 Good evening. Welcome. I'm calling to order this meeting of the comments and selects. On Monday, April 24th. I'm just going to work here at Eric Holden. And I'm going to go right through it. Order of the question has not been pulled over. Tonight's meeting is being conducted in a Irish format. This is the Chapter 2 of the Act of 2043 signed into law in March, March 29th, 2023, which further extends a certain code of 19 that you are regarding on the specification of how it leads until March 31st, 2025. Before we begin this meeting, please don't follow. First, this meeting has been conducted in select board chambers and will resume. This meeting has been recorded. And as I mentioned, the meeting is being brought to staff in this same line. Second, persons wishing to join the meeting by soon may have time to change their mind. This meeting, by the way, is going to be made visible to others than if you wish to participate. We ask that you provide your full hand in the interest of helping record the meeting. Same is true for anyone who is not fully here in the chambers. Third, all participants are advised that people may be listening to an offer by comment, unless a person does not require a quick invite to sell us. Those in participants versus watching an ACMI can follow the post-agenda and the various comments on the website specifically. This is the report agenda is in minutes to be reached. Let's see how much of the town's business is being done tonight. This is the meeting, of course, prior to our first session of the annual town meeting when there was to be done before 8 p.m. to the ACMI and the post-agenda events. Also, as a note, I wouldn't accuse myself of turning me over to my vice-chair, Mr. Hurd, our vice-chair, Mr. Hurd, because I'm always mind-focusing in the State Senate. I have to accuse myself of being managed to involve special legislation. So, at that point, I'm just going to carry the lead for myself and then I'll see you all down the stairs. Any questions? Thank you very much. The first item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda. I have a few questions. The first one is approved by Mr. Griggins, seconded by Mr. Hurd. Any discussion on the questions? Hearing none, I'm motioned by Mr. Biggins, and seconded by Mr. Hurd. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Yes. I think we can register that we'll read the consent agenda for the public's integration. We approve this, and we need to do a full attempt. The rainbow commission is going to approve the five-celebration of Louisville Park on June 17. The request is a contract with the Rainier with the Rain and Land License, but the privilege can't be drained. Another request for the same by J. O. C. Construction. The request for a special one-day green wine license was the L. S. School for the Enroger. Request a temporary permission for the L. J. N. School of the University of Carmelson. Some are positive series that would be more perfect and very basic in the wine office. I'm just asking for a little bit. Our next item of business are two-way forwarding. This is for the embedded special coming that will be made at 5th of April tomorrow. There's no one special coming. On the third. On the third. So, in terms of that, tonight is for this one we're here for the article presentation to have a discussion with the public. We will then, for each of the articles, open up the board for comment, each comment, how we turn the public into three minutes in the U.S. and the state on the topic of those articles. At that point, we should have a session toward the rules of the action. At that time, I think that I'm trying to find the public to invite us very carefully in the careful instruction to do all the morning exercises to make sure that they're all in the producer meeting since evening's record of a record. So, we'll do it at any time. In the beginning of the discussion, I'll go over the statement. All right. So, the first item in the morning will be wearing this article, too. Vote for a hybrid, how many people said it to me. The representative problem of the town being perceived. Christopher Moore, President 14, and member of the Town Being Procedures Committee. The article, too, is a proposal to create a study committee to study the possibility of hybrid format town meeting. We're well aware that there's not clearly legislative authorization to even do that at this point. So, one of the things the committee's going to have to look at is what would it take legally? Also, what would it take technically? And what would be the reasons for doing it? What communities would be served by having an easier time participating in town meeting? And what beneficial effects would we expect? And what detrimental effects might we expect? We carefully put together the motion that we suggested to the board to not presuppose an outcome about what sort of recommendation the committee might make. The intention is also for this committee to live on probably for a couple of years to figure out all the stuff that needs to happen and then to help with the implementation much like the Electronic Voting Study Committee did. I think that the law is just a little bit of a deadlock here. All right, Jason. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Monroe. There was more than it needed to hold that thought. It was a good one. I think, again, if I see it live, I can think that way over the other mic. So, didn't you have a motion or a session? Mr. Herb. I'll move positive action. I look forward to the outcome of the study. One of the reasons that I have to do it, to accuse myself of an X-ray, I don't happen to know that it's in fairly late-breaking news that hybrid town meetings are not specifically permitted. At least it will be some days. That's good to hear. Thank you very much. I appreciate the model that you proposed of a kind of group, but it means a lot to make sure we get it right. Thank you. At this point, I want to invite any public comments to comment below. And I'll check with Ms. Mara first to check the room. And Ms. Mara, is anybody raising their hand? And I guess I forgot to say the national words. If you wish to help public comment, please raise your hand and say, please continue on to that. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Ms. Mara. Mr. Herb. I just have a brief question for Ms. Mara. I'm just wondering if you can answer it. This is at the request of the town meetings committee. Was this something that you felt that it needed just more direct attention, maybe more members, that you wouldn't want to handle just within the proceedings committee itself? Yes, I always thought that it really needed some direct attention from potentially a larger group than the town meeting procedures committee, which is five people including the moderator, who has a big job. So we thought it would be helpful to have a focused group on this. Thank you. For public comment, we've had a discussion of the motion once again by Mr. Herb, seconded by Mr. Gideon, on the motion to favourable action all in favour. I now pose. Thank you very much for your work. Thank you. At this point, I will turn the meeting over to Mr. Herb as vice-chair. I'll see you now, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will make some opening remarks, and then I would like to call on the police chief to offer her perspective. We also have, in addition to Chief Flaherty, our human resources director, Karen Balloy, to answer any questions. This is a piece of home role legislation or special legislation that we would file with the general court that would allow us to exempt civil service procedures or hiring of police officers. Once those officers were hired and on staff passed their probationary period, they would then have full civil service rights if they wanted to complain about how we were treating them or their status or promotions or so forth. The reason that we are asking panel meetings for this authority is that, like a lot of communities, we have found it's been getting more and more difficult to not only hire all sorts of staff, but in particular, it's getting harder and harder to hire police staff. We've noticed in other communities that are not in the civil service system that they get many more applicants for their jobs than Arlington does. And so we thought this would be a good step in the right direction. We had been talking with the unions about the possibility of exiting civil service entirely. That is somewhat a conversation that's going on in bargaining with them. So instead of taking that full step at this point, we thought, let's just try to get us out of the hiring part because I think everybody agrees. I don't want to speak for the unions, but I think everybody agrees that the civil service hiring process is not good for the town and makes it difficult for us to hire qualified people. There are lots of details about how that works. I'd be happy to answer any questions, but I would respectfully request that the police chief be allowed to speak to this issue. Chief Julie Flaherty. So I don't think it's a secret that since I was appointed as chief, I've been exploring or looking at the idea of coming out of civil service for hiring for many different reasons, but I think at this point right now we are entering into a hiring crisis. So about 30 years ago, when I first came on and I sat down and took the civil service test, I was competing with over 300 other candidates for two or three positions and that's just not happening anymore. We're not seeing people signing up to be police officers anymore at this point. Last month, civil service had an entry-level exam and they had nine people sign up for the test. I don't know how many people actually showed up to take the test and I don't know how many people pass that test because they won't have the scores back until September. Last March, we had civil service had an entry-level exam and 16 people sat down and took that test. We just started bringing some people in to begin hiring police officers and of those 16 people that we reached out to, six came in and expressed interest in being a police officer. Of those six that we interviewed, we identified four qualified candidates who will move on in the process and what we've seen in the past is we give conditional office employment, we go through the whole process and then the last portion of the process is a physical abilities test to get into the academy and that's where we're losing people. If we had come out of civil service for hiring, we would be able to administer our own exams, our own test for entry-level 1, 2, 3, how many times a year we determined we'd always have an active list and on the day of the test we could test people for their physical abilities to enter the academy and the written test. So we would know ahead of time who was ready for the academy and we would be able to develop a list then and we would save precious time and money and energy and not lose people at the very end stage. When I talk to my colleagues who have left civil service, they're not having this problem. Civil service police departments are, they are able to go to colleges, go to their social work departments, psychology, sociology, criminal justice departments and recruit graduating seniors because they don't have to be residents. They're able to recruit from college campuses, police officers on college campuses who are post certified and even larger hospital campuses in Boston. So they're not seeing this problem. They're having exams, they're having 50 to 100 people come on the day of the exam to take the test and they're able to hire qualified candidates