entment across the board for all bill types, even though we will not be able to eliminate real estate tax and motor vehicle excise tax. So that is in our game plan. Also be aware that we have already drafted a billing and bill printing RFI. We're not able to get that out as yet. It needs to be fine tuned, but we're in the process of online bill payments. So we expect to get that out before the summer ends. So we're moving in that direction as well. I also wanted to specifically have talked about labor cost, postage, and material cost going up. Scheduling is a critical issue. Physical environment is an issue. I think we can deal with that. Specifically, to Ms. Mahan's question about, can we utilize quarterly billing with respect to making inserts, community, or town inserts? We currently do that today. We can insert a Buxler for a single page. We can shift to a number 10 envelope and include larger inserts in water and sewer billing. The advantage to that is we are in no way violating state law by increase. If an insert increased first class postage, we're not breaking state law. Can't do that with a tax bill. So again, we have opportunities here. The other thing I want to mention is that if, I think this could be an advantage, not could be will be an advantage, if the rate structure that the board is contemplating, not only a rate increase, but going to a block rate structure can be used to eliminate capital project borrowing that will be a major positive impact to the town. Even though we are currently availing ourselves of MWRA zero interest loans, as well as grants through the local assistance programs, we know that at some point, those local assistance programs will be eliminated and that the zero interest portion of the loans may also be eliminated. Although we currently have zero interest and we're currently looking at low interest, historically low interest rates today with respect to issuing municipal bonds, the investment marketplace is second guessing the Fed. We don't know what's going to happen again on this Wednesday's Open Markets Committee meeting and Fed decisions, but we do know that interest rates will go up and we strongly suspect that when they go up, there will be a little jump followed by a large spike in borrowing rates. So if we can eliminate capital project borrowing for water and sewer, the town will be in good stead if we can do that with cash payments and be able to schedule that over the long run. So there's a lot of positive impacts with respect to quarterly billing, but there are definite budgetary and operational issues that need to be addressed and they need to be done in a detailed and focused manner. And I wanted to bring that to the board's attention. It's not just a matter of, oh, we're going to quarterly billing. And the key point is picking the proper 90 day cycle. And trust me, I've looked at every month of the year and we're always coming up with an issue, but I think we can find the best positive approach. And I've been talking with the town manager about that, as well as Mr. Radamakar, as director of DPW. And I think we can achieve an across the board positive goal. And if the board has any questions, I'd be more than happy to answer them, but the scheduling is the biggest one, as well as the budgetary impact. And I'm prepared to also put that budgetary impact in my budget for the upcoming budget go around this fall. So we'll be prepared for whatever the board decides to implement by next July. So we'll be moving forward with you. If you have any questions, be more than happy to answer them. Thank you, Mr. Gillian. All right, thank you. Think everybody said their say. Does anyone have another say? And does anyone want to make a motion? We have two recommendations from the town manager. One is to set rates starting July 1st. And the second is to set rates in a new block structure for January 1st. Those are the two votes you're asking us to make today. So moved. Second. Any further discussion or comments? All those in favor, please say aye. That one. Four zero. Thank you, thank you everybody. Thank you. So that was a lot of work put into that one, right? I know, I'm glad we spent the time on it. Next up, policy on banners, Ms. Rice. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The town manager asked me to prepare for the board's consideration of draft policy to address primarily the use of the brackets on these street light poles that are all five of town. And secondarily, I added sandwich boards in the median, which as the board knows, are frequently requested and frequently just erected without permission. It may be less problematic to sort of leave that out, but I included it for the board's consideration. I wanted to point out for the board that this draft policy, which is in your materials, is only a permission-based policy. It doesn't provide any zoning relief, no need to put it. It is the case with most signs that are not town erected, that would be fall into the promotional, educational, directional, informational part of the zoning bylaw, and that would advertise an event in a different location, which obviously would because there aren't any events taking place on the light poles. Most of those would be accessory signs, which are not allowed under current zoning bylaw. They can be allowed in the zoning enforcement officers opinion by special permit of the zoning board of appeals. So this policy does not attempt to delineate what is or is not acceptable from the zoning point of view. This is purely to assist the board in creating its permissions as the custodian of light poles, inside blocks, and other things. When the board gets requests, and I know those requests have become much more frequent at the department level for private groups seeking to erect banners, things like that, advertising private events. I have chaired a copy of this draft proposal with the town's new economic development coordinator. I have discussed it with him a little bit. I believe he's speaking out of turn to say that he's in agreement that policy would be an advisable thing, although I don't know specifically about this one. So if you have any questions, I'm happy to answer them. Diane. First I want to thank Town Council for bringing back the broad of selectmen hanging. I thought I'd just would see that again. I called the selected officer and I said whose idea it was to do it in the first one. Photographs were attached to my draft. I don't know anything about it. No, it resurfaces again, just when you thought it went away. Just speaking as a member of the broad of selectmen, I just want to ask, is it already inherently applied in here in terms of liability? Should a private group, who bears the responsibility that God forbid and happened once a town day many, many, many years ago that a banner comes down and causes damage to a car or injury to a person? Who bears the cost of that? It could be any party involved. It could be either the town or it could be the party place in the banner. One question that I embedded in the draft policy was whether the board wanted to require insurance. Now, for non-profit organizations, that might be a hardship. I think either way, there has to be insurance and I think we need to. If the board wishes to extend the availability of that advertising space to non-town entities. To date, as long as I've been here, it's been my understanding with one aberration that I believe was not authorized by this board that the only use of those light bulb banner brackets was by town, it was always in the library, but town entities. So if the board wished to permit private entities, non-town entities to use those brackets, the board would have to consider whether it would require liability insurance for those. What I recommend here and the board can certainly explore other things, but my recommendation is that the board allow the use of those light bulbs only for town entity, events for town entity sponsored events. And the reason for that is twofold. One is it minimizes first amendment problems that might arise when private groups ask permission to use those banners. It becomes a problem of you're no longer able, you're not able to discriminate on the basis of content. So you may be in the situation where you're being faced with requests by an organization that many people will find offensive. And then you would be somewhat limited if you'd allow other non-profit groups to use those banner spaces. The other thing is that that type of signage is not allowed under the zoning by-law unless it is erected by the town. Okay. That's the reason I make that recommendation. That's fine. As long as we stick to sponsored by the town or a town committee, if we really stick to that guideline because I can see other worthy non-profits, 5013C is coming in, you have the language outlined there. And then the only other comment that I had is, and I'll leave this to the town manager, the sandwich board on public sidewalks, it was a little bit, I was a little chagrined at the last meeting when we had a business owner up and we were talking about asking him to move the sandwich board so that people could get through and it was stated that they're not allowed and he didn't agree to even move that. Which is one of the reasons why I did not vote to endorse his outdoor seating because I did not see him cooperating with this board. Quite a few people have pointed that out. Since that's come to light, if whatever appropriate authority agency department head could follow up on that, just because, and he brought it to our attention as well as debated not moving it to a safe place to me, you know, but whatever. But my future question would be if that case arises again, if Adam could let us, the town manager could let us know tonight or in the future, do we, besides all things go through Marie, who enforces that? Is that Christine Conley? Is that police department, non-emergency? It would be a building inspection. Okay, all right. But just again, with that's been pointed out, I've had, I mean, every Dunkin' Donuts I've walked into and one Starbucks, funny enough, they commented on that particular thing because they watched it at home. Thank you. And I wanna make clear, I'm not recommending that the board needs to implement a policy with respect to the placement of sandwich boards, but we all know that they get placed. I think we should. Thank you. I can think of two that we've approved that I can recall specifically. One is a farmer's market and the other one completely just lost Chamber of Commerce. Thank you. It's like I had it. And blood drive. Yeah. But that's in the center, I will not walk into it. But I'm actually gonna say, I don't think I've approved the blood drive ones. Like maybe in past, maybe you've done it in the past, but I can't at least myself recall having both of you. I don't recall either. Yeah, in the past year. Joe. Thank you. Thank you for working on this. I mean, certainly there are a number of activities and there are a number of activities alone that are town sponsored and sponsored by committee. So I think it's important that we act on this to make it clear that these town sponsored events will have potential access to the polls. I do have a question on this though. So under Roman numeral two, only A, enters for events or activities presented or sponsored by the town or a town committee, or B, traffic informational, educational, directional, or promotional signage installed by the town or at its direction, maybe hung from the brackets, the polls, et cetera, et cetera. So installed by the town, I'm just trying to get at whether that precludes, for example, I mean, one of the examples that's come up is one of the merchants groups in the area has wanted to identify the area. And we've had this in the past, we had this in Capital Square, where the area has been clearly identified. So I'm trying to determine whether this policy precludes banners, which identify the particular cultural, historical, or commercial character of the surrounding area. No, it wouldn't, but I would expect that those would be installed by the town. I mean, you certainly don't want private parties to be in the area. So when I was reading through this, prior to this meeting, I was reading it to say that they would not be precluded, but we would have to grant permission for that type of signage, which is identifying signage in nature. Right, I think this is certainly the board would want to discuss with the economic development coordinator, but they would not be precluded under this policy. Okay, because that's very important to me, that we do allow that, that we do potentially allow signage that does identify the cultural, commercial, or historical character of a particular area. I mean, we're seeing things like that coming out of the master planning process. I think in the memo that we got, there was discussion of that, of a cultural arts district per se, but we've talked a lot about the identity of place, and I want to make sure that that's not precluded, and that we're not precluded from working with private groups to help us make that happen. Right, but I would say the final decision and any kind of accessing of the polls would need to be done at the town level. Right, okay. Absolutely. No, absolutely, no, no, no, no question. Oh, I just want to make sure this doesn't preclude that. Okay. My, so I'm in favor of this, I think it's good. Marie, I think, so one of the things I did briefly talk to Marianne about this, and one of the things that Marianne said was make sure you build a process with this, and we're not supposed to find a process in this policy, which I actually think is a very healthy thing, but I think it should come, I think that, provided we go forward and we approve this, I think what we should talk about is this like you and Marianne or whoever, creating something like the taxi permit, but something that's just for us, for us for this, is such that if someone wants to hang the banners, you're going to have like a one page form, and I strongly suspect that one of the questions is going to be please attach a sample of what the design will look like. Juliana? I just clarify on that point. If the question is with respect to hanging the banners, the way this policy is drafted right now, no private parties are going to hang the banners, maybe come by the town, if the town chooses to co-sponsor an event, the town was, I mean, the select were asked recently in a creative move to co-sponsor an event, the board decided to, that's fine. So I think what you might want to be thinking about is how to request a co-sponsor an agreement. Yeah, so actually what I was trying to, I'm curious if you agree, so the last one that's in section two is the one that I was hanging my hat on, which is the Board of Select would must approve the hanging of any such banners or signs in the period of time which they will be hung. And so I was trying to come up, I was suggesting that we have a piece of paper that helps, you know, this is the document that's going to carry it to us for us to take a vote on it. Right, and maybe this internally is a little inconsistent because yes, the board must approve it, but earlier in policy it said that only something that is for a town event or a town sponsored event. So it's maybe, maybe I didn't draft it very well. You're really looking, right now you're looking at two levels of approval. One is, are you going to co-sponsor an event? And the second is, are you going to approve the banners? So maybe I could fix that to make it a little more user friendly. Okay, yeah, Dan. You just popped a line of inquiry for me. Do we also want to perhaps have some sort of time limit or maximum thereof or? I think to me that's still in our, I mean, it is explicitly something we get to decide. Okay. That's good enough. I mean, if we wanted to set the policy that we're gonna, so the way I look at it is we can attempt