Evening and welcome to the select board meeting for Monday, July 20th, 2026. Time is 6 o'clock p.m. We're here in the land use hearing room at town hall at 454 College Highway in Southwick. This meeting is being held in hybrid fashion,
both in person and in Zoom. And the meeting is being recorded. Um if anyone else is recording the meeting, all they have to do is make it known to Mr. Anderson. >> Yes, sir. Fred Fred Bore 40 Birwood Road audio and video.
>> Yes, sir. >> L Clark, the Westfield News, MSR. >> Okay. >> Okay. First, we'll start off with the pledge of allegiance. Mr. Pone, would you lead us in the pledge this evening? I pledge algiance to the flag of the
United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Okay, at this time we'll take public comment. Public comment is for anything that anyone wishes to address to the
board that's not on our agenda this evening. If we have an item on our agenda that you're interested in speaking to, we'll cover that and have public plenty of time for public comment at that time. Um, why don't we start on Zoom tonight? Is there anyone on Zoom? I
see one hand raised from here. Um, I believe that's Mrs. Leblon. >> Hi. [clears throat] Hi. I've written down what I want to say so that I don't get all flustered because I don't speak well in public. But anyway, I have a couple of requests. Um, in the past, um,
we used to have people that wanted to speak, um, come to the front of the room and, um, they could be here, he heard. We've kind of done away with that. And, um, I'd like to remind maybe the board again that it would be helpful if that
happened again. Um, I I either attend the meetings by Zoom or I always watch them and I can't always hear everyone. And no, I'm not hard of hearing. Um, just today I was watching a recorded meeting. And um, I
had to rewind it and play it back three times before I heard what that person sitting in the back row said. And I only heard it because I had been told what that person did say, so it was easier to pick up on. But you can't hear people that are sitting in the back of the room
clearly. And even if I put my my um volume on high when I'm listening to the recorded meeting, I have a hard time still hearing it. So, if we could do that again, that would be greatly appreciated. I am aware that um if an item is on the agenda for a select board
meeting that those that wish to speak cannot address or ask questions during public speaking time about those items which prevents me from bringing up a couple of things a couple of my recent concerns tonight. I would be interested in knowing why that doesn't happen, why
we can't address the items that are scheduled for the meeting because I do attend other committee meetings and they do allow it. So, I'm just wondering why it isn't across the board. Um, how are the residents supposed to address their
concerns, ask questions, and be informed without secrecy? When someone does bring up a concern during public speaking time, there's never any follow-up conveyed at the next meeting or the further meetings. Why is that? I've heard the term transparency from this
board, which in my opinion is not an accurate statement. I'll bring up for example Carvana or aka the Bailey project. It's just one example. Also, during a meeting back in November, there was some grant money approved by this
board for quote unquote equipment. Residents are now aware of what those funds are actually intended for. That's secrecy. That's not an open policy. Um, Southwick is not the same town as it was when we made the decision to build
and move here 25 years ago. And the changes, in my opinion, have not been for the better. Registered voters place their trust in who they elect to make the best decisions for the entire town, whether it be seniors or young working people. Please do better for the
residents, their children, and grandchildren. The decisions that this board makes impacts everyone. Thank you. >> Thank you. Is there anyone else on Zoom? >> Okay, we'll turn to the room. Is there
anyone in the in the meeting room tonight that has anything they'd like to address to the select board that's not on the agenda? >> I'd like to address >> and just one second to answer Mrs. Leblanc's first question. She's 100%
right. Would you mind if you're able, would you come forward and state your name and address so that your comments are adequately recorded? >> Thank you. >> May I sit? >> You sure can. >> Thank you. So, I'm here to address the doings.
>> Can we have your name and address for the >> record? 27 Granville Road, Southwick, Mass, 01077. So, I'm here to address the doings on November 3rd and the date [clears throat] which
eludes me, but you were not here because you were out of town, so you zoomed into that meeting. So, I'm here to address those two meetings. Okay. You're the chair. Yes. No. Maybe >> I am.
>> You are the chair or you are ready to let me speak? >> You have the floor, ma'am. >> I am here to speak out against the use of surveillance cameras throughout the town. I object to the enrichment of private companies through surveillance of our citizens. Granting cameras cost
exponentially less than the value of the data collected. This data is often paired with data collected to form a dossier of sorts on every citizen. This is not acceptable to me and many others. First, let me address points that are commonly used to respond to privacy
concerns. Number one, if you're not doing anything, why worry? And you usually have a phone. This is a fallacy. The error rate of the surveillance is between 8 and 30% depending upon the source. There are many cases of
incorrect information acted upon leaving guil the individual guilty until proven innocent. The correction of this misinformation costs time, money, and a sullied reputation. Carrying a phone can be used as a form
of surveillance. The Supreme Court recently ruled that cellular phone companies must be presented with a warrant in order to receive any and all information related to a user. Of course, buying the information makes
that a point. The ruling refers only to seller comp companies, leaving other third party companies able to circumvent the Fourth Amendment. This is not speculation. Cash Patel, the director of the FBI, recently testified under oath
at congressional hearings. He admitted that the FBI, the DHS, and other three-letter agencies and departments regularly pay for third-party information from country companies such as Palunteer and others who have
contracts to provide information. There are other companies as well. Data collected by surveillance cameras owned by an entity are compiled with data from Doge, Social Security, SNAP, Medicare,
as well as other voter information that has been turned over to the federal government and other sources. These are only the confirmed uses. In my opinion, there are likely more. The paid use of data without a court-ordered
warrant has been and should be a violation of the fourth amendment. Number another reason they give there is no expectation of privacy in public places. This too is not entirely true.
This clause most often refers to the photography of public servants and persons of fame. Cell phone information and an individual's gate or eye recognition is not a privacy given up because one is in public. Constant
surveillance from publicly owned places is in intrusive privacy but now is becoming normalized. This is a very slippery slope that our town should not try to normalize. Number
another argument, other municipalities have such systems. This too is not a reason for our town to participate. There are many municipalities across the country cancelling such contracts for reasons of
the intrusive and hidden uses. Windsor, Connecticut, and Tillington are an example of two such towns. This surveillance being implemented in our town causes me many concerns. among them are there was no notice given to the
public as far as I know. If there was, it certainly was not widely circulated. I became aware of this meeting while zooming a select for meeting. This particular meeting all members were present. Two were physically and Mr.
Moldin was on Zoom. Russell Anderson said that there would be six cameras installed, four fixed and two on trailers. Mr. Mowglin asked if the information would be shared. Mr. Anderson responded yes for a period of
one year per the grant. Upon learning this, I called the town administrator the next day to voice my concerns. I was told that the contract was not signed yet. I asked if there would be a discussion with town residents in
reference to this. She indicated that she shot thought so, but she wasn't sure how. I waited two weeks and contacted her again. I reiterated my concerns and inquired as how I could get this on the select board agenda. She wasn't sure,
but she said she would find out and call me back the next day. I never received that call. On July 15th, I contacted one select board member and only one to avoid a violation of the open meeting
laws. I inquired about this situation. The reply I received was quote, "I have already asked this to be on an agenda. Agreed. This should have been talked about more. Not sure what happened. I tried November 3rd
meeting to ask what the grant was for, but chief didn't want to share. I am not opposed if used correctly with guidelines. It's up to the police chief to share those rules." Note, I'm not sure why
I'm not sure they will take public comments on items on the agenda. If they do, it's Moglin's control. And if he wants to answer, don't take it personally. If they don't answer in public meeting, but ask to get a response followup
name of select. P.S. article in today's Westfield News. End quote. It troubles me greatly that several of our town leaders were either misinformed or that many were uninformed. It was my conclusion based on all my communications that the police chief
acted on his own. I may be wrong, but there is no indication of this through the several ways I tried to find relevant and timely information. I object to this grant unless strict guidelines are put in place. Among those
guidelines would be that no data is shared with any entity unless a court-ordered warrant is issued and that all data gathered is license plates only and that all data is wiped from the
system every 30 to 60 days and that only the plates of cars that were involved in crimes or infractions as well as warrants previously mentioned are saved within the system. I also object to the way it has been handled. I
urge the select board to table this matter and place it on a later agenda as all business, thus giving us time to glean public input allowing a decision that is for the citizenry, not personal opinions at the very least. A better
idea would be to vote to put this matter on the next special or annual town meeting to ensure wishes of the citizenry are followed. So that's what happened on the 3 and when you were out of town. Here
is my statement for the record. And here are the questions that I believe should be asked to inform the town. And if you don't want to ask them, that's fine. But I'm giving you each a copy. Thank you. >> So that you will have a chance to peruse
them or at least enter them on the records. And Mr. You ran on being for the people. At both of those meetings, you said nothing. I expect you today and going forth to fulfill your promise that
you got elected on to be for the people. >> Thank you for limiting your comments to items not on the agenda. No, those as you as I stated in my uh my comments, I've commented on your meeting where you weren't here and the November 3rd
meeting which a select board that I commented to not in violation of open meetings was the November 3rd meeting. >> Very well. >> So I spoke about those two meetings as I indicated and as you heard. >> Thank you. Is there anyone else in the
audience for >> question? >> Sure. Can could you please come up and state your name and address just so the recording on Zoom can hear you adequately? >> Hi. >> I don't know if I should sit or stand. >> Totally up to you. >> I'll just stand because um
>> the the woman that spoke previously, Joan, >> and we need your name and address for the record, please. >> Michelle Randall. >> Thank you. >> I think I'm here for the same reason that a lot of people are here. However, I won't make a comment about that because I guess I can't. But I would like you to address her question on why
we can't make a comment about something until after it's on or you said that there would be space and time for us to make a comment after it is addressed on the agenda. >> Y >> now why can't we make is the the comments that we make prior not going to
be taken into consideration or vice versa? Generally, we don't have a back and forth at a select board meeting, but in I'm going to make a a kind of an exception here. It's been long-standing tradition. I don't know that we have a real basis for why we do it that way.
And I I took a note to cover that under other new business tonight. Maybe we should discuss that and just let public comment be public comment. Um, in the times that I've been chair of the select board, I've always kind of run a fairly flexible meeting and let people have
their say when and at different times during a meeting. Typically, under the open meeting law, um, if you hold to the strictest reading of the open meeting law, you you can or you don't even have to have public comments. Personally, I think that's really bad government. But
you usually can have a a section of public comment and then the rest of the open meeting law is that you're supposed to be able to observe your government in action. So there it doesn't it's not necessarily a public participation back and forth type of meeting. I've always
just tried to run my meeting, you know, run a select board meeting where I I like that interaction, right? And as long as everyone we can be civil and there's good discourse back and forth and the business of the board can get done, we kind of let let the the process
play out. And and in my experience in in government for uh darn near 28 years, I've never once had to pick up that gavvel and use it. And I hope to continue that tradition forever. Um and just have a good dialogue back and forth because there's always good input from
people. That certainly weighs on my decision process and how I come to conclusions. >> Westfield's um doing the thing [clears throat] about the data centers. They allowed public comment about the data center situation
prior to them making a vote on the moratorum and actually I vaguely remember the same thing happening here when we were voting on the moratorum as well that we were able to speak our piece about why we would or wouldn't want it >> and that was probably at the planning board for that one. Yeah. Right. So that
this is kind of just how we've always done it. So I don't stand on that forever. Miss LeBron brought it up. So are you. >> Change it. >> We're going to discuss it. I'm going to add it to put on a future agenda for ne our next meeting to say should we change that format up a little bit. So it's a good suggestion. I appreciate it. Thanks
to you and Mrs. Leblanc. >> Appreciate it. >> Not [clears throat] a problem. Anyone else? >> All right, we'll move into our first uh public hearing. >> Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't see you over there. help you put your >> Well, because usually I'm looking out at
folks in the audience. >> Fred Gore. Um, I just have a qu because we're not going to talk about what's happening later. I'll wait until later. Several months ago, I brought up about
our transfer station. I asked, "What are you guys doing about it with all the people legally, overloaded trucks, everything else that's happening at that transfer station?
So, can it be on what you're doing about it?" >> Because that was like months ago and this transparency does not happen. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? Let me look
around the room, make sure I didn't miss anyone else. All right, let's move into our six o'clock public hearing. I have a notice that needs to be read. The South Select Board in association with the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing
on Monday, July 20th, 2026, starting at 6:00. The hearing will be conducted in a hybrid format and interested parties may attend in person at the Southwick town hall or join via the Zoom link or phone number provided above. The purpose of
the hearing is to present a proposed program and budget amendment to the town's fiscal year 223 and fiscal year 24 Massachusetts community development block grant CDBG program awards. The proposed amendment will increase the
amount of funding available for construction of water mane improvements on North Lake Avenue that are being funded through both grant programs. The proposed amendment seeks to transfer up to $100,881 originally allocated to program delivery and administration of the fiscical year
22/23 grant award and up to $82,915 originally allocated to program delivery and administration of the fisc year 24 grant award. All residents with questions or comments
will have an opportunity to be heard. The Southwick town hall is handicapped accessible. Written com comments will be received by the town through July 20th at 2:00 p.m. Written comments will be read aloud during the hearing for further information or submit a written comment. Oh, you're probably too late
because it's after 2:00. Contact Erica Johnson at the Pir Valley Planning Commission and her phone number and email are here. I need a Do we need a motion to open the hearing? Right. Need a motion to open the hearing? >> Second. >> Uh, roll call vote, please. Doug Mglin. Yes. Russ Anderson. Yes.
>> Joseph Di. Yes. >> And I think I saw Mrs. Johnson. >> How are you? >> A little intimidated to be honest. >> They all They're all here for you. >> Usually everyone clears out when I come up. So, you're in luck. Tonight, guys.
We're going to talk about uh community development block grant uh money. So, um thank you. Um, as you are aware, the town has received two consecutive fiscal years of community development block
grant funds and the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission has been working with you to help administer those funds. Um we are currently uh assisting with construction on North Lake Avenue, the
replacement of waterline starting at starting near that near the intersection with Summer Street and then moving back toward Chapman. Um, we have done some projections of the
grant and determined there are going to be funds available, funds that were originally awarded to the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission for administr. We would the um the town would like to formally request of the
state that these funds be moved from the line items for the planning commission to the line item for construction um on North Lake Avenue. Um it did provide some numbers. They were all the numbers were provided in the public
hearing notice. They have not changed. The numbers that I provided to the board are the exact numbers, excuse me, that were in the public hearing notice. I have them separated out because they are technically two separate grants and two separate fiscal years and we have to go
through two separate administrative processes to uh formally request the change in funding um for the block grant. This will result in no net addition or subtraction of funds to the
grant. This is simply taking money allocated to the planning commission and moving it to directly benefit the town. Um out of the 2223 um it's a total of 100,881.
Yes, we went down to the dollar. Um and in the 24 it's $82,915. >> Put it on the screen so the folks on Zoom can see it as well and the folks in the room. How did I do that? >> We have a person for that at the office.
[laughter] I don't perform my own technical stunts. Um, it's on the screen for your enjoyment. Um, does are there any questions? >> I have
Why? >> Why? >> Yeah. Why was it Were those other numbers padded? Now they've come down because you didn't need it. >> No, the other numbers were estimates based on staff we had working at the time. >> Um, and between the time that you'll
notice the number is considerably higher for 22 23. Yeah, >> that was when we had the biggest staffing transition. So, this reflects an overall reduction of staff um and as
well as a changing of staff that is is working on this. You're still stuck with me, but there's been a lot [laughter] there's been a lot of other changes. You can't get rid of me. Um but there have been other changes in staffing. Um and
there's also been some significant changes um in uh leadership at the state level too that have impacted how these grants are uh administratively run. So there there's been there's been a lot of
changes. >> So this will never happen again then. >> Can't promise you that. >> It won't. But I can promise you whenever we determine there's money that was allocated to us that we don't
specifically need to do the work that's included in the grant. >> We will move it to the town. >> Thank you. You're welcome. Is there anyone anyone in the audience or on Zoom that would like to be heard
on this during this hearing? >> Lamar, 27 Granville Road. Are there sewers in place there already? >> No. I was sad. >> Anyone else?
