Let's look at some practice exercises using truth tables to determine whether an argument is valid or invalid. Now remember, an argument is invalid only when you have all true premises and a false conclusion. That's the only situation in which an argument is invalid. Otherwise it's valid. If you have all false premises and a true conclusion, it's still valid. If you have all false premises except for one, like maybe all false and one true premise, and a true conclusion, it's still valid. In order to find an invalid argument, you must have all true premises and a false conclusion. And we use truth tables to determine this. So just briefly, the way you do it is you chart out all the possible combinations of the truth assignments for the atomic propositions, and this determines the truth values for the complex propositions and the conclusion. You just look for a row where the conclusion is false, and yet all the premises are true. So the first kind of exercise that we'll deal with this is you'll determine whether an argument is valid or invalid. And if it's valid, you'll mark valid. If it's invalid, you'll tell me which rows are invalid. So here we have our sequent, it's not the case that PNQ, therefore not P. So by rule five, we've got our two variables. Since we have two variables, we've got four rows. So then by rule six, we give our every possible combination of truth values. Then we put in our formula. Notice we've got that solid, dark line between the premise, in this case there's only one premise and the conclusion. Got that solid, dark line indicating the difference between those. And now by rule seven, we copy and paste our truth values from P and Q over, I'm sorry, first over to P, now to Q. And so here we can actually take a little, I would say necessarily shortcut, a little bit of shortcut. And we look at the conclusion and we could just fill out all the truth values and find the rest and that's fine, right? I'm not knocking it, you go for it. If you wanna do that. But maybe a tiny little bit of shortcut we could do here is we could just simply look towards those rows where we have a false conclusion, right? So where P is true, since it's a negation, we look for those rows where P is true. And that complex proposition and not P, the conclusion that that's false. So we've got two rows for that, but just to offer kicks and grins, let's just note that the other two rows are true. They're not gonna be useful in helping us find invalidity, right? We're looking for the rows where it's a false conclusion and true premises, but like I said, for kicks and grins, let's put it in there. And then we start looking over at the premise. And work from the inside the parentheses out, right? Work from the inner most parentheses out, okay? So conjunctions are really easy. You just look for either a time proposition that's false. And if at least one of them is false, you know that's false, that conjunction is false. So the bottom three work that way. With row two, Q is false, with row three, P is false, with row four, both P and Q are false. So those three are false, just leaving the top one as true, right? That top one is true, okay? Well, since that conjuncts to the top row is true and the entire conjunction is negated, right, that negation is false. Okay, well this doesn't help us determine invalidity, right? We need a true premise, all true premises, and a false conclusion. Well, we get that with number two, right? We get that with row two. That premise is true, and the conclusion is false. So this argument is invalid, it's invalid. And you'd mark, you know, set row two, you'd mark that row with, now over here in your answer column, right? Over here in the answer column. All right, let's try another one, all right? We've got a conditional if P then Q. Therefore, if Q then P. All right, let's see if this is valid. So by rule five, we have our two variables raised to the power of two. That gives us four rows. Then we put in our first premise, or first and only premise really. If P then Q, then we have, of course, a solid dark line there to indicate that after that, that's our conclusion, and a conclusion if Q then P. Now by rule seven, we copy and paste the true values for P into the columns for P and do the same thing for Q. Okay, next step, again, this is a tiny little bit of a shortcut, right? Cuz we're looking for invalidity. That means we're looking for those rows where the conclusion is false. And that's really only row three, right? With conditionals, a conditional is false only when the antecedent is true and the consequent is false, and it gives us row three. So we take a look at the rest of row three, and sure enough, right? The first, that premise there, if P then Q, well, that's true. Because it's a conditional and conditionals with false antecedents are always true. So that means our row three is invalid, right? Our row three is invalid. Now, if four kicks, just for the sake of showing how to fill out the rest of the truth table, you can simply look for the, if you're doing a conditional, just look for those rows where the antecedent is true. Let's do it one step at a time. Those rows where the antecedent is true, excuse me, antecedent is false. Excuse me, antecedent is false. Well, we know that that conditional is true then. And then we could look for the consequent where the consequent is true. We could also mark that as true. And so not to forget our original notation there that the conditional is false with the true antecedent and the false consequent. And then you could just do the same thing for the premises. If you just want to fill it all out, you look for those rows where the antecedent is false or with conditionals and you know that that conditional is true. Then you look for where the consequent is true. That's that top row and the remaining one is false, right? And that's just for this, just want to show you that just for the sake of showing you a completed truth table. You can do it in a couple of different ways. But anyway, just to reiterate our row here, three has a true premise. So it has only one premise, a true premise and a false conclusion. That tells us that this argument is invalid, all right? Now, again, from the sake of illustration, I want to show you how to do this with an abbreviated truth table. An abbreviated truth table, you know, the nice thing about having the, doing the full truth table is there's just almost no room for error. Unless you just make a simple little mistake somewhere. There's no room for error. The abbreviated truth table, you kind of have to know what you're doing in order to get to work right. But it can be a faster way of finding out whether an argument is invalid. So you start out, since you're looking for invalidity, you're looking for all true premises and a false conclusion. Well, you start out with just supposing, right, that your conclusion is false. And if so, you have to figure out all the different possibilities where all the different possible truth assignments within the conclusion, that would give you a false conclusion. Now, we're lucky in this case, because we've got a conditional. There's only one way that a conditional is false, and that's where the antecedent is true and the consequent is false. Now this also gives us our truth assignments for P and Q. So we go back and we fill in our truth assignment for P and Q. And, sorry, we fill the truth assignment for P and Q, right? Then you fill in those remaining truth assignments. Since we got our truth assignments for our time propositions, by rule seven, we go in for the premise and put in our truth assignment for P and Q. And this tells us that that premise is true. So once again, doing it another way, right? Once again, we find out that the conclusion is, I'm sorry, that this is an invalid argument by row three, right, row three.  So let's try another one. This time we've got three variables, right? So three variables. And since we've seen a full truth table, let's try this one though, just by an abbreviated truth table. Let's be adventurous, yes, adventures and logic. So by rule five, right, sorry, but so we put in our three, not by rule five, yes, so the full truth table. So we put in our three variables, P, Q and R, right? Then we put in our first premise, not P and not Q. We put a gray line there to indicate that that's a premise. Then we put in our second premise followed by a solid black line to indicate that what follows is the condition, excuse me, conclusion, right? So we got if R then the conjunction of P and Q, that's our second premise. And finally, our conclusion is not R, okay? So immediately we wanna put in our false conclusion. Wait, we've made a mistake, right? We're not looking for the atomic proposition being false. We need the complex proposition as false, right? So the complex proposition here is false. So that means that R is true, okay? So we put in true for R and then we go back to our variables over here. And we've got a T in for R, okay? Well now we take that truth assignment by rule seven, go through the rest of the premises and put that same truth value in for R wherever we find it in that row. And we only got one place. Okay, so what do we do now? Got a leak. Well, remember, we want to find a row where the premises are true and the conclusion is false. Well, we can't really do anything with, I mean, we could start playing around the truth values for P and Q and maybe hit on something, but that would take way too long, okay? And so just looking at what we have here, all right? We want that second premise to be true in order to find an invalid argument. So we'll just label it as true. Okay, what would it be like for it to be true? All right, well, since it's a conditional and the antecedent is true, there's only one possible way that the conditional can now be true. And that's where the consequent is true, okay? That's consequent is true. So we're getting kind of lucky here. We don't have any other possibilities happening, all right? So the consequent of this conditional is true and it's a conjunction. And the only way for conjunction to be true is if both conjuncts are true. Okay, so then that means P and Q are both true. Great, we figured out another step in the way. We figured out another step in the puzzle. So we go back to our truth assignments for our variables and we fill out, we put in that P and Q are both true. And now we can fill out our first premise. So then by rule seven, you get both P and Q is true there. And since they're negated, their negations are false. And then, uh-oh, that first premise is false. And this is the only way, this is the only possibility where that second premise can be true. And if this is the only way that second premise can be true, is with the first premise is false, then we know that this is the only possible way for the conclusion to be false. And then