and diversify their police departments. So ultimately I think it comes down to I am responsible making sure that everybody in the community is safe and without police officers I'm not able to do that. All right, I'll open up to the board for any questions, comments and motions. I did have a conversation on the phone with the town manager and with the chief and to certainly understand all the points that have been made and indicated I'm willing to vote for this to go to town meeting. However, when I see the comment, the draft comment that's attributed in there that really because I said coming to town meeting as a town meeting member I would vote against this. But since the comment says for me if I vote positive action on this then I'm urging town meeting to do that I won't be voting for it. And I'm going to tell you the reasons why. I understand everything the chief is saying and just to segue and I know a lot of cities and towns have joined or ascribed to the 30 by 30 program and Arlington also is in that which is by, I believe correct me if I'm wrong, by 2030 at least 30% of your workforce should be diverse. And I know the town of Lexington is really I've been watching them and getting their updates. And I think the problem that Arlington has not just with the police department but also with public works is we're not competitive in salary. We have two outstanding female police officers and please Mr. Town Manager correct me if I'm wrong that did apply to Arlington we did put them through the academy invested them and if they're not already in Lexington they're going and they're going to make $27,000 and $30,000 more. I think that's the issue with this and where the comment the way it's designed it's saying I'm endorsing this which I wasn't I said I'd be willing to vote for it to go to town meeting which is the conversation I had with both people and would vote no there because I think this is something town meeting should discuss in debate I still wouldn't be in favor of it just for the arguments given which is we need to attract more candidates and I think first and foremost with and I know I said this before I apologize for repeating having seven and nine vacancies respectively in the Department of Public Works and Fox and Field and Highway for everything that we're doing natural turf anything else it's not going to be maintained and we're not even competitive with stonem which I believe their population is about 20 something thousand so I don't think the issue is getting people to apply for the police department because like I said we attracted two great female candidates but once they get here and they see how vastly underpaid they are I think that's going to continue so I just wanted to explain that I'm all for this debate at town meeting I'm not in favor of it thank you I appreciate your being straightforward and honest about that and thank you very much I would say we do try to offer competitive salaries there are some communities like Lexington that just have so much more wealth than we do that it's hard to compete with them we do have a town manager 12 where we've compared ourselves to we think we're competitive with that and we think we've put competitive wages out there however I'm not here tonight to debate our collective bargaining strategy I would respectfully ask that the board do put this to town meeting so we can have a debate there where I think it would be an appropriate place to have that debate and let them decide I do think having worked in a town before that didn't have civil service and seeing what it's like here I do see how it holds us back and I do respectfully request that town meeting be allowed to take up this issue thank you and could I just add if the draft comment were that the vote of the and I'm not saying this has to happen I didn't if the vote was that the select board thinks this is an important issue that is something that town meeting certainly if the town leaders need to hear the discussion of town meeting and their subsequent vote on it that's sort of a comment that I could vote for it but this is saying something different thank you when you take the chair you have to speak last to attorney heim on the lines of what Mrs. Mahan just mentioned can we just update the draft comments to say because this is similar to the issue that we dealt with a couple of years ago we actually didn't vote to put it on the warrant and then we circled back and we got it to the special town meeting and I voted against it as a town meeting member I don't remember if I was a town meeting member at the time but I think for me you know I've spoken to a few people about this and certainly see both sides of the issue so I would like to be in a position where I just say we're going to push to the warranty town meeting for your debate and I'll go down there where my town meeting had and decide where it is where I land when we go to vote so can we just amend I assume it's within our purview what's in the draft comment yes Mr. Wister the comment can say whatever you want it to say and I attempted to draft a comment that would allow you to say the select board urges positive action or no action but clearly I didn't do a particularly good job of that so you can raise the whole comment and just have the comment say the board forwards this matter for town meeting consideration it's your comment so you can have it read however you want I don't think there's anything too dramatic in there other than the word urge and so I would just move it to what moves positive action instead of in those two locations but again I'll open up for additional comment from the board was it against it's going town meeting anyway it's just a matter of how it goes there it would be to those there it was positive action for no action and I think everyone should vote how