to bind future boards of selection, but that future board of selection could change this policy anyway. So we get to choose it, you know. Here's what I'm thinking is that for some reason, one group comes in and gets to stay up for two weeks because nothing else is going on. And then another group comes in and says, well, we want the two weeks and we can only give them 10 days. If we can have some language that says up to 10 days, 14 days. Yes, I guess that, I... Diane will agree, because she's been on the longest. Any sign for the banners that ever came before us, including all the library signs, you know, the month to read or whatever, we always get a sample and the board has always approved it before the signs are put up. Right, but I'm saying that that should be a part of what this year. Exactly, and they tell you there's going to be up to 30 days or, you know, 15 days or something, but the board always gets to approve it. That's what this says. All right, it's not a makeup break point for me, but we'll just keep it in mind in terms of... I think we should do it, let me keep it in mind. Okay, that's fine. So, Juliana, I haven't, I don't yet see the problem that you see. Okay. All right. Joe? I think my, again, I'll go back, back to what I was talking about before. The only issue I've got is that the title of the policy talks about the use of town-owned property for event publicity, and I think it's really for publicity signage. So you think that is fixed? Yeah, and I think in the preamble, it says to govern use of its fixes with the temporary posting or installation of signs or banners to publicize upcoming events. I'd like to see, or the unique commercial, historical, cultural character of an area. Or the unique commercial, historic, or cultural character of an area. No, I have a question for Joe. Just a little dialogue. Now, are you talking about more permanent signs or these types of banners that go up and down? Banners, banners, banners. I will tell you very specifically that I know that the commercial merchants group in the center has looked at what Capital Square did a number of years ago. Now, I know those banners actually stayed there quite a long time, but under this, I think it's reasonable. We would have to set some guidelines. We don't want all of the polls taken up and then you have no space left for event promotion. So there'd have to be some parameters left. But I think banners by the very nature aren't permanent. They degrade pretty obvious. I think once the process is fully developed, what Mr. Cureau, what you're getting at could be that, let's say Town Day had banners. The board approved that. They could be up for 14 days or a month. And then there's no event. And an Arlington Center Business District banner goes up as a gap filler. And then there's another event and then that goes up. And so maybe there's always something up based on what Mr. Cureau's talking about. And that will develop itself and see how it works out. But I think that's what you're getting at. When there isn't an event being publicized, perhaps the district itself is being publicized. But what? Perhaps the district itself is being publicized. Correct, correct. And I wanna make sure that that's possible, that that's still possible. I'm also realizing there's a timing issue here with one of the other upcoming town events, which is the block party that we approve some things. But I think we're dead. As far as I'm concerned, and Juliana can correct me if I'm wrong, we can approve any proposals we want, even without approving this policy first. We've been doing it one off forever. We can do it one off again until the policy. Yeah, yeah, I just realized this very moment, the light bulb just went off that, oh, we made the meeting before the block party for this policy proposal, what we haven't. I don't feel like that should block. I don't know what to do. Do we want to approve this as amended, or do you wanna, do you wanna, are you? Let her have a final crack at it. Do you want another edit, or do you wanna ask to approve it? No, I'm happy to circulate it again. Okay. Additionally, I'm not sure if the board made a decision with respect to insurance for sandwich boards, or you just don't wanna address that right now, it's fine. Well, it would essentially be the town. No, but the sandwich boards, yeah. Because you can have multiple sandwich boards, although you can't have multiple views of the same bracket. Cyber, that we would, okay. But maybe you don't even need to address this right now. I mean, I could take that out as well, because it seems like the pressing need is very much. Yeah. It's just a stickler on me. You want it? To not have insurance, yeah. I don't know, maybe not an exhaustive search, but maybe find out if there are any other cities and towns that, what modality they, what, what. Yeah, I did do a search for similar policies in cities and towns and was not able to look. I mean, we have people, if they run through our ovens, with them, or they have to have insurance, right? To me, to not have the insurance, I think is. When? Well, since you're recrafting it and doing it up, and making some revisions to it, maybe if you could just see if there's an answer to that question, I'm just. Yeah, so let's, part of me says, so I understand what you're after, so in, I like having insurance, but I also like having flexibility to change my mind. It's my only thing. So, for Juliana, I guess the way I look at this is, for Juliana to do a good draft for us, we have to give her direction about what we want, so I think it would be, as a board, owe her an answer on her question, and so Diane clearly would prefer to put in insurance. And it could be the way you could craft it, as you could say, you know, you could have insurance, like we do right now with the taxi cabs companies in Boston doesn't, everybody's finding out it's woefully inadequate. If you say you have to have a minimum amount of insurance policy of whatever. So, and I would, and I'm okay with talking about insurance in general requirement, but I want a way out if I don't need to, which I think is different from Diane's position, so I think you've got to get to see it. I think we might be on the same page, Mr. Chairman. What if we, you know, said something along the lines of, you know, we would hope that you would request or consider, but do not require, you know, to give us that leeway. Because quite frankly, I don't think that it's necessary, but it would, that would at least start, you know, they would then look into it, and then they could see whether or not it was reasonable on those private business owners. Joe, where do you, on insurance? I see, I'm with you. I think I like having that, I like having some flexibility on it. So, I think we're going to direct, Juliana say, insurance can be waived by this board.  Yeah, I know where you're at. I'm just telling you. All right, so, Juliana, do you want to amend that and send us some of the draft? Any further conversation on this topic? Nope, but, I'm wondering how I get myself out of this, this, this pickle. Well, what I need is the Arlington live block party, potentially as a need for, I'd say probably for up to 10 banners, they may not use them, but that's July 13th and we don't meet before then. Yeah, you're in trouble. I am in trouble. Unless we give general approval to the town manager. Unless you wait until new business and discuss it and ask for a vote. Yeah. Plus we give general authority to the town manager to approve town sponsored, use of those polls for town sponsored events. Let's do it, let's do it in new business and do it specifically for this event. I don't want to have to create a new policy, personally. Gotcha. I'd rather just do the thing. Anything else over that end? Next up. Parking fees. All right, so, little bit of history yet, trying to figure about how far back we've been on this one. During conversations last year, we got a question from Mr. Bailen and others about, it was last year, about whether or not the fee was too high. We asked the town manager to look at what the fee, what the composition of the fee should be and he provided a form. There was Mr. Bailen and others to a 10 voter article to the town meeting. Town meeting approved a resolution. I forget the exact language of it, but it was essentially in favor of lower fees. And so, and I agreed both before that and at the town meeting to make sure that we would talk about this at a future selectments meeting, which is what brings us here. So, I think that the appropriate thing probably is for the town manager to talk a little bit about the document that he has and what the pricing suggestion is. Diane, then I'm going to ask you to talk about what the parking subcommittee said and then let's have a discussion, I think. All right, Adam. So, going back to the memo that had been provided to the board during the town meeting discussion, I looked at two issues, the cost of the first issuance of this overnight parking permit as well as every subsequent reissuance after that first year. And the major difference being in that first year, there's a somewhat great deal of inspection work that needs to be done by the police department, fire department and then permit issuance by the Board of Selectment and the Treasurer's Office. All of that doesn't have to happen in each subsequent year in terms of the cost of producing the permit. So, looking at the hourly rate and the time spent by those departments for year one, as well as a figure that I used for both that first year's issuance and every other year's reissuance, something I called allocation of a scarce resource. The first year came to $186 and every other year came to $50 or $51. So, to talk a little bit about the allocation of the scarce resource, the point I was trying to hit on there is that those folks who receive this permit are receiving a special benefit that very few people in this town receive because of the overnight parking permit. So though there isn't necessarily a cost of producing that there is certainly some value or incentive being given or not incentive benefit being given to those people who are awarded this permit. That's why I included that for the Board's discussion. This was again discussed, this was again discussed at last week's parking subcommittee, so at that point I turn it over to Ms. Mahara if she wants to address the committee's decision. Okay, we did discuss this issue and we discussed it from keeping it the same to making it uniform to what we charge the town lots, charge the public street the same as we do the public lots, a dollar a day, $365 a year, as well as what was presented from the town manager. And the parking subcommittee all recommended that in light of the recent vote by the citizens on the overnight parking ban, in light of the fact we're talking approximately 75 residents out of the 24, 22,000 or so that have this benefit and the fact that we're an overnight parking ban town, we wanna maintain it at the current rate of $200 a year, as well as we have not heard with the exception of some residents on one street of any of the other residents who seek this relief to us every year haven't heard any requests that the fees exorbitant should go up or should go down. And it was felt by the subcommittee to recommend keeping it at 200 for each year because it keeps on the table the fact that we're trying to really in somewhat effect deter overnight parking because we do have an overnight parking ban. And the $200 we looked at other cities and towns who do comparable who have overnight parking bans, they also do the same thing. And it was also pointed out that and this is for the current Board of Selectment to ponder that originally we, the Board of Selectment had very strict guidelines in terms of you had to be a true hardship case. You had to be Highland Ave, Park Ave. You cannot build any when people would come in in East Arlington on Agaton Road on Fairmont Street and say I have parking for three but now I need four cars, two per. They were told no. And we seem to be getting into the slope of, I rented this place and the landlord won't let me or now I have five cars that it might give this Board some relief if we got back to it truly is a hardship case in the future. But it's up to a majority of the Board of Selectment but the parking subcommittee recommends that we not make everything uniform but that we keep it at the $200 a year and make that motion. So motion from Mr. Mohan. I have comments but I tend to, as Chair, I try to sit on myself and make myself the top last. So I confess I'm itching to speak and if you guys want to go, go and otherwise I'm gonna let myself, Joe. Yeah, unfortunately I can't second the motion. I like the analysis that the manager's given us as far as it goes. I think it is reasonable to take a look at the allocated costs and establish a yearly permit fee and then, I mean probably what we should be looking at is breaking this out. There's an application fee and we have to determine the first year application portion and then there's a recurring permit fee year over year. It's the same thing as what we've got here. Hear me out but one thing that I think it does still, I understand the concept of the allocation of scarce resource, I'm still not clear how we're backing into that number. What I think I'd feel more comfortable with is if we were including in here an analysis similar to what's done for the police fire. Oh no, there is an analysis here for the Board of Select in the first year but there isn't for the subsequent years. I guess in subsequent years what some of the additional clerical costs is for reissuing the permits but that's about as far as I've looked at it. I'm just not clear how we get to that $30 on allocation of scarce resource. There is no grand formula behind it. Steve, before I make any sort of announcement just to hear out the discussion. I would not be against having the, at least whether it be officer or toe or someone that he works closely with on these issues. Go and re-examine the parking spots to see if there are any changes. Different curb cuts can occur, different science can be moved. So you're talking about a renewal. Yeah, a renewal. So a more in-depth examination upon the renewal of a license and in which case I would support staying at the current 200. If that is not going to occur and we are just going to renew it, I would, I think maybe going from 200 down to 100 and including more of board of, as Mr. Cure said, a board of selecting analysis on the recurring years and then examining that and then making a decision. But so that's kind of what I'm thinking. So my thought is that I'm not person, I'm not fretting the exact number on either of the things, but I do support something that I think Joe said, but I would phrase as there's a first year fee and there's a subsequent year fee and the first year being higher and the subsequent being lower. So, and I would support 200, 100. I would support other numbers, but I do support, I respectfully disagree with the parking subcommittee, which does good work and I hate to disagree with them and I feel like I've disagreed two out of the last three times and I, and I, and I, and I, I mean, at some point we should evaluate whether we want a parking subcommittee, honestly, because there's a lot of time, including officer or tell that we spend on these issues and it kind of seems like, sometimes you got to make tough decisions or let's not have a parking subcommittee. Okay. Honestly. Yeah. Because it's a waste of, class a waste of their time. Yeah. I like to think that it's an unusual batting streak that I've got going right now, but I'm definitely aware that I've got batting streak right now, but it doesn't change my opinion.  