the second premise, okay, so that means that this argument is valid. And that means this argument is valid. Because we can't find a row where the premises are true and the conclusion is false. Okay, well, now maybe you don't believe me, so we'll do it the long way. So we've got by rule five, we've got eight rows. By rule six, we put in our truth values for P, Q and R. By rule seven, we copy and paste in for P, then we copy and paste in for Q, then we copy and paste in for R. Notice, there's just no need to be creative. This is a purely mechanical way of finding the solution. And that's just fine, right? You don't need to be creative with truth tables. That's part of what makes them really neat is you just follow the steps and you gotta fill that, you don't need to be creative. Okay, so let's just take a look at the conclusion. Just because we're looking for invalidity and we want those rows where the conclusion is false. Well, we've got a lot of rows here to choose from. So we've got was it one, three, five, and seven? Okay, well now we'll take a look at those rows then where the conclusion is false. And we'll see if we can't figure out how the premises can be true, right? So, sorry, then we, sorry, we fill in the truth this time. And you work with the innermost parentheses outward, right? Work with the innermost parentheses outward. Well, with row three, so rows one, three, five, and seven, we fill out the truth assignment for the conjunction, which is the consequence of the second premise. This is a mouthful, right? The conjunction, which is the consequence of the second premise. So we've got that TFF and F. And then we do fill out the rest for the conditional, right? So while we got T, a true antecedent and a false consequence, well that means that three, five, and seven, the second premise is false. So that's not gonna, so we don't need to really worry about those rows anymore. We only need to worry about row one. Well, row one, the second premise is true, and the second premise is true. All right, well now let's go to the first premise. We've got our two truth values for P and Q. Then we apply the rule for the negation. So we've got false and false. Well then that means that that first premise is false. So again, there shouldn't be a surprise by now. We've proven it one way already. But if you wanted to fill out the full table, this is the way to do it. And like I said, just for kicks and grins, just for the sake of illustration, we already know that it's valid, right? Because we can't find a row where the premises are true and the conclusion is false. But just to fill it out, you can see the steps that I'm taking here to complete the truth table. And we could just keep going with this and find out that there is indeed not, the only rows where the first premise is true is in rows seven and eight. And in row seven, the second premise is false. So we don't look at that anymore. Row eight, both the first premise and the second premise are true. But in row eight, the conclusion is also true. So we don't have a single row where it's all true premises and a false conclusion that means this argument is valid. It's valid. All right, that went to death. Really worked on the tables there for that problem. Well, let's try another one, right? And again, we'll just do an abbreviated table just to show you how it's done. So we put in our variables p, q, and r, and we've got our first premise. If p then q, separate with a gray line to indicate that's a premise. If q then r, that's our second premise. I mean now we've got a solid black line to show our conclusion and we've got a conclusion if p then r. Okay, remember, we're looking for invalidity. So to determine whether it's invalid, we assume, right? We try to figure out a way that the conclusion is false, right? And since it's a conditional, there's only one way for a conditional to be false and that's with a true antecedent and a false consequent. Well, this gives us the truth values for p and r. So we go back to our assignments and put t for p and true for p and false for r. Then we assign that to the rest of the premises within the argument following rule seven, we got a truth assignment for p in the first premise and the truth assignment for r in the second premise. All right, now what do we do? Well, remember, we're looking for a row with all true premises and a false conclusion. All right, well, look at that second premise there. All right, we got a false consequent, okay? Well, we want this premise to be true and with a false consequent. There's only one way, right? Remember for the truth conditions for conditional, either antecedent is false or the consequent is true. Well, the consequent ain't true. So we need a false antecedent, right? We need the false antecedent. Okay, so this gives us our truth assignment for q. So we go back, we fill in q for our truth assignments. And then by rule seven, we apply that to the first premise. And now we have a conditional with the antecedent is true and the consequent is false. Well, that means that this first premise is false, all right? So we can't construct a row where it's all true premises and a false consequent. And that's because of the way the truth conditions worked out, working backwards from the conclusion to the premises. So far, we've been real lucky. It's been kind of simple, but this one is also valid. This is also valid. And if you want, you can construct a full truth table to show that is valid as well. Well, let's try one more and this one looks a little complicated. And since it's so complicated, right, I'm feeling lazy and I want to be adventurous and crazy. So I'm just gonna do an abbreviated truth table. So I've got my P, Q and R for my truth assignments. And I put in the first premise, not P or not Q. And I have that gray line to indicate the supremacist follows. And I've got my second premise, if R then P or Q. Now I've got that solid black line to show that what follows is the conclusion. And so I have my conclusion, not R. All right, well, I want a false conclusion and all true premises. So it's a negation in the conclusion. So I assign the negation false by the truth conditions of a negation. That means that R is true. So I go back to my truth assignments and I fill in T for true for R. Then by rule seven, I go to the second premise where R appears. I'm gonna put in true for R. Okay, let's get us into work with. Now we want this second premise to be true and it's got a true antecedent. The only way for the second premise to be true with a true antecedent, since it's a conditional, is for the consequent to also be true. Okay, but this raises an issue because there are three ways for a disjunction to be true. Now you can see how the abbreviated truth table could be a little less abbreviated than you might have thought, okay? So remember, the consequent here, we want neither consequent to be true. And it's a disjunction. The only way disjunction, excuse me, there's three ways a disjunction is true. When both disjuncts are true, when one disjunct is true or the other disjunct is true, okay? So that's when both p and q are true, when only p is true or if only q is true. And those, these three ways that a consequent is true. Okay, well, since we've got now three different rows we're working with, let's go back to our truth, to our truth assignments. Fill in the rest for r, r now has all true, okay? Now we take the truth assignments for p and we fill that in. We got the truth assignments for p, that's there. Then we got the truth assignments for q, okay, great.  It's for r, then we fill in the truth assignments for p and we got the truth assignments for q, okay? And we apply the conditions for a negation to p. And so now we got our, our, our truth assignments for the, for that negation for p, we do the same thing for q, okay? Well, that first row, both negations are false. So that's not gonna help us out. It's the bottom two rows that we have here where one, at least one of the disjuncts is true. So we've got two rows now where the, the premises are true. And the conclusion is false. All right, we've shown that this argument is invalid. Well, now we gotta identify the rows. Well, you can do a couple of different things, right? You can either construct the full table and figure out which rows are, are there, or you can go in the text and take a look at the truth tables that I've signed there. Since we're always filling out the truth assignments the same way, by rows five, six, and seven, we will always have the same rows.  And these, these are the truth assignments for row five. So then you go over here to your answer and mark rows, mark rows three and five as invalid, as invalid. All right, whoo, that got a little involved. You've got a little surprise ending there with the disjunction. All right, the next kind of problem is a two-stepper. Cuz now you've got an argument in English. You've got to identify the premises. You've got to identify the conclusion. You've got to translate them into a sequence and then determine whether the sequence is valid or invalid. So you kind of pulling together all the skills that we've learned so far. Okay, by rule one, remember way back with rule one, you signed the first atomic proposition P, the second atomic proposition Q, and so on. So that first proposition there, it is false that we know that any of our perceptual beliefs are true. Well, the atomic proposition there is we know that any of our perceptual beliefs are true, so that gets P, okay? The next atomic proposition, we are sometimes mistaken in our perceptual beliefs, so that gets Q. The next proposition is either it's false that we are sometimes mistaken in our perceptual beliefs or it's false that we know that any of our perceptual beliefs are true. Well, that's a disjunction of negations, we should figure that out by now. Well, the atomic proposition there is we are sometimes mistaken in our perceptual beliefs, well, we just saw that, right? So that's Q. By rule two, it gets the same assignment of an atomic, same letter for that atomic proposition. And the same thing happens for we know that any of our perceptual beliefs are true, again, by rule two. Okay, now we're gonna find the conclusions. Well, looking at these sentences, I really can't think of an example of where the conclusion is stated somewhere in the middle. I want to say this is true, I can't promise it, but I want to say it's true. It's at least the best bet, right? If you have no idea what's going on, the best bet is the conclusion is either going to be the first sentence or it's going to be the last sentence, all right? Well, looking at that first sentence, it is false that we know that any of our perceptual beliefs are true and the last sentence is that disjunction. And we don't really have any indicator words except for the second sentence. Look at that second