Now we just close the hearing. >> Yeah. >> And entertain a motion to close said hearing. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Roll call vote, please. Doug Mglin, yes. >> And Sanderson, yes. >> Joseph, yes. >> And then we need to take a vote. >> Do we have the vote in a some kind of
format that you need it or I have prepared some suggested questions for your >> reviewed at the bottom. Oh, you need two motions for for both or one for each? >> Two separate grants.
>> Okay. I make a motion to move to submit program and budget amendment requests for the EOHLC that will move a total of 100,881 in program delivery and grant administrative funds awarded to the FY223
CDBG contract to construct the water system improvements on North Lake A. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Doug Mglin, yes. >> Russ Anderson, yes. Joseph DDS. >> I move to submit a program and budget
amendment request to the EOHLC that will move a total of 82,915 in program delivery and grant administrative funds awarded in the FY24 CDBG contract construction of water system improvements on North Lake ABS.
>> Is there a second? Oh, I think that that's the motion. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Roll call vote. Doug Mglin, yes. >> Russ Anderson, yes. >> Yes. And just one point of clarification, Jessica, could you spell out EO HLC because we've been called to
task on using acronyms like that. >> The Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities. >> Thank you very much. >> That's why we use the acronym. >> Exactly. >> It doesn't roll off the tongue. >> It does not. >> Um and if I may for just one second.
>> You may. >> Um they're doing some paving now. There's going to be a break in construction while we take care of some administrative things and get all the money where the money needs to be. Um, and then the contractor is going to come
back, the same contractor, and continue working up the street. So, it got a little bad, it got a little better. It's going to get worse again, but then we'll have water, new water >> as it goes. Thank you. >> It goes. Thank you very much. >> Did you need signins on your sheet or
you got what you needed? Um I am going to take from the meeting minutes what is recorded for people. >> Okay. >> And attendance I took my notes. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Appreciate your time. >> Not a problem. Have a good evening.
>> Thank you as well. >> Okay. Next we have the fire chief and an interview for a call force firefighter William Ayala. Chief >> good afternoon. We actually have two candidates tonight. Williams first do one at a time. We'll start with William.
Williams going to be is applied for and had a preliminary interview with the fire department as a call for firefighter. So William be have a seat. >> Hello. Before we get started, I used to work with Will at Wall-E computer. >> So,
>> thank you. >> Just so it's not a conflict at all, and he still showed up, so we got that going for us. But he's a good guy from from my time at work, but uh this interview stands on its own. So, >> um so why do you why do you want to
join? >> Uh it's always been a dream. Kind of had it in the back. Uh had kids, started a family. Think now it's a good time to start it. You're familiar with the time commitment? Yes. At least the initial training part of it and stuff. >> Yes.
>> So is my wife. >> Good point. [laughter] >> Good point. >> Okay. You've already passed that test. >> You really wanted to see Doug again. >> He misses me. >> He does >> with every bullet so far.
>> Yep. Why South? Um, I worked here for four years. I liked it. I like everything about here. I spend my weekends at Wally Park. Just it's nice over here. I love it. >> Thank you.
I >> think we can also thank Brandon Johnson for recruiting as well, too. Yeah. There's the adjusted. Yeah. So you're just up on Feeden Hills Road in >> Southwick Street,
>> the other side of >> I really don't need questions. I'm sure the chief is more than vetted. >> We had uh preliminary interviews as I said before, which is our typical interview process. um scored very high
marks and came highly recommended by all four people that were participating in the interview. >> Did they know Doug was involved? >> They they still said no problem. >> So I get to ask the most important question. >> Oh boy. >> So what's standing between you being a
call firefighter and not being a call firefighter? >> I have another question. >> Joel, you do. >> That's the last one. Yeah. >> All right. Well, I ask your question, >> Anderson. What What is the difference?
Call firefighter. What is that? Is that Is that >> the old word for volunteer? >> Yes. Yes. Yeah. >> Responding via Patrick. >> Thank you. That was my question. >> So, what was your question, Doug?
[laughter] >> What's standing between becoming a call firefighter in the town of South Lake? What's the one thing? You >> correct. Is there a motion to appoint Will I? >> Well, it was until >> I make a motion to >> Mr. Di second.
>> It's a roll call vote. Doug Mglin, yes. Wait till they finish. >> Anderson, yes. >> Joseph Di, yes. >> Now you can do it. There you go. Congratulations. >> Congratulations. >> Thank you, sir. >> And thank you for your service to our town. Well, I appreciate it. Everyone
does. Our second candidate uh comes to us uh from Southwick uh Elizabeth Hanland. She prefers to be called Liz. Liz is applying for a Sodian position, but she's currently enrolled as a paramedic at Westwood State University um and course to complete probably by the end
of this year um her her deductive portion of it. So she'll be working for us as an ENT and hopefully one day as a paramedic. So this is Elizabeth Hanland. >> Come on up. You said you'd prefer to be 12. Liz, >> please have a seat. >> She knows the last question already.
>> Well, it's harder because that this one pays real money. >> Um, >> why do you want to come or you're you live in Southwick, right? >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, why why join? >> Um, I just wanted the opportunity to give back to my community. Um, I've had
to utilize Southwick emergency services before, so like being in the position where I can give back to the community. um that I grew up in and that I live in currently would be great. >> And you're on Becket right now? >> Yes. >> How often do you work there? >> Um I work there once a week and I work
um I actually work in Bloomfield, Connecticut right now as well. So I'm there >> on their EMS. >> Yes. >> And you worked for RAM as well? Ram's no longer, right? >> No, I worked there until January. Oh yeah.
>> Why did we choose this profession? >> Um so my dad had a medical emergency and I had to call 911. Um and actually South Fire is the ambulance that showed up for that. But so after that call um I was really inspired to become an EMT just
seeing like how the responders treated my dad. Um and how everything happened like to him in the hospital and everything. Um and so then I signed up for my EMT class the next day. What do you like best about it? >> Um, I think being able to like help
people in their moments of of crisis, like in their worst moments. Um, and then also like treating them as a person rather than just as somebody who called 911 and as a patient and like making a personal connection with them. >> That is the difference between working
in the town you live because you see the people, you've you know the people. Um and and it's that's one thing we always pr pride ourselves on is is that um that connection >> you're going to school to be a medic? >> Yes. >> Where are you going?
>> West State. >> Oh, the professor's legendary. I hear >> the Fuga. >> Yeah. >> Gotcha. >> Sure what legend you're talking about, but >> Well, I didn't say it was good thing or a bad thing. No, he's great and he's
been uh um >> he's been great for our department and especially with the the group of young medics that we've had come through that program and and getting up to speed on on running a full ALS service from the chief, the deputy chief Ugga and a couple others. It's really been a
testament to their success. Um need a motion, gentlemen. >> I'll make a motion to approve uh appointment. >> I'll second that. Roll call vote. Doug Mglin, yes. >> Russ Anderson, yes. >> Joseph DD, yes.
>> Congratulations. >> Thank you. >> Good luck. >> He's got to stay till the end. Just kidding. Um, so we're going to review and discuss a townwide notification option. um including a new system from
GOGV and Fire Chief Spanowitz is going to present that. >> Good evening again. Um, as you may recall back in November, the current notification system we're using called uh, Code Red, um, also known as Onsolve, um, was in the process of upgrading
their platform. And in the in the same time frame, they had a significant cyber attack that uh, forced them to really pretty much close all the functions that they had and kind of come up with a quick solution. And unfortunately, the quick solution was not a good one. Um,
it's a system that has had some problems. Um, I'm sure there are some people in the audience that have received phone calls from this notification system from numbers from Seattle, Washington, from Indiana, from um, Teroot, Indiana, it was specifically
California. So, it initially looks like a spam call and it's one of the things they cannot fix. So, it's been problematic. um you may often get a message that is the transa the the actual transcript is wordy. It's it's
hard to understand because the pronunciation is not very good. So after we started experiencing all these problems, we brought them back in and said we we need some training on this and make it better and can you solve some of these problems and they said sure we'll come in and give you the training but the problems still persist. So about four months ago I started
looking at some other uh providers and one of the systems we looked at was called gov. I looked at three total. Uh, Civic Plus was another one and another company called EPR. Um, that was pretty forgettable. Um, it takes me a while. I had to go back and look up the name of the company. Um,
they really had a very complicated system, but GOG gov um has a lot of wonderful features and um, just in the handout that I gave you, one of the the biggest things is they do have simple notifications like we utilize now, often referred to as reverse 90 911. Um, but
they have an app and they create the app for your town. So, small town of Richmond, Massachusetts with population of less than 3,000 people utilizes this company and their app is called My Richmond and you get notifications through the app. The app can also be a
two-way [snorts] uh system for communications. Um, you can pay bills on it. You can track meetings. You can track the calendar in the town. It interfaces with the web pages. So for both the town, fire department, police departments, the websites, whatever you want to do there. Um some social media
stuff as well too. Um it's utilized by um I think they said over 2 million users and 650 municipal customers. Uh they've been incept been around since 2004. Pretty solid company. Um the presentation portion of it was
really impressive because they understood what it is we were looking for. We needed a simple notification system that everybody could use. It wasn't complicated but got the message out there pretty simply and so that's one of the reasons we was drawn to us. Um when you see it up and running and
how simple it is to use it was also very made it very attractive as well too. The implementation um should we go with this company takes about 30 days. So that's part of why I I really kind of move towards this company. Um it's it's not flashy. Um it is really basic stuff but
it is a really good package and the apps are pretty impressive. They create the app for you. You don't have to do anything and they take it from there. So currently uh in the contract cycle with onsaw of code red um we had an automatic
renewal in July. Um the attorneys are currently looking at the contract to see what the ramifications are of that should we decide to move sooner than later. Um so we just kind of have to wait on that one. Um, initially gov did come in more expensive than um, code red, but I spoke with them and I said,
"Look at this is what we're doing. This is what I really need to do." Um, and they were willing to readjust the quote and came in around the same price that we're currently paying. Um, so I think it's a it's a good product. I'd like to make the move to it. Um, there are some concerns, you know, legally with the
contracts and where we stand and how we get our data and our contact list from go from uh, excuse me, go red. No, from code red. Um, but it can be done. Can the list be obtained without code
red? on um >> because we I remember when we set it up but you know we've had people sign up over the years but we also got dumps from Verizon and some of the phone companies as well. >> I would have to look at it. I the way I
understood it was that um Code Red had gone through filtered out the list cleaned it up as much as possible had taken all the input put it one universal list and they have it. They don't own it. It's our list, but we still would need to get that list from them. And I think they would provide that to us
anyway, even if we just asked. >> So, this is $4,800. >> Yes. >> And this that allows notification. I know police use it a lot for >> interrupts. Yeah. And unfortunately, they moved away from the police statistically of moving away from the notification. Code Red was
so >> it was Yeah, it was really problematic. It was a broken system after the cyber attack and it never fully recovered. I would think that would allow us to break the contract if >> Well, one would think. So, we'll let the legal ease handle the legal ease. [clears throat]
>> I looked at them at um the conference. Yeah, they're they seem pretty decent. >> Yeah, pretty solid company. Yeah, very willing to work with us. Um they get very creative with the apps and things. Like I said, I just used I downloaded the the My Richmond one just to see and got a notification that they had some weed treatment going on in a body of
water they had out there. I'm like, that's pretty cool. Um, and it just comes in as a regular notification and it's not always critical crisis stuff as well too because it does have the real town base, real town feel to it. >> Can you tailor that? Because we get
complaints of people Yes. >> sick of being bothered. >> Yeah. They can put it they can download the app themselves and select what they want to see >> if they want it that way. Yep. >> Yeah. We're paying 4,800 now.
>> Um, slightly over that right now. It was a three-year contract initially, right? Well, actually, we've had it since 2019, so this is the automatic roll over on it, but yeah, it was slightly more than that. Um, but it is a good company and I'd like, you know, the board to to just
endorse going forward with this and to see what we can do for making it work um with the current contract and also make it work as our new provider. >> Do I dare ask what they do with their data? Um when I asked um they said it is
exclusively theirs. I'm not sure what that means but that was the language they said exclusively theirs. Um they protect the data because that was part of what we we wanted code red. Um and even when they had their cyber attack they couldn't tell us exactly what happened,
>> right? Um, but I do know it had something to do with the two-way system that they were using and that was part of the the compromise to the system and also one of the the roll backs on one of the features was it was really hard to figure out who was getting the messaging and this would solve a lot of those
problems. >> Okay, >> I think that it's a good question though. I think that would be a good one to raise in contract negotiations with them that you know that they're going to not going to rent or sell that data. Mhm. >> Um because people provide that contact
information that they don't normally make available to others. Um [clears throat] so they would have a under contract a duty to protect it. Right. >> And the the other question I had in the in the pricing and I don't want to
scroll around because I'm showing on the screen here, but the in the pricing there was a certain number of text messages that were >> they call credits the 25,000 credits. We'll never even compose to that. >> Okay. Cuz I was thinking that that's really not a lot if you think about if you send a bunch of all calls.
>> No. Okay. No, it's not. And and I forget the formula, but we are well protected in there. We would never use it up in the course of a year. Gotcha. >> Yeah. Okay, other questions or comments. >> Why don't we carry this to next meeting
just to get that answer on that and then we would we would give you an affirmative. >> Sounds good. >> The other one's still working. >> Yes. Yeah. >> For now. >> Yeah. >> Sort of. Well, some people got a message this evening and mine says this as it would a message for Jared Martell and I
asked them about it. I said, "Well, he must have had your phone number." I said, "I've had this phone number for 27 years. I doubt it." You know, but >> mine comes to my wife on my cell phone. So, yeah, they're it's gotten a little mixed up. >> Yep. This is the best way. >> David, you had a question. I did.
>> Sure. David Alco, can you hear me? Um So, just a couple questions. Does this replace the existing uh system that we have? I received a text and a call when I pulled into the parking lot to
>> Yeah. >> from Southware. So, I didn't experience the the problems that you >> mentioned, but >> just wanted to clarify that. Uh but you said, chief, that the company indicated that they would own the data.
>> So, they possess the data. That's why we want to get clarification on what that really means. Okay. What I think that means is they protect the data is what I believe it means. But I will get that in in writing from them. Yes. >> Because if they if they own the data then they have carved blunt. They can
sell it. They can share it. They can >> you know add to it or whatever they want. We should really be the owners. They should be the custodians. >> Yes. >> And we should have those privacy requirements. >> Yep. And I believe you should. Um obviously the data breach that's
happened before um we don't know how much information got out um they said most of it was larger corporate businesses that were impacted by it um but I don't know what that means either that that could have been something else but to answer your first question guess this would replace code red um as a
notification system for the town >> and that very question you asked is what we're going to try to get an answer back before we decide to go forward with this company or not if they're not going to sell or or rent out that list, right? That it's confidential just for the use for the town.
>> And the ownership piece also gives you the ability to recover the data >> when you, you know, switch another vendor or wherever it is as opposed to them just >> keeping it, >> right? That's our >> Yes, it does say ownership of data. All
hosted data specific to customer is owned by the customer within 30-day calendar days following termination of this agreement. The customer can request a copy of it. Uh yada yada yada doesn't say anything about sharing it though. Okay. >> Just as we own it. >> All right. That's in the contract that
they give. Okay. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. But we'll look for a little bit more concrete and >> Yeah. It's a little nebulous. >> Yeah. But um Bali 352 North Bl Street. Now, this system like allows like residents to
text in and kind of like report potholes, too. Is that like a feature that we'd be using? >> We wanted a pothole feature on it. We could do something like that. Yes. >> Like, so I'm just wondering like, you know, if you're buying so many tax and then all of a sudden you have a hundred residents that have hit a pothole, so
now they're sending those in. Like those those taxs could go very quickly. Will there be anything to monitor that to make sure that that doesn't become an expense that we're not expecting? >> So, it's In a situation like that, no. When it's utilizing the app itself, whatever we use the app for is included
in the prep the package price. So if somebody's, you know, 100 people are importing the console, hopefully it gets fixed to 50 people to report it. But if it still takes some time or it's the weekend or something like that, then I don't, you know, I will find out for sure. But I don't believe it's it what
we would be paying for. We pay for the notification going out, okay, to the residents. Okay. >> Okay. Anything else on this item? >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> The next item is the Cannabis Control Commission compliance acknowledgement for Pioneer Valley Trading Company. Do you want to summarize that, please? >> Sure. This is just a um part of their process in getting their final approvals from the CCC, Cannabis Control
Commission. Uh they just want to make sure that they're in compliance with all of the municipal bylaws, taxes, etc. >> So, this is just an acknowledgement. There's no action required by this board. >> Well, there somebody has to sign it. So, either authorize me to sign it, you
authorize you to sign it, somebody has to authorize and submit the response. Um, and I did look back at the last two and they were both signed by the chairs. >> Understand a motion for the chair to sign this document. Second move. >> Second.
