the data and the metrics we have about what immigrants have contributed to this community thus far. And with that I am very sensitive and mindful of this, how people who are not in favor of this feel impacted and want to extend my compassion both ways. <v Speaker 1>Thank you. So I had</v> a couple of comments with regard to conversations that I've had over the last two days with some of my conservative friends. Some of the questions asked were, if the policy just simply states that employees are gonna be required to follow state and federal law, why do we need this? And what I would say is that it's an expression of values that creates an environment where immigrants who are victims of crime or witnesses to crime will feel comfortable coming forward knowing that there will not be retaliation. Now that doesn't mean that they necessarily will, and building that kind of community trust with community policing takes time. It may be the case that a legal immigrant has family members that are undocumented or people who are in town or relatives and are afraid of coming forward. So that's in order to keep our community safe, to create an environment where we're truly a community and we are protecting each other. I think that a policy setting forth an expectation is important. A second reason is because it sets expectations on how the, the town intends to deploy its resources. Even if we wanted to, under the l decision, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision, LUNN, we couldn't respond or detain someone simply on an a civil immigration detainer. Now if the person is being, if we receive, if the, if the town or the police chief receives a, a judicial warrant or another, another document that is legal to detain someone on suspicion of a crime or for prob with probable cause, that's a whole different ball of wax. Another person said, how, how will the police feel having to live? This is a quote live under the thumb of select board policy. Our policy has been proof read by and worked with the police department so that the police chief says, no, there's nothing here that will keep us from doing our, our duty, from doing our work. And then the last comment I'd like to make, you know, I'm an Irish citizen through my, you know, I'm an immigrant, I could go into my immigrant hist history, but it's probably more important for you to hear is a comment that someone made to me earlier today saying, I don't envy you. This is probably the most difficult decision you'll have to make. And I said, it's not a difficult decision. It's, it's important to get it right, it's really important to get it right. But five Auburn Street in the dis disposition of that property and whether or not to bring down the dam, two decisions that I sat on Bruce and I sat on and I did, and Rich, those were difficult decisions. But do you know what made those easy in comparison to the discussion tonight is that when we were talking about the dam, we were all using the same vocabulary When we said the dam, everybody knew it was the spillway. And when we talked about how it was important for mental health and how it was an important resource and we talked about the environmental impacts, we were all using the same vocabulary, whether we were on pro or con, largely the same with five Auburn Street. In its dis disposition with this subject, many of us are talking past each other and using words that trigger each other, whether it's undocumented or illegal or sanctuary, which has no legal definition, there's no legal definition of what a sanctuary city is or a sanctuary town. If we do have a policy that says this is our sanctuary town policy and that's the name of it, then ice reserves it, the right to not coordinate with local law enforcement to issue arrest, you know, to, to come into town and operate, which is not something the police department wants. But other than that, we're talking past each other When we talk about sanctuary, we're talking past each other when we say illegal in undocumented, you know, person who's in the country without papers, person who entered illegally. So what I'd like to encourage us to do is to try to find some shared vocabulary to talk about an issue that is important. It's important for public safety. It's important to create a community. It's important to make sure that we deploy our resources wisely and, and that we follow law. If the, if a, an employee were to detain, if, if a employee on the townside that's not governed by the school committee detained someone to ask for their papers or refused service because they didn't think that that person was here illegally, that opens the town to litigation that costs money. I've been on this board for two and a half years, I can tell you litigation is expensive. Writing those settlement checks is expensive. So when we set out a policy and it's distributed to employees, they understand this is the law, this is the, the standard of care and the standard of duty that I'm expected to perform to. I could talk to you about how important I think our immigrants are for our community. We've heard a lot of that tonight. I'm kind of talking to people who have been talking past that group tonight. I'm, I'm, I'm kind of reaching out and saying there's a reason for this policy. It's not in reaction to tweet tweets or posts on truth social about mass deportations and the mobilization of the military. This is not in reaction to that. This is in reaction to a number of conversations that have taken place over three years that have