sentence, we got that word for. Well, that indicates that here's a set of premises, right? So what's going on here is this paragraph is stated in the conclusion and this is for the following reasons, right? It gives those reasons. So the conclusion, right, is actually that first sentence. That conclusion is actually that first sentence. Okay, well remember our rules for this, following rule three, right? The conclusion is always listed last in our sequence. And our conclusion here is indication. So it's not P and then rule four, we list the premises in order, right? In order with a comma separating them. So that first premise is we are sometimes mistaken in our perceptual beliefs. That's our first premise, remember they got Q. And our second premise is that disjunction of negations. So here we go. We've got our argument symbolized as a sequence, all right? Now we take the sequence and determine whether it's valid or invalid. And if it's invalid, which row demonstrates invalidity? All right, well, I'm feeling lazy, so I'm just gonna do an abbreviated table. We've got our truth, the sign is P, we've got our variables, two variables P and Q. We've got our first premise Q. So one of the first times we've seen this, right? Where the premise is just a single atomic proposition. And that can happen, right? That can happen. The second premise is our disjunction of negations. And I've got a solid dark line there to indicate the conclusion and our conclusion is a negation, all right? So the first thing we do is we want to demonstrate invalidity. So we assume that the conclusion is false, right? We put that false there. Well, it's a negation, so we apply the conditions for a negation that gives us a true value of true for P. So we go back to our truth assignments and we fill in true for P.  And everywhere P appears in the argument, we assign it as true, all right? It's only one place in this case, but hey, there it is, all right? Well, we want this premise here to be true, right? Sorry, now we apply the conditions for P. So P is the negation for P, so we've got F. Well, we want this second premise to be true, all right? And we've got a false disjunct. Now remember, a disjunction is true just in case at least one of the disjuncts is true. Well, one of them is false here, right? So we need that the other one to be true. And the only way for this disjunction to be true is for the negation, not Q to be true. So we assign it as true and using the truth conditions for negation, well, that means that Q is false. Okay, so our second premise is true. And now we've got our truth value for Q. So we go back to our, then we place that in for our, we'll put in the truth assignment for Q, and we fill it out for the rest of the arguments. Well, gosh, if Q is false, that means that there's no row where all the premises are true and the conclusion is false. That means this argument is valid, is valid. And you mark that as you'd have the same thing where you have the rows available to you and you have to mark the rows. So this argument is valid, okay? Well, let's try another one. So we use our rule one to start assigning atomic propositions. So we got that first atomic proposition, morality is justified by cultural belief. Then we keep going to the next one, still following rule one. Morality is justified by cultural belief. Well, by rule two, that gets the same assignment. We've got the next atomic proposition. Our culture is morally impeccable. There it is, that gets Q. The next atomic proposition, our culture is morally impeccable. That gets Q as well. The next atomic proposition, something that needs to be changed in our culture. Okay, that's a new atomic proposition. So we get an R. And then finally, there is something that needs to be changed, that needs to change in our culture. Well, there it is, that gets R again. Okay, so we've assigned our variables for our atomic propositions. Which one's the conclusion? Well, again, try to think of it. Is it the first sentence or the last sentence? Well, that last sentence has that word however, right? Well, that's not a conclusion, right? That doesn't tell us a conclusion. However, would tell us something, so think about it, right? Try and test it in your head for something that's an obvious one. Say, if an animal's a dog, then an animal's a mammal. My dog, my pet is a dog. However, my pet is a mammal. Well, no, that just sounds weird, right? That wouldn't work. We'd say, therefore, my dog is a mammal. Okay, that would work. So that word, however, tells us not something that's a conclusion, but it's gonna be one of the premises. It might be surprising, right? It might be something surprising, and that's something we expected, but it's a premise nevertheless. So our conclusion is that first sentence again, right? It's that first sentence again. And it's a negation. It's false that morality is justified by the cultural belief. Okay. So that following rule three, we list the conclusion in our sequence. And by rule four, we list our premises. So we got that first premise is if morality is justified by cultural belief, then our culture is morally impeccable. So we got Q, if P, then Q. Second premise is a disjunction of negations, and it's not Q or not R. And the third premise, I got three premises now. Wow, big time. Third premise is simply the atomic proposition of R. Okay, so again, I'm feeling lazy, so I'm just gonna do the abbreviated truth table. So I've got my P, Q, and R set up for my variables, all right? I'll list my first premise, if P, then Q. I got the gray line to indicate another premise after that, and we got the disjunction of negations, not Q or not R. The third premise is simply the time of proposition R. We got that solid black line to indicate the conclusion follows, and conclusion is not P. All right. So we're looking for a row of all true premises and a false conclusion. So we get that conclusion, and we assign it false. And since it's a negation, that means that P is true. So then we go back over to our truth assignments to give P as assigned true, about rule seven, wherever P appears in the rest of the argument, we also assign it as true, all right? Now we, so you might think, well, what do we do for the next step? Well, probably the easiest thing here, look at that atomic proposition R. R is one of the premises, and it's kind of the easiest to look at next, because we need all true premises. There's only one way for R to be true, and that's for R to be true. So it's assigned true. We go back to our assignments. We assign R as true, then by rule seven, we apply it for the rest of the argument. We got R as true over there. And there's a couple of different things we could do here. We can either look at the first premise because it's only way for a true antecedent to be, excuse me, it's a conditional. There's another way for a conditional to be true when the antecedent is true, and that's for the consequence to also be true. We can go that way, or we could just simply stick with R. I'm feeling like we started with R, so let's keep going with R. So R is true, and so we apply the conditions for the negation, and that gives R, the negation of R as false, right? And then we got a disjunction here, and we want the disjunction to be true, right? Since we're looking for invalidity, and the only way for a disjunction to be true with the least one false disjunct is for the other disjunct to be true. It's a negation. So we put the negation there for true. We're gonna get the negation there for true. Well, then we apply the conditions for an negation to Q, right? And so that now means that Q is false, and we go back to our truth assignments. We've got the truth assignments for all the atomic propositions. We take that F or Q, and place it over in that first premise following rule seven. Well, now we got a conditional with a true antecedent and a false consequence. That means that this, and this is the only possibility, right? The only possibility, that means that first premise is false. That means that this argument is valid. It is valid. All right, you've seen some of these practice exercises. Go ahead and give it a shot with the rest. Keep working. Work through those practice exercises to get you really good and confident, to get you to run through them, and you're probably being good shape at that point. So good luck, and keep thinking.


Good evening, ladies and gentlemen and welcome to the Selectman's meeting for July 13th, 2015 I'd like to start and and request that We have a moment of silence since our last Selectman's meeting. We've lost two Real Arlingtonians Jim Robolide and Ed Coughlin and so please a moment of silence We got a mercy on their souls Arlington is certainly less without both of them We also want to on a happier note Welcome, we have a new editor of the advocate with us tonight. So we all want to welcome John Santa to Arlington James I would help if you change your name to John You can report him as Charles First column what idiot runs the board of select All right, we start with the consent agenda. First of all Under that we go through these if anybody's here Or we wish to speak on any of these and then the Selectman take a vote on all of these items First is the minutes of the meeting of June 29, 2015 Second we have reappointments to the Arlington Bicycle Advisory Committee Doug Greenfield and Ron Sender Reappointments of the Permanent Town Building Committee John Cole and Alan Reedy And we have a request for a special one-day alcohol license for the Cyrus Dallin Art Museum summer Soiree fundraiser Sunday August 9th 6 to 8 p.m Heather Leval and then we have a request for contracted drain layers license for the soccer group out of Bill Ricker mass Anybody here wishing to speak on any of those? Yes, Jerry Sorry, yep, we We have millions that watch at home Jerry, so we need to have you at the microphone Okay, Jerry tilt the mic up a little bit. So it's quite a view. There you go. Yeah, even a little more go for it So the Cyrus Dallin Art Museum is having a summer soiree We're requesting a one-day liquor license for Sunday August 9th. The soiree is 6 to 8 It is featuring the unveiling of one of Cyrus Dallin statues that is very Little-known called on the warpath Dr. Daniel Fairbanks of Utah is the restorer of the statue he will Come and discuss how he restores statues. He's a dean of Science and Health at Utah Valley. Not only is he a sculptor and a restorer. He's a forensic anthropologist His wife dr. Donna Fairbanks will play a violin violin piece We will have honorings of James McGough and Stephen Gilligan who were catalysts to getting the Museum approved by town meeting We expect to have hors d'oeuvres and beer and wine and soft drinks available We're going to also have a silent auction We are very pleased that we're able to offer this without the support of the community we have sponsorships