>> Doug Mglin, yes. >> Anderson, yes. >> Joseph TD. Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. Item D, planning board referral request to hold a public hearing to modify chapter 185. And in
your packet was uh a letter from the planning board. How are you? >> I'm well. Good evening. Uh um select board members. >> My name is Alvin Allen, town planner. For the record, um so I'm before you all
to request to hold a public hearing to revise uh the town uh codes chapter 185, which is a zoning ordinance. Um the planning board at their last meeting July 14th did uh uh uh approve uh referring this to the
select board. So I'm here before you request that I bring it back before the planning board for a public hearing. And just to give you a little bit of um uh just a history in regards to this again this is our phase one of the zoning modernization project. We are looking to
make um changes to the um existing document which will um make it more uh user friendly uh read better more readable for um the general public or the lay person to understand um sort of
um what you can and can't do in specific districts. Um we'll also um so that we're going to be uh combining certain language or I'm sorry u uh taking out language that um that's repetitive um
and uh just ensuring that uh uh again more user friendly document and we're going to add a use table which will make it uh again more user friendly. Um again that's our phase one of the project. Um I do have um
a grant uh for eco onetop that will uh continue this um uh you know beyond this this this first um amendment. But uh this again this first amendment is just the ch there's no real changes to the document. There's no substantive
changes. um the the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission who we've been working with for several months now since the fall. Um we've had working group meetings um up until uh this uh J I'm sorry June. Um they've been working
with us in revising the document. Um they offered some substantive changes. one and I won't go through all of them but one one particular example is uh currently um for a special permit you have up to two years to move that permit forward uh afterwards uh that permit
will lapse uh the state recommends three years um they may have actually changed on their >> last week >> yeah last week it may have changed I believe it's four years now but uh essentially those sort of changes they they recommended that we go with what the the state um would would allow for
Um, so there you have it. And again, in our in our phase two, we'll be looking to make more substantive changes in regards to uh uh mixeduse housing um uh uh a a town center overlay district and
um transitional zones um to to ease commercial residential uses. So that's um coming >> but that's down the road a bit. Yes, that's down the road a bit, but today we're just talking about uh no uh real
modifications other than um making the document more user friendly and then also adding the use table. >> So for um just generally whenever the planning board this is basically a request to send a zoning bylaw change to
town meeting. So the normal process is which is you're seeing play out here is the planning board makes a request to the select board to put an article on the next town meeting warrant which is the ask in front of us. Then the planning board automatically votes to
send it right back to the planning board to hold a public hearing on that topic. So, anything that they're looking to change, you would bring to the if you have questions, comments, and concerns on that particular bylaw amendment, you could bring those to the planning board when they hold their public hearing. And
then the whole smash comes back to a future town meeting where anyone in town um votes on um a zoning bylaw change, which is a twothirds majority at town meeting. So, at this time, unless there's any other questions,
>> so this is the proposed changes. That's correct. >> It it it's a lot because it rolls up all of chapter 185. >> Yeah. >> To be more to flow a little better than it did, but it there's not any substantive changes other than the addition of a use table. And um sorry, I
don't mean to jump on your parade here, but there was actually a law signed into into law. I think it was last week or two weeks ago, the state modified chapter 48, which is the basis of our chapter 185. So, the planning board's going to have work to do just to get
this past the attorney general >> at our next town meeting just to come into compliance with chapter 48 like the tolling for special permits and a bunch of other things too. >> Does does this go to the attorney general prior to the town meeting or after? >> After our attorney always reviews bylaws
and they usually point out if they have any kind of fatal flaw, but then the attorney general has to say after town meeting. for example, that the um the planning board tried to bring that battery energy storage thing that was taken out by the attorney general, >> right? >> Yes.
>> So, I would entertain a a motion to send this back to the planning board to have a public hearing. >> So, moved. >> Second that. >> Roll call vote. Doug Mglin, yes. >> Russ Anderson, yes. >> Those are yes. >> They're in good shape. while I have you
all. And it's uh in regards to zoning amendment um the planning board at their last meeting July 14th, they're uh seeking to com to put together a committee to address large-scale solar and invest. And so they're uh there's a
question as to whether they can just form a committee or whether or not they require select board um approval to approve a committee boards. That's always a good question. Um, we'll come back to you this week via
email because I also you also want to make sure that as you have that that if you do a subcommittee that the stakeholders are represented from all portions that have a stake in it, whether it's public safety, whether it's health, whether it's you name it,
>> right? So that you get the best input to come up with the best proposed bylaw. >> Yes. >> Awesome. All right. Fair enough. >> Thank you all. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Item E, execute contract for Real Estate Research Consultants, Inc. This is
something we had talked about uh end of the fiscal year. This is for the board of assessors. They need to conduct um some audits and updates to some valuations. Do you want to provide some
additional color here? >> Yeah, sure. I I was looking I thought an assessor would be here, but um I'm happy to do that. >> Oh, no. Um so, this is the new assessor came in and very important to him on his
and his priority list was to have um an appraisal done on the personal property and um you know, it's impossible for us to do as a small town with our small staff. So, uh, there was discussion that they could use their overlay and, uh,
that we really wanted to kind of get this done by the end of last fiscal year. So, this is just the contract for you to approve, uh, between the assessors and this, um, real estate appraisal firm, real estate research consultant. >> And we were able to move the money at
the year end modernization act to move the money into the account to be able to do this. We were >> Is there a question allowed >> for you? Sure. >> Like we got a new assessor, but he can't do
the job that the old assessor did and now we have to pay someone to assist him. >> Thank you for your question. >> I I >> You're on tenuous ground, Fred. You know that, right? >> No, >> I'm just asking is there an amount? Yes,
it's $26,300. >> Okay. >> Discussion. >> Was this the package where we talked about they could do it in house, but it would take three years? >> Correct. >> Okay. So, it was discussed at some point >> and this is just business. Is that
>> I think it is the business side. Yeah. >> Personal property. >> Yeah. >> 300 accounts. It says, >> right? >> Personal property revaluation program for all locally assessed businesses. personal property in the municipality. >> That's 19,800. Then wireless and cable
review and evaluations 2500 >> and then a public utilities appraises 4,000. >> Yeah, >> that's 504. >> What's the cable review that holds >> that? Those are the biggest taxpayers in the town and those are the ones that
always take you to ATB and so it's a little bit aside from the personal property. All all the the it's >> still commercial. It's broken out into a different category. >> So, they're just auditing to make sure we're getting >> Yes, they are.
>> That was in court for a hundred years in Springfield, if you recall. >> You need more uh this one up out the bid or is it not? >> This is professional services. Yeah. And there are probably >> that was their selection >> one or two in the state >> and the I assume the the board of
assessors approved this. >> Yes, they did. This is for you basically to approve the contract. >> Make a motion to >> executive >> approve the contract as submitted. >> I will second that. >> Roll call vote. Doug Mglin, yes. >> Russ Anderson, yes.
>> Joseph DD, yes. >> Okay. Item F is to execute a contract for CIM bond for third party review for the WGI project. Um, that's also going to kick off an other new business item.
Um, under the bylaw, there was a bylaw change um, fairly recently that allowed the planning board to send development projects out for peer review and have plans looked at and analyzed. >> Um, the planning board has chosen to
exercise that option for this plan due to its size and scope. um the applicant actually pays for that work but they pay the money to the town and then the town pays the
um the third party auditing or the third party reviewer. So we have the money on hand to do this but we have to execute the contract because we'll actually be spending town money um that's being that was already on on hand from the developer itself. So, um
there's a contract here from Thai and Bond for this work and we already had checked that it matched the amount that we have on hand and I'm looking for their exact dollar amount so I don't give you the wrong >> it's $6,400.
Um I'll make a motion to approve. >> I'll second that. Roll call vote. Doug Mglin, yes. >> Russ Anderson, yes. rules of TV. Yes. >> And just a prelude to in other new business, um I asked to have on the agenda
that we we develop a standard contract with Tai and Bond that we can do these by uh agreement. So when the developer if a developer places money on on hand with the town and Tai and Bon agrees to do
the work, we'll have an overreaching contract that we can execute under without having to wait for subsequent select board meetings to authorize a particular contract for a particular project. And we lost about three weeks um just waiting for the right sequence
of the planning board to meet, then the select board to meet and then have this contract in front of us. So, um >> it it's not just something that um planning board just issues. >> They can't they can't >> really. >> Yeah. [clears throat]
>> It has to be the town entering into the contract, >> right? >> Item G, execute Wally Park pickle ball contract. time bound one was a long one discussion on that one. This has just been a long time coming. We had already
voted to approve it. Um but this is with Masta Landscaping um which was awarded the bid for the contract months ago. But this is to actually execute the contract
to build said pickle ball courts. >> And is LEC's separate? We prove that too. >> LC is acting as a clerk of the works for that. That should right item is separate. >> He's broken out as a separate price
or is it included in this? >> I don't I don't think so. >> You have master and then we have a separate contract with LEC for something different. >> Totally different. >> Okay. All right. All of these contracts have been completely vetted by the legal.
>> My only question on seeing the um if they don't complete by I think it was an October date, the $500 a day. >> Is that that still stayed in there, right? Because the amendments I see all the amendments, too. And I don't know if it got taken out, but >> No, when we had a meeting, we did change
them obviously because the original contract had >> Right. That was really the only change was the dates because we had um it had been a little bit with the change in park and rec director etc for it to get to this stage. So we had to extend the dates.
>> Seems aggressive but hopefully make it >> seems really aggressive. 30 days is that am I reading that right? October 30th 26 for full completion. November >> it's three months three and a half months. >> No get substantial. >> When is it starting? We got to sign a
contract signous up to >> let them do it. >> It's in their interest though. $500 a day interest for them to get it done. >> Doug, can you educate the public where the money came from?
>> Would you like to, sir? >> You're the chair. I would think that would be >> I can delegate as as necessary. I've done a lot of talking tonight, sir. And the floor is yours. >> Preservation funds. Correct. >> Correct. Absolutely. 100%. >> Meeting. Correct. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Motion to approve.
>> Thank you. Is there a second? >> I'll second that. >> Roll call vote. Doug Mglin. Yes. >> Russ Anderson. [clears throat] Yes. >> Joseph DD. Yes. >> You. The next item is to execute a survey at 454 College Highway. Fun fact, that's this building and the property
surrounding. So in the back corner by the police department animal control Wall-E Park um we want to get that uh sorry not Wally Park correcty Park we want to get
that area surveyed and delineated. Wallally Park is a designated park in the town of Southwick. We want to get that [clears throat] >> thrifty park. I >> did it again. Wallally Park, a great place to go. But Priy Park is also a great place to go
and it's been designated officially a park in our town. There was an official vote of a select board under a prior administration um and the park and wreck. So, we have some work that we'd like to do in that back area over there,
but we do not want to intrude on Rifty Park. Um, and we want to make sure that where we think the property line is, there's also a sewer pump station over there. Um, the place where they park some of the public safety vehicles is
over there. There's a ConX box over there. We just and we're considering that area to place of the eventual hut for the Southwick municipal fiber. So, we want to make sure that we have adequate room and space. and we've seen some conflicting
lot lines and property lines. So, we're going to have it properly surveyed from proper meets and bounds to just to double check and be sure. Um, and was there any other area of that that's a focus area? >> That is the focus area due to the funding that we have which is grant funding.
>> Correct. So when the day comes that we need that uh you know we're doing some pre-planning now um as we enter into certain parts of the municipal fiber project we want to make sure that where we're thinking that uh fiber hut's going to go is actually our land and not in
the middle of the park. So, we're just going to get that done. And that's what this proposal is here in the amount of $4,780. [clears throat] So, so there's a lot of language in here from I'm just trying to see make sure it isn't somewhere else as far as how quick
they're going to do this. Um he's got 30 days all over the place in regards to paying him, but he hasn't. It just says his schedule to do it a timely manner. Is are we not going to put borders on how quick he does it or they
do it? >> I mean, I had several conversations with him. Um he does understand um he does understand that we you know, obviously we want it done soon. that's why I reached out to him and that um he
has he doesn't have it completely finished but he's got a lot of information that he can put together in a timely fashion before going out there. So um although I didn't give a certain time frame we had the mutual understanding
that it would be done expeditiously >> especially if he wants to get paid. Well, that's good numbers all over it. That's got 30 days on. >> Yeah. Right. Which is >> we'll do it in a timely manner >> and then you got to pay us in a month, right? Yeah. >> But the and the and the proposal the only the proposal was only good for 30
days from July. Was it 14? >> 14. [clears throat] >> I'll make a motion to approve. >> Second that. >> Uh roll call vote, please. Doug Mglin, yes. >> Russ Anderson, yes. >> Jose, yes.
>> Okay. Item I, there's a two-parter in the document that you have from uh dated back from May 29th from Mr. Goddard uh the assistant DPW director um
was the number one was the community one stop for growth. We already voted to approve that um and acknowledge that supporting that grant request. So um that was items one and two on under number one and number two was the DPW is
requesting to exercise a year two option for the annual heavy equipment rental bid. Um so he's requesting that the select board approve to exercise our option to extend the heavy equipment rental contract currently awarded to Crestview
Construction for FY27. and the original structure allows for up to three years of coverage at the town's discretion. Um, and he says that he has reviewed the rates contained in the original bid for year two and confirms the rates will not materially change
from fiscal year 26 to 27 with most items reflecting an increase of less than 5%. >> And this is a on an as needed basis for water main break. >> Yeah, we just need a piece of equipment that they bring it to us. >> I'll make a motion to approve. >> Second. Roll call vote, please. Doug
Mglin, yes. >> Russ Anderson, yes. >> Joseph Dei, yes. >> Great. Um, I we want to take this opportunity since we have such a good crowd in in attendance tonight. This is something that we had put on to the town meeting
warrant to set up a revolving account for. Um, I have a prop, don't I? >> I do. >> And we, um, we have the decorative lamp posts up and down the center of town. Um, and one thing that um, I've seen
done in other communities, including cities to the north and several communities in Connecticut, and I've been working with, um, a couple, so is, uh, Mrs. Parker um and also our former treasure collector clerk who's done this in her community is I'd like to start a
program where we make uh hometown hero banners for veterans um that have served our country to be to go onto these de uh the decorative lamposts in our town. Um, and people can
sign up to sponsor one either for a family member or donate an honestly to support for someone who has served our country. Um, and we'll have these made and displayed throughout the town, especially as we head into our uh quincentennial, 250th birthday year. Um,
this would be a nice thing to do um and something that we can honor those who have served our country. So, uh, we'll take checks. we can make those out to the town of South Lake. We have a uh I like I said, we have a dedicated revolving account that we'll be able to accept funds into that we can
continually replenish and expend money from, donations to fund these banners. >> What's the cost? >> We don't know yet. >> I don't We have a rump number, but >> this is something that Doug has been asking about that we were able to get on
the town meeting and he's very very excited about it. So, we're not quite ready to roll it out, but once I showed him the flag, he was like, "Yes, we are. We're bringing it to to the meeting." So, we don't have all of the information yet. And Chris Lansky, who is our
veteran agent, we share with um Agawam, is going to um as soon as we can roll it out, we will. And then please just look for all of the information on social media and our website and uh by calling us if you'd like. It's just not quite ready to roll out yet.
very soon. >> Okay. Next, review and sign the state primary warrant. So, this is something that we have to as a board vote on, but this is uh for Tuesday, the first day of September,
2026 for the 2026 state primary. And does anyone want to read me to read all the offices that are up for the primary? >> Not really. >> Okay. Um, senator and governor and a few more. So,
we just need to post that. And, um, we also got a message or a letter here from the town clerk with early voting hours. So, I'll why don't we take a mo a vote on the um the ballot first or the warrant for
the 2026 state primary. >> Motion to approve the ballot as submitted. >> Second. >> Doug Mglin, yes. >> Russ Anderson, yes. >> Joseph DD, yes. >> Great. And our town clerk is letting us know that they will be holding the following
early voting hours for residents of Southwick to engage in the opportunity to cast their vote before the state primary to be held on Tuesday, September 1st. So, here they are. Saturday, August 22nd, 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Also includes the last hours to register to
vote for the state primary. If I getting these wrong, Christie, let me know. Monday, August 24th, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Tuesday, August 25th, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Wednesday, August
26th, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Thursday, August 27th, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. and Friday, August 28th, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. >> Make a motion to approve as submitted.
