 Good evening everybody and welcome to the January 12th meeting for the Ellington Board of Selectment. It's a little past 7.15, and I do call this meeting to order. Just a reminder that we are being filmed by ACMI, so smile widely while at the microphones. We'll jump right into it with, oh, I would actually first like to remind everyone if you're here for a citizens open forum. There is a sign-up sheet outside, so please sign up for that prior to us reaching that agenda item. To begin with an update from the Ellington Food Pantry, Christine Von June, our Director of Health and Human Services. Thank you very much. Thank you for the opportunity to talk about the food pantry tonight. So as you know, the Ellington Food Pantry is a division of the Department of Health and Human Services, which falls under my control. And over the past year, we've been seeking out an alternative site. As you know, the main food pantry is located within the basement of a church, which makes it difficult for people with mobility issues and people with access issues. We've also seen a dramatic increase in the number of residents needing assistance for food. So over the past year, we've been working with a coalition of churches in town to seek out a new space. And over the past year, we were lucky enough to partner with the Housing Corporation and the Coalition of Religious Organizations, and we've secured an alternative site. So we're currently temporarily housed within the former Broadway diner, which is at 117 Broadway. The Housing Corporation of Ellington, as you know, purchased that site, and we're using it until they demolish the building and build commercial and housing, a mixed-use site, which we will then move both of our permanent site, the 21 Marathon Street site as well as the temporary site into this new site at 117 Broadway. So we're really excited. With that comes so much work. We've got two sites to operate. We've got a lot of volunteers to manage. As you know, all of the operations have relied on both donations from the public as well as volunteers to provide the food to the residents. So there's so much work. There's even more work to go to come down the line over the next year. We're looking to hire a food pantry director. The goal for that position will be to eventually bring this bring the food pantry along as a private non-profit. So we're looking to move this away from the town and to create a private non-profit that will be eligible for more grants and foundation funds to really help build the food pantry even more. So that's really the long-term goal. It will be a part-time position. We hope to post this within the next few days. So I guess at this point I'll just open it up for question. Thank you very much for being here. It sounds like a pretty exciting time for the food pantry. And I know that a lot of this work is falling on your shoulders. So I do really appreciate that. And thank you very much. Questions from the board? Joe. I'll just say thank you for all your work on it. I mean I've had occasion with some youth groups who have volunteered for the food pantry to visit each of the locations. And I think that this new one is so much more accessible to people who are coming looking for services as well as the volunteers who are coming to drop things off. But it's understandable what the challenges are. Managing those two sites. So thank you for taking the initiative on this. Just a no question, but great. I'm obviously very supportive, and I'm really glad about the progress you're making. Thank you very much. Moving on. A presentation, which is a report of the Building Maintenance Committee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So back in 2012 the board voted to establish a Building Maintenance Committee with the charge of evaluating the maintenance needs of town buildings, sites and facilities, recommending maintenance policies to the town manager and to devise funding strategies to support ongoing maintenance demands. So that committee, that committee has been meeting for the past several years, has been comprised of the deputy town manager, Andrew Flanagan, energy manager, Ruthie Bennett, the CFO of the school's Diane Johnson has been part of that committee, superintendent buildings, Mark Miano, citizen representative, Vincent Cervone, Barbara Thornton as well, who was really the brains or the real impetus behind getting this Building Maintenance Committee started. As well as a finance committee representative, Christine Deschler. So again, they met quite regularly over the course of the past several years, formulated short, mid, and long-term policy recommendations for maintenance planning in town, but also, as you will hear more about tonight, are going to recommend the creation of a facility, a consolidated facilities department with a department head level facilities director. That will be included, or the town's portion of that funding will be included in the budget. I submit on Thursday. So we thought both a general update on the work of this committee as well as a discussion with the board about that proposed creation of the department and position would be warranted before the budget was submitted on Thursday. So I don't know if this is going to work here. If you want to nix the projection and just... But I think it's a good place to start. Take a look at the town's current organizational chart, as it relates to facilities. As you can see, so let me tell you, the positions you see in yellow are currently funded by the town, and those positions in blue are funded by the school of town. So just by taking a look at it, you can see it's quite decentralized under the authority of the manager, the five individuals, the recreation director, the public work director, our chief of police, myself, the planning director, and the library director, who all to a certain degree have building responsibilities pertaining to the maintenance and cleaning facilities services of the building. Going very quickly, I'll point out the public work director, you'll see, as it is today, the superintendent of building reports the public work director, despite having that position, most of the other positions in the school department funded by the school. Our human resource director on the town side is hiring, and the hiring and associated employment thing that they relate to both maintenance staff on the town side and on the school side. The other piece of the cleaning contract, as you see here, we have between the school department, nine buildings that fall under the jurisdiction of the town, and the brink of several different cleaning contracts. Again, all managed by folks who may not traditionally get job responsibilities, be responsible for maintaining, overseeing the maintenance and service of the building. So, in a few slides, we'll look at what's proposed. So, as Adam said, for a number of years, and they came up with a town-wide maintenance policy, we focused on three different divisions of maintenance, short-term, mid-term, and long-term. Currently, the town does a very good job of long-term, you know, as a capital committee, there's a process where the department tends to aren't involved. Thought I was understood. The short-term and, basically, emergencies, those are taken care of, but they're not very structured. There are very few records of what the emergency was, what was done to repair it. So, when you go to look back and see how they had this problem before, there's no record of the new structure. But the emergencies are taken care of because the staff is running in many different directions and they're not organized or centralized. The biggest issue that the committee found in town was lacking was this mid-term maintenance policy. And that's really a way for the town and the school to maintain our assets. We built a number of these buildings in the last decade, at least without a policy of maintaining them before this emergency. The buildings are, you know, decreasing in value quicker than they should. A lot of the equipment isn't maintained as well as it could. And there certainly aren't records for preventative maintenance that we're doing on a consistent basis, because there is a structure for that. So, that's the maintenance policy discussed stage three in different divisions. The committee then developed recommendations to the town manager. One is to create this consolidated division, facility division, where all the organizational elements that you saw previously would be consolidated and centralized. Under a director of this department, so one of the recommendations is to fund a director position. So, there is one department head who's managing the facilities. Clearly this person will interact with all the other department heads, but there is one location and one place where the facility's maintenance would be focused. And then the other recommendation is consolidating the existing maintenance budgets from the town and the school. And then we'll discuss later how that will happen in phases. But again, trying to make it more centralized and focused. So, there is one place to go and one person who manages along with the other department heads all of our existing assets. So, one of the things we looked at when developing these recommendations to the town manager was at some of our comparable land or neighboring communities. You can see how they were addressing their maintenance needs and whether or not they had the facilities department and was the board of the alone. So, you can see in either whether it be a neighboring community or a comparable community at the time of the salary survey, most of our comparable communities have centralized facilities function at the end of one department. What we did is we looked at total square footage of all the facilities in the city at 1.3 million were above the average, yet we do not have a centralized facilities department. As it is today, there are 11 different department heads in the administrative staff that oversee just about 40 buildings. And in that context, you're one of the major blocks of state. For