been deliberative and thoughtful and careful. So over the next two to three weeks, I encourage my fellow residents to continue to send letters. It's helpful if the letters address the actual policy. If, if you could give us feedback on what you'd like to see or not see and if we could try to find some shared nomenclature vocabulary so that we're all talking about the same thing. I don't know that that's possible, but it's something to aspire to at this point. I will ask if there are any other comments from the board. And then what I will do is ask everyone at home and in the room to continue to look at select board agendas. I believe this will be either on the 11th or the 18th and I'm, I'm think it might be closer. I think it might be the 18th. So on those two meetings. And then if we need to have another meeting, we can have another meeting. And I also welcome with regard to the title, the original title that we were working with workshopping was Welcoming Community. The reason that had kind of been set aside, and I'm not saying we don't go back to that, is because it only addresses one part of our community. It's not, it doesn't state what our standard of care or duty is to our L-G-B-T-Q or trans residents. It doesn't, all the other to our conservative and people who think differently and have political, we don't talk about the community as a whole. It's a specific segment of the community. So we kind of put that aside and came up with this. I welcome titles and maybe we go back to welcoming community will. We can figure that out. But that's not gonna be decided tonight. Again, thank you all for coming. I'd like to thank everybody who sat on Zoom and watched us go through multiple agenda items. Before getting to this, I'd like to thank the chief for coming. He's had a very busy evening. It was the police academy, police Citizens Academy graduation tonight. And I see Patricia was one of the graduates, or two of the graduates followed him over. So thank you and welcome and we'll see you at a future meeting. At this point I'd like to move on to the alcohol policy. You can stay for that, you can stay, it's not quite as interesting and we'll just make wait a moment or two for you to get out of the room. So with regard to the alcohol policy, it is the express desire of this board to nail something down tonight to send to council so that we can get this out by the end of the year. To that end, there are two items that I'd like to put first and foremost and to hear from my colleagues on the board. The first item is the request from, or the correspondence we've had from Bossy pickleball, Dave and Busters, and Level 99 to be open until one o'clock in order to not lose business, to Framingham locations that are able to serve later when they have, excuse me, when they're covering West Coast sporting events or fights. So I'd like to hear from the board on their thoughts and comments. Yes, Ms. Slager, <v Speaker 10>I just wanna point out on page six that there is a typo,</v> but currently it says 1:00 PM which would mean that they'd only have three hours of alcohol service. <v Speaker 1>Understood. So it's 1:00 AM</v> <v Speaker 10>It's 1:00 AM but I am, I am in favor of,</v> of the 1:00 AM I understand. And those businesses, certainly, if they are having West Coast events, if they are having sporting events, if they do need to be open later, I don't think that very many businesses will do this, because I think you need to be of a certain size to attract a crowd that would wanna stay. I mean, this isn't, Natick isn't a town that's known for being open late. So I, I really don't, I, I know that there, there may be some concerns about policing, about people maybe having a little bit too much to drink at that late hour. But I, I, I think that they're probably minimal in my, in my, in my mind. So I would be in favor of keeping the 1:00 PM <v Speaker 11>1 8 1 8 1 8.</v> We got you doing that. <v Speaker 1>Mr. Evans, did you have anything to say?</v> <v Speaker 11>Yeah, it's, it's large, ditto what Ms. Slager said.</v> But it's interesting that, that most of the businesses, if not all of the businesses were Natick Mall, which is com is competing against different entities. It's not like a restaurant downtown, for example. So I think 1:00 AM is a, is a good concession. They do have to adhere to the alcohol policies. They do have to make sure they're not over-serving people. So I think the safety issues are less of a concern. If they become a concern, we can go take a trip to Dave or the police force can do a drive by and, and take a look and see if they're in compliance or not. From, from my perspective, and in talking to the owners of those places, I'm confident that they have the wherewithal to, to keep this on track and not create a problem for us. <v Speaker 1>So along those lines, I asked DJ Bossy</v> to send me a list of the places that they lose business to, to see when they closed. And the four businesses that he set sent me, I'll close at one o'clock on Thursday, Friday and Saturday. If there's a, a Monday night or a Tuesday night fight, rather than having them go to, or a sporting event, rather than having to go to filing a, an ask for a waiver for one night. I think one o'clock is fine. I, I asked, I talked to Featherstone, Mr. Featherstone at Dave and Busters, and he said, for events, sporting events that take place late at night, people usually come late at night. They don't start drinking at eight o'clock and they usually come for a late dinner, have a couple drinks