Good evening. Welcome to the Board of Selectments meeting for April 11th. First order of business is to get me out of the seat and elect a new chair and that is always run by our Administrator Marie Krippelka. The first order of business is tonight's to have an organizational meeting for the purpose of electing a chair and vice chair. So I'm going to ask nominations for the purpose of electing a new chair. I'd like to nominate Diane Mahan, Mr. Chairman. Do I have a second? Second. Okay, now we'll have a roll call vote. Move to close. Any other nominations? Are you new to this? I think I know by now. I'll move to close the nominations. Second. Hearing none, it's closed and now we'll have a roll call vote. Mr. Dunn. Yes. Mr. Currow. Yes. Yes. Mr. Verne. Yes. This is Mahan. Yes. All in favor. So we now have a new chair. Congratulations, Mrs. Mahan. Thank you. And now I'm going to open it for nominations for a vice chair. Mr. Currow. I move to nominate Daniel Dunn. Second. Move to close nominations. Second. In favor. No other nominations hearing none. We will go to the election of a new vice chair. I'll start with Mr. Currow. Yes. Mr. Dunn. Yes. Mr. Dunn. Yes. Congratulations. So we have a new chair and a vice chair. Thank you. Thank you. I sat in my chair for a couple of seconds. It's a letter. Give my pen to the right drawer. I can steal your pen if I'm happy. Go for it. Situated. The only time I use a pen is getting this desk. Put that there. Mr. Currow. First I'd like to thank all my colleagues for electing me chair. I think one of the things the board is well known for now is how efficiently and respectful we run our meetings and I hope to continue on with that tradition that has been established by previous chairs. So with that I would like to go to agenda item two. Thank you to Diamond and Platinum sponsors of the Patriots Day Parade Committee. Is there a representative here from the Patriots Day Parade Committee? If you could come up to the microphone. Just state your name. Hi. Thank you so much. Christine. Thank you. So we're on the Patriots Day Parade Committee. Thank you all for your support. And thank you for approving the parade this year and closing the streets and all of the other approvals that were needed for the parade to make it happen. So we obviously could not have pulled this parade off this year without the support of our generous sponsors. Our Diamond sponsor this year was Armstrong Amulance. Our Platinum sponsors were Leader Bank as well as John's Landscape Service. Tonight I believe we only have Leader Bank with us, Representative Leader Bank only because of the change in schedule I think schedules were a little off this week. We wanted to bring up the representative from Leader Bank to publicly thank him for or thank the bank for their generous support in allowing us to make it happen this year. Mr. Fenchuo if you'd like to come up. So we have here a plaque. Our top three sponsors are getting a plaque. As you know from the schedule we have a road race with the Boys and Girls Club at 8.45 in the morning on Sunday the 17th. Top three parade sponsors are on the t-shirt. So Leader Bank has a place on the t-shirt as well as the other two sponsors. And so every sponsor will be getting a t-shirt. So if you want to hand this over to Mr. Fenchuo. Thank you. Perfect. And then the plaque as well. John thank you so much. We're so blessed to have Leader Bank in Arlington. You folks are always here supporting everything. That means a great deal to us. Thank you very much. We appreciate the honor and we appreciate the ability to serve and help in any way we can to our town of Arlington and we'll continue to do this as many years as we can into the future. Thank you very much. Thank you. When you're done let me know. I just wanted to say that at noon on Sunday there will be a battle reenactment. And then at 2 p.m. the parade will kick off from Brattle Square. We have a number of great bands. Obviously again could not have pulled that off without the generous support of the donors and the sponsors. So thank you all. I would just say that it's been a pleasure serving in the committee this year. It's a very energetic committee under Christine's tutelage. She does a great job. But I would say to you that I've been involved in the parade and the committee for as many years as I can recall. It's been an amazing parade. We have a lot more bands than usual. We have floats this year which we haven't had in a long time. So the early weather forecast is 60 and sunny. So we hope you can all be there. Thank you. Thank you to the community as well. We're really lucky in Arlington to have volunteers like yourselves and the sponsors like leader bank Armstrong and John's Landscaping. We rely on them quite a bit for many different events and they always step to the plate. So thank you all very much. Thank you. And of course Bose. Thank you very much. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And we will see you at the parade. Normal step step step off location. All right. Thank you. Thank you.  I know we have a few debauchment heads and others attack members. Mr. Towne manager if I could have you sort of got it through this. Absolutely. Thank you madam chair. So tonight before the board for its discussion and potential adoption is a complete streets policy. This has been something that's been discussed for quite a while now. Last year the board voted favorably to recommend the town meeting and town meeting voted favorably on a top meeting. So we're adopting the complete streets statute. The board also endorsed as applying as a community for the community compacts to adopt and implement a complete streets policy. So this is the next step in that. And we have a director of public works. Mike Rademacher assistant planning director Laura Weiner and representative of tax got Smith here tonight to talk a little bit about the policy itself and answer any questions the board might have. Good evening. Laura Weiner assistant director of planning. I know you have a long agenda tonight so we'll try to keep it brief for you. This policy group was developed. This policy was developed by a working group of tax chair by Scott Smith who's also here as well as Mike Rademacher who joined us on the committee and also will be the administrator of this policy. The policy is a response to a recently created state program that is trying to encourage communities to build complete streets. Which means a street that accommodates all users, drivers, pedestrians, bike riders, transit riders and freight carriers. The current thinking in transportation planning is that the way to reduce congestion is not by building more streets or wider streets but by encouraging people to drive less by making it safer and more attractive to walk, bike and take transit. Both the federal and state government are moving in this direction. The state has made will make available $400,000 in grants to communities who adopt these policies, a complete streets policy for construction of complete streets. Our policy which you have had before you will focus on the major streets that are accessible to public transportation. It builds on the bike facility network which you have already approved in past years. It has reasonable policies for exceptions such as for lightly traveled streets or streets that are too narrow to accommodate a bike path or even a sidewalk and has performance measurements which is a requirement of MassDOT. And lastly as Adam mentioned it was one of our community compact best practices that we promised to adopt. I'm going to pass it over to Scott Smith now. Scott Smith a member of TAC and of Town Meeting. Just point out some reasons to support it. One we're already doing it. Both our major project just completed and the one now underway both complete streets projects consistent with the master plan adopted by the town and last year acceptance of the legislation was supported by about a four to one margin at Town Meeting and finally I think it's consistent with our desire to be an inclusive welcoming community to everyone. Mike Rademacher Director of Public Works thank you. I just echo what Scott said that it's somewhat an easy next step for the town of Arlington. A lot of the projects we work on now we try to accommodate all these different facets of transportation and to memorialize it in a policy that can make ourselves available for some funding seems like the right thing to do. Okay. Mr. Dunn? I'd like to move approval on the complete streets policy. So I agree with what the speaker said that this is something that we've been doing as a town for a while and I have absolutely endorsed it and I've tried to encourage it and I think that this is a further step. You know, some of the ways that the roads were built in town, you know, were built for a different era and different modes of transportation and I think that we have correctly recognized that we need to be more opened up multiple methods of transportation, not just personal cars and I think that this document does a lot towards addressing the balance of what we need for transportation in Arlington so I'm very happy to support it. Mr. Kuro? Thank you very much. Like my colleague said, this is no brainer. I just had one question on the performance measures. Would I be right in assuming that we already have the baseline measures in place or will you be compiling those once the policy is adopted? I think once we choose a project we will have to do a baseline measure before we do the construction. So Mike, maybe you want to give a plug to Wednesday evenings which is directly related. Yes, on Wednesday evening the DPW and planning department together are hosting a planning session to talk about phase 2 of the Mass Ave which starts at Pond Lane and goes to Mill Street and so focuses on Arlington Center and sort of just to start visioning of what we would love to see that revitalize the Arlington Center. Thank you. Mr. Grilly? It's 7 o'clock in the town hall auditorium. Thank you. Mr. Grilly? Yes. My colleagues have already made all the comments but I believe where we have already best embraced this concept is in the East Arlington Corridor project and we fought long and hard for that project but I was stunned to see recently, not stunned but pleasantly surprised, realtor.com listed the 30 top neighborhoods to live in the United States and East Arlington is one of those top 30. Those who are flocking to this town and please continue to do so they want to walk, ride their bikes and take mass transit. I'll still be driving but thank you. Anyhow, congratulations to all of you. Hearing no further comment on a motion by Mr. Dunn. Seconded by Mr. Byrne. All those in favor say aye. Those opposed. unanimous vote. Thank you for all that work. We'll see you in the future. It's not over. Now have the consent agenda. I'll read through everything on the agenda. If anyone is here to approve, then please vote. Seconded. By Jeffrey Chunglow, our director of veteran services for the permit for Memorial Day Parade on Monday, May 30, 2016. A vote for Special Municipal Employee, Arlington Recreation Department, our director of recreation, Joe Connolly. A request by the farmers market winery application, sale of wine, for coastal for their annual walk-up on Friday, April 29th from 2.30 p.m. to 4.00 p.m. Eva Bittaker, Hottie School PTO, a request for a one-day beer and wine license on May 7th, 2016 at the Robbins-Wittemore House for a private party, R.T. Aron. Excuse me. And then we have appointments of new election workers, and I apologize if I say any name incorrectly. Patricia Bello, 15 Murray Street on Enroll for Precinct 12. Priscilla Burz-Vay for Winslow Street on Enroll for Precinct 11. Thomas Fitzgerald, 67 Stokecraft Road on Enroll for Precinct 21. Elaine Forrest, 54 Medford Street, Democrat, Precinct 7. Adrienne Landry, 34 Hamilton Road, Democrat, Precinct 2. Doris Noviello for Winslow Street, Democrat, Precinct 10. Gillian Paddy, 30 Tower Road, Unenrolled, Precinct 17. Kathleen Roche, 121 Newland Road, Unenrolled, Precinct 21. Donna Shaw, 273 Cambridge Street, Unenrolled, Precinct 14. Louise Thompson, 8 Summer Street, Democrat, Precinct 14. Holly Trempie, 112B, Sunnyside Ave, Unenrolled for Precinct 2. I'd like to have a motion to approve. Consent agenda. Move approval. Seconded by Mr. Burns, seconded by Mr. Greeley. I would ask if there is anyone here, whether it's the Memorial Day Parade, Farmer's Market, Hardy School PTO, and seeing none. Any further discussion by my colleagues, Mr. Carroll? Thank you. It's my understanding that there's been a slight update to the minutes just to reflect that we did vote on the full membership of the Minuteman Building Project Assessment Task Force and those involved in enumerated revision. Okay, Mr. Berman, that is a friendly amendment. Still seconded by Mr. Dunn. Any further discussion? If not, all those in favor, say aye. Aye. All those opposed? Unanimous vote with the amendment. We'll now go to licenses and permits. Renewals for approval. Cafe outside seating permit. We have Common Ground at 319 Broadway, Restaurante Livio 201 Massave, and the Madrona Tree at 315 Broadway. Is there anyone who would like to speak to this item, this agenda item? Mr. Dunn? I just have, so last year was the first year that we implemented all of these, I believe, and so we're coming up on round two. And Mr. Manager and Madam Administrator Secretary, I forget your title, Marie, Mayor? We'll go with Mayor. Have there been a lot of feedback that you've heard? I'm sure we'll be getting some more requests with the good weather coming for East Arlington, Florida. Yeah, frankly I have to say I've not really heard any feedback other than a certain resident who does put the board know his feedback from time to time. I'm happy to move approval. Second. Moved by Mr. Dunn, seconded by Mr. Greeley. That's so hard, Mr. Byrne. Any further discussion, Mr. Curell? Yeah, I just had one question. I might have to direct this to the office as well. There was a reference here to the experience with one of the applicants regarding the use of umbrellas with alcohol-related logos and some issues with the buffer zone between their outdoor seating and adjacent establishment that there was a little bit of back and forth in getting that resolved. It's supposed to be done, but now when they put the tables out this time, that umbrella can't go up to it. Do we need to put that in as a condition? He was sent a registered letter, so he has it in writing. A registered letter from the board plus the building department. It's up to you if you want to put it in writing. I guess we could put it as a... I took it that it was already in there. Is it in there? It would just not be a subject? Not being... Perhaps I'll revise my vote just to be clear. Move approval subject to all conditions as of 4th. That's perfect. That I can agree with, because with one of the renewals, which I am going to vote in favor of, I have had preliminary conversations with the town manager and town council about something that was brought to my attention, but I don't know if it's a case in point that actually exists. So with the revising of Mr. Dunn's motion, seconded by Mr. Grayley, all those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed, unanimous vote. We now have a request. Handicap parking sign at 911 Oxford Street by John A. Caruso. Is Mr. Caruso here? Yes. Good evening. You can just say your name and address. Hello. I'm Lexington Ness. Semedine Sanderson Road. I'm here to speak on behalf of my mother and my sister. I have both residents living there handicapped.  