another one, a great process with regard to capital planning is we have capital budget requests coming from several different people who provide the facilities rather than have one person really providing the facilities capital for the program. So, that again would be another bad thing. So, based on everything I said and Ruthie said she had to propose for the national chart as we see it. We'll see a new color of that in this scenario. We're going to bring joint and funded positions that would be joint and funded. Again, you'll see the director of facilities reports of child manager, much more centralized structure to be a deputy director, Ruthie is the energy manager, and then we said we would really work hard in order to get one to develop some administrative function, whether it be a real line in the current resources down. But we think it would be successful. It's never important what I just proposed with administrative support. Right now, utility bills pertaining to improvements are paid by the Department of Parks. So, this would be one way to consolidate that. Also, two distinct divisions, maintenance division and custodial division, both have a supervised division with both positions that exist right now. What you see is a little different, is the clean contracts will go under the custodial division. You know, a lot of people, everybody who manages the clean contract has gone home when they come to work. The way custodial division is handled is supervised, and we definitely weren't mentioning it. So, we can be assured to build up oversight with regard to that. And then you see, on the maintenance division, we'll work on the rental building manager with really general crap and who oversees improvements in center six buildings that have been currently cut down to different types. This would just start as somewhat of a summary. The town manager's implementation plan. As Adam mentioned, it will be submitted to the budget on the 30th day. It will soon be creation of the facilities department. We are recommending funding with the director of the facilities division of 50-50 between the town manager and the school side. As I mentioned, established administrative function, consolidated boarding transfer for all custodial and maintenance personnel, and began consolidating the maintenance budgets on the town side. So, in year one, we're saying, where can we consolidate maintenance budgets that may exist in different departments now under this facility department. And then in year two, look to consolidate the town and the school maintenance budgets as one under a stable working contract. So, yeah, perhaps up what we recommended again at going Adam's initial opening remarks. Huge thanks to the committee. They spent countless hours leading all this number in, or for almost two years now, really carefully looking at what we're working on. So, yeah, I'm already certainly selected in the recommendations that you see tonight. So, with that, happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much, Andrew Ruthie and all the other members. We can tell quite a lot of work went into this. And with that, I'll open up the discussion or questions from the board to begin. Joe. Thank you very much. Thank you for all the work. I had two questions on this. The first is on the custodians, those that would be assigned to the schools. Was there any discussion about what the relationship will continue to be between those custodians and the principals who were ultimately, you know, responsible during the large part for those facilities? One became those informal relationships that happened whether it's the town hall custodian and the manager's office or a school custodian and principal. And that's something we all agreed that it was essential to the community as a workforce. So, a lot of public participation will all be a priority. They currently now do report to the U.S. Supervisor. No, I know. That is existing. I know more reporting in the informal day-to-day being on site. Right, right. But that can always, you know, product-to-line relationships can always be a little bit tricky. And so I was just wondering if there was any discussion about that. And the other question is on the rental building manager. Does that include this building and the function that's held right now for... The rental building manager does not have a responsibility to associate with this building. Not with this building at all. Okay. That will be maintained as a 50-50 funding position through the general fund. Okay. Okay. So it's just for those buildings that are currently under the ARB plus the parameters and the Gibbs. Okay. I know that there's been a push to centralize the rental functions for the school buildings. Was there any discussion of trying to pull that into this function as well? There was. Is it envisioned that that will be part of this going forward? Can you say it's pulled in in terms of the funding plan? Not just the funding. Not just the funding. The management of rental for school facilities. So the way it is, nothing part of this is altered for the reporting structure as it is running. Yeah. Okay. Okay. But the rental of school facilities won't be managed through this department initially. Okay. Okay. Great. Thank you. Thank you, Joe. Mr. Grayley. So thank you very much for all the work all of you have done. Barbara. How many years now have you been helping us here? Oh, yeah. I know. So when you were talking rental, you're talking about our properties, but I was wondering in terms of under here, when we rent out facilities like for weddings and that kind of thing, would that somehow be subsumed or somehow under this facilities manager? In terms of the main care of the facilities? No, like we rent out town hall for weddings. Isn't that part of a facility maintenance? Right. And the way it works now is the custodians do, they take no jobs on their own economy. That's all coordinated by custodians who supervise the work of the Patsy. So that's happening. Right. But I'm actually talking about Patsy as a then coordinator. Again, and I think she's one of some of the formal, you know, relationship with the American custodians. So she worked very closely today with the supervisor. I know, but you keep talking about custodians. I'm talking about the job of actually event rental, building rentals. Okay. And so I'm sure, but how are the schools on this? So what's their reaction to this? Are they all, they're on board? Yeah, Diane Johnson. Yeah. I know I heard she's on. Yeah, as well. And it's probably too early, but are we expecting cost savings because of this? Okay. Well, one thing we've said is that not to expect cost savings initially, but what we hope to be able to do is maintain our assets in a much more coordinated and beneficial way to the town. Yeah. So boilers, we made it five million years out of roofs, windows, building in the looks. Yeah. All that kind of stuff. We look to see this as a basic efficiency game posed with monetary. Well, I think part of the challenge in seeing the financial game, which I do think we will see is that you can't see what would happen if we didn't, right? We can tell you as you look at the buildings over time, the longer you take to do that midterm maintenance, the more expensive it is and the more rushed you do it and the better, you know, the less you check. Right, right, right. So in that sense, yeah, so we do it more organized and on schedule things won't go down as quickly. So you will see saving, but it won't be as obvious as now. We haven't been boilering. It uses less electricity or less power. Right. But you think that clearly our willingness to need to be maintained more consistently and that won't save us money because the last longer. Yeah. I mean, look how long it took us to get to the elementary schools and what that has cost us now. But I have lots of benefits to it. Thank you. Great work. Thank you very much. Dan. I want to thank Barbara for, as usual, sticking to something and following through. I really appreciate that because you've spent so many years and you hang with it. Just a comment. First of all, I'm in full support of the director of facilities position. I had more extensive conversation with the town manager that was really me just bouncing things off. I do applaud the fact that the schools are on board with this. It is a 50-50 funded position. But I also am happy to see similar to what we've done with IT that the ultimate reporting is to the town manager. Initially, when we tried that out, there were a few people that kind of had some trepidation about whether that would be successful. And I think we've shown, you know, there's been no turf war or anything being held up. So it definitely does work and can work. It's probably a little bit too early. Probably won't be until year three or maybe the end of year two that any anticipating sort of growth of the department or position. But I think right now we're establishing the director of facilities, incorporating in what current employees we have, whether they're supervisors or actual custodians themselves. Just to put on the table, this question may not know the answer. Will it be, say in the future, we determine that we do need to grow this department with an additional person or persons? Is it we go back to the table and discuss with the school superintendent and Diane Johnson? Or is it already a given that as long as both sides agree, it will follow the similar 50-50 funding? Now that may be, and what I'm thinking of is one of the things I'm really excited by is one of my previous jobs for the Baby Bells, which is now Verizon, was as a loading clerk. And one of the things that was invaluable for the equipment that the phone company had is to know all your transformers, your senders, your markers, know what the maintenance plan was to get the extra five to seven years out of them, keep track of, you know, back then I think it was D-Base three and Lotus one, two, three that we were tracking things on, which is very scary. But once you plug that in, and maybe this person exists, but really