I mean, it's not that we just sat down and I mean, this was a lot of, you know, several over the course of a year, year and a half that we had these meetings and we were told, please go back to the drawing board, please look at this again. This fee amount, does parking subcommittee came back in multiple times? We, how many times have we discussed the overnight parking fee in our meetings? To this year? Yeah, for this year only. We've probably had maybe three, four. Really? Yeah, I'm not counting last year. This originally started out last year. When we did the analysis so that Swan Street and Forestry could get on the parking there. And since we've had it, the only thing that we've met on, did we have one meeting regarding Swan Street on this overnight with the warrant article that was to balance it? No, I'm just saying, you know, for what it's worth, but whatever the majority of the board comes up with, but you know, and I think it's a good idea. Honestly, what Mr. Byrne brought up is, again, it would be an additional cost, but if the fee stayed 200 per year, having officer Roto go out and look at the 72 to 75 that we have and see if there can be a curb cut so that we can get back to the original spirit. And again, it was, and I don't mean to be chastising, but getting away from the original reason for granting overnight parking permits. You could not blast into Highland Abapal River and you didn't have a place where the town would grant you a curb cut. We could. I think that's a very good suggestion because I think, I know, and that's the other thing. We've been out, I can't tell you how many times, to just about all 75. Between last year and this year. I definitely appreciate that the reasons we're giving permits is different than what was originally done. And I think that so long as we're talking, like if we're doing that on purpose, it's a healthy thing. If we're doing it by mistake, it's a bad thing. But the fact that we're actually, the fact that our policies are evolving over time in and of itself, that doesn't scare me. It's only, we just have to be doing it for the right reason. No, I just want to respect the overnight parking ban, which is what this town has voted in. That's the point. I mean, what we're doing is not respecting Okay. So. Oh, okay. I would, I would quibble with the, with the choice of words there. Okay. It does have to be respecting. The town has consistently in town, meeting voted that they want to. Yes. And maintain the overnight parking ban and your parking subcommittee is saying in order to do that. We need exceptions. Well, we need to be firm on exceptions and recommending 200 per year. Mr. Ballin, did you want to weigh in? Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the board. I think you all know my opinion on this, cause I've been before you several times as well as at town meeting. Do you recommend $186.29 and 51.71? No, I don't actually, I will get into that. What I, what I recommended at town meeting, which town meeting did pass as a resolution by a majority of the members was $150 for the first year and $25 for each subsequent year. The basis for that was very simple. Mr. Chapter Lane did a very honest assessment of the actual costs. And as I said many times to you before, there's a very clear Supreme Judicial Court opinion. I don't know why you're not concerned about it. It's very clear. Permit fees have to be tied to actual costs. You can't make up numbers that you feel are numbers you would like fees to be. They are based on costs. You have on a piece of paper now a very honest assessment of what the costs are. The only thing I quibble with Mr. Chapter Lane's assessment is the $30 allocation of scarce resource because I think as he acknowledges and I give him credit for trying, he acknowledges it is a number he made up to try to sort of factor in other issues, but it is not part of an actual cost. The numbers are very clear of what costs the town to do these permits every year. I have no problem with the additional costs for the first year. $150 is reasonable, even though I think that's a little padded. I tell you for sure the fire department does not spend an hour assessing each property. But nonetheless, I'm not going to quibble with a few dollars here and there. $150 seems very reasonable to me for the first year. But you have very clear written documentation of costs for subsequent years. It's $22 more or less. Rounding it to $25 seems to make sense to me. But I'm baffled by why the members of the board, the Park and Civil Committee, continue to try to push this fee issue beyond what is actually legal. And I really, really encourage you to think about that very clearly. Ms. Mahan keeps mentioning the overnight ban and the unfairness issue. I've said many times before, make it very clear what the criteria are for an exception. Not everybody in town will qualify. This is not for convenience.  Charging them an excessive fee, just a made up fee, isn't the way to discourage it. The way to discourage it is to have clear policies on who can apply, who can't. An application fee, I would suggest, a nonrefundable application fee will discourage a lot of people. It's $150 a year. But again, if the board intends to support $200 flat fee every year, it certainly won't be the end of it from my perspective. I think you really would be incurring liability here for the town. That is completely unnecessary. And you certainly won't hear it at the end of it from town meeting either. And I guess the only thing else I would say from this one place resident is that if it is your policy to go ahead with keeping the $200 fee, I would like to know how residents on our street can go return this to a private way. Because basically, we were promised something that was taken back. At this point, I think we'd like to go back to be a private way. But anyway, what I really want to just emphasize is you seem to be suggesting something with this, making this a large fee to discourage people from applying it. Honestly, it doesn't make sense to me. As I presented before, there are loads of cities and towns around here that have permit fees. I understand it's a little different. But essentially, the cost is the cost. The cost is printing, et cetera, all the administrative costs of a permit. Nobody else charges more than $30 a year. I don't understand why Arlington is trying to turn this into a revenue stream. Thank you. Thank you. All right, so we have a motion that hasn't been seconded to something. Do you either want to second the motion or do you have a different motion that you'd like to make? I have a question for Marie. Sure. Of course. How many hours would you say into either you or Marianne or the board's office puts into a renewal of a parking permit? They come to. Yeah, just not for the first year, for the second, third, fourth. But we don't give it out the second year that you're downstairs to see the only thing that I will add to the reducing it the second year. When it says of Adams, it has the treasurer's report analysis. It does not query goes to every card during that renewal. Now, whether it takes him or not, whether to go down the whole street, I'm not with him. Sometimes I do go with him. We went to every house on Forest Street in Parivirbo. We've done all that. But now whether it would take him an hour of his time, I'll pay to get down Swan Street. I couldn't answer you that. That's not the answer I knew. We just do the initial parking request. We have the hearing here at the Suckman's office. And then we notify Steve. He gets out the permit. And then every year, in my understanding, Steve sends out a renewal at December to have it come back for January. So their office takes care of that. But we don't think of that. So I think I'd like to make a motion. I don't think I can give you the, I don't think you should. You've got to pass the gavel if you want to make a motion. But that's what I'm asking. Who do you want me to pass the gavel to? Who's passed it to me? Well, but you also have a motion on the floor. No, well, normally what happens as a courtesy is Suckman's motion gets seconded and then voted down. But we don't have that courtesy anymore. So my motion dies, so pass the gavel. All right. I feel like I'm starting back again when I was first at Suckman. I think you're getting, I actually think you're getting, I think it's very polite. I don't think there's anything. No, I'm just saying in past practice, normally. It just said, unless somebody says I want to burn down all the buildings in town, as a courtesy, you second it. And then the person fails, but whatever. So Mr. Dunn? I'd like to move, although it's due to fee of $200 for the first issuance and $100 for subsequent issuance. Motion by Mr. Dunn. Is there a second? I'm not prepared on that either. Then someday you're going to have to make a motion, too. I'd like to make a motion, yes. So I move that. There will be that, you know, the first year, there will be the $200 free. And then on the subsequent years, it will be $75. There will be a $75 free. And that is the treasurer's cost plus the allocation of scarce resources plus the police hour from the additional fee from Corey's work. And that's where that comes out to like $75, $27. And that's what I'll make that motion. I can certainly support that, so I'll second it. Like I said, the numbers are not, truly, I'm not wedded to anyone. I wanted the tiers, and that's perfectly fine. OK, motion by Mr. Burns. Seconded by Mr. Dunn. Any further discussion? Yeah, can you run that by me again? Yes, sir. So it would be the $51.71 from the cost of producing the reassurance plus the police hour and a half from the top. And that comes out to approximately $75. Could I ask Mr. Byrne, are you including in your motion this what I possibly heard suggestion of having Officer Roteau, when he can fit it into a schedule, going out to the renewals and the ones that can? Well, as Marie said, that's already done. So yes. No, that's not done. Marie said that they drive by. The renewals. Yes. He's going to add that? OK. So that that will be done, because I think we'll find quite a few. I assume you need to go to the $75, which will include Corey to go to every house to check the vehicle, et cetera. Yes. See if it's back in there. Any further discussion? If not, we want to get. I just don't feel comfortable with the allocation of scarce resource. I'm sorry. I'm just. Joe, where are you? I'm trying to, like, I would like to just dispose of this. I'm going to, you know, as in, like, I give you, like, this is a parameter of stuff that I'm excited about here, which is having a two-tier. I'm looking at, like, $160 and $75, which backs out that $30 of allocation of scarce resource that just puts in the allocated costs that are here, taking into account on the second year. I'm sorry. Did I say $75? Yes, $75. Well, it takes into account the police time on the second year. All right, either we take a vote on the current motion and then see where it goes, and then you make your motion. Or, I mean, we're falling out of line with it. We kind of look silly-willing up here making motion. So unless you're withdrawing your motion, but might. No, I'm not making a motion. Okay, there's a motion on the table, seconded by Mr. Byrne. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed? No. Okay. Motion fails. So. Mr. Curo, do you have a motion or are you ruminating? I move. I move a schedule of $160 in the first year and $75 in the second. Second. Okay, motion by Mr. Curo, seconded by Mr. Dunn. Any further discussion? If not, all those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed? No. Three to one. Three to one. Oh my god. Thank you. All right, parking done. Next up, ZBA appointment. So as the board knows, we have unfortunately received the resignation of two members of the ZBA. The ZBA needs four votes in order to approve a special permit. It does have enough of a form in order to disapprove a special permit. But regardless, it also, if a special permit request comes in, they have to schedule a hearing within 65 days and they have to act on it 90 days. And they're non-dependent. So the good news is the clock is not running. We definitely have sufficient time to make appointments. We have enough of a pull from the previous set of applicants that if it was the will of the board, we could appoint one or two members right now. However, what I would recommend is that we have actually asked the Selecting Office already to advertise. Set a deadline for July 12th. I suggest that the board have me interview those people that I would make recommendations for us to approve at our July 22nd meeting. I am fine with that. Can I add a three-spammer? One thing I think that we obviously not everyone agreed on, but I think what we've heard from the members that worked with Ms. Tulumeri and Ms. Lugarelli, that they had quite a bit of, I guess, parliamentarian knowledge into the zoning board and the history of the board and everything that kind of encapsulates what that board does. And I hope, and I urge whoever's watching too, that has that knowledge to apply. And I hope that's something you'll strongly consider when looking at these candidates. All right. Thank you. And you did actually remind me of another point that I'd like to make, which is that the by-law requires at least one of the members be a lawyer and another one of the lawyers must be an engineer or an architect. And one of the existing members is an architect. So the two, right, I'm sorry, so one is a lawyer and one is an architect. So that means we've satisfied the special requirements, but that does leave us with two open seats. So I've got a process taking with teams that are very vibrant. Do I have the agreement of the board that that should be the process, or do you want? Yeah, I don't know if you need a vote. I just want to make sure that I'm going to. This has obviously been the item of controversy. I want to make sure that it doesn't get to us. And I will hold it high esteem, your recommendation. All right. Thank you. All right. That's it for ZBA. Correspondence received. We'll receive. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. We've received a letter from the Richard Davie of the Mastio T regarding the Chapter 90 funds and the amount that is being released to us, which is not the whole amount because of pending state legislation. Could I also note we've received from the Mastate Lottery Commission that the Mystic Wine Shop has filed an application for information as well as the actual application for a keynote to go game. And we have 21 days of receipt of this letter. If we object. So I don't have any feelings on it right now. But just because we received it, I believe today. So we have 21 days' response. So if whatever. I think just to be clear, I think from the description, this isn't one of those monitors that's installed is what I, the way I read it, it said there's not a monitor. It's whatever keynote to go is. You sit there and watch the screen. I've never played it. I don't gamble on the soil. I just want to note that we got it. And if we don't object, then we don't respond. That's a motion? Yes. Correct. Is there a second? Can we move receipt? Yeah. Second. All those in favor? Second on move receipt. Jeez. You guys have, I don't know. No, no. Jeez Louise. That's called just exhaustion. All right. New business. I have nothing. Juliana. I have no new business. Diane. I live in the neighborhood. This was also discussed at the parking subcommittee. I'm not even going to tell you what they recommend. But I would like to bring to the manager's attention if he could have the police department receive quite a few complaints over the past year or two greater Boston motorcycles right across from Jimmy Steakhouse for the past year and a half. They've taken up all of Mass Ave with not only motorcycles they're selling, but also ones that they've repaired. They have been spoken to. And so then what they started to do was park three and then leave four feet park three. So they're in effect using all that. But now it has snaked up to Quincy Road, which I mean, I went by the other day and there were 10 bikes. Maybe one, I'm going to stop in the gas station that's right there, but I know just about everybody who works there, unless one of the gentlemen and there's no woman is taking a ride in the motorcycle. So they're now creeping around the corner and residents have been complaining about that. And especially during the week with the Odyssey and middle school, it's a nightmare up there anyways. Because now people are parking so that, so if the town manager could ask the police department to look into that and start issuing whatever the fine is. I mean, I don't mind them taking some of it, but they literally take all of Mass App beyond all the way to the corner and now they're going up Quincy Street. The other thing is I just had a conversation with the town manager. I appreciate Mass DEP's fast response on the oil tanker spill that we had. And I did speak to the town manager, Mr. Rademacher about this. I believe the Nipdy's permit process is coming up. The what process, right? Nipdy's is the agency out of DEP that the city of Cambridge and Somerville has to go to continue dumping. They're still, yeah, they're runoff. The CSOs, the combined fuel flows. When the project originally came out where Cambridge is eliminating about 75% of them, but not 100% and they discharged into the L-Wife to the Arlington side. Every five or 10 years, the Nipdy's permit is up. And I remember going to the last one with Clarissa and we were saying, you know, we would like all the CSOs eliminated. I apologize. Is this related to the spill? No, no, in the sense that I want to capitalize on the fact that they acted so quickly on this, that we thank them for that, but that we also bring up the fact that the Nipdy's permit process is coming up soon and what they committed to was we can't do this in this first 15, 20 year phase plan. We can do it in the next. So I kind of want to piggyback on something where they did a good thing and responded to it and just let the board know that I've asked the town manager and Mike Rademacher to find out when those hearings were and what the board had done in the past were designated two members of the board. Anybody's welcome to go, but you know, to go and speak at that. And that's all my new business. Okay. So was there, so you've got the town manager looking to, is there a specific thing else you wanted us to do with that? Not until we get the information of when the next hearing is. I apologize for being dense on that one. I was not, I was not tracking anything, unfortunately. Joe. Just a couple of things I wanted to say. I went to a third master planning session which had 85 participants showed up at the Hardy School. It was a very, very informative evening. A lot of stress put there on the lack of commercial and industrial property in the town. That came out loud and clear, among a number of other things. It was a great session and they really, they really conducted well. I know if Mr. Greeley were here, he'd want to make sure that we thanked everyone who came out for the 100th of the town hall and thank everyone else here and Mr. Berner and Mr. Chapter Lane for their singing performances. It was great and anybody who's going by, especially at night, I'd urge them to look up on top of the town hall to the clock which is now illuminated and is working. So, interestingly enough, all the discussion at town meeting about clocks, the, I guess both the church in the corner and ours were fixed in the same week. So, now if you don't have your watch, you know what time it is, your cell phone. You know what time it is. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. And then just lastly, for your advice during our previous discussion, we have been working hard with the ATED or organizing the block party. We made a lot of approvals for several meetings ago and I know departments have all, and the Selectman's office have been helping a lot logistically. I did want to try to get our approval for, I'm going to say up to 10 banners. I don't know that it's all going to be used, but just as a contingency. So, if I could move approval of the hanging in the center of up to 10 promotional banners for the Arlington Alive, Summer Arts Block Party within the parameters of the draft policy, shall I say, within the parameters of the draft policy that we previously discussed this evening to be hung no longer than July 13th. Is there a second? Okay, I have a question. Sure, sure. So it will be, so the up to 10 banners will be hung only on the day of the event. No, not on the day of the event, leading up in the, I see, I blew this one. What you have to do is, if you're seeking permission, you can get permission from this instant. From this instant until through July 13th. Up to 10 banners to be, hung anyway. No, no, from the, we actually have on the light poles, we have, I'll second that. We've been hangers. Second. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed. No, I'm aye. Okay, I'm sorry, I just didn't, I didn't. I was doing, I talked with Marine. Exactly, and I didn't know where you were and I didn't want to record you. I apologize. Any further business? No. Steve, no, no business. I had two things that I want to talk about. Juan, Joe already did. It was the 100th of town hall, which was almost two weeks ago. It was an absolutely fantastic event. I enjoyed myself immensely.  You know, you're going to see a lot of people you expect to see and it's going to be a fun thing. But it turned out, I think it really exceeded all of my expectations by a lot and I really enjoyed it immensely. So the select homes, the people who did the, the back work, you know, Maria and her helpers who did the ticket sales and from Brian Rarick who did the stage management to Patsy who did so much work for it. I think it was a fantastic event and the building got an event that was, you know, quite worthy of the 100th anniversary. I think it was a, it was a really good time. I'm sorry I did not get a chance to stand out on the roof, but it was raining a lot. The second item I had was also a social call in nature, so to speak. The Rotary had an event on Tuesday which was their annual awards dinner. I was there, Mr. Cura was there, a number of other town. Mr. Talcott, Mr. Chapter Lane. Mr. Chapter Lane, in fact gave the keynote at the event and a number of town volunteers were recognized for the service that they give to the town. It was a good event and I enjoyed it. And I also brought a proclamation that you all signed. You're all done. You're all done on the signature too as well. So that was it for new business. Move to drum. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Welcome everyone. Calling to order the meeting Board of Select in the town of Arlington Monday, July 22nd, 2013. Thank you all for coming. I'd like to open this for a moment of silence. The town meeting member Nancy Sweeney who's also a member of the Human Rights Commission and a longtime volunteer at the Jason Russell House passed away last week. Our thoughts are with her family and friends. Could we have a moment of silence please? Thank you. Just a quick note about tonight's agenda. I'm gonna be moving one item up, the memorandum of understanding. I'm gonna move up after the treasurer. Another element is just in case anyone was working from the original agenda. We issued an addendum today that has an additional borrowing on it. And so we're gonna be covering that with the treasurer when we talk about his item. Okay. First up, consent agenda. We have the minutes of the meeting from June 17. We have a whole series of reappointments. These generally get bundled into every six months at this point, 45. These are reappointments that come from the town manager. Board of Health, Dr. Michael Fitzpatrick. Board of Youth Services, Anne Horgan. Cemetery Commission, Michelle Hasler. Conservation Commission, Curtis Connors. Nathaniel Stevens, Charles Tyrone. Constable Richard Boyle. Disabilities Commission, D. Heidi Hampel. Human Rights Commission, Sherry Barron. Library Trustees, Joyce Radosha. Open Space Committee, David White. Anne LaRoyer, Park and Recreation Commission. Leslie Mayer, Personnel Board. Richard Terry, Trust Fund Commission. Augusta Haydock, for the Trust Fund Commission, sorry, Vision 2020. Mary A. Harrison. All of those with terms to expire on June 30th, 2016. Sorry, Mr. Chair. Also, William McCarthy for Cemetery Commission. I knew I missed something there. Thank you. Thank you. William McCarthy under the Cemetery Commission. Sorry about that. Under Park and Recreation Commission. James Robillard, Terms to Expire, 630-14. Donald Litters and Jennifer Rothenberg, Terms to Expire, 630-15. And those were all reappointments. In new appointments of new election workers, Barbara Gardner, Martin Caldwell, and David Fuller. Do I have a motion? I move approval. Second. Any discussion? All right, is anyone of those people I just named here who wishes to speak or be? Yes, I saw someone move. Thank you for your service. Was that Mr. Stevens? Come on up and say hi. Take the praise for all of the committee members who do the town's work. Thanks very much on the Cemetery Commission. We appreciate the Board of Selectments' support and the town manager's support with all our issues and at least but not last, Juliana Rice for helping us with any of the issues when we need support. So thanks very much. And the other commission members could not make it tonight. But they thank you as well. We are delighted for your service and thank you for coming up and accepting the reappointments of so many people. Thank you. Any other comment? All those in favor please say aye. Aye. Aye, 3-0. I should also have mentioned Mrs. Mahon and Mr. Greeley are both out of town tonight. This meeting had originally been scheduled for last week and then I asked it to be moved and so that caused some scheduled collisions. They regret that they can't be here with us. Next up is item number two, appointment. This is a new appointment as opposed to the reappointments we just did to redevelopment board Andrew G. Bonnell. Mr. Bonnell? Yeah. Come on up to the microphone. You can tilt it up a little bit. It's very flexible. Tell us a couple sentences about you, why you're interested in this board. Thank you. And of course, thank you for joining us. Thank you for having me. I'm a four-year resident of Arlington looking to expand my involvement in the community. I'm an attorney of an office in Wuburn. Practice in the area, I have some experience before becoming an attorney in redevelopment, economic development, land use planning. And when I saw that the position was open, it really piqued my interest and seemed like the perfect opportunity for me to really get involved with Arlington and help the town move forward, particularly with some of the things that are happening in town right now. Thank you. Questions? Yeah. Mr. Kira? Did I understand part of your practice currently is property law or? Yes. Yes. Property and real estate development. No, thank you very much. My only comment is welcome to the hot seat a little bit. Some of the, you know, some of the board, that board handles some of the controversial issues that really shape what Arlington is gonna be like. I understand. I'm looking forward to it.  It's all good debates. All right. Any further comment or discussion or motion? I move approval of the recommended appointment. Second. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. 3-0. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Congratulations. Looking forward to working with you. Thanks. Same. All right. Mr. Gilligan, next up, requests for borrowing. We have requests to proceed for the capital projects. I vote to extend equipment and the late agenda item to the town manager to accept the grants and loans from the MWA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members of the board, I'm here to ask you to allow the town to proceed to borrow over $7 million. That $7 million is for capital projects authorized by the 2013 annual town meeting. It is for $1.2 million in sewer projects, $650,000 in water facility projects, and $2.4 million to permanently finance the last phase of the construction of the Thompson School. In addition to that, I'm also asking the board to vote to extend the useful life of certain equipment which was spelled out in the memo that I forwarded to the board last week. Not all equipment within these projects is being requested to have its useful life extended. The request is to allow for the borrowing to be more advantageous to the town and also allow us to have an extended coupon which means we will not start to make a first payment until into the next fiscal year. It's advantageous to the town financially. Excellent. Do you want to talk about all three or one at a time or how do you want to do it? Whichever, whatever you prefer, Mr. Chairman. Let's go through all three. Okay, so we've got the capital projects which is over $3 million. Those are spelled out in the Excel spreadsheet that I forwarded to you which were all voted by town meeting. Again, the water project and the sewer project, I'll touch upon the water facilities main project. That is the emergency addendum item that also you mentioned earlier unbeknownst to the town at the writing of this memo. The MWRA has included the town in a local water sewer assistance program project where we will receive an interest free loan of $550,000 which only leaves the town having to borrow $100,000 for that water project. If it was not on the agenda tonight, it would not have been able to be on the agenda until your August meeting which then would have delayed the issuance of those water bonds for another 30 days into September. Hence the request to have it discussed tonight. And also part and parcel of that vote is for your authorization for the town manager to act as agent for the town in authorizing that loan. Questions? We're gonna have to do three separate motions. Yeah, yeah. No, no, it's very straightforward. I think, thank you. So, Mr. Chair, I move to make sure I get the language right. I know I have to be very specific on this. I moved to proceed with borrowing as outlined in this recommendation for the town of Arlington to issue general obligation bonds, GO bonds for capital projects totaling $3,575,350. School construction, GO bonds totaling $2,443,750 and four cents permanently financing current bond anticipation notes bans for Thompson School construction general obligation bonds of $1,200,000 for construction of sewers and $650,000 for construction of water facilities. Is that correct? I'll second that. Well done. Any further discussion? All those favor, please say aye. Aye. Three zero. Mr. Chairman, you did that in one breath. Yeah, and I have a question for council actually as I make this next motion. Do I need to read out all of these lines or can I reference it in the motion? Oh, no, you can reference that. Okay, thank you. Because I don't have that many breaths tonight. Okay, I moved to, it's all right. I moved to vote to extend the useful life of certain equipment within borrowing as stipulated under GL chapter 44, section seven, nine and seven, three, A. The recommended vote for useful life of equipment as provided by bond council being enumerated in the memo provided to us by the treasurer dated July 16th, 2013. Second. Any further discussion? All those in favor, aye. Aye. Aye. Three zero. All right, we're two for three. Last one. Yeah, let me just go. I'll grab it. Go for it. I'm not going to be as in depth as you are. I love that. Thanks. We can just, or you can do it. Mr. Gillian, is this the motion that I would like? That's it. Perfect. And the administrator to the board has the full vote. Yeah, excellent. I move that the board of selectmen authorize the town manager to act on behalf of the town as its agent and executing agreements and performing any and all actions necessary. Second. That sounds good. In regard, and that's in regard to the. To the MWRA. Yeah, excellent. Any further discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Mr. Treasurer, anything else? Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I just like, as I stated in my memo, I will be appearing before the board in either late September or early October, having proceeded with the bond sale. And we will time that in the best interest of the town with respect to a sale date. And I thank the board. Thank you for your time. Thank you very much. All right, one item to be taken, we are going to take item number 13 for approval, draft Memorandum of Understanding, Battle Road Scenic Byway. Ms. Oluski. Hello, thank you. This is Clarissa Rowe and. Angela Oluski. Sorry. And I just, there was a four page memorandum in your packet. Both the town manager and the town council have reviewed it. It's between the towns of Arlington, Lexington, Lincoln and Concord. It's setting up a management structure for the Scenic Byway, the Battle Road Scenic Byway. I think the things that would concern you the most are what kinds of powers you're giving away. There are no powers being given away. The any money request would have to come back to the board of selectmen. The way I read this and obviously Adam and Juliana can talk about it. The ultimate power really resides in the four select boards, but it is a way of setting a program for the management of the Scenic Byway. The four towns are members. The National Park is a member and the membership is spelled out. I think it's pretty self-evident. Pretty flexible and not too rigid. Anything to add to that? Question. Reading through this, I think this is very straightforward. I think it's very exciting that we're fine. I know this has been on hold for a while, pending the availability of some funds to push forward the Battle Road Scenic Byway project. And I'm very excited. I know we have the right people also representing the town in this. So I will move to approve the MOU, pointing out the need for one small clerical change in the first page under Roman numeral one, number two, the first line, the spelling of funds at the end of the line seems to have dropped a lot. Funds, we need to be. Funds. Well, I thought I wanted to disperse funds. We'd love to disperse funds, but we're dispersing funds. That sounds great. So I'll also move. I'll second, and I'm excited about this as well. Thank you. I think about my early days in town meeting and how we were talking about Lexington Concord, everyone talks about them, and we need to make sure that Arlington gets involved and so on and so forth. And this feels to me, it's been years of work, but this feels to me like some of the articulation of that progress. And I think it's really exciting. I think this is going to, I believe that this is going to be an organization that's going to help, you know, ATED and others really drive a lot of economic development for the town. I'm very excited about it too. Thank you very much. Can I make one other point? Mr. Chair, one thing I'm excited about in this is that it's always struck me that as we try to compete with our neighboring communities, that the presence of the National Park Service there gives them a great advantage compared to us. I'm glad that we are now in an agreement like this where we do have some kind of a formal relationship with the Park Service and the National Historic Site. And one of the things I actually asked the representative from the National Park Service about was trying when the maps are republished. And of course they're just about to be republished just fall, but in the next publication to include Arlington in the map. And I think that would help tremendously. And he promised me before, but I think this time he'll keep this promise. Excellent, excellent. For the discussion, all those in favor please say aye. Aye. 3-0. Thank you very much. All right, next item on the agenda are public hearings scheduled for 715. It being after 715, we can start the public hearing. And these are a discussion of the alcohol compliance report. So I am going to invite our detective to run. So we have six restaurant or life disease that we are going to discuss. I'm gonna invite the detective to talk about the process, the procedure, and the events related to all six. And then we're going to go forward and hear each one of the, go through each one of the six licensees one by one as listed in the order of the agenda, barring anything unexpected. It's also worth noting that the board has previously adopted a set of, what's the word I'm looking for? Guidelines. The guidelines, thank you. So we have a template of response. First we are going to be doing essentially finding a fact to see if we think the reports are accurate. And if we think that there is a violation, then we can follow those guidelines. But the guidelines do give us flexibility if we think that a given violation was particularly, you know, egregious or minor. So I guess with that, if you could introduce yourself and walk us through all six, the process, the procedure, so on and so forth. Okay, good evening. My name is Gregory Foley. I'm an inspector with the Allington Police Department. On Tuesday and Thursday, June 11th and 13th, the Allington Police Department conducted alcohol compliance checks on various restaurants and liquor stores in the town. We utilized two underage operatives prior to going out on the street and checking the businesses for their compliance. We take all their personal property, I secure it in an evidence envelope. I keep it at the station. They have no cash or anything in their pockets. All the cash that's used during the compliance checks are provided by me. Prior to going out, we also take the underage operatives to our booking room and we give them a breathalyzer. Prior to going out on both nights, they both operatives scored 0.00, which is no alcohol at all. And at the end of both nights, we do it as well. And on the end of both nights, they both came back 0.00. So there was no alcohol consumed during these checks. They signed off on the Town of Arlington guidelines. The Town of Arlington release forms prior to going out. And we went over the Commonwealth of Mass Compliance guidelines through the ABCC, the Alcohol Beverage and Control Commission, where they understood what their role was in the operation. Like I said, we used two underage operatives. We took photos of what they were wearing prior to going out on both nights. I also conducted the checks last year in 2012 as well. Thank you. And then just so you went through essentially half of the checks on one night and then half of them on another? Yes, just to kind of break it up a little bit and not get overwhelmed doing all the establishments on one night. On Tuesday the 11th, we did 17 checks. And on Thursday the 13th, we did 19 checks. On the first night, Tuesday the 11th, we had two violations. And on Thursday, we, during the 19 checks, we had four violations. Mr. Cura? And just to elucidate on that point, just so everyone here and at home is clear, checks were performed on every single liquor store and other restaurant which serves alcohol in the town of Arlington. Well, correct. There was two places in town, La Posada up in the Heights. They, it's bring your own alcohol, which we don't, we're not gonna supply the kids to go in the restaurant. And the other one was the Arlington Diner, which had changed their hours for the summer. And they closed at three in the afternoon. So both nights we went out, we left at four. But there's been no violations there prior to 3 p.m. As far as I know. But they should be aware that they're subject to a check just like any other. Because this could happen on a different day next year when it'd be open for business. And just to, so the people at home and in the audience know what we have in front of us. So we have the report from Inspector Foley and it describes in the cases of the ones that where there was, you know, it says no sale, ask for ID, no sale for ask for ID for most of them. But then for some of them, you get a description like the two operatives sat at the table close to the Coke refrigerator in order to bottles of Bud Light. The waiter brought two bottles long and so on and so forth. So we've got a written description of what the operatives saw as reported by Inspector Foley. And so that's part of what we're looking at and talking about when we talk to these licensees. Okay, any other questions or comments? All right, if you could stick with us and see if we have any future questions, we go along. First up is Mana House from 9A Medford Street. And it should be noted, this is a second offense. You came before us last year and we found that you had violated the policy. Can you talk to us about this report? I'm transferring it to my daughter. I will translate for him. Okay, thank you. Can you give both of your names, I'm sorry if I didn't. My name's Ina Choi. My name is Sung Jo Choi. Thank you. So I do remember exactly what happened that night. There were two people, it was a man and a woman, they came in and they sat down and we gave them a menu and they were looking at what to eat and I heard them what they wanted. So while that was happening, I was taking care of another table and then when it came back, they just wanted beer. So I said, you know, we can't just give beer, it's a restaurant, you need to order at least something. So they were like, okay, well, can you give us like another minute? And I said, okay. So then I came back and they just wanted miso soup. So at that point I was like, okay, well, I guess that's fine. So I gave them miso soup but while I was doing that, like I gave them the beer first, I opened it for them. But then when I went to the kitchen to the miso soup, at that point I just remembered that I was supposed to check their IDs. The owner did remind me too, did you check their IDs?  And then, but at that point, the other waitress already gave them the check and they already paid and they just left. So yeah, and then at that point I pretty much expected that I would come here because he has been warning me about this. And but other days I did not forget. It was just that one time I forgot. Questions or comments? Let's start. So after you came last year, we... Oh, it wasn't me I came last year, it was my sister. Your sister, but after... Sorry, your establishment was here last year. Yeah, as a restaurant. Oh yeah, as a restaurant, yes. You, we handed out a penalty of, I believe, two days. That's three. Three days of not serving alcohol. What type of impact did that have on your restaurant and do you think that that didn't, I guess that punishment didn't prepare you guys well enough to make sure it wouldn't come here again? No, it definitely did prepare. It actually losing that three days caused us to want to lose money and that really affected the owner. And yeah, I got in deep trouble right after from the owner. So right after I always checked. So just that time I just forgot. So we're split second. Thank you, Kara. What specific measures were taken after last year to ensure that employees... How many employees are there at the establishment who would be serving? Just two. Two? And what specific measures were taken to ensure that the compliance checks were, that the people didn't forget? The owner would always tell me or the other waitress. I'm sorry to pull that. The owner would tell me, like remind me, yeah, every day. Well, not every day, but only when I work. I work Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday nights, so yeah. If he knows I'm taking out alcohol, he'll say, did you make sure you checked? And I always check right after or right before I give it to them. I go back out and then I say, oh man, check your ID, please. And then they always give it out. So Mr. Chair, how are you proposing to proceed this evening? Would you like to, are we going to hear from all violations as we go? As we go. Yeah. I have some comments. I don't want to hold off making a motion. That's fine. I was just just chairing it. I was thinking that we should take, unless there's a specific reason, I'd be inclined to handle each one as we go. Okay. I agree, I think they're all individual, so I can just answer this. So from what I hear is we've got two checks and two failures. We've got a failure, we came here, we talked about processes and implementation to make it such that we wouldn't have a failure again. Clearly whatever processes we talked about and did not work. What changes will you make to make sure that there isn't a strike three? What changes, what changes are we going to make so that we don't get a strike three? Yeah, like no matter the age, I'm always going to check. It's the law I'm not going to forget this time. So I guess I'm not satisfied with that because people come, people go. It's not one person forgetting. It's not one person remembering. You've got a systematic problem here. It isn't just a single person. Like I guess one of the things that, if I'm an engineer in engineering backgrounds you talk about, you don't have, you can't plan for the next time someone being smarter. We don't get smarter. We have to build a system around that. Frankly I'm unconvinced that you know how to stop this from happening again. I need to hear that you can adopt a process that's going to change, that's going to make a different result. Well I mean it's common sense that I have to check it. It's the rule. We're over two. Yeah. Common sense is not prevailing. Yeah. So you were here for our last hearing. You heard the steps that a number of the other restaurants were taking to avoid repeats. They include things like documentation, training, checklists, signage. There's a whole bunch of things like that. Have you adopted any of those? Last year, when I was doing the hearing, when I was at the restaurant, when I was at the strike, they told me what they were doing. They asked me if I did anything like that. Yeah, he did it all. And could you elucidate? Well, for the most part I remember he would always just tell me. Or not when I'm working, but during break time, like right before I work, he would say can you please make sure you check your IDs so that we don't have to get in trouble. And... All right, I'm gonna ask my question again then. What are you gonna do differently to prevent this from happening again? Because just so we're clear, I will not vote for you to have a license if you promise changes. You clearly aren't, the process you're using is not acceptable. You have to come up with a new one. And if you don't commit to a new one, I'm gonna personally be supporting revoking your license. I mean, new rules. Like what to do with my parents and me, and what to do with my mom. Like, you can't tell me what to do with them.  