from American alum Century Bank Leader Bank Watertown savings and Winchester Cooperative Bank in addition to the Dallin family. So we're very excited about unveiling this piece which is Lovely and I think you've all received I hope you've all received invitations and you notice we didn't put a picture of it on the postcard because it's Really quite unusual and not seen very often We hope you all attend and Did I get anything oh You can check out our website if you're interested in Reviewing what I've said or you choose to buy tickets. They're available available at wwwwdallin.org If you have any questions, I would love to answer them So is it a permanent display or it's on loan to us? No, it's ours. It was donated in 2007 and it came to us in eight pieces and a lot of other damage and Frankly, we couldn't afford the restoration of it. It's several thousands of dollars and Daniel said that he would love to restore it So we shipped it to Utah and he's had it a couple of years. He he does that as a pastime Which is wonderful Not a pastime. I'm capable of but and he's gonna drive it back So we're unveiling it. We're having our soiree at the Wittemore Robbins house And it will be installed at the museum when we get ourselves another inch of space and push some of the sculptures around Boyd members other questions Steve Okay, thanks Jerry. Good luck with Kevin. That's June 9th from 6 to 8 August 9th. God Someone wake me up here today. Anybody else wishing to speak on any of the items. I just reference come on up. Yep Hello, I'm Christopher Tonkin from the chairman out the Arlington Bicycle Advisory Committee as you probably know by now I just like to say we'd like to reappoint Doug Greenfield and Ron's senator to our committee They've both served admirably in the years before and Happy apparently happy to willing to serve again. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks for your service as well Thank you anybody else all those in favor of the consents agenda, please signal On the motion by mr. Burn and seconded by miss Mahan all those in favor, please signify by saying aye aye all those opposed me For an axe appointment for the tree committee Eric amund son Eric. I hope I'm saying that correctly sir Please come forward You have to go through a grilling when you're newly appointed, but not really Thank you very much for your willingness to serve. Why are you willing to serve sir? I I I've been inspired by I think specifically Brian Murray An old friend of mine and gotten more interested in trees as times gone on so That's why great Questions comments from the board I'll say that as I'm the normally the liaison of this board to the tree committee And I I don't attend that many meetings, but I read the minutes and check out the agenda and stuff like that And I will say they are one of the more active committees that I'm involved in so They have been really good at recruiting new members to help them along too. So I'm thank you for joining us Anybody else motion move approval second move approval Anything else are okay on the motion by mr. Dunn and seconded by mr. Cure all those in favor please signify by saying aye aye all those opposed Eric Thank you very much for your willingness to serve. Thank you. Take care Introduction newly appointed member to the Arlington Historic District Commission remind me the appointment was made at the last meeting Am I correct? But a Margaret Capodano was unable to be with us that night. So welcome It's the grilling. We had just you know So Thank you very much and is there any reason in particular your interest I think I'm very Appreciative and respectful of the mission of the historic society and having lived on a street That has been part of their mission for the last 16 years I I felt that it was important that we Continue the tradition of having someone from Avon place On on the committee. So here I am great. Thank you For the questions discussion, okay, you've already been approved. Thank you very much. Thank you and Joe, I think I should turn this over to you, sir Because you are that you are the driving force Behind this appointment, which we're about to make mr. Cureau. Thank you very much, mr. Chair We're very pleased this evening. We've we've traveled the road over the last year. You'll recall that that this board did Take up and proposed a town meeting the idea of establishing a position of poet laureate for the town of Arlington This is a route that obviously has been done in a number of other jurisdictions both local state and and national but You know partly given the emphasis that we've been placing on the arts in our community with our long Literary heritage including having the I think it's the oldest continuously operating children's library in the country It's it seemed fitting and you know appropriate that we tap into some of the great talent in our our town and seek to To call out this particular Honor we've certainly we are known for a lot of our Other public artists we just heard from the Dallin Museum, of course but that this seems to be a way to honor a contemporary artist who's You know versed in letters and might be able to help inspire some of our younger people and people of all generations in the town through their work, I know that Lizza Halley the Chair of the Paul laureate selection committee was not able to come this evening I do see some of the other members of the selection committee three three members here Is one of you going to introduce the mounting Miss Howard? Yeah with the chair's permission And I see also John Well, I'll let you introduce. Thank you very much My name is Jane Howard and I've been privileged to be on the poet laureate committee And because Lizza is away. I'm taking her place tonight, but Pamela Powell is also away But with us tonight is also Jeff Boudreau and John Burt and it was a privilege for us to serve in this way as you know, it was we had 10 applicants and Was really a difficult decision, but I think you'll be very pleased with the person that we chose and I'd like to introduce Miriam Levine who you now know quite well from her resume and perhaps She'll tell you a little bit more about her cell. Thank you James before we hear from her. Could you tell me why I was rejected? Oh, I didn't submit Far more qualified Welcome. Hi, thank you Kevin. If you get some coaching for me next time you might make it Oh I'm against this Miriam the only way that would happen is if you totally ghost wrote I'm really delighted that Arlington is has established this Position and I would be absolutely delighted to accept it if you vote for me I've already been in contact with Andrea at the library and I will be holding office hours there twice a week and it will be Among other things that I'll be doing so people can come by with a poem One session will be in the early evening another session will be in the afternoon Just top for one-on-one. I also hope to hold workshops at classes at the high school And at the senior center and do other things as well. I've got a long list Any questions Yep, who wants to go first mr. Dunn I actually I don't have a question for say I just I have so I've never gotten poems in my selectments packet before and it I really enjoyed the reading them I really enjoyed what you had to write and I think that you're Reputed your resume your experience not just as an author, but also someone who works with communities and teachers This makes you an excellent choice. I'm really thankful and excited that you're here to do the visit to volunteer. Thank you Mr. Carol I'm looking at I see you have a folder with you And I didn't know if you had a piece of work that you wanted to share with with the viewers at home or with Us or oh, maybe I actually brought this to a pass on to someone who called me earlier about getting Getting some sort of press release or something and I was just gonna hand it over But I'll be glad to read a poem a very very short one that I think is in this packet Yeah This is called surfer at well-fleet and a lot of my poems are set in particular places There's quite a few at set in Arlington particularly at the ponds, but this one is a surfer at well-fleet Where does he get the patience to wait through the twilight? Rocking on his stomach in the break and surge Head to the side as if he were sleeping It's freezing in the afterglow When he finally rises on his lone long ride home Were we done grilling her? Well, I just want to say I've known Mr. Mrs. Looney for a really long time I actually used to play over their house many many days and nights my brother Bob was really good friends With their son David and I remember when we were younger we all knew that both mr. Mrs. Looney very very smart, but they always committed talk with us, you know Keep us unguarded and I have a lot of great childhood memories at the Levine home And I'm thrilled to see how life circles back and we get to come back into each other's lives again So I'm thrilled to see both of you and thank you, Mrs. I Like to move approval of the nomination of the poet laureate selection committee and further discussion All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. I Congratulations. Thank you so much. Thank you to the committee for your hard work Thank you, and then a metropolitan area planning council alternative alternate representative David Fields David so mr. Chair Excuse me, so David isn't able to be here today, but David's one of our staff planners technical planners in the planning department If the board would be willing to vouch Allow me to vouch for him. This is an alternate position. Laura wiener is the board's primary designee to the MAPC However Ralph Wilmer who was the board's alternate representative took a job with the MAPC So he can't represent the board today MAPC working for the MAPC, and that's what necessitated This request to have David designated as the alternate representative. Okay, so motion move approval of approval second and discussion So on the motion by mr. Cura Cura seconded by mr. Dunn all those in favor, please save the five by saying aye. Aye those opposed Marie anybody under citizens open forum Okay, sure I won't bother reading through the whole thing because I know he won't go longer than I promise to keep it brief. I'm Steve Ravillac I'm from 111 Sunnyside Avenue, and I'm here on behalf of myself and a few of my neighbors It's been a long time since anyone from my street came and talked address the board about dillboy But unfortunately, I'm here to address the board about dillboy stadium and to to ask for your help or to ask at least a favor for a lot for you know quite a period of time the Stadium's public address system was a noise problem. That's certainly gotten better over the over the years But what I'm really here tonight about tonight is the cannon fire or the explosions, whichever you'd like to call them