knowing someone that knows equipment, knows the maintenance schedule, knows the craft, you know, I would have 20 linemen outside and 40 trunkmen inside, and I would know, you know, you send Jeba to the one that, you know, that kind of thing. So that person may already exist, but I think I heard you all sort of talking about that in the future. Maybe that's something, a position we grow with a current employee, but I think that is so vital to have a person, at least, or whatever the town manager in this committee deems in the future, that really gets on board with that because there are some other things that are, I'll take the turf, for example, you know, we've stretched after years out of it, but we could have gone a good five or six more years out of it if the maintenance plan, which we are now doing. So I guess I would just advocate for the future. It sounds like you all are talking about that, you know, as you get into this right now, you want to get the director of facilities program up and running, but I can't say how much I think that's a vital, important position. And I really think it needs to be a unique position versus when you spread it out, things fall through the cracks. I just wanted to put that. Thank you very much. Further? I just had one question looking at the organization chart. So looking at, I'm looking at the updated one. Can you talk a little bit about the deputy director position that's on it? And is that a new position? Because I didn't see that on the initial org chart either. Okay. Okay. That makes sense. I think this is a good plan. And I think this will be wise investment that pays off in the long run. And I really like seeing the town and schools work together too. I think that's a really good step in the right direction into what where, you know, is an overall goal of, you know, moving that way in the future. So thank you all very much for your hard work. And we'll certainly reap the benefits of this. So thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Do you need a little time to shut this down? Can we move on? Sounds good. Thank you all. Moving on. Consent agenda. The minutes of meeting for our December 22nd meeting. For approval, the cause and event. We have a motion to approve approval. Arlington 2015 5k race, which is slated for May 17th, 2015. And the request for a contractor drain layer license. By a KV, a route or construction Inc. We have a motion. Move approval. Sub-trial conditions are set forth. Second. Just want to comment that Adam correct me if I'm wrong, but the part of this race that's on the minute man is that is how we're currently operating. Yes. Correct. Just worth noting. Thank you very much. That is worth noting. Discussion from the board. Discussion from the crowd. Seeing. Oh, here. We've got some hands. Come on up. Julie and Robin. Yeah, I'm Julie. And I'm Robin. Great. Please. So we are the co-raised directors for this race. It's a race that started in Portland, Oregon three years ago. So it's been run successfully for three years. The women who started it were in touch with. And so we have a lot of their learnings, but I have a background in project management and event management. So we feel very confident we can take this on. We have a race committee of about 15 women in Arlington and a few surrounding communities who have already volunteered to help us to run this. And we have almost 250 racers that will sign up. This is approved through the fit girl program that's run through the Arlington public schools. So the woman who organizes that is really excited about this and wants this to be the race if we can get it approved. So as you can see from the materials that we submitted, the exciting part about this race is that each runner gets to choose the charitable organization that benefits from half of their race registration. So if we are aiming for somewhere around 500 runners total, each of those runners will make a choice about which charity is going to be the beneficiary of what we're hoping to be about $15 from each of the registrations. So that's a possibility for 500 different charities to be supported through the race or charities that are able to field larger teams of runners. So that's sort of the spin about what makes this race different from some of the other races that people can register for. So I think with our connections in the community and our kids' schools, there are a lot of organizations out there that could really stand to benefit from the race. And part of the committee's work is to reach out to local organizations to have them promote it to their, you know, the people who support them to say, hey, we're going to get the money basically if you sign up and you select us. So that could be organizations within the community. It could be schools. It could even be I was talking to a neighbor and she's like, my daughter's lacrosse team. Could this be the way they raise their money? Absolutely. You can choose any nonprofit of your choice. Very cool. And please tell me again where we can sign up and the date again. The proposed date that we'd like to do is May 17, which is Sunday, when I worked with the police chief. His recommendation was Sundays are better than Saturdays, early in the morning is best. And so we want to really do, we want to impact the community as little as possible in terms of traffic and problems, but obviously the most in terms of raising the community. Registration will open hopefully once we finalize things with you all tonight. Maybe tomorrow. Yeah. Thank you very much. Questions from the board? Seeing none. Comments, questions from the crowd? Seeing none. All those in favor please say aye. Aye. All those, good luck. Thank you. Moving on appointments. An introduction. We want to vote it. What? We want to vote it. We did vote it. Do we vote it? Yep. I want to vote it again. Moving on appointments for an introduction for the newly appointed Equal Opportunity Advisory Committee member, Sarah Elizabeth Hirshon. Hi, I'm Sarah Hirshon. Can you all please tell us a little bit about yourself, why you'd like to serve in the committee and all that kind of stuff? Sure. My name is Sarah Hirshon. I've lived in Arlington for the past six years in East Arlington. I'm a lawyer by training. I do commercial litigation. I do a little bit of labor litigation, intellectual property litigation, and recently started a fashion law at my law firm. I wanted to join this committee because I have a two-year-old little girl. We love Arlington. When we bought our house, we really were Cambridge transplants and weren't sure we wanted to stay. We lived in the Davis Square area and thought, East Arlington, it's sort of an extension of Cambridge. It's more affordable, so we'll buy a house, but have really grown to love Arlington and want to develop some roots in the community. I've always, since I was a young student, been involved with people who are either less fortunate than I was, had disabilities, trying to promote women and especially equal. My father's a lawyer and always sort of promoted. Said to me, you can do anything. He tried to sort of break the glass ceiling for me and encouraged me to do whatever I could to make sure that there was a level playing field. And so I've, throughout my career and even in high school and college, tried to do the same thing and hope to continue to be able to do that for my daughter. Thank you very much. Questions from the board? Mr. Dunn. Thank you very much for volunteering. I really like your story because it sounds so much like mine. And I mean this because some of the people up here had the fortune to be born in Arlington, whereas I was the same way just a little bit earlier. I moved in in 1999 and I was like, yeah, there's this place. It's not that far from Fenway. I can do it. And after living here for a few years, I was like, wow, this place is pretty good. And it's beautiful to see it continue to work. It's magic. So thank you very much for volunteering and you are part of what makes it good. Thank you. Thank you, Tim. Where are they? We have a motion. Second. We have a motion and a second. Second. Thank you. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Thank you very much. Thank you. Good luck. Moving on, an appointment to the Disability Commission for Cynthia D'Angeles. Hi. Hi, Cynthia. Hello. Please, can you tell us a little bit about yourself as well? Why'd you like to serve in the committee? Well, there's lots of reasons. But I'll start with that probably since high school. You can summarize it. Yeah. I love to talk. Since high school, I've been working with disabled individuals. Went to Boston College, worked at the campus school for multiple handicapped kids. And then I graduated in May of 1977. There you go. Now in Hall of Amp. And went to work in Winchester Public Schools. So I've been a special educator. I've taught multiple handicapped kids. I always say I have a heart in the head and the belly full of special ed. And it's near and dear to my heart. Everything about working with disabled individuals and helping. And now I have the opportunity because I'm quasi-retired. Not really. But I'm doing consulting for families. And then I realized, well, now I have the time. Which I didn't before to really volunteer. It's been something I've wanted to do for a long time. So I've been here 35 years. So I was born in Belmont. Stayed there for about 20-something years. And popped over the side here. I love it. I love the town. So I just want to get back. Thank you very much. Mr. Gray. And Adam convinced me. It was a good interview. It was. Yeah. It was fun. Move approval. But thank you very much for your willingness to help us. You're very welcome. I'm actually honored to do it. Thank you very much. We have a motion to second for the discussion. Yes. I just want to say I had the opportunity briefly before the meeting. You share the same first name as my youngest. So you're already near and dear to my heart. But I've sort of traversed a little bit in the special education world. And know all the different travails. And peaks. And certainly from speaking from you. Not only do you have the experience, but you definitely have the intestinal fortitude. That really strong bone that you need. To. Work in that community and thrive with that community. And I really look forward to know that you're going to excel on this. And I anticipate this is probably going to be a spring board to some other things. I have my way. So I want to thank you. I love working with teams. That's the other thing. I love. Big meetings where it can get adversarial. But it shouldn't. And really learning and. And figuring out ways in order for all of us to kind of. Make peace with decisions and agree to disagree sometime. So I've been doing that on the special ed end. For a long time. So. That's the part I love is being on a commission like that where it's lots of personalities. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. We have a motion to second all those in favor. Please say aye. Aye. Opposed. Best of luck. Thank you. Moving on. Citizens open forum. I. Accepting unusual circumstances. Any matter presented for consideration of the board. Shall neither be acted upon nor decision made the night of the presentation in accordance with the policy under which the open forum was established. Should we note that there is a three minute time limit to present a concern or request. The first one I have is. Michael Laffrey, but I do on. Understand that. Michael is here might be here for agenda item number eight. that after citizens open form. And the next is Jill Menka. Oh, sorry for the confusion. So we do not have, is there anyone else for citizens open form? Seeing none, I'd like to thank everyone for signing in and we're still working on the implementation of this. So thank you very much. Next, traffic rules and orders and other business. It requests for a handicap parking sign at 16 Whittemore Street for Michael Laffey. Michael. With sciatic damage to both legs, getting it out of a car is a problem. When the car door is fully opened, you can backhand sit down, lift your legs in. It's not too bad. Now our driveway is too narrow to open the car door completely. Just open it halfway. That gets very hard to get you to swing your legs in. The door gets in the way. So I can be painful on that. The solution I certainly was thinking of has been able to park at the curb in front of our house where I can open the door completely. Get in and out and if I want to go out later, it's there and I don't have to depend on anybody else to bring the car out for me. Thank you. Certainly make the quality of life a little better. Thank you, Michael. Kevin. Yeah, move approval subject to any conditions as set forth and that's the what to use, sir. Thank you. We have motion in a second. Any further discussion? Mr. Dunn. I just want to comment that we we've got a recommendation note for approval for people at home or watching or whatever and from the police department. So I'm happy to support. Thank you very much. Any further discussion? Seeing none. I would like to thank both the police and fire department for their recommendations and all the legwork they do for this, as well as Mr. Laffer for coming in tonight. So with a motion a second, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Five, nothing vote. Thank you, Mr. Laffer T. Moving on for approval, Arlington Public Art, Adria and Jill. Good evening. Good evening. Hello. Oh, no, you go. So I guess I will say maybe we'll start with a B then seeing we'll take three separate votes for simplicity. Sure. Sure. So I want to just thank you all for being so supportive of Arlington Public Art and allowing us to do our projects the last four years. And we've got a full plate this this 2015. And so we are asking for your approval for cheerful where you sit again at Whittemore Park in front of the Dallin Museum. We are again collaborating with Dallin Museum. And last year we raised $9,000 this year. We hope to even do better than that. So that's very exciting. And then we're also, well, let's see. So you wanted to take that by itself, cheerful where you sit. Yeah, please. The date the date, the date is July 10th through the 12th. And it's the same weekend as the Arlington Alive Block Party. We thought that that is an obvious thing to try and do. Bring them together as well as Shakespeare in the park is the same weekend. So it'll really be a full arts weekend. Thank you. I'll move it. I move approval. Second. Motion is second. Further discussion? Discussion from the crowd? Seeing none. All those in favor, please say aye. Moving on. Art Rock set, spypon. Ah, yes. So last year Art Rock's monotony was such a huge success that we just couldn't help ourselves but do another one. And this is a great collaboration with the Parks Department and the Parks Commission. They have been super supportive of the project. And so we are asking permission to do a public art temporary three week long public art exhibition at spypon park. And yeah, the dates are May 3rd through the, no, excuse me, it's opening May 9th and down May 30th. Thank you. Do we have a motion? Oh, or a question first. Do we need to approve this if it's under the park and rec? I mean, we can move to support it. But I think yeah. I think it was mostly, yeah, to support it. Yeah. So I moved to support the Art Rocks, Art Rocks spypon. Do we have a second? Second. The motion is second. All the further discussion? Seeing none. All those in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Thank you. Transformer box project 2015. Yes, in 2015 we'd like to continue with this project and it will be in the Arlington Heights area from Brattle Street to there's one in back of Trader Joe's. I believe you have a map. We do. So you can see where those things are. Does anybody need a map? Okay. So I'm in touch with Michael Radmacker who thinks that Trader Joe's, the transformer box behind Trader Joe's may or may not be owned by the town. So he's looking into that. So we have a total of six this year that we'd like to do and the theme is pattern. Then there's also one that's going to be done at the high school and it'll be done on an earlier schedule. Thank you very much. I am. I really like this project. I think it's nice to see around town. But that being said, it's their motion. I move to approve it. We have a motion. Do we have a second? Second. We have a motion and second. Further discussion? Yes. So and if you've already covered this, excuse me. So next year are you going to continue from Brattle Street down to the center? It'll be from, you mean in 2015 or 2016? 2016. Because this is covering from the heights to Brattle Street, right? So hopefully in 2016 we'll do East Arlington. Okay. Yeah. Because we did the center last year. This year we'll do the heights and then next year the East Arlington. Okay, right. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. Great. Further discussion? Seeing none. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed. Thank you very much for being here. Thank you. Moving on, I think we're going to take agenda item number 12, a discussion regarding the police chief recruitment. Next. So, Mr. Chaplin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So at the last Selectman's meeting, I believe under new business, I had confirmed to the board that chief Fred Ryan would be leaving the position of chief of police with Arlington to go become chief of police with the MBTA and told the board that hopefully by this meeting I'd be able to outline my intended process for both an interim replacement for the chief as well as a permanent replacement. So I provided the board with a somewhat detailed memo about some of the considerations that I've taken into account over the past several weeks, some conversations that I've had, and tried to describe my thought process about the chief's replacement. To start, for the interim chief, what I am looking to do is identify within the ranking officer's group an officer who is not interested in the permanent chief's position as to not give a potential interim chief a leg up on the permanent chief's position. So I've started that through the current chief, Ryan, conversations with some of the ranking officers. I would hope to continue that over the course of the next few weeks and hopefully have someone named before the end of January, but certainly before the end of February when chief Ryan actually does leave the town. So I will keep the board informed about that appointment hopefully again over the course of the next few weeks. In terms of a permanent replacement, quickly as I laid out in the memorandum to the board, there's several possibilities. There's a civil service process. The chief's position is currently a civil service position. That would be strictly for internal candidates and would be a regimented process that would allow up to four candidates from each successive rank. So I gave a scenario where if there's currently three captains, if two captains signed up for the process, then it would move down to lieutenants, but if two lieutenants signed up, it would not be able to move to sergeants. Conversely, if you didn't reach four, it could go down to sergeants. And there would be a scoring system that would provide candidates one through three with scores and to choose anybody other than number one, you would need to provide bypass reasons that could be challenged in civil service. Another option that was under consideration was a civil service process, but an open competitive process that would be open to civil service candidates from across the state. I had some concerns with that mainly because the way that system is working currently is any veteran who otherwise qualified and had a passing score would automatically go to the top of the list. I certainly think veteran preferences have their place in governmental hiring. In any hiring, automatic top of the list for a veteran candidate didn't provide me with the flexibility I think that I would desire in the hiring of a police chief. And then a third option would be to consider removing the position from civil service, then having the