They believe in that and give me a license. I think it's better for me to think about my dad. So I... What do you want them to do? Because we're not really sure exactly what we can do. Because I know that forgetting is not intentionally there, but what do you suggest that we could do? Because I don't know. Mr. Kira, is your staff tips trained? Sorry? Is your staff tips trained? Yeah. So the training should have given you some guidance around what to do. I mean, I think perhaps one suggestion might be to take the training. Yeah. But I do have a question for you. I mean, did you set any policies and any expectations with your customers after the last time? I mean, what is the expectation? Is the expectation that you'll be carded if you appear to be underage? So ever since that time, the thing I got annoyed was, like when I would check their IDs, they would find it kind of ridiculous, even though it's a rule, and it's a small restaurant. So I don't know if that's why either, but I would explain to them, like this, we got a penalty like a few months ago, and we don't want that again, so we need to check the IDs. It's not because you're over 80 and I don't believe you. It's because it's the rule, and I have to do that, because I don't want to get in trouble. But, and I would check it every day. It was just that one night, yeah, just for a split second, I just forgot. Okay, so could I continue this question? I want to believe it's just one night, but we have no way of establishing that. It's a big coincidence when we just do the checks once a year that that would happen. I tend to be on the same page with Mr. Dunn on this. Our guidelines say that as a guideline, for a first offense, the guideline is to suspend the license for three to five nights, for a second offense, six to 10 nights. We always have the option, though, to revoke the license. Within that, we have discretion, and we're gonna have to make that decision tonight. The way I think about this is I take this extremely seriously, and I think starting from the harshest penalty and then work back. If somebody didn't show at all, I'd say forget it, that's a lost cause. If somebody shows but is not able to demonstrate a real clear plan, as Mr. Dunn stated, that also, for me, is a strike against them. Things that help, and we've seen this, and we will see this in some of the other hearings, are when licensees provide us with plans. A couple of licensees proactively provided us with plans and procedures for how to avoid this. Other things that I'll be taking into consideration tonight for you and for the other licensees, so if anyone else is listening, is whether or not there are repeat violations in successive years. This is a real problem, that there are repeat violations in successive years. And I think we have now a number of repeat violations tonight, regardless of what we do with the other licensees and the others, three strikes definitely is out for me. And two, maybe, if I'm not convinced that there's a proactive plan to address this. Yeah, going off of that plan, I think that what I would do if I was in your shoes, would probably be have a card, everyone policy, moving forward, and I know other restaurants, I believe, put up signs to instruct their employees on how to kind of go about this. And I do agree with my colleagues that we're not really, you're not explaining that process to us. And it does give, it does make me a little hesitant to, on how to move forward in this circumstance. But just saying that you're not gonna forget is that's not what I'm looking for, at least. And I don't think that's what anyone else up here is looking for, either. I don't know if you want motions yet. I've got a thought for a motion that perhaps one of you might wanna make that I would come in. And that is, so the way the town council has asked us to work is whatever motions in the memo that she provided us. One of the, is that whatever decisions we make would kick in after our next meeting so that she has time to write up the formal results of these hearings. And I would be interested in supporting a motion that is something that's happening, 10 days or whatever, but is actually indefinite until we receive a written plan for mitigation of prevention. And I'm sure that our offices, Marie and Marianne, will be able to help them put together, show examples that we've received from other things. And the answer, and if they come back. You're saying no less than 10 days. I'm saying no less than 10 days, and indefinite until we get a plan that we as a board approve. So that gives them the option of they come back with a plan and we approve it on August 19th, which is our next scheduled meeting. Then that would be the suspension where we vote. If they fail to come back with a plan that is satisfactory, then that suspension is indefinite. I think we'd be on a solid legal ground on that. Is that correct, Ms. Rice? Yeah, I just, I guess we'd want to, better understand about indefinite. Would it be indefinite until such time as they've provided a plan in the future? Until we approve one. Okay, yeah, that's fine. And do you want 10 consecutive days? Yeah. I think that's, I think we kind of have to do that. I mean, yeah. But that's my suggestion, the image. I think that's a fine suggestion. So I want me to try to frame it. I move to suspend the restaurant liquor license for Manahouse for 10 consecutive days, starting on, and I know the recommendation was the same day of the week, so. They were a Thursday. Yes, to commence on a Thursday and to keep the said suspension in effect until such time as the licensee is able to produce a plan that meets with the board's, a plan, a mitigation plan will meet with the board's approval. Do we have to give a specific date in that motion that this will start or just for Thursday? Well, I think what we were saying is that this would be following the. Yeah, but let's say we should, let's put a date that would be the start. What is the start of the suspension? That's 23rd, would that be 19th? If we say Thursday, it would be Thursday, the 22nd, Thursday, August 22nd, August 29th, September 5th, or the Thursdays. September 5th. That way it gives the licensee an opportunity to come in in August and cap it. Our second death. Any comment, Ms. Rice? So do you understand what we're proposing? Sir, you're giving us, so we're not going to sell off over 10 days? So we are suspending your license for 10 days. 10 days. To starting September 5th. Okay. And that suspension is more than 10 days. It is indefinite until we receive a written policy that you adopt that meets our approval. So you have to get us something, which presumably if you give it to us, our next meeting is August 19th. The deadline for you to get our agenda for August 19th is the previous Thursday. If you get us something by that Thursday, we'll consider it on August 19th. And if we approve it, then you have a 10 day suspension. If we fail to approve it, your suspension starts on September 5th, and it continues until we approve the plan. There's a lot of good samples from some of the other restaurants in town. And there's a lot of process stuff that you can do. Putting signage on the liquor cabinet, having employee trainings, having refresher courses, redoing tips trainings. You can see we're pretty skeptical. I forgot to split second. You're over two. Like we've only checked twice. You haven't gotten it right once. I'm pretty skeptical. So I might make a suggestion that, although I know it's probably somewhat uncomfortable, you might wanna stay and listen to some of the other licensees and see if there are some ideas that they're bringing forth that you could adopt also. Good idea. Okay. Any further discussion? We have a motion from Mr. Kerro, seconded by Mr. Byrne. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Thank you. Thank you for coming. All right. Next up, not your average Joe's, 645 Massachusetts Avenue, first offense. And I guess I should have said at the previous one that our first offense are recommended to is three to five. Three to five, thank you. And our second offense are recommended six to 10. So we just handed out a punishment that is on the heavy end of the second offense. Gentlemen, can you introduce yourselves and talk to us? My name is Steve Silverstein. I'm the founder and CEO of Not Your Ever's Joe's. With me is Joe Gottlin, Senior Vice President of Operations. And John Forbush, who's the general manager of the Arlington restaurant. Thank you. I thought you dropped off this envelope, but unfortunately it was too late. I reviewed it just a minute before the meeting, but I haven't seen, I haven't read it closely. I can walk you through that. All right. Listen carefully to the previous hearing. We regret and embarrass that we're here. We've been in Arlington for 12 years. I've served over a million and a half people. I'm not sure how many previous things were conducted in our operation, but this is our first offense. It's unfortunately, Joe will explain to you the process that we went through. Joe actually said, well, why don't we offer it to help? And I said, yeah, but we're here too. So we admit clearly the cases written up by the inspector. We had a young lady who was trained and I think you'll hear about an extensive process that we go through. And I'd say beyond that, we've served over 25 million people in the state of Massachusetts. And we've never had meaningful, whatever the exactly that means, liquor issue in the state of Massachusetts. So we had a young lady who was trained, who signed that she was trained, but she didn't follow the policy. So maybe if you would like me to, I'll ask Joe to take you through our process. Thank you. Please do. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  On the green tabs, the first tab will be our policy book, Book of Joe as we call it. And the tab that's highlighted there specifically states our policy as it relates to alcohol service. And if you look at that, it specifically goes to the point of carding potential underage guests. We set a policy and we set our buyer. We felt at a reasonable place where if anyone looks 35 years or younger, we require our staff to card that person. And I can tell you, we receive a fair amount of email complaints from guests who have been over the age of 21 but did not have their proper identification and we refused alcohol service and they took exception, but we don't sway on our position there. The second tab gives you a signed document that will require every new employee at their orientation and training to sign off that they acknowledge the policy and specifically rewrite the policy again for them stating that they are required to card anyone 35 years, who appears to be 35 years or younger and sign that document understanding and it's also written in that document that failure to do so will result in immediate termination of their employment. Something by the way we take to heart, providing job opportunities for people throughout this community for example and to terminate someone we don't take lightly, but we believe this kind of violation is serious enough that will require that immediate action. The third tab is their acknowledgement that they read the book of Joe and accept all the findings there so it's another second document that we require their signature to further make the point that they understand our policies and procedures. The fourth tab shows you in our training materials how this subject is covered and not only do we discuss the carding process but also the topic of over serving or looking for behavior on guests who might come in who have been drinking elsewhere and the responsible policies and procedures that go along with that and then the final tab is our final exam that we require for any employee, server or bartender to be allowed onto the floor. It's a 50 question quiz I believe and it shows in the tab that one of the questions is to write out the policies specifically rates to carding, all of which this employee who had this violation completed. On top of that we've submitted to you the signed documentations of these policies from the employee in question. And furthermore we show documentation whereby once we looked into this, once we were notified by the board at what happened we did in fact terminate the employee immediately. There's one other page there on the back that shows a list of 25 employees. Those are all of our employees in Arlington who are responsible for serving alcohol either as servers or bartenders. Our liquor license in the town of Arlington does not require us to have all employees serve, say certified, some other towns do. They do require our management team to be served, say certified, all of which are and we have documentation to support it. When we were notified of what happened it was a wake up call and as Steve said and someone who's responsible for operations certainly disappointed and embarrassed that we are even having to be here we immediately took steps to have every single employee in our Arlington restaurant serve, say certified. They have completed that certification. I believe there's two additional employees that were on vacation that were required to complete it before they come back on the floor. And furthermore Stephen has gone so far as to mandate that not only in Arlington but in every one of our 18 restaurants we will require all employees to be served, say certified as a requirement of employment. We take this very seriously. As Steve said we've been in business in this town for over 12 years. We take pride in what we do and the jobs we provide but when it comes to alcohol serving we understand how serious this is and how important it is. I'd just like to introduce John Fullbush, our general manager if you had any questions for him. Thank you. Do you have anything you wanted to add? Just wanted to mention that I have been with Knockdriver Joe's for over 12 years, hired hundreds of employees, I have never had an issue with this in the past. I go through the same orientation with every single employee that's brought in to any one of our locations and I haven't had an issue up until this past June. And I do have that additional list if you don't have it in your packets there of all the certifications. Thank you. Questions on board? This is extensive. Yeah. Well I definitely appreciate the professional manner that you're dealing with this and the steps that you've taken to ensure this won't happen again. I think you've heard before that that's something we're pretty keen on and it's for the safety of our town and of course you understand that. So last time we did for a first offense would suspend the license for three days and I would be comfortable moving forward to that right here in my colleagues discussion. So that's. I'll support that motion when you make it. So I appreciate you coming forward. I appreciate you taking responsibility and you guys have done what we would, what we really ask for in a situation like this. I mean, because we don't want the mistakes to happen but at the same time when they do happen to figure out what changes are gonna make to keep them from repeating is obviously the key to future success. And I really, I do support still that we enforce our policy. I think that we should give you a suspension and I will support that. But at the same time, I think that you're, I'm quite confident with the steps you're taking. We won't have to worry about round two. And I will also be supporting Steve's motion. I do think the steps that you take and go above and beyond and well, but I think just as you take this seriously and feel that you have to have a no tolerance policy and your own enforcement internally, I think that we also just for consistency's sake, also have to have a be consistent with our policies as well as we go forward. So that is the lowest end of our guideline. And I appreciate that. Obviously I would like to challenge that. But if I understand your basis for that, I can't, I'm sure there are other good operators. It sounds like the past violators received three days. It just seems a million and a half people later, you're gonna affect 25 people's paychecks. I think we have an outstanding record. I can't imagine with the documentation what we could have done differently. You have a young lady who chose, we don't escort them to their tables. One thing is we operate in Virginia, Maryland is that they have fines for the employees also. And I was sitting here saying, God, I hope this never happens again. But it might be something you wanna consider is to put some skin in the game for the employee who not only was terminated, but has a monetary fine because I can see a scenario. Unfortunately, despite all these efforts, I don't know what else we could have done better to be honest with you where we could find ourselves in a situation and we're the ones that are penalized. Yet it wasn't, we did everything that I think would be reasonably expected of us. That's an interesting question. Ms. Rice, do you know does state law permit our rules to put to administer punishment to the server as well, or are we constrained? Well, the way the Massachusetts law is written is purely in terms of the licensee and actions that can be taken against the license itself rather than individual fines. Under Massachusetts law, as it currently stands, this board doesn't actually even have the authority to administer fines to the licensee. Only the ABCC can do that. So you understand, is that we've taken all these steps. I honestly, I guess I would challenge not at this moment, we have other, you have other business to conduct tonight, what we could have done differently. No, I am going back to that point about, you know, potentially financially charging an employee. I think of it more as, you know, a team atmosphere.  