one of the Wf that deputy well the Boston militia One of the women's football teams whenever they play at dillboy stadium From what I have heard bring a cannon and shoot it off whenever they Score a goal. It's like having a bomb go off in your backyard And I could I mean it's loud enough from my house that I can feel the structure of the house shake Anytime there anytime they anytime they score So I was wondering could you is there any chance that you could talk to our colleagues in Somerville about this? Okay, mr. Chapter Lane, thank you, mr. Chair So mr. Revillac along with probably nearly a dozen of his neighbors emailed me over the weekend And I actually responded probably when you were en route here, okay to your neighbors I plan on reaching out to the mayor of Somerville tomorrow to see what we can do to address it Okay, thank you very much. You're welcome. But the noise is better. Did you start with did you say it's better? The PA system is a lot better. Yes But this is brand new About three weeks ago three or four weeks ago the chair, mr. Grilly and town manager Adam Chaplin and myself we met with DCR the new commissioner to talk about the new project, but Since back in July 2012 the same three of us along with some other people the senator reps We met to get an agreement from the then DCR commissioner about after they leave there to replace the road in some way Still hasn't been done, but we did bring it up Maybe if you could pass this on to the sunny That Dan Driscoll was there and basically said that oh no they kept going back and forth I just said fill the holes and they said no because of the condition We have to do something more than that the liability and correct me if I'm wrong He said that the project had gone out to bid It was on a list and we're just waiting to hear back. We're still playing phone tag But you know, I don't want you to think that any of us have forgotten that just you know We're gonna just keep banging and banging until hopefully something happens tonight and and she deserves a good deal of the credit for We we owe miss a debt of gratitude. Thank you. Thank you for being so patient To me it was as important as me a guy so but I just want to let you know we have nothing Okay Thank You steve's So now other business attend discussion and adopt the selectman's handbook code of conduct summary and awards Proclamations and events we are getting towards the end of this but hanging there with us. There's Still a couple more sections to go and Dan I saw your email I Was that related to in terms of I don't recall is that an event something about an event I had sent an email saying that when we do we might consider a house party good block party. Yeah, it's okay That's not in no second. Yeah, okay. Sorry. All right, so Why don't we start with code of conduct anybody any comments any additions amendments edits deletions Yeah, sure Yeah, where are you though just tell me what it is it's under Conduct it appears in under a Page three number three Somewhere else you know, what does I sit here?  Where is it? You're still looking for inshore. No, I found it twice. I was trying to point it out to you Yeah, no, I got it page three number three on the right. Yes. Oh Mr. Yeah, thank you very much. I just have to want to say that I think that after we follow this We will probably be at the utmost conduct of any single board in the whole entire Thank you very much You got that James Any and all of this can be made available to you or to mr. Sprague, of course, but it's not we vote on it by sections So yeah, mr. Dunn. I am happy to support this. I think that it really if we can I think that we all I follow this fairly well to already and so I think Let's think about as I was rereading this today Like one of the places that I'm sure I can do better is when I find something out sharing it better with the rest of The board is definitely something that I can be smarter about but some of these other things I think are just really good common sense and I'm happy to move approval Happy to second mr. Carol. Yep second and I just like to say I think in some ways This might be the most important part of the whole the whole handbook Not just for us, but I think as an educational piece also for our constituents. I think that The way that it lays out just exactly what the board of selectman's limits of Authority are that we act as as a complete board not as Individuals and that we we act through the the staff and through the manager. I think Being presented as concisely as it is More concisely than I'm stating it. I think it is an incredibly important Peace and possibly the most important section of the handbook I'll send anybody else and I have always felt in my 27 short years on this board That one of the most important qualities for an elected official to have is the ability to disagree Politely or whatever, but we disagree and there are times certainly it's gotten heated in here But that then the next issue we're able to move on and not Let feelings of you know didn't vote for me on that one or whatever and this board I believe has always conducted itself in that manner, but we should serve as an example for this community and Also to keep in mind we are five different individuals and if all of us were to call town manager town council Which we do occasionally necessarily so But if they have to take you know, imagine five phone calls per day from each one of us on some of these some of these issues that You know, we're not letting them get their job done or whatever. So and you know, I think All of you certainly behave this way and I congratulate you for it so it was moved approval by mr. Dunn seconded by Mr. Cureau on the code of conduct all those in favor please signify by saying aye Aye all those opposed the next one is on our events awards proclamations and events and the You know the select wins awards we do those every five years and this delineates that the process we fall Jimmy has been each one of us appoint a member to a nominating committee and the only thing that we've done differently here is that We have always held that any member of this board can make a nomination individually Other than individual for any of these awards or of a group for any of these awards So what we're recommending here is that we follow a little bit of the process we follow for CDBG which is the nominating committee would make would go through anybody can make a nomination to the nominating committee anybody on the nominating committee can make a nomination and then the nomination committee whatever they want to go through in terms of a process of Culling down that list and then they would make recommendations to us for at least one or two names for each one of these awards to the chairman and the vice chairman and Then any member of this board to the chairman and vice-chairman can also make a Recommendation and then the chairman and vice-chairman bring a slate of candidates to this board for final approval the the reason I believe this step Would be helpful as I've always been nervous about Three names are recommended for an award and we only give it to one person I think it's an embarrassment for the other two to have been nominated and Us publicly say no Do you know what I mean? It's So anyhow, what do you think of that? We're just adding that extra that step in there was chair and vice chair or designese serve as a subcommittee and that makes sense to people is that You know, it's a great. It also means any of you could make a recommendation to the chair and vice chair You also could make a recommendation to that screening committee if you wanted to go that room, but it But for us to then make kind of call it down and I shouldn't say also won't be me because I think it's so What did you tell me it was a 2013 Anybody remember the last time it says every five years, right? Think was your last chairmanship, but I believe it was in the Right, so three years ago. So two years from now is when we would go through this process again Then we're trying to Indicate, you know for proclamations and then just, you know Highlight we do the town day town night. We do the sister city program and if necessary any anniversary celebrations So questions or comments? Second, further discussion All those in favor, please say them by saying aye. Aye. Aye those opposed Big big amount of thanks to Doug who really ends up writing all of this and taking a hundred ideas and Stephen and Marianne and also Eve want to say Eva. Why can't I get names right tonight Eve from Adams office? So thank you very much All right item number 11 This is for a discussion and vote regarding the scheduling of a public hearing on the oak tree development project eligibility application Following updated communication from oak tree and mass housing the issue is we currently have Asked for a July 22nd hearing, but there's difficulties with that Doug am I turning it over to you? Yes, so John. Hi, please. Good evening members of the board. Mr. Chairman the As the board will recall at its last meeting we voted to Authorize a couple of different dates Although the 22nd looked like the most likely to host a hearing where the developers oak tree Could make further presentation to the board and answer the board specific questions about there some 200 odd page submission to mass housing that the board is gonna produce a response to that submission For mass housing to consider in terms of determining whether or not this specific site should be eligible for a 40 B project Following some communications with the folks from oak tree It became clear that they weren't going to be available on the 22nd or actually any of the times that we had Discussed here because of their own scheduling difficulties summer vacations things like that I Try to take it upon my upon myself to understand that this board in the town generally tries to be courteous in respect those types Of scheduling conflicts Unfortunately, the only date that they said that they could start doing it was August 5th Which was quite a ways out from where we had originally anticipated it I was spoke to them and after some back and forth with them and Greg Watson from mass housing Who was really terrific in trying to facilitate some of the negotiation about this they also agreed to an extension of time to? put together the selectments response after This hearing if it's going to happen on August 5th now obviously that depends on this board schedule And if this board is willing to move it to August 5th, but that's what they're saying. They're Basically only available time is I do want to note some caveats that they presented to me. I Know that the board is eager to have an opportunity to ask questions and to explore some of the presentations that they've made representations that they've made in their document submissions in greater depth They've