flexibility to look externally, remain internally, but be able to develop a more flexible process for the selection of the next police chief. Some of the things I did when considering this met with the leadership of both the ranking officers union and the patrol union, had discussions with town council, HR director, deputy town manager, the fire chief who has a perspective on civil service, just trying to formulate my perspective on all of this. And where I came down was I feel very strongly about the management flexibility that's afforded by a non civil service process. But I was also very compelled by comments that were made to me by members of both police unions in regards to the fact that we are very proud of our police department that recently accredited very successful police department and it would seem to be speaking out of both sides of our mouth from the management leadership position to then turn around and say we need to go outside the department to find its next leader. So the course of action that I would like to pursue is through the town reading process and then through the approval of special legislation, taking the position out of civil service but committing for this recruitment to keeping it as an internal process so that we will have the folks in the department, men and women in the Earrington police department having the shot of becoming the next police chief. I think it strikes a balance between the flexibility of choice that I think is appropriate for the management leadership of the community to have along with maintaining morale within the ranks of the Earrington police department. So happy to have a discussion but that's thought process I went through the considerations I had and Pat that I'd like to follow. Thank you very much Adam. This was a very informative memo that you sent us and I think it proves that quite a lot of work went into it and this is an important decision and I appreciate the amount of leg work you stuck into this prior to this meeting. I will open up to questions, comments from the board Diane. I have a question and I apologize for not it wasn't as I was sitting looking at this whole thing. Are you asking us tonight? Obviously you and I have had conversations regarding the civil service chief and it's my understanding that that would be going to town meeting or a special town meeting to do that. Are you planning on waiting until town meeting to do that? Are you anticipating the special? So my thoughts would be to ask the board to consider calling a special town meeting within the annual town meeting so that we wouldn't have to go to any extra efforts to call the special town meeting but haven't scheduled early in the town meeting if not the first night the second night to be able to have this warrant article or potential warrant article acted upon and then get that piece of home roll legislation up to the legislature as quickly as possible. With that caveat could I ask tonight if I had my druthers we would be voting the process that you have outlined because to me the civil service component of it will be a separate meeting and a separate discussion as well as I think an important vote for the board. Would it hinder you tonight if what we voted was to approve the process that you have before us which in effect is not taking the civil service route but is open it to internal candidates only because I agree that we do have a very good Arlington police department. We do have great community relations. We're on top and at the forefront of everything and the next chief that I see I think will really benefit with whatever internal candidate is successful and I can think of a few in the sense of I don't think that we need a change agent to come in right now to the Arlington police department as we did years before. I think we're 75% down the road and we need someone with the experience and maturity that can continue on and maintain what we have. So would it hinder you tonight if what we voted was the process that you've outlined here which isn't the civil service process and then when we have that hearing for the special town meeting regarding civil service because I don't want to go into a big long speech about why I think civil service is important unless this is the night to have it as well as your thoughts on that. So I guess I put this course out there for the board's input tonight hopefully support with the understanding that there are caveats. Certainly the board needs to vote affirmatively on a recommended vote of town meeting at some point through the warrant article screening and review process and then there would need to be town meeting approval of that. So I guess what I'm saying tonight this is my intended course of action understanding that there is still approvals that are necessary. All right. Then I'm not going to belabor this civil service point until we get to that part where we really should do it just for the sake. But I definitely do have strong opinions on that and I've shared them with the town manager and we'll have done. I hope and we'll continue to do it in a respectful manner. Of course. Thank you very much. Joe. Thank you. First, Mr. Manager, it's clear that you've bent over to make sure you talk to all of the stakeholders involved here. I really want to thank you for that because I think that's extraordinarily important when we're undertaking something like this. Secondly, I think to Diane's point and kind of echoing her, you know, when an organization is challenged, you can see that there is an imperative really often to go outside and bring somebody to somebody in. But, you know, this organization is far from challenging in the last time before us was to report on the recent accreditation. So I think that we do have to acknowledge that. And at the same time, I want to just commend you, though, on outlining a process whereby we can acknowledge all the accomplishments of the Allington Police Department, reward the members of the department, also maintain some reasonable flexibility in a way that's sensitive also to anyone who might be applying for the position. So unless somebody else wants to, I'm happy to move to support the recommendations you've put before us tonight. Thank you, Joe. We have a motion. Do we have a second? We have a second. Diane? I guess one of the things that I hadn't really come to roost in my head yet, so the position, we're going to be with an interim chief for probably six months, maybe even a little more. That's correct. Okay. I saw in an earlier conversation with Adam, I shared some of the things that I think are important in the traits and skills and attitude that the future police chief has. And I think that he agrees with most of what I was suggesting. And I trust him to do the right thing. And so I'm happy to support this. Thank you. There's no question in my mind about the excellent personnel we have within the department, and surely there's a chief among them. But I would ask two points. One, Diane, I believe by supporting this, we're supporting him removing it from civil service. So I just want to be clear, I think that's what we're supporting. That's what he's recommending we do here. I was under that question as well. I think so I would interpret it. I would agree that we are that that is what we're supporting. But I think that also we are going to have that we're going to have a vote to choose. We're saying also that we're going to have a special town meeting, but we're not actually taking that vote either. And then that's going to have an article. And then we're going to have a talk about whether or not to support the article to remove civil service. And so this is, I would argue the first of many votes that we're going to take that are taking this out of civil service. I just want to be clear what I thought I was supporting. So if I may add on, how does this play out? You put in together a committee to interview or how does it happen from here? So we would actually the interim will be named and that I assume would be your choice. So we would put together a process that wouldn't look altogether that different from the way most other police hireings or promotions, not so much hireings, but promotions are done. Or how a civil service process which is so we would have we would hire a third party evaluator. There are several professional groups, both locally and nationally that do that. There'd be a written component. There'd be a verbal component in front of a panel, and most likely an interview component in front of me or maybe myself and a couple other town personnel. And I think the most important thing that I didn't mention, as part of a non civil service processes, we would really be able to tell that assessment group what it is we're looking for in a police chief. Civil service process can be a little bit more regimented. We'll be able to outline those characteristics and traits that we're looking for in the next chief, things that, you know, Dan mentioned, you know, looking for a chief that has, you know, an interest in community policing and ability to communicate with the public and the media, things that chief Ryan brought to the table, along with the hard skills that we want for someone to be able to manage the budgets and day to day operations of the police department. So I think this the process would be a pretty robust process. But mirroring similar promotional processes in the police department. And that evaluation team group whatever would provide you with three names would give you top scores. What Yeah, so we would plan under this situation of asking for probably somewhere between three to five names. So we'd, you know, if there were five that rose to the top, give us more. And instead of giving us exact scores, you know, ban them if possible, so that it's not as clear that you're jumping over somebody from score to score, but have more of an undefined choice. Right. And to you, and you would choose or interview, I would assume each and then yes. And so am I right? Any current officer is available to apply under this process? So we would probably put