Second, >> Doug Mglin, yes. >> Ros Anderson, yes. >> Joseph, yes. >> And just to go back to the warrant, just so uh we get all the details, on Tuesday, the first day of September of 2026, the polls will be open from 7 a.m.
until 8:00 p.m. right here at town hall. Item M. Chief Administrative Officer Contract renewal extension and discussion.
The current contract with the CAO um was executed on the 28th of May 2024 and is a three-year agreement. And within the contract, we have certain obligations that we need to to do and we
have um certain obligations to the CEO that we need to adhere to [clears throat] and one of those is to discuss um the renewal of said contract and also importantly it's something that we have
not done that we need to do is to conduct a review of the CAO and according to the agreement um section five, the board shall review and evaluate employees performance each year by the contract anniversary date.
Said review shall be in accordance with a specific criteria developed jointly 8 to 12 months ahead of the review meeting by the board and the employee. The chairman of the board shall provide the employee with a summary written statement of the findings of the board and the board shall provide an adequate opportunity for employee to discuss her
evaluation with the board before the review is made part of the employees personnel records. We haven't done it. It was on our goals and objectives for last year and we just never did get to it. Um it's certainly on my goals and objectives uh topic for this year. Um
which we're going to discuss in a board as a board in the uh I believe at our next meeting. Um it's on here for uh old business tonight, but I doubt we're going to get to it due to time. But um I think we need to discuss
offering the CAO an extension to the contract under the the current agreement. The current agreement has a provision for continued service to the town absent an agreement. Um but it's my you know we we need we
should discuss as a board what actions we should take if any at this time to to extend um or offer a subsequent contract to the CEO subject to negotiation yada yada. Well, we didn't fulfill our end of the
bargain for evaluation. So, >> correct. >> We don't have a lot of options really. I don't feel um So you had two years in annual evaluation either year. Well, you won't hear from both. No.
>> I had added it to the goals and objectives from last year. >> Yeah. and as a board we did not get to it. >> How come? >> It's an excellent question. There was a lot on our goals and objectives that we didn't quite get to and finish. This was
one of them. So, as the chair this year, you know, certainly, you know, in knowing this contract because um I was party to the negotiation for it as was um you know, the other members of the board at the time. Um, I knew it was something that was in the
agreement and there's a it's interesting that there's such a long period of time to do the review and to get ready to do the review >> April 12th. >> So, we're within that window now to do it, but we also owe the CEO under the agreement
um notice of renewal and then to negotiate a successor contract. Like I said, in the in the contract itself, there's a provision for um continuing the contract post the end of the contract. Basically, it's
kind of a fourth year, but not really. So my suggestion is to offer a contract extension um of at least one year to get through that review period, that review process and period and then get a review done.
And then you can entertain uh discussion for a longer term contract up to the, you know, a three-year contract, which is what we would normally uh as a board is the contract length that we normally negotiate. That does that give us enough time? >> Well, technically we're within the
one-year notification of the contract if we were to say, "Look, we don't we want to we want to part as friends. We're past that period of opportunity right now. That should >> that would have been on on July 1." Um, but I I don't think we're at that point
because I don't think we've had that review to to to have that discussion and I really think we should. I know I've had a lot of conversations with Mrs. Parker one-on-one, but I think as a board um we need we need to do that and
put it on record as to, you know, where we are and where we're doing well, where we're not doing well, and how we move forward. Yeah, >> I think it's I think it's I think it's reasonable and fair. >> Yeah, I don't I don't disagree with that.
>> But by the same token, we got to make sure that the eight months we're getting it done >> 100%. >> That that would be not right. >> I mean, you had two years and both parties are well aware of it and and no one brought it up. >> I'm not going to support this.
Sorry. We hold ourselves to a standard and now we just move the ball. But I got it. It's all good. As they say, >> make a motion to extend it one year.
>> Subject to negotiation and then we are we would be committed to doing that review. >> Correct. Can I say something? >> Absolutely. >> Um, I've been reviewed many times. I don't think it takes eight months to do a review. I think that collectively we
can certainly come up with criteria and accomplishments versus uh maybe things that weren't the expectations that weren't met that we don't really necessarily know, right? because we although I will say and I know that each of the previous chairs will also uh
attest to that we've spoke about it many times needing the review and wanting the review and me wanting to have the review so that I could subsequently review the department heads but felt that I should have mine and have that standard done first um because historically in the
town it hasn't been done so um you know that's definitely something that should be done it's not a giant task or ask um it should be very transparent and everybody should know what's what their town administrator is doing um and and
and the things that we're accomplishing uh collectively. So I don't necessarily think it takes eight I don't think that we would have to wait that long. Um and I certainly would hope for a full three-year
contract and not just an extension. Um, of course that I'm just letting you all know my opinion, but I think that this could be done certainly sooner than within 8 to 12 months and then we could talk about, you know, whether or not we
go on another year or another 3 years or not at all. >> So, are you saying not to extend it? >> Well, try to accomplish this now. We can we we don't need we don't need a year, you know, to give me an extension now to go to 2028 to be able to review over the
next 8 to 12 months. I mean, I think that we can get it done sooner than that. If you prefer to have an extension and we do and we take our time and do it very methodically and get it done within 12 months to then have that other year,
that's entirely up to you. I just wanted to give you my opinion. contract states you have to do something with a year in advance either way. >> Correct. >> Correct. So, as much as you that we can say, "Oh, we'll do it within five months
and we don't have to worry about an extra year." The contract states that's a yes or no with a year left. Period. It does state that, >> right? And that was not done by June 17th of this year. >> Correct. >> It wasn't July 1. So, so now it'll be
whatever date you decide on a year in advance. It doesn't, you know what I mean? So, if it's >> so to give you the extension gives you the opportunity to not renew my contract, >> whichever you have a year's date to do it. So, we the date gets backed up, right? So, we didn't do it on the that
date. So, if we did it today and gave you we didn't give you year extension, you still have a year. Correct. >> We have until June 30 of 2027 at this moment. The way I read it, it would just continue on from the date you decided.
So, I'm not reading that correctly. The only reason that that part for the extension was in the event we were working on and I'll find it because I know that was part of my ask was that
um if we were working on negotiations and not completed yet then it would extend on with that other 3% or whatever it was into the following year while we were negotiating. That was the spirit of that portion.
D three. Yeah. Until such time, Mr. Salary and benefit shall be otherwise provided for. So the spirit of that was a contract negotiation time.
All right. So, I guess I'm confused now. >> Yeah. >> Because >> as am I. >> What's written in spirit? >> So, on on one hand, what I'm hearing is that you you'd rather us evaluate you between before the end of the year, end
of next year, you this next coming year. >> I would. >> And and then determine what's happening with after that. you an extent per year, whatever the number is. >> Yeah. >> Versus extending it a year and taking
the time to evaluate and do that. So, the only question I'd have on that is that the I don't know if we need something that waves language in this contract because there's there's restrictions we have as far as um packages, severance
packages, and other things that are all date bordered. Mhm. >> So, we missed some of those dates. We recognize we missed some of those dates. We're falling on the sword and saying we're trying to extend this so that we can get this done the way it should have been done.
>> Yeah. So, I don't I don't see where where is it that we have a one-year extension clause possibility here. We don't we don't we're offering you we're we're we were talking about offering a one-year
contract successor contract to this one >> which would give us the under the same terms and conditions herein but that would give us the time to get that done and pending the outcome of that formal review offer a second successor contract
of of the three years. I think we're saying similar things but differently. >> You're condensing it. >> I Yeah, sure. I I don't know that I will be able to just agree to it. >> We're not asking that right now.
Obviously, subject to negotiation and discussion. This is a policy position of the board at this moment recognizing the fact that >> and I wanted to get it in front of the board because well, well, one that date went by. So, you're going to be without
a contract on July 1st, 2027, >> but we also have that provision in the contract that we're supposed to do a review, which we haven't done. So, this I thought that potentially that might be a way to get that done within the time
set time parameters in the agreement. So I I would entertain that. >> You want to add more? >> Well, I would entertain that motion. we could decide to vote on that and then we can talk further and come back to the
board with a a different position or b um you know negotiate that contract bring it back to the board for for a vote >> and or we can if we want to have a further discussion offline we could certainly do that. >> Okay.
>> So I'll make the motion we extend the contract for one year. >> We're going to offer a one-year contract. I don't think it's an extension. This contract's really not extendable as I see it. Right. Do you agree? >> I don't see an extension other than in the event we are actively negotiate and that's literally the language that I had
requested because of that. If we are actively negotiating then the salary would commence. >> Okay. >> Appropriately. >> So you put that motion forward and we'll vote on it. We'll talk to Kim and >> as a one-year contract. >> Yes. And then figure it out and we'll come right back to the board if if
anything does change. All right. So, I propose that we offer a one-year contract to further negotiations. Um, and based on Kim's the attorneys, >> yeah,
>> uh, selection July of 28, correct? Uh, I'll come back to you on the date because the date would be it would be it be it I'd have to read the contract
again because we're within that one year. We had a one-year notice period that elapsed on on um July 1st, June 18th, 17th. >> So, but it'll be a one-year contract subsequent to that. So,
is that your motion? >> Yes. Is there a second? >> No second from you, sir. >> I'll second the motion. Roll call vote. Doug Mglin, yes. >> Russ Anderson, yes. >> Joseph DD, no. >> Okay. Other new business. I alluded to this
earlier. We'll be quick on this part. Um, I think we should negotiate an agreement with Thai bond as our thirdparty reviewer for future uh projects that under the bylaw require third party review. That would give the
planning board and the town um flexibility and u more responsiveness to the public and applicants in going for third party review instead of having to wait for um this board to have to meet to vote to approve a project that the
the applicant is already putting funds on escrow with the town. So this is not town dollars being expended. This would kind of be just a blanket contract that we could put in place and then they could just do a scope of service for each particular project for dollars that they've already met and agreed to do the
work for. Um, if that's okay, I'd like to put that on um uh the CEO's desk to work on getting that done along with Alvin. Um, and then the other new business is
to just kind of go over and announce that we are having the police department, fire department, the sheriff, dispatch. I'm sure I'm missing some, um, is having a public safety day. Make sure I'm missing something.
>> No, did I miss anybody? I don't want to miss anybody. Granville Police Department, Talon Police Department, the Massachusetts State Police Airwing, and Interstate Towing. Um, that's if you park badly at that event. July, just kidding. July 30th, 2026, 5
to 9:00 p.m. at the Southwick Regional Softball Fields. So, uh, Chief, where's the parking? >> So, there's a couple changes in there, actually. Uh, the airwing will not be out. We're actually going to have a life there instead. Uh, Star, I'm sorry,
there's a difference. Thank you. Um, Red Cross is going to be there as well. A couple other additions. Um, it's going to be actually behind the superintendent's office in that little straightaway. >> Yeah. >> The uh fields of the track.
>> And hang on one second. Mrs. Leblanc, are you still on tonight or can and can anyone online hear Chief Banish from the back? >> Oh, she is here. Can you hear me? Can you hear Chief Banish? Okay.
>> Now, we can't hear you. [laughter] >> All right. Well, uh, so the it's behind the superintendent's office at the on the school complex there. So, there'll be parking on Feeding Hills Road and on Powdermill Road in those parking lots on both sides there >> as well. >> Sorry. >> Woodland School
>> and Woodland School. So, 5 to 9:00 p.m. Thursday, July 30th, 2026. Okay. Uh, I propose that we carry item A to the next meeting. Seeing how it's already 7:30 and folks have been here a while, I want to get to item B. So, item
B is vehicle surveillance cameras. Um, I'm going to open the floor up for questions and comments after. And if we could have the police chief and uh, Sergeant Wescott join us up front here, please, so that we can be heard.
Um, I just want to go into a little procedural background because there's um, social media is a heck of a thing. Um, >> there was a lot of, uh, I I don't spend a lot of time on social media, but I did
get some phone calls and some commentary back and forth. Um, and we're going to go into as much detail as anybody would like to hear or any questions that you may have. We're going to take public comment. Um, but I do I do want to draw your attention to um a couple of things
that transpired that required active participation by uh the citizens of the town of Southwick and the select board. So, at every annual town meeting, there are five or six warrant articles at the top
of the warrant that we vote on. Okay. Item one is usually the election uh warrant which is for the election that was held the week prior to town meeting. Okay. And then there's article two which has the board is allowed to appoint minor officers so on and so forth. Item
three, four and article five is allows by vote of town meeting uh transfers the authority for the select board to apply for and accept grants. um to see if the town will vote to authorize the select board to apply
for and accept any and all grants from private entities entities, the federal government or the Commonwealth of Massachusetts for the purposes for which said grants are authorized or to take any other action relative thereon. Um so and that was done at every single town
meeting I've ever been a part of for the last uh 20 something years, high 20s. Um and then on uh Mrs. Lamar pointed out on November 3rd, 2025 on an agenda item and
in open session of the select board, um a motion was made by myself to approve um a $29,932,000 award to the Southwick Police Department. Um and it's seconded by um Mr. Anderson and a unanimous vote um
Diane Gail, yes. Doug Mglin, yes. Russ Anderson. Yes. To accept that grant. So that's how we got where we are, right? And so just procedurally, that's where we are. So with that being said, we I wanted to give the police department an
opportunity to kind of explain what the equipment that we have. >> We good? >> We're good. >> Okay. Right. We well we've been zoom bombed a few times so we're always on guard here right um >> if it was that camera
>> yeah no kidding um >> but we want to you know discuss what we have no equipment's been deployed a policy has not been implemented yet for and which is a a predicate for whatever is going to happen with these devices
um who has access to them >> is someone in the room on Zoom One more. >> I know. Try. >> There we go. >> Usually it's a person in the room that joins that [laughter] kicks our butt.
All right. So that's the basis for where we are. So we have to implement that policy. Then we can discuss, you know, before anything got put on polls or put anywhere else in town. So, who wants to go over what is the general equipment that was the
subject of this grant? And >> I want to ask the grant was >> Miss M. Lamar, I haven't opened the floor yet for questions. I'm I asked the the tube the chief and the sergeant to kind of go over some of the equipment first, then I will open up the floor to
questions. Okay. >> Yes, sir. >> Thank you, ma'am. >> There's no need to apologize. Thank you. I mean, I I think we'll start how we got to where we are. A little bit more um explanation there. Every year as part of our process over the police department,
we obviously re-evaluate what we're doing, what equipment we have, how we can best move forward, uh you know, with personnel, with technology, with equipment. Um the uh cameras that we're talking about, the license plate readers been discussed for
a number of years within the department. I think that dates back to Chief Lannis or possibly even before that. Uh it's something that obviously has a significant price tag to it as you've seen. Um it was something that we didn't
feel right going to the town for funding for it. Uh we were able to apply for a grant uh roughly last fall if I remember correctly. That was the Edward J. a burn memorial assistance grant, also known as a burn
grant or a uh JAG grant. Uh we were awarded that grant to the tune of just under $30,000 uh with the approval to purchase three cameras uh and equipment.