My sister is 80 and recovering from a broken hip operation. It's very difficult to pick them up for doctors appointment, shopping and so forth because of parking in front of the house. Although there is a driveway, it's nearly impossible to make a swing into the driveway because of the way the cars parked in front of the house. If cars were not parked so close to the driveway entrance, the swing into the in and out could be completed. Therefore, we're requesting a handicap or no parking section so we could get in and out of the driveway unimpaired. That's my request. Move approval. Mr. Byrne moves approval. Second. Seconded by Mr. Curell. Any further discussion? Just with the caveat when there's a snow emergency, we do ask that the car be placed somewhere else when the snow emergency is declared.  But if somebody else with the placard happens to come along and park there, they can do that. But I haven't ever heard that happen, but I just want to make sure you're aware of that. So on a motion by Mr. Byrne, seconded by Mr. Greeley. Did you have any comments? I just had a question. Yes. Mr. Byrne, is she heading out dancing or God love? She's unbelievable.  She hangs on to the cart, but she comes with me. So she's been great.  Thank you. Thank you. Motion by Mr. Byrne, seconded by Mr. Greeley. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed? Unanimous vote. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. What I would like to do this time, because I know there are another meeting or two that they have to go to, is take an agenda item out of order. Agenda item 17, former colleague Clarissa Rowe, chair of the Community Preservation Act Committee, CPA, with their funds draft recommendations. And my whole committee, please. Not the whole committee, because three of them had conflicts. Oh dear, what have I done? I'll let them introduce themselves. Hello, everyone. I'm Chuck Taroney from the Conservation Commission. Joanne Robinson, Historical Commission. Eric Helmuth, you appointed me. You appointed me. Leslie, Mayor Park and Recreation Commission. Richard Murray from the Allenton Housing Authority. Andrew Pinkson, also a Selective and Appointed. This is a wonderful committee. And I want to thank you for appointing the people that you did appoint. We, I believe you've seen our draft recommendations. You know about the money. And we're really here to ask, answer any questions and to ask for your support. Mr. Greeley. Do you want approval? You want us, what do you want? I love you. I move we love you. But really, what a spectacularly done report. Yeah. See this man here? Yeah. Behind me? He does spectacular work. Yes, he does. But that's a beautiful report. Very well done. Oh, second. Motion by Mr. Greeley. Seconded by Mr. Curell. Mr. Dunn. I just have a question which you may or may not be ready for, which is, so what about next year? What do you think is going to be different? Or are you just like, you've been racing through to the finish line and you'll say, we'll talk about next year, next year. Where, first of all, we're going to have a real schedule that makes sense so that we're in the traditional budget cycle so that we have warrant articles in January. And we can go to the budget sequence that we should be going through. It was, you know, we worked very, very hard and we did our best and, you know, we take what we're doing very seriously and there was a lot of work that had to go into making sure that all the projects were ready.  Okay. And we will have a public meeting and, you know, any, we're going to, after a town meeting, we're going to have a celebration at my house. They don't even know yet. And we'll figure out how to do it even better. But I'm really pleased with what's come out of it. Thank you. Mr. Grayley. I actually did have a question. Sorry, just help me. Okay. Town meeting actions are limited. The difference between reject recommendations and reserve amount recommended to applicable reserve account rather than approving the project. What's the difference between those two? Well, town, in town meeting, town meeting can really, they can vote a project up or down. Right. If we say, like Robin's forum, it's 636,000 something dollars. Right. They, somebody could get up and say, I don't think that project's worth that. We think that did only should be $500,000. And then they put a motion on town meeting floor and the body votes for that. And 136,000 goes back to CPC. Okay. It goes back into the fund. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Carroll. Thank you very much. And thank you to the committee for all of your hard work. I was able to catch part of the presentation of the project proponents a couple of weeks ago. And they were every bit as impressive as the report that we have in front of us. And, you know, I see this as a great success. And I think that what you've put forward really demonstrates everything that we talked about when we were proposing the CPA for Ms. Roe was proposing the CPA for Arlington. You know, yes, the shovel ready projects. And yes, if you look through these, a lot of them are leveraging, in some cases, volunteer help and many cases funds from other places, including CDBG. There's the Robbins Farm Park project in particular is actually addressing a need that has been in the capital budget for many, many years. And we just haven't been able to push to the top. And I think it's impressive. I think that the breadth and the depth of the projects here are really... Right. And Dean Karman pointed out to me that if we hadn't accepted the Robbins Farm one, the town wouldn't have had the money to do the overage for the Straton School. Right. And then with Drake Village work, I think it's bringing $1.4 million into the town. So it is... That's what it should do is leverage. Thank you for great work. I don't have much to add just to thank you as well. And I think that it's also pretty important to see that they span across the entire town when you look at the map. It starts up the heights and glues all the way down the East Ireland. And I did the map. So thank you. And I think that's great. Thank you all very much. You're welcome. And I want to say thank you to everybody who serves in this committee. I'm a bit jealous when I see all the different names on the committee. I'm like, I want to be on that. Because it's such a great meeting of the minds and the cadre of expertise that you all bring, as well as I really enjoy the report, and I spoke to Ms. Rowe about it, in terms of the amount of work that you all had to do with a really condensed amount of time at the very beginning, which probably will be a one-time thing, because now you know the ropes and others do as well in terms of what the process is. So hopefully for you all going in the future, but it seems like from what I read in there, that will not have to be so much work done by so few so quickly. And I really do appreciate that. On a motion by Mr. Byrne, if there is no further discussion, seconded by Mr. Greerly, all those.  All those opposed, unanimous vote. Are you all here also for article 58? Yes, and for... I just want to let them go to their next meeting, if that's okay with my colleagues. Yeah, that's fine. 58 and? Or just 57? 57. 57. We're asking for positive votes of support. Okay. No. Oh, I'm... We're asking for no action on 57. No, on 58. It's a good thing he's with me. Okay. On article 58, a motion... I would draw the, I love you, a motion for no action. Motion of no action by Mr. Greerly, seconded by... I'm trying to figure it out. On 58, because I don't have 57 before me. Could I just offer a brief explanation? So we put 58 in there, not knowing where we would be with the community preservation plan, and where we ended up was a draft. And we thought, you know, rather than ask Tom Benning to debate a resolution for a draft that's not finished yet, we would say, let's give you the draft. We'll hand it out. Invite their comments over the summer. We'll hold our second public meeting that really is sort of a miniature master plan kind of process. We also plan, by the way, we've scheduled with Vision 2020 to put some questions about CP priorities on the census survey that goes out at the end of the year. So we're going to keep gathering community input about priorities and finalize the plan and then come back next year to Tom Benning and ask for their support. Mr. Dunn, did you... Thank you. So I just want to double check. So we're, you're passing out a draft, but you're seeking a no formal action on it at this time. Correct. Okay. Thank you. That actually wasn't clearing to me coming into tonight. The draft was just made from existing plans, like existing master plan, existing open space plan, but we didn't have enough time to really kick the tires and get a whole lot more public input and we'd like more. And one of the things that the housing plan has not done yet, and we would really like to incorporate the recommendations from the housing plan that's being done into our recommendations for next year. Tom. Okay. A motion by Mr. Grilly for no action, seconded by... Second. Mr. Curell. Any further discussion? If not, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Those opposed? Amen. I'm a spoke. Thank you very much. Okay. We will now go back to the agenda. Excuse me, I have a tickle that just won't go away. Agenda item 13 for approval, A-Town Jazz Festival Banners, submitted by Dan Fox. Is Mr. Fox here? I think you could just say your name and whatever affiliation and explanation you can give us. Sure. Dan Fox. I'm the owner of Mooringside Music Studio, a local music school in town. And I also put on the A-Town Jazz Festival. It's going into its fifth year now. It's very hard to get the word out. I'm sure most of you have not heard of it, even though I've had articles in the advocate and in the globe and so forth. So this year is the biggest year so far. I'm incorporating it over three days, April 29th to May 1st, and six different venues around town. And I'm trying to really make it a community event. From now on, this is my goal all along. And so this is the first year I've been able to expand it. And I really want to get the word out to people to finally know about it, to be able to put the banners in the center of town. And I also have venues in East Arlington and the Heights. So I don't know if it's possible to have banners in different spots. But... Okay. Move approval. Move by Mr. Byrd. Seconded by Mr. Kiro with a question. A second with a question, yeah. A question. The question I guess is just how many banners, which locations, like how many each location and which dates are you looking to put them up? Well, I'd say as soon as possible to let people know about it. I'm thinking maybe a dozen banners, most of them in the center of town, a couple on the Heights and East Arlington. Okay. I don't know if the manager... Not to put them on the spot, if it's something else that the BW director knows, if we can accommodate that number without interfering with some of the others that are up right now. Yeah, actually I would call on the town manager in terms of A for East Arlington, we're sort of in the beginning of setting up a process in terms of, and I believe that falls under year purview. And then the center one, does that fall under yours and the board of selectmen? So if I could hear from Mr. Chaplain and Mrs. Kropelka, or if you want Mr. Rademacher. Well, so in terms of the process, my understanding has been East Arlington in the center, still the board's jurisdiction of whether or not banners will go up. One of the challenges is going to be the new brackets in East Arlington are different size than the brackets in the center. So I think it's going to be probably one location or other based on how large they are. Have you had them fabricated yet? No, we have the design, which I emailed. So it's available for you to see. The size of it is made for the size that I believe are in the center, it's 30 by 60. So there are banners up right now in regards to that art project founded by the family of Thomas Hartel. Is that how you do this? Of Gracie James. Gracie James's family. But I think they are only on one side or the other. Perhaps Mike and I could coordinate. We could give you the proper sizes to order to make sure they fit on the brackets. We've had some situations where banners have been ordered to not fit on the brackets in the past. And we could give a count of what's available in terms of space. Right. Okay, so Mr. Fox will coordinate with the town manager and whoever else he designates. Mrs. Kopalka, does he need to also contact you on that? I think he is in Indiana, except for the heights, the holes to hold it. And they haven't put the dots to hold it yet. So I don't think the heights is doable at all. Okay. Put the center in East Allington. Work it out. And then we have Allington alive. Signs going up. So you'll have to work it out with the schedule. Okay. So why don't we have Mr. Chapter Lane be the point person. And if there's anything that you need to inform or acquire of the Selectman's Office through Mrs. Kopalka. From 8.29 to May 1, correct? That's the first banners that you want, which is only a couple of weeks away. Yeah, there's not much time. We might be able to accommodate you on that if the banners are up for the Allington Festival. From the festival? I don't think so. We'll let all the think tanks on the left with Mr. Fox figure that out and wherever appropriate in spaces available. So I believe the town manager gave you some contact info. So if you could start with him and then you may trickle down to one or two other people. Any further discussion, Mr. Dunn? Just with the time frame, I guess I'm a little bit worried about whether it'll happen this year or whether you're going to make it. But regardless, if you try again next year, I'm happy to support it again. Just see with a little more run up, we can get it more scheduled better, I think. Absolutely. Thank you. Seeing no further discussion on a motion by Mr. Byrne, seconded by Mr. Curell. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed, unanimous vote. Thank you, Mr. Byrne. One quick question, Madam Chair. So if people want notice, Dan, if people want information, you say it's over a number of venues. Yes. Where would they go, the website? The website, and it's on the banner. Okay. And it'll be in posters around towns. Eighttownjazz.com is it? Eighttownjazz.org, yeah. Okay, good luck. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, agenda item 14, submitted by Mary Jo Sojourn, Body in Brain Yoga. Approval for a sidewalk sale to benefit Earth Citizen Organization at Body in Brain Yoga, 325 Broadway on April 16th from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. Is Mary Jo here? Oh, I didn't see you in the corner, sorry. Hi, I'm Mary Jo Sargent. I'm here representing Body in Brain Yoga in Taichi at 325 Broadway. And this event is a fundraiser to raise money for the Earth Citizen Organization. It's a nonprofit international organization that provides low-cost education to environmental leaders who will then in turn go into their own communities to do environmental outreach on a volunteer basis. So it's a fundraiser that we held last year. And I don't know if there were any issues last year, but I'm here to ask for that permit again this year. Move approval. Second. Move by Mr. Kuro, seconded by Mr. Greely. Any questions? All those? See no further discussion? Oh, Mr. Greely. So the sale is to sell? It's a donation of yard sale. So it's secondhand items, five and $10. And actually some of that money will go towards an event we're having at Monotomy Park June 18th. Also, too, it's like a mindfulness walk that anyone can attend. So that's one of the activities we're doing. Okay, great. Thank you. You're welcome. Seeing no further discussion, a motion by Mr. Kuro, seconded by Mr. Greely. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed? Good luck, Mary Jo. Thank you for doing that. We come to agenda item 15, sign request on Raveen Street from Rebecca and Doug Perlow. I see a familiar face. Good evening. I'm Doug Perlow. I live at 40 Irving Street. If you've read my letter, I don't really need to add to it. I can answer questions. If you haven't read the letter, I can explain. You want to give maybe a brief? Sure. Very simply, when we first moved into the house back in 95, because of the school across the street, people were parking right up to the both edges of our driveway. We were having a tough time getting, especially out safely, in but mostly out. We asked, we came here, my wife actually did, in 96 and got approval for a no parking sign, a space length adjacent to our driveway. That sign was put in, it said no parking here to corner with no arrows. And people didn't, people still parked next to our driveway because they didn't know if it meant the corner being our driveway or the corner being Raveen and Irving Street. So a kind police officer, who I cannot for the life of me remember who it was, said, why don't you paint the curb yellow, which we did, and why don't you put an arrow on the sign, which we did. And we went one step further into face to the sign by putting the word driveway. So it said no parking here to driveway with an arrow toward the driveway. That worked for 18 or so years. Last year, sometime the sign inexplicably was removed. We asked DPW to replace it. They replaced it as they had originally with a no parking here to corner. And I think we sent one example of a photo, but it's daily. People don't understand that it means no parking here to driveway. They park right between the sign and our driveway, bringing back the old problem. So all we would like, and Mr. Schenard says, the sign people won't make a sign with that language unless you folks approve it. Mr. Byrne? Now did the sign, I'm going through the different letters that I have here, quite a few of them actually. And so did the sign, they already moved the location of it back to its original location? The sign is in its original location. Okay. And there have been no changes. It says no parking here to corner, no arrows. And people must, people believe that it means from the sign to the corner of Irving Street rather than from the sign to our driveway. And even since the sign has moved locations, people have still been parking there? The location is what it's always been. Once they put it back, it's back where it's supposed to have been, where it always has been since you folks approved it back in 96. So the location is the same, but the wording is different. Okay, so you want the wording changed. And I guess my, I've been going back and forth because there are sign regulations, right? I just did. We have to follow kind of for everywhere in town. And I don't know if I'm quite ready to move away from those sign regulations. And I'm sorry that, you know, the board back in 1996, I'm sure we can point to Kevin for that one. He's the only one, I'm 99. I'm trying to remember. But you know, I'd be interested for my colleagues, but I'm on the fence on it. And I don't know if I'm ready to make that motion or support it. I understand. What we're looking at is from a practical standpoint, one sign has people doing what they're supposed to be doing. The standard sign that meets your regulations has people doing the opposite. So and for 18 years, the altered sign, we altered, stayed in place and worked fine. And no one said anything and no one bothered anyone. I also don't know if I would be supporting defacing signs around town. Well, I'm guilty of that. I'll tell you that, but it worked. And that's really what we're looking at is a practical solution. Mr. Dunn. I'm ready to support the proposed change. I definitely understand. I'm generally someone who would say, you know, the signs are the way they are for the reason and they've got the uniform code is there for a reason. But at the same time, sometimes specific situations do warrant deviations. I can't recall having heard one of these and being in favor of it before as a board. For me, this is unusual, but at the same time, partly because of the streets that are going on there, because of the hill and because of the off-center intersection there that's an academy. So I'm happy to support it. Mr. Carroll. I think I'm having the same struggle as to burn this out with this. And one of the reasons for my struggles, we have the original minutes in our packet. And when I read the minutes, says the chairman moved to amend the traffic rules by placing a no parking sign on the right side of Revene Street to the corner of Irving Street, voted unanimously, which indicates to me that the intention of the board at that time was actually to prohibit parking from the sign to the corner. It wasn't a reference to the driveway and the original vote. So it feels to me like the original intent was actually to do exactly what the standard sign says. And I have read that. The intent when we came here in 96 was to do what I'm asking you to do now. How the minutes were worded and what exactly was approved, it's hard to say. And I'm wondering if maybe your intent and the board's intent diverged. I don't know. All I know is what's in the minutes. It makes little sense to make no parking in three what are currently valid spaces and then allow parking right adjacent to our driveway. That's the opposite of what we were trying to do in 96 and what we're trying to do now. But I would note and we got correspondence from TPW and from the police department that it's illegal to park that close to driveway in the first place. I know. I understand, but I'm a little worried about setting a precedent. I think what you're saying is that that sign isn't needed in that particular location because we do have it's illegal to park within 20 feet. I'm worried that if we start putting signage up to protect driveways, the distance from driveways will start setting a precedent. Can I see? Let me just get from all of them and you can Mr. Greeley. So the picture I'm looking at, no parking here to driveway with an arrow, that's the one you deface. That's the altered sign. But that's what you would also like to see. That's what we had for 18 years. I'm going to make this tough in the chair and agree with Mr. Curo. I think we should do this. Yes, Mr. Curo. I just want to make a quick connection in my opinion to say the least. I think you want to agree with Mr. Don. Mr. Don. Oh, you've switched seats. Sorry, Mr. Don. I shaved my head. If I might, if it eases. Can I just check? Just where we are at this point, anyone else here from the board? I'll give you one more turn, Mr. Perlow. Simply if it said no parking here to corner with arrows. Right now there's just, it's anybody's guess which corner it's talking about. So that would perhaps be a compromise. I think arrows are allowed, but I guess you have to look them up and see. And I would be more amenable to that option where it's indicating Mr. Dunn. Just one thought specifically towards one of Mr. Carrow's arguments, which is what the intent of the board was before. Yeah. Frankly, well, I agree that considering their intent is important. We get to make our own decisions. No question. Okay. No question. Okay. Mr. Graley? Plus, the board was not as bright back then as it is here today. I just want to point out. I'm so going to leave that one alone. But am I right? Am I right? There absolutely is no room from your driveway to the corner for a car to fit, right? Well, there's just between the sign and our driveway. One car fits perfectly. Right, but I'm talking about the other side of your driveway. Oh, the other side, no. No. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Carrow? Yeah. I just wanted to, I need to respond to Mr. Dunn. I mean, I think my point in that is just that it's a question as to whether we're taking a vote to create a new precedent or we're taking a vote to correct an existing situation or a previous situation that's been in effect for 18 years. Okay. Well, Mr. Byrne? Yeah, I have one idea. Maybe that will make it easier for Mr. Perlow and potentially keep it so we don't start messing around with sign language. What if we just move the sign closer to the driveway so that one car couldn't fit there? Would that then stop it? That seems to be a potentially practical situation where we could stop this problem without messing around with sign language that's in state law and our bylaws. I mean, I don't know if we'd need someone from the town to look at the potential placement of it, but I think that will solve our problems and kind of hit a precedent here or hit a compromise here. The idea makes sense. I don't know how people will respond, but I can't predict how they respond. But I mean, I think that's a sensible solution that is in the right direction. Can I ask the town manager if that would be something that the town would have to look at or can we just vote on it or what would you be comfortable with? So you've got your automatic 20 feet back from the corner. You've got your automatic three feet. I think it's three feet from the driveway. So, I mean, it is the border of the parking commission, so it's in their purview. So I think I'd like to move it, you know, say half the distance between the driveway and the current placement of the sign, which will stop cars from parking there and the sign will still note that it's illegal. And I'm not happy to make that motion right now. Second, if it's in order. Okay, so we'll have two motions on the table before us as of right now, Mr. Greeley. What's the other motion? Originally, Mr. Dunn, seconded by Mr. Curell, was to approve the original request. No. Oh, you didn't second it? I didn't actually formally move it. Oh, I thought you said I'm ready to move. I'm sorry. I thought, okay. I would like to make a motion. Second, Mr. Burns motion? Yeah, yeah, business out there on the table at the second. Would you rather we vote on that first? No, no, I'd like to hear both. Would you rather we defeat that sound? I mean, I would recommend this compromise move that we make it no parking here to corner and add the arrow. The only thing we'll be in wild on here is adding the arrow in the direction to which it applies. Second. Seconded by Mr. Dunn. Okay, so, um, Mr. Burns, more original motion is now folded into Mr. Greeley's compromise motion, which I also agree with that was the one that was more amenable to Mr. Curell. I just need some clarification on that is, is the idea that we want to prohibit parking between that sign and the driveway, but allow it from the sign to the corner with Irving? There is no room. There's no room. With the, with the 20 feet from the intersection and the three feet from the driveway, it's not allowed anyways, but I guess what we're saying is the positioning of the sign will make it clear that that space. No, I understand. But which, which direction would we see the arrow pointing towards the driveway or towards the driveway? Towards the driveway, which is also towards the corner. Okay. Mr. Perlman? No, I, I'm sorry, you may have it. The driveway is the opposite way from the corner. Yeah. If you look at the map, The arrow is going to point towards your driveway uphill toward the driveway. I think that's, Yeah, leave it at that. Because there's, because downhill from, You know what? Can I move to table so we all can take a look at it? No, seriously. Okay. Motion by Mr. Greeley to table. Second. I'm sorry. Mr. Dunn. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed. Unanimous vote. Sorry. Okay. And then just so when we come back for the next meeting, I would just ask through the town manager if there are any logistical issues in terms of who is actually coming up with sketching and creating the sign. If that's all going to be the town of Wellington or if not coordinate with Wayne Shenard or whoever. Mr. Rademacher, am I saying this right, Mike? So when we come to the next time we have this at our meeting, which undoubtedly will be our next meeting, but I won't commit to that, that that second part in terms of the logistics of if we do move approval for whatever who's responsible for that, who does what, who do they coordinate with? Okay. And a motion to table. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed. Unanimous vote. Thank you. I can't get rid of this. Yeah. Agenda item 16 for review and endorsement, the revised community benefit agreement for RMD. We have attorney Hind, our town council, if I may, Mr. Jafferling. Yeah. Thank you, Madam Chair. As the board will recall at multiple sessions of previous board meetings, the board was provided the opportunity to consider the potential application of the Massachusetts Payson Foundation. One of the many requirements for a registered marijuana dispensary marijuana treatment center to open in a municipality is to obtain either a letter of support or a letter of non-opposition from our case the court of select then from the beginning of this process, the select man expressed some nuanced opinions about this matter, but it was made clear that it was also contingent on development of acceptable community benefit agreement to mitigate certain issues and help make sure that Arlington is not only a suitable location, but is getting the benefit that it should from the placement of a registered marijuana dispensary at a previous board meeting, the board voted to support a letter of non-opposition contingent on the development and negotiation of acceptable community benefit agreement. Most of the terms are exactly the same as the last time this was before the board, the select man wanted to have a little bit more teeth with respect to making sure that financial data was required to be submitted to the town and that we didn't have to go get it from DPH or somewhere else. So you'll see two paragraphs, five and six, which we negotiated with the Massachusetts Payson Foundation to require certain disclosures be submitted regarding gross sales and other financial records on a certain time scale also to make sure that the Payson Foundation, if they ultimately open a dispensary here, maintained financial data for seven years. So from the standpoint of negotiations, we feel like these are, along with the state requirements for maintaining data and reporting, these are additional measures which help make sure that we have all the financial information that we need to verify what kind of business in RMD is doing in Arlington if it's actually successful after the DPH process. Mr. Dunn. I'd like to move approval of the proposed agreement. Second. Moved by Dunn, seconded by Mr. Byrne. I don't see, I know I did receive some notification from one of the other renters in this building. I don't think he's here. I'd like to come up and just make some brief remarks, but I think I'm going to refer you to... Hi, my name is Michael Robb. I'm a Arlington resident. So Alex, we're going on our way to pick up some others, but we just heard about this recently from our pediatrician and it's our understanding that the dispensary is proposed to be in the same building as our pediatrician. And I'll tell you, we've been residents for five years. We're homeowners. Had we known that there was going to be a dispensary in an area, I mean it would have impacted the way we looked at Arlington relative to Lexington or Winchester or Belmont. So we're surprised that there's going to be one, but really shocked that it might be in pediatrician same building. We just don't want our kids exposed to that thing while they're young. So just our opinion, but I would guess that a lot of other people share that same opinion. So I hope you consider it. Mr. Dunn. I'd just like to share with you some... I understand that an email went out from your pediatrician, which I think was missing some important facts and I think it was actually wrong in a couple of respects as well. So one of the things... Massachusetts had a vote as to whether or not medical marijuana should be permitted in Massachusetts. And that was approved overwhelmingly. And Arlington itself was voted by more than two to one that Arlington was in favor of having medical marijuana and dispensaries. Then a town meeting took two votes over a couple of different years and it chose a very narrow set of the town where a dispensary would be permitted. And that narrow set of town includes the center and the businesses around it. And so I absolutely understand that this is not a choice that makes everybody happy because none of these votes were unanimous. I just think it's really important to recognize that there's a lot of will of a lot of voters and a lot of choices that were made in order to do it. And I understand that you may not agree with it, but it is something that I think that we should be following through on that will and making this available. You know, and I get that. I think, you know, from our perspective, we're not going to patronize businesses near it as often. I mean, given a choice, we go somewhere else. And really, I think long term, if it becomes a, you know, an attraction for people looking to get drugs or be exposed to it, that's just ill-impact. If I could just clarify, just, and I apologize where we're at at this point in terms of the selectmen letter of opposition or not. What we have to do is take the vote, the state vote, take the local vote. Then we look to our town council, our chiefs, our town manager to say, taking into account what was voted in, what state law, what's local by-law, is this something that rises that we can oppose or does it meet all the standards required that we would send a letter of non-opposition? That's all we really have purview or control over in terms of trying to effectuate what it is you would like to do, as well as the pediatrician tenant and perhaps any other tenants, the more effective place to do that. All we can say is we've looked at this, we've spoken to our department heads, yes, we oppose it because of these reasons under state law, or no, which is where we are right now, it fits everything that they need to fit under the various laws. Where you all would be most effective, and stop me if I can't say anything like this, is when this goes to the state agency that it will go to, that would be informed, like we can't really give you the relief, I hear the relief that you're asking. And then the other thing would be, and please let me know if I'm stepping out of turn, is any business who is renting in that facility, I think it would be much more effective speaking with the landlord. I'm trying to think of who are the decision makers, Mr. Attorney Hyne, you want me? I'd just also like to note that there's some additional opportunity for folks to provide input on a specific site location. So one of the things that have to happen is that in order to have an R&D on it, you have to have a special permit and that's subject to environmental design review. There's also local Board of Health regulations, there's a lot of things that go into how a specific facility operates. For example, is it going to operate by appointment only? Is it going to have other limitations? There's already limitations at state law, which are important to recognize. For example, there's certain types of signage aren't allowed. There's a lot of security measures that are required by state law, but also are redundant in our own local regulations. And there's also a few other things that I would encourage folks not to feel like this is the end of the conversation with respect to how do you appropriately balance the rights of not only other tenants, but people with other concerns, like who want to maintain their relationship with a pediatrician and make sure that they're not going to be in a place where how the specific entrance to the facility is structured, how access is made, how appointments are made, that those things aren't going to overlap. Essentially, you're not going to have overlap with kids going to the pediatrician's office and folks who are basically patrons of a registered marijuana surgery. I think those things are probably possible. I don't want to speak out it through myself. And then, of course, there is the state process with the Department of Public Health, and I think folks can make their concerns and know how to participate in the faculty. Okay, Mr. Berman? Yes, so I do, I support this as well, and I've supported throughout the whole entire process. And I'm going to support it, you know, over the concerns we're hearing tonight, because this is a very heavily regulated industry. And what we're, I think what you'll see on Water Street is a very nondescript pharmacy, is essentially what it's going to be. I don't think you will even know it's there from history.  It's, you know, it's in office, and you need a, you know, prescription to go in there and receive it. So, you know, it's not like we're just, you know, allowing plot dealers coming in and running around the streets of our LinkedIn. This is a heavily regulated industry, and it's one that it's completely legal now, and we're going to continue. I understand. I don't think it's wrong, and I think it's wrong for us to, you know, go against our zoning bylaws and state laws in kind of usurping this other business interest. That's just where I'm at. All right. And I want to get to the other two speakers and then move on, because what I'm trying to say is the relief that you want, there's two other ways to actually get it. And unfortunately, you know, we have to go by what we're bound by. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And with the caveat that I definitely want to hear what people have to say, but we're really limited in what our role is here. My name is Jason Coville. I live on Robins Road in Arlington. I have my two kids here at night, too, but they're asleep right now. I also do go to Arlington Pediatrics and was made aware of this. There's two things that I just point out. I voted for Medical Marijuana. If you asked me if I would have voted for Medical Marijuana, I haven't cited in the European Pediatrician's office. I would have said no. I think that's the difference. It's not necessarily the Medical Marijuana is an issue. It's the cited in the European Pediatrician's office. I understand the zoning issues as well. There are other places within the zoning area where this could be located. And I think that this particular opportunity is when the town has leverage with the business owner because they need this letter from the town in order for their application to go forward with the Department of Public Health to request that they seek a different location within that zoning area. I think that's a reasonable request to make given that it's going to be in the European Pediatrician's office and to select from the Burns Point too. We're not so much concerned with the people smoking pot or anything like that or dealing pot. It's that Medical Marijuana has been tried in a number of other states as well. Massachusetts has adopted it. The one thing that's been clear from all the other states that have adopted it is that Medical Marijuana and children don't mix. It just does not work. There's a lot of public safety issues, public health issues. And for the town to just basically ignore that and say, hey, you know what, we're going to allow it in the same building as a Pediatrician's office. It just doesn't make sense. And so at least I'd like to go on record and say there is some people out here that oppose this and would ask the town to at least consider using their leverage that they do have at this point with this letter to at least go back to the owner and say, look, can you find another location? My name's David Whitford. I live on Water Street. I've lived there since 1995. And I had not heard anything about this until recently. I'm also a reporter by profession. I did a little research today. And I just want to state for the record that I see no reason to oppose this. The research that I've seen shows that crime actually, if there's any relationship between crime and medical marijuana dispensaries, it's an inverse relationship. If we're worried about attracting unsavory elements, maybe we keep banks out of our neighborhood because banks attract more criminal activity than medical marijuana dispensaries. So I just want to state for the record that I live on the street and I sit in my yard and I'd be able to look at the building where all this goes on. And I have no objection. My name is Sarah McLaurin. I'm an Arlington resident. My kids go to Arlington Pediatrics. And I'm also a psychiatric nurse practitioner at a clinic downtown. And I see firsthand the impact of kids who smoke a lot of marijuana while their brains are developing and the significant increase in the incidence of schizophrenia as a result of that and the damage that does to individual lives and family lives. And so I just second what the person before said about the specific concern about it being co-located in a building with the pediatrician's office and there's a family practice, I believe in the same building as well. And I think that there's been significant people in the National Institutes of Health and National Institute of Drug and Alcohol Administration who have spoken out and said that the legalization of marijuana, yes, it has medicinal purposes, but that kind of allowing it to be acceptable at an early age just increases the risk that kids will use more drugs and get more involved in other, more damaging drugs. Thank you. Hello, my name is Rafael Baptista. I live on Falmouth Road in Arlington. I've lived here for 20 years, very close to the Burns House.  I've heard about this recently also. I just want to come here to be on record to say that I'm opposed to it. My children do go to the pediatrician in that building. From my understanding, did the police chief in Arlington, Fred Ryan, ask that if we were to cite a marijuana dispensary that there would be additional crime and that he would need additional funds for more police? Is that correct? Yeah, I don't think he said there would be additional crime. He did say that he would need additional police and that's part of what we're proving tonight is the funding mechanism from the dispensary's revenues to pay for the additional resources. So if someone were to open a business which is a normally safe business, say a restaurant or a convenience store, would the police chief ask for additional funding for more police? Or is there something special about a marijuana dispensary where the police chief feels like more police is required? Well, I'm going to perhaps the town manager speak to that, but I can probably rattle off 20, 30 different one-time uses as well as businesses. But Mr. Chapter Lane? I would only add that the police chief actually, in his memorandum in regards to this matter, cited the need, the desired need for additional resources based on a number of restaurants and liquor licenses being opened over the past, how many years, 15 cents a liquor license has been offered. So this is a specific issue where revenue can be directly got from this particular type of business, but I think the chief has been pretty consistent in expressing desire for a higher level of services when the need arises. And actually what I would like you to do, and I apologize, is it's not a questioning back and forth. If you could just say what you want to state on the record because I've already explained the process. So I'd like to state for the record I guess that the idea of setting a business that the police chief says would require additional policing is probably not appropriate, I think, near pediatricians office. And I would like to say that I'm sort of surprised that the Board of Selection is sort of advocating its role to say that we should go to the state. Of course, certainly the state is one place that could stop it, but you all have that role to stop it here if you want to. So the idea to say, oh, we can't do anything. We have a very small role to play. You're one of the gatekeepers. You could take that role now and stop it at this point, which I would like you to do. Right. No, and I understand that. And then the other form of relief which we can't get into is I would encourage any of the tenants in that building that are occupying that building going to the landlord. Right. That would be another gatekeeper. Right. There are many gatekeepers. So are you done with your remarks because I see more people and more hands. Thank you. Mr. Dunn, before we. No. I'll wait until the end. Okay. Mark Manier, Irving Street, no signage. My daughter also goes to the Petition Office there. I have really nothing against dispensaries, but I do question the co-location. It just doesn't sound like the right place to have it. I understand, you know, there's a tenant and an owner for the building and whatnot, but I don't think it's the right thing to, you know, push that to the landlord to make that decision. So I say that there should be some form of criteria in terms of the suitability of the location. Thank you. Thank you. Hi, Jim Barrett, Arlington resident. Like many people here, I have two children who go to the pediatrician in the building. I'm very comfortable with the idea of dispensaries. I'm very uncomfortable with the idea of them being co-located. That's also sort of a small street, and I understand you have your process, so feel free not to answer this or direct me another way. But by my math, just to break even, it's going to have to be a $13 million business just to cover the cost of the extra police that's been requested.  