they feel and make a sentence no and so I think that's good information for town meeting to know the extent to which we are or not we are we'll see so it's going to town meeting you know I guess I see no one in the room so I'm not here can someone tell me what the other side of the argument is for this besides the civil service process itself and taking the test and things like that the other thing is one of the benefits of civil service is that if you have a police officer that wants to go to another city or town who also is in civil service the chief in Arlington can say no I can't afford to lose that officer they have to stay here now if the officer wants to go to a city or town either that doesn't have civil service in Massachusetts or is outside of Massachusetts all that goes away and I know I've been on this board a long time that we've had police chiefs come in not have civil service we've taken it out at some point chief Ryan then when he came in we gave him civil service status for a whole abundance of reasons which I'm not going to reiterate here because I'm not going to get them correct because I didn't do my homework on that so the town in my opinion definitely sees value in civil service but I certainly understand the chief's but there are other benefits that probably somebody from the union or someone else would tell you but I don't know that the town manager is going to want to do that so I'll leave it at that and I don't know any of my colleagues when I answer that yeah I mean the conversations it's separate issues since they'll have civil service protections while they're on the force and some of the benefits of civil service will be there in place anyways I mean I think I was going to talk after but I'm going to go now civil service has been the way it's been there's I think there is still this I think there's a few people that just recently took the test and the question would be where do they fall in the scheme of the hiring I think and then I think some conversations shift to what's not really the meat of this article is not let's not have a hiring problem hiring issue because let's retain our talent and that is definitely an important conversation to have gets frustrating to me at least that every year of the year our bargaining seems to go into arbitration that we can't work with our officers I understand and I've had conversations with people about the limitations that Arlington has I think they're having seen conversations at the school committee level with teachers and pay relative to some of the neighboring cities and towns and it's the same we have this conversation in many different forms with lack of ability to create new growth and the limitations of proposition two and a half and that is a real aspect of the discussion but I think for something like this some of the officers definitely want to want to see some movement in the way that the town negotiates with unions and we don't step into the role of collective bargaining we've been chewed back by a couple town managers now when I do but I think that's one of the one of the arguments that you will hear from officers is let's not just look at how we hire to replace it's an officer that's been with the town for 20 years expendable but we can pull somebody back in pretty simply if we pass this legislation but again it's not everyone understands that there is an issue with hiring police officers in civil service I think the chief can correct me if I'm wrong but I think I'd heard one time the chief was trying to hire five people applied and one person got through the academy and so now we're having issues as people retire people leave where detectives are getting pulled back into uniform and we definitely need to find a solution so I I always get weary with issues like with this but I think it's something that I'll vote for to move on to town meeting for the discussion and we'll see what happens at state we don't I'm not sure Mr. do you know if this is passed in any other jurisdictions or is this a novel idea for the state to review it's a somewhat novel idea the city of adalboro put forward a similar proposal I will say for the last two years that I know of there have been several petitions for towns to move out of civil service entirely none of which have moved in the city of adalboro it's a complicated issue up on beacon hill involving multiple unions particularly the fire union which is dead set against any changes the police may be a little less so but on beacon hill it's just a difficult situation but I think this at least would send a little message to our senators legislators and the legislative leadership that something needs to be done is there any more comments on the board this is just 714 so so I understand that the civil service that you had at one point being 300 people flying and now being very few is that even across the board with non civil service if I may Mr. Chair yes there are communities Burlington just got out of civil service for example they get 100 people applying I think the last time they opened up a job application there I know when I was back in Amherst we had plenty of people applying so the non civil service communities have much better luck and make it much easier for them to get attract people to get jobs in their towns my question was though is the trend going down for them also yes there are more communities getting out of or trying to get out of civil service than staying there aren't people moving into civil service at this point so I think I think Burlington had 200 applications when they opened it up would they have 200 applications or is the trend that people in general are less likely to apply for police officer positions I think the trend in general is that it is harder to hire people in police positions I think that's all across the