 Good evening. We're calling to order the meeting of the Ireland's select board for Monday, March 1st, 2021. As a preliminary matter, this is John Hurd, the select board chair. Permit me to confirm that all members and persons anticipated on the agenda are present and can hear me. Members, when I call your name, please respond in the affirmative. Diane Mahan. Yes. Steve DeCorsi. Yes. Len Diggins. Yes. Dan Dunn. Yes. And staff, when I call your name, please respond in the affirmative. Adam Chaplain. Yes. Doug Hyne. Yes. And board administrator Ashley Maher is participating remotely. Good evening. This open meeting of the Ireland's select board is being conducted remotely consistent with Governor Baker's executive order of March 12, 2020 due to the current state of emergency in the Commonwealth given the outbreak of the novel coronavirus. In order to mitigate the transmission of the virus and reduce risk of COVID-19 illness. We have been advised and directed by the Commonwealth to suspend public gatherings and as such the governor's order suspends the requirement of the open meeting law to have all meetings in a publicly accessible physical location. Further, all members of public bodies are allowed and encouraged to participate remotely. The order which you can find posted with agenda materials for this meeting allows public bodies to meet entirely remotely so long as reasonable public access is afforded so that the public can follow along with the deliberations of the meeting. Ensuring public access does not ensure public participation unless such participation is required by law. This meeting will feature public comment, even if members of the public do not provide comment participants are advised that people may be listening who do not provide comment. And those persons are not required to identify themselves. This meeting the select board is convening by zoom as posted on the town's website identifying how the public may join. Please note that this meeting is being recorded and that some attendees are participating by video conference. Accordingly, please be aware that other folks may be able to see you and take care not to screen share your computer. Anything that you broadcast may be captured by the recording. Please also take care to adjust your screen or device name if you would like to speak in order for us to recognize speakers appropriately and develop accurate minutes it is helpful for participants to see your full first and last name when calling upon you rather than a nickname. All of the meeting materials for this meeting except any executive session materials are available on the novice agenda dashboard. And we recommend the members in the public all the agenda as posted on novice unless the chair notes otherwise. We're now turning to our first item on our agenda before we do so permit me to cover some ground rules for effective and clear conduct of our business and to ensure accurate meeting minutes. I will introduce each speaker on the agenda after they conclude their remarks the chair will go down the line of members inviting each by name to providing comments questions or motions please hold into your name is called. Further please remember to mute your phone or computer when you are not speaking please remember to speak clearly and in a way that helps generate accurate minutes. For any response please wait till the chair yields the floor to you and state your name before speaking. If members wish to engage in colloquy with other members, please do so through the chair taking care to identify yourself. This meeting will feature opportunities for public comment on certain items. After members have spoken is chair will afford public comment opportunities as follows, I will first ask members of the public who wish to speak to identify their names in addresses only. Once the chair has a list of all public commentators, I will call in each by name and a for three minutes for any comments. Please keep in mind that all participants and members of the public must be recognized by the chair before speaking. Each vote taken in this meeting will be conducted by roll call votes. That takes us to the next item on our agenda. Before we start I just wanted to note for everyone. Obviously this is a special meeting that we added given how late our last meeting went. I think the plan going forward unless I have any objections from members is to. We have a cut off time of 11 o'clock is to assume we are not going to go past the 11 o'clock deadline for any of the warrant article hearings unless we get closer to Tom meeting and the situation necessitates it. But that is the plan. I think we should be careful about that. I think we should be careful about that as of right now. By a shake of the head if that works. Just to avoid that. Mr. Chair. Yep. I totally like that plan. I would just say that one thing perhaps is that if we do choose to go past 11 that we should be careful to set what our next deadline is at that time. But I agree we should avoid it if we can. Yep. But that's that's a plan as of right now. That takes us to the next item on the agenda. We have our consent agenda we have minutes of meeting server eighth 2021. Do we have a motion to approve. Approval. Mr. Corsi. Second. All right. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. The changes to the plan that has been presented to the ZBA and we've had a lot of neighborhood input on this continually, but in the past few weeks since we've sent the letter and since we've first, we've lost talked about this. I know we've all spoken to many, many residents who are really unhappy with the plan and the plan just at this point is just really a disaster for the area. This is just on for a general discussion. I'm going to turn to Mr. DeCorsi first. I know he went to a neighborhood meeting last night, so he can give us an update and then have any comments he has. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yeah, so since we've been talking about this probably two out of the last three meetings, but on our meeting on January 25th, we voted to send a letter to the ZBA. That letter ended up going out in early to mid-February with our continued concerns about the wetlands issues, the traffic issues, the general siting of the property, and we raised a new issue, which was the removal of the townhouses from Dorothy Road, which was supposed to serve as the transition between Dorothy Road and what initially was proposed as the apartment buildings behind it. I attended a neighborhood meeting last night, and the neighbors continue to be very concerned about what is being proposed there, what the impact will be on their neighborhood, both environmentally, by traffic, and just in general lack of compatibility with the neighborhood. It's a very real concern. It's a legitimate concern. And you know, we're all concerned that this board has expressed its concern going back to the initial stages of this application back to 2015, where Mrs. Mahan and Mr. Dunn appeared at Town Hall back in August of 2015 at a public hearing to oppose what was then the original application. So if I could, Mr. Chairman, I want to, we've received, I've received a number of questions since we sent out the letter about language that we used concerning our opposition to the removal of the townhouses. And I want to focus on that in particular this evening. There are continuing issues with traffic and wetlands and other environmental issues, but if I could take some time to talk about that and then open it up for discussion. Mr. Chapter Lane has a presentation that I'd like to, if we could share that screen, I'll just walk through it. Okay, so, yeah, so again, as I said, this is a follow up to our February letter to the ZBA. Next screen please. And among the number of items that we discussed was our concern of the removal of the townhouses. We spent a couple paragraphs talking about that and really raising the doubt in our mind whether this project would have been approved, had it been submitted initially without the townhouses because of the transitional aspects that were cited, that's for the justification for it. Next slide. Okay, and this is the exact language that we use from our letter. I'm not going to read it exactly, but we're basically pointing out that it bears noting that the removal of the townhouses removes probably the only thing that was consistent with the neighborhood. And then we go on to state that our doubts about what would happen if it had been removed from the initial application. Next slide. This is a copy and unfortunately part of the picture looks like it's it's washed out there on the left side of the slide so that is a copy of the actual mass housing project eligible eligibility letter approval back in December of 2015. And in that letter numerous instances where mass housing had findings related to building type density, massing and compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood. Next slide. And specifically, what they were approving at that time was six townhouses on Dorothy Road and 207 apartment units, 150 feet off of Dorothy Road. And with that mass housing in their recommendation said that the applicant should be prepared to address municipal concerns, well relative to size, scale and density the project, and its impact on the character of the surrounding neighborhood and fully to propose measures to address and mitigate these concerns. And if you go to the next slide, they're announced mass housing made specific comments about what was before them and this again is right from the project eligibility approval letter mass housing wrote should consider a change in tenure type or change in building type or height and this is before the comprehensive permit issues, you may be required to submit a new site approval application for review by mass housing. So let's summarize what happened at the beginning back in the 2015 2016 time period, the original application called for rental and home ownership units, the building types were townhouses and apartment buildings. This is a proposal which has not been approved by the ZBA but it's been submitted to them and it's been the subject of a number of discussions at the most recent meetings with the ZBA. The tenure type is rental only, and the building type is apartment building only no townhouses, no ownership units. You look at the top on the eligibility letter it seems to me that the change of those two items raises questions whether a new site approval would be submitted. Next question. Again, I went through the December 2015 project eligibility approval letter. There are at least four instances mass housing cited the transitional nature of the townhouses and how they're citing on Dorothy road will complement the existing residential development and act as a buffer. These three blurbs there again right from the eligibility letter from page eight of mass housings findings and these are consistent with findings mass housing has to make this so so called design guidelines. Next slide. Okay, this is a subsequent message or finding that mass housing issued. This is from page nine of the eligibility letter and Mr chapter life you can go back to the previous slide for a second. The language on that next slide if you look at the third blurb over to the to the right, the language is almost identical. And I would view that in 11 page letter. I want to make a reference is to how the townhouses would complement the neighborhood and act as a buffer between the existing neighborhood and what was being proposed. The fact that mass housing used identical language on two consecutive pages in my mind highlights the importance of the townhouses to the proposal, at least at the project eligibility stage. Next slide. I just pointed that out on on page nine. Next slide. Here's a picture of what was submitted initially or a rendering of what was submitted initially to the ZBA. This is what the townhouse street elevations were proposed to look like. This is what was initially proposed to mass housing. And this is what was contained in the application currently pending before the ZBA. Next slide. This is what is now before the ZBA. If you can go back Mr chapter lane for a second. Okay, that's the original six townhouses on dirt road. Next slide. Now what we see and I would suggest that this rendering is in a light most favorable to the developer. This is what you see in my rendering. It shows the four tour hot that what you may think a toy houses on the left side of the screen there are the actual houses on Dorothy road. What you see across from 58 Dorothy road, which is the furthest house on the right, all the way down to the corner of little john and Dorothy road is what's being proposed to that site. And that's what we see on the street. So far, no more transitions on no more buildings that are compatible with the neighborhood and that that invisible ink or the lightness that you see on the apartment. I can assure you will not be lightness if this building ever goes up. That was designed to show that those parts of the building aren't on the street frontage, but they're really maybe they'll be there. The building on the revised proposal that wasn't part of the application that wasn't part of the project eligibility approval is a building that is now 23 feet off of Dorothy road, the original proposal called for it to be 150 feet off of Dorothy road and I realized that this is a smaller building than what was proposed behind the townhouses, but it shows the general lack of comparability and you can really see how. This ever got put in how it would overwhelm the neighborhood. Next slide. This is what the revised proposal looks like. Again, it's not part of the application. It's been submitted to the ZBA they've had discussions on it. It's one building. The top edge of the or the three closest wings that that are near Dorothy road or 23 feet off of off of the street. There's absolutely no comparability in my mind with the neighborhood. There's no buffer. There have been some changes made to this. The other thing I would point out is that there is a you can't read it in the fine print, but Dorothy road and little john road or little john street or identified there is being 40 feet wide. The street themselves, Dorothy roads about 25 feet wide. Little john is about 2526 feet wide. It's nowhere near the width that that may be suggested here. Next slide. This again is stating the obvious the removal of the townhouses conflicts with both the mass housing project eligibility approval letter findings and the contents of the comprehensive permit application. Next slide. Yeah, actually, if you can go back Mr chapter link to the previous one on the conflict. And so why is this important for the board we do we realize that this matters before the ZBA, we have to respect the ZBA process. However, the select board had two opportune or had an opportunity to click on the initial plan back in 2015. And what was commented on was a different plan at the project eligibility stage. And the select board board of select men at that time, submitted two letters to mass housing before the project eligibility letter was granted. And there was very little attention, given to the townhouses because at that point, the townhouses were compatible. And there was doubt expressed as to whether the townhouses would be a good enough transition from Dorothy road to the apartments. The select would never had any opportunity to comment on what's now before the ZBA, and what would have been before mass housing had the initial had what's being discussed now been submitted initially. And so why do I bring this up again this to the importance of this and people may say okay, once this is down this path. If it doesn't have a role, or you can't go backwards and take a look and what I say to that is, there are rules to what submitted. And if there are changes made, as I pointed out, the change tenure type, building type, move things from ownership to rental. There are substantial changes, and there is provisions to go back to mass housing in that situation to either get a ruling on whether this is a substantial change, or get a ruling on whether a whole new application is submitted. And the design guidelines that I think would be applied had this property as proposed now would have been applied by mass housing, maybe similar to what mass housing did in another matter that we set it in our letter. In Medfield, where mass housing denied a project eligibility application at the project eligibility level for a 182 unit development that was proposed for Medfield, because it wasn't compatible with the neighborhood. I'd like to have that chat again at this stage to be able to comment on that. And since our meeting on January 25, the ZBA met on January 26. And there was a statement made at that hearing that again, in my mind gives even more importance to take the action that I'm going to propose in a minute. About two and a half hours into meeting on January 26. There was a question from a neighbor as to why the developer doesn't have to go back to mass housing and what what the implications of the change are. And the attorney for the applicant talked about the final approval does have to go to back to the subsidizing agency, but I'm going to read this to Harvard. He said who's the ZBA consultant working for the town. The subsidizing agency will not do any sort of design review of the finally of plans that is only done during the project eligibility process. Whatever plans the board eventually approves, if they approve them will be the final plans. The subsidizing agency won't make any changes to those. That's why we never had our opportunity to comment on this. This is a substantial change. Mr chapter, anything go to the next slide. What I'd like to propose to the board and I know Mr Chairman, you talked about it being a discussion I'd like to throw this out as a potential action on our part. The applicant's proposed changes to the tenure and building types. The board urges the ZBA to request that the applicant submit a new site approval application for review by mass housing before any further action is taken on the revised proposal. There are two more things beyond the sliders chapter and if you can put a picture one. This is a picture that a person driving