No. We have an examiner looking at business plans, and you're saying what you're saying. Mr. Dunn? So things like traffic and things like that, those go under the environmental design review, which is done by the redevelopment board. So that goes back to something that the town council mentioned earlier. So one of the many steps that follows after this is that they need to get a permit to be in that location from the ARB, and that includes things like impact of the business, like traffic impact. But yeah. Yes. And I understand your position, you're in with the town vote. However, it was never, the question was never asked, do you want this beside a pediatrician's office? It just wasn't. And as a refuge for all of you, it is still not recognized by the federal government to be legal, and therefore by federal statute, you could probably hide behind that if you need a reason to go there. So once again, thank you for your time. Thank you. Thank you for coming out. Okay, to wrap up. Wrap up. I'm Dr. Scofield. I'm the one that sent that note. I sent it personally, signed my name, not my office name. I simply knew that this vote was going to be taken, that it was an important vote, and I wanted to let my Arlington families know that if they wanted to speak, if they had an opinion to express, that this was a good opportunity to do it in advance of your taking a vote. That was all that my email was about. It was just simply, if you have something to say, please say it today. I have spoken with the landlord on multiple occasions. He still denies that this is happening. No idea, never heard of it. No clue, no clue. So I'm getting nothing from him in way of what are you actually doing and what are the actual plans. I did get a call the other day from the attorney for the business owner that is trying to put this in, is trying to swing my opinion. I simply have doubts, and I would ask you to, if not vote no, simply defer and look at this again. I think the town has an awful lot to say about it. Thank you. Thank you. I want to thank everyone who came out regardless of how the vote goes. Town council and others have suggested follow this process through when it gets to the environmental review with our redevelopment board here in Arlington, because some of the questions that were raised tonight, you'll get a more factual, not only answer to that, but also airing of that in terms of if there is a case of point that you definitely have made and are correct in, that would be a more appropriate forum, and I don't mean to do double talk or anything on that, but I do commend you all for coming out and hope you stay with it as well as it sounds like the doctor is also following up with sort of double entendre success with the landlord. Did anyone, my colleagues, Mr. Kiro? Thank you. I mean, I think my colleagues know that the concerns I've had with the proposal, but I don't want to relitigate that issue here. I feel like we've debated that at length, at previous meetings. I only to say that some of the information that's come to light and other things that I have learned, you know, speaking with folks in public health and law enforcement, I've only strengthened my original position on this. That said, I did agree after being on the losing end of that first vote to move forward with the negotiation on a community benefit agreement. So I wanted to ask some questions specifically about the community benefit agreement, which is the matter before us. Preparing for tonight, I took the draft that we have before us and I looked at what other communities have done. And I want to thank the council for all his work on this, but I do have some questions because it appears that there are three different elements that you find in a number of the other community benefit agreements to try to maximize the benefit to the community. Either, well, not either. Sometimes they're all in combination. Either a minimum payment per year. So there is a percentage as we've laid out here, but there's also a minimum payment if that percentage isn't made. Or in some cases, there's actually an escalating percentage over the first few years of operation. Or in some cases, there's actually a portion which is actually a payment to the municipality and there's a portion, it's a payment to local non-profits. So I just throw up Brockton as an example, negotiated a community benefit agreement. It's similar in some ways to ours. So it's $100,000 in the first year of the dispensaries operation. And then each subsequent year it's 3% as we have, but there's a minimum of $100,000. Additionally, Brockton seeks 1% of gross profits starting the second year that go to local non-profits. I could envision if we had a piece like that that would provide certain revenue for either the youth health and safety coalition or some of the other non-profits in town. And I'm just, I don't want to put council on the spot, but I'm just wondering if the proper way to ask this, if those types of provisions were considered and rejected by the applicant or... So Mr. Kuro, we did our own internal review of different types of agreements that were in place at the time that we negotiated this. And I want to remind everyone that this has actually taken place over the series of a number of select meetings. And I believe our negotiations went all the way back to what the fall at the very least. So one of the things that we were trying to negotiate for was a higher percentage than some communities were getting. So there were certain, that piece of it was part of our focus. And the specifics with respect to a minimum, I don't recall whether that was specifically discussed. I think we had a suite of things that we wanted based on the needs of, as articulated by the police department and other town personnel. And we were more concerned with trying to make sure that there was some upfront payment along with a healthy percentage of gross revenue. I don't know if the town manager's anything to add, but there were a lot of things that we considered on the table and went back and forth. I don't recall off the top of my head all of the different pieces that we looked at back and forth. I know that we looked at the city of Salem as a model for a little while and then wanted to push that a little bit more based on Arlington's location. The other things that were considered and discussed were things like the likelihood of other dispensaries in the area. As the board may or may not know, there's likely to be at least one dispensary in Cambridge. There may be two at some point in the near future. So the market conditions are a little bit different, depending on the geographic location and how much competition you're facing. I don't want to advocate on behalf of, it's not my role to advocate on behalf of the folks who we've been negotiating against, but I think what I suspect that they would say is that they're obviously going to be dealing with competition from Boston, Cambridge, and potentially a couple other nearby areas. So as part of the explanation, I don't recall all the details of our negotiation in present time. I would note that Burlington did a 3%, but they have a minimum of $250,000 per year and $20,000 in donations to Burlington organizations. So I just throw that out there. I would like to say in the absence of any specific voted guidance by the Board of Selectment, we felt as though we maximized the financial benefit to the community. If there was specific voted guidance or rejection to this agreement, we would certainly take it back. Can I also add one other thing, Madam Chairman? I think we also wanted to, there's a tension between dedicating money to specific sources, because there's only a certain amount of money that we're likely to get when we're in a negotiation with somebody, especially when you've got a projected business, that even though I think the market for this is starting to flesh out, there's a certain amount of, there's a definite amount of uncertainty that both municipalities facing and that Registrar Mayor wanted to dispense. So I think we wanted to have as much flexibility as we can. You'll see that the way we phrase what the money is to be used for are things like community wellness, to address some of the concerns that have been expressed here, that we want to make sure that we've got some flexibility and adaptability to use that money where it needs to be used the most. Do we want to concentrate most of our efforts on, you know, Arlington Youth Education programs? Do we want to focus more of our efforts on potential patients that are going to be on this? And then obviously the police department's needs were the other sort of, one of the other major categories that we considered. But I do recall that we did have discussions about how specific do we really want to be with saying that this money is dedicated for this purpose, or especially as we're learning as a community how to deal with all of the ups and downs of this. Do we want to have flexibility? So that's another piece of it. Yeah, I do want to say I appreciate that there are clauses in here regarding the police department role in placing the security cameras. And there are provisions regarding the, you added the provisions that we discussed the last time around the financial records because of the bill or so. I appreciate that. And I apologize. This is a little bit of an uncomfortable forum. We used to, you know, we do negotiations. I guess this is not subject to an executive session. So necessarily the discussion, the board discussion has to happen. That's, thank you. Okay. You all set, Mr. Chapter Lane? Okay. On a motion by Mr. Dunn, seconded by Mr. Byrne. Excuse me. Any further discussion? If not, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Unanimous vote. Thank you. With my colleagues indulgence, if I could take out the board, skip over discussion, future board selections meeting and take agenda item 19, which is the reharing of Warren Article 22, bylaw amendment tree preservation bylaw, Mary Ellen Arano and Susan Stamps. And I think there's also Sally, I don't know if Sally's here tonight, but I've heard her name. I just want to say to my colleagues for this tickle. I'm sorry. Just to my colleagues, I did have, and Ms. Stamps Susan was kind enough to do this, a 57 minute phone conversation with her for the sake of you all. So that I wouldn't have a 57 minute conversation with her here at the selections meeting. At the last time we had this hearing for this tree bylaw, we left it, that we tabled it, we felt there were some tasks, perhaps herculean, that needed to get done. Susan Ms. Stamps indicated to me, she asked for the opportunity to come before us again of the mindset that, you know, there was an awful lot that had to be done within two weeks and I'm keeping an open mind, but I'm not convinced that that has all happened, but I will want to hear from my colleagues on those points as well as, I don't want to rehash everything from the beginning. If you could just, you know, five, seven minutes, well, just sort of give us a report back. It seemed to be two specific points or however you define them. So. Thank you, Madam Chair, and congratulations. Thank you. So I have with me Mary Ellen Arano, Chair of the Tree Committee and Co-Chair, and also Ed Tremblay who is also on the Tree Committee. We were here three weeks ago and we did go off and do everything you asked us to do and we've completely redrafted the bylaw. And to cut to the chase, we've had very positive response from the developers and I can be very specific about that with names if you'd like. I can go through the specific changes we've made to the bylaw if you'd like me to. I had sent you all an email on Friday and I enumerated the changes we made. I'd be happy to go through those if you'd like. I'm not exactly sure how much detail you want us to go into. What I would like to is either stop with my colleagues. If anything, they would like to state and then the town manager and or his designee or vice versa. And then hearing for what comes from these seats, might craft better what you need to address and what we already get. Sure. That's okay? No, thank you very much and thank you Susan in the Tree Committee. As you probably recall, I was not a very big supporter of the Tree Bylaw at our last meeting and I'm really grateful for the work that you went back and did. I'm happy to support this now. It's just a really good shool compromise on your part and one that I'm really grateful you undertook. So thank you very much and I look forward to supporting this. Mr. Dunn? So I've been definitely a fan of this overall in general from the beginning. I definitely was worried about the last draft and some of the things that were in it. My only concern right now is frankly it's just the timeline. It's just that I haven't had, one of the things that I hate is when the Board of Select, and this was, I'm sure through no fault of Mr. Greeley, when I was a town meeting member before I was elected, you get to town meeting and you find out that there was some flaw in something and you say, how come the Board of Selectmen didn't see this one when they had the hearing on it and most of the time I have enough time to really sink my teeth into things and I can say yes, that's why I'm supporting this and this one I haven't quite had enough time and so I am, but at the same time I am heartened to hear that Mr. Byrne is supporting the draft and that actually goes a long way towards making