and watch the game. So we're not, and we're not looking at one of, one of the good things about our policy is that we have very strict and spelled out violations and, and you know, what a violation is and, and how the people, how organizations will be judged and what the penalties are. So I would prefer from a policy standpoint, for this 186,605 square feet at our Natick Mall, our single largest taxpayer, I would like to, we can always change the policy, but I'd like to experiment with this and see how this, this works. And that means the last call would be at 1230 and that would line up with the framing the four Framingham or locations that compete with the Natick Mall area. So are we all in agreement? We're not voting this? Yes. <v Speaker 6>In a previous meeting we had discussed the possibility</v> of having staggered closing hours. And I gather from what you just said, and I I I just want to confirm this because I was sort of in favor of the staggered closing hours where Thursday, Friday, Saturday would be 1:00 AM but that having a consistent 1:00 AM would be better for these large businesses. Although they have to publish their opening and closing. So don't they have to come for a waiver if they're gonna change their closing hours for a special event? <v Speaker 1>Yes, they do. So the way this, so if we set one o'clock,</v> in other words, any licensee can say on Mondays, we close at nine on Fridays, we close at one, they set their own hours, they come before us, we sign off on it, it goes to the A, B, CC. So individual businesses, based on their business model, their, you know, their customer base, they can, they can schedule the staggering closing hours. If, for example, they routinely close or they've asked to close at 12 and there's a West Coast fight or a West Coast sporting event and they wanna close at one on blank date, whatever, they would go into open gov and file an exception. It would come to Donna Donovan, Donna would send it over to Deputy Chief Anne. He would make a decision about it. He would send that recommendation to the board and it would be on a board agenda. The reason I would prefer to make it a one o'clock, no later than one o'clock closing is that would reduce the amount of work that Donna needs to do. Lieutenant was on needs to do that we need to do in making exceptions. <v Speaker 6>Except, except I don't see that.</v> Because an exception is an exception. If our policy says, you know, Thursday, Friday, Saturday one, and you know, Sunday through Thursday, say 10, just as an example, whatever it says, if somebody wants to stay open on a Monday, they still have to come for the exception either way. 'cause they're gonna close normally at whatever our policy says. And if they want to stay open, you know, whether they set the hour or whether our policy says one and they set the hour at 10, or our policy says 10 and they wanna stay open later than that. Either way they have to come for an exception. <v Speaker 1>If it's always at one o'clock, Monday through Sunday</v> and they've set up their hours so that they close at one o'clock, all of those nights, they never need to come to us. Right. If there's a Monday night fight, they don't have to come to us. <v Speaker 6>Right. But most of them are gonna not,</v> <v Speaker 1>They're not gonna do that because the cost of personnel,</v> they have to be open till that time. I think that our policy should be as simple as possible, let businesses figure out what their business model is. And if they decide that every Monday night is really dead and there's never anything, no really good sporting events, or there's three a year they can file for exceptions. I think keeping things as simple as possible and as under-regulated as possible, putting as few barriers for businesses to figure out what is in this 15 page document is probably the best policy I think that ensures compliance. <v Speaker 6>Okay. I just, I wanted to raise the issue</v> because we had that earlier discussion <v Speaker 1>And I do think that that businesses will file</v> for staggered closing hours. 'cause they're not gonna want to be open till one o'clock on a Monday in Natick and they'll, you know, they may say Monday through Thursday, and I just wanna put that burden on businesses because they're gonna know what their customer base needs. Yes. <v Speaker 11>Very quickly. And, and,</v> and each time we receive a beer and wine or all alcohol license, they're specifying their opening hours. Now what we're doing with this policy is saying, this is the max you can have. And anything you put forth has to adhere to that or be under it. So, and if they have the exceptions, you know, they have three times a year, they have an exception, then we have a process to do that. But by and large, I agree with the chair, they know their business, they know their business hours, they know their staffing, and we should give them the tools to make it easy. Do. <v Speaker 6>Yeah. And just to be clear, I'm not against this.</v> I just wanted to understand the, the thinking because it wasn't what I heard at the last meeting. <v Speaker 1>So the second item that came up was assistant managers.