We looked at several different uh suppliers. We obviously looked at Flock, which is the one most of you have probably seen online. Uh we also looked at Motorola and was there another one, Mike? >> Access. >> Access that we looked at. Uh we after
exploring each one of those groups, we decided to go with the Motorola cameras. Uh Sergeant Wescott will explain a little bit more as far as how those work and everything. Uh getting back to the grant a little bit, that particular grant can be used for law enforcement
programs, correction, excuse me, corrections, prevention, education programs, crime victim, witness, uh all stuff of that nature. Uh once we're awarded the grant, I believe in last October, I did uh email
the CEO and said, "Hey, we got this grant. What do we need to do to uh have that approved?" It was brought to the board of selectment at that point. It was heard at that November, I believe third meeting we had talked about. >> Correct. >> Um, let you get to that. You know,
obviously one of our concerns was the legality of using these cameras. I mean, obviously, as you know, there are concerns with them as far as personal um information being out there. Uh pretty much all the court decisions that have
come down so far across the country have basically said that uh the initial reading of license plates in public does not constitute a search is considered mere observation. Um, you know, recommendations for addressing
these types of concerns are implementing stricter regulations on data retention, requiring warrants for accessing, enhancing transparency regarding the technology used by law enforcement. Um, as far as the fourth amendment analysis that the uh, this is actually a
Massachusetts case, there's a Massachusetts case in 2020. It's called Commonwealth versus McCarthy if anyone wants to look it up. uh that dealt with uh cameras, specifically uh ALPR ones that were posted, I believe, out on the Cape on a couple of the two bridges that
go over to the Cape. Uh they looked at the Fourth Amendment analysis, the duration of the surveillance, the surreptitiousness, and the categories of information that were collected. Um again, I'll let you guys look up, you
know, further on that one. The bottom line in Massachusetts was ALPR's ALPR use is not automatically a fourth amendment search, but courts will uh scrutinize whether or not the surveillance is limited, targeted, or
proportionate to the investigation. And the bottom line again is under the current case off fixed location ALPRS which is what we'd be using here uh without a warrant are generally not considered a fourth amendment search.
The plan was at the time before we deployed any of these cameras we're going to come to the public with a um press release on our website. We'd also come to the public with other forms. Obviously, our our phone system's not working right, but um we'd be coming to
the public with a full policy to basically spell out everything as far as when they can be used, who can use them, what information there is, what information shared, who owns the information. Um
and that was our thinking at that point in time. It wasn't hide it from the public. Let's go and do this. We do know there was obviously a issue over in Westfield, I believe last year, earlier this year where, you know, there was some public outrage as far as cameras being over there and the public being
completely unaware of them. So, with that, I will let Sergeant Wescott go into the specifics of what these cameras that we chose can specifically do and not do. >> So, basically, this is my faulty. Um, so we looked at what we needed. a
lot of the car breaks are happening. Um, that kind of stuff, we found that those cars coming into town are stolen. These will give us the heads up that, hey, this car is stolen. It's coming into town. Does it read every plate? Yes, every plate that it can. Um
the reason so the three different people that we looked at Block, Motorola and Access, Motorola gave us the most secure. We own the data. We own the cameras. We can delete the data whenever we want. It's set to automatically
delete in 60 days. Um we can reduce that. We can expand it. Uh so that's why we went with them. Other companies have problems. Access would be a good choice, but they're in their trial phases. So maybe if we go with access with security
system in town, then we switch over to access. Now all the data comes directly to us. Right now it goes to the cloud. Motorola cannot access it. We have to call them. If there's an issue or we want them to look at something, we can call them and say, "Hey, can you look at this?" Other than that, they can't get
to the data. It's ours. Um >> dual authentication. >> Yeah, there's dual authentication. We know who logs in. We know when, we know what they run for us to even search it. We have to have a case number, a reason, and it's got to be approved. So, we
can't just have, you know, anybody on the street can log in and say, "Hey, I want to know where my girlfriend's been every week." They can't do it. It's highly restricted. It's protected information. Most of it comes from the
uh Commonwealth and that data is highly restrictive. So they can't just I can't run a play for you and then give you the info. The policy is going to stay up to including termination for violating the policy. Um so we are
trying to keep it very secure and very regulated the best we can. Um we just don't have the manpower to monitor every street all the time. if there's two of us on the road, it's mere luck if we run into these people coming
into town, breaking into cars, and doing whatever else. So, that's what we did. Um, literally, you get a picture of the vehicle and the license plate. It's one still image of the vehicle either coming or going. Um, that's all we get.
It gives us a map and we can kind of see where they're coming or and where they're coming in, if they're leaving. That's what we get from it. We don't get your date of birth, your social security number, all that stuff. No, it's your vehicle. Anything associated with it,
like if it's in the hot list. So, if it's stolen, it'll alert us saying, "Hey, this stolen vehicle is coming into your town." We have to look at the image and the plate and say, "Yeah, that's the correct plate. That's the vehicle." And now we can move our resources through that location. Um,
it only alerts us if the vehicle is, we can set all the priorities. So, there's low, medium, high, stolen vehicles, high. We want to know when they come into town because what are they up to type thing. Um, so there's all different reasons for alerting. And not everybody's going to get the same
alerts. If the detective gets a warrant to look for a certain car, he can get a warrant and he can put that in. He's got to have the case, the reason, and everything. and it'll give just him that info. It won't go to anybody else. Um, so we're trying to regulate it. We're
trying to make it a good tool for us and it's just a tool. We don't want it to be, hey, we saw this car. Let's go harass them. We want it to be, hey, you got your dirt bike stolen last night. We have on camera a red pickup truck. We can type into the analytics red pickup
truck, motorcycles in the back, and it'll just look for red pickup trucks in the area with a motorcycle in the back and just give us those vehicles. Now, we have to do the leg work to go and make the case. We can't just say, "Oh, that's it." Um, so that's part of this whole
thing. >> This is an investigative tool. This this isn't something where it's going to be tracking your speed. It's going to be sending you tickets. This is merely part of an investigation for us. Like the sergeant said, if there's a stolen vehicle, if there's
somebody who's missing, if there's B&E in the area. Um we had some the other night, coincidentally, of course, >> um over on I believe uh where Granville Road. So, and we did have a license
plate actually stolen from a different address and lo and behold, that license plate actually popped up on a delayed query in Connecticut down below Harford. So, unfortunately, a lot of our stolen vehicles and stuff uh end up down in
that particular area. I think a lot of the perpetrators come from that area as well. Um, that's the other thing with Motorola and Flock. Flock, we get it. Everybody has access. Motorola, we can say, "Hey, let's share it with Westfield. Let's share with our surrounding communities." Um, basically
on our map, I drew a box around Southwick and those are the only alerts we get. So any cameras that are just outside our borders, if somebody passes them coming into town, we'll get an alert. So the way we leverage this is we can only afford three cameras on this
branch. Westfield's got I don't know how many, but we can get their data and we didn't expand it to all of Westfield because I don't care if they're on the other side of the pipe, but if they're coming into town, I want to know. So now we just
leveraged it. So our three cameras, there's six cameras on our borders or however many there are. If there's any down in Connecticut, Southfield, Graanby, it all ties in. We have to allow sharing and they have to allow sharing. We also can write a policy
saying, "Hey, if you use our data, here's the terms and [snorts] they have to agree to that before they can even look at our data." Um, so what he was saying too, missing people, we had a case not that long ago, right up on the north of College Highway, elderly man,
dementia took the family car before anybody else got was away. He was gone. They're like, "We think he went to Westfield." Before we even got the information to enter into the report to put it out as a bolo, we contacted dispatch. They literally called Blessfield and said, "Hey, we think he's
in town." They put his plate into the uh their system, and he was found before we even left the house. They were able to locate him, stop him, and get him back home before we could even get the information to put out. That's how this stuff works to benefit the uh community.
And like everything else, I know it's been out there on social media. The system's not perfect. Uh, are there going to be late misidentifications? Yeah, there are. There's a couple right on the sheet that's been going around. The, uh, PVTA van on there is coming back as a black Ford Mustang. The
problem with that is, and unfortunately, the plates blacked out, but you can't see it. It doesn't read the PVTA. It read A with the corresponding numbers at the bottom to come up with that Mustang. But, you know, if you're conducting investigation, you should be looking at
that picture saying, "Yeah, that picture doesn't match. What's wrong with this?" Okay, I see. The problem is it misread the plate. That's a completely different plate. It ran it as a passenger plate. Same thing at the bottom with the Kia Optima, which is a budget rental van.
Uh, the budget rental was a temporary tag. I actually had one of my cousins uh call me not too long ago. He got picked up on a plate reader somewhere out of state. Same thing. It ran the plate and when I
looked at the picture of the plate he gave me, it ended up being a dealer tag. So the technology read it as a regular passenger plate, which it wasn't. So I told him, send it back with the explanation, hey, this is the wrong plate type and whatnot. And I haven't
heard anything else. So I assume that that took care of the problem. The other thing the grant did is it gave us five years with the cameras. So we own them forever. It gave us five years to the analytics and data if we want. So my goal is if it works and we all say,
"Yeah, you know, this is a great tool." Then within that five years, my goal is to write another grant for more cameras and another five years of licensing. If we find out, hey, this doesn't work, you know, it's caused more headaches than it's worth, then we can just drop the
program. It's it's a fiveyear term right now that we have for the analytics and the data. >> So that's about >> it's about it. I mean both of us live in town. Both of us are lifetime residents here. You know neither one of us have
any interest in having our friends and our family surveil at all times. Uh I just think it the benefit here outweighs the negative as far as how we're how we're using as a department. we compare it down pretty significantly
so it's as least intrusive as it can possibly be. >> Thank you. So I appreciate your the information you provided. Does the board have any other questions >> just equipment wise? If if it's
vandalized, are we liable for it? >> Uh I think it'd be like any other piece of town equipment. It would be insured through Maya. Unfortunately, even ask about something like we I mean we only and honestly that's one of the reasons why we wouldn't say, "Hey, we're putting them in these locations." Number one,
vandalism. And number two, we don't want to tell the people coming into town breaking into cars where to avoid, what roads to avoid. We only have three. We can't put them everywhere. Um they are L6Qs. They're portable. So, we could put them on one pole and then if we have a problem in the south end of town, we
could adjust them as needed to get the information we need. Like if if we have a rash of brakes just on Granville Road, maybe we have to put one up there and so we can work on that issue. And they're portable how they are. They're battery operated portable. They can be fix
mounted or moved wherever we need to at any time. They're very easy to move. >> I did want to quickly address uh something that came up earlier too. Um I know you were talking about the four mounted uh cameras and the two mobile ones. >> Yes, >> that's actually a completely different
grant than we had gotten. Those are actually speed signs. >> Those are speed signs. So, uh, those I believe there's going to be one on Feeding Hills Road, Powdermill Road, South Lingard, and M Vining. And then the two trailers, those basically track
speeds. They don't record any cars. They don't send you tickets, anything like that. There is information sharing that was part of the grant we got them on. We have to provide uh speed um >> traffic count, wasn't it? traffic counts basically that you know x amount of cars
went through the average speed was this the high speed was that the low speed was that so that information goes out there's no plates there's no >> what is the purpose of gathering that >> so here's a good purpose for it so we
get complaints all the time with speeders on the street we have two or three people on the road maybe four if we're lucky so if you write in a complaint hey there's speeders on depot court or Depot Street, wherever you write a complaint, we station an officer
there every shift for a week or however long we determine. Now, if we can put one of these signs there and get analytics and say, "Hey, you know, the most traffic, the most speeders are between six and seven. Now, instead of tying a guy up for an hour at a time and only having one guy on the street, we
can put him in that area wherever for the time that it's actually affected and really um maximize our use of the personnel. >> Thank you, >> Chief. And the um the 30 30,000ish for five years that includes the cameras,
[snorts and clears throat] subscriptions, the service, everything launch. >> The only thing it doesn't include is the um mobile It's a data plan. >> Oh, like a self service. >> Sell service and it's already included in our first net um contract. It's
already there. That's the only thing we have to pay for is that. >> So, at the end of five years, if you don't get the grant, >> y >> what's what commitment do we have to continue those? >> Zero. >> There's no commitment to continue. >> I mean, if you wanted to, let's say, >> if you wanted to, that would be obvious.
probably technology is old after 5 years in my >> so after 5 years we would have to renew the not even the equipment we just have to renew the contract itself >> and we can negotiate stuff um there was talk about hey if you renew after 5 years we'll give you the updated stuff
um but that would all have to be negotiated >> and then the only other thing I saw in one of the websites I saw stoass I saw others on a on a transparency issue or whatever you want to call it >> was [clears throat] They posted their logs of, you know, the case number that
it showed how how it went, >> how long they keep your information. It was it was pretty interesting actually how it all worked. Is that kind of something you're talking about once once you're there >> in the past for like >> you just can't pull somebody over. You have to make sure that the car fits, the
sticker fits, the person fits, you know, all that stuff. >> When when you use the APRs, if you're looking for something, u see the three red boxes at the bottom. Yep. those three red boxes, you have to put that criteria in even to do a search. >> So, what I got was a a spreadsheet of this. >> Yeah. Yeah.
>> It showed you the case number, the officer involved. Didn't tell you what you're doing, but >> So, we could do audits where we could say, "Hey, how many, you know, we could look up the chief, hey, how many times has he done a query, and it'll show us when, where, everything that he queried,
and we we get everything from it." So >> similar to >> C and part of the reasons these haven't been pushed out is because the chief and lieutenant are diligently working on a real solid policy. We want to make sure it's ironclad. This is what you can do. This is what you can't do. Here's who can use it. Here's who can't. And here's
the punishment if you misuse it. We have to police ourselves. So that's part of the hang-up of this going out is there really buttoning down a real good policy to do this which has to get approved by you guys. >> Okay.
>> Absolutely. >> So So what's the the give for the grant? What's the what are they getting out of this? >> Nothing. >> The JAG grant is to help the communities with police and all that stuff. It's the
Jag burn grant. That's They get nothing back from it. We don't share data with them. We don't do anything. We don't share it with Motorola. >> I hear you, right? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> You to publicly say that. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. They they get nothing out of it. Um Westfield's got it several times. And that's why I'm thinking if these cameras
work out and we want to improve it because three roads, there's many ways in and out of town. The best places that your choke points and then your access points. So, we want to get the cars coming from Connecticut. we want them getting coming in from Springfield. And those are the ones that we data share
that we're thinking about data sharing with too is because a lot of our stolen cars end up down in Connecticut or over in Springfield. So if we data share with them, we can see if our trades are over there already and we can we can recover much faster or have an idea of where
where the property went. >> Further questions, >> I'm sure, but I know people too. [laughter] Mr. Dee, >> I'll wait to the end. >> Okay. So, I started public comment on Zoom. So, I'll start in the room tonight. The young lady behind the fire chief, if
you could please just come up so that Mrs. Leblanc and anyone on Zoom can hear you. >> We're right down each room. >> You don't have to. >> My push back if you want. Don't worry. >> That's just basically people. Um, my
name is Pelle Randall. And I know that I have to say the thing. Thank you very much for your explanation. You cleared up a lot of my fears about this. Um, so Motorola, I don't necessarily cuz I had inquired about who was going to be the producer of these cameras and I didn't
get an answer, but now I do have one and I'm going to investigate on my own. My issue is that a lot of the cameras that e even the LPRs, the basic of basic cameras in their contracts very
sneakily, there's something added for signal trace. Do you know about that company? >> No, I I heard it going around a little bit. Yeah. >> Signal trace is an additive. It's a device that they come and they put it on um depending on what's in your contract.
I don't know about Motorola. I know that they were doing it for spot cameras and another company. >> Yes. >> That had helps. >> Um >> is this is this the one that does other type devices? >> Then they collect that on who you're with >> and um and they trace your whereabouts
and stuff. Something that actually the NRA has raised flag about because it goes against >> I mean that definitely sounds like fourth amendment violation to me. So >> that is my concern as well as my husband's. Um, and then also, um, just
you say data sharing. Um, when you say that, [clears throat] it raises a red flag. So, I just want clarification. There is nothing in your contract that you're sharing data with the company. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> There there's no data. Data sharing
would be us to Westfield, us to Springfield, us to another agency, police agency, >> that needs the info. Um, and they would get what that picture is. They would get a picture of the car and the location. >> Okay. >> It's basically the same thing that was going around. >> Yeah,
>> that's true. >> Um, yeah, cuz even with the elder, there's been people that have gotten better than they >> Yes. >> Um, but I'm glad that you guys and I would say Yeah. And I would say that's was the problem is they look at a
picture and said, "Hey, there's our suspect. Let's just go after him." >> No, we have to investigate. We have to do more than just a picture to >> which makes me appreciate you guys a lot. >> Yeah. >> Um and then I have other there's some other ones. Um okay. So access to data
that's just them and that's part of your contract for the five years. And then what is the additional cost of the mobile? >> So it's it's like a data plan. So they're all wireless devices. So it's just a data plan so that we get the information. >> So it's like what 80 bucks a month or something? >> I don't even think it's that for us. We
get a big we get a big discount because we have so much stuff on there like all the cell phones and everything else for the town. I can't tell you what it is. Um but it's through FirstNet >> through AT&T. So >> it's a SIM card for the camera. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah.