me think that it might be ready. So I'm ready to vote yes but also with a little bit of trepidation, not because of the core of it but simply because I haven't explored it enough. Mr. Chapterlings, did you want to say something, Mr. Greeley? Well, you know, same thing, I want to support this and I'm very impressed with the amount of work you all have put into this. Were there builders opposed? What was the negatives from a builder? Okay, so we initially, you asked us to talk to Arlington builders about what they would like to see and not see in the bylaw, how they would feel about it, get their input. You also asked us to talk to builders in other towns with these bylaws to find out what the incremental time involved and cost involved was their experience. So we did both of those things. We found out, you didn't ask the question, but we did find out as far as incremental cost, it really depended on how many trees there were to come down. So I think if you add up the relatively minimal cost for the surveyors to put the trees on the sort of the plot plan and then replacement trees when it could be two, it could be five or six, either you replace the tree or you pay into the tree fund. I'm going to say the average cost would be somewhere around a couple of thousand dollars for the development. In some cases, it could be nothing if there are no trees on the lot when they start. And the additional time was a little bit of extra time for the surveyor to put the trees on the plot plan, a little bit of time for the builder to go visit the tree warden, submit the plans, perhaps have a conversation, maybe be at the site when the tree warden goes out to look at it, maybe not. And then in the process that we envisioned for Arlington, it would be going back into the tree warden's office and picking up the approval once it's approved. So there, did I cover everything? I think the direct question of what their concerns were certainly was added time. What's the added time? So that's the part we really focused on about minimizing the cost of the microphone. Just trying to minimize that added time. And then eating into profits obviously is a concern. And so we wanted to drill down sort of what those added costs would be. And as Susan enumerated it's putting the survey, putting the trees on the plot, which we got quotes for $10 a tree, $20 a tree. And in Arlington, so you can kind of do the math on what that would be for a surveyor. And then it's the mitigation if you do take a tree down. So that was really the majority of the concerns. And could I ask what Arlington developers you did speak to? So the ones for whom I have permission to use their name, we spoke with 10 Arlington developers. Some of them do almost all their work in Arlington. Some do some of their work in Arlington. We were able once, and as a result of those conversations and you and I spoke about this when you called me. They were looking for simple. They were just over and over again. And I believe that, Madam Chair, that was the message you brought from your conversations with builders. So we rolled up our sleeves. We completely rewrote the bylaw and we made it really simple. We were able to circle back with the builders and we were able to contact five between when we got it redrafted at the end of last week. And tonight we've talked with five of the 10. Excuse me, was it five? No, it was actually, it was six of the 10. Out of the six, four were totally comfortable with it. John Carney, who's a very big builder in town and in fact he sent an email to that effect which I forwarded to all of you. I don't know if you all saw it and if you didn't see it, I'm perfectly happy to read it for the listening audience or the viewing audience. No, no, no, if you could just just sort the names of who. So John Carney, Scott Siever from Siever Construction was fine with it. We had John Quinn from Springfield Construction who does some work in town, not a ton, but he was fine with it. And then we had Jonathan Nyberg who works. He puts together deals, as you probably know, with lots of different builders in Arlington and he was comfortable with it. They're all of them like trees a lot and they felt that we had made it very simple to implement. Yes, there was an additional cost but it's a cost of doing business. It saves trees and Arlington is experiencing a net loss of tree canopy so they understood that it was important. The two and then the remaining two out of the six that we spoke with were... I can't use their names, I don't have permission. No, I don't want you to... One of them seems to be very focused on all the other zoning bylaws that are before town meeting and it just is like, just don't talk to me about another regulation. And then that was essentially what the other person said to. Okay, and if I could at this point, I, like Mr. Dunn, support this in its concept and to steal what one of my colleagues I think have said to me, devil in the details and as well as going through this and I had said to Susan, I apologize if at the last meeting I just seemed so zoned in and focused. I was looking at it from the limited legal background that I have and construction and phasing this out as well as talking with developers, mostly when they encountered me. I would like to support this, but I do have strong concerns around the fact that, A, what the labor intensive demand will be on the town side. I do know when I spoke with the town manager, I believe and I'm not going to misquote him so I'm going to call him the town manager on this. You analyzed case scenario if this were an effect last year, how many projects it would affect, as well as from that, extrapolating from that, what that would mean in terms of what we would need for an employee and then my other concern is where, and I do appreciate that this has been simplified. I really felt like everything I said and relayed from developers, you all took on head on, but where this is so in my opinion and please correct me if I'm wrong, so dependent on having a tree warden in place, which I know right now we do have an employee that's stepping up and adding his duties and doing what he can, but not acting per se in the 24, 25 hour tree warden position we'd like to have, so with that sort of entree if you could, or just tell me what your fears have been elated. No, I'm happy to respond so I guess I would answer your question about staffing as best I can and then just express only one concern I had with the revision and I'm sorry I wasn't able to provide it in writing, I didn't see this until mid-afternoon today so it's sort of on the fly. So Mike Rademacher, director of DPW and I, under the prior version of the bylaw thought it would probably be about one day's work for someone in DPW to review plans and then go out and inspect the site. I think Mike can correct me, but I think it was 47 projects last year that would have been applicable. Is that seven? 57? Oh, 47. Oh, it was four. I'm sorry. So roughly about a day's work, briefly speaking with Mike about it today, with the changes that were made, it's been streamlined, so maybe about a half a day's work if the same amount of projects went forward. So that's not necessarily a concern but a statement of fact that there would be some workload required from somebody at DPW. As the chairwoman mentioned, we are looking to fill a part-time tree warden position and though out of the gate this might not have been something that had been prioritized, it certainly would become part of that tree warden's responsibilities. The only other concern that I had and perhaps I'm just not understanding it correctly is whether or not those in town who are interested in seeing a heightened level of tree protection would feel as though this was satisfactory if two, three large trees were taken down on a site and were replaced with what would be far smaller trees on the site and trying to look at things from the town's perspective that they could think a new by-law that would protect trees as past and then see a development happen and have these large, beautiful trees removed and smaller ones put in and say, hey, the town's not doing their job what's going on. So I mean to some degree that's a communication challenge but it was something that struck me as a, as just an issue of concern. Right. And I agree with that and I did talk to Susan about that, that there's the perception out there that, you know, especially when some of the residents came in that said, look what happened up here on Oldham Road. We need a tree by-law. So this doesn't happen when the way that I see what this by-law in effect will do is that development still would have happened because, you know, it's built out and it's not necessarily the tree, it's the roots. So what this by-law, in my opinion, does most effectively is doesn't really necessarily stop that case in point from happening but what it does is allows developers to, because they took down a certain amount of trees, pay a certain fee which I appreciate you're not doing DBH anymore. It's just tree for tree because I heard that from developer. Diameter breast height, I know what DBH is. But those trees in all likelihood will be planted in other locations. It's not that, you know, it's going to go back there. And my only thing in terms of public perception is, you know, a lot of people were coming in and thinking that what this tree by-law is going to do is this won't happen anymore and that's not the case. It's really. And I think, you know, that message needs to get out there. But are you, with my colleagues indulgence, are you saying that, and what I would like to do is when I understood it, when I wasn't chaired that this is a by-law from the tree committee, that they're presenting to the board that we could vote no action or approval but we were also being requested to actually be the lead sponsor on this town meeting and especially being chair, I would prefer that the board, like other Warren articles, takes a vote on it in terms of support, you know, no action or positive action. And since I anticipate this is going to be a very lively debate down at town meeting floor and I certainly can't hold myself out as the architect in knowing all the ins and outs that it be as it originally was submitted as submitted by the tree by-law committee. Am I incorrect in my memory? If I'm not mistaken, it's actually in the warrant as submitted by request of the tree committee. I think so. No, but I do correct me from wrong, Susan, but I thought you said from the very beginning we want to submit this, but we'd certainly ask the board if they wanted to sponsor it on our behalf. I prefer not to do that. I just don't know of any distinction. This board is going to make a recommendation to town meeting and we own that recommendation. I think it's clear that the tree committee has been the driving force behind it, but I think what our vote is is what our vote is. No, that's fine. I'm just saying it's as submitted by the tree committee. So, Mr. Chapter Lane, do you feel comfortable that if this went into effect that this would be something from the town side would be doable? From a staffing perspective, this is much simplified. It certainly seems to have less work. We haven't filled that part-time tree warden's position where we are working towards that, but if the board voted favorably and town meeting voted favorably, we would strive to make it work. Okay, is there a motion? No, I will make a motion, unless you want to, Dan. Actually, I was curious what the other members of the audience had to say. I don't know if that's from cutting you off, Steve, and if I did, I apologize. No, I'm happy with that. But I can see interest from the rest of the audience. I want to hear what they say. Okay, as chairman, I will now say that I see this interest from the audience and the chair for it, but I think everybody can see where we're going. Is there anyone else that would like to speak to this? May I make one quick comment? You know what they say, when you got a W, you should be careful. Is there something else you need to... The quick comment was that we put in a definition of tree warden as the tree warden or his slash her designee. So that designee could be, you know, I think somebody suggested the lady who sits in the cemetery office could conceivably do some of the flow on the paperwork. The tree committee can step in if the tree department gets really backed up. I think it gives a lot of flexibility. Okay, thank you. Anybody? Are you on? Yes, Mr. Grayley and then Mr. Chappell. We have to have a tree warden to have a designee. Yes, I agree with that, Mr. Greeley. So I would say the manager's designee if we don't have a tree warden, but... I do think we have a temporary tree warden, don't we? Well, good. I'll talk to you about that later. Just because I don't want to be... Yeah, sorry. All I was going to say was I don't think I can let it go having someone described as the lady who sits in the cemetery office. I'm so sorry. She is the clerk for the Cemetery's division that has a responsibility. I know who she's talking about. I'm just ignorant, that's all. Now, let's hear from... I said when you got the W, you stop. Steve, just name and address. Steve Revillac, 11 Sunnyside Avenue. I'm coming to... I'd like to say a few words on this from the standpoint of a homeowner. During the last year, my girlfriend and I have been planning to replace an addition on our house. Part of our house lies in a floodplain, and so we've... Aside from all of the other stuff one does when planning a construction project, we've also had to file an NOI with the Conservation Commission. In terms of the added work for a construction project in the length... Let me just back up one second. In addition to the addition that we plan to remove and rebuild, there is also the matter of a tree which will have to come down as part of the construction. With the NOI process, the tree part of it was actually very, very simple and took very little time. It was essentially the Conservation Commission told us you're taking it down, you've got to put something back up. What are you going to put up in its place and where are you going to do that? We gave them answers and they said fine, and that was about the extent of it. I was... Another area where I had a little concern was the replacement ratio. This really comes from the way the Conservation Commission handles and our wetlands protection bylaws. For us, removing a tree from a flood plain was removing a protected resource from a protected resource area, and the mitigation was to replace a protected resource. Take down a tree, put one up. I think that's a much better replacement policy than the DBH one. The one thing I would... Maybe it's not even that much of an issue, but there are... I hope there's some clarity in areas where the wetland protection bylaw would overlap with the tree protection bylaw just so that there's not a