down Dorothy Road took on February 28. The area to the left is where the proposed apartment building will go and I know that if it is approved, it will be the largest single apartment building in the town of Arlington. This is supposed to be a two way street in the drawing. It is a two way street in the drawings. The renderings that I've seen submitted. There's a lot of activity going on in that street. Here's the activity that takes place when there's cars parked on one side of the road. You only can fit down one side. Next picture please. This is a picture of the corner of Dorothy Road in Little John. The area to the left there where that telephone pole is. That is now the single entrance for the proposed 172 apartments. One entrance. All of the traffic at the end of the day was likely to go down Dorothy Road in order to enter this proposed site. So, after meeting with neighbors, after looking over the history that this board has had with this property, the town's history and proposing it. And I want to say Mrs. Mahan's comments at the January 25th board meeting where she made a call for an aggressive stance in opposition to this. As a board, we've been consistent. Our predecessors have been consistently opposed to this. I see these changes that have been made to go way beyond what should be before the ZBA at this point. I'd like to make the request of the ZBA and I'd like to continue our opposition. And I appreciate the time that you gave me tonight, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Mr. Mahan. Sorry, I'm set up on my husband's home work office and I'm literally between four different screens. So I apologize for taking so long. First, I'd like to second what I think Mr. Ducorsi made as a motion regarding I sort of see it as a please correct me wrong. If I'm wrong, Mr. Chair, Mr. Ducorsi, it's a two pot motion with sort of direction and or request to ZBA as well as mass housing or is it a request to ZBA and they then make the request to mass housing. Mr. Ducorsi can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the request is to urge the ZBA to tell the applicant that they have to submit a new request to mass housing with the revised plan because it's substantially different from the from the plan that was originally submitted. Okay, so so I will definitely second that. Excuse me. I do agree with all the materials that our colleague Mr. Ducorsi has provided that this is a substantial change as well as sort of an anchor on the proposal that went to mass housing as Mr. Ducorsi outlined. Really, a lot of their project weight laid heavily on the townhouses buffer transition zone, which now is just a mere fragment of the plan that they have before us. And I know that the zoning board, I shouldn't say no, I believe that the zoning board of appeals next meeting is March 11. I would just ask, and I'm assuming the answer is yes that if we do, the board does take this vote tonight that this message a could be relayed to the ZBA before. Not necessarily the March 11 meeting, but the open meeting law, so that they have the information, at least 40 hours in advance of March 11, so that if they deem appropriate, they could put it on their March 11 and or if they feel comfortable, either with Attorney Heim, Attorney Whitton or somebody else can advise them that they already have an agenda item that they can discuss this under. And if they do agree with the select boards, if we do vote that way, action that mass housing needs to be considered this or consider this as a new proposal because their previous approval was granted on something that no longer exists. So I guess I would ask through you, Mr. Chair, if Attorney Heim can give me some guidance on that and maybe more awfully frame what I'm trying to say. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mrs. Mohan, if what you're asking is whether the ZBA can be notified so they place an item on their agenda in advance of the March 11 meeting. Yes, I think they can that can be done, can be done by myself. And I would like to add directly after this meeting to the chair and vice chair, if the select board so wishes it, what would essentially then happen if the zoning board is inclined to agree is the applicant would basically have to describe their revised proposal to the subsidizing and would have to reach a decision with respect to substantiality. And I believe that this board would have an opportunity to comment on that. Because when they submit that request to review eligibility under their revised proposal, they're supposed to CC the zoning board and chief executive body of the town. So, yes, we can definitely advise the chair and the vice chair of the zoning board that you'd like to have that considered by the ZBA. And yes, that can be addressed on March 11 meeting if the chair and vice chair are so inclined to put it on the agenda. Okay, and then on my last question and then I'll not ask anything else. Besides, I definitely have seconded Mr. DeCorsi's is, I know when we submitted our, we believe we've reached the 2% request to HUD. And my personal opinion, and maybe shared by others including my colleagues that we got penalized because of counting the water bodies as buildable areas. So that issue is that pun intended dead in the water or is that something we're still pursuing it could possibly have some positive movement on that. I don't know if turning on members chapter lane through the chair could answer that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, that issue is preserved for appeal. So, what would have to happen for that issue to come up again. But although it is preserved is similar to like an appellate work preservation of a trial court matter. So if you're familiar with this man being preserved for appeal in a more conventional way, what would essentially happen is if the applicant or anybody else appealed the ZBA's determination on the permit itself. And that matter was litigated in the HAC. The HAC's determination was appealed by the town. The town would have the right in superior quarter or in court to assert that 1.5% was wrongly decided, and that we ought to be able to establish local control, which would essentially mean that you'd remand it back to the ZBA for decision consistent with that procedure. I think I think what I'm hearing is that that's something that's still on the table. But that we should keep it there for now. And perhaps pursue that in the future but I would leave it to town council and any other more learned people than me. But I just want to raise that that that's that's still something that I feel should be pursued but at the appropriate time I don't want to, you know, send all five bullet points over at the same time we can do one at a time but that's something that's available to us. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Mr. DeCouste just to clarify how we're going to notify the ZBA do you want your motion to be that the board directs me as the chair to work with attorney Heim to write a letter to the ZBA consistent with the language that you provided in your last slide. No, I think that's appropriate. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And again, with any edits that you feel are necessary or any additional context. Sure. Mr. Dickens. I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman. Yep. I'm sorry, Mr. Dickens, obviously deferred to the board. I think it would be okay with the board. I think it would be valuable, given the fact that the 11th can sneak up rather quickly. I think it would be valuable to just authorize a more direct notice to the chair of the board alongside that more formal communication. Yep, that's okay. That's fine. Maybe I'm being. Yeah, I'll amend my motion. Yep. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chris. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Chair. You make a very good case obviously Corsi. And so the brevity of my comment here is inversely proportional to my support for the motion. Mr. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Corsi. That was indeed very persuasive and very informative. I just want to say go on the record is saying that I would have voted for the letter as written if I was on the board just if that ever comes up as being a useful fact. I my only change that I want to make to or not change augmentation to Mr. Decorsi's motion is, I think in the in the past when I was on the board we went through great lengths to not offend the sensibilities of other boards by telling them how to do their business. And it's counter productive to us if we do. And so I just want to, and we look at some of our past letters with the ZBA, we've, we've gone through great lengths to remind ourselves and remind them what's our decision and what's their decision and I know Mr. Decorsi is not trying to insert himself into that and I just want to make sure that we keep that language in that tone when we communicate this message. Thank you Mr. Corsi. Yeah, thank you. I couldn't agree more Mr. Dana and I believe I said at the beginning of my comments tonight that this is the ZBA's decision we respect their decision. This is a request of us to them. So, yeah, that's understood and I hope hopefully that's conveyed if any but any member of the ZBA is watching this evening. And would we just in the mechanics of it would we defer to the chair to draft and send such that we get it done in a timely way. So I think what I'm suggesting is that he just go ahead and notify the ZBA tomorrow, but we can also I can also work with Attorney Heim to put a letter together. We'll notify them in the quickest way possible tomorrow and then me and Attorney Heim will draft a letter that summarizes the language as the board suggested. So we have that in writing and we'll get that out in the next day or two to great. Yep. All right. And with that, I support everything that's been discussed here. You know, thank you Mr. Corsi for putting together PowerPoint. Everyone knows the project, but it's a lot easier to see the, the treacheries of the project when you can see it laid out in front of you like that. So, you know, I think it, this all makes sense and it's the next step that we need to take to make sure that the residents of that area on overburdened by a detrimental project like this. So I appreciate your efforts on this. So Attorney Heim, we have a motion by Mr. Corsi seconded by Mrs. Mahan. Yes, thank you. Mr. Corsi. Yes. Mr. Diggins. Yes. Mr. Dunn. Yes. Mr. Hurd. Yes. To unanimous vote. All right, that takes us to a warrant article hearings picking off where we left off at 1215 am last week. That we are on article 80 resolution facilities department report, clarify responsibilities, track progress of the department of facilities and maintenance table from the February 22nd, 2021 meeting. We have Ms. Thornton with us. Ms. Thornton, can you hear us? Yes, I'm here. Let me get my. Yeah. And we do have, we did receive an email from you today that highlighted. I think what you're going to tell us tonight. So if you just kind of go through the, the points of, of what you had sent us as to how you. You're going to lay out the suggestions for the, the seminary annual reporting for this article. Yes, thank you. I'm glad to see you all looking rested. Yeah, I thought that in the interest of time and to make the whole meeting go faster, I would just jump to the end. I'm assuming that you have all read why I think the facilities department is so important. You've noted that the history that it was actually started in 2015 by an action of the select board at that time. I think there's a lot of the long-term money and a lot of potential risk on the table for not paying close attention to facilities. And now we, we, we have a letter from Jim Feeney, which I was very pleased to see are an email and we have a new facilities director coming on board. So I'm just going to jump in and make a recommendation that the select board request that the new director or the director of the facility department has issued a tradition of a of two reports a year, one for the capital planning committee, capital planning committee begins their annual work, looking at the needs of the departments and the schools in early September of each year, late August, early September. It would be very timely for them to have on their desks a report from capital plan, the facilities department director about what he thought were the issues and what had gone the year before. The second report would be same same basic framework but maybe a little different orientation or recommendations would go to the select board six months later. And it would stipulate the same kind of general information what has been accomplished in that last year, and, and recommendations that may be of special significance for the select board. All right. All right, with that, I will turn to the board for any questions, comments or motions are done. Thank you. So Barbara says reading about this and I was thinking about it. So the structure of this if I'm following it. So, actually, let me talk when we start with the parts that I really agree with you on that I'll get to the parts where I'm not necessarily so much an agreement. But I think that that agreement is super important. I'm really glad that we built it. And if I remember back in 2015 when we started it and it was a it was a good process we had a good facilities director we had good progress and implementation. Then the position went on field and made Jim feeding fill in and now we've got a new leader of the of the department. And I agree that we should have some regular reporting from that group to the select board. So, in a second I'm going to through the chair asked the town manager, what he what he thinks is an appropriate timeframe for us to commit to. And then, but I'm not going to do that quite yet because what I'm going to do instead. But first I'm going to talk about the part that I disagree with, but at least make sure if I understand it correctly. I'm just asking us to recommend a town meeting to have town meeting recommend to us what we should do. And we can skip to the steps and just agree with you and just make it happen without the town meeting part. If, unless there's a nuance here that I'm missing. No you got it. So, Mr. Chair, it would be appropriate for the time manager to comment on what reporting he thinks is appropriate that he'd be willing to commit to from his department. Yes, Mr. Chaplain. Thank you Mr. Don thank you Mr chair and thank you Barbara. I think a semi annual report. If not identical, maybe very similar to what Barbara has described makes very good sense. Based on what Mr. Feeney put in his email it sounds like a semi annual report is, you know, administratively doable from his perspective. And I do like the alignment that Barbara described. One time in the July, August timeframe would be appropriate for that capital planning committee report as Barbara knows from her many years of service in the capital planning committee. So, you know, probably having something done already by the by early August would make sense for transmittal to the capital planning committee that would then of course be available to the select board. We're waiting six months right around the time that we would be submitting the town managers operating budget on January 15, which of course is also inclusive of the capital budget might be a good time to include a report from the facilities department to the board that we could of course also share with the finance committee as they begin their budgetary review process for the season so yeah I think. I was a long winded way of saying I like what's being proposed. And I think we could do a mid summer and then mid winter reporting structure that could, we could get into a nice cycle if we, if we start doing that. Thank you, Mr. Chaplain. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Barbara. Mr. Viggins. Thank you, Ms. Dorton. Thank you very much me for for for bringing this through our attention and for educating me a lot about the history of this and the importance of it. And yes, I like what Mr. Chaplain has just as a timeframe. My only concern was I'm plopping this onto select board in the middle of March, when we're doing all the hearings me for an article is might be just a little much so having that coming a bit earlier me late mid February, I think we'd really be good and I look forward to reading these reports and then discussing it with with my colleagues on the board and you and others. Thank you very much. Thank you. This is mine. Yes, I'd like to mute. I'm unmuted. Yes. Thanks to Mr. Thornton for, you know, hanging with us late and starting with us earlier. And I know it's been over a year's time that you put an awful lot of energy and not study energy and analysis into the resolutions that you submitted to us. And what I would like to do is a make a motion be asked question. I think what I'm hearing is that I'd like to make a motion to move approval, but to change the September 1 state facilities report to capital planning CC to select board to August and be able to change the March 1st facilities reports to select board CC to capital planning and finance committee to February. Is that what I heard from you. So Mr. Chair, Mr. Towne manager or Mr. chairs or something else I'm missing. We can hear from the other board members, but I think what Mr. Don was suggesting is that we have no action and just tell Mr. Thornton that we're just going to go ahead and direct the, the, the, the building committee to the facilities department to make these reports to us without the resolution going through time. Okay, sorry, I missed that part and then with what the town manager said regarding changing the September of March date so then my question would be from reading everything that Mr. Thornton and then interim facilities are now assistant deputy town manager Mr. Feeney has submitted to us. One of the things that I'm assuming is inherent in the language before us, but because I don't see the two specific words categories in there, which from my construction background for my court reported background is sort of a either report or a pipeline placeholder for warranty and recalls. So what I'd like to ask through the chair to miss Thornton what you've submitted to the board and Mr. Feeney submitted to the board. Where would tracking of warranty and recalls because I know one of the big things that has sort of plagued the town and school buildings in the past, not only has been maintenance but has been tracking track of warranties and adjusting accordingly when those should be applied as well as I know there's been a lot of building issues because the town or town slash school received notices that a certain part of a piece of equipment was subject to a recall and they give the information on here's what you need to do to get this part and or get the expertise out to install it but there's really been no follow up on that so what I guess what I'm asking is is that inherent one of the bullet points and could you kind of point me towards that. Yeah, it is. This is, there are so many things about this that are my favorite things but one of the things that I think is critically important is the establishment maintenance of a database. In that database and there are databases available and the one we looked at years ago and I'm not sure where where it is now was had the unfortunate name of being called school dude. But there are there are databases and the databases do hold that kind of information it not only tells you when the last time the the roof was repaired on down in school that it also tells you the warranty information for the boiler and the school. And so it's, it's all there and it's assembled in in a good database that's interactive. That's easy to use for information that you might want to share with the custodian or information that you might want to share with with Adam or or the capital planning committee. Are you saying that that is included in school dude because I used to do all the, it was then AT and any TNT and then AT and T for all the trunk senders mainframes all the equipment that we had. And I looked at school dude and I didn't see the capability there and that that could be because I don't have the knowledge you're saying that school dude, which that name just sends me whatever. It does have the capability to do that. Mr. Chaplin. So, thank you, Mr. Chair and through you to Miss Mohan. Yeah, let me start by agreeing that it's a terrible name. I, that can't still can't believe they've built a business with that name but they are for public sector best sort of best in a database for facilities management and maintenance. And my understanding is yes that they can track along with age, life expectancy, preventative maintenance schedules they can also track the scheduling of warranties and recalls. And what I would suggest is that that type of reporting would probably be most appropriate in the reporting to the board in that February timeframe, because I think the, the summer reporting to capital planning could and should be very project based, as Barbara had mentioned what's been accomplished over the past 12 months and what do we think we can accomplish in terms of capital investment. And I think that January February report will be more operating focused and look at what you know what what is on deck what's in the database what's the work to do and what are we what are we budgeting to do that work from an operating point of view. Okay, so I'll leave that to the town manager to the previous facility director when I asked for that information. From what I was told school dude, didn't have the capacity to track that but I know we now have a new facilities director, and by previous I don't mean Jim Feeney he was at sorry acting them director but if you could just follow up on that. Just to share with the town manager, just to make sure that's the case because that's really a vital part and I know when the new facility director appeared before us at the last meeting that's also a point that I raised to him, and he said, he believed that was the case but that he would let us know so and I'm not saying anything untoward I'm just saying if school dude, or maybe we can call it something else like, you know, Okay, so thank you Mr. Chairman. Right. I think you mean Mr. Corsi I've already spoken. Mr. Corsi. Okay, thank you Mr. Chairman. Yeah, now I support Mr. Dunn's motion and the appreciate the comments from Mr. chapter line in terms of a proposed timetable and thank you Mr. Thornton for coming back and then improving on the original article to move towards a semi annual type type reporting so I think we're in a good place tonight. So thank you very much. Thank you. Crystal Claire for turning on Mr. Dunn. Do I make a motion no action. I would recommend no action. And Mr. Corsi you're seconding that motion. And I agree with this and thank you Mr. Thornton for bringing this up and I think this also highlights a few things one the need for reporting and the need to have easier communication with the select board for issues like this where we can, you know, if there's a gap in reporting that we can reach out to our facilities department and come directly to us rather than having to go through the warrant article process and we can certainly work on that going forward but thank you for this. And so we will be very beneficial to us and all the residents to get semi annual statuses of our facilities departments. All right, with that, this is a public hearing. If anyone wishes to speak on this item, please use the raise and function in your zoom application. Arthur Prokosh. Mr. Prokosh, can you hear us. Yes, hi. Thank you. Just ask your name for the record. Yes, Arthur Prokosh. I'm on Thornton Street in East Arlington. You can go ahead. All right, thank you. So I just want to briefly comment that I urge the select board to treat climate mitigation and resilience as an emergency, both symbolically by endorsing this resolution and practically in its actions. And specifically for East Arlington and a large progress. Can I just say, are you speaking on the climate crisis warrant article. Yes, I was trying to, I believe that a warrant article 91 was next. Right, so we'll have public comment on that one for review. My apologies. No problem. Thank you. Nothing further. All right, and I do not see any additional hands on this article will close public comments. So we have a motion of no action by Mr. Dunn seconded by Mr. Corsi 39. This is gone. Yes. Mr. Corsi. Yes. Mr. Diggins. The rare yes for me on a no action vote. Mr. Dunn. Yes. This is Mr. Heard. Yes. Thank you. All right. And that takes us to article 87 resolution overnight parking waiver for residents of multi family dwellings. And I'm going to move on to the next slide. I'm a precinct or table from our February 22nd, 2021 meeting. Is Dominguez with us. Hi, Miss Dominguez. Can you hear us? Hi. My name is Sylvia Dominguez and I'm the, can you hear me? I'm sorry. Yes, we can. Okay. I was just, this is my first year as a town. And I'm very proud to represent precinct four, which I think it's a very special precinct. And my name is Sylvia Dominguez and 87 and 88, I think could be seen together. Sure. Both regarding parking. Yep. And. And basically I just want to say that precinct four. It's really like a parking lot for commuters. For L wife. And I really want to do, to help. My neighbors. Do better with this. I've also conducted a. What you call it a survey of my neighbors. But I've also had conversations with my neighbors. So I really look forward to, to work with the board. This spring and summer. And I'm more than willing to withdraw these as resolutions. Considering that. All right. Thank you. Mr. Of my neighbors. But I've also had conversations with a couple of you. And most lately with a Steven. The cursey who's. Told me we can work on this. So I really look forward to, to work with the board. Spring and summer. Thank you. Mr. Of course. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you. Mr. Mingus. We did speak. A couple of times and what I told Mr. Mingus is. That these two areas, they, they are under the purview of the select board. And while I couldn't guarantee any action on behalf of the board, I certainly would be willing to work to put this on an agenda. For her to present to us. with a comment to that effect, I'd move no action on both of them. Thank you. Mr. Dunn. I'm really glad to hear that that conversation happened because this is one of those ones that's really sticky because I understand what we're looking for here, but the problem is that the solution that's proposed is pretty expensive but at the same time, I really love creative thinking and I hope that we can come up with a way that solves the parking problems for the residents and doesn't you know, and also has a appropriate size to drain on the town resources. So I'm really, I look, and I've always wanted in previous, and I've never successfully done it to try like pilot programs with different areas. And if that's one of the ideas that we tackle, I'd love it. Mrs. Mahan. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you, Mr. Mingas. I had corresponded with her by email, promising to give her a call and did not do that. So I apologize, but I will make sure that I do do that. And I just would say, I would love to do a pilot program somewhere. I know that George Leigh, who was chairman with LCFUR, at the East Island to Canaveral Committee, tried for years, including with Mr. Mingas's father. That when they would talk to residents and precincts in East Allington, and they would say yes, but then sort of one of the hallmarks or bellwethers of the select board has been a neighborhood that wants to embark on some sort of trial period to get two thirds of the neighbors assigned onto a petition. And what had happened in the past, which maybe not might not happen here in the present is that when it came to putting their name on a petition and it was hard to get to the two thirds. So I'm not saying that that's a standard by which this current board will look in terms of a trial. It's something that I, as of right now, stand by. We do it with other similar efforts in terms of private way abatements and repaving the road. But I look forward to definitely having a conversation with Mr. Mingas and discussing this at future select board meeting or meetings. But I think really the big thing is going to be actually getting at least two thirds of the neighbors in a pilot program actually signing the petition, not more at a mouth saying, oh, I think that's a good idea. So that's a hurdle we all have to work on. And I'm committed to work on that also. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Diggins. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And through you, Mr. Chair, I have a question for Mr. Mingas. So what's the parking situation nowadays? I mean, since the pandemic? Well, right now it's really not an issue. But when the pandemic is over, I think we'll have the usual situation. Okay, so the parking is not an issue. What about the ban on overnight parking? Is that an issue still? That's very selective and arbitrary. It's just arbitrary. And so some people are able to park overnight and nothing happens, other people get ticketed. But there is, we're still under that particular rule. Right. I'm sorry to interrupt me. I wasn't really talking so much about the enforcement of it as much as it is the issues associated with having no overnight parking. Not having overnight parking is a serious problem for residents of this precinct because most of these houses here are two and three family. There's only a handful of one family homes here. There's lots of people who park in the same driveway, maybe even four or five cars. And then they have to wake each other up to get out or to go to appointments. I mean, there's lots of appointments that are lost, people who are late for work because their neighbors upstairs don't get the car out in time. Also, when we get the cars out, there's no way to put them because starting, because of the overnight, the streets are empty for the commuters. So our streets are full from seven o'clock until seven o'clock, seven thirty at night. Right. And so that's why I was asking. So with the lack of use of the streets due to people not parking there because of the pandemic, I was just wondering if maybe that overnight kind of, I want to see musical chairs. It's not quite the right analogy, but that over, I was shuffling, eight of them was alleviated somehow. But okay, well, well, thank you very much. So as I've mentioned to Mr. Wingers and other people about this is similar issues in the town has embarked on a sustainable transportation plan in and even though the parking wasn't one of the prominent parts of it, it is a part of it. And it's, I mean, when we release the plan, probably in the next couple of months, I mean, that's not going to be the end of the process. We will be able to continue working on our sustainable transportation plan. And so that's going to be an avenue for us to use to pursue this and it's kind of challenging sometimes in the position of leadership. I'm like, when do you follow the majority? And when do you say, okay, we've heard for the majority, but this is what we need to do for the benefit of everyone. So we've had these referendum or referenda in our man. The voting has been in favor of maintaining the overnight parking ban, but it's non-binding. And as Mr. Horsie has said, this is in the realm of the select board and it may be sometimes that we have to do something and things that the majority have voted against. You know, I mean, that's part of leadership, but we will process that and we'll think about it and we'll work on it. And hopefully we can come to a better way of dealing with the situation we're precinct for and all the time. So thanks. Yeah, and I just want to thank Ms. Dominguez for bringing this issue. I know this is an issue that's prevalent for a lot of people in that area. I look forward to future discussions about a pilot program. I don't know that we can do a pilot program specifically for overnight parking. I think it might be more geared to your second request because I think that's an issue that hits a few more than one precinct. Or if we were to do that, it would have to be a broader base than just precinct four. But we did, to Mr. Diggins's question, in our last meeting under correspondence received, we had an email that was sent to me by Mr. Eamon Keating, who is also a precinct four resident. And his concern was that during the pandemic, instances of where this area has a lot of tandem parking with his up and down residents, who as Ms. Dominguez said, they might have each other's car keys under normal circumstances, and they just move the cars so they can get out if somebody wakes up at six in the morning and the other person wakes up at nine in the morning, they don't have to deal with that. In the pandemic, they're having issues where people don't wanna be in other people's cars, right? For social distancing issues. So he did bring up a point that we would have to discuss at a future meeting, which I could put on the agenda just to see if there's any action we can take imminently regarding that specific issue, and that would just be in the realm of enforcement of the overnight parking ban during the pandemic. But I just want to, I'm not asking for any action on that right now, but I just, there is concern from residents of this area that the overnight parking ban is causing a burden on their ability to switch cars safely, distance from even their neighbors. But I look forward to these conversations. We did, prior to the pandemic, we were having a lot of conversations about the overnight parking ban and just parking in general, which we kind of got sidelined with all that was going on. But as we move through this, I think around the spring and the summer is a good time to take this up again. So I wanna thank Ms. Dominguez for bringing this to our attention. Look forward to working with you on this issue. So with that, this is a public hearing. We have one hand that's raised by Darcy Devney. Ms. Chetlin, Ms. Devney, can you hear us? I can, that just, that did something very odd. Okay, I'm actually a precinct for resident. We have two cars and we tend to park. And I'm also on the Sustainable Transportation Planning Committee and eliminating overnight parking, just the overnight parking provision, it just encourages more cars in town. And that is not part of the sustainable transportation plan. It's not something where you want to give them any more reason to have more cars in town. We already have, for about a decade, we've had a fairly steady population of about 40,000 plus people and 35,000 registered cars. That means we have way more registered cars than registered drivers to begin with. So I don't think we wanna be encouraging that. The other thing is, and there are a bunch of other reasons why overnight parking ban is still a good idea and the snow, the recent snow will have emphasized that to some people. The other thing is, it's not clear to me why the commuter parking problem from Alewife has been a problem and the solution on most of these East Arlington streets in this particular neighborhood near is to have two-hour parking limits on the street and that worked just fine. And it may need a little enforcement now and again, but it's not, there's no reason to say we have to go to something like Cambridge and have a visitor permit that you have to ask for and what if you're having a visitor, well, if you have two visitors, do you have enough permits for them? All that kind of stuff, I really don't think that Arlington wants to get into it when we could so easily solve the commuter problem by saying two-hour limit or four-hour limit even if you like, but that seems to work. I mean, you can check with the police department and see if they think it seems to work, but I've lived on Thorne Dike Street for a lot of years and it definitely worked when we started putting them in. And now I think it may just be a matter of sort of pushing the two-hour limits out a little further from LWIFE because if you get a certain amount away from LWIFE, then people start to bother. But I do live in Precinct 4 and I do tandem park and is it an irritating thing? Yes, is it an inconvenience? Yes, that's not a reason to get rid of either overnight parking or to establish a whole permit parking system. Just my opinion. Thank you. And we have Sarah Ogud. Hi, thank you very much for taking my call. I'd just like to respond to the previous comment. Ms. Ogud, do you have your name for the record? Yep, my name's Sarah Ogud. I'm also a Precinct 4 inhabitant. I live on Dorothy Road down close to Little John Street. So in the area of the proposed Thawndyke Development, Thawndyke Place Development. And I would just like to add to the previous comment that even as far away from LWIFE as we are, it's a huge issue pre-pandemic and it is starting to come back with overspill of LWIFE parking. I think enforcing to our parking would be ideal as long as that did not apply to residents. It's bad enough that we cannot park on our own street overnight. So not being able to park on the street during the day as well would be very restrictive to many of us. So I would request that the select board take that into consideration. Thank you. Thank you. We will have these discuss... We have a vote of no action on the articles before us. These discussions will be ongoing as to what, if any, actions we take. So we're not taking any actions whatsoever on parking with the vote that we're taking. We're just taking a vote of no action on the two warrant articles that are proposed before us. With that, I see no further hands. So we will take two separate votes. So first will be a vote of no action on Article 87. Turn right. This is Ma. Yes. Mr. DeCorsi. Yes. Mr. Diggins. Yes. Mr. Dunn. Yes. Mr. Hurd. Yes. So now let's vote. Thank you. Now we will take a vote of no action on Article 88. This is Ma. Yes. Mr. DeCorsi. Yes. Mr. Diggins. Yes. Mr. Dunn. Yes. Mr. Hurd. Yes. So unanimous vote. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Mr. Dibingas. Thank you. That takes us to Article 90, Resolution Program to Install Electric Vehicle Charging Stations, tabled from our February 22nd, 2021 meeting. We have this is Ms. Dominguez as well. Sorry. Thank you so much, Chairman. Yes. This is another issue that I ran on as well as parking and anti-racism and affordable housing. So here we go. Sustainability and climate change. So I've been a electric vehicle driver for now about seven years. And the reason that I wrote this warrant is because there is initially because there's no charging station, no charging offered anywhere in East Arlington, which seems kind of crazy to me considering the density we have here and the fact that the lots are small and very few people can actually charge at home. And I also am keeping in mind with the fact that we have a net zero for 2050. But also President Biden has been talking about 2035. So it's only a matter of time before this is a real super issue. Electric vehicle sales are increasing by 30% a year. And I think it's necessary for the town to start looking at an actual budget item and not only what can prove thus, which is to put together grants to pay for these. Because this is just something that's going to overwhelm the town at some point because electric vehicles are selling so much. So that's the reason that I put this together. And I'm hoping that this occurs because this is a serious issue. And starting with East Arlington, of course, I hope we get one soon in this neighborhood. All right. Thank you, Mrs. Mahan. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I know we have this article and then we also have the following article, article 91, which on the select board designate to net zero. We had that discussion 2050 versus 2035. Park, I'm blanking on its name, as well as something else. But also as a member of the Long Range Planning Committee, which is chaired by our colleague, Mr. DeCorsi, we've been having discussions regarding what our budget looks like going forward and need to have some really serious discussions around this. So I guess what I would do is I know it's a resolution, but I don't want to move action on a resolution that doesn't identify a funding source, as well as a site for this. So I guess I'm sort of floundering here. I don't know if either the chair or through the chair or Mr. Chaplain can sort of give me any guidance on this. I don't want to say no action. I'm fine for saying move approval, but I don't want to move approval when we have an outlined a pathway to A, designate an area or areas, and B, find a funding source, which right now I'm not going to go into the extensive conversations we've had in the Long Range Planning. Yeah, I think it would be good for Mr. Chaplain to just give us an update of where we are in charging stations and what the future looks like and where the money for those charging stations will come from. Mr. Chaplain? Absolutely. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you, Mr. Mingus, for filing this. I guess I would first say, although I'm sure it's not immediately convenient to Mr. Mingus, there is a public charging station in East Arlington at the Gibbs School parking lot. It's not available during school hours, but all non-school hours it is available to the public for charging. We have made at least one investment in East Arlington in public charging. That being said, I guess I'd say a few things. One, we've not yet spent significant town money on implementing any of these charging stations because of the availability of grants. And we've also, I think, been a leader in the region and in our installation of charging stations, but also trying not to get too far ahead of what the charging needs might be. And frankly, upsetting apple carts with removing parking spaces that are only available for electric vehicles. So I think in terms of this resolution, I'd say a few things. One, I think a vote of town meetings supporting a broader installation of electric vehicle charging stations could be a powerful tool for our budget planning in years ahead. And it would give us the imprimatur of town meeting to be able to go forward and plan in that manner. I think I would suggest though that the board consider in any language in a final resolution being subject to budgetary consideration by the Capital Planning Committee and Finance Committee so that Ms. Mahan's concerns are addressed. I could see this being something that the Capital Planning Committee could consider in future budget years, but of course it would be subject to balancing the capital budget and the availability of funds. So I think again, I would say overall it's something we are working on having town meeting support would only aid in that work, but having it be considered in the context of our larger budget would also be appropriate in my opinion. Yeah, Ms. Mahan. Okay, I thank the town manager for that clarification. So, and I know Attorney Hyme will be the person who has to put pen to paper and craft that. So I would move approval and Ms. Dunn. Still thanking this one through, I'll pass for now. Yeah, Ms. Diggins. I'll second it and through you Mr. Chair to my colleague Ms. Mahan, I have a question. Sure. So what's net zero thinking about in terms of charging stations? Being my first, I think I've been on it two months on the committee because I just recently got on that. And I know that we'll have someone who speaks under article 91, but they do have a comprehensive plan around net zero and actions that could be taken and Ken Pruitt who works out of the planning department is sort of overseeing this with other members of the committee. That's sort of enveloped in terms of plans moving forward. But again, we had this discussion which the town manager chaplain was also at. The big thing is first getting the net zero plan through with the 2050 and the action steps that fall in line with this, which I don't recall having a specific discussion regarding charging stations. My take would be it's probably included there somewhere. And I just wasn't at that meeting because I wasn't on the committee yet. But so I don't want to represent. I can tell you what I know about net zero and what's coming up in the next warrant article and declaring a climate emergency and things like that. But I can't go beyond that. So I don't know if Mr. Chapter Lane, who I know has attended those meetings for several years versus my two months. Chapter Lane. So first I'd say Ms. Mohan hit it right in the head. There will be a very thorough presentation to the board on the clean energy future plan, but we actually explicitly discussed at the last meeting how the agendas are very packed and we were gonna wait until we've gotten through these agendas. But I will, if you'll indulge me, I'll just read. There's a number of areas, net zero buildings, zero emissions mobility and then other measures being recommended, but there's specifically one for zero emissions mobility. It's number two and it's, I'll just read you that the bold type is create and implement a plan to expand public vehicle charging options at libraries, business districts, public parking facilities and other facilities, both on and off street. So there's a greater description in the plan to talk about that effort, but there is an explicit measure included in the proposed clean energy future plan or the net zero by 2050 plan, excuse me, to expand our charging infrastructure in town. Thank you very much. Well, I mean, as with being a lot of the resolutions, the, yeah, the articles that are resolutions, the town is either moving in that direction or we as the select board can accommodate me in short order, but I'm gonna get back into my old ways of, I'd second it, I'm guessing the second. So, and unless I hear something really overwhelming later on in the hearing process, I mean, I'll vote for it. Thank you. Mr. Corsi. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yeah, I'd given the comments from Mr. Chapter Lane and this is my, I'd support this. The only question I have for potential motion is on the funding. If we want to elaborate and say, town and or outside grant funding, I don't know if that's helpful at all, Mr. Chapter Lane, in terms of sources to put both of those in there. I think it is. I think we're still in an environment where either from the utilities, state grants or potentially even private grants, there's a lot of monies that we could use externally to help us do this. So I think it would be helpful to make it clear we're looking at multiple funding sources. Okay, thank you. So if I could add that, if that's okay with Mrs. Mahan, if I could add that language for the, just to put before funding in the resolution or the potential final resolution. Ms. Mahan. I would take that as a friendly amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Corsi. Thank you. And I will just say that, I mean, I, I know we're trying to total the line of the resolutions to, sorry, sorry about that. Live TV here folks. So we're trying to total the line of, you know, resolutions that are duplicating efforts we already made, but I think based on Mr. Chaplin's recommendation, it's certainly something that is worthwhile to bring to town meeting for a vote. And given that Elon Musk is now the wealthiest man in the world, there's certainly gonna be a need to go forward in, I think Arlington is sort of an epicenter for that transition to electric vehicles. So we hear a lot of people telling us that we need more electric charging stations and we know it's in the works, but I think this is worthwhile to reiterate that for the folks. Mr. Dunn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I found my thoughts and as someone who threw some money at Mr. Musk many years ago and delighted, you all remember, I picked up my Model 3 as one of the first ones and I can't be happier with it. But onto the issue. I'm definitely happy to support Mrs. Mahan's motion. Mrs. Mahan, I would wonder if you'd consider, and the one thing that I think that was really kind of sticking with me is that I'm not comfortable with specifying that East Arlington is first. I would prefer that we write something, but I also agree that it should be equitable. And you know, if we think in that means, and so I would hope that the motion would should talk about, you know, intelligent and equitable or thoughtful and equitable distribution of locations rather than trying to specify regions where it should happen first. I would also take that as a friendly amendment. So Attorney Heim can also incorporate Mr. D'Corsi as well as Mr. Dunn's amendments. Mr. Chairman. Yes, Attorney Heim. So my understanding is that I'll obviously take the, as with other resolutions we discussed last week, I will take the balance of the board's comments. I'll try to work with Ms. Dominguez to make sure that their resolution is consistent with both the board and her intentions for it and craft something to come back for final words and comments. Yes. Thank you. And this is a public hearing. So if any members of the public would like to speak, use the raise hand function on your Zoom application now. We do not have any public commentators. We have a motion by Mrs. Mohan, seconded by Mr. Diggins, Attorney Heim. Got me there. Mrs. Mohan. Yes. Mr. D'Corsi. Yes. Mr. Diggins. Yes. Mr. Dunn. Yes. Mr. Hurray. Yes. So now let's vote. Thank you, Ms. Dominguez. Thank you. With that, that takes us to Article 91, resolution to declare a climate emergency in the town of Arlington, tabled from our February 22nd, 2021 meeting. Do we have Mr. Wilde with us? Hi, Mr. Wilde, if you can say a name for the record. Hi, I'm Park Wilde and I'm in Precinct 5 in East Arlington. Sorry for the pronunciation, if you just... It's quite all right. My answer to that. All right. And if you could just tell us about your article. Yeah, thanks a lot for having me on. And you could just hear already, even earlier in the meeting, all the interest that there is in climate issues. A lot of the information that's more detailed, we sent in advance and there's a website, emergencyarlington.org and also a video that kind of goes through the five planks of this proposed Arlington Declaration of Climate Emergency, one by one. So I'll answer any questions you have about any of them, but I won't sort of take you through the five one by one at this point. The key issue is that the issue that the issue of the climate emergency really is important. And we shouldn't be immobilized. There really are things that even though state actors are important, national actors are important, there really are great things that Arlington can do. And I think it's going to make us feel good to work together and to have kind of an umbrella declaration that sort of states what is really our intentionality as a community to do something about this issue. It would place Arlington in good company. Other municipalities and towns in Massachusetts have been making this type of declaration just in 2020. We have Boston Act and Wellesley Lexington and a lot of our other peer communities. Early on trying to get organized around this potential declaration, we put together a small committee. And the early advice we had was that we had to talk to the people who've been doing such great work already on climate issues in Arlington. We couldn't be just the Johnny come lately and expect everybody to all of a sudden do our thing. And we took that very much to heart. And so we've been having a series of community events and stakeholder meetings that have led to first us adapting our proposal listening to many of the stakeholders but then also getting endorsement from East Arlington Livable Streets in October, Mothers Out Front in January, Sustainable Arlington and the Clean Energy Future Committee which Ms. Mahan is on in February. And so each of these has had a chance to influence this proposal. If I were in your shoes, this being Arlington and not some other place in the country, I think the issue isn't going to be, is this important enough? But I would anticipate that you've probably got two questions on your mind. One is, is this gonna contradict the good work that the town is already doing through the net zero by 2050 plan? And the other is probably not, is it gonna contradict it? But is it kind of redundant with it, right? Like if Arlington's town government is already in favor of net zero by 2050, do we still also have to do this declaration? And my answer is we've taken care to avoid both of those problems. For example, we don't have a year statement in this Arlington Declaration of Emergency that contradicts the net zero by 2050, but we really do have a distinctive expression of urgency and kind of a particular way of doing the public education and outreach that I think is going to help the town and to help the folks who are most strongly promoting the net zero by 2050 plan, just by giving it an umbrella or a wrapper that drives it home to people. What is Arlington really about as it does kind of the dozens of individual measures? You know, Ms. Dominguez was mentioning a charging stations for electric cars. Each of these is on the net zero by 2050 plan as one of the bullets in the plan. But I think that this Arlington Declaration of Climate Emergency helps to make the big point in a way that's gonna be salient to people. So thanks a lot. Thank you, Mr. Diggins. Thank you Ms. Wilde. Well, I am going to be inclined to support it. But just a couple of questions. What is it that individuals can do that you feel that we aren't doing that would make a difference? I'm not saying that we as Arlington are gonna move the needle, but this is just to amp it up, meaning our consciousness, but we wanna do more than that. We want people to actually take action. So what are maybe one or two things, me that we as individuals can do? And then what are one or two things that we as a town can do? Either the government entities, me as select board or departments, me that you feel that we aren't doing that would be beneficial. First thing is, that's just a terrific question because so often you get individual action pitched against kind of political action or policy action, but you wisely asked me about both, right? So for individual actions, you know the lists of like 101 good things you can do for the environment and lots of them are very small impact, but the big things that have a big impact are the things that people in our community can do that substantially reduce our fossil fuel use. So if you think about driving less, if you think about flying less, if you think about making the home energy fossil fuel burn less, those are the things that make the biggest difference. But the key thing is don't stop with just those personal choices. Focus on trying to encourage town government, state government, federal government to really take action because it can't be just 1,001 points of light like in the Reagan administration, it has to really be government action that makes a difference in our times. You're so enthusiastic, I love it, I love it. It's about an important issue, you know? And so it, like I said, I would generally, I would prefer to see me something really concrete me that we as the town could take on me and we're doing it, you know? And so I encourage you, whatever happens with this resolution to just keep up the energy and keep me figuring out ways that we as individuals and as a government and various departments can do more. So I am going to move approval. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll second Mr. Diggins motion. And thank you, Mr. Willoughby. And thank you for your outreach as well because I had heard as this process was going along there was some questions and it sounds like you've worked with some very stakeholders and made some changes and that there seems to be general consensus on this. So thank you very much. Thank you. And Mr. Lahn. Thank you, Mr. Chair. If I could third it, I would, but I can't. We just had a meeting last week of the Clean Energy Future Committee as Parker has pointed out and there was a very detailed sort of matrix of all the different action steps. I can't remember who was 11 of 31 pages but as of our meeting last week it is a public document and it does outline specific action steps whether it be charging stations, whether it be economically, not economically, environmentally friendly vehicles purchased by the town and we also included the schools, not the school curriculum, but the school town school because originally the way it was written it was just assumed that school was under town but we also added in school to tie into that. Again, not getting into the school curriculum which has already been taking some of those steps. And one of the things there was, as I said previously there was a discussion around 2050 versus 2035 and Park can probably give a better recitation in terms of the conversation around that but I'm just gonna say what my takeaway was and if he could speak to that briefly. A, around these steps, Ken Pruitt who is in our planning department has had conversation with Charlie Foskett but the 2050 versus 2035 had to do with different groups getting them all under our umbrella. Park, can you say it better than I'm saying? Right, so there's just a lot of the details that are kind of really important and interesting but just to touch on the two that Ms. Mahan mentioned one is about what town organizations are kind of being called upon by town meeting in this resolution to act on climate. And the answer is all of them that it's not really just the select board it's the select board and the school board and the zoning board but part of our stakeholder outreach was talking to attorney Heim and attorney Heim explained to us he sort of checked with us to make sure that we didn't have exaggerated expectations that just cause the town meeting passes this resolution that all of a sudden the zoning board is allowed to break its rules. And the same is true for this question about the school district. So this really does include the school district but it doesn't mean that all of a sudden the superintendent has been disempowered or that the school board is disempowered. This is a call on each of them to do to act in their own area. For example, in the schools the town is working very hard to have the new school construction for the high school meet a very high energy standard. And I think that's a considerable, considerable success. The second thing is, could we have said 2035? If I were king, I would have said an earlier date than 2050 but it was very clear for a number of reasons that we wanted to write this in a way so that all the people in the town who had already been putting long hours of work into net zero by 2050 could also support this without seeming like they're supporting two contradictory things. So you could think of this proposal as being kind of like net zero by 2050 but with a special tone of urgency. All right, Mr. Dunn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am happy to support this motion. I think that there are times when specificity is important but then there are times when it really matters to capture the tone of town meeting because it gives a moral authority to other decisions that are being made in town. And I think that there's going to be a lot of decisions over the next few years that we can say, yeah, we got this resolution from town meeting and that's why you should support it. And I think that that's a very powerful statement. And thank you, Mr. Willey for the presentation. Certainly your enthusiasm for the subject is really impressive and the detail they've provided for us to support this. This is an incredibly important issue for the town, for the town residents. And I think this is, you will find broad support in town meeting. So I'm happy to support this. This is a public meeting. We have two hands raised. Do we have Mr. Burkhart? Mr. Burkhart, can you hear us? Hi, sorry about that. Can you just say your name for the record? Hi, my name is John Burkhart. I live in Westminster Ave. Hi, and I'm very encouraged by the comments from the select board. And thank you for considering this proposal. I just want to add a few things. I think that the emergency declaration does put us in a sense of urgency and in thinking in emergency mode, just like what we're doing with the pandemic, we need to be looking at new information all the time. And although the science is very clear what's happening with CO2 and temperature rise, what scientists can't predict with any certainty is what the impacts of that will be on the planet because we've never been on a planet this warm and the planet has never warmed this quickly in all of the geological history. And we're already seeing that play out. The IPCC report outlined a lot of scenarios. Scientists went and measured some of them like the melting of the permafrost and found that it's melting at a rate they weren't expecting until 2070. It's 50 years ahead of schedule. Most people have no idea how serious it actually is. Greta Thornberg described her experience reading about the climate crisis and she convinced herself that what scientists were saying couldn't possibly be true because her reasoning was that if it were true, then this would be all that we would be talking about and then it would be in the headlines every day. And just like with COVID, we'd have updates all the time. New information is telling us what's happening. So she convinced herself that it couldn't be true. And I've had the same exact experience in reaction with friends and family and colleagues. There's a psychological phenomenon that's going on where we're in kind of a collective, a state of collective denial. I don't think that anyone here or at least the select board is from the tone that you've taken with this proposal and others tonight. But I think the general public is in a state of denial and I'd like to draw an analogy. If we were all in a room together right now and an alarm went off, we might look at each other but if nobody got up to go to the door, we would kind of look at each other for a while uncomfortably and then we probably conclude that it's not a real threat and we're not in any imminent danger. But if somebody stood up and said, this is an emergency and there's a risk here and we need to leave right now, everybody would get up and mobilize and head for the door. So I think that's exactly what we need to do in our town, for our citizens in a somewhat official capacity to confront this emergency. We need to sound the alarm and our leaders need to acknowledge the truth that this is an existential threat to civilization and that we don't have the situation under control. That's what I have to say tonight on this issue. Thank you. Can't go through a whole meeting without doing that. Mr. Hazleton, Mr. Hazleton, if you can just say your name for the record. Hi, my name is Andrew Hazleton and I'm in precinct five in East Arlington. And I don't have a lot to add to what Park and John have said but I just wanna say that I'm an architect who works on public schools and commercial buildings and I'm just cognizant of what an enormous lift it's going to be to decarbonize infrastructure. And I just wanna say that I'm currently involved with a public school building in Massachusetts where we're spending, in spite of the design team efforts to convince the client not to do this, we're spending $7 million putting in fossil fuel infrastructure in a public school. And that's probably not even gonna be legal in two years and it's just a shame. And I guess my perspective on the declaration of emergency is that it could be really helpful. I mean, from the perspective of somebody that's in the trenches, it's so discouraging when we're pushing for sustainable design in buildings be they public or private buildings and there's no reinforcement from leaders whether at the state or the local level because the client's tendency invariably is just to treat sustainability as one of many conflicting objectives in their project. So I just wanna say that I think that having strong leadership from the town, which I know we have but it just can't be strong enough I guess is what I'm trying to say. That's all. Mr. Beach, can you say your name for the record? My name is Philip Beach. I live on Park Street in Arlington. I've really been very pleased by what all the people on the board have spoken about all the actions that the town is doing. This is great. This declaration, as Mr. Dunn really pointed out, to me, a lot of its importance is that it gives town officials the mandate to speak now, to speak to the citizens who may be feeling sort of helpless about what they can do individually but also to speak to people outside of the town to state officials and government officials, federal officials. We've seen this last four years, the dangers of what happens when our high leaders just aren't telling the truth. I think Arlington can be such a leader in that. So I really appreciate the power that this declaration can carry in the town and outside the town. Thank you. Thank you. And our last speaker is Gina S. Gina, if you can just say your name. Yes. My name is Gina Sonder and I live on Kimball Road in Arlington. And I just want to build on all that was already said so well. And we are one of those people in that room with the alarm going off, that's standing up and moving out and being a leader in declaring this crisis. And the hope here is that, as Mr. Dunn said, we're going to influence people beyond the town. This is one of many towns to declare an emergency, excuse me. And perhaps this will move our governor to finally pass that bill that's been sitting on his desk and move the whole country to declare emergency and speed up action to mitigate the climate crisis. Thank you. And one more speaker, Ms. Malofchik. Ms. Malofchik, say your name for the record. Hello, best Malofchik, Russell Street. Thank you very much. Thank you, Park and your colleagues for bringing this comprehensive resolution forward. I fully supported. I'm heartened to see the support and the insights from the board. And you have given me the confidence to submit a substitute motion for my tree canopy resolution, which I think is a complimentary component to what you are doing. And I hope that the board members, those who are town meeting members will agree when it comes before town meeting. So thank you very much. Thank you for all of your effort into Gina as well and everyone who worked on it. Great. And with that, that closes the public comments portion. And so attorney nine, we have a motion to approve. And just so I'm clear, Mr. Chair, these folks had a draft resolution. I'm taking that draft resolution and I'm working with that, correct? I is. Thank you. Mrs. Mohan. Yes, thank you. Mr. DeCorsi. Yes. Mr. Diggins. Yes. Mr. Dunn. Yes. Yes. To unanimous vote. All right. And that wraps up all our articles from the last meeting which by my calculation had us ending up around 145. So I think we made the right choice. All right, that brings us to article six by law amendment, Community Preservation Act Committee member term limits, Mr. Chaplin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So this idea was brought to the attention of both myself and town council by the current leadership of the Community Preservation Act Committee sometimes toward the end of last calendar year with the reality that a good portion of the four publicly appointed members are starting to move towards the end of their term limits. And concern being that that committee has built up good institutional knowledge skill and ability to manage both the funds in the process and oversee the projects that the Community Preservation Act has done so well to fund and oversee over the past couple of years. So I thought in discussion with the leadership of the community, again, of the CPA Committee and with town council that this still is an outlier in our LinkedIn's boards committees and commissions. I might be wrong and town council can correct me. I'm not sure if there's any bylaw term limits. I know the council on aging imposed term limits upon themselves to enforce turnover, but I think it's the only bylaw required term limits are for the CPA. So the form of this change, I am certainly subject to the board's feedback, excuse me, to the board's feedback and input, but I do think it's worthy to consider either extending or eliminating these term limits so that we can maintain the institutional knowledge and the good folks that have given a lot of time over the years to this committee. Yep, that's done. I'm happy to support it. I guess I'll move approval and I don't think I have any other comments. All right, thank you. Ms. Mohan. I would second Mr. Dunn's motion and this is in binding perpetuity if for some reason here's down the road a future select board and or the town manager whether he or she wanted to make some sort of change to this they could. So, but I definitely want to second Mr. Dunn's motion. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Mayans. Yes, thank you. Man, this is all, I have to consider this in the context of some other activities that I'm involved in in the region, you know, and so I just have some questions that may help me to kind of gauge things overall. So, for this is the first time that these public members are going to be term limited means this is the first batch or cohort that are reaching the term limits. I believe so. Yeah, I think that's accurate just based on the still relative newness of the existence of the committee where we're just coming up on this for the first time. Right, right, right, right. So do we have the sense that there is no one wanting to fill these positions should they be limited out? No, I don't have that sense. I mean, there's a vacancy right now that we're posting for. I don't believe, I may have seen application, I don't believe I've seen any applications but I don't want that to color that question, but no, I think we always across all boards, committees and commissions are always really fortunate with the people that apply. There's a lot of folks in town who step up to serve in so many different capacities. Gotcha. So I would say I certainly don't bring this forward as any suggestion that there aren't good people who can serve. Gotcha. I bring it forward as a suggestion that good people who want to serve don't necessarily need to be asked to leave. Yeah, yeah, I hear you, I hear you. And so is there, so let's say you did have to bring in new members to determine whether or not has there been any development of an onboarding process for potential new members? I would have to defer that in the leadership of the committee. All right, fine, fine. And one thing that TAC does, and I'm not sure, I don't think TAC has term limits, but what we do have is we have like non-voting members, which I think is kind of good because these are people who are interested and they get to participate in the meetings, they have a seat at the table. And of course everyone in town has a seat at the table but they get to ask questions before the other people. And I think it's a good way for people who are interested to get up to speed, so that when a vacancy occurs, then they're essentially at the top of the queue should they choose to apply because they have the experience. So it's just something that I think maybe we could consider. I mean, I think this is gonna go through. I mean, I'm gonna support it, but I'm just asking some questions because it's helping me process some other decisions that I'm gonna have to make. So let's see. Oh, so what might be the alternative to voting someone off? Are you asking about the removal procedure that's been done? Yeah, yeah. So I've, I know I talked to at least one board member about that today. I'm not wedded to that. That was put forth as a potential compromise for not, you know, in lieu of term limits having there be a removal procedure, it would be the first removal procedure for any committee. There isn't anything codified right now. Right. For removal of folks from boards committees or commissions. Yeah. I think I would defer to council if he's given any thought to, if that did, if that was included in any recommended vote, how we might actually envision that. Yeah, I think it's something to ponder which is me sometimes you get the members who are, they just be by their nature obstructionist. You know, it's kind of nice to have me away, you know, to cleanse the, well, just deal with it. And so another potential solution to this would be to expand the limit of the term. I know that would require a change to the bylaw for that committee, but was there any thought about that? Frankly, we did not discuss that. Okay. All right. That's all. So thanks for entertaining those questions. I appreciate it. Is there a question? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yeah, I support the motion. I actually have a couple of comments. I can remember this vote at town meeting that this language was added by substitute motion. And I think there was a concern at the time we were just enacting the Community Preservation Act and there was uncertainty as to how the funds were going to be allocated and what the reporting was going to be like over time, both to the select board, the finance committee and the town meeting. And I think what we've seen is it's been a very successful program. It's been a program that has been open and transparent and it has been very effective. So I support this. I'm not crazy about this type of putting a term limit, particularly where we don't have it for any other committee in town. The other thing, and I'm gonna offer this as a motion, the town manager said that this was a compromise about the removal. That removal language actually concerns me because someone gets appointed for three years and they're worried about, okay, have I voted a certain way that I may somehow antagonize the appointing authority and be removed by a majority? I think you make your appointment, you live with it for three years and if it doesn't work out then you reconsider after three years. Bear in mind this is only four members out of nine. It's not a majority of the CPA committee. The other five members that have their own appointing authorities have no term limits. So I just think I support what the manager wants to do here and I'd like to offer as amendment taking out the compromise language so that it would read as is about what the removal of the term limit. Mr. Dunn, do you wanna amend your motion? Sure. Okay. Mr. Mahan, did I go to you already? Yep. Yes, you did, thank you. All right. And I'll also support this. I think there's been some discussion about term limits in general in our committees in town. And I think a lot of our committees operate well with the institutional knowledge of the members that have been there for a long, long time. And this committee is relatively new. I think we have a lot of committee committees that have had members that have served on that specific committee for much longer than the six years that this has been in existence. And I think that compared in conjunction with fresh ideas from new committee members creates really great work out of these committees. And I would just say, our select board agendas are packed week after week, not specifically with CPA reappointments, but with reappointments. So there are certainly turnover in town boards and opportunities for residents to get involved. But so I think, so I will vote in approval of this article. With that, this is a public meeting. Mr. Sherman, I know one thing before you open it for the, Yes. Thank you. I'm sorry, it's hard on Zoom to figure out when to interject something. Sure. I just want to note for folks just so this is a general understanding, it's not that it's not possible to remove somebody from a committee or a commission. It's that we don't have any other provision that allows for doing that without cause. So you'd be building into the bylaw. That being said, I well understand that the amended motion is to remove this specific piece of it. I just wanted to clarify mostly for the public that just because somebody's on a committee, they can't be a holy terror for three years and do whatever they want. There are ways that people can be removed from committees. This is basically a mechanism to move somebody without cause. So I just wanted to clarify that. Thank you. Thank you. And with that, we have one public commentator, the chair of our CPA C committee, Mr. Helmuth. You know a few. And Mr. Helmuth, just say your name for the record. Hi, I'm Eric Helmuth. I'm a resident of precinct 12 and I'm the chair of the Community Preservation Act Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I just want to preface by saying that my views that I'm about to state are my own and my own only. They do not represent the CPA committee. We've not taken a vote on this matter. And further, they do not reflect my views on the tenure of any current member of the committee, including myself. So as Mr. DeCorsi correctly noted, this limit was instituted on the floor of town meeting. And I think that it was some reasonable caution for a brand new body, for a brand new program. We didn't really know how CPA was going to work. We didn't really know what the priority funding priorities were going to be. And, you know, I think that that was something that Tom and he felt obviously felt comfortable doing. Six years later or nearly six years later, now we know, you know, that we have a good sense. And, you know, I know I'm selfish, isn't interested in saying this, but the committee has funded projects as equitably as we can across the whole town and across the areas of CPA. We've collaborated closely with the capital budget and done that partnership as best we can. We've received unanimous votes of support from the finance committee, select board and capital planning committee every year of our funding and very strong votes from town meeting. So I think there's a lot of confidence now. And in my personal view, I think that we, I don't see as much cause for being that outlier, being the only committee that has a limit on how long you can serve continuously. And I think the reason that this can be an issue is the same reason for any other community that deals with complex tasks. The CPA law is a strange animal. It has unusual requirements and restrictions and it's a constant bit of work to really figure out what we can and can't fund and explain that to folks. And it takes at least a term, at least a year and sometimes two to really come up to speed. I think to Mr. Diggins really good point about onboarding. Yeah, but we do it. But it's one of those things that you just have to learn by going through a cycle or two because there are so many different things that can come up. So I think that it would be helpful. It's helpful to have institutional memory for multi-year projects that you funded before. It helps you just understand kind of where you wanna go. I think it has been pointed out there is natural turnover nevertheless. We have a vacancy now. I think that we've had at least three members who were appointed in the five or six years who are no longer serving. So there had been plenty of opportunity for fresh blood and that has been welcome and wonderful. There's also turnover in the five statutory representatives from home commissions as well. So I think we do have a shake up in a good way. And finally, I wanna express appreciation for Mr. Diggins' good point that I hadn't fully considered. And that is the independence of any committee member to do their work without undue fear of being removed without cause. And I think that the select board has a good vetting process and the town manager for appointing members. I've been pleased to be invited to participate in that project process for new members. And I think the due diligence happens upfront like it does in the other committee and is effective. And I think that I can say as chair of this body for a number of years that the select board is a good partner in consulting with us and giving us advice, but they have never told us what to do. And that's really important in a position of public trust. So I think that making us the same as other committees would preserve that independence in a good way. So thank you for your consideration. Thank you, Mr. Helmuth. Here we have Beth Miloftchak. Ms. Miloftchak, if you can just say a name for the record. Beth Miloftchak, Russell Street. Thank you for this opportunity to speak. I would like to see an audit of all of the projects that have been funded to date before a consideration was made of changing the rules by which town meeting approved this committee. Mr. Helmuth very kindly told us his perspective on that. But I think for the public, it would be nice to actually see the numbers and see how the funds are dispersed among the funding priorities as regulated by Community Preservation Act law. I also think this committee could benefit from some diversity of worldview and opinion. And I'm just wondering if our Director of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion had been consulted on this decision going forward. As we know, in 2019, there was a hard won award for Whittemore Park, approximately half a million dollars. And town meeting was misled by a statement of Mr. Helmuth invoking Town Manager regarding a project that's underway now. And so I find it disingenuous to consider this suggested change and would certainly like more information on to the work of the committee. And in my remarks there, thank you. John, you're muted. Thank you, Ms. Mlodczyk. And do we have any additional comments from the board? Yes. Mr. Dunn. I would just like to firmly refute Ms. Mlodczyk's repeated misstatement of past events. And thankfully these are all recorded and her version of the truth does not stand up. Thank you, Mr. Dunn. So, Attorney Hyatt, Mr. D'Corsi. Yeah, just on that point, Mr. Truman, and Mr. Dunn's right on the Whittemore Park discussion, we did that, that issue came up at that hearing and there was a change of circumstances as to the removal of trees. But I would invite people and we can perhaps get the date of the hearing that came up, we discussed it. The circumstances were discussed, we weren't misled. Thank you. And with that, Attorney Hyatt, we have a motion to approve. Mrs. Mohan. Yes, thank you. Mr. D'Corsi. Yes. Mr. Diggins. Yes. Mr. Dunn. Yes. Mr. Hurd. Yes. Mr. D'Anne, Ms. Boat. Yeah. And that brings us to Article 15, By-law Amendment Domestic Partnerships. And Mr. Chapter Lane, do we know who is presenting on this article? If I could confirm with Attorney Hyatt, is Attorney Cunningham taking the lead or are we promoting Guillermo Hamlin? Well, I believe Mr. Hamlin is the original proponent of the article who proposed this to the Rainbow Commission. To my understanding, he's prepared to speak on it. Mr. Cunningham, WTown Council Cunningham, worked extensively with the Rainbow Commission and Mr. Hamlin on the preparation of this article and the research that went into the memo. All right, and we can promote Mr. Hamlin. Mr. Hamlin, if you could just say anything for the record, then just talk about the article. Hello, my name is Guillermo Hamlin. I am a Precinct 14 town meeting member. And as Doug Hyme said, I'm the initial petitioner for the Domestic Partnership article. Some background, as a result of joining town meeting, I wanted to see what I can contribute to the town bylaw that was unique and in my opinion, needed to provide some material good to the residents of Arlington. As a result, I was studying the most recent efforts from the city of Cambridge, Boston and the city of Summerville regarding domestic partnerships. I'd learned in the history of the town of Arlington that there has never been a domestic partnership article on the books. After consultation and some outreach to the town council, both Doug Hyme and later down the way, Michael Cunningham, we've begun doing the work to draft the language of a standard domestic partnership bylaw amendment. Along the way, after researching more about the domestic partnership aspect, in particular, the differences between a city ordinance and a town article, the enforcement from the municipal law enforcement unit, as opposed to just cities being able to just issue an ordinance and lead accordingly. It made me appreciate reaching out to the town council and not really rushing this out as much as I may have wanted to. We took the time to really see other towns such as Provincetown to really get some inspiration on this article language. So I decided to get the 10 signatures, but prior to submitting it to the town clerk and select board, we presented it to the rainbow commission. And after a brief presentation with the assistance of town council, they decided to adopt it. And the reason being, I believe, is that it is a human rights issue. It is something that can be materially beneficial to those who are in committed relationships, but for whatever reason are not choosing marriage. One unique aspect about this domestic partnership bylaw is that closer to the submission, the question began to rise, what to do about reciprocity. I'm in no position to lead on what the town or you the select board can vote in terms of moving this forward, because the language as it stands now is for those of two consenting adults. In the city of Somerville, they have waived that need. I believe that they made it two or more and made it an enterprise of consenting adults. Working with Michael Cunningham and Doug Hyme, I asked if whether or not this could be viable or whether it was the case that it is within the scope of the domestic partnership bylaw. Michael Cunningham was very kind and helpful to look it over and was able to provide some additives in language that could potentially effectuate it, but we decided to proceed with the standard domestic partnership bylaw tonight for your approval and review and submission, because we believe that in terms of its precedent, it holds up. It holds up prior to any gay marriage ruling. It's been in the state for some time. I can refer to the town council on the specifics, but in terms of precedent, we have plenty to work with here. The only area that I seek guidance is whether or not to allow for language that can affirm, protect, and anticipate any reciprocal needs from, say, residents of Somerville who intend to move to the town of Arlington and then may find their domestic partnership to be dissolved automatically just by moving. I asked that the select board consider the language that was submitted to consider how to define the parameters. I'm not necessarily asking the select board to decide that tonight, but if possible, maybe ask, offer some advice on ways that we could offer to town meeting. So specifically, I'm asking for a vote to proceed with the domestic partnership bylaw with some guidance on whether or not we should anticipate two or more domestic partners in anticipation of reciprocal needs from abutting cities, in particular, the city of Somerville. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Hamlin. Mr. Diggins. Well, as a member of the, as it leads on from the select board to the rainbow commission, I was happy to see Mr. Guillermo present on this. I could say so much, but I don't want to, I don't want to get impassioned about this because I really want the board to vote in the way that it feels its best. And sometimes I can get a little animated and just, I don't want to push it. I just, I'm going to pass for now and then let other people speak. I may come back to it, but I'm clearly in favor of this. And I understand Mr. Guillermo's concerns about the speed at which we move on with this. He brings up a very good point regarding being reciprocity. And so I've always been more of an incrementalist. And so I think if we just do the domestic partnerships it'd be a big step forward. But if we think we can go further, I think it'd be a very good thing. Thank you. Mr. Hamlin. Excuse me. Oh, I need to take a sip of water for a minute. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Could you just have a few, I guess, legal questions either to the chair or through the chair, to town council, council or deputy town council, only because I'm just, I can go toe to toe with you on medical malpractice stuff. But in terms of domestic partnerships and mass state law, I am really lacking in that. So could I get sort of a brief explanation of what is allowed by mass state law regarding domestic partnerships? And my question is, is it mass state law outlined something that is municipality, city or town can avail themself as an opportunity to enforce this law or are they rights that mass state law outlines are guaranteed to every municipality and citizens in those cities and towns? If I've asked the question. A problem. Turn you high or turn you coming in? Mr. Chair, I'm going to turn it over to Mr. Cunningham. Yep. Thank you, Ms. Mahan. There is no statute at the state level on this issue, but we know that other cities and towns have domestic partnership bylaws and they've been on the books for some time. You have communities like Boston, Cambridge, Brookline, Nantucket, Provincetown, Truro, all have the domestic partnership bylaws that have passed through the Attorney General's office and those have been active for some time. So I think in terms of legal ground, if Arlington were to enact a domestic partnership bylaw that would involve two persons, I think that's on firm legal ground. The question raised by Mr. Hamlin is, and I think is a good one, is whether more than two persons for a domestic partnership would stand up to scrutiny at the Attorney General level, and that is less certain. That has not reached the conclusion there is no judicial or statutory guidance for us at this point on that issue. And I guess through the chair as a follow up to that is some of the language that I've seen is that Moron Article 15 that asks for recognition of domestic partnerships as allowed by the Commonwealth of Mass. And that's where the crux of my question is, where it says as allowed by the Commonwealth of Mass, what does that mean? Is there something that's already afforded to everybody? Or is there something through the Commonwealth of Massachusetts that if you choose to adopt this, it's gonna pass the test of the Attorney General or? So, Mike, before you chime in, I've added on the chat a link to the state site regarding a compilation of laws, cases, web sources on the legal issues affecting unmarried couples, whether it's for the purposes of that. And I don't know the legal case, but I do know that the state site sites the city of Somerville's ordinance granting polyamorous groups certain rights. So I can't speak to the legality or the Attorney General. All I know is that they seem to display it on the site as something that's notable. But again, I can't speak to anything beyond that into which case I defer to Town Council for the rest. Attorney Cunningham. And Ms. Mahan, I guess, thank you, Ms. Thank you, Chair. I'd say on the issue with the state's approval, that's what we're looking at the presidential value of other communities that have gone through this process. And the fact that they've gone through it, it's been subject to Attorney General scrutiny and that it's been permitted gives us the guidance we need to be comfortable with an assurance that it will be permitted by the state. That we have no such assurance for domestic partnerships of more than two persons at this time. But that's okay. That, thank you, that clears it up for me. First, I'd like to move approval of the proposed warrant article in terms of, and I don't mean to say this in a negative way. I take the same stance when I've had conversation about Allington's MBTA assessment, which is ridiculously unfair. We pay 200,000, Quincy pays 800,000. And myself and my colleagues have been working on that to change it. And people have said to me, well, you know, Quincy only pays 800,000 and you're gonna hurt Quincy if you push this because then they'll have to pay their fair share. And what I've always said is, well, I'm not here working for the city of Quincy. I'm here for the town of Allington. So in terms of if people move here from Somerville, and under their ordinances, because they don't have bylaws, because they're a city and we have bylaws because we're a town, we'll cross that bridge when we get to it. My thing is, I'd like to, in moving approval on this, and I'm certainly be guided by my colleagues, is I'd like to start taking the steps that we're going down the road. And as we get further on down the road, if we do have to, and I don't mean that sarcastically at all. I'm just trying to, you know, little fish and a medium sized spy pond. So I'd like to move approval just under what Mr. Hamlin, attorney Cunningham and attorney Heim had bought one. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Dunn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll second Mrs. Mahan's motion. I just have a couple of thoughts to add. One is that I have more than a passing knowledge of Quebec family law, having recently been married in Quebec. And one of the things that's kind of, that came out of my understanding of that is the domestic partnership law in Quebec is actually has ended up, like they passed it before marriage was legal so that they could extend rights to people who weren't, it wasn't available to. But that set of law is actually languished and it's actually behind at this point. It's like not, it's not a desirable thing to enter into in general because of some anachronisms. And I say anachronism relating back to like 2011 or something like that. Is it 2011? No, sorry, 2001, sorry. And so I guess there's a little bit of a risk here I think that we're gonna create something that we're gonna look at in a few years and be like, wow, we created something that's actually a little bit stuck. But the good news is it's not permanent we'll be able to improve it if we do that. The second thought is that I actually, I am a strong supporter of non-traditional families. I think that people want to build families that don't follow what has been the traditional and I'm gonna use the word heteronormative man and woman relationship. And I'm comfortable with their being more. And so if there is appetite on the board I would be delighted to join a move to make this available to three people. But that said, I'm not, I'm also happy to support it as written more narrowly. But if we can count to three on the three, I'm there. This is of course the. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yeah, I'll support Mrs. Mahan's motion and I think to Mr. Dunn's earlier points, I this draft or proposed bylaw, I would imagine most of the domestic partnership bylaws that you saw across the state were enacted prior to 2003 prior to the Goodridge decision. I think so, what you were mentioning, Mr. Dunn in Quebec, this was probably pre 2003 language that we had in a number of the different communities. So I don't know if there's any other language that with the passage of time should be changed. But I think for tonight's purposes, I support what's presented to us and what Mrs. Mahan moved. All right, thank you. Mr. Diggins, any additional thoughts come to fruition? Well, I mean, I certainly have the appetite to three because I kind of hit it at this in the first meeting with my first time on the board after the election, me and the sad. It was actually in Somerville that I lived in a relationship meet and it was with a married couple. And my link to Arlington actually was that the graduate student who came to the lab, he and his wife actually lived on Park Ave. So my first time coming to Somerville was to come to their place. I mean, it was just such a wonderful, wonderful relationship. And interestingly, I often say that Arlington has always welcomed me. He would stop at Villalago meet and get some fresh pasta and then swing by Dagestanos, I mean, and pick up some food and then head to the Park Street and this was back in the late 80s. And there was just no problems with anyone in Arlington at any time. And so I see the value in allowing for me different kinds of family structures. But at the same time, I don't want to make this too much for town beating to swallow because I think it really would be good for us to get to domestic partnerships. I think partly domestic partnerships have maybe language because of gay marriage, but there are lots of reasons for why people don't necessarily want to get married and they want to have the protections that you get from domestic partnership. If nothing else, I mean, to have the ability to take care of kids in an equal way and visitation rights for when a hospitalization is a factor, I mean. And so by inclination would be to, I guess I prefer to send up something small to town meeting and have them amended into something larger than to have them recoil made as something huge. But as Mr. Dunn said, if we get to three on here, I mean, I'll be the second one. If we get to three, they'll be great, but there will be no offense at all to anyone if we stay at two meeting. And so that's it. Thank you. Yeah, and I'll thank you, Mr. Hamlin for bringing this to our attention and putting together the article with the Rainbow Co-commission. I'll support Ms. Mon's motion as well. I think this is an important step and I'm certainly open to further discussions or if any board members wanted to open those discussions, happy to do so as well, but as moved, I'll certainly support that motion. Do you have any additional comments from the board? With that, we have a motion to approve by Mrs. Mohan, turn your hand. Oh, sorry, this is a public hearing. If any members of the public would like to speak, use the raise hand function on your Zoom application now. Going once, going twice. We have one, we have a few raised hands here. Mr. Rubinson, Mr. Rubinson, if you could say a name for the record. Hi, yes, this is Annie Rubinson, Tender Street in the Heights. I am the co-chair of the Rainbow Commission. I just wanted to mention that when you talk about passing things incrementally, I think back to the Equality Act, which recently passed through the House and this idea that, okay, we're going to not discriminate against gay and lesbians, but we're gonna hold back on transgender because giving transgender people rights is more than people can handle. And it created quite a stir when it happened because people were left feeling left behind. So I just want the support to consider the fact by saying, okay, well, we'll go with the two versus three or more to Len's point. If they're caregivers and this impacts people's relationships and I know things feel safer, maybe, but I just want to consider that when you're leaving people out and making them other, then it may not have the impact that you are searching for in making Arlington a welcoming town. Thank you. We have Laura Kiesel, right? Ms. Kiesel, if you can just say your name for the record. Yeah, my name is Laura Kiesel. I support this measure. I agree also with what Andy Rubinson just said as well. I wanted to point out that marriage equality is still something that is not available to many disabled people because of health insurance reasons, Medicaid and medical divorce is very much a reality and it's become more of a reality due to COVID-19. I also have a potential question because I know the Somerville Domestic Partnership rule in addition to allowing two or more, the other new language that it had that was kind of innovative was that you didn't necessarily have to live with that partner to have a domestic partnership. And I think that that was introduced in part because the COVID-19 pandemic, people were having problems getting like clearance to see or spend time at other people's homes that were their partners because they didn't technically share a residence. So I would be wondering if that language is in this as well to consider people who may not live together as domestic partners because if not, I would support that to also be considered especially again, given the pandemic and allowing people access to their chosen family. Thank you. Tony Cunningham, do you have any response or Mr. Hammond? Yes, Mr. Chair. I'd say the language in the proposed bylaw in front of the board does require a cohabitation that the domestic partners reside together that would as Ms. Kiesel points out that is another distinguishing element from what Somerville has done. But again, that would be something that's not consistent with other cities and towns that have done domestic partnership bylaws. I don't know, it may be something that the Attorney General would approve. It may not be. It's just, we don't have any guidance on that issue at this time. Thank you. And I was, I back on what my Cunningham said. This measure as it's written does not allow for that. I would say if it's something anyone's interested in to please add any friendly amendments based on the approval tonight. All right. And that is all the public commentators. Do we have any additional comments, questions from the board? With that, Attorney Chaim, we have a motion to approve. Mrs. Maughan. Yes. Mr. DeCoursey. Yes. Mr. Diggins. Yes. Mr. Dunn. Yes. Mr. Hurd. Yes. It's unanimous vote. Thank you. And thank you, Mr. Hamlin. That brings us to article 18, vote appropriation school committee member, stipends with Krista Kelleher. Name is Kelleher. If you can just say your name for the record, tell us a little bit about the article. Sure. Again. Again, this is Krista Kelleher and I am at 153 Medford Street, precinct five. Thank you so much for your consideration of this article and for your support of it last year, when it was first filed. Just for a bit of background in my professional work, I conduct applied research to ensure equity in electoral leadership at all levels of government. Promoting gender and racial equity in public leadership requires the removal of institutional barriers to both seeking and serving an office. When I filed this article for consideration last year and collaborated with Jennifer Seuss on it, I wanted to ensure that first, all of Arlington's public servants are valued and that the concept of equity is implemented through town policies and practices. And then second, access to key leadership positions for all those interested is strengthened. So I'm gonna offer a really brief rationale for why even a minimal stipend offered to school committee members makes for good policy. School committee members deserve value and respect for the key leadership role they step into once elected. They provide a vital public service and during both pandemic and non-pandemic times, they take on a range of responsibilities such as the school budget. Historically, school committees have had more women serving on them relative to local governing bodies such as city councils and select boards, bodies that are frankly more likely to offer stipends. We also know that according to data being collected by the Massachusetts Association of School Committees, cities are far more likely than towns to provide compensation for these decision makers. Here in Arlington, service on the select board, as you know, offers a $3,000 stipend for each member with 3,500 as chair for chair. Several other elected public service positions are afforded compensation such as the three member board of assessors that offers 4,900 to those serving on it. And other appointed positions come with compensation such as the retirement board at 4,500 per member. Arlington should lead on this issue and acknowledge that the existing disparity between its two main policy-making bodies, the select board and the school committee, that needs to be remedied. So this disparity needs to be remedied. This is a matter of equity. Finally, opportunities to serve should be open to all, including those for whom even a relatively small stipend may be important. Individuals with limited incomes or non-traditional work hours, single parents, persons caring for special needs children, young children or elders, it may make a difference to have a stipend as they consider running for office. A stipend might also make it more likely that individuals with perspectives currently underrepresented, such as persons of color and new Americans will step up to run and bring to the table important voices and experiences. So while I know it's minimal by most measures, a $3,000 stipend might help cover child care costs associated with meeting participation or balance out paid work time due to school committee obligations. Just so you know, there's really limited data on school committee compensation in other Massachusetts communities because the mass association of school committees tries to collect data, but it's self-reported and so it's voluntary. So it's hard to confirm stipend averages or even the actual number of towns that offer stipends. We do know that for town manager 12 communities, three of them offer stipends and nine do not. The background memo submitted by Jennifer Seuss and me provides some more data points and more information. So I recognize that a feasible funding source needs to be identified, but offering stipends will remedy a long-standing inequity. As a community that values an inclusive welcoming town governance system and engage civic leaders, we need to take many steps to realize, respect equity and access for all. Affording some level of compensation to school committee members is one of these steps. Thank you so much for considering this article yet again. Thank you. All right, Mr. Corsi. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, I'll move approval. And I want to thank Ms. Keller for the presentation. It was, you convinced me a year ago and I'm convinced again, I know how hard the school committee members work. Just one question I have for Attorney Heim, where this does require an appropriation, whose recommendation would be before town meeting on this article? Mr. Heim. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So I understand that it's a little bit of a funky article was last year, remains this year. The law requires a simple vote to set what the level of compensation is. It's not actually an appropriation article. Obviously, if you're going to approve it and set it for this coming fiscal year, there needs to be some money to back it up. But the main motion here is the select boards, some sort of budgetary article to figure out how it's going to be funded would have to be either figured out later or in some sort of adjustment to the appropriate budget. Okay, thank you very much. Thank you. Mr. Dunn. I'm definitely very happy to support it. And I do think that it was appropriate that like the school committee, for the finance committee went back in the day. I remember we actually took, we gave ourselves a pay cut during one of the budget crunches. We went from $100 per member down to $50 per member because we were trying to figure out our way to contribute. And I think that that is one of the things that makes it really politically difficult for the school committees, because they have these very difficult decisions where parents stand in front of them and say, hey, you're cutting this teacher's aid or that it's so important to me. And the list of things that the school committee has to cut is, it's a hard list that they choose from. And giving up their own stipend is one of the things that goes. And so all that said, I understand why it hasn't been true, but at the same time, I absolutely support them getting some sort of stipend. And I'll also say that for me, like the select board stipend was often, I get a lot of, you show up at enough meetings and people start hitting you up as a fundraising source. And I said, and I've often treated this stipend as my fundraiser, my Arlington fundraiser kitty. So I guess, I'm probably more words than were necessary, but I'm happy to support it. Thank you. And Mr. Niggans? Yes, I'm very happy to support it too, but I do have some questions. First, Kristen, can you give me a sense of how many hours a person on the school committee works? I mean, I know they have the school committee main meetings when they have these subcommittee meetings also, right? So approximately how many hours a month do you think? I think it really, thanks for the question, selectman Niggans, I think it really depends on what cycle, what part of the year you're in, what year it might be, contract negotiations, what subcommittees you serve on. We were, I was thinking of doing a survey of former school committee members and maybe even present ones to figure that out, but I don't, I do know that we have a former select school committee person here to talk a little bit about hours put in, but I think it varies very much. I ask because my sense is that they put in more hours than we do on the select board, so that's what I was driving at Ms. Keller-Hur. And the second question is, I saw that you had provided me some, I think Jennifer Ms. Seuss has provided the data on various school committees being in the payment for them, there's quite a few. And I was wondering, do you have a sense of the ethnic makeup of these committees? And kind of a corollary to that question is, do we have a sense of maybe how it's stipend me correlate with increased ethnic diversity in committees? Selectman Niggans, it's an excellent question. I don't think, I think there's limited