But, Mr. Chair. I do agree that the establishment, though, has gone above and beyond, and I would be willing to entertain the three-day suspension being non-consecutive nights, three Tuesdays, three consecutive Tuesdays. I wasn't quite willing to go that far, but I was thinking let them choose the three consecutive days. Of their Tuesdays? Yeah. No? I think that we have a policy in place that we've, you know, kept intact and wild. So we have changed the start date in the past. But we've also, you know, we've had the last, but at the last time we were handing out these punishments, we did, you know, people did come to us with steps as well, and we didn't seem ready to. Yeah, I guess I would say that this has been of all the times, you know, of all the people we've talked to so far, this has been the most convincing. So, I'm, yeah, one of you two gets to make a motion. It would, it would, you know, obviously as Steve stated it, we would have loved to not have any suspension, but I also understand your point of view to be able to choose the dates would be helpful. As you might have seen, we've made a sizable investment in our Arlington restaurant on the Wannis. If any of you have been in there, the entire interior is being redone. We're really excited to roll out this new prototype to the town of Arlington. There's a lot of excitement and enthusiasm. We're changing our uniforms. There's just a lot of nice things going on. And so the timing of this could be detrimental to the business and to the employees. And I guess having some control over when that happens could be helpful. I'm, and maybe I won't get a second, but I would move to suspend not to average Joe's license for three days in the month of September to be designated by the licensee provided the licensee informs the selectman's office of the chosen dates by August 50th. I will second that semi begrudgingly, but I'm... It's probably where we are. Yeah. Any comments before we take that vote? I mean, you don't have to, just if there was a last question. No, we understand your perspective. I think you understand my perspective and I appreciate your willingness to dialogue it. Okay. Thank you. Any further discussion? No. Ms. Rice, any comments? I don't recommend it, but it is within the board's purview to take this action if it chooses. Any particular, just because it's a violation, it's a deviation from our recommendation or from our guidelines or is there anything else? My recommendation is always that the suspension run consecutively starting on the day of the week on which the violation occurred. Okay. I'm personally prepared to run a file of Ms. Rice's guidance on this vote. Yeah, I think I am too. Okay. Further discussion? I'm sorry. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Double checking. 3-0. All right, thank you very much. Thank you. My last, we will not be here again for this. Go ahead. Thank you. I will wait back at your place though. So, all right, next up, Sabzi. 352A, Massachusetts Avenue, second offense. Aye. Introduce yourself, please. May I run class for that? Aye. Joan Sabzi.  Since the last time I was here, you know, tried to do the checklist. I took the suggestion of one of the board members that we ID everyone. It's signed up. The Hirees Jose, the gentleman, was tip certified, surf safe certified. He's not with us anymore at the restaurant.  I put a monitor in the kitchen so I can watch them and be careful. Just hired a new guy. I had my wife go in. Secretly order a drink. Thank God, you know, just whatever I can do, even like I don't have to wait a year or whenever this thing operations are, I'm gonna do my own. Make sure that they follow it. Again, it's, but it is my responsibility and what the, you know, what the staff does. Any suggestions or any things? I mean, we have a guideline that, you know, when they hire, they sign off on it. It's brought up. I mean, we don't have meetings every day. It's a small restaurant, you know, three staff. I mean, I see them every day. But I mean, I make a memo now in my cell phone to just be, to remind them again, check ID. Don't risk it. I mean, I mean, but then at the end, it's a human nature and you wish that people, you count on their good judgment and that they follow up on it. And my job is to help them and make it easy for them and that's it. I mean, I really feel terrible to be here. I know it looks terrible. We've been open two years and twice. I know your face is, it's terrible. I don't want to. But I'm in it in the long run with a license or without. We live in Arlington, married in Arlington, put too much money into a little place and whatever it takes, I'm gonna move forward. Now, can I guarantee you 100% I'll never see you again? I'll be lying if I say yes, but I can guarantee you 110%. I will do my best, whatever I can, whatever I can do to not be here, that's in my control, absolutely. I just want to note that before the meeting you, in fact, last week, you provided us with some documents. Yeah, right away. I just did that. Just, I mean, and then I think at night, what else can I do so it's not repetitive? I'm gonna change the paper on the cooler so it's not always the same color. It's green and then it's blue and then it's yellow. So it shows up on it. I particularly like this one, which is on the front of the fridge. You've got something that reminds people at the moment. Yeah, before they pull it out, it's like, hey, go back and just check again. It's, I mean, they're kids and for them, it's just a job. You'll be lucky if they stay six months a year, but whatever I can do to let them know that they're doing me a favor to do their job right. Mr. Kira, and what is your standard for ID checks? What's the expectation you set up with the systems? The standard is just to take the guessing work out of it, ID everyone. No, I mean, if they get insulted, that's the customer we don't even want. If they don't get it, it's because of that customer. If they're old and they have a kid, I think they would appreciate it if they go to an establishment and their ID is checked. Funny part is the waitress that's still with us, Bahar, who was the waitress last time, she almost checked, you know, she checked a couple that was way older and the guy was a little bit upset and he pulled up his wallet and he was a cop. He showed his badge, but she was like, I'm sorry, your wife. But that's what you want. But on that day, I know it seems terrible because it's two times and we did that. Jose, tip certified, Cersei, mental lapse, and here we are. But it's my job too. Next time he opens the fridge or he's about to do something, help him out, help me out. Put a monitor in the kitchen so I can see it. So if I can see somebody at a table and doesn't check ID, at least I can ring the bell. Hey, what are you doing? My inclination on this one is to do a straight 10 day suspension, but to accept the measures that have been presented to us as a good faith effort to prevent recurrences. I did appreciate that they were provided to us ahead of time so that we had a chance to review them. I note that there is a log in here of when employees received the uphaul training and guidelines. We do have examples of the signed policies and pictures as well of the signage that is around the restaurant to remind staff as well as a full-size blow up here. We ID everyone, which really goes to the heart of the question I've been asking the other licensees. What's the expectation that's set up with customers? And I think especially, we heard with the last licensee that they have confidence and they have demonstrated that they are able to use some kind of discretion, but I think that with a second violation, I think it is important to take, as you say, take the guesswork out of it. So I appreciate that. I'm willing to accept this as a good faith effort and not have an indefinite suspension after the 10 days, but it is a second violation two years in a row and I think we do take this seriously. I'd lean more towards sex myself, which I think, so I think that, Steve, means that you get to call the shots. I was thinking, I think that eight might be appropriate if we came in the middle. Just because I do think that having a second fence, we have to show that we are very serious about this. And I'm not saying that you're not, right? I think that you have made a lot of points to show us how committed you are to running your business well. And that's something we appreciate. And unfortunately, we do have to take a measure and I'm sure you understand that. Absolutely. So I'll move that the call license of Sabzi restaurant will be suspended for eight consecutive days starting Thursday the 25th, the recent September 5th, Thursday September 5th and with no further actions needed after that. Second. Any comment? Any further discussion? No. Ms. Rice. Fine. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. 3-0. Thank you. I'll see you again, but again, not here. Exactly.   Next up, Shushay, 43446 Massachusetts Avenue. First offense. Okay, this is. Hi, could you introduce yourselves? Okay, sure. My name is Wendy and this is my mom, Mrs. Low and she own a restaurant. I'm a manager here. You're the manager of the restaurant? Yes. So could you tell us about your reaction to the violate, what to the report, whether you think it's accurate, what steps you've taken and so on and so forth? Sure, yes. Well, the restaurant we have been here is about over 30 years. And I think we are the first restaurant, Chinese restaurant in Arlington too. And this is our first time too. So hopefully this will be our last time too. And I will change our guideline and will be more carefully and to train my staff more carefully. And I think the time they come to check, I was away with my mom. So I think we had a new service person. So that's why, you know, I don't know what. I asked the bartender, who's just my brother and he told me he was, I think he went to deliver. So the new person, they didn't carefully. He think he's older enough. The age, I asked her, she told me, you know, they looks like over 21 because I think she asked those two men for the license for the ID, but they say they don't have. And she was thinking, she's just, from her look like, you know, she'd say, look like over 21. So she serviced the two, I think it's about like a bottle wiser for the two men, you know. So that's why the, how that happens.  Yeah, when I was reading this, I did find it interesting that IDs were asked for. And then that was just kind of disregarded. Yeah, they did check, they did ask for ID. But I think they say they don't have ID. So, and. So she just stood by herself.  But, you know, either way. I know, I understand. The fact that she's new or she could have been there for 20 years, that really doesn't come into play here. Yeah, I understand. So, and I, as, you know, I guess I'll ask, as we did the other individuals who came up, what type of like overall policies have been implemented since this has taken place? And to make sure that this won't happen again.  And the Y and B, you know, class, you know, or we have just have hired someone to train them, you know.    You're prepared to do so. Well, well, the last thing I only, I can say, it's no ID and no service, you know. That's why I would tell my staff, you know. Yeah, I think that's how it should be. Yeah, that's why I'm going to tell them like that, you know. So don't look from outside, you know, the age, you know. Just think, guessing the age, you know. Mr. Cure, do you mind if I go? Please. So I'm definitely concerned that you're not making structural change, that you're not recommending that you're going to make structural changes. Saying that you'll train them more isn't a structural change. That's doing the same thing again. So we've seen three people come before you. Two of them brought real concrete steps. They said, you know, we're doing this change in the policy. We're doing this change in the signage. They're doing this difference in their training. They're doing this in terms of their, you know. Each, the two of them had very specific steps. One of them did not. And, you know, I was very unimpressed with that first one that didn't make any commitments.  The first, you know, the first group that we had here that was going to make any checks. We're going to see them again, because they're going to make the same mistakes again, unless they, or actually we won't, because they won't get their license unless they change. So for me to support continuing your license, I'd like to hear you commit to certain, to making concrete steps in your process. We'll keep this from happening again. Written, you get to choose them. They're your business. But I mean, some of the things that other team, other, I've worked with is written training, periodic checks, like monthly refresher courses, tips training, serve safe training, signage for your customers, signage for your employees. Like these are all things that are very specific and some, like they're process changes that are significantly different from saying, I'm going to train them better. Are there anything that you're prepared to commit to? I think a way to follow up the one you told us. I'm sorry to say it again.  Yeah, I'm not satisfied. It's not concrete enough. Do you understand what I mean when I say it? Yes, I do. Okay, but are you unwilling to do any concrete steps? Yes, yeah. Mr. Cura? I'm inclined to take the same formula that we took on the first one this evening and to recommend a five day suspension that continues indefinitely until we receive a plan that the board can approve. And I recognize it's a first offense and that for me that's somewhat of a mitigating factor, but I don't have a lot of confidence that there are concrete steps being taken. I probably won't be supporting that. I thought that, you know, that was appropriate for Manahouse at the beginning strictly because that was a second offense and we didn't see, we didn't hear any steps to get better. And at the last time we handed out punishments, you know, we went through this process. I think that would have been, that what you just recommended would have been the strictest punishment that we gave out throughout the whole last process. Sure. And so I just don't think that really evens out at this point. I will. Makes sense too. I don't think that needing after a first offense, I, you know, while I hope that concrete steps will be taken, and, you know, I'm sure that I'm confident that they will after, you know, no one wants to go through this process, which why would you? But just having a first offense, I do think that, you know, a five day suspension is appropriate, but I don't think that, you know, we have to, or I wouldn't be inclined to add, you know, extending circumstances to that penalty. I think that five days is, you know, that shows that we do mean business and we're very serious about this and we're not, you know, we're not taking this lightly at all with being that it's a first offense. That's how, that's how I feel. So I'm more inclined, I had support, Mr. Carrow, and I can't support just a simple suspension. And my reason, and so I agree completely with your statement that this were, that I'm behaving differently than I did the last time, but I also feel like I learned from the last time. And the answer is, is I feel like we stepped up, we talked with each one of the people who came up there, we talked to them about, you know, steps that they needed to take, we got a lot of lip service, and then they showed back up again. And I feel like what I learned from that is, I need to see from the license holder that they're committed to changing behavior. And I believe I just asked, are you, will you commit to making any concrete changes? And the answer I got was no, which I'm frankly quite flabbergasted. And until that answer changes, I'm unwilling, I do not think that they should hold the license. Okay. No, I don't see that though. And what, why with say, Sabzi who we just dealt with, they, even last time they did bring very concrete, sir, they brought, you know, they was actually very impressive what they were willing to do. And that, you know, so I don't think that even just showing those concrete steps means. It does not guarantee success. I agree with that. And I don't think anything actually guarantees success, but well, obviously we need a second for anything. So it looks like it's two to one. And I'm willing to. Well, yeah.  