the other criteria that had a certain amount of supervisory experience and a certain amount of years as a ranking officer. So I think I haven't made it hard and fast, but I would think at least having attained the rank of sergeant with some number of years in that position would be the minimum criteria. Thank you. No problem. Thank you. When we vote, I will vote to abstain. I don't want to vote against this in the sense that I agree with all the hard work and the input that the manager has gotten from everybody, including us. I think you've outlined a sort of good paradigm. Not to belabor the point that I really feel strongly about a civil service chief in my tenure as a member of the Board of Selectment. There was only one era when I first became a select man that we didn't have a civil service chief. And I don't like to go back and pass history. But I'll let others, you know, interpret that as they may as well as when our current chief that we had sort of echoing on that time and era, one of the reasons that we went to town meeting and said, please make this chief a civil service chief was sort of one of the provisions that I don't want to say protection would provide. But I think we sort of looked at the lessons of years past and you know, when I first got on the board, we did not have a civil service chief and as well as I equated to, you know, when you go to a physician, do you want someone that couldn't get into the U.S. or Canada or England, went to one of the islands for med school, passed to the EFCMG, flex exam, or do you want someone that went to a teaching hospital, interned resident, wasn't attending, went and sat for their boards, got board certification and has continued to maintain their qualifications. So I sort of equate the civil service process with that as well as for my first years on the board as well as one of the reasons why we did the current chief. Also, there are politics involved sometimes and the civil service, the protection that the civil service designation provides really puts a strong sort of firewall to that. So I'll stop on that. I just want to let my colleagues know, you know, I'm not just doing it to say I'm not going to vote for it, but I'm going to abstain because I agree with the process and all the hard work everyone's put into it and when this does come up as a special town meeting and I agree with whatever the town manager wants to do to put this in for a special town meeting and then get into more, try to convince at least two of you all up here. I'm going to try. Thank you very much. I will abstain. Okay. Thank you. We have a motion. Did we have a second as well? Yeah, a second. Further discussion? Seeing none. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Abstain. Aye. Thank you. 401. Thank you very much, everyone. Thanks, Adam. Moving on. We'll go up to number 10. For approval, a letter to the FAA that we spoke about at our last meeting. We received some correspondence from the resident, Peter Jones. And this was a letter that I drafted and I hope you'll take a vote to support. Before we do vote, I do just want to thank Frank Siano, who is Arlington's representative on the Boston Logan Airport Noise Study Committee. And he did take a look at this draft with me and made sure all the key points were hit. And he, that's a hard committee to be on and he does some great work. And it's one of those ones that you probably, you know, are spreading more bad news than good news to residents. And that's never a fun thing, but he's certainly a great voice for Arlington on it. And he is working with him. It was a real pleasure on this. And I do thank him very much. That being said, I hope everyone got a chance to read the letter. And I'm happy to take any edits, but we'll go from there. Move approval. I'll bless you. Second, I do have two edits to suggest and a comment. So I suggest we change takeoff to flight operations and change departing to using. What were you using? Remove the, in one place we say takeoff and I want to change it to flight operations. So instead of just talking about planes to take off, I want to talk about all flight operations. I want to, I think we should talk landing as well. That's what I meant, yeah. Thank you. So, yeah, I was thinking that. Yeah. And the letter that we got, I think I was under the impression that Arlington was only affected by the takeoff pattern. Okay. And not the landing. And so I really wanted to make this tailored to our concerns. Okay. And that's kind of where that came from. I guess I hadn't realized that it was that detailed. Okay. All right. The comment was, I just, that I got an email from Will Brownsburger. And they did, there is a change coming. He said it's going to make a little bit of a difference that they're taking, that Logan is going to be approved again to do two direction takeoff and landing out to the ocean. Because for safety reasons, they've been restricted to only either doing takeoff or landing. And now they're going to be able to do both over the ocean. And it's not, it is not the solution to the problem. It is a minor, it is an improvement. Thank you. Going to your second item, it was, I'm sorry. It was the same, oh, my second item was the same point. I was making the same point in two places, but I'm good. I'm happy. Okay. Thank you. Further discussion? Yup. Yeah, my only, my only discussion, I think that you should sign on behalf of the board and maybe just have an introductory sentence saying that I write you on behalf of the board to select the town of Arlington. I don't think for something like this that we would typically in all five of us sign. I don't know. Usually we do the stationary dance, all five of our names at the top. Which we do. Yeah. Yeah. Sometimes. Yeah. That sounds fine by me. Although we represent the town of Arlington. So unless you want to change it. That's why I was suggesting just an introductory sentence. I write you on behalf of the board of Selectman for the town of Arlington. If I may suggest you could also, Mr. Chairman, I'm sorry. Yes. If I may suggest you could also just put in very truly yours, board of Selectman by Stephen Byrne, chair of the board of Selectman. You know, I don't feel very I don't feel strongly about it either. Whatever the past practice has been, just trying to make it streamlined so we don't all have to come up here and sign a letter. Maybe if it's okay, I'll just take Joe's recommendation and we'll run with that. Okay. Thank you very much. We had a motion and second all those in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed. Moving on. Mr. Greeley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So I submit to the board for your approval the policy related to alcohol in the town of Arlington and with the big note of thanks to Marianne, to Doug, and to Eve for the work that they put in. I had no idea when we started this that this policy would take 32 pages. We are now in the process of a parking policy which is going to be we've not had that before, but I only had one recommendation that I would make, but otherwise whatever, basically what we tried to capture here is what does exist as our policy and I believe the chairman has something he'd like to discuss tonight, but I would recommend almost instead of the kind of table of contents that all we really need to do is if you go to the next page, page 3 just put page numbers after each one of those, the types of licenses to be granted in Arlington I mean it really serves as a second table of content not a big deal, but I'm just saying just put a page number after alcohol licenses for restaurants, page 4 for alcohol package store licenses, page 17 or whatever it's to save a page, it's not a big deal and other than that other than changes anybody see anything inaccurate in there or something that's not anybody want to recommend? I have some comments so further comments we'll start with that I'm trying to get back into my novice agenda have the thing open plus my comments so one was a question that I had for Doug that he answered for me today that I just think is worth having in mind when we talk about it and that is we are not affecting alcohol delivery in town because that's done on that regulation of alcohol delivery is on the state level so there's nothing in here that we're doing there is alcohol delivery in Arlington and if we approve this policy that is unchanged and it is unlikely we could change that even if we wanted to within this policy so that was one comment I was going to do the one change so there's two changes that I would like to make I can support this as it is right now I've voted for it in the past I can vote for it again as a whole I think it's a good policy there are a couple things that I would do differently if I wielded my magic wand or my scepter of total power first of all I would make it clear within this that it is okay for the serving of alcohol in the town gardens when town hall is rented with the appropriate caveats and the appropriate restrictions is a tip certified is there a bartender is it an appropriate age group is it managed well you know all the things that we do when we make sure that I think it is currently that should be something that is available to people who rent town hall in the gardens and the second thing I would change would be is that I would change the outdoor alcohol policy to say that you don't have to go through the establishment to get to the outdoor seating and in particular I'm thinking about the model that I see in places like Cambridge and Somerville where when they have a particularly wide sidewalk that they put some tables out there surrounded by you know railing or whatever and I can think of for instance the Broadway Plaza in its infinite glory having some nice seating out there so those would be the two things I don't know Mr. Greeley if you're looking to bite off changes like that absolutely but that's also Stephen I'm thinking I'm on the same page as you for this so maybe we can team up right can we go back for a second just because I agree with both of you but we need to find