conflict between the two. Overall, I think this is a great idea and I applaud Mr. Amser taking this on. Thanks, Steve. Okay. I don't know if Mr. Byrne or Mr. Dunn. Mr. Byrne? I'm going to move approval and I'm going to thank the tree committee for resubmitting this and doing such great work on this, and I think it is acceptable after putting a bit of thought into this sense I've come to realize that this is a much more potentially serious issue in town than I initially considered. But at the same point, this is going to address it in a way that is reasonable to all parties involved. It is not overtaxing on individuals who want to either build a home or put an addition on a home, which was a top concern of mine going into this. And I think it will... And maybe it was pointed out earlier it's not ideal to everyone and nor it should be. So yeah, I'm happy with it. So thank you. Second. Okay. On a motion. Any further discussion from my colleagues? No, I just think it's quite incidental that we also have in front of us the manager's fiscal year 2017. There's a lot of trees in that picture. How many trees are in this picture? Is that a coincidence? No coincidence. No fourth on it. Okay. On a motion by... Harry, no further... Mr. Dunn, I'm sorry. No. Question from the town council. Interesting question I hadn't thought about. What about... How do we handle precedence or conflict or anything like that with other... like conservation or wetlands? So I'm not sure that... I'm not sure I agree that it's necessarily an issue of conflict. It might be redundant. Okay. That doesn't necessarily mean that there's a conflict. I think that state law is always going to trump local regulations. It's the shortest answer to it. So if there is a real conflict between what state law requires and what a local bylaw requires, we want to follow state law. If it's two competing local bylaws, I think that the worst case scenario is that both may apply and the tree committee... I'm sorry, the tree warden and the conservation commission would have to take that into account in terms of... Probably in this case, I think the conservation commission would have more flexibility than you would under this policy. Thank you. It does say in the bylaw, in the part that Mr. Heim wrote, that these boards, Board of Appeals, CONCOM and those sorts of boards could waive the requirements of this bylaw. So I think that he took care of it when he wrote the first draft. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. All right. I'm going to call for a vote now, Susan, so hold on. And this, my colleagues, have any further comments or questions? On a motion by Mr. Burns, seconded by Mr. Dunn. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Unanimous vote. Thank you. Thank you very much. Have a good night. I'm going to continue on. I will come back to number 18. Agenda item 20, Selectman Reports and Selectman Report comments and support material on Article 28 and Article 35. I'm chair, so I don't get to talk that much. So does Mr. Chapter Lane or any of my colleagues? Well, I can speak to Article 28. Okay. Why don't we start with that?  These are FAQs that were provided by mothers out front in regards to the community choice aggregation issue. They had asked whether or not the board would consider including it in as part of their report to town meeting. I had said there's three options included as part of comments, included as an appendix or distributed separately on town meeting chairs. They seemed to prefer the appendix and I don't want to directly speak for the board's office, but I think they seem to think that the appendix, like we do with the revolving fund, additional information now might be advisable, but certainly up to the board's prerogative on whether or not that's an appropriate measure. And if I could, if I could ask Mr. Dunn on the article 35, you did supply the board and I did have a conversation with you, but... Do you want to talk about 35 or do you want to keep of a comment on 28? 28. It's wrapped up 28. I am happy to include it as an appendix. I would prefer, I believe, that it either have a header or a footer or a cover page that says prepared by, not this board. And the answer is, because while I think it is very informative, there's a couple details in there that I'm not actually ready to say. Yes, that's something that, as the board, I say. I think that's very fair. So simple on top, provided by mothers out front? Correct. Okay. And do my colleagues want to... Actually, since it's under one agenda item, I guess we'll vote on both. Okay. So do you want to, Mr. Dunn, speak to... Article 35. Sure. So article 35, the finance committee held a hearing on the town manager's budget, specifically the changes that had happened between the original proposal of the town manager's budget and that, which was before them. Chairman Greeley asked me to attend. I did. The finance committee asked a series of difficult, but on point questions that I think were good preparation for what's going to happen at town meeting. And one of the... I believe four of them went out of their way to say, I need something like this in the town manager, in the Selectman's report. And so I drafted it, and I don't have any particular... I'm not like wedded to the language. If there's other language that would make other board members feel comfortable or you choose to disagree with the finance committee and say we shouldn't say anything, well, that is the board's prerogative. I'm happy to accept this as well. And I will just say, I did have a conversation with Dan and everything's in there. So Mr. Greeley, did we have anything? No, I agree. Okay, so I guess I will take... Appreciate Dan's work, as always. You could make that meeting, huh? He had a debate. That was the night my wife and I flipped the mattress. Okay, we're going to continue on. We can do this at the end of the meeting after adjournment. Okay, so I guess I will take a motion for one of my colleagues for the Selectman's report, comments and support materials amended on article 28 and 35 by Mr. Burns, seconded by... Second. Mr. Curell. Seeing no further discussion, all those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed? unanimous vote. What number are you here for? With my colleagues... It's what? The CDBG. CDBG. Is it okay if we do that and then I'll go back in order again? True. Okay, so with my colleagues' approval, we'll now go to article 32. Endorsement of the CDBG application. You want Jen to...? Sure. Yeah, oh, yeah. Oh, no, I'm sorry. Mr. Chapter... Notice she can stay till the end of the meeting. I just... No, no, no. Go for it. Okay. All right. Just say who you are even though we all know. Good evening. I'm Jennifer Radham, the Director of Planning and Community Development, and it was a pleasure working with a couple of you, Steve and Dan on a couple of rounds of reviewing applications as well as Adam. What you have before you this evening is basically the endorsement of the CDBG application, which we would move to town meeting. We... I think since the last time that we've seen each other, we received a notice from HUD indicating that we've received... we will receive, rather, by July 1st, $1,033,162 through the Community Development Block Grant Program. And so this report is basically outlining what we will include as part of the expenditures with those funds as well as some program income. So the report walks through the process that we went through, the allocations that we are recommending, and they include things around rehabilitation and housing, public service programs, public facilities and improvements, and planning activities, including funding staff in my office. And then at the last page of the report indicates the exact allocations that are recommended for the coming year. So... Yeah, I think that was all that I wanted to share in terms of the report. The only other update that I wanted to provide you with also is that we did hire Amy Fidalgo to be the Community Development Block Grant Administrator. She could not be here this evening, but you will... many of you have maybe met her. She was the administrative assistant in the Planning and Community Development Office, and she'll, of course, meet with you at future times, where we'll have additional meetings on the CDBG program. So I would entertain any questions that you might have about the report or the process. I'm good. I don't know... Yeah, sure. I think it's... we kind of have this down pat. We do it year after year. I will say that working with Jenny and Amy was absolutely fabulous this year. I think we're going to see some changes to how we operate this program moving forward, and one that changes that are very welcome. So thank you very much for that. And again, you know, as we say every year, this is just not... this funding is not easy to distribute. We kind of put many admirable operations up against one another, and we do our best to, you know, use our judgment to fund them. So we do appreciate your support in endorsing this. I do have one comment in terms of the letter we received from John Ordenware. He seems to compare the money that... or the funding that is going to the HCA, and he seems to compare that to the thousands of dollars for public service, and it's important to know that each of those categories are capped at a certain percentage. So the HCA funding is not necessarily, you know, going against the public services funding, especially all going within the same category. So, you know, that the funding given to public services cannot be spent on the other different programs like housing, and that's very important to note for when considering this, because, you know, I think we would all want to give the public services, you know, exactly what they ask for, but that's just not possible under the funding mechanism. So thank you. Okay. Are we just... Did you already move it, and I missed? Nope. I moved approval of the CDB budget as drafted, and I'll note that this is one of those crazy votes that has six votes, exactly. Second. Second by Mr. Byrne. And I would just add, just because I have the captured captive audience of both of you, if at some point during the budget year when you all deem appropriate, one of the first things when I first got involved in town meeting was when CDBG came before town meeting I was very naive. I thought we had a say in it, voted it up and down, and there was a particular program for like $50,000 for lead paint removal down monotony manner that didn't get funded. And as town meetings sometimes has the propensity to do it, because I wasn't aware of, you know, how it actually worked, it turned into a two-night discussion and as a result of that, you know, and at that point I think CDBG was more like $3 or $4 million. Don't quote me, but I remember $3.4 or $4.3. The then town officials went back and saw that for this particular program there were funds that weren't used from a previous year. So what I would ask the town manager if appropriate, if it gets to a point, if all the CDBG monies which are very limited and they're all on course and they're all being spent, we don't need to know that, but if for some reason a case in point does arise that, you know, monies became available for whatever reason, if, you know, we could be made aware of that so we could say because it may be a program we're saying no to right now, but we can say, oh, because of the fact that, you know, Mahan Community Center didn't use, you know, $15,000. I'm trying not to say one of the people to get their hopes up or we said no to this for $15,000. So just with that, I'm not asking for a report back on what the budget looks like, but if that case in point does present itself and we are able to restore a program, if when the town manager with Jen and whomever could just maybe put it on as an agenda item just so or whatever else correspondence whatever you deem appropriate. In fact, we in the subcommittee even talked about the need to adamant your recommendation. So I think that's right on point with what you suggested. I'm trying to make more work for you, but he did. No, no, I'm only kidding. I do appreciate that and I want to thank the CWG subcommittee because I know how much harder it's getting to see all these great programs and, you know, maybe one fifth we can get there. On a motion by Mr. Dunn, seconded by Mr. Bernstein, no further discussion. Thank you. Thank you. That's too roll call. You do that, Mrs. Kruppelka, just to make sure. Do you want to roll call or do you want me to take it over? Yeah, just to make sure we have everybody. I'm sorry. What if we have a tie vote? Yeah. Aye. Aye. Aye. I'm waiting to hear what Adam says. Aye. Aye. Just to make sure that where I went so quick, we didn't overlook the town manager. I apologize. Sorry. Okay. Now we will, I guess if it's okay with everybody or we will finish with the articles for review and then go to the discussion of future board meetings or maybe why don't we just keep future board meetings to the end? Is that okay? Okay, so let's go to article 29 table from the March 7th meeting. Removal of the easement restriction? So at the March 7th meeting, there was a brief discussion where I asked the board to basically authorize me to negotiate on the same basis as the easement restriction or the release of exterior lines from the Venner Road property several years ago. So I did that and negotiating with Attorney Leone on behalf of the property owners, the Dolans, negotiated an amount of $28,000 and really using the exact same approach in terms of amount that was paid for the taking of the property as well as the lesser amount of taxes that were paid for that slice of land being undevelopable and proportionately that $28,000 matches up with what was paid by the Cacaris family two years ago. The other point that I'll let town council add more, I know the chairwoman had asked whether or not there were other situations in town that were similar to what we were talking about. A very specific answer is challenging because an extensive title search would need to be done to really determine where they would be. Do you want to add to your sense of what there might be for similar situations? To the extent that we could try to investigate whether there's some kind of inventory of these specific types of property rights by the town, we weren't able to find anything that would not require the types of title searches that Mr. Chapter Lane's talking about. What I mean by that is that this is basically like an easement, so it's a property interest that would impact potentially the title of the property when somebody went to sell, which is why these things are in front of us. We did try to search as well as we could, but absent a better inventory of this type of unusual situation that we were talking about. There shouldn't be a lot of these exterior lines lying around town somewhere, and the other, it's not perfect