So we should just come to agreement on what we want to do and make that motion. I'm feeling pretty strong. So I love you guys. Yeah, I mean, I think that we do have to require some steps. I mean, I'd be willing to go a little shorter on the duration, even just to four, just in deference to the fact that this has been a long standing business that hasn't had other violations for, with an indefinite suspension until we approve a plan. I'm confident with that. Okay. So I, so I move, I move a, I move that we suspend the liquor license for Shanghai village for four consecutive days, to commence on Thursday, September 5th. And that said, suspension shall remain in effect indefinitely thereafter until such time as the board is presented with a mitigation plan and approves it. So the motion that we're about to take a vote on is so unclear is, so it's four days. Our next meeting is August 19th. We invite you to provide a written plan for how you're going to prevent this from happening in the future. Okay. Thursday before August 19th is our deadline to get everything on the agenda beforehand. If we see that plan and we approve it on August 19th, it's a four day suspension. Until we receive that plan and approve it, it's an indefinite suspension but it starts on Thursday, September 5th. That's the vote we're about to take. Okay. Any particular comment you want to make right now before we take our vote? Well, I don't think it's a head choice, right? I don't think at this point you do. Okay. Ms. Reis? Go ahead. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye, three zero. Thank you. Okay. Next up, sweet chili, 474.72, Massav, second offense. Oh, my name is Verde Khairarati Khan. I'm a manager of sweet chili. Last year I was here, I felt embarrassed and I also hire a tip training instructor come in to teach my way staff. And this year has happened again. I'm gonna rehire the tips training person to come to teach my way staff again. And then I will also put up the sign for the customers and for my way staff to remind them that before they're serving, they had to check the ID. And I always tell them that, you know, from what I learned from the tips in our training class, anybody under 40 years old, just check their ID. I've been open to business for 16 years. Comments, questions? So where do you think this went wrong this time? Because this is two years in a row now that- My wet twist, she just, she's had a bad day with her personal, she has a personal problem. And then she never checked the ID. You're reasonably certain you know which employee this was? Yes, I do know. As soon as I got the letter, you know, I told them, see I told you guys many times to check the ID. And you know, last year I got one and this year I get it again. I don't know what's gonna happen. And you know, they say sorry. I say sometimes sorry, doesn't cut it. I'm in trouble, not you.  I don't know what's gonna happen, but I can promise you, I won't be here next year. I will do my best to not gonna let the third time happen. I will rehire the tips training person again and then put up the sign for the customer and at the service bar station. So thank you for coming in.  I will recommend the attendee suspension as with no circumstances following that. I think you realize what has to be done and you're trying your best to do that. So I guess I'll go ahead and move a 10 day suspension of sweet chili's license starting on September 5th. I'll second that. I would prefer it to see it in writing the plan, but it sounds like you've definitely thought about this and you've stepped through a number of specific actions that you plan to take and I feel satisfied with that. I'll second the motion. I agree with your assessment. I support that as well. So we're about to take a motion vote on a 10 day suspension starting September 5th and with the sincerest hopes, the changes you're making keep us from seeing you here. Any further comment? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. 3-0. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Last but not least, Szechuan Dumpling, 1360, Masao, first. Thank you, evening. My name is Kwan, I'm the Szechuan Dumpling owner and I just own the restaurant like five, almost five months we knew in Arlington. And then unfortunately I got the letter from the broad of selection a couple of weeks ago I knew that we got a violation about my employee and they never checked the customer ID maybe under age four, like a BNY. After a fight out, I know that was on June 11th which is Tuesday, was my day off. Unfortunately it happened, you know and then I have a very serious like training and then warning to the two waiter who work on that day about I tell them need to know that they have a right and they need to check every customer ID like 35 or under. And then I definitely like, I believe they not gonna do that again and because they know that there's like a last change if they really want to work to my restaurant. And here I promise that it's not gonna happen again in my restaurant before I really need my employee to check every customer ID in the future to keep away, you know, the violation or trouble. That's all, yeah. Would you like me to start? Please. So I guess thank you for taking this seriously. What I didn't understand exactly and what you just described is was there any part of what you just described like a new policy that's happened since or was that all stuff that happened before June like the training or is this a new training that you just described or? Well actually I have two waiter, they just knew here in my restaurant. Yeah. And yeah, unfortunately I never, you know or maybe talk to them about like they need to ID every customer look like 35 or under. And that's why maybe the problem happened and then I read up to, I got the letter, I know we got a violation. I have a restaurant is talk with them about have to ID all the customer in the future. When do you anticipate hiring your next employee? I'm sorry? When do you think you'll hire your next employee? Right now or next? Like when do you think you're, when are you hiring a new waitress or waiter? Do you think like later this year maybe? Well as soon as they come, they... What I'm trying to get at is, how are you gonna train the new ones differently? Well, well in the future if I have like every new, like waiter or waitress working in my restaurant, I have to talk to them first and then make sure they will check the ID, customer ID, like wherever customer look like 35 years old or under, they have a right to do that and they have to do that. Is your training only verbal? There's no written, no test or anything like that? No. Have you considered putting in things like that? Yeah, I will. Okay, so if you look at some of these other restaurants have come up that have had problems, some of the ways that they've mitigated it in the future is by adopting a more rigorous training program. And so one of the people who just came up said, didn't indicate that they were willing to change their training and I found that pretty frustrating. So are you saying that you're willing to change your training for the future to make it more rigorous? Yes. Okay. I'd like to hear, can you tell me, yeah I guess, do you follow what I'm, like the more concrete things that you can say that you're willing to commit to doing make me feel a lot better about us not seeing you for a future offense? Yeah, well definitely we will do more training to my employee and then definitely we're not gonna do that, make that a violation again, like. Do your employees go through tips training? Yes, they do. Not quite there. Yeah, I mean I feel like there's a definite will to make improvements but I would like to see them really more concretely. And I'm leaning towards the same measures that we took with two of the other licensees. Yeah, do you think like as we've talked about like putting some signs up on the beer chest, is that something that you'd be willing to do? Yes, I would. And you'd be willing to maybe ensure that if everyone who's even gone through tips certification would be willing to go through that again. And so I think those are the type of, that's what we wanna hear up here is what I've, I don't wanna speak for my colleagues, but I think that's kind of what we're looking for to hear from you so we know how to move forward. So if you could give like a brief guideline if you'd be willing to do that or in what else other steps you might take, let's just. Well, I will, I will try to talk with my, we stop or we wait or we dress about have to check all the ID to all the customer in the future to make sure that we're not serving like customer underage. So definitely we're not gonna make that happen again in the future, yeah. I'm leaning towards four with an indefinite suspension pending a written plan similar to what we just did with Shanghai Village, I think, just we would just wanna see in writing what you're just a summary, some of the things that you're thinking about now putting into place for controlling this if you could get it to us within the next couple of weeks then on August 19th we could take that up, but. No, I'll second that and I think you're committed to this. I do. I think that you definitely don't, it's clear you don't want this to happen again and I do think that just for our sake seeing something written out would be really helpful. So if you could get that to us I will support this and I'm sure we won't see you here again. All right. Sorry, did you want to make a motion? So I'll make a motion. I'll move to suspend the liquor license for Sheshwan's dumpling before consecutive days commencing on Tuesday, September 3rd, said suspension to be for an indefinite period of time until such time as we, the board receives and approves a written mitigation plan. Is there a second? I'll second that. Okay.  Yeah, so we're about to, we're about to take a vote. They'll suspend your license for four days starting on September 3rd. We need to see a written plan for the changes that you're making in your process, whether they're new signage, whether they're written training, written tests, whatever processes that you are willing to commit to that you think will keep this from happening in the future. You submit those in writing. Our next board meeting is August 19th. Okay. We need you to submit them the Thursday before, the Thursday before that. Talk to, come into the office or call up the office, talk to Marie and talk to Marianne and they'll help you, but ask me things you're committing to do. If we approve that plan, then it's a four day suspension. If you don't submit anything in writing and if you choose, and if you, or if we're not satisfied with your plan, the suspension is indefinite until we get a plan that we approve. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Comments. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. 3-0. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Well, that was number four. Number five, outdoor seating. Thank you, Inspector. Thank you. Oh, I apologize, Inspector. On behalf of Chief Ryan and the members of the Yalink the police department, I thank you for your time. This is obviously an issue that we take very serious. I apologize for not, I was thinking of saying it to myself. I was gonna have to call, I was gonna call on you and then I moved right on. No worries at all. All right. Thank you for having me. Thank you, Inspector. Thank you for staying with us. Sorry about that. Next up, my fault. Outside seating permit on three, barismo. So what punishment would you like? Yeah, kind of no. So, Hong is here, but I'm gonna be doing the speaking. Sure. Do you wanna point him out to her? Thank you. My name is Jamie Vincendale. I'm the manager of barismo and we're applying for an outdoor seating permit. As part of the due diligence, we took some time to put out a draft of the same materials we gave you and we put it out and tried to get some signatures just to collect some information, let people know we're doing about 140 signatures. We are looking to expand the seating, not expand the seating, sorry, to add seats outside would be six seats inside and additional eight seats with tables. And four seats roughly on two little benches. It would be a small barrier of planters of about two feet in height to separate the road. And what you can't see on the plan is there's actually a tree right at our neighbor's space so it just kind of nice shade gives it a nice divide there too. So we chose to put it to the edge there but still giving up room for people to open doors. The only comments that I had coming back from customers or about it was what are we gonna do for bike parking? Which I don't have an answer to that but as far as what the plan is, I think we're hoping to make the neighborhood a little nicer and achieve more of a cafe feel. Just I wanna note from the planning, report to the planning department, public sidewalk of the site is 15 feet wide, applicants propose to use 11 feet of sidewalk for outside dining leaving four feet free for pedestrian travel which is a minimum amount required by the town. Applicants have also demonstrated sufficient insurance coverage. And that was in addition to, that was just a part of a memo we received from one department and from other departments. I just thought it was particularly helpful. Comments? Questions? Mr. Carroll. Yeah, I just wanted to note for the board's sake that as I did with the last application for outdoor seating, I did visit the site and take a look and it does seem to square with all of the reports that we received that there is sufficient space there for this. I think it would actually be an amenity to the place. And ironically, I think the last application we received for outdoor seating, the bicycle parking was there and actually impeded the ability to have the furniture without constraining the passage on the sideway, in my view. But I didn't see that there. I think that this would be a positive amenity and I'd like to move approval subject to all conditions as set forth. I have a question, maybe. You're going to second for this question. Yeah, I will second. Although my question is maybe for Marie I might know this best. When we were giving out the outdoor furniture to the Capitol Creamery, do you remember how much space they had on the sidewalk? So they had four feet as well? Okay, no, I was just curious. I was trying to picture what there is to here. No, I think this will be a great addition to the neighborhood. So looking forward to supporting it.