>> No, 100%. Just making sure we answer them to your satisfaction. >> Um uh and then okay, deletes 60 days. And you said the error rate still is pretty prominent, but that again >> I don't know how prominent it is. Um that was just three I pulled up real
quick. Um I don't know. I I'm sure that we could actually get a rep here from Motorola and have them talk and he can give you all the numbers and everything else. >> We'd hoped to do that tonight, but unfortunately we are. So, but the thing is is it's on us to verify the data. So, it's just
saying, hey, here's a hit of a possibility. We have to look at the vehicle, look at the plate and say, "Yes, that's really that plate on that car." Or, "No, the camera got it wrong. The vehicle is different. Plates's different." Or maybe it is the correct plate it's reading, and the vehicle's different because it's on a stolen car. They commonly will take plates and just
put them on here and there. So, that mismatch could give us a clue, hey, something's up here. That plate doesn't belong on that car. Let's go towards that area. >> Yeah. There was just an instance, I forgot in what state, where the guy kept getting pulled over because of his plate. So he it was like every single
day. >> And there's registry. Yeah. There's registry problems, too, where we'll run a plate and it'll say no insurance. We pull him over and he's like, "Look, I got I got everything right here." >> Nine times out of 10, our guys will be like, "Hey, you can't drive. I can't let you drive because you can't you don't have insurance according to the registry. Just get it taken care of."
You're not going to get a ticket. You're going to get a hey, heads up. You gota you got to get this corrected. >> Okay. >> So, there are registry errors. We do know that. And our guys are very good with working with that and working with the citizens of the town. And it's absolutely going to be deleted. >> Oh yeah, it's 60 days. It's automatic.
It just deletes. The only thing that holds longer right now, and we can change that, is hit confirmations. So, and the reason why those hold longer is because we want to be able to audit it. We don't want all the data gone and say, "Hey, you know, the chief made 30 requests on this plate, but we can't see
what it is because it got deleted." So, we hold those for right now, it's set for one year, but that's only for a confirmed hit on on one of those situations where maybe it's a long investigation for a drug case or anything else, that retention time has to be a little longer. Will it just
regular data that it just generates? We don't want it. We don't want every time I drove to Mrs. Murphy's today. Um, so after 60 days, it's gone. >> All right. And [clears throat] um I just I would really like for you guys to look in the contract to see if
signal trace is added in at all. >> Um because that is very like people have gotten just camera and then all of a sudden that's added. It's a small device. >> I did. I did talk to the rep today and he said the data goes nowhere else but to us. Yeah. >> But I'll I'll definitely check on that.
>> Yeah. That's like a company that a lot of these surveillance camera. >> What? Leonardo is a separate company. They're competitive. >> They're they're >> what's happening is they're cancelling. Jason Peron won No Crossing. So, what's happening is a lot of these companies
did not cancel them. Leonardo is coming in trying to take it. Signal trace built in. They're trying to sell that. >> I've looked at their website and it's a device that they add on to the cameras. They say on their >> they can they can add it on but not but it can work with FL but it would have to be worked into their contract.
>> That's the company that they suggested working with. >> Yeah. [clears throat] after the fact that they do go in. >> Yeah. And the thing that we didn't go with flock is because a lot of these problems were flock generated >> and and just a quick point uh normally the discussion is to the board or the
folks up here. Mr. Peron is eminently qualified due to prior experience both on this board as and as a police officer for the city to the north. So hence why we gave him why retired >> police officer from the city of
Westfield. Hence the wide latitude, but if you could keep the discussion between the board. No, it's absolutely okay. >> Are you good? >> Those are my questions. Thank you so much for clarifying. >> Okay. Was there anyone else in the first row? Because I missed the first row entirely. All right. Then we'll go to
the second row. >> Mrs. Lai. >> So Beth Ali, 352 North Lumis. >> Could you would you mind coming up a little bit just so that the folks on Zoom and the recording can hear you? >> Sure. >> Thank you. Um, so if my first question is what would the annual cost be if you
didn't get any grants? So after five years come, if you're only keeping the three cameras, what because then that's going to come down to the the taxpayers, what would that be? >> I honestly can't give you an exact number. I think it's around five grand just for the subscription. >> Okay. Okay. >> I can't I don't really know. It was all
written into the grant. >> Okay. Um, and then second, Southwick has a a small police department. I've personally experienced situations where repeated emergency calls involving domestic violence in my neighborhood could not always receive the immediate
and all the attention needed. Has a department evaluated whether the system is going to be generating extra workload um on an already, you know, small staff and then how would you know tips that come through there take precedence over,
you know, calls that come in? There's no continuous monitoring. So, >> it's only going to pop up when something goes through and it flags as a high, medium, or low um alert alert. >> Where does it alert you at dispatch or in on your laptops and a cruiser or how
do you get an alert? >> Anybody who's logged in? So, we're going to install it on the lap MDTs. >> But if they don't log in, then they don't get the alerts. >> Um, so some people might just be like, "Hey, I'm not using." Um, for your question, domestics, that kind of stuff are going to take the most priority.
This should help us. This is more of a tool to help us put the resources where they're needed. So, if we don't have anything going on and we got a stolen car coming into town, hey, let's roll that way instead of being south or wherever, we can kind of direct the people where they need to go.
Um, so it's just another tool. Um, >> I mean, potentially life-threatening calls are going to get precedented over some motor vehicle thing unless there's a, >> you know, murder on the loose or something. But even then, >> we've got to deal with the the pressing
matters in our own community first. >> Did they give you like any idea like with our our town size and stuff like how many like tips or like hits like you might want to and I I know every day is going to be different, but any kind of estimate about what that would bring. >> They didn't give us an estimate. There
are analytics on the screen and it'll show us like, hey, Saturday nights you have all these hits. Monday mornings you don't. Um, so there is analytics that it gives us. Um, we just don't know. It could be 20 hits one day and zero hits the next. We're not We'd have to just
weed through it. >> Okay. And I think my last question would be is, you know, I know that you said if you feel this is something that's working, you'd apply for like another grant. Um, what would the metrics be to say if this is working, if it's something that is good? Like, you know, either like how many of like what what
would you look at for metrics to determine if it's something if we can locate missing endangered people, if we can possibly save a life with it, then it's working. If we can stop stolen cars from coming into town, if surrounding communities that are
coming in and causing these issues go, "Hey, South's got cameras now. We're gonna, you know, maybe we'll go to Granville, maybe we'll go somewhere else. >> It, you know, it it's kind of a hard target to hit. It's a hard set of numbers to do, but I mean, it's already
worked, I think, twice with just missing people. And that's just using Westfield's cameras. And the only way we can use those is with the software sharing in the program with Westfield that we have. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Anyone else in this? Sorry. Anyone else in the second row? >> Anyone in the second row? Just kidding. Mrs. Lamar >> questions and they've already been answered and I came in very antagonistic because I felt violated, but you guys
have eased my conscience a little. >> I'm glad we've had this >> less violated and more safe. That's why >> question >> and listen and and I'm going to come right to the the rest of the second row
and the third row. But look, that's why we have this meeting. And I I was on the phone with a news reporter as I was driving to the airport on Friday and I said, "Listen, come to the select board meeting. We have public comment at the beginning or during any p uh any select
board meeting. It's why we're here." And my email's on the website. Most of the people in the room that I know already have my cell phone. Uh don't hesitate to text or call me or email me. Email the CEO or any of the other my other
compatriots up here on the select board. Um cuz open and honest discussion is the best way. and you know the social media and some of the keyboard warriors it just it perpetuates on itself and all of a sudden it becomes a real a real thing
when maybe it is maybe it's not but we'd love to have the discussion so you know I I one appreciate anyone who's joined on Zoom or has been here in person to have a discussion um and like I said at the beginning of the meeting uh Mrs. the
blank's question and this young lady's question is also good. We're going to bring that up for how we structure our meetings, but it's always been my my opinion or the way I run a meeting is to kind of have an open dialogue when when we can just for this kind of reason,
right? Because I think we answer and we're going to get to everybody, don't get me wrong. We answer a lot of questions. Hopefully, we assuage some fears or if we're doing something incorrect, you hold us accountable, right? So, and and I appreciate you stepping up and saying that. It does mean a lot to me.
>> One quick question. So, when you're when you're sharing data with another jurisdiction, they have what is the the spec of information on the case that they're looking into that you need in order to share that data. >> So, basically, they have their own
policies. We have we can make sure, hey, you have a good policy. It we're not sharing any data right now because we don't have the things. But part of our policy that we can write, we can send them a policy saying, "Hey, >> your policy has to meet this criteria. If it doesn't, you're not getting our data and we don't share it."
>> That's that one's >> the [clears throat] stalking aspect and also >> targeting one person >> um also came to mind and I forgot when I was >> there would need to be something they actually have an investigation open on. It's not just going to be, hey, I want
to know where Mike Wescott, how many times he went out of town in the last week >> police department >> or another police department. >> Yeah. And that can be written up in our policy to share where they have to go through it and acknowledge it and say, "Okay, yes, we need to follow these guidelines." >> Perfect. Thank you.
>> And we can add it and take it away at any time. >> Okay. >> Anyone else in the second row? Third row. four. Oh, there you go. David >> Matthew Road. >> Sure. How are you?
>> Like to express my top position for the cameras. Uh, Sergeant, I appreciate what you said. There's no doubt in my mind that this would be a good tool for the police. Um, my my problem with the policies is that policies change.
Someday there will be three different selectmen here and a different chief and a different sergeant and you know all bets are off. Um my concern also is that I just don't want to live in a town where I feel I'm under constant
surveillance. I want to go to the stores that I want to go to. I want to go to the church that I want to go to. I want to visit, you know, I want to visit friends that I want to visit. And I don't want to feel like I'm being locked and that the data that captures my
license plate today, but maybe my face through AI recognition tomorrow and a dossier, as you said, of other information is going to be in somebody else's hands. And yeah, it can get deleted, but it also can get hacked and
it can get stored and it can get shared. And like I said, when other people are in the seats that you're in today, all bets are off and it's just another step towards what they do in China where everybody is surveiled all the time.
This is Southwick where we're not that far away from the one-horse town that we were. And you know, so it just doesn't feel like it's it's the hometown that I wanted to build a family and grow a
family here and, you know, only honk my horn when I want to say hi to my neighbor. It's I don't need the surveillance. I don't need And believe me, my car was stolen out of my driveway in South. I know it would be a good tool for you, but I'll just take my chances
on that and, you know, feel like I can live in a nice peaceful area without being watched by Big Brother. >> Thank you. >> Anyone else in that row? That row. We're working our way to the
back, sir. Sorry, the next row. I think I'm up to the fourth or the fifth. I know the gentleman in black shirt had a statement he wanted to read and present to the board. >> Just get the comfortable one. [laughter] >> Right there is good so everyone can see and hear you. Um, first I want to start
off by saying that my dad was a former police officer, so I totally respect the police. My first name is Asher. >> That's what you should start off with. Um, but yeah, so my dad was a former police officer. I totally respect police. I understand how this could be helpful in regards to finding their
stolen vehicles, solving other crimes. Um, but I really do believe that this crosses a line and something that I'm not personally comfortable with. Um, so the first question that I have and then I have a statement that I'd be will or like to read. It will be over 3 minutes so I could submit it to the record to
have be read. Whatever you prefer. Um, would the police department be open to have like not sharing the data to the other towns >> be something we could certainly discuss. >> Yeah. And we could definitely discuss it and we can share people we share it
with. Um, so some towns are like, "Hey, you don't share with us, we don't share with you." Um, other towns like, "Yeah, here have our stuff. we don't care if we have yours. Um, but yeah, I mean, the power of it is sharing. >> Like I said, we can only afford so many cameras. Um, it's just way more
beneficial if we can, you know, Westfield's already got our original dispatch. >> If we can share with their cameras and that would be, you know, that's a home run for both. We have three extra cameras. If they get three extra cameras for us, we get six or 10 from them. Um
but yeah, we definitely chief knows we've probably got 200 requests for data sharing. We haven't shared with almost any of them. I think we have eight. >> I mean we we have no interest in sharing with Texas and California. We have no
>> no no reason for it. >> Um and then I heard you earlier mention that the data would be deleted after 30 to 60 days, whatever is decided. If that was shared to another town, does that town now have access to that data based off their policy? So, for example, if
that town didn't have their policy for it to be deleted by 60 days, let's say they had it be a year, for example, would they have access to our data for a year based off theirs? >> No, ours just disappears after 60 days. So, if they query ours, it's not there if it's been over 60 days. And we can
fine-tune that. We can maybe we go all data, you know, 30 days. um we can fine-tune how we need to with that. >> Can pair it down or we can move it up, whatever is whatever is most appropriate for what we're doing. >> Okay. Um and then the last question, so
when the policy is completed from the police department, is that something that would be available for the town to have public comment on or to basically make suggestions or if we had anything that we thought would be >> I'm chief, I said this, but you can fory request all of our policies. >> Okay. Um, but the board, it's got to go
to the through the board and the board's got to look at it and then once everything's approved, it'll be available. >> Okay. Um, so then I'm going to go to state if that's okay. Um, before I do that though, I will want or will say there was one meeting, I forget if it was a regular town meeting or something,
but I do recall vividly um the select board member Joseph D was talking about how there was this law or bylaw that was trying to be passed regarding an environmental policy in town and he mentioned like a little kid skipping a rock on the lake. Yep. Um, so if that
was an intrusion on basic freedom or policy, I don't know what ALPRs would be in that regards, but okay. Um, dear Mr. Chairman Douglas A. Mulman, Mr. Vice Chairman Russell E. Anderson, and Mr. Clerk Joseph J. DD I write to the select
board a group of residents just like me from the small town of South Massachusetts a place of doers and innovators home to those like Amasa Hulcom who was the very first individual in the United States of America to produce and sell telescopes commercially and the great state of or the great
common congan lakes which were a source of heister industries in booming communities like New York City over 100 years ago in profound opposition to the adoption of Motorola solutions automatically license plate readers or ALPRs candidly called vehicle
surveillance in the agenda today. When civil liberties are on the line, it is up to all residents of a community, young and old, rich and poor, of varying political parties, of every race and every creed, to stand up and protect our rights. History has continuously
demonstrated that once a right is given up, it is very rarely returned. I write with sincere wishes that not only these words, but all of those who have been brave enough to speak out today will be taken into the deepest of considerations. While I may be profound in my opposition, we need as a community
to come together and recognize that we all just want what is best for this town. I urge the select board and the police department here today to consider the enclosed information as you consider your next steps after receiving the Byron JAG local law enforcement funding
opportunity grant and the proposed purchase of Motorola Solutions ALPRS or any brand for that matter. I emphasize proposed since it's never too late to say no and it's never too late to do the right thing. I implore you to consider the following informations outlined in
three core categories. Legality in the courts, morals and ethics, and demonstrated effects. It is critical to note that this list is by no means exhaustive, but merely provides a glimpse of what an 18-year-old boy can momentarily gather. We begin with
legality in the courts. As mentioned by um the police chief, Mr. Spanish. In 2020, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court or the SJC, the highest court in Massachusetts, determined the following information about automatic license plate readers. Below are excerpts from