</v> Now the deputy chief would like the board to require the manager, the license manager to be on duty 51% of the time. One of the challenges I have with that is that if a, if a business is open, so Dave and Busters opens from 11 to one o'clock three days a week, and then they're open the other four days, whatever it is, we have somebody working 60 hours a week who didn't sign up for that. That's gonna be a hard time, that's gonna be difficult for recruitment. Pur purposes. Retaining, and, and it's also, remember this person is responsible for the license. The manager of records name is sent to the A, BCC. This person has a violation that follows that person to the next job. So what I would suggest is the email that I had sent out to businesses, the larger ones, I sent an email asking all of the license holders two questions. One was, would you be interested in staying open to one if you had that option? And two is how many assistant managers would you need for when the manager of record is not on duty. Understanding that we're putting every, as we we're proposing with the proposed policy, that every single assistant manager be fingerprinted and go through a background check. And that, that kind of makes sense having multiple ones. If you require 51% of the time for the primary, what I'd like to do is do what most towns do. What most towns do is they have the manager of record who is responsible whether that person is there or not. And the second part of it, that policy would state under no circumstances will the manager of record be absentee person can't live in Florida and check in by phone. So that person needs to be somebody who is regularly involved with the running of the business. That is what Fox Foxborough does. That's what Wellesley does. That's what's framing him. And when I mentioned to the, the license holders, alternatively alternative to assistant managers, the board could simply hold the manager of responsible for any violations which occur, whether he or she's on the premises at the time. They all said yes, we would prefer that. It makes things so much less complicated. And I'm, I wanted to get the board's feedback on that before I marked this up and sent it back to you for approval. Yes. <v Speaker 11>Yeah. I, I would say that that's a great policy.</v> It simplifies it, it makes it clear that it's what the businesses are used to seeing in, in other locations. And I don't see any benefit to doing it in any other fashion. Honestly. These people know that they're the manager of record and are accountable and they typically are running more than one location and they do not want a violation to be following them around. So they'll, the onus is on them to make sure that whoever is on duty that night knows the RU rules and adheres to the rules. So it is very transparent process. <v Speaker 1>Any other comments on managers?</v> Another comment that was raised with regard to page three, section two 11 and two 12, the, I think it's 2 11, 2 12. The question is, do we need to, do these sections need to be included since it's mass general law, legal, age, and intoxicated in individual? No. <v Speaker 11>No.</v> <v Speaker 1>So the argument four is it's, you know,</v> it's a reiteration of what they need to know, but I can go either way on this. <v Speaker 10>Yeah. To me that, that's such a basic thing. Agreed.</v> That they really need to, you know, any, anyone who's involved with alcohol should know these policies, so it's okay. I don't think it, <v Speaker 6>I I I think I, I'm sort of half in agreement.</v> I think legal age is pretty obvious. Doesn't need to be there. But I think it is worth restating the intoxicated individual. <v Speaker 16>I thought the same that two 11 could go,</v> but two 12 could stay. <v Speaker 6>Yeah. Just</v> because, you know, this is, it just sort of reinforces what TIPS training is gonna tell them. <v Speaker 1>Well, hopefully the license manager has,</v> is a master in TIPS training and isn't just gonna go through but point taken. All right, I'm gonna strike two 11. Leave two 12 in, take out the footnote. <v Speaker 6>Yeah. If we could go back to assistant managers Yes.</v> For a second. I think I'm okay with the manager of record without the assistance. You know, I'm just, my concern is, and I I heard what you said about, you know, being nont absentee essentially, but I'm, I'm worried about how we state that because if they're managing four restaurants, for example, you know, how do we know <v Speaker 1>A manager of record cannot be on</v> more than one license at a time? Mm. So if you're at Dave and Busters and you're the manager of record, you cannot be at Dave and Buster's in Fernwood or Dave and Buster's on the North Shore or wherever else they may be. Okay. <v Speaker 6>I'm not aware</v> <v Speaker 1>They're,</v> they are only tied to one license. But that's a really good point to emphasize. <v Speaker 6>Yeah. And I wanna make sure that that's there</v> because, you know, it's not enough to be non absentee, you know, if they've gotta live relatively locally. Right. Whether, you know, three towns away or whatever, relatively locally is. But I think they also have to be on site some of the time or they're not really managing. <v Speaker 1>How do we prescribe that? How do we enforce it? Well,</v> <v Speaker 6>That's what I, that's, that's the difference.</v> I think that's a question for council is how can we, how can we state that in a way that makes a lot of sense? Because I think that that's the right answer. <v Speaker 1>Okay. Right. What I will do is</v> I will pull from other policies. So my, my goal with this is before the next meeting, 'cause we need to vote it at the next meeting, is to give you a marked up version with what we've talked about tonight and a clean version. And then I'm gonna need feedback within 48 hours so that I can send it to alcohol counsel for some of the questions that we have. Like there's a question about cordials and things like that. So I will, with the policies, I will send you excerpts from other policies that I have. 