the right wording for allowing drinking on sidewalks and I think we all agree as long as there is some sort of barrier that'll be a hoot but wouldn't something in the garden have to go through our one-day license policy so what needs to be stated differently in here about that is it Mr. Chairman or Marian? Doug? I don't know so presently the default policy is that rental of town hall premises is restricted to alcohol only inside the premises it's a little bit ambiguous it does in my opinion it does allow for the selectman to make a special basically dispensation if you'll forgive the word to allow for alcohol service outside for example in the town garden but it's a little bit unclear as to how exactly that works so in other words it's not in the normal application somebody has to basically specially apply in order to have alcohol service outside for example in the garden so you can change the policy to remove that or clarify that you know it's either additional piece of the application or it's just part of the standard application why don't we make that motion would you like it in a form of motion? we'll let Mr. Grayleaf maybe Doug that's your first thing to change here for us if you would now we're going to discuss what you two wanted to talk about and that again I believe has to go to Doug for him to really write it up for us and then to what I believe we should do is approve this policy that exists and now change that policy with the two things both of you are bringing up tonight and then we'll come back for final board approval after that stretch and as we would at any other point that we want to change the policy that's the way we do it although I have no problem with discussing these having Doug work on them and not approving this until the next meeting either this is basically the default for how the policies are right now so it might be more efficient if you all want to discuss these ideas say these are things that I'd like town council to draft into a revised policy and then just come back to the next meeting and have that final I could do that we're in agreement we want him to change the I think that we so for the first one say with the outdoor one day license perhaps we'll go through I just for the sake of having some rhyme or reason to this discussion and perhaps this will serve as a format for you know parking and what else as we move forward we'll go through the types of licenses to be granted which you spoke earlier about on table on page three and you know I'll call licenses for restaurants package store special one day and if you would like to make a proposal under one of those specific types of licenses we'll take them we will consider those proposals and ask Doug to you know come back and discuss them one by one and I think that's just so we're not just talking in circles I think that that might be helpful to add some solidity to this Joe I think that's fair I just I have some general comments that I think cover most of them so if that's possible so yes please I have a question just on what the chairman Mr. Dunn and Mr. Grilly are talking about just so I can look where what language and verbiage on the issue of serving alcohol outdoors without having to enter the establishment but having some sort of barrier is that would that language be consistent or contained with page eight under e-service and consumption of alcoholic beverages and then number three consumption of alcoholic beverages on premises I just want to know where I put my is that where whatever our conversation that's where it would be contained so I want to look at the other language around it okay I just want to orient myself thank you okay I think this would become a point four whatever you all say I just want to know notice I want to look at what else is there too right okay thank you okay so and now but just for clarity sorry yes and I know this is getting icky icky Doug am I right but the town hall gardens is an issue on the application it's not a statement within the policy so it's two there's two separate things the actual permanent itself doesn't explicitly say that you can do it it says you can't but the actual policy says that basically the selecting can grant like special permission to do it it's just a little bit worded and so if you're reading it it wouldn't be clear to you that you could have alcohol in the town hall gardens in my point of view okay thank you so and I guess we should have started this off a little differently so I apologize to everyone watching at home this is getting a little confusing but we're doing our best and so why don't we start with Joe's general comments if you will start if you have any comments regarding what was presented to us from Mr. Greeley and the team and then we'll get into changes after those more general discussions okay so I guess the only two that I think I have that cover multiple sections firstly under the restaurants I think I understand why the recommendation is there to make sure the penalty starts on the same day as the violation and I think we recall that we had some discussion about some penalties last time around yeah I'm having a hard time I used the comment feature in this thing which isn't letting me cross reference the pages very well my comment on that is that I'm wondering if we shouldn't firstly on that issue try to be consistent with some of the other types of licenses because I notice we don't include that for packaged shows we don't include that for theaters and if we shouldn't try for consistency to include the same provision for those other types of licenses as well and private clubs for that matter that if there is a violation that is found that it be the penalty begin on the same day as the violation occurred just a little bit more consistency between the various types of licenses that was my first suggestion before you go on do you have that Doug so a general issue with respect to trying to make it consistent across all that recommendation I have no problem with that recommendation I think it probably you know would have laid out a roadmap for us the last time around I think it should be applied across the different types of licenses and by the same token I think one other place granted I've been at this a lot shorter time than some of you but I think where we also ran into a lot of discussion was around the length of the penalties and we have some bands in there we have discretion there do we really need that or should we just draw a line in the sand and say this is the penalty if we for a first violation for a second violation for a third so rather than saying three to five it is three and that's what it is and the expectation is very clear or are there cases where we really want to have that discretion and I put that out there's a question Dan I like having the flexibility in the sense that we do have a hearing and we do sit and listen and take all the factors into consideration and sometimes there are mitigating factors and sometimes there aren't and sometimes you can have a first offender that it's totally unique to yet another first offender as well as you could have someone that's a first offence and basically they just had one violation whereas you could have someone who had a first offence and they could say we sent in two people versus we sent in one and then the second one they did or something else like so I like the flexibility in the sense that we do hold the hearing with people who violate our policies and we are listening to what they say and sort of measuring what judgment we do should be appropriate so I like the flexibility of having the well as you know we went through this in one who didn't like giving different day suspension to different cases and the ABCC has encouraged us to be consistent with application of these kind of things so I personally kind of like doing something like first offence three days, second offence seven days, third offence 14 days or revocation myself it's clear it's right out there it says hey if you do this you'll lose three days if you do it's second time you lose a week that's pretty imagine losing two weeks for any of these restaurants but this is what exists so that's why absolutely and I'm asking the question I was really interested in what the thoughts were you've seen a lot more of these than I have Mr. Dunn. I think Diane was well spoken and I think that the board has judgment and should exercise it. I agree at first I think I probably was leaning towards Joe's thoughts on it but after Diane's points I like having that leeway and I think it's important that we can utilize it so I don't think we'll need a formal vote on that change. I can count. I think that was all I had that was general. Can we please ask the gentleman in the audience? No we will not be doing that. Thank you though. Joe. I think that was all I had that spanned all the different types. Thank you. So in your first change I think that we didn't really get the sense of the board on that that we asked Doug to look into. I agree. I think it's like extended to all penalties Okay. So can you work on that? Yes. Thank you very much. Now moving on back to Mr. Dunn and I'm sorry to cut you off but I think I think the strategy might work a little better. Mr. Burnham at your disposal what can I do? So can you just run through which one we do first? So I think that we already have the town garden ones that was presented and I'll ask to try to judge the feeling of the board on this like we just did for Joe's changes. So does the board feel like we should modify the application and it sounds like the policy might be okay but just the application is something that needs to be worked on. I think I'll if the board has no objection I take a shot at clarifying the policy as well. Okay. Does the board like that idea? Yep. Okay. Thank you. Now moving on to and you'd like to remove. Yeah. I just want to say Mr. Chairman I'm just not sure did Mr. Currow have any of the ones on the one-day licenses? On the one-days I did not. Correct me if I'm wrong Mr. Chairman you were trying to I did not. I'm sorry I should