the Supreme Judicial Court's ruling in the case Commonwealth. Jason J. McCarthy, which I have fully read myself. quote, "With enough information or rather quote with enough cameras and enough locations, the historic location data from an ALPR system in
Massachusetts would invade a reasonable expectation of privacy and would constitute a search for constitutional purposes. In simple terms, and from my understanding studying to become an attorney, this means that without a search warrant, not currently required by the law to access data collected by
ALPRs, the highest court in Massachusetts finds the current means of gathering or accessing such data is in clear violation of the fourth amendment of the United States Constitution as well as article 14 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights. Moreover, let us
consider the parallels to other means of surveillance such as cell site and location information that is a digital breadcrumb trail that your cell phone leaves behind and its similar implications with ALPRs. The SJC has further ruled in
Commonwealth v Augustine that a search warrant based on probable cause is required to access a citizen's historical cell site location information or CLS CSLI from telecommunication providers. Think Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile. In relation
to ALPRs, the SJC ruled in uh the previously mentioned McCarthy case that quote like CSLI data, ALPRs allow the police to reconstruct people's past movements without knowing in advance who police are looking for, thus granting
police access to quote a category of information otherwise and previously unknowable. C. Carpenter like full CSLI and GPS data. ALPR circumvent traditional constraints on police surveillance power by being cheap
relative to human surveillance and serpent serpent. I don't even pronounce that. He previously mentioned that >> um >> serreptitiously. >> Thank you very much. The report further continues that quote for while no ALPR network is likely to be as detailed in
its surveillance as GPS or CSLI data. one while may be able to make many of the same inferences from ALPR data that implicates expressive and associated associated rights. The court cites a documented document submitted by the International Association of Chiefs of
Police, that is the world's largest professional organization for law enforcement leaders who warned quote collecting ALPR data from multiple sources creates a risk quote that individuals will become more cautious in their exercise of their protected rights
of expression, protest, association, and political participation because they consider themselves under constant surveillance. End quote. Furthermore, the SJC and McCarthy found that quote, "Similarly, with cameras in enough locations, the hot list feature would implicate constitutional search
protections by invading a reasonable expectation of privacy in one's realtime location. If deployed widely enough, ALPRs could tell police someone's precise real-time location virtually anytime the person decides to drive,
thus making ALPRs the vehicular equivalent of a cell cellular telephone pain. In other words, quote, to know what the to know that the government can find you anywhere at any time is, in a word, creepy, which was a quote from the
associate justice blend. As for the morality, morality and ethics of this proposed surveillance, using the select sport's own description from the agenda, we shall remember the words of Benjamin Franklin, who famously said, "Those who would give up essential liberty to
purchase a little temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety." Let us not give up essential liberty for perceived safety. However, one should again ask what safety this would provide. Shifting to the demonstrated effects, let us shine a light on what
the real instances of the use of ALPRs provided. In transparency, I fully acknowledge there are certain positive instances when ALPRs have helped, and I count on my fellows neighbors who disagree with me to provide that perspective. But for me, I ask myself
safety, but at what cost? As we explore these demonstrated effects, let us continuously ask ourselves, is this safety? Is this secure? Or is this right? in Aurora, Colorado, police department officers um who held a woman and four black girls ranging in age from
six to 17 years old at gunpoint after wrongfully suspecting they were in a stolen car according to a false reading from an ALPR. Now, that was from NPR. As noted, there are multiple instances of the ALPR technologies getting the license plate incorrect. So, I asked, is
being falsely held at gunpoint safe? Is it secure? Is it right? I don't think so. In Denver, Colorado, Christina was accused of a crime she didn't commit because of quote unquote evidence from ALPR's recording her. She had to prove her innocence, a terrifying reality in a
world where we are innocent until proven guilty. That was an article from the news outlet Colorado Sun. Is having it to gather a stack of evidence to prove your innocence right? Again, I think no. In February of this year, a flock camera in Sherwood, Arkansas, misread the
license plate of an SUV, leading officers to detain an innocent couple at gunpoint while their six week old baby sat alone in the car seat in the back of the vehicle. Now, this was from Institute of Justice. Is endangering a sixwe old baby because of a decision to
allow ALPRs in a community safe? Is it secure? And again and again, the answer seemed to me a resounding no. According to a New York Times article, a man had guns drawn on him and was wrongfully handcuffed in front of his home due to a false positive from a tainted ALPR
database. His name was Mr. Hoffer. And quoting from the article, quote, happened Mr. Her happens to be the chairman of the Oakland's Privacy Advisory Commission. In addition to filing a federal filing a federal lawsuit against the entrust
community county sheriff's um department for the detainment, he is speaking out against the surveillance technology. Quote, "The error rate of this technology is incredibly alarming." He told me, "If one in 10 innocent people end up stopped with a gun pulled on them, that is a lot of potential for
abuse." Despite his role as a privacy advocate, Mr. Holer isn't afraid of technological innovation. His main concern is preserving the right to be anonymous in public. Quote, "If we allow law enforcement to rewind life and search through our every interaction,
our relationship to public life is forever altered." End quote. He said, quote, "And I simply don't understand the idea that if we use enough technology, we can achieve a 0% crime rate. I reject that because there's always going to be or that I reject that
because that's going to lead to extreme overpolicing. End quote. Most thoughtprovoking is a decision by the LAPD, the nation's third largest police department, let their contract with Flock, an ALPR provider, um expire,
citing serious concerns over civil liberties and privacy. That was from 404 Media. If the nation's third largest police department can't figure out how a how to use ALPRs to balance security with civil liberties and privacy, that's a major red flag. Automatic license
plate readers are creepy, dangerous, and reflect big brother surveillance. The residences of this town and the select board need to come together and get this right. I fear if we don't, there is nothing separating our ALPR technology errors from those nationwide. Not to
mention the data privacy concerns which have to an extent been clarified that could enable mass surveillance accessible throughout the country. With the utmost opposition to the adoption of Motorola solution ALPRs in Southwick for the quote unquote short list outlined above, I respectfully ask the select
board and the police department not to proceed with this plan. Sincerely, Adur. >> Thank you very much. All right. Can I address a couple of those? >> Sure. >> So, real quick, the a lot of that a lot
of these those cases, >> hopefully those cops got dealt with accordingly because it's is it the LPR's problem or is it the officers for not >> legitimizing the hit and doing their due diligence to either rule it out or rule it in. So, that's one thing. Um, a lot
of people are leaving Flock and it's over these concerns. That's why we didn't go with Flock. um because there are problems with that platform. There's just a couple of my things. Thank you though. >> Thank you. >> I'll come back to you because the the gentleman in the back I made him stand
up four times already. >> Come on up, sir. >> Lake Street. >> Can you just come up and speak a little louder just for the folks on Zoom, please? Thank you. >> I just want to piggyback off what the last couple people said. It seems like a lot of the concerns aren't what these
cameras currently do, but what they could do in the future. I have no doubt that the South Police Department has the best intention with these, but a lot of the fear comes from what could be added to them. For example, leave you said that you could either ramp up the time that the camera that the pictures are saved or lower it
>> or lower it. >> Is that uh put to a town hall town vote or is that at someone's discretion? >> That would be probably at my discretion. >> Okay. >> But it'll be right now in the policy, too. So the policy would have to be changed >> and I'm just well again we get back into
the it might not be you and that chair or me and that chair in a couple of years might be somebody else. So >> you always want to memorialize that and at least a um policy and procedure would have to go through the select board and everything else. >> I just kind of want to inquire what the capacity of these cameras is to accept
add-ons or change the software on to do different things like accepting AI recognition or anything like that like are they capable of that? I mean, what do you mean by AI? So, there is analytics with it. So, if we have a description, say somebody breaks into your house and you have video of the car
and it's a red car with a green sticker in the back windshield, >> we can put that into the analytics and it'll show us just red cars with a passable green sticker. Then we have to go from there. Um, is it going to say, you know, >> Joe Burns is driving this car? As you
can see in those pictures, half the time you can't even the lights got to be just perfect to even see who's in the car, never mind in facial breath. Um, most of it is just shadows and you can't even see who's in the car. You just we're just getting that vehicle. >> I mean, could these cameras be upgraded
within the 5-year contract to better quality cameras by Motorola or anyone really? Or could could the software be changed on them so they can do different things? I guess that's kind of what I'm asking. >> Yeah, the cameras are ours. Yeah, the cameras, we own the cameras, so it's not like >> it's not like they can come in and say, "Hey, here's these new cameras." We'd
have to ring it up and go through all the steps to do that. Um, >> and I'm sure they're not going to want to do it without some monetary compensation to do it. >> Yeah. Basically, it's it's really I mean, anything can be upgraded. New tech yesterday is old tech
today. So, there's there's all sorts of stuff that could get added. Will it get added? It's money and time. You know what? What do we want? What do we not want? That's it's a whole discussion or
the possibilities are endless if you open Pandora's box to whatifs, you know. >> Yeah, I know you guys were a lot of the concerns. >> Yeah. >> Yep. >> Thank you. >> Appreciate your question. Is there anyone else in the room before I go on to Zoom? >> I do.
>> Sure. >> Brad Gore, I'll speak loud. Mike, this is and Mike and I, we all know each other. Mike, what are the model numbers of that motor >> L6Q? >> L6Q's are equipped with digital and optical
zooms, correct? >> Uh, I honestly I don't know, but they are okay. >> They are. >> Yeah, >> those cameras are capable of zooming 250 ft. Okay. >> So,
what precautions is is going to be in place where I live here, the camera is mounted here and inadvertently also looking at my property. >> So, right now
>> because you can use the the zoom to wide out or narrow it. >> Okay. That's what some of these people should be concerned about too is >> Yeah. >> where these are located. >> Yeah. >> Now, you had mentioned, not you, but you also mentioned that two
traffic cameras were uh signs were going to be blocked. I went searching for two days and I found a couple of them. I won't even tell you where. You probably know with the Motorola and the Fox mounted in the
back of the signs. >> Yes, you can do that. >> Hidden in a little box. >> Yep. >> Unless you pull up to that sign and go, "Hey there, I'm here." >> You're never going to know I'm there. >> Yep. >> So,
now if you recall the whole thing with the Westfield form, that was actually on their traffic trailer, I believe, was the one they had the picture of. They actually have two. >> So these L6Qs when we set them up in a location, they have to be so many if you look at their specs, they have to be so many feet off the road.
>> And then they can only detect plates so far. So we're not putting it up to look in your house. We're putting it up to look on the road. And if we widen it out too much, we're going to lose analytics on what's on the road that we're focusing on. If we wanted to put up a camera to look at your house or
whatever, we'd have to get a warrant. But I'm just saying if the pattern is wide enough and inadvertently >> catching the house, >> you you guys can say whatever you want. >> Yeah. >> But who's watching the watchers?
>> Yep. >> I mean, we could >> depending on what they watching the watchers. >> Yep. >> So, these are all legitimate questions. >> Yeah, I hear you. that and you know we know each other good
>> and >> has anybody thought about this? And the other thing is why would you enter in a five-year contract >> to a product that we've never used? Why wouldn't you use hey we'll try it for one year? >> So because the grant because the grant
paid for it for five years. So >> but we could have paid for it for one year. >> We could have but then after one year >> guys can you keep the discussion here for the moment? We could have said, "Hey, let's get them for one year, but then after one year, if we don't get a grant, now we're on the hook to pay for it." >> Just because we have the software for 5
years, doesn't mean we have to use it for 5 years. >> And and right and the question on the gentleman back there who they blow the software in over the air. All the upgrades are done over the air. You don't even have to touch the camera. We have >> send a signal out. You want to upgrade?
Yes or no. Click the box. Yes. Done. >> Yes, we have to do that though. It's on us, not on Motorola. So, I have I'd have to go in and connect to the camera and say upgrade or not. >> Question, it does get upgraded if they decide to. Don't get me wrong, I think I
think the product is great. I really do. >> Yes, >> it is an asset. Number one, >> I if used properly. >> Yep. >> It's a great tool to have >> and I would 100% back it. But every time
you listen to the news now, another cop is getting arrested for getting in there and pulling a bunch of data out. >> The policyy's working. If any of our guys do it, if I do it, fire me, please. That we have to we have to police
ourselves. You know, >> it goes right back who's watching the watcher. >> The courts and the command staff. And don't forget now the the >> sorry the pile in but the the police officer standard training commission now
that holds the key to every police officer's livelihood in their unelected hands. >> I understand. I think it's a great program. I really do. I back it 100%. I just you know 23 and uh and and me. Have you heard that company? 23 and me.
>> Yeah. That's [clears throat] a different >> I'm getting to this. You know where I'm going. >> Yeah. Bank. You know where I'm going? >> Yes. >> 23 and me went belly up just like Motorola anybody could do. They could sell that subsidiary out to whatever. 23
and me collected DNA data. If you remember that. >> Yes. >> The co-founder of that company last year bellied up the company because there was more money to be made in selling the data. >> Yeah.
Initially, he sold the data which is everyone's DNA for $256 million. I believe that was the amount. 22 states had found out about it and didn't let it go through. 305 million I think was
offered by a medical research company and they want everybody's DNA. >> Yep. >> So there can try to I get it. I get where you're going with this, but >> right, >> a little tangential. >> I'm just saying it can happen. >> And here's one of the good things. We
have the data. It's ours. It's in the cloud, but it's ours. Motorola doesn't have access to it. So, I don't think the town's interested in selling the data. >> Where where's this cloud? What town is this cloud over? >> That's a whole >> Is there anyone else in the room before
I go to Zoom? All right. Mrs. Leblanc's been patiently waiting. Hi. Um, first of all, I'm not a fan of this at all and I'm not buying the sales pitch. Um, been around too long to know and I
there's information out there all over the place. I'm 100% agreement with Mr. Methy. And to the young 18-year-old gentleman that did his presentation, he did an awesome job. Kudos to you. You covered just about everything. Um,
again, like I said in the beginning, this town is not the same town we moved to. I don't feel that it's big enough to, you know, get involved with this. Um, and again, it's going to cost the taxpayers money again when we have to
either buy our own equipment or do whatever. And so, it's chuch-ching, chuch-ching, chuch-ching, more money from the taxpayers. I just really don't think we need it, and I'm not in favor of it. So, that's my two cents. Thank you very much. Is there anyone
else on Zoom? >> I saw the message, but we've never read those in public because I don't know that I can authenticate him. So, if that person like to make a statement, they're more than welcome. Anyone else on Zoom? All right. Thank you very much. I
appreciate your patience. Um, and we're going to move on to our next item promise you I'd come back, didn't I? I'm sorry. >> Will we be sharing it with any federal agencies? >> As of right now, no, we don't have any. We're not sharing with anybody. Um,
>> yeah, we it's something that would have to be part of our policy and we'd have to look into it like who, what, when, where. >> It's we who do you have in your pocket? It's we >> nobody. the chief and these guys have to make a policy. So the policy is going to
dictate all of this. >> So the so we have no input. It's we he's the we >> it's a collective I would say. >> So if you guys all decide that you're going to talk to the FBI, then you just are going to go
ahead and do that. We >> I'll just weigh in here only because we've had police policy and procedure come in front of this board as an an agenda item in open session. The book is like this.
Do we have specific questions that we ask? Absolutely. Mr. uh Sari Sergeant Wescott actually said you could foyer request any and all of it if you want it. Right. But we we will carry that on a future agenda item just like we're doing tonight just like we did in
November, right? To discuss a particular item, right? So and you've seen >> So can can we just say no threeletter agencies sharing here and now? >> This is your elected select board. That's what >> threeletter agency sharing.