country frankly I read articles about that so in that regard I think we're trying to have a multi-tasked position taking away as many obstacles as we can to hiring I think civil service is an obstacle we need to get rid of that again without getting in the particulars of collective bargaining I think we're trying to put things out that would be favorable to the unions and favorable both to be able to hire and retain people so it's a multi-faceted approach if the problem is getting more people to apply I just want to know whether or not this is a solution to it I mean I'm supporting it for other reasons one is because it was a recommendation from the equity audit and I understood the rationale for that and I supported I mean on the other side of it I do understand the value in having people from a community police in the community but in a community that has our own sense of composition the only way to get more diversity which is to bring it from from outside it's a difficult state though so you take it from you take it from someplace else they have less but like I said I think the equity audit I like the reasons for that I understood those reasons and then of course there is the Chief of Police who is supporting those and I I'm just going to give that a lot of weight just as I would if it were going in that direction it would be really hard for me to go against unless I had unless I had some compelling reason and I don't but I would burden my colleagues with respect to report because once again this is going to town meeting I think it's important to town meeting to know if you don't support it and not to say it's important just to get to town meeting anyway so I think it's important if you don't that you let people know that you've gone and why you don't so that they have more information to make a decision so that's it, thank you if I may this is the vote on sending it to town meeting at town meeting members have the ability to express themselves at that point in the debate so I would respectfully take a different position for what you've just articulated Mr. Jans because I think the vote tonight is whether to give town meeting the opportunity to take up the issue well thank you for that I just understood and so I just assumed that it was going as a matter of whether we voted positive action on town meeting to take it up or not so I clearly misunderstood I'm sorry for that I'll withdraw but by advice and it's about I understand why you always saying take the position you are thank you Mr. President thank you Mr. Heard just a follow up question and I'm aware of the I believe this actually is almost identical to what is currently pending at the legislature for the City of Attleboro is that the first time Attleboro has attempted to do this or have they done it in a prior session and it wasn't approved I believe I believe I don't know I know it's pending in the current session and again just to be clear if an individual is hired after the 12 months that police officer is considered a civil service police officer there's a lot of issues here in terms of civil service what happens with the civil service program and whether there's an opt out later on whether there isn't challenges in terms of flexibility both for officers and for communities and I think based on what the Chief has said tonight I'm willing to support this for hiring purposes because clearly there are challenges here I will say there are a number of other issues Mrs. Mohan referred to them I think those go beyond what's being attempted here but they certainly are very important just as we go forward and I think for purposes of the town meeting discussion I think it would be important just to try to distinguish presently what's happening with civil service communities non-civil service communities because I know just in general I think earlier this year that the Commissioner of the City of Boston Police Department sent letters to the Massachusetts Association saying we can't hire police officers so there are major issues here for this limited purpose I'd be willing to go along and support it Thank you I guess just to wrap up our discussion before we go to public comment I'd say it sort of touches on what Mrs. Mohan was saying and leads into Mr. Bingham's question are we going to see 200 applicants? Probably not because there's a whole host of figures including what does it pay? What's the reception? How are the officers treated? I think that's a separate issue that we need to continue to work on to make sure that we're taking care of our police department and we're attracting new members and we're retaining our current members because it's certainly a lot of value and institutional knowledge of officers that have been in the town for a long time so I think there are again I'll support this to send this town meeting where my town meeting had down there when I vote but I think there is a continued discussion that we're going to have beyond just the hiring because we don't want to go through even if we're hiring out of civil service I don't think the chief wants to take up all her time hiring where there's constant turnover so I will support this at this hearing I will likely support it at town meeting and but again I want to continue to have those conversations to make sure that our officers are being treated fairly they'll be being paid what they should within the limits of what the town can provide and certainly from resident perspective, town perspective from us that the officers are getting the respect they deserve for the work that they do so because this was on the special town meeting warrant it wasn't a long time between when it was published and when we had the hearing there's nobody in line or nobody here who's speaking to this but I think given the short timeframe about there who have