'cause I have them all on my lap, many of them on my laptop from other towns and how they word it, give me your preference or I'll stick two or three in them and ask Mr. DeLuca what is his advice. <v Speaker 6>Yeah. And, and you know, like I said, I'm sort</v> of in agreement about the manager, but I don't wanna, you know, what's an absentee manager? Is it somebody that's, you know, he lives locally, but he never shows up at the business. Right. How do we And and you're right, we need to prescribe it in some way that is both reasonable and enforceable. <v Speaker 1>I am not in favor of saying that he has</v> to live within X miles. Well, whatever. Well, whatever, whatever. But yes. Point taken. Yeah. So a last comment that came back from a license holder. One of the hotels has a security system. We inserted a section that says if a licensed premise uses closed circuit or other recording cameras for purposes of security, the cameras must be maintained. And in working order, failure to do so shall be a violation. Video recordings must be kept for a minimum of 30 days. This particular hotel has an extensive camera system that is motion detected, but it writes over itself. Yeah. <v Speaker 11>Let's,</v> <v Speaker 1>And so I, I don't know how</v> we ensure that we have access to viol, you know, recording of violation without putting, you know, this, this person wrote you, you know, we, we will be in violation. We don't wanna be in violation. How do we do this? And I'm not going to suggest that they buy a different surveillance system. So if anybody has any ideas hard and fast, because as Mr. Sidney said, we need to wrap this up tonight, I'm open to them. Otherwise I'll leave that to alcohol counsel. <v Speaker 11>I would leave that to alcohol.</v> I'd leave that to alcohol counsel because none of us are expert in that area. And you know, I, I see the, the point of most security systems are actually like that. That they overwrite, they have a certain capacity and then they overwrite it. So <v Speaker 10>Do you know what the timeframe is for overriding</v> <v Speaker 1>It?</v> It depends on motion. So she said it could be anyway. 'cause I called her and she said it could be anywhere from two weeks to 45 days, depending on how much a, you know, if it's the holidays, if it's a busy, if it's a Boston marathon when they're packed and there are a lot of people, it might be as little as two weeks. I do wanna point out though, that no other policy can I find in the state of Massachusetts that requires videotapes. Yeah. So this is a nod to, or a nod to our deputy chief who would like to ensure that there's 30 days of video and that they're kept maintained in working order. A compromise may be they must be maintained and in working order, failure to do so shall be a violation. And to maintain them, because we had a situation that was very serious with a license holder on premise restaurant where someone walked out and literally collapsed on the sidewalk, was so drunk that they were unable to, to walk when the police were called. And the deputy chief went back the next day to say, I want to see your, they don't work. They just, they don't work. And he really didn't have a way to say, well, let me see what you have. So I appreciate, I don't wanna write policy based on one incident that happened four years ago. Yeah. I also don't want to dismiss his expertise. So my, my kind of splitting the baby would be keep them main, if you have them, keep 'em maintained and in working order. <v Speaker 6>I, I wonder, so I, I think,</v> <v Speaker 11>I'm sorry,</v> <v Speaker 6>Go ahead.</v> Yeah, so I wonder if we could say, instead of putting a timeframe on say something to the effect of, and, and I don't know how to word this. It might be a question or counsel, but if we could say, recordings from any video system requested by enforcement Right. Shall be preserved. <v Speaker 1>So the under mass general law,</v> when a law enforcement officer come under 1 38 when he, he or she or a a select board member even asks a license holder for video or any evidence as part of an investigation, they have to provide it or it's a violation. So it's not the case that we even need to write that in here. They can't impede an investigation. Yes. Mr. Evans, <v Speaker 11>What you just said sort</v> of spurred some thinking on my part had to happen. So if we are, we believe a violation has occurred, there's a very good chance that it's, you know, we're, we're within the period where they haven't overwritten that surveillanced. Right. Or, or video. So I don't, you know, and again, alcohol counsel will, will have something, but given that you haven't found anything that specifies it, I'm, I'm thinking that they're gonna have their video for insurance purposes. Right. They're gonna, if I'm an insurer Oh. And each time I go into that business, I'm gonna say, have, have you verified that these are working? Right. So that, that happens at least once a year. I would think so. I think we're, we're getting a little too far in the weeds maybe. And, and trying to prescribe this. And I think agreed. Keeping it simple, you know, and, and realistic about what's really happening out there might be a better way to go. <v Speaker 1>I, I completely agree. Yes.