represented to me that there are certain things that they don't think they're going to have any more detail on But I still think that It's a worthwhile exercise for this board and for oak tree and for everyone involved because there's a big difference between Five so individual select men trying to sift through a 200 page document and being able to ask some direct questions to the folks Who should have the most information about this project? So? Basically, I think what the board needs to decide tonight is is this August 5th date viable for a public hearing to have Oak tree come before the board make a presentation and answer questions that members of the board have Obviously, if it's a public hearing there would be an opportunity for members of the public to have some kind of comments as well And if that's the case how much time determine how much time we really need from mass housing to get in that letter I think that the board has a regularly scheduled meeting on August 17th Ideally we'd like to ask until the 18th so that the board can vote on the letter that We'll be putting together with and for the board for their approval and have plenty of time to consider it Does that make sense? Yeah, so summer, but here's the issue When we set the date for July 22nd every member of the board was available for that Now that they've changed that we have two members of the board that aren't available on August 5th Okay, so may I ask what state are we in right now in terms of with mass housing? I know That they're giving us 15 days beyond the hearing or beyond when it was originally due so the Original due date of the letter was August 10th, right? And in order my feeling was that the board if it's gonna try to accommodate oak oak tree schedule Would ideally not have to convene not only one, but two would not have to convene two special meetings in order to You know basically both have the hearing and then be able to consider any letter and vote on it before transmitting it So that would be the ideal time frame would be for the for the 17th Now if the board feels that it can't meet on the 5th It may be difficult for us to negotiate a date that works for for the parties and that's a Possibility in terms of they haven't really given me any alternate dates I asked them if there are any alternate dates that they they wanted after the 5th and they Would like to do it on the 5th and I know that the selectman, you know wanted to do it on the 22nd And you know to the extent that we can't do it on the 5th I'm not sure how that would impact mass housings extension is the only issue that I see Okay, so we I really feel all board members should be here. I think it's it's that important to hearing So I'll let my colleagues speak which I probably should now anyhow, but I really feel From what I've learned. I believe on August 12th. Was that all right with you Steve August 12th. Would that work for you? Because I don't think I asked you before him dates wise Am I right Dan? Myself Diane But if that cuts a week off No, I oh you would be available the fifth You're not yeah, I mean these are vacations that have been planned I guess what I would recommend is that we is that I would be prepared to vote that you set the date and you just make the Like so I I agree that we should try to have all five of us in the room if we literally can't that's so be it If they can only literally only make one day when three of us can be here Then that's not very that's not good for the same, you know, there's I don't think we can settle it here I have no I'm happy to delegate that But So you don't know if we went for the 12th whether the mass housing would then say all right We'll give you to the 27th. I think the best thing that I can do mr. Chairman is Take dates that you give me and try to work with within that schedule You know obviously again if we're saying that you know, we wanted to have it on the 22nd They weren't available. They said the fifth now the board doesn't feel like the fifth is an appropriate date for the board I'll do my best to try to find mutually amenable date. I don't know that I Think it might be difficult to get an extension Beyond what we had sort of anticipated but if that's the case then you know, I've certainly be willing to do my part to try to Expedite the having the letter ready so that we can turn it around as quickly as possible See, I guess I just have a question about this extension. So it's 15 days after the hearing is when that's housing So did they say that no, so what what the what the so we're just still going off the original That they sent you haven't had further so I've had further negotiations with both mass housing and with oak tree so What mass housing was amenable to doing was waiting until I had an opportunity to present this new these new options to the board to Decide how much time they would give us What I'm trying to communicate is that the sense that I got from mass housing is that They are want to be helpful and want this to be a constructive exercise But they also don't want to push this out another 30 days So to the extent that you know, the and they have to understand that the board has open meeting law requirements It can't just consider deliberating vote, you know, and that as Mr. Greeley is noting that the board has its own scheduling You know issues with in terms of long-standing vacations and things like that So in other words the letters do August 10th our next regularly scheduled meeting is for August 17th So it made sense to at least suggest that what I was hoping the board would be able to Respond by August 18th, which would be the next day after the board could take a vote if we move the hearing out to the 12th and Oak tree is amenable to attending on the 12th Then I think you know we can obviously work double time to try and have the letter ready for you as soon as possible and You know give you guys as much time as possible in advance of the 17th To review it so that we can still keep on the same general schedule Oh, I mean mass housing has been terrific in the sense that they understood that I was asking for a somewhat flexible extension of time based on the board's availability to meet and approve a Letter after a public hearing. I know it's a little bit convoluted Just to clarify so they said on the 18th We could send in they said that we can have an extension of time And I said that I would work out the exact parameters as to how long that extension would be based on the board's feedback tonight Okay, so we so then so after this you'll have to Talk to mass housing again to finalize a date this visit and I guess what I'm a bit concerned about is Us, you know setting this Requesting a date and them telling us. Oh, no, sorry We didn't mean that or something along those lines and coming back and saying that we have to work within the initial parameters So I guess I know it can be tough only having one meeting a month, but I I guess I'm just a Bit worried that while they're saying this now they could change their mind at any second. We could be What's the way No that we that Arlington and the board could be in jeopardy if We then now go back and say oh mass housing We would like this date and they say no and stick to the original date when the meeting is not planned so well Yeah, I would suggest that as the fallback fallback that the July 22nd hearing still happens And that there would would be no oak tree there And it would be time for a public comment from Departments with an interest and then the public and the board of course with public comments on the 196 page submission I mean there's obviously something missing if oak trees not there But if if oak trees not cooperating in mass housing is not willing to be flexible I think you're absolutely right that the board should have the opportunity to so hold a hearing on what we know and Then still have that opportunity to have a response into mass housing But that would be the fallback to to what you've described I Guess I would just maybe advocate for My current understanding and perhaps in terms of the 15 when I heard 15-day extension to me that meant august 10th became august 25th I don't I don't know that anybody said that we had a 15 Some reason I had 15 days We weren't granted the 30 days by I'm blanking on Greg's last name Mr. Watson, but I thought it said 15 days so what since you'll be speaking with mr. Watson and others is What I would like ideally to have happen is whatever day we have this hearing And if we go with the 22nd and then have to do something else when we're rushed But if everybody can agree it's just one week later. It's everybody else's summer schedules It's the same night of the week what they want if the 15-day extension in order to give What we need to do the board but mostly the town manager and department heads that if we have the meeting on the 12th Then 15 days from that would our response would be do Recognizing that we do have a meeting at the end of the month So we'll probably come in four or five days earlier that would be my If I could advocate for because I know You know everyone's working cooperatively and you know we want to stay that way and just you know The board's trying to be as flexible as possible and then I did have discussions with the manager And the chairman that we not follow the process that we had down at the Hardy School If we could just have the presentation from Oak tree just with regards to the Mugar Apostle Don't want to hear anything about Quaker community and the Cambridge assisted living and the project in North Reading and the project in Concord Kyle Isle and if we could maybe get it down to 30 minutes because their original presentation was like an hour 10 PowerPoint that really I don't think sets up the right tone and tenor for the meeting and then my last request would be if possible because a lot of this is when we did the site visit and Ms. Noise was pointing out Hydrology and where it would go and the plans and other engineering plans when different people including Corey Beckham and Kowalski From our planning department myself and others when we are pointing to plans that were submitted. They were saying no no no They haven't been engineered yet. So at the very least if we can't get Before hand meaning before that night that we sit down and have whatever meeting that Oak tree is at If we can't get details on that if they could at least submit what plans they're now Engineering whether it's hydrology whether it's traffic whether it's whatever Because they were like four or five in the hundred ninety six page submission that were from Rizzo and associates like 15 years ago When I pointed that out, they said oh, no, we're gonna So if we can't get details can we at least get four or five bullet points? And I know you're at the mercy of what they say yes or no too. Thank you So Joe was up next but you