data, but I do know that there are folks collecting data on this in the state. So... I'd love to see that. If you have time to look forward, that'd be great. If you don't, let me know and I'll poke around for it because I'm just got intrigued by the question. And... It's an important question. Yeah. And so a part of me, and I'll say this, Mr. Dunn's comment about the school committee and having to try to keep stipend me when you're doing cuts into things in the school. I think the solution to that would be to have it not come from the school committee budget. So the town could put that money up and look at me. I don't have any kids, but I love kids. I think kids, by definition, are our future. I mean, and every time I hear people being complaining about what we'll do, we'll bring in families with more kids than we have to educate them. For me, that's a good problem to have. I mean, I'd love to see me, Arlington, me cherish that opportunity because those kids are gonna be the ones that are gonna get us out of the climate crisis and all other kinds of crises that we've gotten ourselves into and maybe they'll help design websites. I mean, that can help people register for vaccines. I mean, when other websites aren't working. So I'd like to see us do what we can to educate them well, and that includes having, that part of it means having a good school committee. So I'm gonna do the incremental thing again, be to say, this is a good start. But I'd like to see, get more, and part of it's like, let's start with the 3,000 now, and then maybe next year, we can put in another article where we can maybe step that up over five years so that we get you to 6,000 even if the second board stays the same because I really think the school committee people deserve more, and on top of that, once we get to that point, then index it because as you know, I mean, 10 years out, if you still have 300 or whatever, that's gonna be half of what it is when you started. So that's it, thank you very much. Thank you so much. Mrs. Mahan. I get to follow Mr. Diggins. First off, Mr. Diggins, I would challenge any elected official on any board commission housing authority assessors to put in 50% of the amount of time that I put in. So I don't agree with Mr. Diggins that my colleagues on the school committee put in far more hours, I'll speak for myself. And I think anybody who has lived and breathed in Allington knows how many hours I put in. So I'm gonna have to totally disagree on that. That's not taking away from my colleagues on the school committee that perform the job that they do. So I'll leave it there. So I'm in favor of who made the motion, Mr. DeCorsi's motion seconded by Mr. Dunn. I think it should come from the school budget. I understand the argument, oh, well, parents are gonna come in and say I wanted a teacher's aid. Speaking from personal experience, my youngest, who's well beyond the age of 22 now, but was severely disabled and had severe special needs, was denied. My husband and I paid a little over $100,000 of teachers, equipment, her Nova Chat board that could speak for her that was denied by the schools. And I used to think, well, it's because I'm so politically active. And I have been pointing out over the years, the school budget, how they always say, I've had two different times where there was seven figures difference of what they said they didn't have it and they really did have. So I think, if you say the audience is gonna be, oh, well, they're gonna come in and say, it's out of the school budget. They're gonna come in and say, don't do that teacher's aid. Guess what? I couldn't get services that were vital to my youngest that affected her life now as an adult that she should have had. That's not a problem. So I'm really kind of hot button on that because taking a positive out of my experience, other severely disabled children who go through the Allington public school system who can't get the services and who are forced to hire advocates and still don't get the services under state law that they should get. And it's either if you're lucky enough like my husband and I that we end up paying, you know, 50,000 for this piece of equipment, 35,000 for a teacher from the cutting to augment the ridiculous lab that Allington offers for severely disabled kids. So I feel very passionate about that. You kind of hit two buttons with me in terms of myself personally, how many hours I put in. When I ran for the select board, I didn't even know you got money. I assumed it was like school committee, you did it. And I do the same thing similar to Mr. Dunn. I, you know, under the law, I can use my campaign funds to maybe, you know, give money for a raffle, buy a table of 10 to help, you know, I'm gonna say a club that doesn't exist, the Zoom Club of Allington. I don't do that. I use my select board to do that. And people are having a problem with that. So I'm certainly in favor of the school committee being compensated. I don't think it should be from the townside budget, especially looking at what we're looking at in terms of 2023 fiscal year, 23 and how much we're running from there. But also, and I, you know, once they get that, I would not be in favor of hiking them up to 6,000 a year or two after that. But who knows, I may not be on the board. Then I may only be able to express my opinion as a town meeting member. So I apologize, but you really pushed a couple of buttons for me there, dude. And I had to say something. So I am in favor of this 3,000 and town meeting will determine it with finance committee and whoever else recommendation. I would say from the school budget. And I don't mean I won't apologize to Ms. Kelleher and Ms. Seuss and anyone who I know spent a lot of time working on this. I don't mean any of my remarks in untoward way or negative way in terms, because I think my colleagues on the school committee should be at least receiving as much as we are on the select board. And thank you so much. Thank you. And I'm also happy to support this. I was happy to support it a year ago. I'm a little nostalgic as I sit here reviewing this article, because if it wasn't the last article we heard, it was very close to the last article we heard in the chamber. But I think it's very well thought out and definitely well deserved. We could go back and forth all day about time commitments, but it's definitely, whatever it is, it is a significant time commitment. And I think they should be compensated for that time in the same way that we are. With that, it is a public hearing. If any members of the public would like to speak to this, please use the raise hand function on your Zoom application now. Mr. Chair, may I say something while you're gathering those? Yes. Two quick items that I just wanted to make sure that I sharpen my pencil on. One, Mr. DeCorsi's original question about whose motion it is. I will note that the finance committee did report on this article last year and I would recommend that they report on it again. And they did approve $3,000. So I think it would be helpful to have some motion language that's consistent from both the select board and the finance committee because it involves something with some overlap. I also just wanna note for folks that one of the things that is important to remember just for future reference is that as long as elected part-time employees make under $5,000, they're not eligible for the pension system and therefore not eligible for health insurance. So that's been one of the things that we've considered in what we said or stipends at in the past. So just as a, just as something to clarify, especially in case any members of the public were gonna comment on that school. Thank you. Thank you. And we have no public commentators. So with that, attorney nine. That was because of me. You scared them off. I did. Mrs. Mohan. Yes. Mr. DeCorsi. Yes. Mr. Diggins. I don't think it was you that scared them off. Yes. Mr. Dunn. Yes. Mr. Heard. Yes. I'm gonna take it as, you know, usually I'm just too long-winded. So, but I'm gonna take it as a victory this time. It's unanimous vote. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Bellhardt. Thank you so much. Clothes is our warrant medical hearing portion. New business, attorney nine. No new business. Ms. Jacqueline. Just one piece, Mr. Chair and to members of the board. I think as the board knows, we're no longer able to conduct first dose vaccination clinics in Arlington based on limited supply of vaccines at the state level. We are however, starting this week to provide a limited number of doses to senior housing in coordination with the Arlington Housing Authority. We're also part of an application that has been sent in to the state to participate in a larger regional collaborative. That would be led by the Cambridge Health Alliance as the overseeing entity located primarily at Tufts University, which would of course be pretty proximal to Arlington. And then we'd be partnering with communities, Cambridge, Somerville, Everett, Revere, Winthrop, Medford and Maldon and of course Arlington as well. So we're awaiting to hear back from the state as to whether or not they would approve that entity, but we basically we're doing everything we can to try to bring vaccination closer to Arlington. Based on what we've witnessed, which is there are still a significant number of people who live in Arlington. And now this is happening in every community that can't get to Fenway Park, that can't get to Gillette and really need this to be closer to home, either getting there themselves or potentially getting there with our help to the council and agent. So I just wanted to let the board know that that effort is underway and if we are successful in getting it approved, I'll let you know right away. That's all I have, thank you. You, I should dig in. Oops, sorry. So the only thing I have to remind people of is that the town survey has been extended till the eighth, on Monday. So if you didn't take it, you still have a chance to take it and we really ask that you take it. The more people that take it, the more we have a good sense of what's going on in town. It's a good survey this year. Thank you. Yeah. Mrs. Mahan. Now, thank you, Mr. Chair. If I could just follow up with the town manager and I do call him Adam sometimes, but I just want people to know that there's no slight, but we're at the select board meeting. So he's the town manager. On your new business, I just wanted to ask, because I know I had sent you, actually I sent it to our health and human services, director Christine Bonjourno and I CCQ today from Statehouse News about the fact that the governor for whatever reason, I can't figure it out, stopped local boards of health that went out and spent money and got people in there and had clinics set up. Did an about face on that and said we're not going to provide that anymore. And then because of different boards of health and town managers and city managers got an audience with him, he did another about face and what Mr. Chapter Lane pointed out, said if you can guarantee that you're at a site that's delivering at least 750 doses, I think it's per day, it's either per day or per week. Is it per day or per week, Mr. Chapter? Per day, six days a week. Six days a week. And the article I had forwarded to Mr. Bonjourno said that the way I read it, and I don't know if Mr. Chapter Lane has seen it, if you have, if you can correct me or say if it's true, that there was a collaboration approved which included Maldon, Medford, Winthrop and Fluan and a few other cities and towns. I didn't see Cambridge, Allington or Summelville in there. And I was forwarding it to say, are we doing that? So my question is are we, the way I read the article out of Statehouse News, the Maldon, Medford, Winthrop, Everett, the Fluan and Salem and a few other communities, they had already been approved. Are we joining that? And they have already been approved or are we doing what the governor has suggested, which is coming up with a collaboration of our own with Allington, Balmont, Cambridge, the cities and towns you mentioned. I'm just confused, just like a lot of stuff with this vaccine. So if you could kind of clear that up. So we are attempting to do the latter. And I, you know, I did respond to your email today, but I also got a funny message back. So you may not have received it. Did you get my email back today? No, I'm guessing no. No, I haven't checked my email since like 12. Yeah, no, my email was funny today for an extreme problem. But that aside, no, what we're attempting to do the latter. So there was a group, you maybe are thinking of, it was a Melrose Wakefield Medford group that sort of like that Metro North Public Health Collaborative that had been in existence. I believe they're still being allowed to continue, but we're part of another group that Medford would also be a part of that it has applied. And we're waiting to hear back. Okay, that's, that's what was confusing me. So, and I just want to say, you know, I know it's, it's late, but not as late as we have been going in the past. So thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to applaud that the way that the town of Allington from the manager on down has really had to just keep, you know, coming up to the drawing board, coming up with plans. I don't want to say on the fly because these are, we have professionals that are working for us here in the town and basically play by the rules. And then all of a sudden, you know, especially around COVID-19, you know, PPE and PPP programs and now vaccinations. And then the rules change, you know, the drop of a dime two or three times. It's really frustrating. And I know our town manager, health and human services director all the way down council on aging, you know, even Allington rec and facilities in the high school and our school side are doing everything they can and will continue to do that. So I just wanted to make sure my remarks, I'm taken in a way that I'm dissatisfied with anything that the town's doing. Cause you've come up with like plan six or seven now to try to play by the rules outlined and then the circumstances change and instead of complaining and, you know, stamping your feet about it, you say, okay, rules have changed, we're going to try to set something else up. So thank you very much. And that was my whole new business was around the governor first saying, yes, board of boards of health, you're going to get it. No, you're not going to get it. Yes, you can get it, but you have to come up with this other way that you can deliver 750 day with a collaboration of all the cities and towns. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You, Mr. Corsi. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And you just did the library briefly on what Mrs. Mohan said. Thank you to the town manager and to Mrs. Bonjuono Health and Human Services and the whole team, because I know for a fact there are changes and unforeseen circumstances that come up all the time. And I'm aware of one that came up today and then she was, I've got right to it and has really been amazing. My doing business tonight, actually I'm going to move up the street to Huntington High School. And this winter has been a particularly tough or tough academic year even for all the students and student athletes. And I want to recognize two of the winter sports teams. They just finished their seasons and the Huntington High girls hockey team won their third Middlesex League title in a row. And special recognition because I've got two former basketball players in the house here. The Huntington High girls basketball team won their first ever Middlesex League title. So congratulations to both the girls hockey team and the girls basketball team. There'll be a couple of new banners at the high school for the seasons that they had under very trying circumstances. Thank you, Mr. Dunn. No business, thank you. Thank you. Mr. DeCorsi, you stole some of my new business which is just occupational hazard being chair, I guess. But I did want to thank to congratulate the girls hockey team and note that one of the stars of the team is our own Ms. Krupalka's granddaughter, Maddie. And then I also did want to acknowledge the boys hockey team who did win the Middlesex League but they had a really interesting year where they started off, they were young and they started off slow and they were winless for about half their season. And then they went on a tear at the end and had a chance to win the Middlesex League but just lost in over time and shoot out in overtime to get to the finals. But that was a great season for them as well. I've had a few inquiries about the civilian advisory board and the committee and its creations, current makeup and when the first meeting is gonna start. So we've had correspondence with the town manager. We're just waiting for a few last designees but the board office is gonna go ahead and schedule a meeting to get that going and whatever remaining designees that have to be appointed will just either be appointed by the first meeting or attended the first meeting. So for those who have been inquiring about it it is in process and the first meeting will be scheduled imminently. And then I just, we kind of, we skirted our new business in the last meeting because of the time but I just wanted to acknowledge the passing of Mr. Joe Daly who was a staple in town for anyone that's involved in politics Joe was always present. He passed away a few weeks ago and then a few days later his counterpart, his wife, the second half of the daily double also passed away. And it's huge loss for the town. Joe was a large presence in any room that he was in. So I just wanted to acknowledge that loss for the town and will miss Joe greatly. With that, I will entertain a motion to adjourn from. What's adjourned? Mr. Diggins, seconded by. Second. Mr. D'Corsi, attorney Heim. This is Mohan. Right before I say yes it looks like the school committee race in Lexington today was decided by one vote. Two candidates, one vote unofficial results but I got that from JJ Krasig out of Lexington. So every vote counts on everything. So yes, moved to adjourn. Mr. D'Corsi. Yes. Mr. Diggins. Yes. Mr. Dunn. Yes. Mr. Herb. Yes. Janis Vogue. You're welcome. So long guys. And everybody. Good meeting. Thanks.