have. Does anyone have anything on one-day licenses? Yes. Yes. And I guess I would like to get a sense from my colleagues but also from the office. There's language in here I think it's on page 19 but basically it talks about that the board of selectmen through its office has the ability to deny one-day requests that come in basically last minute that don't follow. I think we have a 21-day notice of requirement. I'm just going to give a scenario and I'd be interested in what either my colleagues or even Mr. Sullivan as important would say to that should we have language in there that says if during the course of a year you hit a certain benchmark in terms of a number that you're coming in consistently what it is I can think of one or two places where they're consistently coming in and we're saying okay should we have some language in there that says once you do this five, ten times you will need to take a further step and apply for say a theater license. Like I'm trying to because I hate to say no but I do want to start enforcing with just a few cases but it's a lot of requests that the office isn't being hit at the last minute and I know a lot of times we're sort of waving that so I'm just wondering is there any other stronger relief and you might not know what it is right now that we could propose to help that person help themselves but also you know so we're not the bad guys Well we try to be very pro-business I think it would come down to us just enforcing this you know it's 21 days or it's 19 days sorry even though you know there could be a dispute on you know exactly what time and all of that and being pro-business in the office for the select men we try to bend if we can but we do have problems on reaching out you know police aren't always available to get it to us you know on spot like we may and working with Corey you know we're really trying to stick to that date I would love to find a way to encourage our you know one applicant that we seem to have an issue with to go with the adolescence it would be a financial benefit to them as well as time for them and us I'm not sure how we would write that in there but I do agree with you it would be great to have perhaps even a letter to them signed from the select men once all of these policies are you know set over and in stone saying these policies have just been you know we voted or changed amended and voted on we will not vary from these okay so maybe keep the language that's in there that says you don't meet the 21 days we have the option and I think just because having been in the office like everybody else we need to start enforcing that yes I'm hearing what's in there is enough we just need to enforce it and we all need to be aware of that I agree with whatever vehicle through the chairman and Mr. Grilly when this is all said and done that you know I don't anticipate every business owner maybe they will assign somebody that are going to read all 32 pages but perhaps in that particular instance it would be nice in courty it's just to highlight yes so they know from the get go and it would be great to have a vote you know from the board saying no matter who comes late you're just late you know on and it particularly works on that theater license but we do have some organizations that just don't do it a whole lot that think two weeks out is fine and you know we got to keep it consistent I guess you know and we have to keep it so that's not political you know to be worked in through you know after the fact and I guess that would be it just a commitment to it on the ABCC actually suggest a longer period this is what the committee had sat down and met upon and agreed upon it used to be 14 days Cory actually may be coming to us in the future asking for more but at this point in time it is 21 days so thank you very much any further discussion regarding the one day license seeing none moving on package store license any comments yes Joe I noticed that in the package store license policy that we we restrict sampling to wine tasting and we say you know beer tasting is not allowed and such I know that state law does it says this will be no beer tasting and I know that state law does make provision for sampling to be allowed at package stores for you know wine beverages liquors and cordials and spirits and you know I think to myself I think that possibly this is from before the time that we had all alcohol package stores in town and I can envision that some of the package stores might want to have a tasting of you know craft beers or craft bourbons or what not and I was looking through the state laws and the state laws actually are pretty clear about the quantities to serve and I'm wondering if this isn't a section if it's the sense of the board that we should allow the full flexibility that's allowed by state law around samplings if this isn't one instance where we're not better served by referencing the state law which does outline exactly what the quantities are that are permitted and so I just I put that out there for the board's consideration yeah I um so I agree with Joe on that so I'm sorry yes Doug? Mr. Chairman so I make sure I understand the change the change is one to as a licensing authority allow the service of not only wine samples but explicitly of craft beer spirits in the chorus well I think the state law says malt beverages it says look as in cordials and says spirits that's the language of the state law there are I think three or four different sections is it just that you want to take that specific sentence or do you want me to also insert no just insert a reference I would take a lot of our language out on it and say consistent with you know whatever we have to do to allow those samplings but consistent with state law one second that's it am I in the correct place where we're talking about page 15 yes um if I look at sampling sampling doesn't it doesn't that say it is allowed it says no beer tastings or is that what it is and it only says wine oh because it only says wine it only says wine it has a lot of language about specific serving serving such the state law already outlines that I don't know that we can keep up with that that caters to what you say and then yeah okay I just wanted to make sure I was in the correct section yeah that is correct I know that this is not to be sarcastic but the thing with novice versus having pieces of paper like as everybody's talking I'm trying to find especially if you're following along the home as well as everybody who has to what page we're talking about that's the reason I'm saying am I on the right page thank you man further discussion regarding the package of Georgia no any further discussion any board members yes I'm just thinking about how confused we all are on this and we made these rules the descendants of those who made these rules and I'm wondering whether we start a process where once we send out a license of a policy related to that one day license to the we do already we do in every when people come in for applications for this the policy is right over one day but also if they come in for a restaurant I usually you know I try to always give them the policies so that they understand what they're getting into along with telling them to go to the ABCC website and it's their responsibility to be familiar with what's demanded by I wonder whether we want to start having them sign that they've read the policy going forward I'm sorry to add to your but we're learning as we're reading through our own policies here so for example and it's something Joe brought up but you don't mind me saying that Joe under package stores they shall not allow in more than one third of windows or on outside walls the posting of advertisements I know I'm not mentioning any but I've gone by three or four that more like three quarters of the windows are covered with advertisements and I wonder if they just don't realize that I didn't realize they also need our approval for what's put up on the inside of these stores so but I think that comes from zoning I think that comes from planning doesn't it that that's any like a supermarket any store in Arlington cannot have any more than one third of their windows I would have assumed that signage was completely under that right so there's a there might be a redundant layer of policies and regulations but the zoning bylaws technically this is conditions of a license and so whatever the zoning bylaws require don't require could be enforced under zoning but this could be enforced separately as a licensing matter but I'm saying I think we took it from the zoning bylaw which says one third of the space but I just wonder whether we remind them of this I'm not recommending a change any further discussion regarding package stores seeing none moving on theater licenses discussion I just had one housekeeping thing we still have a line in there about pro rating of theater license fees granted in 2012 it seems to me we can probably take that out at this point that was put in there when we first adopted the policy but I presumably doesn't serve any purpose at this point so strike the portion regarding pro rating further discussion regarding theater licenses seeing none now this is the speed we were looking for moving on farmers markets discussion regarding the farmers markets licenses seeing none discussion regarding caterers licenses I actually want to go back to theater briefly I'm sorry I think we still want permit rating in general the specific language says pro rate for the ones given in 2012 so let me rephrase if someone applies for the theater license on May 1st of this year do we want them to pay the annual fee or do we want them to pay a pro rated fee that's what I'm asking and if we strike pro rating entirely we're saying if the board chooses that I can go along with it so perhaps just pro rate for 2012 so there's one sentence that says by the vote of this board this annual fee may be pro rated for licenses granted after January 1 I am on 21 and the next one speaks specifically to a 50% pro rating for 12 I think I was reading through the club