>> We appreciate we appreciate your input. >> Even fourletter ones. >> What happens now? So, so clearly the reason we kind of given our you up to you guys to decide if we're going to allow these cameras who >> it is or do we have to go get 200 signatures so there could be a town
vote? What what's what's next? Like I >> honestly I don't I don't think that that's honestly it's going to be this this board, right? And because that policy has to come back in front of this board for a vote. >> Just know a couple times during the time you guys have been talking it's like it
hasn't been if it's been when this happens. when this happened and this happened and it could have been just you know just talk or or me being a little paranoid and reading into conf more than once the worst were when not yet when so >> so it just seems to me it's like the
decision's already kind of been made >> I don't think so but I will I will make this commitment to you as the chair is when that policy is ready to come in front of the board we will carry it as an agenda item and we will take a vote up or down. If
we don't have a policy, they can't do it. We they've already said as much. So, this board will be the gatekeeper of that policy and therefore I believe the gatekeeper if we will have these devices or not subject to the accept that policy
acceptance. So, and as chair, I'll I will commit that I will carry that on a future agenda when that policy is ready and I will run a meeting similar to this where we allow this dialogue back and forth that we don't normally do
time using this grant that you have to utilize and and execute it and because when you first started you talked about the grant being able to do cover other things that would fall under the umbrella of police floor or safety of the town. Um, so is there a time limit
and say say it comes out that you know these aren't going to be what we want in Southwood to be able to execute those funds doing something else to help the police department. >> So as of right now the grant has actually been finalized the monies have been spent those three cameras were purchased. If for some reason the board
decides hey we don't want these in Southwick then we got to figure out what we're going to do with those cameras. >> Wow. That's that's the long and short of it. >> Okay. So, >> we're we've got to move on. We got other Sorry, I'm sorry, Joseph.
>> Yep. Westfield [snorts] dispatch. So, they don't look at the system at all now >> for Westfield. >> For Westfield? No. >> It has to go through the cruiser, the officer. >> All right. And then is stuff really ever deleted? I mean, >> yeah. Yeah. Automatically, >> you're the computer guy. I mean, is it
really ever deleted? >> I just wanted I wanted to talk to that. Hey, folks, we we were we were very >> Excuse me. Thank you. >> So, just like the video with video retention, right, >> uh, Sergeant Wescott alluded to it too
is you delete the data, it is indeed gone and especially because it's here, you know, and it's deleted and gone. But if you need to preserve it for an investigation or whatever, they can retain that and they can also retain >> the the >> the record of the queries that were
made, right? So while it's recording stuff and you dump that every 30 days, but his or anyone else's requests for the data, you retain that for a longer period of time. >> I see I hear deleted. I also hear deleted elsewhere and it's never deleted. That's why I asked. Is it
really deleted? >> Okay. And my last thing is I am not ready to give up the the town's liberties for this personally. That's just my opinion, but I mean >> Jamie is going to skip that rock. Wow. All right, we've got to move on. Thank
you very much. And I appreciate everybody coming out and sharing their opinions and thoughts. >> Westfield gas guy still alive back there. All right. >> Come on. That's good to have you here. >> A earlier draft of this was sent to
everyone and there was a couple of minor edits from town council that were incorporated in andrew and their solicitor. >> That's what it is right there. >> Yeah. Barrister. >> Yeah. Same thing
>> went through. So this is the successor agreement to agreement number one that was already done and run with Whip City Fiber Westfield Gas and Electric. This is contract number two which
is the buildout for the pilot area. We've completed almost all the pole applications are in and done except for we >> one additional >> one additional application needs to go in but this contract is for the construction
um and implementation of the pilot area that this board voted to send to do to put to form to contract some months ago. >> Months ago >> uh eight nine months ago now maybe longer prior
Yes. Prior >> prior to your election to this point. >> Absolutely. Yes. >> And it does include it does not include the hut that we talked about for the surveying. That's not constructed in this phase of the project. >> That would be at at a subsequent phase.
>> We don't need it for this phase. >> We're actually going to piggyback off of Whip City Fers infrastructure in Westfield at Stanley Park. >> Yeah. We're going to install. >> Is there a camera there that we can see this or no? We have >> just um we're gonna install Southwick's
equipment in our stand. >> Correct. And then we can always take it out of there and bring it into Southwick when the time's right. >> Great. >> And thank you for that. >> So there and and it was a compromise. We actually did go around the town campus
looking for a good place to house this temporarily till we had a proper hut. But that is a good place once you get the lines figured out and everything. >> Yeah. Well, that's why we're doing the design. But um by putting it at Stanley
Park when the day comes that we cut over to our equipment, there will be an outage of limited duration, but there will be an outage throughout the town for Whip City Fiber while they physically move this stuff from Stanley Park to our hut
>> at 2 a.m. to 4 a.m. probably. Yeah. Yeah. And that HUD is in the budget. We don't need any more existing money. The monies that were approved, >> this is all the HUD is not in this contract. The HUT it would be in a future contract depending on the outcome
of the trial. This contract encompasses monies that have already that we already have or that are already authorized to borrow under the $3 million that was authorized at a town meeting two or three years ago. Now, >> correct. Okay.
>> And the remainder of the monies that we had left over from ARPA and everything else. >> How long is it going to take? >> So, as the make way is done, we can start our construction phase and it should be probably done within a year. Right now, we're doing in West Springfield this year, we're doing 10
FSAs, fiber service areas. So, that's 10 areas of 250 homes or more. >> Gotcha. So, a year to be done. So 6 months before the first house maybe >> uh typically yeah we'd say probably within 6 months
it would be all three FSAs would probably be delivered. >> Yeah. >> Have the rates been set and all that? >> The rates are set. The rates are actually the rates for Whip City are in here and we need we would need to set our rate but our rate was already
discussed at being 90 bucks a month for residential. >> Right. and we had some preliminary commercial rates, but as we get a little closer, there's not a lot of commercial properties in this first >> first few FSAs, but there are a couple. Um, and there are some that are larger.
That would just be a separate negotiation. Oh, you don't just say it's $79 a month or $400 a month. You need to >> sit down. >> It's a custom. >> Yeah. >> But this does get over to the schools. It does get over to the library. Um and
then along Powder Mill Road >> to Wally Park. >> Uh yes. >> Or some or for the front of it. Anyways, >> yeah. You've got on lot cost there because it's a ways back. But yes, you do get to you will go past Wally Park. Yep. >> Wonderful. >> The goal with the test area is the I
call it the woods, the fernwoods, the birchwoods, those woods because of the density except Fred's house. We're skipping that one completely. >> But the proof will be in the >> Fred's getting it. Don't worry. No. If you can't get those numbers to work, we're done. >> Well, that's right. We got to show that we can demonstrate the take rate that
every other city in town that that has a competitive uh incumbent has been able to do, but we have to prove it that the Southway people will also take it at that rate. >> No, understood >> to to prove it out. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Well, we need to vote. >> Yeah. So this um we need a motion to and this is actually an IMA because they are a governmental agency and so are we. So this is
actually an intermunicipal >> intergovernmental agreement between the town of Southwick and the city of Westfield gas and electric light department. >> So the only deal we have is nobody from your sewer department can ever work for your cable side. >> That's correct. >> That's correct.
>> I think that's in there. We've seen what happened. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I already told their all of their bosses the same thing. >> Nicely, >> Mr. No, not nicely at all. Yeah. >> You say I am. >> Okay, I'll shut up.
>> These two gentlemen are here to answer any questions that you may or may not have. I >> think those were the questions for the public, right? How much is it going to cost? When's it going to start? The money's already been approved, so we're not going back to town meeting. There shouldn't be any uproars of anything. That's what it is. You're doing the
right section of town. It's the most dense area to do. Um, >> I think you checked all the boxes. >> Tried. >> Yeah. Long time coming. >> Yeah. >> And there'll be negativity, of course,
because, you know, they lost by so many votes anyways the first round. But, uh, this money was always sitting here. >> 20 for the twothirds for the whole project. >> 20 votes. >> Votes a vote. >> Yep. But it but it would and to be fair, it
was 20 votes for the borrowing authorization for all the money. >> Yeah. >> Um the correlation was that the majority of the town was in favor of the project, just not twothirds that you needed to borrow that much money. >> Correct.
>> Um Doug Mogan's opinion, this project's going to get a lot more expensive as you build it out further because we're two years further down the road. and look at the costs of what we've seen in in this business over the last few years. It has not come down. It's gone the wrong way. >> But that's a whole another animal. Who
knows if they're going to do a build out in two years. This may work and a town may say, "Well, that's great. If you live in that neighborhood, you have a second option. Totally. >> Oh well, and that's the end of it. >> They're covered. We're covered." And it moves on. You know, you can't future's the future. >> No, I get it. I know it. I just think
from a um from a mission standpoint um a select board was called a board of selectmen back then. >> Yeah. >> Way before I ever came to town. >> Um probably no I was probably born was
committed to installing cable TV in the entire town. It was a non-negotiable when they did that. Right. And that was a pretty smart move because when you get west and it gets less dense, it gets expensive per subscriber. That's why we're doing Fernwood Birchwood first.
That's the lowhanging fruit, right? But the people that live on the west end of town up Granville Road or out that way, >> they're going to need this service as much as anyone else. And so I think it's going to be it was important to me as as a select board member and as a member of
the committee to to make this a project that would benefit everyone in the town of Southwick, not just a select few. If not, we could have just gotten probably someone like, you know, one of those fiber companies just come down College Highway, hit all the businesses,
the few residences along College Highway and everyone, you know, west of the center would be >> like our gas. >> So, like gas, like, you know, like some other stuff, too. Anyway, >> I'll get off my pulpit. It's 9:00. I'd entertain a motion to execute uh this in
IGA with between uh city of Westfield Gas and Electric Light Department and the town of Southic and >> with the select board acting as the municipal light >> signature >> h
>> uh I believe it's all I remember >> I have a lot of things to send >> yeah but how many signatures are >> need to be in the motion Yeah, >> it is all three. >> So, >> I'll second that. >> Take a moment. Doug Mglin, yes.
>> Russ Anderson, yes. >> Joseph Dy, yes. >> Aren't you glad you stuck around? >> Would this be docy sign or wet signature? >> We're going to do a wet signature right after this meeting. >> Okay. >> And you can either stick around. I get it to you tomorrow. >> Okay.
>> All right. I won't blame you. We're moving. >> We're good. >> Yeah, we're good. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Appreciate it. >> Um, we didn't have much in the way of miscellaneous correspondence. They're going to be mascot let us know they're going to be doing some bridge work on
the Brook on North Blumis that crosses Munbrook. They're replacing the rusted guardrails that have fallen down and off. So, look for shiny guardrails on over Mun. We have no minutes for today. No >> warrants. Acknowledge payroll warrant
2702 dated July 14th in the amount of $361,610.79. Oops. Put someone's eye out. Acknowledge payables warrants 2701B dated July 1st in the amount of 2,472,96327 and warrant 2702B
dated 762026 in the amount of $26,74846. Before we adjourn, I want to ask a question to think about for the next meeting. Um, because it came up in public comment, and it was a good one because it came up from Miss Leblanc and the young lady. Why wouldn't we just
allow public comment on anything at the start of a meeting versus holding an agenda item and taking public comment at that point in time? >> Sir, so back in the old days, uh, depending on who the chairman of the select board was, almost depended how it
flowed, right? Russ Fox would take every question in and not say a word. Yeah. Right. >> Um a big part of it was could you answer the question and and honestly most of the public would understand if you said I got to email you tomorrow. Yeah. I
don't have it in front of me. Um Jason Peron would just about talk to anybody at any time. Right. If you could answer it, you would. Absolutely. I pretty much did the same thing in my my career. Um so I think it comes back to the chairman. At least in the past it has. and what that appetite is because you
know 80% we can answer 20% we just go oh god >> but what about it I and I agree with you on that and I just try to measure like if I don't know the answer and I'm not really sure I'm not going to answer it in front of answer that may be wrong >> but the the question was and Mrs. Blank asked it was
>> there's a we had 20 30 people out here tonight, >> right? >> We could have took public comment, public comment, not the back and forth about the the camera situation and said thank you and have get their piece in. >> Uh the young man could have read his
>> uh novel and I'm kidding. I'm kidding. You know, could have read his thing and been home, >> right? But instead we we held it until we got to that item on the agenda >> that I don't know if that's a legality or not. >> It's not. I don't think it is. I think
it's just protocol of the board, tradition of the board. So that's why I wanted for our next meeting. Let's think about that and let's carry and we can just >> It's not a rule. It's not even written down somewhere. It's something >> the agenda too. We've moved stuff forward before. >> You absolutely could do that. But >> um
>> yeah, we had a point. We only thing we can't move is stuff that's like at a public hearing. You can't start it before that time. You could start it way after. We've done that. But I mean, you know, some folks came out to talk about this item. I And I let this meeting go with the back and forth. Technically,
it's not back and forth. It's directional. But, >> you know, public comment, you address it at the board. The board can choose to address it or not. I just think it's good government and good policy that have a dialogue. I think we answered a lot of questions tonight. We may not have changed minds, but at least we provided more information than people
had coming in. That's all. But I think like if someone wanted to come and make a statement about this issue at at 602 and steamed right out of here, they could have done it if they want under what we're talking about now. >> Yeah. It really doesn't make sense to
not talk about items or talk. You can't talk if it's on the agenda. It's kind of counterintuitive. I think we should and so how about we just carry it on carry it on the agenda for next week and say we'll just change that or we'll just agree to make that a change in policy of the board because it's not a it's
nowhere it's written down. It's not in our handbook. It's no >> general recommends. >> I think it's more of the Robert's rules of order, >> right? >> It's it's public law >> and it's public comment for things that are not on the agenda that you want to talk about. But if something is on the
you can absolutely take it >> at any time. spoke speak if you want to during Yeah. whenever that is you could have moved it up so they could have been here. >> No, but I mean if someone wanted to just talk about this topic tonight and said I'm very opposed to these things. I think it doesn't have to be this. It could be anything. If we had dog
licenses on here tonight and >> it was item 14. >> Yeah. >> I I hate dog licenses. I don't think we should have dog licenses. And because it was on the agenda, we shouldn't have that public comment up front. I don't know. I think that's the young lady public comment for things not on the
agenda. >> Anything on the agenda, please wait until it's brought up >> and then discuss it. >> And that's what that's what we did. But that was Mrs. Leblanc and open the floor for >> and Joe's completely right. It it's really the presiding board and and
chairman who really decide that >> the time for public comment has passed. I'll talk to you after the meeting though. How's that? I would be on this issue because that >> Oh, okay. >> You better go this far. >> Yeah. All right. I've kind of lost all control at this point. Anyhow,
>> the only thing I would suggest like a caveat to that is I mean, prime example, we got to meet police officers present their information which then um provided more context of what people may have wanted to suggest or say, what comment is. >> Absolutely.
>> That's a caveat. You have more facts that are presented. >> Fair enough. and and and and like I said at the beginning of the meeting, um open meeting under the open meeting law, there's no requirement for public comment. It's just the fact that you
could sit here and watch your government do its thing. I I don't think that's good business. I'd much rather have this type of of meeting and as long as we can all, you know, do that, we should I I'll continue to do it. So, I appreciate
everybody coming out. You know, >> the only thing I would caution is like our first comment >> is we may need a podium and technology because now you have to take the minutes of the person that you're interacting with. Y >> so that could be a challenge under our current system.
>> I I just and I think you're right, but I also think now with folks recording the meetings and us recording these meetings and posting the videos directly to YouTube, it preserves that part of it. The minutes are you know Mrs. >> if you can hear it but
>> yeah well I think we're doing we're trying to do >> here isn't bad but other conference rooms are pretty poor. >> Yeah. >> So >> all right we have no executive session tonight. >> No I have new business though >> I'm going to come to that right now. >> Yep. >> Any other new business? Mr. Anderson.
>> Mr. Dee. >> Yeah. Um my question is the parcel of land and the industrial road that we have spent money on to somewhat design a road to go in >> Hudson Drive. You mean the industrial park?
>> Industrial park. Okay. So, can we get a can we reach out to the landowner to find out what process happened to see because I don't think it's transferred yet, but yet I thought we had a heck of a dialogue going in regards to the
process when we spent money, grant money to do some design work down there. So, I'd like to know where the where the ball fell >> because I I don't know. We have there's a project there sitting there that's going to come our way. >> Yep. And I don't want to be uninformed
of to really that process and how that how that transpired that it did or didn't go to another nonprofit and while the select board was actually working on it to do design work for it to turn into something >> correct. >> So someone reach out and get that
information or that history I should say. Yep. >> It's a good point. >> Anything else Mr. D? Anything else? >> Oh god no. >> Mrs. Sigoni. >> Mrs. >> Money. [laughter] >> Some news there. >> Congratulations.
>> Congrat. >> You want to make the motion to adjurnn back there or you're good? I'll take a motion to adjurnn. So move. >> Second. >> All in favor? I >> I. Thank you.