</v> <v Speaker 10>Well, correct me if I'm wrong,</v> but didn't this start with the ask being that everyone was required to have video, <v Speaker 1>The ask was required to have video</v> <v Speaker 10>Required.</v> So why do we even need to mention it at all if we're not gonna require video and as part of an investigation, they need to provide all materials anyway. Why is that part of our policy? <v Speaker 6>I think the question is, you know,</v> we don't want a situation and, and we've come close to this a couple of times and, and once had it actually happened where they have video and they basically have the right to say it wasn't working. <v Speaker 1>Well, they don't have the right to</v> But they have said it. Yeah. <v Speaker 6>They have said it, which means even if it was working at</v> the time of the incident, they're basically saying it wasn't working and won't produce the video. <v Speaker 1>That's the deputy chief's concern.</v> <v Speaker 6>And, and I agree with that. That's fair.</v> If if they have video, it has to be working. If they don't have video, that's fine. They don't have it. <v Speaker 1>I I'm gonna ask slippery slope.</v> I'm gonna ask council if any other town requires this and what it looks like. Yeah. In other policies. Think that's, <v Speaker 11>That's, let's let,</v> just let him earn <v Speaker 1>His, I mean, I, we don't need</v> to recreate the wheel when it comes to alcohol policy, especially in the state where it's antiquated anyway. And it hasn't really evolved since right after prohibition. So a question from a board member about licenses. So posting of licenses, all licenses, including the alcohol license shall be posted. This is page seven, shall be posted in public view at all times. The question was, what if the other licenser is not in public view? Can we pull their alcohol license? No, we can't pull. But if they aren't, then that's a violation of health department policy, et cetera. I think we make it simple and we just say the alcohol license shall be posted in public view at all times. Yeah. So we don't need to enforce everything that everybody else is enforcing. Okay. Oh, that may be all I have. My goal is to give this to you by the weekend, get it back by Wednesday, send it to Mr. DeLuca immediately, ask for feedback after Thanksgiving and have, and I'll give you a clean draft so you don't have to read through all of this, you know, nonsense. And then we'll ask him, you know, what opens us to liability? What is unnecessary from a legal point of view? Remember Ms. North's, you know, as the license, the practicing lawyer without a license at her, you know that, that I am at her footsteps and kind of walking behind her. One of the things she says is, for all of our policies, less is more. Yeah. So we, you know, right now we have, I don't know how many pages, 14 pages the draft was sent to all of the license holders for comment. So the only comment we got back was the one about the video and it overriding writing. Cool. I think that's a wrap. That may be a wrap. Mr. Marshall, do you have any town administrator updates? <v Speaker 3>Just a note for board members.</v> I know Ms. Wilson, Martin had sent around a draft of a policy. If you can all just, if you have an opportunity to take a look, I know that there's probably a lot on your plates with the holidays and everything else in general. But if you have an opportunity to take a look before she comes and presents and if you have any comments, please feel for, please feel free to forward them along to her in preparation for the meeting. That would be great. <v Speaker 1>I, I don't seem to have that.</v> Did she send it to select board@needma.org? 'cause I'm not getting this. That was a couple days ago. <v Speaker 6>Didn't get it. Didn't need spam folder. It is,</v> <v Speaker 1>It it's not, it's just it's not working.</v> There's an issue. I'll forward it. Thank you. What meeting agenda is she on? The 11th? <v Speaker 3>I believe. The 11th. Okay.</v> <v Speaker 10>Thank you.</v> <v Speaker 1>So</v> <v Speaker 10>Are you talking about</v> the green communities report or something else? <v Speaker 3>This is the,</v> <v Speaker 10>Oh, the municipal.</v> Municipal decarbonization. Okay. Yes. All right. She sent two things. <v Speaker 6>Yeah, she sent it As a G Doc,</v> I can forward you a PDF if you want. You <v Speaker 1>Just did.</v> Okay. Mr. Sydney, I'd like to talk to you in the next couple of days about executive session minutes on the 11th. I'd like to see us have all the Valentine ones put together for approval by the board in an executive session. And during that time, I will brief the board if there's anything to brief on a legal matter that takes place that day. And we will start that on the 11th at six. <v Speaker 6>Okay. Well you did send, somebody sent out a</v> <v Speaker 1>Document. I know we'll talk about it.</v> <v Speaker 6>And I looked at everything</v> and that I did the best I could with what we <v Speaker 1>Had.</v> I know. So we're gonna do better you and I together with Okay. And we're gonna get more. Okay. I will entertain a motion to adjourn. <v Speaker 6>So I'll move. You don't want to ask for second, second</v> <v Speaker 1>Updates? I do not. Okay.</v> <v Speaker 6>Roll. So</v> <v Speaker 1>Moved.</v> I, I just second refused a request of Mr. Sydney's for select board updates. But if you have anything, feel free to share in 30 seconds or less. Okay. We have a motion. Second. By whom? All three of us. Everybody? Yes. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? That's a wrap. <v Speaker 6>Nine 20.</v>