want to say something directly to this I do I do if I may mr. Chairman I Just want to be clear on what Oak tree has represented their position is That they have made the submissions that they need to make for a mass housing that they will be retaining and Engaging in further studies that though those won't be ready On July 22nd August 5th or August 12th or anything of that nature now that The board I may share the board's frustration about that But just so we're clear on what the expectations are. I still think that this board should have the ability to Make inquiries and ask questions that a lot of which I know miss mohan asked at the site visit But as an individual, you know at the site visit not as the board convening as a body Which is it which is a different a different animal and a different type of Dialogue with the developers so I don't know that we should be expecting them to have radically new Information as much as it should be an opportunity for this board to sort of probe into that information and make sure that we understand What they have submitted as much and what they say that they will submit in other words as miss mohan will recall from the site visit You know they made statements about what they had and what they didn't have and that they would be submitting further information But I think it's a fair point of inquiry for the board to say well I'd like to understand, you know why that Information wasn't submitted, you know in the original packet so that we can you know Put forth the most robust response we can to mass housing whether this board feels that the should be eligible or it shouldn't be eligible With respect to this scheduling I do think want to say that also think that mr. Dunn's point is well taken that maybe the best thing this board can Do at this point is authorized It's chairman to work with the town manager and town council to you know try to negotiate a date that's effective for everybody Because obviously there's been some difficulty in you know making sure that the board schedules are well presented I take responsibility for that Joe with your indulgence. I just want to make it clear running this That I expect I would be I'm running this like a selectance meeting which and I agree with limiting them to like 30 minutes for a Presentation, but then all select when we'll speak we'll speak next questions comments anything Then we'll take public input and then the select one speak last so and that's the way we run it here That's the way I would I would run it down there. I mean I'm I also expected. We're holding it downstairs in the main hall I have a feeling it's going to be that crowded that will have to have to set up the stage and microphone I almost a town meeting set up I guess But where the board sits and oak tree can come before us and make presentations as good members of the public So that's just where I see it Joe. I just want to be clear. That's where I expect to run it But forgive me you were next no problem. No, what I was actually going to say I was going to Actually say what Doug had said that I think given the Sensitivities around the scheduling I think that Dan's proposal does make a lot of sense that we Delegate to you to work on the the date That that that makes the most sense and see how far we can push mass housing I agree that it's ideal for all five members of the board to be here I think there were two of us had some scheduling issues and and quite honestly I think that if there's a choice to be had Ms. Mohan has to be here. We we appointed her as the liaison on this this Project if it comes to that and we can't pull it off with all five members of the board The question that I had though is for this public hearing do we have special notice requirements? How far in advance do we have to publish two times and the advocate or is it not that nature? So we're calling it a special hearing we're calling it a hearing because I think of the I'm sorry to secure we're calling it a hearing because of this sort of nature of it But technically speaking this is not required by regulations of any kind. It's not quite the same thing as The hearings that will be occurring before the ZBA if the housing of mass housing approves the eligibility letter technically they've provided Public information session with the Hardy school presentation So I don't I don't think the notice requirements would be in effect because the select men technically could just Respond based on the written submission alone. This isn't required as as part of the select means so strictly Obviously, we'd want to we'd want to provide more notice, of course Okay, thank you Other comments So sorry, Mr. Chairman briefly. I just I'm really I'm happy to be very flexible and Anything that we can do within reason. I don't care for the meetings around Mondays or other days I just want to get it done. I want to get to the best document in response that we can Yeah, I agree. It seems to me That we should do the following I think we should reschedule the July 22nd And I don't I know we're calling it a hearing But I wonder whether we want to call this a special meeting of the board of selectmen for a hearing on the Mugar property I I want to keep it clear. This is a meeting of the borders, right? It is very important for us, I believe to lead this discussion and What questions they don't answer that night? I want us to follow up with a letter You know, we're not ready for that water mitigation question. You'll that you will certainly come up with Diane So we track that and we send that to them and say well, we eventually would request an answer to this but So it sounds to me like they are willing to meet on August 5th Yes, I believe what I would try and do with Doug and Adam is try and get them to change to August 12th But if they won't to accept the fifth, sorry Joe Right, and again, you could be there on the 5th I'd rather not You know, we just talked to go to conduct how we are a board, you know But I mean I understand you know scheduled sort of vacations are made months in advance So I would ask that Adam or Doug I guess Doug you're doing the negotiation with mass housing and no tree Or you both do whatever to add to direct you How much time now James To ask them just to we would we request that they come to a meeting we've scheduled for order August 12th But let me ask you this Are we killing you too now with your ability to respond because I believe we can hold a special selectments meeting at 730 in the morning If need be yep to approve a letter from us The response of the appeal whatever that's called Responses of the project ill right So we don't have to worry whether that's done by August 17th. So sorry I think I think you know what what I will try to place the premium on where Adam and I will try to place the premium I'm for hearing the board correctly is trying to get agreement to the 12th And if that affects what extension mass housing is willing to give us then we will place the premium on making sure that as much as the board can be there as possible and Turning around the letter as fast as possible so that we have to have a special meeting because mass housing says, you know, August, you know 17th or 18th or nothing Then I feel confident that we can do it So I don't want to overstep my bounds. I'm sorry. No, I'm with you Okay So then on the motion by mr. Dunn directing me Set this up and seconded by second by mr. Burn all those in favor, please signify by saying aye Aye, and I'm gonna take an unusual step, but either James or Bob. Do you want to ask a question here? Okay The press, you know, I mean But this is this has got to be new to James, but this is this is a huge issue for us James It's called the new debt profit. You're already starting to get information on so we think we're good. Yeah, all right. Okay So although did I all those in favor, please signify by saying aye Opposed, okay, so thank you, sir. It's so important. We'll vote twice. Yeah I told you to take this thing and run this So correspondence received move received is our second discussion To Greeley. Yes, mr. Adam. Do we hear anything else about what happened in the school committee of the Minuteman School Committee meeting last week? In what is in regards to what this came out of? so so obviously so what we're moving to receive is a Motion for art is a notice from the school committee that they're saying we're not working on a regional agreement anymore Which and we think would be lovely if you did which is I didn't think was particularly helpful and I'm curious whether any other Do you know or do they do anything else related to either the building or the? No, I'm definitely not aware of any other action taken though. I know our school committee member I think was Quoted in local press as being based on this board's action being opposed to putting any ballot initiative out there for the bill the project I remain very disappointed, but there's a lot of works left to be done Thank you, mr. Chairman may town council just asked me I believe this this correspondence received says they want to take themselves out of making any further attempts to change the regional agreement Outside of what they're going to be statutorily required to do based upon Wayland's request. Okay Yeah, I was just wondering are there any plans for managers within the District to get together to take another crack at this or I believe in this so well in this email Ed says we'll talk about this that Are upcoming managers administrators meeting? We will need to pull together the managers to see what we can do There's nothing there's nothing on the books, but we'll have to do that Motion to receive all those in favor, please say the five by saying So a new business and we'll start with so what you learned last week there mr.  