evidence, but that I would submit to the board is that as everybody knows there's a lot of real estate transactions in Arlington, and if this was a present issue on a lot of properties, I think it would come up more often, but it's come up on these two properties for reasons that everybody understands. Is there a motion? We recommend favorable action. Second. I'm happy to support. I'm wondering is it possible for our comments to include what we believe the intent of the owners is to do with the easement, so to speak? The natural question that town meeting is going to ask is what is going to happen once we do this? Is it appropriate for us to include a comment? I think we can try. If I can get attorney Leone or the Dolans to submit to us what their plans are, didn't we talk about this in the first hearing where we said maybe we should talk about what could happen even? What could happen is that you have a potential for repeat of what happened the first time, which is that that particular house was knocked down and a lot was subdivided and developed. So we can apprise town meeting that could be a risk of, not a risk, but a potential outcome using these exterior lines. I'm curious what other board members think. I figure one way or another we're talking about this at town meeting. Someone is going to ask a question at town meeting, so I guess what Mr. Dunn with a town council has lined out, see what they're willing. Bring it to their attention that they will be asked that and or we will be asked that. They'll have to have some response. Do they feel comfortable providing that now so we can review it and possibly include it in our final. Am I encapsulating it correctly? It would. I'm fine with that. If it's going to hold up any sort of process or I don't think that we really have to do it either or we're not going to be able to do it. We're only being there at town meeting and I know that he will be more than happy to provide what's going to happen on the floor. So I don't feel like it has to be in the report. I just don't want anyone to go on a wild goose chase to find it when the answer will be at town meeting in the meeting with us. It does, if I may, Madam Chair. I think that the report actually impacts articles 22, 29, 32, 33 and 58 that there won't be another meeting of the board before the report is finalized. Whatever we decide, the board decides tonight excuse me. We should have some at least ability to wrap it so that town council and the board's office can put it into the report. I'm persuaded by Steve's point. The answer will be in the room. Thank you. Any further discussion? On a motion by Mr. Greely, seconded by Mr. Burn, all those in favor say aye. All those opposed, unanimous vote. Article 33, we tabled this from the March 21st meeting. It just was a little glitch that we didn't actually have. They were evolving funds listed. We have that reference material in there. Pretty routine. If you have a question, if not all those in favor say aye. All those opposed, unanimous vote. And now the special town meeting article 6, Minuteman regional vocational school bond authorization for Minuteman school construction. Who would like to speak to this? Mr. If Selecman agrees, I think this probably is best to will report at this point. Yes. We'll report and we will have to make a report at a later date. Second. Seconded by, a motion by Mr. Dunn, seconded by Mr. Burn. Any further discussion or questions, if not all those in favor say aye. All those opposed, unanimous vote. And we now final votes and comments for articles 21, 23, 24, 30 and 59. Move approval. Seconded by Mr. Greely, seconded by Mr. Burn. Any questions, comments? Mr. Attorney Heim? So as the board can see wherever I could with respect to develop comments on the articles that were before you tonight for their actual first or in some cases, second warrant article hearing, I developed a draft comment. If you are all comfortable with that draft comment, I just wanted to make it clear that for the warrant article, I would like you to vote and comment. And similarly, if the board is so inclined, if I could summarize my understanding of the tree committee vote, I'm sorry, the tree bylaw vote tonight, I can try to draft a vote and comment for inclusion in the report that reflects the board's understanding so that as many things as possible are included in the report and there's as little as possible will report or separate information to our e-mails that you're going to send to us, because is it March 14th or you're not talking about that deadline? April 14th? Okay. So, all right. Actually, then I have to drop it off so I can pick it up. I just want to confirm the board is comfortable with the draft comments that I included anticipating what your action might be on those warrant comments. Secondly, if the board is so inclined, I would be comfortable with drafting a vote and comment on the tree bylaw so it could be included in the selectments report. And I certainly would e-mail it to you to make sure that nobody had any individual objections, but if the board would so authorize me, I could basically put together a voting comment that reflects what the tree committee put in front of you and the committee. Any further discussion? And for those of us that you think might need a reminder phone call in terms of e-mail, feel free to do that. Or you can call all five of us, whatever you want. Any further discussion hearing none? All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed, unanimous vote. And we will now go to taking out our calendars. That was mean. Thank you. Thank you. We have a future board of selection meetings. You got to give me something. I'm not sure. I think we don't have any scheduled as of tonight, right? Or do we? Scheduled for the 20 April. 20 April. 20 April. 20 April. 20 April. 20 April. 20 April. 20 April. Right. How does the agenda look so far from the 25th? Well, I'd like to start at seven. I'm not going to put anything heavy on. Unless we have to. For the 25th? We have two alcohol hearings. Let's to go ahead with this. Talking to the town manager and town council and the police chief, subsequent dates have been proposed. Yes, I'm not chairman anymore since I wasn't privy to such discussions. No, in terms of move forward when we can move forward and all the players can be here, who need to be here, want to be here. So that was going to be a part of my new business but I'll say it now. Mr. Grilly just raised, I will be asking the selectmen's office to, once we set dates to pull you on those two specific items, which may be at two different meetings, just I think it's really important that we have a full board that can stay. I think we need to take them separate since we're still going to be in town meeting as well as the dynamics of what needs to get reported back and everybody else has to check off what they need to do. One's definitely ready to go and the second one isn't. So Mrs. Krupp-Helika will be pulling everybody on dates to say, will we have a full board? And then the town manager and or town council will be sending out information and following up with phone calls. So you're looking for a meeting on an unusual date. Is that correct? No, no, we can still meet on the Mondays but I just want to make sure the two Mondays that we pick that are town meeting Mondays that five of us are going to be here. Excuse me, you said Saturday 11th, but the 11th is on a Wednesday, do you realize that? We'll be in town meeting. You know what? I must have been looking at the April thing. So let's start with May. I haven't pulled up my case. Everyone else have the calendars? I'm behind you all. I'm sorry. Yeah. About nine and 23. Does that work good? No. I could not do nine. Not to nine? Okay. Is there, on those two issues, the one that we were thinking is ready to go first? Is there any sort of time consideration we should have? So the two time considerations are one, the notice. You know, a formal notice has to be issued by my office. I'm sorry. A formal notice has to be issued. And then the second issue is just trying to schedule around the inspector. I need to basically have the, basically the witnesses in place that will be necessary because I don't anticipate that it will be, I anticipate that it will be a very formal presentation of evidence. So there's about two or three members of the police department at a minimum that I have to work with their schedules. How about May 11th? Which is also town meeting. If we have the slackman's meeting at seven o'clock that night. I'm out, sorry. Okay. How about the 16? How about two and 16? Is two too soon? Well, given that we're in town meeting, we might need, the board might need an opportunity to vote, say, on the Minuteman position or there may be. All right. How about two and 16? I will not be here on two, sorry. But that doesn't mean you can't still go ahead. But in terms of, you wanted a whole board. Okay. I can do nine 16 or 23 for the full board in terms of. Okay. So how many of us can be here on the ninth? Can the four of us all be here on the ninth? Mm-hmm. So let's do nine. Knowing it's probably still town meeting. It's probably still town meeting. Yeah. Nine and then on 16, because 23 doesn't work for you, right, Mr. No, no. I can do nine 16 and 23. Okay. I want to do nine and 23. But Joe said you can't do nine. Oh, Joe can't do nine. I cannot do nine. No, I can't do nine. Okay. So Joe can't do nine. So two and 16. Can't do two. No one to. Well, I can't be here. Yeah. That's fine. But we'll have a full board on the 16th, right? I guess. Well, you can't be here nine either, right? Nine. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. I think I haven't heard to the 23rd yet so far is the only date. I've heard that the order or the 16th. We can call on May 16 and May 23rd in May. Okay, June, what say you all? May 16 and May 25th, you said? 23rd. I have to enter in those last ones before I go ahead and look at my next one. We did just say 16 and 23rd, right? Yep. Good. I'm not even saying anything. I'm just having to make sure we did. 23rd and then what about the 6th and the 20th? Hold on, sorry. Yes and yes. Okay. For me. Okay, 6 and 20, hearing no objections or Mr. Grillich? Yeah. Okay, then we go to our summer schedule in July 11 or 18? June 6 and 20. Oh, sorry. Yeah, I have a conflict in July. Let me double check with you. I cannot do July 11. 18th? Does 18 look good? Okay, 18 is set. Yep. August, I cannot do the 15th. Eight or 22? Both are good for me. Anyone? Eight or 22? I have a preference. Oh, sorry, I'm jumping in. I'm trying to catch up. I would say 22 and if not, eight. Either of those are all right. Okay. Okay. Let's go to the 8th. Okay, you want to continue into September? Maybe we've had enough fun for one night. I would propose the 5th, the 12th, the 19th, the 20th. Okay, that's all set. Okay. Sorry, what did we settle on for August? Okay. Okay. July 18th and August 8th, right? Correct. Thank you. Nick can't wait. I have a second. Yes, all right. Okay. We have a motion to receive. Is that a motion to receive? So moved. Seconded by? Really? Really? He killed it out. Does anyone have any comment? Or if not, all those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed? You know, let's vote. New business, Mrs. Cropelka? No new business. Thank you. Mr. Towne manager? I have no new business. Mr. Grielly? Yes. I'd like to thank the voters for returning me for my 10th term here to the board of selectmen. It was not the best day there for weather, but it was wonderful for all of them to go out. I want to thank the Arlington Jazz Band and the magical singers and the select tones for the meeting of the Historical Society. Singing around the piano show that went really well. I want to congratulate Mr. Steven Byrne and Ms. Jacqueline Darherty on their engagement to be wed. Oh! And finally, one official piece. The chairman has asked that I continue working with Adam's Evaluation, which all five of you and Karen and I are working on the compilation of that. And we will bring it up with your agreement for the 25th meeting. That works. Is that all right with everybody else? Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Byrne, congratulations. Oh, thank you. Very much. Yeah, that was probably enough new business for the last few weeks, but... Years. It's all in vain, he's paying. No, actually, I wasn't able to plan it on Saturday, but they did have a hockey tournament fundraiser down the rink for the Macriffin Fund, which was apparently very well attended and was just a spectacular day from what I've heard. So I wish I could have played, but I'm glad to everyone who was able to participate and donate. So thank you. Well, congratulations, Mr. Greeley. Congratulations, Mr. Byrne. Congratulations, Mr. Mahan. Congratulations, Mr. Dunn. That's all I got. All of your elections, your engagements, and everything. Nick's feeling a lot better. Do you have anything that can be congratulated on? The only thing I wanted to mention is that we do have a long-range planning committee. Is this Wednesday one of the items on the main item, I think, really, on the agenda is going to be discussing the timing of potential debt exclusions for our school facilities. I know a lot of us hear about this. I have a feeling, Mr. Chaptoy and Ms. Mahan, and I, in some ways, tip of the spear through the School Enrollment Task Force, we get a lot of communication on this. And so, but this is where the rubber stats hit the road and we'll be having those concrete discussions, I think, starting this Wednesday. The only other thing I didn't want to say, I wanted to publicly apologize. Earlier this evening on one of the other agenda items, I want to apologize to the town council and the manager. I raised some questions and concerns that I probably properly should have raised with you directly as soon as I had flagged them on one of the items, so I apologize. Thank you. Mr. Dunn, Mr. Vice Chair, congratulations. Thank you. Just two items. One is Minuteman is really rushing to the front and I've been doing a couple of meetings. It hasn't been getting the time that it deserves lately from me because of work, but I finished my conference on Saturday and so I'm hoping to put some paper out in the next few days on that. And just seconding what Joe just said about the pending overrides and things like that, as we were writing down those dates for the upcoming thing, I was like August 8th, I bet we've got, I bet I know what's gonna be on the agenda and I believe in August 8th it's gonna be what, you know, picking a date and the language and the amount, so. August is generally a pretty slow month too, so. Yeah, but yeah. Used to be. There's no slow months anymore. Any other new business? My new business is on to take an emotion to adjourn by. This is on Grayley. This is on Grayley seconded by. Second. Mr. Cure, all those who say aye. Aye. All those who vote, we are adjourned.