concerns I think that we should be aware of the concerns I would encourage them to contact us and let those concerns know or let reasons that they're in favor of it be known to before we go to the special town meeting because I think the limited time may or may not have affected that but I think it helps us all of us get as much information as we can I suspect there may be some folks that have comments quick question because it's been raised a lot I'm not getting any discontented about me but through you Mr. Chair the town manager or the human resources director I think I know 10 and I think when I put up public works in police on the Allington 12 we're very near the bottom could you quickly list out as close as you can who the Allington 12 communities I understand for like town manager and then schedule employees we're at the top and for like teachers we're at the bottom at like 68% and police officers are like 72% but could you list the Allington 12 or come close to it um Needham, Belmont, Stoneham Reading Stoneham Watertown and Rochester okay so I reiterate again that Stoneham is paying better than Allington is for town jobs so anyways and with that this is public hearing this is public hearing we'll first go to anyone in the room that would like to speak and is there anyone on Zoom seeing no one gets raised it was the public hearing for sure so I'm reading the tax of the article and it says to see if the town will vote to authorize and request the select board to petition the Mass General Court to exempt the town from provisions so it doesn't seem to me like we're voting on whether to send this to Tom Meade can I clarify I think what the discourse here is is the select board through its comment really just the comment articulating the position that it supports and wants to tell to take a certain action or that it just wants town meeting to talk about it and take a vote so for example in the draft comment it just sort of says select board moves insert position action so what I intended there was positive action, negative action whatever it was but you could also draft something that means like the select board forwards this article for the purposes of town meetings discussion and then close it out with the balance the board does not take a substantive position but advances it to town meeting for its collective discourse and judgment so I think what your colleagues are talking about from my perspective at least what I'm hearing is that the part of the discussion is are we voting on this and saying town meeting please do this or are we voting on this because if we don't vote on it the default motion is no action before town meeting it would need either a substitute motion or something like that to be before the meeting do I have that correct? yeah Mr. Diggins in the same place I feel like if you put more of this my right election for the last time we put initially this for a special town meeting is that we have to vote to put it senate to town meeting correct the special town meeting is only articles that the select board votes to put before town meeting no Mr. Leicester these articles are on the special town meeting more you are voting whether or not you are going to have a positive action motion or if there is a no action that is the default action before town meeting and maybe I understand what you are doing so all special legislation any special legislation we ever submit of any kind has that same premium it's how many will you authorize this the select board always files special legislation through our legislative delegation so we are back to where I got the word because the town manager said I am not going to send this to town meeting and my understanding is that this is going to town meeting this is a matter of whether it goes there with no action if I may Mr. Diggins if there is no positive action someone would have to submit a substitute motion town meeting members could do that but they are not guaranteed to do that because this was inserted in the request of the manager the manager cannot submit a substitute motion only a town meeting member can do that I understand that's how this was in New York yes sir I understand I guess what I was getting I could go on we are all on the same page thank you so I think you are hearing that it would get worse so before you all take a vote I just want to make sure I understand from a comment perspective and again a comment can be done it's your motion whether or not you want this draft comment to just be we urge positive action or you want it to be a slightly more tap down version that I just sort of articulated where you are forwarding it to town meeting for discussion and to where you are saying you don't take a substantive position but you are advancing it for town meetings discourse and judgment I can well confirm if Ms. Maron can certainly talk on this I just think if it says this is like what moves positive action which is what we are doing I think we sometimes give ourselves a little more influence over the way town meeting votes than they have so we spend time a little bit on semantics where it says urge is kind of like we are really pushing this whereas some of us are we might urge something that we ultimately vote against so I would just not comment on this but I just think if it says we move positive action I don't think it's going to sway the town meeting one way or another but it's a little more in line with what you are hearing for the board I agree with that but I want to wait to see I don't know if there is a motion yet but I would be interested if the motion is what Mr. Hurd said select board moves positive action to go to town meeting or which is within the purview of my colleagues if the motion is the select board moves positive action and requests, urges, whatever word you want to use and