Well, you're gonna do that. Yeah, I was on my list Yeah, okay, we can wait All right new business Okay, Doug new business. I'm just waiting to hear the time in get on the edge of your seat. No, okay So Excuse my voice tonight. I'm a little a little horse, but I had a couple and then I'll close with that Received the deadline came and went on Friday in terms of CPA candidates for the the board's for at-large position appointments We received 20 applicants. I had sent a list to the board earlier today if you haven't seen that yet So the chairman and I will start this week of pulling together the screening committee and figuring out Exactly how we want to handle those 20 I know the chair and I spoke today about whether or not we'd want the screening committee to do some first round interviews and then give us Some candidates to interview following that we'll work on that in the next several weeks still working up to that September Deadline for getting the four candidates appointed. I'll say I think we got some very very strong candidates among that pool of 20 Maybe all strong candidates. I think one way the other the board will have Both a good a good pool of people but also some difficult choices to make Opinion on that 20 candidates I did expect a lot and you know in essence they're handing out more each year Not they hand it out, but they will recommend More each year than we actually hand out in the city in the CDBG funding so I can understand why a lot of people would be interested in this but With 20 candidates and many of them are names. We all know All the rest of them. I'm sure Names will come to know or that are highly qualified As you know, the process we've all voted on is the screening committee is going to make recommendations to Adam and I Who are then going to make recommendations to this board? Should we bring you only four candidates? Do you want eight candidates? How? What are your thoughts on what Adam and I present to you? I mean, I think our goal originally was us Recommending for that was our original proposal, but now that there's 20. I'm scared For me it doesn't change the process that we set out I Like the idea and I understand You know giving the board a little more flexibility on it But something would kill me about getting names and having you know us discuss it here And then tell people no and and I think that Mr. Chairman and the town manager are fully qualified Mr. Burn I mean, I think the the reason I own that two tiered selection process was to avoid Really public embarrassment here We have full faith and confidence I'm used to telling people no That's shaky, but we're working on it. However, I would say I mean, I think I don't think we had specified in the process How many candidates you expect from the screening committee? So I would guess at least eight right so Geographic distribution across You know, I also think interest in aspect. Sorry No, is that the board good with that? So I wanted to mention chair, I mentioned cheerful where you sit Had a great weekend was able to go down to the reception Yesterday and bring a chair home that after I decided to purchase realized was designed by the family of select Minkuro Not by me mine did not sell Savannah and Lisa That was by the caro family It was a small children's chair.  We did sit her down She fit right in there I wanted to mention it was under correspondence received But I think it's worth mentioning the $240,000 green communities grant that was received by the town last week that The lion share of the credit goes to Ruthie Bennett the town's regional energy manager any energy working group for the hard work They've put into coming up with the projects applying receiving grant awards implementing the projects and that's resulted in this grant I do think it's important to mention this now totals about $938,000 in green communities grants that this town has received since 2010 That's almost a million dollars in money that the actions that the town took to become designated as a green community have Leverage from the state that that's a real big number a significant number So I think that's a that's a credit to the town and the leadership the board showed in 2010 to get designated as a green community so then the final thing I'll say is that leads to the Executive education and sustainability leadership program that I attended last week First I want to thank the board again for providing me with that opportunity. It was really a tremendous week There was a great cohort In in the group there were leaders of higher education business. I was the only town manager There was some municipal energy managers, but there was really a nice Tross of industry not nonprofits as well And I mentioned to the chairman sort of the the leader of the whole initiative coming out of the School of Public Health was Dr. John or Dr. Jack Spengler and the name it looked familiar to me, but I thought you know big big Harvard professor You know, you know, what are the odds and on the first day he comes up to me after some introduction says oh Arlington It goes you might be familiar with my mother Peg Spengler Instantly Yeah, wow so so that said You know I'd be happy to talk in more depth at some point But the whole framework was Promoting what would be a leadership model of having your normal chain of command with a hierarchical framework be combined with what would be a more networked leadership framework where You know people work together outside of their roles But then report it back into the normal roles within an organization to be able to come up with New ideas and new ways of doing things which is really what sustainability in a lot of ways is about is rethinking the processes that any Organization is using so it was a great program It was very stimulating and I think it'll certainly have a lot that I'll be able to bring back to the organization in the upcoming weeks and months Which is probably the last thing the department has want to hear me say leading up to the next department has meeting But I think it was a very very good program and thank you again That's that's all I have Just one thing we're on the parking parking implementation governance committee. We're hearing from a vendor tomorrow for the Meters on the streets and so I'm really looking forward to that and I'll be happy to report back at our next meeting in August Steven just something that has come up to me a couple times people need to clarify While the meters are closed the timing is not if it's a two-hour zone if it's because people are getting tickets And they're saying I thought We made a point to say that in they were supposed the treasure's office supposed to be putting Bags on the they're also big signs. Oh good. Three three Free element doesn't say the hours though, but it does say three hour Yeah, we tried to be very clear about that But we'll I'll bring that up tomorrow at our meeting and we can we'll discuss it But there are so many differing Limits and one hour 15 minute two hour three hours So we're going to do our best to codify that through this group at least in the center for now Yes And the chairman reminded me this so thank you And thank you for recognizing Mr. Coughlin and Mr. Roble on at the beginning of the meeting to that vainum Mr. Burn waiting for the Arlington select group in terms of organizing around the field, but some of my Colleagues in the sports world have also gone to representative garbally About possibly getting some funding for the summer Street Robolod field. I saw him on Robes is wake and he said I could announce this but that because I said I want to do it and it gets beat out Or whatever, but he told me was successful in procuring $25,000 to go towards the effort to Maintain upgrade Robolod field. It does have to go before the governor Who could veto it? But from what I understand from the representative and I know mr. Burns With this he told me it's in with a bunch of amendments that they if they do anticipate the governor V do it wouldn't just be vetoing the 25,000 for Robolod. It would get put back in So as close to sure money as you can I'm really happy about that and I said I didn't want to jinx it But he said no it would be okay to announce it and then the second thing is I Mentioned at the last meeting under new business the athletic director coach to do the lekkie Asked for a meeting with me just in terms of you know out there on the field and And I have had a brief conversation with the town manager and we'll be meeting with him I think believe Wednesday or Thursday just to sort of go over the whole thing But one of the things The athletic director was pointing out was besides the fact that the turf is now They've begun to take off the old turf and put in the new turf which were very happy for from capital planning So the field will be closed to probably about mid-August on that Dr. Janger sent the notice to all the parents to let them know but she didn't indicate there was some sort of what I call short money Getting mr. Chaplin losing my voice short money things that She would like to do for years. I was able to procure a storage bin Through Joe Nolan, but now it's ever star and changed over so that's gone So she'd like to get some sort of a shed for the equipment as well as Where the hurdles in the sand is over by the track, you know get some protective covering there So what I told her was of the warranty Pierce Field remediation fund which The chair was on the board back then and mr. Sullivan and super and then superintendent Donovan we were successful in gaining a lot of money, which you know initially we had 750,000 or something in there. It's down to short change. It's like Five to 8,000 no more than that So I've asked the town manager if he could get an approximation of that and I told Melissa The athletic director we can send her that figure, you know, there's no need We've used it to put in the handicap elevator fix the Insignia in the middle of the field lacrosse net. So we've been since it's short money We've been able to do that and probably zero that fund out and then The Pierce meeting and then there are some other things that I discussed with Melissa and I'm just going to discuss with them first to see if he has any thoughts on ways to go and things like that but My short-term plug would be there's a little bit of uncertainty around the track when that gets renovated. I was cross-country myself and Been talking to the people who put the track in We basically according to them and they've been very honest with us and helping us extend it out this year if we Renovate it and the money's in there. It's just a matter of when it's going to happen to me if the turf is going out there anyways We could place a new turf over the car. I mean a new track over the current track Their feeling is if it goes one more season, especially a bad winter season We're gonna have probably have to spend three times as much To dig up because you won't be able to put the band-aid over and because of the continuation You know something that could be fifty to a hundred thousand could be two fifty three hundred thousand So but I'm going to work with the town manager on that as well as a few other things But I just want to let you know what an update at that meeting. Thank you, Mr. Nothing Nothing So just to inform the board that at our last meeting as you know We approved a contract for our new controller Richard to skate I spoke to him the following day and he was in Chicago on his cross-country trip from Seattle I think it started Adam sounds right. Yeah, and he accepted we've accepted so he will be starting as our controller on August 17 It's all I have to do business to adjourn to adjourn is there a second The next meeting of the board of selectmen is going to be out of script for 12 for somewhere there about And regularly scheduled is going to be August 17 all those in favor of adjourning. Please say aye opposed We are adjourned