I don't know is there a motion so it's whatever whoever wants to make the motion if you want to just make the motion to move positive action to send this to town meeting that's something I can vote for but if you feel so inclined that no I want to I want to go the whole hundred percent then that would be your motion and I would not vote for that thank you Mr. Chair do you want to make the motion? no because don't even get me started with the legislation I think there's a range of where people are but I think for the purposes of having a 4-0 vote I think based on what Mr. Hurd said and what I'd be comfortable with is in the first sentence select board moved positive action on this article and I'd strike the last sentence of the comment and leave everything else in there and I don't know if that's comfortable with the other members and then to the extent that people have more comments that they want to give as individuals they can do it at town meeting but I mean I think I'm going to move positive action on this article and just leave it at that and if I could say to that if the first sentence as Mr. Dacorsi says if the second sentence I don't agree with that and everything else would be fine the summation of Mass. General Law Chapter 31 so I don't know how strongly people fear about that where it says in short sets forth many criteria you know I'm just trying to understand I'm not disagreeing I'm just asking if we could take out take out the sentence in short and then leave everything else where it says the polls are before the board is to remove civil service requirements and da da da da I'll find that and Mr. Dacorsi I think I was going to make because I do really want to flag the sentence of the board here now so Mr. Dacorsi I was a fur so I'd like to wait until they exclude that vote and the thing is we're in the unique position that we already have our draft comment before before we've even voted if we didn't have that we wouldn't be in this vote right now so please don't anyone which I don't feel that anyone is doing that to take that into account so if you could kind of wipe that you know because I mean I could go on for another 20 minutes but you don't want me to disagree with that second sentence but I'm not going to go there Mr. Dacorsi my only concern in the comment is we have Chapter 31 in the vote I think Chapter 31 has to be identified as what it is in the comment and if you don't agree with the full sentence that's fine but I mean I think somewhere you have to identify what Chapter 31 is in the comment in what's happening here just as a matter of fact that's fine may I make a suggestion yeah no no it says that it's Chapter 31 that's all if you'd like to proceed in this manner it could read the select board moves positive action this is a terminating discussion or it just moves positive action the proposal before the select board is to remove civil services parentheses general law Chapter 31 requirements and criteria with respect to new hires under the flexible criteria set forth in the special legislation above does not otherwise propose to effect civil services, processes, conditions or rights, respect to employment, promotion, etc the police officers then that's just the end the only thing on that is what I moved is we moved favorable action and then again individually I think the concern was with the word urges so for me I don't really need the full purposes after that I think that's up to the individuals down the town meeting if they're opposed to it as town meeting members so I mean do we want to simplify this and just says the select board moves positive action on the article? yeah leave it at that uh oh backspace backspace I didn't want to say that it was very good on the spot editing that was almost anti-masking so to sort of clear right now the proposal would be the select board moves positive action on this article sorry for all the time we spent on it no no no there's a very well written comment before it's your comment that's what it should reflect do you have a second? any more discussion? alright so we have a motion for positive action only from Mr. Corsi seconded by Mr. Diggins all those in favor say aye aye all those opposed that is 4-0 vote with Mr. Helmut recusing we have that move presents on to correspondence received move receipt we have an online ADA compliance report from Joan Roman we have a motion to receive second we have a motion to receive from Mrs. Mahan seconded by Mr. Digg Corsi all those in favor say aye aye all those opposed we have a new business thank you Mr. Hannon I would just mention I would have sent you an email that there is something on YouTube now you have a link to it you might just want to take a look Mrs. Mahan I wasn't going to have new business but to that end I do want to thank the select board's office I have not reviewed the whole 48 minutes but I did go to the encounter in the select board's office and I did call Ms. Mahan ask her to pass along my congratulations for the exemplary way that they performed as they do every single day thank you Mr. Diggins Mr. Corsi no new business in our just I only saw the first meeting not the manager Mr. Digg very well so is entertaining Ms. Mahan I would like to move that the select board adjourn and reconvene down at Arlington's regular town meeting and that we remain in session throughout the course of the annual town meeting and that our adjournment of the select board will be at the annual town meeting will be concurrent with the annual town meeting at the annual town meeting second and I just said that so many times because when we go into the special we'll have the same vote thank you that's why we never call anyone else to make that motion motion by Ms. Mahan seconded by Mr. Diggins all those in favor say aye aye all those opposed by Mr. Diggins